|
|
#31
01-04-2007, 09:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
[ QUOTE ]
I think I get it. Running backs are a non-factor in the game of football and should be eliminated. Thanks for opening up my eyes. [/ QUOTE ] Running back is probably the most overrated position in football, but that doesn't make it unimportant. 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. Obviously I'm over simplifying the argument by ignoring things like turnovers, first-downs and touchdowns... but this is the easiest way to explain why it is so hard for a non-QB to deserve MVP. If you want to take things like turnovers/first downs/touchdowns into account, you can go over to footballoutsiders.com and look at their DPAR (Defense-adjusted Points Above Replacement) numbers. Its no surprise that Peyton's is about 3 times higher then LDT. That stat is determined on a play by play analysis of the season and takes all those things in to account. It is saying that replacing Peyton with a replacement level QB would cost your offense 3 times as many points over the coarse of this season as replacing LDT with a replacement level running back would. And if that seems completely counter-intuitive to you, you probably aren't watching close enough when you watch the NFL or are completely blinded by sports center and fantasy football. 
|
|
#32
01-04-2007, 10:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
Jeff Garcia thinks you can just stick an aging replacement QB in for a superstar QB, and nothing really changes. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#33
01-04-2007, 10:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
I think an RB's relative value goes up on a team that is really good, and a QB's relative value goes up on a team that is bad.
This is because on a winning team, you will often times have the lead, and need to eat up the clock with a good, reliable RB who can hold onto the ball late. On a bad team, you are often behind, and thus, are required to pass more to catch up, and are rarely dependent on eating clock. This is where your QB is way way more valuable than your RB. I think on a very good team, the gap is far far less. You have to factor in that on a winning team, it is sort of a given that both the RB and the QB will already be good players, though.
|
|
#34
01-04-2007, 10:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
[ QUOTE ]
Jeff Garcia thinks you can just stick an aging replacement QB in for a superstar QB, and nothing really changes. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Not sure if you're being sarcastic. But he has been a pro-bowl QB on the 49ers. Also we can ignore the detroit year since...well detroit is a black hole.
|
|
#35
01-04-2007, 10:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
[ QUOTE ]
I think an RB's relative value goes up on a team that is really good, and a QB's relative value goes up on a team that is bad. This is because on a winning team, you will often times have the lead, and need to eat up the clock with a good, reliable RB who can hold onto the ball late. On a bad team, you are often behind, and thus, are required to pass more to catch up, and are rarely dependent on eating clock. This is where your QB is way way more valuable than your RB. I think on a very good team, the gap is far far less. You have to factor in that on a winning team, it is sort of a given that both the RB and the QB will already be good players, though. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Guys, just because Running game = Valuable, != RB = Valuable. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#36
01-04-2007, 10:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Guys, just because Running game = Valuable, != RB = Valuable. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] I'm sort of designating the RB as the "running game". I wasn't trying to imply that an RB isn't dependent on a good line. But a good QB is helped drastically by a good O-line as well.
|
|
#37
01-04-2007, 10:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Guys, just because Running game = Valuable, != RB = Valuable. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] I'm sort of designating the RB as the "running game". I wasn't trying to imply that an RB isn't dependent on a good line. But a good QB is helped drastically by a good O-line as well. [/ QUOTE ] QB is far less dependent on O-Line and WR than RB is on blocking.
|
|
#38
01-04-2007, 10:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Guys, just because Running game = Valuable, != RB = Valuable. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] I'm sort of designating the RB as the "running game". I wasn't trying to imply that an RB isn't dependent on a good line. But a good QB is helped drastically by a good O-line as well. [/ QUOTE ] So your counter argument to the "LT doesn't deserve to be MVP" argument is "But 8 players are more valuable than 1 player!"?
|
|
#39
01-04-2007, 10:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Wasn't he just a coke head? Big difference... [/ QUOTE ] both [ QUOTE ] How about LDT? [/ QUOTE ] LDT>LT>LT2 [/ QUOTE ] Or LTD for LT and TDs
|
|
#40
01-04-2007, 11:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LT AP\'s MVP
[ QUOTE ]
LT had one of the greatest if not greatest season ever by a RB. [/ QUOTE ] Priest Holmes and Marshall Faulk have had better seasons in the last 10 years alone.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
