Jump to content

MVS Appreciation Thread


Sasquatch

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Packer_ESP said:

Speaking of penalties, hasn’t MVS drawn quite a few high yardage DPIs? That’s another product of him getting ridiculously open on long plays.

I don't know if its a lot but I know he has been impactful in a handful of games drawing holding and PI penalties to extend drives. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

I actually agree with the WR's who want their stats to reflect the PI penalties they draw.  Those are often very impactful plays.

I've never liked the idea of the spot foul for pass interference penalty because it assumes that the wide receiver will actually make the catch.  I think PI penalties should be capped at 25 yard max. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 dollars says MVS is far-sighted and it's undiagnosed. It's common to go unnoticed because the only time your vision is impaired is with objects very close. MVS can probably spot a dime on the floor from the back of the room, but when the ball is closing in, suddenly he's got a blind spot. I've seen his eyes go somewhat cross-eyed in game footage when they've shown him on the sideline. (Not something you're going to see in a still photo). Fixing the dropsies could be as simple as getting LASIK or wearing contacts. Yes I'm serious. I'm also far-sighted and see the similarities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Mr Anonymous said:

10 dollars says MVS is far-sighted and it's undiagnosed. It's common to go unnoticed because the only time your vision is impaired is with objects very close. MVS can probably spot a dime on the floor from the back of the room, but when the ball is closing in, suddenly he's got a blind spot. I've seen his eyes go somewhat cross-eyed in game footage when they've shown him on the sideline. (Not something you're going to see in a still photo). Fixing the dropsies could be as simple as getting LASIK or wearing contacts. Yes I'm serious. I'm also far-sighted and see the similarities.

I could buy this more if he wasn't a body catcher. That's just a proven way to drop passes. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

I've never liked the idea of the spot foul for pass interference penalty because it assumes that the wide receiver will actually make the catch.  I think PI penalties should be capped at 25 yard max. 

I can never make my mind up about it... I see the merits of what you're saying but capping it also makes it so CBs would rather blatantly interfere than give up a long catch. Both options have pros and cons and I can't think of a way of making it better without introducing subjective referee appreciations regarding how blatant it is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Mr Anonymous said:

10 dollars says MVS is far-sighted and it's undiagnosed. It's common to go unnoticed because the only time your vision is impaired is with objects very close. MVS can probably spot a dime on the floor from the back of the room, but when the ball is closing in, suddenly he's got a blind spot. I've seen his eyes go somewhat cross-eyed in game footage when they've shown him on the sideline. (Not something you're going to see in a still photo). Fixing the dropsies could be as simple as getting LASIK or wearing contacts. Yes I'm serious. I'm also far-sighted and see the similarities.

Fine. Cant be sure its actually the problem but works for me. I'll play along. They test everything else about these athletes bodies - I'd find it hard to believe they dont conduct a simple eye test - but hey, I'm down with it. Get his eyes tested and corrected where/if necessary. It would be an inexpensive fix to a potentially expensive problem - so cross the problem off the list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Anonymous said:

10 dollars says MVS is far-sighted and it's undiagnosed. It's common to go unnoticed because the only time your vision is impaired is with objects very close. MVS can probably spot a dime on the floor from the back of the room, but when the ball is closing in, suddenly he's got a blind spot. I've seen his eyes go somewhat cross-eyed in game footage when they've shown him on the sideline. (Not something you're going to see in a still photo). Fixing the dropsies could be as simple as getting LASIK or wearing contacts. Yes I'm serious. I'm also far-sighted and see the similarities.

quick someobody @ MVS on twitter w/ this

it can't hurt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Packer_ESP said:

I can never make my mind up about it... I see the merits of what you're saying but capping it also makes it so CBs would rather blatantly interfere than give up a long catch. Both options have pros and cons and I can't think of a way of making it better without introducing subjective referee appreciations regarding how blatant it is.

Out of curiosity, has this been proven in college? I've never heard of it being an issue but I don't watch college enough to know, just know its like a 15 yard penalty for PI.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, dwaye50327 said:

Out of curiosity, has this been proven in college? I've never heard of it being an issue but I don't watch college enough to know, just know its like a 15 yard penalty for PI.

No idea, I don't watch college football tbh. I'm sure plenty of guys here do, maybe they can share how often it happens there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

It's based on Expected Points Net. League average chance of scoring based on down and distance and field position before and after each play. My statement is based on 1st and 10 from the opposing 23. ....

Remove running in general because it's almost always less efficient...

MVS has a catch% of 52.4%. Adams has a catch percentage of 77.2%.

MVS has a 1st/TD% of 52.4%. Adams has a 1st/TD% of 61%.

MVS has a Yards/Target of 11.1. Adams has a Yards/Target of 9.2

MVS has a Yards/Completion of 20.9. adams has a Yards/Completion of 11.9

+++

Ultimately they compliment each other. MVS' ability to be hyper efficient in limited reps without being a diva is a tremendous advantage in this offense. Davante's ability to just eat targets at an absurdly high level and still maintain efficiency is a staple of the offense. 

Thanks, Alex, for your thoughtful and detailed response.  Really helpful.  Expected points net must obviously calculate in all of the stuff I was wondering about. 

I agree, they complement each other.  Adams catch percentage of 77% is pretty remarkable, to go with his other good numbers.  It's been really good, obviously.  And I think the attention that Adams commands, plus the running game and underneath stuff, helps to situate MVS with some single coverage or access deep, depending on the defensive personnel and scheme.  

I wonder if MVS  would benefit from more targets?  Often a player gets into a better groove, and sync between player and QB improves, etc..  But at the same time, often with more targets a guy gets more defensive attention, and the QB lthrowing into tighter windows?  

Alex, expected points was based on league average; Packers offense being better, their expected points must be higher.  That must reduce the expected points differential, to some degree.  

I assume the catch% of 52.4% (less on long ones) is why they don't go deep to MVS more.  If you go deep on 1st, assuming it is NOT complete, then you're looking at 2nd-and-10.  Uncomfortably high risk that will turn into a turnover via punt. 

But yeah, seems things have complemented nicely, Adams and MVS in particular.  It may be that MLF is using MVS very appropriately?  When the defense give the deep stuff, take shot?  If it doesn't, don't force it?  Matchup stuff, which is why MVS might catch a bunch one week versus a particular defense (Detroit?) then go a couple of games with no targets.  It's not that MVS is inconsistent; it's that defensive game plans and personnel are inconsistent.   

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, dwaye50327 said:

Out of curiosity, has this been proven in college? I've never heard of it being an issue but I don't watch college enough to know, just know its like a 15 yard penalty for PI.

Found this:

https://operations.nfl.com/stats-central/stats-articles/analyzing-defensive-pass-interference-fouls-in-the-nfl-and-ncaa/

Relevant quotes:

Quote

47.1% of NFL DPIs are 15 yards or more, while 56.1% of NCAA DPIs would be 15 yards or more, but they are capped at 15 yards.

Quote

Each season, there are more DPI calls per pass play between NCAA Power Five conference teams than in the NFL.

It looks like there is more DPI in college than the NFL, and also more longer DPIs, so it looks like it does have some impact.

  • Like 1
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...