Jump to content

MVP Watch FINAL RANKINGS (Version 17.0)


BayRaider

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Drained said:

This list never had Dak in the top 10 ever? Despite record breaking pace?

Lol. 

And why is LJ no.9? He's been pretty ineffective this year so far.

 

MVP award has always been more about team record and efficiently stats than bulk yardage stats. Cowboys were 1-3, plus, I’ll honestly never understand people hyping up bulk yardage like it’s more impressive than overall efficiency. Dak had a 9-4 TD Ratio and was on pace for 15 INTs for the year. 
 

These are the same type of people that argue Brees should of won MVP in 2011 because of his bulk stats, when his 2011 season doesn’t hold a candle to 2011 Aaron Rodgers, the correct and rightful MVP winner. 

Edited by BayRaider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Drained said:

This list never had Dak in the top 10 ever? Despite record breaking pace?

Lol. 

And why is LJ no.9? He's been pretty ineffective this year so far.

 

A player that has great stats on a team that misses the playoffs with a losing record should be in contention for MVP - this is what you're suggesting? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BayRaider said:

MVP award has always been more about team record and efficiently stats than bulk yardage stats. Cowboys were 1-3, plus, I’ll honestly never understand people hyping up bulk yardage like it’s more impressive than overall efficiency. Dak had a 9-4 TD Ratio and was on pace for 15 INTs for the year. 
 

These are the same type of people that argue Brees should of won MVP in 2011 because of his bulk stats, when his 2011 season doesn’t hold a candle to 2011 Aaron Rodgers, the correct and rightful MVP winner. 

I disagree that it wasn’t a legit debate.  Rodgers was better but Brees that year might’ve had the greatest season that didn’t win an MVP.  He broke records and I I believe that was before some of the defensive rule changes as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DirtyDez said:

I disagree that it wasn’t a legit debate.  Rodgers was better but Brees that year might’ve had the greatest season that didn’t win an MVP.  He broke records and I I believe that was before some of the defensive rule changes as well.

2011 was the year everyone was passing for a crazy amount because of the lockout shortened offseason. That year, at the time, had like 3 or 4 of the top 10 all time passing seasons. It may have been before a pass friendly rule change or two, but it was still one of the most QB-friendly years in NFL history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, BayRaider said:

MVP award has always been more about team record and efficiently stats than bulk yardage stats. Cowboys were 1-3, plus, I’ll honestly never understand people hyping up bulk yardage like it’s more impressive than overall efficiency. Dak had a 9-4 TD Ratio and was on pace for 15 INTs for the year. 
 

These are the same type of people that argue Brees should of won MVP in 2011 because of his bulk stats, when his 2011 season doesn’t hold a candle to 2011 Aaron Rodgers, the correct and rightful MVP winner. 

Why does this only apply to QB? LITERALLY  any other position and no one has a problem with bulk/volume stats over efficiency stats.

Bulk stats matter.... alot, for all positions.

No one is penalizing a 2000 yds rusher at 4.4 ypc over a 1200 yd rusher at 6.1 ypc.

Or a 20 sack season playing 200 more snaps than a 12 sack season

Or 2000 yd rec yds with 140 recs vs 1000 yds with 50 recs. 

Bulk up or go home...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Drained said:

This list never had Dak in the top 10 ever? Despite record breaking pace?

Lol. 

And why is LJ no.9? He's been pretty ineffective this year so far.

 

Passing yards is very likely the single worst stat to correlate to good play. 

  

9 minutes ago, Bearerofnews said:

Why does this only apply to QB? LITERALLY  any other position and no one has a problem with bulk/volume stats over efficiency stats.

Correct. A QB has to win games. 

Edited by wackywabbit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bearerofnews said:

A qb has to throw the ball to help his team win. 

A QB has to throw a lot against prevent defenses in garbage time to try to catch up. Passing yards do not correlate with wins when looking within a QB's season.

Edited by wackywabbit
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Bearerofnews said:

Why does this only apply to QB? LITERALLY  any other position and no one has a problem with bulk/volume stats over efficiency stats.

Bulk stats matter.... alot, for all positions.

No one is penalizing a 2000 yds rusher at 4.4 ypc over a 1200 yd rusher at 6.1 ypc.

Or a 20 sack season playing 200 more snaps than a 12 sack season

Or 2000 yd rec yds with 140 recs vs 1000 yds with 50 recs. 

Bulk up or go home...

Look at the history of the MVP award. Efficiency stats for QB are alwaysssss way more valued than bulk stats, which is how it should be. 
 

Is 3500 yards 30 TDs 5 INTs gonna win you more games or 5000 yards 30 TDs 15 INTs? The first one is going to win WAY more games, and also WAY more effective. Although YPA would also come into play. 
 

Don’t forget garbage time that QBs get free passing yards and also prevent defenses. RBs aren’t getting garbage time yards, for the most part. Bulk rushing yards are definitely more impressive than bulk passing yards. 

Edited by BayRaider
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BayRaider said:

Look at the history of the MVP award. Efficiency stats for QB are alwaysssss way more valued than bulk stats, which is how it should be. 
 

Is 3500 yards 30 TDs 5 INTs gonna win you more games or 5000 yards 30 TDs 15 INTs? The first one is going to win WAY more games, and also WAY more effective. Although YPA would also come into play. 
 

Don’t forget garbage time that QBs get free passing yards and also prevent defenses. RBs aren’t getting garbage time yards, for the most part. Bulk rushing yards are definitely more impressive than bulk passing yards. 

Ok so, then context matters.

Qb 1 had 5200 yds 40 tds 7 ints and team went 12-4

 

Qb 2 had 3800 yds 40 tds 5 ints and team went 12-4.

Qb 1 played better, as he helped move his offense more than Qb 2. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bearerofnews said:

Do you have data that supports this? What the win loss record is of qbs who throw 300 plus yds?

It'd be a lot easier to tell you if PFR didn't put up a pay wall this year. W/L of 300 yard passing games?

You count this up and tell me: https://www.footballdb.com/stats/300-yard-passing.html

Is it 28-23-1? 53.8% wins? That's what I got on a quick count, but not going to bother to double check. It's clearly not a strong correlation coefficient.

I would actually LOVE to compare that to games where a team threw under 200 yards (which I'd bet would be a better win %), but too cheap to tell you

https://stathead.com/football/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=game&order_by_asc=0&order_by=pass_yds&year_min=2020&year_max=2020&game_type=R&ccomp[1]=lt&cval[1]=200&cstat[1]=pass_yds&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&temperature_gtlt=lt

Edit:

@Bearerofnews, just to show you how seriously I take data to back up a point, I found another site to query stats (which doesn't have the current season). http://footballqueries.com/TeamGameSearch.aspx

For 2019, teams that passed for >300 yards went 68-67-2. Teams that passed for <=200 yards went 67-66-0.

So... yea, I certify the take that passing yards do not correlate with wins in the current NFL. You could report the number of prime jersey numbers on a team and find just as strong a correlation with wins.

Edited by wackywabbit
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wackywabbit said:

It'd be a lot easier to tell you if PFR didn't put up a pay wall this year. W/L of 300 yard passing games?

You count this up and tell me: https://www.footballdb.com/stats/300-yard-passing.html

Is it 28-23-1? 53.8% wins? That's what I got on a quick count, but not going to bother to double check. It's clearly not a strong correlation coefficient.

I would actually LOVE to compare that to games where a team threw under 200 yards (which I'd bet would be a better win %), but too cheap to tell you

https://stathead.com/football/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=game&order_by_asc=0&order_by=pass_yds&year_min=2020&year_max=2020&game_type=R&ccomp[1]=lt&cval[1]=200&cstat[1]=pass_yds&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&temperature_gtlt=lt

Edit:

@Bearerofnews, just to show you how seriously I take data to back up a point, I found another site to query stats (which doesn't have the current season). http://footballqueries.com/TeamGameSearch.aspx

For 2019, teams that passed for >300 yards went 68-67-2. Teams that passed for <=200 yards went 67-66-0.

So... yea, I certify the take that passing yards do not correlate with wins in the current NFL. You could report the number of prime jersey numbers on a team and find just as strong a correlation with wins.

Fair enough. It also shows throwing 200 or less doesn't correlate to wins. I'll try out that site with the query search engine to see what the numbers look like with > 300 yds and 0 ints. 

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...