Power Rankings and MVP Race Thread

[incognito_man]

I like ranking by tiers, going finer than tiers just results in folks arguing why they're 13th and not 11th because they beat 12 or something

Tier 1: Kansas City

Tier 2: Green Bay, Carolina, New England

Tier 3: Denver, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Buffalo, Seattle, Detroit, Dallas, Washington, Pittsburgh

Tier 4: Baltimore, Jacksonville, Minnesota, New Orleans, Tampa Bay, Cincy, Houston, Oakland, Rams

Tier 5: Arizona, NYJ, Tennessee

Tier 6: Chicago, Cleveland, San Fran, Miami, NYG, Indy, LAC

[strat1080]

2 hours ago, tonyto36 said:

That wasn't my point.  My point was that the Chiefs have a couple guys you can't be sure about lasting a full season (Houston/Hunt) and not much depth across the roster.

Brady is one guy the Patriots can't do without, but outside of him the Patriots have plenty of depth to withstand losses pretty much anywhere.  Hightower is possibly the only other guy that you could argue the Patriots would be significantly worse without.  The Patriots could get by without Gronk, and no one else strikes me as a doomsday scenario.   Maybe if both Solder/Cannon go out.  

Yeah. I agree. Its a given that if a star QB goes down that team isn't going to be able to win in the playoffs. Not a very good point by Chiefer. We all know from experience that Tom Brady can win with key injuries as well as Rodgers with key injuries. Alex Smith has not proven that. It remains to be seen what Smith and the Chiefs can do if they have some key injuries and face some adversity. What Brady and Rodgers are doing this year with their horrible OLs is nothing short of amazing. Aaron Rodgers just keeps winning with practice squad guys from other teams starting on OL.

[Chiefer]

5 hours ago, tonyto36 said:

That wasn't my point.  My point was that the Chiefs have a couple guys you can't be sure about lasting a full season (Houston/Hunt) and not much depth across the roster.

Brady is one guy the Patriots can't do without, but outside of him the Patriots have plenty of depth to withstand losses pretty much anywhere.  Hightower is possibly the only other guy that you could argue the Patriots would be significantly worse without.  The Patriots could get by without Gronk, and no one else strikes me as a doomsday scenario.   Maybe if both Solder/Cannon go out.  

Why can't we be sure about Hunt? He's a rookie, with fresh legs and a style that's easy to figure out. 

And Houston, a Chiefs defender ran into his knee, then the docs didn't find out about his ACL till the offseason. He's not injury-prone, just bad luck.

Besides that point you seem to be implying a doomsday scenario, so why does the Chiefs doomsday scenario seem more realistic then your own? 

Its like me telling you that Gronk, Hightower, Cannon and Solder are gonna get hurt and I'm not worried about the Patriots.(Pretty sure all these players have been hurt in the past) 

I don't dwell on hypotheticals, what's going on now is what's really happening. Like the Chiefs beating the pants off of your Patriots on opening day, if anything you should be worried that it doesn't happen again.

[Jakuvious]

On 10/9/2017 at 6:02 PM, iknowcool said:

They started off 9-0 in 2013 and finished 2nd in their division.

Granted you don't have a team like the Manning-led Broncos in the division, but you never know.  Their upcoming schedule isn't exactly a walk in the park.

The year we started 9-0 then fell back, we were beating up on some of the worst teams in the league. I believe the Eagles were the only team we beat in that run that ended up with a winning record. You say our upcoming schedule isn't a walk in the park, but I'd argue that it's honestly easier than what we've faced so far. We've already beaten a few of the best teams in the NFL. There's also some pretty obvious differences in team quality between 2013 and now (our passing game was pretty garbage then.) It's early to say anything about homefield, for sure, but that 2013 team really doesn't have too much to do with this one.

[Jakuvious]

14 hours ago, tonyto36 said:

As a Patriots fan, I'm not too worried about the Chiefs come playoffs, just because I think the Chiefs don't have the depth to handle a full season grind.  I think if any of Kelce or Hill get hurt or Hunt gets hurt/slows down to rookie wall, the Chiefs are going to be a slog offensively.  On the other side, any of Peters, Houston or anyone else in the front 7 go down and it could be bad.   Houston in particular it seems sketchy to assume he'll be healthy come playoffs

This is a very strange argument to make given what has happened so far this season. We have had, at one point or another, injuries to starters at SS, CB, OLB (including that OLB's backup), NT, LG, C, RG, WR, RB, TE, and K, and excelled through all of them. Depth is one of the primary reasons that we're undefeated right now. If we didn't have depth the season would already be over (as it has been in past years when we have lost players like Charles or Berry to season ending injuries.) We have one of the deepest and most thoroughly talented rosters in the NFL. That's why we're winning. And the fact that aside from Berry and Ware, all of those players should be coming back at some point in the season, just means we should be a stronger and healthier team by the time the playoffs roll around. Even if we're unlucky late in the season too.

Second, why does it make any sense to expect Hunt to get hurt? Or Kelce? Or Hill? Or Peters? If you want to say Houston has been hurt before, that almost makes sense, but I'd be less concerned about Houston going down as a Chiefs fan than I would be about Gronk going down as a Pats fan. Or Charles/Anderson as a Broncos fan. You're applying something that's more or less random (injuries) to the Chiefs and no one else.

And hell, even if Hunt did go down, why would the offense be a slog? It isn't like we lead the league in yards per pass attempt or anything.

14 hours ago, tonyto36 said:

Smith:  35, 28, 21, 37, 37  (33.8 average)

Brady:  36, 39, 35, 45, 40.  (39.0 average)

Rodgers:  42, 50, 42, 26, 29.   (37.8 average)

Brees:  37, 45, 29, 41 (38.75 average)

It's easier to throw less passes when you complete a higher percentage of them for more yards per pass, for less interceptions, and for more first downs.

[Jakuvious]

9 hours ago, strat1080 said:

Yeah. I agree. Its a given that if a star QB goes down that team isn't going to be able to win in the playoffs. Not a very good point by Chiefer. We all know from experience that Tom Brady can win with key injuries as well as Rodgers with key injuries. Alex Smith has not proven that. It remains to be seen what Smith and the Chiefs can do if they have some key injuries and face some adversity. What Brady and Rodgers are doing this year with their horrible OLs is nothing short of amazing. Aaron Rodgers just keeps winning with practice squad guys from other teams starting on OL.

You mean like we already have? This year, and many others?

[Hunter2_1]

Smith is still Smith, but has hit on a few deep balls. His average throws through air is still down in the late 20s. The 77% completion is indicative of his play style still. He relies on YAC a lot, which is why his Av/attempt is up on previous years.

Still, I'd take him over anyone not named Brady, Rodgers, and Brees so far. 

[childofpudding]

The bizarre MVP arguments have already begun.

Apparently Kareem Hunt and the OL has to go on IR and Alex Smith still has to perform amazingly in order for him to be the MVP front-runner.

[Chiefer]

2 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Smith is still Smith, but has hit on a few deep balls. His average throws through air is still down in the late 20s. The 77% completion is indicative of his play style still. He relies on YAC a lot, which is why his Av/attempt is up on previous years.

Still, I'd take him over anyone not named Brady, Rodgers, and Brees so far. 

 

[Chiefer]

6 minutes ago, tonyto36 said:

No one said anything about Smith being inefficient deep throwing it.  IIRC I heard an ESPN statistic that Smith is still throwing downfield at roughly the same rate, it's just that balls have been completed more.  Which I'm sure he should be credited for, but also I don't think it's a coincidence that Hunt showed up and started dominating games and all of a sudden play action and deep passes have become more effective for Smith.  

I honestly don't think play action deep passes are a big part of the offense. 

Hunt helps sure, but so does Kelce and Hill, and Wilson and Conley, and Robinson. Smith is seeing the deep man and throwing it to him more accurately. He's the centerpiece of the whole offense, he's in the driver seat and taking full advantage.

Through 5 games he's up there with some HOF type QBs, and nobody wants to give him credit.

Good! That's how this team likes it, keep giving them no credit. Make excuses, they'd rather have it that way anyways tbf.

[childofpudding]

21 minutes ago, tonyto36 said:

No that's not true.  The difference is Smith hasn't been the reason the Chiefs have been winning.   That's not that Smith has been bad, but he's been fortunate to be on a loaded team.  It's the same nonsense I remember from Packers fans years ago.  Rodgers was good but he also had a stupid loaded receiving corps and good OL.  

Yes he is, the dude is balling and has been absolutely clutch. Multiple times vs. the Texans and Redskins he got key first downs through the air or with his feet. That may change, but for now he is the MVP of that team and of the league. Brady and Rodgers both have plenty of offensive talent as well, by the way. Gronkowski, Cooks, Nelson, Adams, etc.

One criticism is his tendency to take bad sacks at bad times, but that's pretty much it.

[Hunter2_1]

1 hour ago, Chiefer said:

 

Yeah, he's hit on deep balls, as I've said. How many has he attempted compared to balls thrown between 0-5 yards? He's still Alex Smith, but he's able to be productive down the field too. 

[Chiefer]

2 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Yeah, he's hit on deep balls, as I've said. How many has he attempted compared to balls thrown between 0-5 yards? He's still Alex Smith, but he's able to be productive down the field too. 

I think it's more of a product of Smith combined with Reids offense and the injured OL. We saw against the Patriots that with a healthy offense Alex can sling it downfield like anybody else.

But @tonyto36 looks like you're gonna get your wish. Injury report for today has Houston, Albert Wilson, Kelce all not practicing due to injuries.

I wonder if they don't play that Alex will get some credit for the win. But Hill and Hunt are healthy so probably not.

 

 

[Jakuvious]

8 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Smith is still Smith, but has hit on a few deep balls. His average throws through air is still down in the late 20s. The 77% completion is indicative of his play style still. He relies on YAC a lot, which is why his Av/attempt is up on previous years.

Still, I'd take him over anyone not named Brady, Rodgers, and Brees so far. 

Ultimately, how is this different from any other QB in the NFL now, though? Smith hitting on deep balls basically is the equivalent of most upper echelon QBs nowadays. Even the greats are primarily throwing short, high percentage passes. It's the current landscape of the NFL.

[Jakuvious]

5 hours ago, tonyto36 said:

The Chiefs rely on key players that if they go out, IMO the Chiefs will be in a ton of trouble.  Without Houston you look a lot like the defense last year that couldn't stop anyone.  If Hunt goes out, Smith goes back to being an average QB who can't handle a full load.  Without Hill, suddenly Smith is not a downfield passer.   Like most teams, there are key players I don't think the Chiefs can get by without.  The difference is Hunt/Houston have legitimate worries about making it through the season.

See, you're going to say in the next paragraph that I quote, that the Hunt comments are about him being a rookie and hitting a "wall," but again, here, you talk about Hunt having legitimate worries about making it through the season. You're just making things up in regards to that, at this point.

For Hill going out, Smith has completed 15 passes so far this year over 15 yards in air yards. 8 to Kelce. 1 to Hunt. 3 to Hill. 2 to Conley. 1 to Wilson. Hill has not actually received a substantial portion of Smith's more aggressive passes. It's not like he's just throwing bombs to Hill and is staying in a conservative little shell otherwise.

Without Houston, you say we look a lot like the defense last year? You mean the defense that was 7th in scoring? Sure, the season would definitely be over if we were that bad.

Quote

Hunt I tried to specify rookie wall.   I didn't try to imply they're likely to get hurt.  Houston I do think it's fair to say he's more likely to get hurt.  I think Houston would be a bigger loss to the Chiefs than Gronk to the Patriots.  The Patriots, unlike circa 2013, have enough to get by without Gronk on offense.  I don't think the Chiefs have enough at LB to without him.  

See here where you say you didn't imply he'd get hurt. See before where you said there are worries about him making it through the season? See the contradiction?

Without Houston we have Ford and Hali starting at OLB at the end of the season. Not great, but not bad. DJ and Sorensen are excellent blitzers. Jones, RNR, and Bailey are all well capable of getting pressure on the DL. It would be unpleasant, but we would survive. I'd argue that we have more quality options in the front 7 than New England has as pass catchers.

Quote

It's also easier to throw less passes for better efficiency when you have arguably the leagues best running game.  Teams go into games to stop Hunt, not Smith.

Now? Maybe. I suppose. New England certainly didn't go into week 1 trying to stop Hunt. It takes a couple of weeks for teams to adjust to that kind of thing. Teams are just not starting to gameplan for Hunt. For most of the games so far it has been clear that stopping Hill is priority #1, stopping Kelce is priority #2. Which is, by proxy, trying to stop Smith as a passer.

And all this credit being given to Hunt instead of Smith, yes, Hunt is excellent. I'm completely blown away by how good he has been so far. But if all it took was a great RB to make something click in Smith, he had Gore. He had Charles. Those players, if anything, just encouraged his conservative tendencies. Smith himself deserves credit for how he has stepped up his game this year. He is playing incredibly well. Period. Full stop.