Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

[ QUOTE ]
Cross posted from the Colts/Chiefs game, but I thought that this one stat emphasized the greatness of Peyton Manning more than any other that I have seen:

Bob Kravitz from Indy Star had this interesting stat today:

Since 1978 there have been 40 teams that have given up more than 2500 rushing yards in a single season. 39 have missed the playoffs. The exception: You 2006 Indianapolis Colts

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that great a stat, since it doesn't factor in rushing attempts. The Jets were actually worse at defending the run than the Colts.

Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

[ QUOTE ]
People who say the MVP shouldn't just be the guy with the highest DVOA or DPAR. I agree. If two people are close Peyton is #1 by so much that it not much else should be considered.
Look at baseball MVP threads guys didn't say he should be MVP because his VORP or WARP are the highest by 3 runs. All of these stats have flaws in the sense they cannot perfectly capture a players value, but these stats do much better jobs than stats like TDs.
People who say obviously QB's are more valuable than RB's, but it's unfair to always give them the MVP. Either they are voting for an award which isn't MVP or they are borderline retarded.
CDS the Saints would be better with Peyton and some of the stuff you mentioned such as Brees coming off shoulder surgery are irrelevant when discussing MVP.
Also Noodleman hit it right on the head.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah the shoulder thing your right...but I simply don't buy the argument by most that Peyton is so good he performs fantastic no matter the team/system/personel.

Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

[ QUOTE ]

but I simply don't buy the argument by most that Peyton is so good he performs fantastic no matter the team/system/personel.

[/ QUOTE ]

That imply one of two things: That Peyton Manning is not a Hall of Fame quarterback, or that Hall of Fame quarterbacks can not perform exceedingly well regardless of team / system / personnel.

I think both are extremely incorrect.

Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

but I simply don't buy the argument by most that Peyton is so good he performs fantastic no matter the team/system/personel.

[/ QUOTE ]

That imply one of two things: That Peyton Manning is not a Hall of Fame quarterback, or that Hall of Fame quarterbacks can not perform exceedingly well regardless of team / system / personnel.

I think both are extremely incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 1st isn;t true...2nd is.

Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

LT's the man. Manning and his brother are weak.

Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

[ QUOTE ]


"
Running back is probably the most overrated position in football. Consider this, Peyton passed the ball 557 times this season and LDT touched the ball just over 400 times. If you were to assume Peyton was going to gain the same number of yards per attempt that LDT does per touch, Peyton would obviously be more important because LDT only gets 70% as many touches. Now if you add factor in the extra 2+ yards per touch Peyton gets, its just not close anymore."

That basically sums up everything. This is inarguable. Manning is loads better than any other player in the NFL. QB is the most important position by far in the NFL, and again, it's not close. They have the most touches, and therefore the most impact on the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

It may be "inarguable", but I want to throw some tidbits out there that I may not have been discussed yet. I'll play the devils advocate for LDT, since apparently everyone on this board thinks he's a horrible choice for MVP.
Yes, Peyton gets more yards per touch than LDT. He also has like up to 4 guys to throw to, and an option to run on every play. He literally has more ways to burn a D than an RB does.

Keep in mind that when Peyton gets X yards per touch (pass, since we know he never runs), some of that credit has to go to the receivers. Not half, but certainly some. Sure Peyton is accurate as hell, but you can't tell me he doesn't get occasional help from Marvin and the boys. Hell, Marvin made one of the best catches I've seen this year on a TD. Peyton can't get 100% of the credit for Yards-per-touch when things like this happen.

When an RB gets the ball, he basically IS the option, and there sure as hell aren't 4 or 5 holes that his O-line made for him to hit on each touch. Usually one, if he's lucky. Peyton has several options on each touch.

You also have to account for what LDT does downfield that other RB's can't do, like lay out some damaging stiff-arms to pick up an extra 15 yards here and there. Once LDT hits a hole, it's ain't over. He does some amazing things downfield that other RB's usually can't. (This argument has little to do with Peyton, as basically I'm comparing LDT to his peers).

Also you guys are forgetting that LDT had a couple TD passes this year, so I think he accounted for 33 TD's all-told.

Also factor in LDT's occassional blocking when an OLB is rushing the passer. Not that other RB's don't do that. But you have to add that to his value above Y/T. Just because he doesn't get the ball every snap doesn't mean he isn't blocking, or maybe even open somewhere but not getting the ball.


Also factor in that a QB's numbers go up bigtime when they are trailing late. Because they basically never run the ball, and the D is playing soft to not give up huge gains late. Peyton lost 4 games this year, so I haven't looked at the numbers, but I'm pretty sure he benefitted from getting several attempts to come back late through the air.
Hell, you can routinely see QB's add another 50+ yards late in the game when they are down. Those yards are pretty much meaningless if they still lose the game, and should probably not even count, but meh.

Also take into account that LDT has presumably never called his kicker a "drunken idiot" like Peyton did. His players all seem to love him. He's pretty valuable to those guys. Just look at how they celebrated his efforts when he got the record this year. I think LDT is a pretty damn valuable guy to have on your team.

Honestly, with all this said, I really could care less if Peyton won it. It would in no way have been a shocker. I'm just trying to make arguments for LDT since all the math nerds are pissed off tonight about Peyton getting snuffed.

Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

[ QUOTE ]

He also has like up to 4 guys to throw to, and an option to run on every play. He literally has more ways to burn a D than an RB does.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why bother this route of argument? Who's more dependant on his teammates: LT or Peyton? With a below-average offensive line, he'll average 3.6 ypc, like his rookie year. Peyton Manning made BRANDON STOKLEY a somebody.

[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that when Peyton gets X yards per touch (pass, since we know he never runs), some of that credit has to go to the receivers. Not half, but certainly some.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some, yes, but their jobs are made much easier by the fact that they only have to get open a LITTLE, and have the ultimate confidence in knowing that if they run their routes right and are open, they will get the ball. Peyton does not play favorites for the sake of playing favorites, and as a result the jobs of WRs are a lot easier.

[ QUOTE ]
Sure Peyton is accurate as hell, but you can't tell me he doesn't get occasional help from Marvin and the boys.

[/ QUOTE ]

He also gets makes people like Ben Utecht contributors.

[ QUOTE ]
When an RB gets the ball, he basically IS the option, and there sure as hell aren't 4 or 5 holes that his O-line made for him to hit on each touch.

[/ QUOTE ]

For the RB to make stuff happen, blocks have to open it for him. Peyton needs less daylight to hit his WRs than LT needs to burst through blocks. I would also say LT's blocking > Peyton's receiving. I would also say the fact that LT has Gates lets him face less men in the box. At times, everyone knows Peyton is going to throw, and they can't stop him anyway. You can't blitz him, you can't sack him, you can't sit back in your zone coverage. The best way to stop him is a 3-4 with a lot of great LBs to bring pressure. If you really, really wanted to, you could stop LT. Remember, LT wasn't even having a great season until teams started respecting Rivers.

[ QUOTE ]
You also have to account for what LDT does downfield that other RB's can't do, like lay out some damaging stiff-arms to pick up an extra 15 yards here and there.

[/ QUOTE ]

DPAR counts it.

[ QUOTE ]
Once LDT hits a hole, it's ain't over. He does some amazing things downfield that other RB's usually can't. (This argument has little to do with Peyton, as basically I'm comparing LDT to his peers).

[/ QUOTE ]

Peyton is much farther ahead of his peers YEAR AFTER YEAR than LT is. Hell, the Chargers don't MISS A BEAT when Michael Turner comes in.

[ QUOTE ]
Also you guys are forgetting that LDT had a couple TD passes this year, so I think he accounted for 33 TD's all-told.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great. It's too bad TDs aren't that important. Manning had 35 TDs, if you really want to compare. What, your excuse is that Manning gets more of an opportunity to throw the ball, and, in general, gets more of an opportunity to accumulate value? Well yeah, that's the point -- that's the inherent value a QB has over a RB.

[ QUOTE ]
Also factor in that a QB's numbers go up bigtime when they are trailing late. Because they basically never run the ball, and the D is playing soft to not give up huge gains late.

[/ QUOTE ]

They have to be trailing by a lot for garbage stats to come into play, and by that same logic, more desperate throwing attempts to come back = more turnovers. Even assuming Manning had a lot of opportunities to pile up garbage stats -- he hasn't -- it's a testament to how great a QB is that he still keeps his TOs low. He fumbled twice all year! That is mind-boggling for a QB.

[ QUOTE ]
Peyton lost 4 games this year, so I haven't looked at the numbers, but I'm pretty sure he benefitted from getting several attempts to come back late through the air.
Hell, you can routinely see QB's add another 50+ yards late in the game when they are down. Those yards are pretty much meaningless if they still lose the game, and should probably not even count, but meh.

[/ QUOTE ]

See above. Lmao @ it being meaningless. If the defense knows you are going to pass, and still can't stop it, but end up winning anyway, it's meaningless? Wtf? And do you REALLY think ANY defense is saying, "Yeah, let's play super soft and let Manning pick us apart so they can come back and beat us!" Um, no. The Colts are the most explosive offense in the NFL, and if you play worse as a defense just because they are behind, that is beyond stupid.

[ QUOTE ]
Also take into account that LDT has presumably never called his kicker a "drunken idiot" like Peyton did. His players all seem to love him. He's pretty valuable to those guys. Just look at how they celebrated his efforts when he got the record this year. I think LDT is a pretty damn valuable guy to have on your team.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meaningless coachspeak [censored]. Winning breeds chemistry. Nothing more, nothing less. Of course, I could throw out the whole "Peyton calls his own plays!" "Peyton is a head coach / offensive coordinator!" Whoops, looks like I did anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, with all this said, I really could care less if Peyton won it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The phrase is "couldn't care less." Sorry, that bugs me.

[ QUOTE ]
It would in no way have been a shocker. I'm just trying to make arguments for LDT since all the math nerds are pissed off tonight about Peyton getting snuffed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you implying that you don't even believe that LT is really the MVP?

I'm far from a math nerd. In fact, math is my worst subject. I abhor it.

Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

tell peyton he can have the MVP if he fights LDT for it

Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

Vyse,

Logic has no place in this forum. Now shoo.

Re: LT AP\'s MVP
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just trying to make arguments for LDT since all the math nerds are pissed off tonight about Peyton getting snuffed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it amazing that the N-word gets used so often in these discussions. In my adult life I have never seen someone called a nerd in a serious way unless that person was advocating the use of better sports statistics.

Why is that? I'm really curious.