Jump to content

Who will win league MVP?!?!


brownie man

Recommended Posts

On 9/1/2019 at 8:35 PM, diamondbull424 said:

Let’s be real. The Patriots have the GOAT at HC and won 10 games with Matt Cassel at QB the season Brady went down. Brady isn’t the most valuable for that reason alone.

If the award truly went to the most valuable player than I’d say Big Ben should have won a few of those awards, especially when they had those garbage OLs. But that’s besides the point.

hahahahaha what the hell? this is the funniest thing ive ever read

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Soggust said:

But the guy you were quoting didn’t say anything about 2007 (which was obviously an outlier year and not the norm, even for Brady). His point was that NE won 10 (actually 11) games after Brady went down with a guy who hadn’t started a game since high school.

Again, literally no one is saying that a 16-0 season is the same as an 11 win season. The argument is that an 11 win season with a trash QB is an example of why Belichick is the GOAT HC. Doesn’t mean Brady isn’t still the GOAT QB, but he has had help (as ALL GOATs have). 

I think he’s adding the 07 season to provide context. I don’t think that’s a bad thing either. 

The 07 team and 08 team were largely the same in both personnel and quality. The biggest difference was obviously Cassell starting and the SOS was poor. The 08 season is a testament to Belichick, no doubt. But the following 09 season, things were different. Brady was rusty, the schedule toughened up, the defense regressed in a major way, and other pieces began to show their wear (Moss, one of the biggest). 07 gets brought up in conjunction with 08 because the teams were largely similar. The 09 team was different. 

Cassell - who I acknowledge is largely a career backup, at best - did have a pro bowl season and sit in the driver’s seat for a KC playoff appearance. He wasn’t absolutely inept. He was pretty decent for a little while. 

I’m not trying to get into this whole debate, I’m just highlighting that little bit with Cassell and the 07-09 seasons. Belichick and Brady are the GOATs.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

I think he’s adding the 07 season to provide context. I don’t think that’s a bad thing either. 

The 07 team and 08 team were largely the same in both personnel and quality. The biggest difference was obviously Cassell starting and the SOS was poor. The 08 season is a testament to Belichick, no doubt. But the following 09 season, things were different. Brady was rusty, the schedule toughened up, the defense regressed in a major way, and other pieces began to show their wear (Moss, one of the biggest). 07 gets brought up in conjunction with 08 because the teams were largely similar. The 09 team was different. 

Why were things different in 09? I'm asking legitimately - I will admit 100000% I am box score watching a bit at this point (since it was 10 years ago, my memory is a bit rusty on the details). It seems in every way that comparing 08 to 09 is much more legitimate than comparing arguable the greatest season of all time. You say that 09 was different, but I'm struggling to see how.

Just looking at the rosters - 

2007:
Lx5k9qo.jpg

2008:
L9VTIKN.jpg

2009:
UCwtlGF.jpg

This doesn't really show the leading RBs but for reference:

07: Laurence Maroney - 835yds 6tds
08: Sammy Morris - 727yds 7tds
09: Laurence Maroney - 757yds 9tds

I'm struggling to see the major differences in the 09 roster comparatively.

------------------------------------------------------

You mention Brady was rusty. I guess I could buy that, but he didn't have a terrible year and it was comparable to basically every other year in his career, sans 07. 2007 is clearly the outlier year in his career up to that point:

0XyGTdR.jpg

Furthermore, he goes on to have an amazing year in 2010 with his leading receiver being a 848 yard Wes Welker.

------------------------------------------------------

You also mentioned Moss regressed in 09, but again - did he really? His stats seem to align with his entire career sans 07 (maybe 03 too, but again as a whole pretty comparable across his career):

X4mQ1cY.jpg

------------------------------------------------------

Finally:

In 2007 the Patriots had the #4 Defense in Points, #4 in Yards, and #9 in Turnovers.
In 2008 the Patriots had the #8 Defense in Points, #10 in Yards and #20 in Turnovers.
In 2009 the Patriots had the #5 Defense in Points, #11 in Yards, and #12 in Turnovers.

You could make an argument that the defense was better in 2009 than 2008, right? At the very least, once again comparing 08 and 09 seems MUCH more legitimate across the board than comparing 07 to 08, which is the broader point I was trying to make. 

------------------------------------------------------

8 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

Cassell - who I acknowledge is largely a career backup, at best - did have a pro bowl season and sit in the driver’s seat for a KC playoff appearance. He wasn’t absolutely inept. He was pretty decent for a little while. 

Derek Anderson was also a pro-bowler. Clearly, players can have fluke years and prove to be inept over the course of their career.

Cassel played decently for exactly one year in Kansas City (a year where he was assisted by the #1 rushing offense and a Dwayne Bowe who was a TD monster that year), but I'll give him his credit - he was absolutely a good game manager that year and even made the pro bowl (as an alternate). Being "pretty decent for a little while" is stretching it, in my opinion, unless it's understood we are talking about him having exactly one decent season outside of the 2008 campaign in New England.

------------------------------------------------------

9 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

I’m not trying to get into this whole debate, I’m just highlighting that little bit with Cassell and the 07-09 seasons. Belichick and Brady are the GOATs.

Absolutely agree with this personally. I'm just trying to illustrate that it's unfair to compare Cassel's season to arguably the GOAT season when it was clearly an outlier in many of the player's careers, including Brady.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2019 at 4:22 PM, lancerman said:

Can we just acknowledge that Brady was the favorite to win MVP before Wentz went down and that Wentz was leading him in exactly one stat (touchdowns) when he went down

At the time, no Carson was the Favorite, if nothing else than Patriots fatigue 

No injury, he would have finished with another signature win that year at the upstart Rams, and had two games against bad team in the Giants and Raiders to pad his stats.
He would have won the MVP with all that + leading the Eagles to a probably 14-2 record (Foles would play week 17) and homefield in the playoffs his second season. The narrative momentum was there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going out on a limb and saying Rivers will win it this year.  It sounds like they are going to be losing a very good running back in Melvin Gordon, so more of the responsibility will fall on the shoulders of Rivers.  I picked the Chargers to go to the Super Bowl this year too, so I think Rivers is going to come through in the MVP race. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Soggust said:

Why were things different in 09? I'm asking legitimately - I will admit 100000% I am box score watching a bit at this point (since it was 10 years ago, my memory is a bit rusty on the details). It seems in every way that comparing 08 to 09 is much more legitimate than comparing arguable the greatest season of all time. You say that 09 was different, but I'm struggling to see how.

Just looking at the rosters - 

This doesn't really show the leading RBs but for reference:

07: Laurence Maroney - 835yds 6tds
08: Sammy Morris - 727yds 7tds
09: Laurence Maroney - 757yds 9tds

I'm struggling to see the major differences in the 09 roster comparatively.

Complete lack of leadership and quality on defense. Bruschi, Seymour, Vrabel. Big Vince was there but this was the first year without some big names. It was the year that started the defensive breakdowns (09 - the 08 Miami game not withstanding...)

50 minutes ago, Soggust said:

You mention Brady was rusty. I guess I could buy that, but he didn't have a terrible year and it was comparable to basically every other year in his career, sans 07. 2007 is clearly the outlier year in his career up to that point:

The offense transformed in 2010, the following year - mostly because of the personnel. 09 is the 2nd lowest passer rating Brady will put up from 09-current. The T-2nd lowest in TDs. The highest amount of interceptions and INT%. 

I guess it’s hard to quantify statistically, but 09 wasn’t just “oh Brady’s back”. He was coming back from his first major injury and we’ve seen guys take a little bit to re-acclimate. He wasn’t trash or something, but he was below the level we saw him at last and the below the level he’d maintain for the rest of his career after that point. That, combined with what I saw, is enough for me to surmise that the injury had an effect on him even after he got back in 2009.

50 minutes ago, Soggust said:

You also mentioned Moss regressed in 09, but again - did he really? His stats seem to align with his entire career sans 07 (maybe 03 too, but again as a whole pretty comparable across his career):

Moss did regress. His speed didn’t take the top off anymore. Moss was an incredibly underrated WR in terms of intelligence and since he’s one of the GOAT athletes, he was definitely able to be productive. But 09 was when he took real steps back and then he was out of there shortly after. 

50 minutes ago, Soggust said:

Finally:

In 2007 the Patriots had the #4 Defense in Points, #4 in Yards, and #9 in Turnovers.
In 2008 the Patriots had the #8 Defense in Points, #10 in Yards and #20 in Turnovers.
In 2009 the Patriots had the #5 Defense in Points, #11 in Yards, and #12 in Turnovers.

You could make an argument that the defense was better in 2009 than 2008, right? At the very least, once again comparing 08 and 09 seems MUCH more legitimate across the board than comparing 07 to 08, which is the broader point I was trying to make. 

Something to keep in mind with that: NE had the easiest schedule in the league, by a fair margin, in 2008 (.35 lower than the 2nd easiest team). Coming out of the season, their schedule was 25th toughest (.480).

Compare that to the 07 schedule: .535, 2nd toughest in the league by season’s end). Major drop off. 

50 minutes ago, Soggust said:

Derek Anderson was also a pro-bowler. Clearly, players can have fluke years and prove to be inept over the course of their career.

Cassel played decently for exactly one year in Kansas City (a year where he was assisted by the #1 rushing offense and a Dwayne Bowe who was a TD monster that year), but I'll give him his credit - he was absolutely a good game manager that year and even made the pro bowl (as an alternate). Being "pretty decent for a little while" is stretching it, in my opinion, unless it's understood we are talking about him having exactly one decent season outside of the 2008 campaign in New England

Pretty decent is exactly what I’d consider him for 2/3 seasons (the middle season he was bad). You’re bringing up the rushing game and Bowe, but that’s just reinforcing that Cassell was seen as a guy who could take the keys to a hot rod and not wreck it. Give him a car that’d require skill, he’d crash it. But that’s what he did in 08 - he took the best roster in the league and did reasonably well, but still missed the playoffs. 

50 minutes ago, Soggust said:

Absolutely agree with this personally. I'm just trying to illustrate that it's unfair to compare Cassel's season to arguably the GOAT season when it was clearly an outlier in many of the player's careers, including Brady.

Sure it is an outlier, but IMO it gets misused in the “Belichick can get solid enough play out of any QB” type opinions. Cassell played alright in 2008 and only repeated that once - but you said yourself, even Derek Anderson (or Jake Delhomme, Rex Grossman, whomever) can do good things when they’re in a perfect situation. I disagree that that is a cause to use the system argument (especially since NE’s system hasn’t been static).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Sure it is an outlier, but IMO it gets misused in the “Belichick can get solid enough play out of any QB” type opinions. Cassell played alright in 2008 and only repeated that once - but you said yourself, even Derek Anderson (or Jake Delhomme, Rex Grossman, whomever) can do good things when they’re in a perfect situation. I disagree that that is a cause to use the system argument (especially since NE’s system hasn’t been static).

I may not agree with everything in your response, but it is well thought out and certainly makes sense and I respect your opinion. I DO however, completely agree with this line. I know I'm coming off like a Brady hater here, but I'm really not. He's obviously fantastic and the GOAT, imo. I 1000% agree that he is not a product of the system (it's such a stupid argument in general, but whatever). My only point was that getting 11 wins out of Cassel is one of Belichicks best coaching achievements, in my opinion. Also, by isolating 07 in comparison, it misrepresents the picture since that was obviously the most statistically significant year of Brady's amazing career. But again, I can certainly understand where you are coming from in the sense that Cassel didn't turn into some elite QB even with the weapons New England had.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First anomaly or outlier are words used by frustrated fans to justify their own teams losing or to pretend that greatness is not really greatness.

  • Flacco '12, Young '94, and Foles regular season 2013 and playoffs 2017 are not outliers.
  • Its all very talented players putting it all together and coming up huge.
    • Flacco is a 212-136 TD-INT QB. That puts him at 34th all time in that ratio (Young is 8th and Foles is 12th)
  • Or maybe Torrey Smith, Jacoby Jones, and Riley Cooper are just that good?

Exaggeration for effect:  '81, '84, '88, and '89 were outliers. Joe Montana was really a bum! (4-7 in the playoffs over those 11 real years)

 

Actual outliers like Timmy Smith in the Super Bowl are really very rare.

A QB performing at a high level for 4 playoff games or 10-16 regular season games is not really an outlier.

 

Brady is the greatest, a 7 time MVP (3 seasons and 4 Super Bowls)

His 2007 season is exactly like Manning's 2004, 2013, or Rodgers' 2011.

Cassel absolutely is a REPLACEMENT LEVEL average QB (he kinda played like Joe Flacco often plays like in his subpar years)

The point of this is not that he is very good. It is that he is not complete garbage.

If you want to argue that he is 2% or 4%  below average, he still lines up right next to average on the bell curve (record and rating)

Any pretending that the candle that is Matt Cassel resembles the sun that is Tom Brady is asinine foolishness.

Any pretending that Matt Cassel was Sean Salisbury is also foolishness.

 

Edited by SkippyX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/3/2019 at 10:14 AM, Kiltman said:

At the time, no Carson was the Favorite, if nothing else than Patriots fatigue 

No injury, he would have finished with another signature win that year at the upstart Rams, and had two games against bad team in the Giants and Raiders to pad his stats.
He would have won the MVP with all that + leading the Eagles to a probably 14-2 record (Foles would play week 17) and homefield in the playoffs his second season. The narrative momentum was there.

This is inaccurate. Brady was the favorite by every objective ethic at the time 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, lancerman said:

This is inaccurate. Brady was the favorite by every objective ethic at the time 

👍

im not going to argue an unprovable thing anymore. We can both have our truths.

To say either was unequivocally the mvp before Wentz went down would probably be the camps that are the most wrong here. They both had clear claims at it before then. In that case the NFL tends to lean on narrative and newness, so yes I think Wentz had the edge. But if you don’t, cool. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kiltman said:

👍

im not going to argue an unprovable thing anymore. We can both have our truths.

To say either was unequivocally the mvp before Wentz went down would probably be the camps that are the most wrong here. They both had clear claims at it before then. In that case the NFL tends to lean on narrative and newness, so yes I think Wentz had the edge. But if you don’t, cool. 

The odds makers had Brady leading, most of this forum had Brady leading, he was generally considered to be leading. If the season ended the day he went down Brady would have led in all but one stat and he would have had the same record. Wentz wasn’t winning off TD’s alone 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...