So....forgetting the draft, are we a better team than that one exiting the playoffs?

Holy **** what do you not get about me not questioning us winning 10 games. But the more you beat teams by is an indicator of the quality of the team. That is common sense. no one is arguing that we didnt win 10 games, its that we took advantage of an easy schedule and arent as good as you think they are simply because we happened to get to 10 wins.


To use one of your mindbogglingly oversimplified arguments that you like to use. The goal is always to score more points than the opponents. the better teams score more points than their opponents and point differential is always a great indicator on the truly best teams in the league. This year the top 5 teams in point differential were the Pats, Falcons, Cowboys, Chiefs, Steelers. The 5 worst were Browns, Niners, Jets, Rams, Bears. The dolphins had the 9th worst point differential in the league and were outscored by 17 points over a 16 game sample size. That is a huge red flag that should indicate that a lot of this teams success this past year was due to schedule and luck.

Edit- And to give you an indication of the kinds of teams around us in point differential the Bucs had the point differential directly ahead of us and the Panthers the one right behind us. Bucs were 9-7 and Panthers were 6-10.

 

We beat the Steelers by 15. And no matter how many times you repeat it, Ben played in that game. The entire game sans a couple of plays.

We lost to the Pats by 7. That's one score. The Pats must suck.

 

You're way out in left field. Most teams are not going to the playoffs losing starters for multiple games at both safety positions, corner and linebacker...and on offense at QB, left tackle, and center, while having nothing at either guard position.

No one is arguing that the Dolphins were, or are, elite. We are telling you that a team with that many injuries, with a new offense and coach, going 10-6 and making the playoffs IS impressive, no matter how much you try to act like it's not. Further, all those injured starters are back and healthy, and that alone makes our team better than last season, and that is reason for excitement.

 

In your first two sentences you managed to contradict yourself completely.

That may be a new record for this board. Congrats.

 

Ive said that was a solid win against the steelers already. If you think Ben was himself after the injury then thats up to you but he missed like 3 weeks after that game from the injury that he played through. Regardless, I've already said it was a solid win, but aside from beating the steelers at home with an injured big ben for the second half, our best win was what, the bills or cardinals?

The Pats were also up 31-0 at halftime and played with their 3rd string QB for the final 2-3 quarters of that game. And ive already posted the pats winning 10 games this year alone by more than one possession. I've also stated about 10 times now that i'm not saying that they need to win every game against bad teams by more than 1 possession, but not 1? That is indicative of something that you dont want to admit.

You really gonna stake your argument to winning by more is not indicative of a better team?

 

I actually didnt but congrats on your latest post arguing semantics or something that is completely besides the point of the original post. You are the michael jordan of doing that.

 

I have literally said that what they did was impressive a bunch of times. youre not even disagreeing with me and youre acting like you are just because you dont like that a 10-6 team could possibly be an aberration.

Again, I dont care about injuries. Injuries happen to every team and next year there will be other key guys who go down again. If anything the injuries further my point that the team wasnt as good as you think they were because their depth sucked too. Also, we still have nothing at either guard position so not sure what your point is there.

 

Please do tell me how a team with the 9th worst point differential in the league at -17, a statistic that is generally incredibly telling as to who the best and worst teams in the league are, did not out perform their actual ability by going 10-6.

 

You're claiming that we weren't really a playoff team because we didn't blow out people. You're claiming that we weren't a playoff team because of a weak SoS. You're claiming that we aren't really a playoff tea because we were the 6th seed. You're claiming that 10 wins was a mirage because of some other excuses, up to and including, making interceptions, last minute scoring, missed FG's by the other team, etc etc.

None of that makes since. Then you get called out and claim the Dolphins aren't an "elite" team. Well, no ****. Who here has claimed that? Everyone debating you has said nothing to that effect. Everyone has said that the Dolphins, injured, depleted, and with a new HC and offense, made it to the playoffs and that's something to be excited about. Then you come up with, "Their SoS was easy...didn't count." "They failed to beat people by more than 7 points. Didn't count." "The got blown out by the Pats (Super Bowl winners), and the Ravens. Didn't count." "Big Ben didn't play (not true) when we stomped the Steelers. Didn't count."

And in this last post you're suggesting that the Dolphins 7 point loss to the Pats didn't count because the Pats were at one time up by a lot.

 

Good question. And by ability I'm sure you mean the ability of a bunch of back-ups and scrubs?

 

Oh damn, you're right, I forgot every other team got to turn the injury setting off and we forgot to do that this year. Also, part of what makes the truly great teams in this league great is that they have quality depth that allow them to lose guys and not have liabilities as starters. If anything you are just adding to my point that this roster of guys isnt indicative of a 10 win team.

 

You're right. It was 3.

Sorry, no record for you.

 

You mean the truly great teams, even with drastic injuries, will somehow figure out how to get into the playoffs?

/thread

 

I never said didnt count. I said that they took advantage of a weak SOS and got to 10 wins but got thoroughly embarassed in every game they played against good teams, and that everything about their performance over the course of the year indicated that they were benefitting from a schedule that was incredibly easy.

I have never disagreed that the dolphins, injury depleted and with a new HC and offense making the playoffs is something to be excited about. Obviously, it's always the goal to make the playoffs. I'm saying that the actual ability of this team was not of a 10 win team last year. We can see the types of moves we make in the remaining time in the offseason to determine next seasons team ability, but there really is no arguing that the actual roster of guys we had last year was not of 10 win quality. The strength of victory, performance against good teams, and your continual admittance that we played "scrubs and second string guys" a lot is helping my point.

Teams who get outscored by 17 points over the course of a 16 game season have an expected amount of wins at 7.5.

 

No, the truly great teams will figure out how to get to the playoffs and are still an actual contender, rather than a guarantee to get blown out on wild card weekend.

 

"I'm saying that the actual ability of this team was not of a 10 win team last year."

"youre not even disagreeing with me and youre acting like you are just because you dont like that a 10-6 team could possibly be an aberration."

"Holy **** what do you not get about me not questioning us winning 10 games."



contradiction

 

This post is complete bull****.

 

Thats a contradiction only if you continue to misrepresent what i'm saying in the context of responding to your post. You continue to say "well we won 10 games so we are a 10 win team because standings" and continue to act as if im saying we didnt win 10 games. We won 10 games. That is a fact. That is why im saying im not questioning us winning 10 games. What I am doing is questioning the actual ability of this team and saying that it is not the ability of a 10 win team.

Both of those are not mutually exclusive. I can recognize the fact that we won 10 games obviously without contradicting myself when i say we didnt have the talent of a 10 win team.

 

Misrepresent? lol

Those sentences are really clearly worded.

You said that you're not questioning that they won 10 games and then you did just that...on multiple occasions. Including in this thread.

 

you really seem to be having an issue differentiating between recognizing the standings from last year with the possibility of a team over performing and not actually having the talent and ability of a 10 win team. Im not sure why you are having difficulty with the possibility that a team can over perform or under perform their actual ability based on a bunch of different things that can effect how a team plays over the course of a 16 game sample size. I recognize we won 10 games. Me saying that they over performed their actual ability and talent level does not = me saying that they didnt actually win 10 games.

 

Yeah, you're right. It's a huge red flag that we were missing both starting safeties, has injured linebackers, and injured corners.

 

So, just so we're clear...you admit that even though starting many subpar players due to injury, you continue to act like a team featuring our starters is not better than the team on the field with subs last year? Yes, we probably over performed last season. No one is arguing that. You, however, are arguing that the team now, when healthy, isn't better than the injury plagued team last season.

You're not helping your case.

 

Bold is not true...except for some reason you keep throwing out things like the Pitt game, or that the Bills would have been 9-7 if we hadn't swept them. Winner why you ignore things like that. You also continue to ignore the situation of the Dolphins last season, with a rookie head coach, new offense, and key starters on offense and defense being injured. When considering all those things, yes, winning 10 games and getting to the playoffs was impressive.

 

Quddus played up until the last couple of games so stop exaggerating his injuries. Our LB's stunk regardless of injuries and if your argument is centered upon injuries to Koa Misi and Jelani Jenkins, our group of LB's stunk to begin with. Maxwell played every game until week 14 or 15 or so. The Jones injury was significant, ill give you that, but every team has a significant injury throughout the year.

We also had Suh play every game, Landry, Stills, Wake, Tannehill played every game until week 15, Ajayi. We had significant injuries, but we also had a lot of core pieces play the entire year or at least most of the entire year, so stop acting like every one of our best players was injured and we were this miracle team with nothing but 2nd stringers.

 

Im not throwing out the Pitt game. It was pretty obvious that Big Ben was not himself considering he got injured in the second quarter and missed 3 weeks after the game, but if you want to take that game fine, we still got thoroughly embarrassed by the Titans, Bengals, Pats twice, and Ravens.

And even if the Bills beat us both times, they are 9-7 and still an average team. If you are making the argument that we didnt lose to every good team because we beat the ****ing bills you might want to look at their team and season last year.

You think im arguing something im not. I continue to say last year was impressive. What I am actually arguing is that we over achieved and that with the actual talent we have, we are between 7-9 wins than 10, and our point differential reflects that.

 

That is literally all im arguing.

I have said almost nothing about next season. Anything I did say was in regards to the fact that we will not be as lucky with the schedule and that original post i quoted that started this whole conversation was ridden with beyond homer bias. And every team when you return the guys who are injured at the end of the year is better than they were with injuries the previous season. Part of the reason we were exposed and had so many liabilities on the field after injuries is because we continue to have no depth year in and year out. Sure, if we remain completely healthy next year, we will probably be a lot better. But every team has injuries, and it is the depth of the teams that have injuries that allows them to continue to be good. The Pats are even able to trade defensive starters in the middle of the year in smart business decisions that would make most teams suffer on the field at least, but because they have great depth and a great scheme, they dont get picked on with liabilities on the field.

Have you ever noticed how when the dolphins seem to have an injury at CB, LB, or S, that injury is readily apparent and it appears that the other team is continually attacking those holes? Have you ever noticed that when the patriots have an injury, those injuries appear to be a lot less noticable?

 

Why do people lie about this stuff (the part I underlined)? You realize that it's easy to disprove you because there are records of the games all over the internet?

Ben missed one game due to needing his meniscus cleaned up. Not 3 weeks. lol

When Ben got hurt it was the end of the 2nd quarter and the Dolphins were up 16-8. Landry came in and finished the last series of the 1st half for Ben.

The Dolphins offense scored 2 more TD's in the 2nd half. And Ben looked fine when he was tossing up that 25yrd TD pass in the 4th quarter.

 

He missed 1 game. They had a bye in there as well. The dolphins played him on 10/16. He didnt come back from that injury until 11/6. And the game he came back he had his second worse game of the year aside from the dolphins game. He had 83 yards until their last drive of the game and he was playing with a hyperextended knee, so if you want to continue to feign ignorance and act like Big Ben was perfectly fine, go ahead, but considering he didnt play for 3 weeks and the first game he did play he looked awful, he was probably not close to 100% right after injuring the knee.

And 16-8? We were really laying that beat down on them werent we!!!

 

Yes, Phins, we all understand that the Phins had no depth. We also understand that, if healthy, the team is better than the team on the field last season. You continue to minimize the injuries, but that see to be because you've taken the stanice that the Dolphins are no good. The only way to support that is by minimizing injuries, and discounting the games they won. Fact is, we had tons of injuries, at key positions, during the time when we ripped off a bunch of wins, and made the playoffs. Perhaps you remember the previous 5 or 6 seasons where we lost those close games. Last year, we won them, and we did it despite injuries.

It was an impressive season.

 

They were also playing the Ravens. He wasn't playing with a hyperextended knee. You implied that he missed 3 weeks due to injury. Not true. Hell, he didn't even miss three weeks. He missed one game, then the bye, then he played. He had a torn meniscus. It was torn BEFORE the Dolphins game. He just aggravated it and needed it cleaned up. He had a scope done and they trimmed some off. I had the same thing when I was in the military. I had a scope and less than one week later was participating in PT and drills with Motrin as my pain relief.

Again, I see you giving all these "but they were injured" excuses for every team except the Dolphins. Why?

 

PHINS18- The Dolphins were just no good and don't use injuries as an excuse! They never beat a good team nor did they beat bad teams by more than 7 points.

US- They beat the Steelers pretty handedly.

PHINS18- Yeah, but the Steelers had injuries.


lol

 

And again, every team has injuries. Just about every team aside from the bottom feeders will be significantly better if they didnt have injuries.

I havent taken the stance that the Dolphins are no good. I have taken the stance that they are much more like a 7-9 or 8-8 team last year than they were 10-6. Thats not calling them bad, that is calling them more average than they are good. You can call it discounting the games they won, I call it taking the games they won in proper context. If they showed that they were significantly better than those teams in all those games, you wouldnt see me "discounting the games they won." but the fact of the matter is that while yes they did win the games, they struggled mightily and had coin flip games against teams that, if they were really all that much better than they had been for the previous 3-4 years, they would have beaten handily more often.

Aside from Pittsburgh, look at the games they won. Look at how much they struggled in so many of those games. Look at how bad just about all those teams they played were.

We had a lot of injuries. Every team has injuries. Not to mention the people who got injured are guys who seem to be injured every year. Albert, Pouncey, Maxwell has missed games each of the last 3 years, Misi is always injured. You also seem to be ignoring that our best players played just about every game. Wake, Suh, Ajayi, Landry, Stills, James, Tunsil, Kiko. Tannehill played every game until the last 3 games of the year. Every team has injuries. We will have injuries again next season. If you want to stake your claim to us being better next year by relying on no significant injuries, go right ahead. You will be dissapointed.

Im not saying the dolphins are bad, all im saying is they significantly over achieved last year due to a very easy schedule and were proven to be significantly worse than just about every good team they played. Point differential doesnt lie, we were outscored by 17 points last year, a number that has over the course of NFL history coincided with around 7-8 wins.

 

You are really terrible at nuance. I have already said numerous times the steelers win was a good win. I also said that it does come with a caveat that Big ben was injured in the second quarter and couldnt move throughout the rest of the game. Doesnt change that we still beat them handily, but it provides what you seem to really hate: context.

We played coin flip games 8 other times with teams who you are arguing that we are significantly better than. Good teams would beat bad teams handily at least once in that stretch. Look at the records of the teams we played and how they played against other elite teams and you will see that.

 

Hey, Phins, maybe reread the title of the thread, then reread the whole thread, then maybe you'll understand why people are arguing with you.

 

Well that's all relative to the talent level of the teams, good teams don't have lots of close games vs bottom dwellers, also good teams beat other good teams, we got trounced vs good teams.

League avgs are good for league avgs, but are not so good for individual teams, just because something is generally true league wide doesn't mean it pertains to each individual team, and using the best/worst team in the league as an example isn't a good example.

If we were to look at avg record in a season league wide(around .500), that doesn't help predicting wins for individual teams, same as yds, TDs etc.

So if you win a lot of close games vs sub par teams but lose most games vs good teams handily, that isn't a sign of skill, that's a sign you need to get better.

 

This is literally the only point im making. Bingo.

 

Gotta read more than one post. Look at posts #252 and #262. Clearly I did at least some digging into the actual percentage differences between how often good teams have close games vs. average teams having close games.

And that difference is 5-10% generally speaking (5-10% of total). This translates to about 1 extra game per season that an average team will have a close game (0-7 point differential) compared to the best or worst teams.

Yes, the difference exists but it doesn't help or make the argument phins18 was making that somehow our record in close games is a sign of underperforming last season because he listed something on the order of 8 such games. So chalk one of them if you wish up to "being average" but no more.

 

Sorry if its been said but we are better simply by being in the 2nd year of gase's offensive and defensive systems. Our players weren't on the same page for the first five or so games. Gase had to simplify the offense. Year two everyone will be on the same page and were going to get a lot more complicated meaning more difficult to plan against. We are better.now lets hope we stay healthy

 

It's getting a little chippy in here. I agree that we need to be much more dominant of a team. We should blow out the sub par teams and the margin of win should decrease as we get into the good then elite teams. That should be the expectation. We never should have gotten into a shootout with the Browns as an example.

I know it's the NFL and even the bad teams still have tons of talent but our amount of talent should always outweigh the subpar teams. Too bad the only bad team we play next year will be Jets and Rams.

 

Okay, but we lost to NE in week 17 and the Steelers in the playoffs without Tannehill. You've made every excuse under the sun for Big Ben and why the team couldn't function without them, then you ignore when our QB goes down. It doesn't work both ways- either it matters or it doesn't.

And in some ways, you're right- we blew out the Steelers with Tannehill. We did lose to NE by 7 in the first game, but it literally came down to the last pass. So make sure you mark that caveat on the Pat's Super Bowl win...they only got it because RT17 was injured (according to your logic).