***David Wilson Bandwagon*** (3 Viewers)

[Touchdown There]

But I don't think we can say - as I feel was being suggested - that the Giants had a better chance to win by leaving Wilson in.

The Giants turnover ratio was -5. That game was out of hand anyway and building Wilson's confidence by going back to him and supporting him is the way to build a team during a long season.

Out of hand? What game were you watching?The Giants were down by 6 points with 2 minutes left in the game and had the ball.

#2

You make a statement that is completely wrong, he corrects you, and you call him a hater.

You need to study up on turnover margins. It is only the most important statistic in football Cap'n Rolly LOL.http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2013/8/23/4649718/college-football-turnover-margin-winning-percentagehttp://12thmanrising.com/2012/05/29/the-enigma-of-turnovers-reprised/

I don't need to study up on turnover margins. I know that as turnover deficit increases, you tend to lose more. Go reread what I bolded. You said, and I quote, "That game was out of hand anyway." It clearly was not out of hand. The Giants had a chance to win the ballgame until the pick six off of Scott's hands. You said something incorrect as if it was fact. Someone called you out on it. You called him a hater.

You still don't get it.

I don't get it either. Care to explain?

Study the chart labeled "Turnover Differential". Choose path A or B.

A. Print the chart and cut out all rectangles. Lay rectangles end to end with the rectangle labeled "-5" last. The volume of that rectangle/ the volume of the rest = % of wins when the turnover differential is -5.

B. Work backwards from the standard deviation. -5/1.76 = -2.84. Check out some standard deviation bell curves. The chances of winning that game was identical to the percentage of times that -2.84 happens on the bell.

 

[Touchdown There]

You need to study up on turnover margins. It is only the most important statistic in football.

I don't need to study up on turnover margins. I know that as turnover deficit increases, you tend to lose more. Go reread what I bolded. You said, and I quote, "That game was out of hand anyway." It clearly was not out of hand. The Giants had a chance to win the ballgame until the pick six off of Scott's hands. You said something incorrect as if it was fact. Someone called you out on it. You called him a hater.

You still don't get it.

I don't get it either. Care to explain?

Study the chart labeled "Turnover Differential". Choose path A or B.

A. Print the chart and cut out all rectangles. Lay rectangles end to end with the rectangle labeled "-5" last. The volume of that rectangle/ the volume of the rest = % of wins when the turnover differential is -5.

B. Work backwards from the standard deviation. -5/1.76 = -2.84. Check out some standard deviation bell curves. The chances of winning that game was identical to the percentage of times that -2.84 happens on the bell.

zσ inside outside Fraction outside CI2.575σ 99% 1% 1 / 1003σ 99.73% 0.269% 1 / 370.398The odds of winning with a -5 turnover ratio is about 1/250.

 

[lbouchard]

But I don't think we can say - as I feel was being suggested - that the Giants had a better chance to win by leaving Wilson in.

The Giants turnover ratio was -5. That game was out of hand anyway and building Wilson's confidence by going back to him and supporting him is the way to build a team during a long season.

Out of hand? What game were you watching?The Giants were down by 6 points with 2 minutes left in the game and had the ball.

#2

You make a statement that is completely wrong, he corrects you, and you call him a hater.

You need to study up on turnover margins. It is only the most important statistic in football Cap'n Rolly LOL.http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2013/8/23/4649718/college-football-turnover-margin-winning-percentagehttp://12thmanrising.com/2012/05/29/the-enigma-of-turnovers-reprised/

I don't need to study up on turnover margins. I know that as turnover deficit increases, you tend to lose more. Go reread what I bolded. You said, and I quote, "That game was out of hand anyway." It clearly was not out of hand. The Giants had a chance to win the ballgame until the pick six off of Scott's hands. You said something incorrect as if it was fact. Someone called you out on it. You called him a hater.

You still don't get it.

I don't get it either. Care to explain?

Study the chart labeled "Turnover Differential". Choose path A or B.

A. Print the chart and cut out all rectangles. Lay rectangles end to end with the rectangle labeled "-5" last. The volume of that rectangle/ the volume of the rest = % of wins when the turnover differential is -5.

B. Work backwards from the standard deviation. -5/1.76 = -2.84. Check out some standard deviation bell curves. The chances of winning that game was identical to the percentage of times that -2.84 happens on the bell.

Ok, according to the chart on page 2, there is about a 1% probability of victory if you have a -5 turnover differential, which the Giants did. A microscopic chance of winning. However, what we're saying is that this was one of the 1%. The Giants had the ball with about 2:00 minutes and a chance to drive down the field and win the game. Eli's pass ended up being pick sixed. I'm not sure why you're arguing this.

 

[Touchdown There]

No, it was not the 1%. You witnessed a margin of six that landed in the 99%+. Not sure why you are arguing it.

 

[lbouchard]

No, it was not the 1%. You witnessed a margin of six that landed in the 99%+. Not sure why you are arguing it.

No one is arguing that the Giants lost the ####### game. You said the game was out of hand. It clearly was not. The Giants had a chance to win it at the end. You said something incorrect. End of discussion.

 

[Insein]

Giants signing of Jacobs tells me that Wilson gets one more chance. Don't #### this up David.

 

[Touchdown There]

No, it was not the 1%. You witnessed a margin of six that landed in the 99%+. Not sure why you are arguing it.

No one is arguing that the Giants lost the ####### game. You said the game was out of hand. It clearly was not. The Giants had a chance to win it at the end. You said something incorrect. End of discussion.

No

 

[lbouchard]

No, it was not the 1%. You witnessed a margin of six that landed in the 99%+. Not sure why you are arguing it.

No one is arguing that the Giants lost the ####### game. You said the game was out of hand. It clearly was not. The Giants had a chance to win it at the end. You said something incorrect. End of discussion.

No

Ok you're right, it wasn't a 6 point game with Giants ball at the 2:00 minute mark.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Wilson is obviously going to get another chance. No first round pick's career is over after one bad game. That said, it could not have been a worse start for him. Brandon Jacobs is cannon fodder at this point, so the only question is whether Wilson still gets the majority of the carries against the Broncos.

 

[Touchdown There]

No, it was not the 1%. You witnessed a margin of six that landed in the 99%+. Not sure why you are arguing it.

No one is arguing that the Giants lost the ####### game. You said the game was out of hand. It clearly was not. The Giants had a chance to win it at the end. You said something incorrect. End of discussion.

No

Ok you're right, it wasn't a 6 point game with Giants ball at the 2:00 minute mark.

Covered within that 99% are losses that come close. It also includes losses by a lot.

 

[OPS]

No, it was not the 1%. You witnessed a margin of six that landed in the 99%+. Not sure why you are arguing it.

No one is arguing that the Giants lost the ####### game. You said the game was out of hand. It clearly was not. The Giants had a chance to win it at the end. You said something incorrect. End of discussion.

No

Ok you're right, it wasn't a 6 point game with Giants ball at the 2:00 minute mark.

Covered within that 99% are losses that come close. It also includes losses by a lot.

You are not using statistics properly. Please stop.

 

[Touchdown There]

No, it was not the 1%. You witnessed a margin of six that landed in the 99%+. Not sure why you are arguing it.

No one is arguing that the Giants lost the ####### game. You said the game was out of hand. It clearly was not. The Giants had a chance to win it at the end. You said something incorrect. End of discussion.

No

Ok you're right, it wasn't a 6 point game with Giants ball at the 2:00 minute mark.

Covered within that 99% are losses that come close. It also includes losses by a lot.

You are not using statistics properly. Please stop.

Only use statistics if it helps you confirm your previous bias. If not then disregard.

 

[weebs]

Jesus no one cares can we discuss the topic now

 

[Faust]

N.Y. Giants' David Wilson rips his critics in fiery tweetBy Dan Hanzus

Around the League Writer

Speaking on the topic of David Wilson's nightmarish season debut, Giants safety Antrel Rolle told a New York radio station Tuesday that the running back has two options: "He can either get in the tank, or he can man up."

Judging by his Twitter feed, Wilson has settled on the latter.

David E. Wilson ✔ @4stillRunning

Ayy to fantasy participants and pissed Giants fans ur irrelevant to me!!! Nobody wants me to succeed more than ME!!! WATCH US WORK!

Seriously now, could there be a more obnoxious scenario than going through troubles at your place of work, then having to deal with idiots on Twitter ripping you for costing them in their matchup against Tina in accounting? Total nightmare.

Wilson is in a better spot than people realize. No one should be scared about the arrival of Brandon Jacobs. Wilson will have a shot to redeem himself in Week 2 because coach Tom Coughlin needs the running back to provide balance to the offense.

All that said, Wilson might as well move his belongings into "the tank" if he puts it on the carpet Sunday against the Denver Broncos.

The latest "Around The League Podcast" recapped every Week 1 game. Click here to listen and subscribe.

 

[Insein]

N.Y. Giants' David Wilson rips his critics in fiery tweet

By Dan Hanzus

Around the League Writer

Speaking on the topic of David Wilson's nightmarish season debut, Giants safety Antrel Rolle told a New York radio station Tuesday that the running back has two options: "He can either get in the tank, or he can man up."

Judging by his Twitter feed, Wilson has settled on the latter.

David E. Wilson ✔ @4stillRunning

Ayy to fantasy participants and pissed Giants fans ur irrelevant to me!!! Nobody wants me to succeed more than ME!!! WATCH US WORK!

Seriously now, could there be a more obnoxious scenario than going through troubles at your place of work, then having to deal with idiots on Twitter ripping you for costing them in their matchup against Tina in accounting? Total nightmare.

Wilson is in a better spot than people realize. No one should be scared about the arrival of Brandon Jacobs. Wilson will have a shot to redeem himself in Week 2 because coach Tom Coughlin needs the running back to provide balance to the offense.

All that said, Wilson might as well move his belongings into "the tank" if he puts it on the carpet Sunday against the Denver Broncos.

The latest "Around The League Podcast" recapped every Week 1 game. Click here to listen and subscribe.

That's cool, bro. Just don't drop the soap big homie.

 

[Donsmith753]

Starting with confidence

 

[Max Power]

Seriously now, could there be a more obnoxious scenario than going through troubles at your place of work, then having to deal with idiots on Twitter ripping you for costing them in their matchup against Tina in accounting? Total nightmare.

Yes, there could be. You joined twitter, deal with it bozo. I'm calling a lot of people bozo these days.

 

[loser]

Starting with confidence

Yup.

 

[FlapJacks]

is there the thread where we discuss Da'rel Scott?

 

[zamboni]

A bit surprised the team went with Jacobs over McGahee, as McGahee would be a better role model for Wilson.

Leads one to believe that either McGahee is really toast, or doesn't want to play for the league minimum. Or perhaps Jacobs was the choice since he knows the offense and can step right in without a learning curve.

Either way, as mentioned, Jacobs probably isn't much of a threat to Wilson's job, but if nothing else, can help mentor the kid in pass protection.

 

[Grahamburn]

Now that he isn't over-hyped anymore, any other offers you guys are sending/recieving?

What offers are you fielding for Lamar Miller?

 

[Khy]

The Giants reportedly believe newly signed Brandon Jacobs can "possibly spell" David Wilson "on passing downs and maybe at the goal line."
Note that the veteran running back cattle call the Giants held Tuesday was scheduled before Wilson's nightmarish 2013 debut. Jacobs was brought back to help fill the gap left by Andre Brown (leg) -- not to take Wilson's starting job. A source tells ESPN New York that one of the reasons Jacobs was signed was because of his familiarity with their protection schemes, an area Wilson has struggled in. The two-time Super Bowl champ is also expected to help "mentor" Wilson in other areas. Per ESPN's Dan Graziano, "the odds are that [Jacobs] won't be getting too many touches right away, if ever."
Related: David Wilson

Source: ESPN New York
Sep 11 - 8:17 AM

ESPN New York says the Giants are going to give David Wilson "an opportunity to prove that the fumbling was a one-game issue."


Related: Da'Rel Scott

Source: ESPN New York
Sep 11 - 8:24 AM

 

[JuniorNB]

Touchdown There and Eminence battling hard to be named biggest troll of this thread. Not sure whose shtick is more boring. Very close at this point.

 

[mphtrilogy]

wilson now needs to run angry, i have no choice but to start him this week..

yeesh, my team is a mess

 

[Khy]

wilson now needs to run angry, i have no choice but to start him this week..

yeesh, my team is a mess

I'm trying to convince myself to sit him this week in favor of DeAngelo Williams... I just LOVE the upside. Right now I'm starting Charles, Ridley and Williams but dammit I love Wilson even after last week. I think the 'main' reason I'm sitting him this week would be that I see the Denver game turning into a shoot out quick. So while he may see like 10 or so carries before the first half is out he may not get to much after that.

 

[Concept Coop]

Study the chart labeled "Turnover Differential". Choose path A or B.

A. Print the chart and cut out all rectangles. Lay rectangles end to end with the rectangle labeled "-5" last. The volume of that rectangle/ the volume of the rest = % of wins when the turnover differential is -5.

B. Work backwards from the standard deviation. -5/1.76 = -2.84. Check out some standard deviation bell curves. The chances of winning that game was identical to the percentage of times that -2.84 happens on the bell.

They had the ball down a score with minutes left in the game. The odds of that happening, after the number of turnovers to that point, were very small. But it happened. How often does a team win down 6 with the ball and 2-3 minutes to work? That is much more relevant.

 

[Rick James]

Thinking about sitting Wilson for Brian Hartline, but will probably wind up starting Wilson. Cool story bro.

 

[drake_ovo]

if wilson is benched on your team, u have issues. just saying

 

[Wadsworth]

if wilson is benched on your team, u have issues. just saying

...or a very strong roster.

 

[Khy]

Thinking about sitting Wilson for Brian Hartline, but will probably wind up starting Wilson. Cool story bro.

That's a tough one really... that's a 'go with your gut' thing. Personally, I like Wilson a little bit more... I just don't see him blowing up again.

if wilson is benched on your team, u have issues. just saying

...or a very strong roster.

Yeah, I mean it's not insane to sit Wilson. Again as I said in my post at the moment, I'm likely sitting him for DeAngelo Williams. But that's only because I have a guy like Williams who I drafted in I think the 9th round and is playing a weak D. Although, I'm really not positive I'm going that route as I still like Wilson's upside during this game a LOT more.

 

[ShaHBucks]

if wilson is benched on your team, u have issues. just saying

...or a very strong roster.

... Or you're a smart FF GM

 

[Khy]

if wilson is benched on your team, u have issues. just saying

...or a very strong roster.

... Or you're a smart FF GM

Yeah, you're right... if you're smart you'll start any RB over David Wilson this week. He's probably going to be released by the Giants after this week anyway.

/end sarcasm

 

[jacobo_moses]

wilson now needs to run angry, i have no choice but to start him this week..

yeesh, my team is a mess

I'm trying to convince myself to sit him this week in favor of DeAngelo Williams... I just LOVE the upside. Right now I'm starting Charles, Ridley and Williams but dammit I love Wilson even after last week. I think the 'main' reason I'm sitting him this week would be that I see the Denver game turning into a shoot out quick. So while he may see like 10 or so carries before the first half is out he may not get to much after that.

I think with that said though. Coughlin knows the only chance he has to beat Peyton is to keep him off the field. Which means a healthy dose of running (with D. Wilson) and Jacobs. Jacobs I guess is not in very good game shape though.

 

[Concept Coop]

if wilson is benched on your team, u have issues. just saying

I'll be benching him at the flex spot for Boldin.

 

[Khy]

wilson now needs to run angry, i have no choice but to start him this week..

yeesh, my team is a mess

I'm trying to convince myself to sit him this week in favor of DeAngelo Williams... I just LOVE the upside. Right now I'm starting Charles, Ridley and Williams but dammit I love Wilson even after last week. I think the 'main' reason I'm sitting him this week would be that I see the Denver game turning into a shoot out quick. So while he may see like 10 or so carries before the first half is out he may not get to much after that.

I think with that said though. Coughlin knows the only chance he has to beat Peyton is to keep him off the field. Which means a healthy dose of running (with D. Wilson) and Jacobs. Jacobs I guess is not in very good game shape though.

That's a very very valid point. I guess it depends on how much trust Coughlin puts in the kid. Personally, as a Giants fan I'd love to see Coughlin put him out there on the first few plays of the game and run him 2-3 times. Regardless of the result (unless it's a fumble obviously), whether he gets 1 ypc on the 2 attempts or he explodes for a 80 yard TD on one of them. I'd just like to see Coughlin put him out there and say "I believe in you 100% kid... this is your backfield. Take it".

if wilson is benched on your team, u have issues. just saying

I'll be benching him at the flex spot for Boldin.

Sure... after last week though that's like saying "I'm benching him for Calvin Johnson" though.

 

[ShaHBucks]

Now that he isn't over-hyped anymore, any other offers you guys are sending/recieving?

What offers are you fielding for Lamar Miller?

I don't own him. I'd rather have him than this bum tho

 

[ShaHBucks]

if wilson is benched on your team, u have issues. just saying

...or a very strong roster.

... Or you're a smart FF GM

Yeah, you're right... if you're smart you'll start any RB over David Wilson this week. He's probably going to be released by the Giants after this week anyway.

/end sarcasm

You're overreacting. Someone has to return kicks.

 

[Khy]

Now that he isn't over-hyped anymore, any other offers you guys are sending/recieving?

What offers are you fielding for Lamar Miller?

I don't own him. I'd rather have him than this bum tho

Wilson fumbled... Miller looked like a high school football player. Please.

 

[Concept Coop]

Sure... after last week though that's like saying "I'm benching him for Calvin Johnson" though.

Perhaps, but I'm not quite that high on Boldin just yet.

My point was that there are a lot of rosters that justify Wilson being on the bench.

 

[Khy]

Sure... after last week though that's like saying "I'm benching him for Calvin Johnson" though.

Perhaps, but I'm not quite that high on Boldin just yet.

My point was that there are a lot of rosters that justify Wilson being on the bench.

100% agree and I'm as high on Wilson as probably about anyone on these boards. But I don't think I could blame anyone for sitting him this week. Unless people start saying stuff like:

"I'm sitting him for Marlon Brown" or something ridiculous like that... any reasonable player who did well last week or should do well this week I can see a case being made for... even guys like Joique Bell could have a case made for them this week. At least until we see if Wilson can come out Sunday and put this past week behind him.

 

[CentralPA]

Contemplating on starting Sproles over him in a Standard scoring league but I think I am giving him one more shot.

 

[adamjw2]

My biggest hesitation to start him is that the Broncos know he is a playmaker, and they know if they can strip the ball from him, he will be on the bench... so they are gonna be throwing the kitchen sink at him to get him to cough up the ball.

 

[CentralPA]

My biggest hesitation to start him is that the Broncos know he is a playmaker, and they know if they can strip the ball from him, he will be on the bench... so they are gonna be throwing the kitchen sink at him to get him to cough up the ball.

Well, most defenses I think would aim to get the ball no matter what but it is probably emphasized a bit more in the Broncos D meetings this week for sure.

 

[B-Deep]

My biggest hesitation to start him is that the Broncos know he is a playmaker, and they know if they can strip the ball from him, he will be on the bench... so they are gonna be throwing the kitchen sink at him to get him to cough up the ball.

i think this is nuts

they are going to be throwing the kitchen sink at him to get him to cough up the ball, yes, but they are not doing it because they fear him and want him benched, they are doing it because turning the ball over to the broncos offense wins games for the broncos

if he gets benched, bonus

 

[kobain]

I went out and traded Wilson. My team got destroyed so i figured i need to do something before things got out of hand since it looks like my WRs suck big time.. I have T. Richardson as my RB1, Wilson RB2, and R Mathews as my Flex. My WR1 are Antonio Brown, and TY Hinton WR2. I also have F Jackson and Steve Smith on my bench. It looks like the Steelers are just not confortable with that offence, so Antonio Brown might not give me the production i need from my WR1 and TY can be a hit or miss.

I traded Wilson and Steve Smith for Dez Bryant. I think it's a fair trade, what do you guys think?

 

[Khy]

I went out and traded Wilson. My team got destroyed so i figured i need to do something before things got out of hand since it looks like my WRs suck big time.. I have T. Richardson as my RB1, Wilson RB2, and R Mathews as my Flex. My WR1 are Antonio Brown, and TY Hinton WR2. I also have F Jackson and Steve Smith on my bench. It looks like the Steelers are just not confortable with that office, so Antonio Brown might not give me the production i need from my WR1 and TY can be a hit or miss.

I traded Wilson and Steve Smith for Dez Bryant. I think it's a fair trade, what do you guys think?

That's a trade I'd even do and I'm buying Wilson hardcore still... I can't believe someone did this trade. That guy was trying to buy on Wilson and I think what happened is you brought low on Bryant and sold high on Wilson (somehow).

 

[LususV]

I went out and traded Wilson. My team got destroyed so i figured i need to do something before things got out of hand since it looks like my WRs suck big time.. I have T. Richardson as my RB1, Wilson RB2, and R Mathews as my Flex. My WR1 are Antonio Brown, and TY Hinton WR2. I also have F Jackson and Steve Smith on my bench. It looks like the Steelers are just not confortable with that office, so Antonio Brown might not give me the production i need from my WR1 and TY can be a hit or miss.

I traded Wilson and Steve Smith for Dez Bryant. I think it's a fair trade, what do you guys think?

That's a trade I'd even do and I'm buying Wilson hardcore still... I can't believe someone did this trade. That guy was trying to buy on Wilson and I think what happened is you brought low on Bryant and sold high on Wilson (somehow).

Agreed. I'm a huge DWilson buyer and I make that trade every day (as a DWilson owner) in redraft. Definitely not a sell-low. Great trade.

 

[adamjw2]

My biggest hesitation to start him is that the Broncos know he is a playmaker, and they know if they can strip the ball from him, he will be on the bench... so they are gonna be throwing the kitchen sink at him to get him to cough up the ball.

i think this is nuts

they are going to be throwing the kitchen sink at him to get him to cough up the ball, yes, but they are not doing it because they fear him and want him benched, they are doing it because turning the ball over to the broncos offense wins games for the broncos

if he gets benched, bonus

Where did I say they fear him? I said they know he is a playmaker, and they know if they can strip the ball, he will be on the bench. In other words, they can make the Giants one dimensional, or at least, severely handicapped in one dimension.

 

[kobain]

I went out and traded Wilson. My team got destroyed so i figured i need to do something before things got out of hand since it looks like my WRs suck big time.. I have T. Richardson as my RB1, Wilson RB2, and R Mathews as my Flex. My WR1 are Antonio Brown, and TY Hinton WR2. I also have F Jackson and Steve Smith on my bench. It looks like the Steelers are just not confortable with that office, so Antonio Brown might not give me the production i need from my WR1 and TY can be a hit or miss.

I traded Wilson and Steve Smith for Dez Bryant. I think it's a fair trade, what do you guys think?

That's a trade I'd even do and I'm buying Wilson hardcore still... I can't believe someone did this trade. That guy was trying to buy on Wilson and I think what happened is you brought low on Bryant and sold high on Wilson (somehow).

I'm a Giants fan and i hope Wilson comes around, and is successful. My hesitation is with Coughlin. The guy will go to extremes to prove a point / teach a lesson. . In 2004 the giants were 5-3, when he benched Kurt Warner and threw that season away just to get his Rookie QB some experience. I'm not saying that the same thing is going to happen with Wilson, but just look at what Coughlin did to him last season just to teach a lesson.

 

[B-Deep]

My biggest hesitation to start him is that the Broncos know he is a playmaker, and they know if they can strip the ball from him, he will be on the bench... so they are gonna be throwing the kitchen sink at him to get him to cough up the ball.

i think this is nuts

they are going to be throwing the kitchen sink at him to get him to cough up the ball, yes, but they are not doing it because they fear him and want him benched, they are doing it because turning the ball over to the broncos offense wins games for the broncos

if he gets benched, bonus

Where did I say they fear him? I said they know he is a playmaker, and they know if they can strip the ball, he will be on the bench. In other words, they can make the Giants one dimensional, or at least, severely handicapped in one dimension.

which, if true, is a side effect of the gact that they always try and create turnovers and likely see a weakness here

it's a small thing, but the assertion that the motivation for focusing on turnovers will be to get wilson on the bench is pretty odd

they want turnovers because it gives them the ball