The above is the post that I originally quoted you on.
Below in regular print are my comments, and beneath each of my snippets are
bolded comments that YOU made in the post I originally quoted you on. Where you're getting the idea that I don't seem to understand what's going on is baffling. If you're using some type of satire or facetiousness that I'm not catching, please enlighten me. But it's pretty difficult to mistake the comments that you made:
This part was your way of suggesting that because he hasn't put up THIS type of production since 2013 that he's declined. All I was saying is that using statistics is a lazy way to come to the conclusion that a player is declining. Compare Drew Brees to Russell Wilson. It's insanity. Role, philosophy, etc all play a major role in what type of production a player is able to have, along with who is throwing him the football.
Which leads into:
YOU said the stats have proved he isn't the same player. I didn't say that. So lets forget about the stats and go to the eye test, which to your credit you also mentioned. Like I said, I think that Graham has declined some, but not enough to where he shouldn't be able to make a huge difference on this team with the greatest thrower of the football in the history of the game behind center.
You and I are not far off on our thoughts, I was simply saying that your usage of his numbers in 2013 is a logically flawed way of determining whether this particular player has declined. If Graham would have went from Wilson to Brees and didn't improve his stats, that would be one thing. But he went from a mostly passing oriented offensive attack, to an organizational philosophy to build around a great defense and running game. No one will mistake Seattle for an elite passing offense. IMO, you should be accounting for this. If you disagree, then fine. But don't try to make the argument that I didn't understand what you were trying to suggest.