A maybe more interesting case is a player who went to 4 conference championship games but lost all of them.Brady is the most impressive player in any sport ever, and by a wide margin in football. I am incredibly impressed by the stat that I think defines him: He has been to ten Super Bowls and won 7.
Doing that is going to give you a great winning percentage. But I still don’t really see any independent significance to the winning percentage. At the risk of infuriating the board further, 60, 75, 90? Don’t see how any of these would matter much or add or detract from 7 and 10. You can have a great winning percentage and not be Tom Brady. And you were the one who made the point on the other side that my make believe player with 5 one and dones would still be GOAT 2.
Given that I have become the villain of page 42 of the Tompa Bay thread, at this point I am trolling a bit. The truth is that the six wins in the years he didn’t go to the Super Bowl were each amazing and memorable and there are some fan bases that would love to have those alone. Tony Romo would take half of them. And anything that calls out the hypocrisy of Manning ball washing is fun too.
But I still just don't see much INDEPENDENTLY interesting about the win percentage. I still see it as mostly an artifact of the stat that really matters that we all already have branded on our souls.
that player could be 8-4 (depending on byes), which is a great percentage.
That being said, you’re not wrong and neither are they.
You’re ‘little bit of trolling’ is being matched by other’s ‘little bit of piling on by the jackals’.