The MVP race

[J-ALL-DAY]

4 hours ago, Soko said:

Purdy’s biggest case against is less about pure strength of cast, and more about how he performed when the cast wasn’t there. No, having good players and coaches around you shouldn’t kill your MVP chances, but looking flat when some of those guys are out does ding your resume.

EDIT: Not saying Purdy shouldn’t be at the top right now. I don’t really know how I’d vote. But everyone has warts on their profile.

Except he didn't look flat. He had bad endings in the Vikings/Bengals games but he played some of his best ball in those two games. All this talk about his supporting cast and no mentions how he had the WORST OL during those two last losses without Williams. Is anyone putting Banks/Brendel/Burford/McKivitz amongst the best in the league? No other MVP candidate is playing with a lesser OL, and no one played more than one game with a worser OL. The Ravens don't have a great pass blocking OL so that's the closest comparison. 

Purdy had 713 total yards against the Vikings/Bengals without Deebo/Williams. The issue wasn't moving the ball. The team just sucked in the RZ and scoring range and obviously Purdy was part of the reason for that. The only true bad game he's played all season was against the Browns. They completely had him in hell and he couldn't even grip the ball on a few of his throws. But every MVP candidate has had of duds so that's not a huge deal. 

[mtmmike]

11 hours ago, typecast said:

Anyone got them Baker Mayfield evaluations and pre-draft career prognostications?

Nice

[J-ALL-DAY]

7 minutes ago, RavensTillIDie said:

So a fully healthy 49ers team vs an ailing Ravens team missing their top tight end, their top runningbacks and potentially their starting LT (granted he's been playing injured for some time now).

IF the Ravens somehow come into San Francisco and pull off the upset, the award is basically Lamar's to lose IMO.

I mean we are missing both our starting DTs so not exactly a healthy team vs healthy team. 

Likely has been a very good replacement for Andrews anyways.

Stanley would be the big loss. Hopefully he is able to go.

But yes, if the Ravens win and Jackson has a good/solid game, he will be the favorite in a lot of folks minds. 

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

7 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I mean we are missing both our starting DTs so not exactly a healthy team vs healthy team. 

Likely has been a very good replacement for Andrews anyways.

Stanley would be the big loss. Hopefully he is able to go.

But yes, if the Ravens win and Jackson has a good/solid game, he will be the favorite in a lot of folks minds. 

at this point I don't even consider it being down a starting LT when we're without Stanley. Even when he does play, it's like 30% of the snaps so he doesn't re-injure himself and even then he STILL manages to hurt himself. AND EVEN THEN, when he does play his level of play is basically average at-best anyways. So that basically doesn't even count.

[Forge]

1 minute ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

at this point I don't even consider it being down a starting LT when we're without Stanley. Even when he does play, it's like 30% of the snaps so he doesn't re-injure himself and even then he STILL manages to hurt himself. AND EVEN THEN, when he does play his level of play is basically average at-best anyways. So that basically doesn't even count.

That's a shame. He was so damn good. 

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

Just now, Forge said:

That's a shame. He was so damn good. 

For like those 2 years or so yeah. Ever since the knee injury he's been awful and it just seems like he's never fully rehabbed or recovered from it.

[Soko]

20 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Except he didn't look flat. He had bad endings in the Vikings/Bengals games but he played some of his best ball in those two games. All this talk about his supporting cast and no mentions how he had the WORST OL during those two last losses without Williams. Is anyone putting Banks/Brendel/Burford/McKivitz amongst the best in the league? No other MVP candidate is playing with a lesser OL, and no one played more than one game with a worser OL. The Ravens don't have a great pass blocking OL so that's the closest comparison. 

I don’t really think the SF’s line is all that, even with Williams. Williams is a monster and probable HOFer, but he’s 1/5. So no, I don’t put the line anywhere close to best in the league.

It’d interesting that you’d use Purdy’s lack of a supporting cast in those games as an argument for Purdy, and then say that the supporting cast argument against Purdy doesn’t hold water. So he gets an excuse for not having his best linemen and his playmakers, but when they’re in, he gets the credit?

20 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Purdy had 713 total yards against the Vikings/Bengals without Deebo/Williams. The issue wasn't moving the ball. The team just sucked in the RZ and scoring range and obviously Purdy was part of the reason for that. The only true bad game he's played all season was against the Browns. They completely had him in hell and he couldn't even grip the ball on a few of his throws. But every MVP candidate has had of duds so that's not a huge deal. 

We can agree to disagree. Purdy and the 49ers as a whole for sure looked flat (17 points, not really sure how it’s even debatable) for 3 games compared to how they looked when the playmakers were healthy. Drop off is obviously expected, but for the offense to falter that much, it’s going to hurt his resume. 

I already said all the candidates have dings on the resume and Purdy very wall may be the front runner. People out here acting like he’s got the perfect case are weirdly resistant to any Purdy criticism.

[J-ALL-DAY]

Just now, Soko said:

I don’t really think the SF’s line is all that, even with Williams. Williams is a monster and probable HOFer, but he’s 1/5. So no, I don’t put the line anywhere close to best in the league.

It’d interesting that you’d use Purdy’s lack of a supporting cast in those games as an argument for Purdy, and then say that the supporting cast argument against Purdy doesn’t hold water. So he gets an excuse for not having his best linemen and his playmakers, but when they’re in, he gets the credit?

We can agree to disagree. Purdy and the 49ers as a whole for sure looked flat (17 points, not really sure how it’s even debatable) for 3 games compared to how they looked when the playmakers were healthy. Drop off is obviously expected, but for the offense to falter that much, it’s going to hurt his resume. 

I already said all the candidates have dings on the resume and Purdy very wall may be the front runner. People out here acting like he’s got the perfect case are weirdly resistant to any Purdy criticism.

Huh? I'm talking about all the supporting cast arguments used against him....no one used the OL being arguably the WORST in the league for him when the team went on a losing streak. So which one is it? I mean you are correct in saying the OL even with Williams is not good. Without him? AWFUL. 

Sure, in terms of scoring points the team was not great. But they moved the ball at will and Purdy was averaging over 11 YPA even without Williams and Deebo. The other MVP candidate on the Niners had a fumble inside the 20 yard line against the Vikings and Moody missed a 41 yard FG. Moody missed a FG against the Browns. Things happen like that for all teams throughout the season. It just happened in consecutive weeks for the Niners and defense was dog sh*t against the Vikings/Bengals. The Vikings also had some poor luck on offense as they should have put up far more than 22 points against the Niners. 

If Purdy had played like he did against the Browns in the next two games? The argument would be stronger. The team legit was moving the ball at about the same rate but were not finishing drives with TDs. That was with CMC and the run game being nonexistent. The offense averaged 6.1 and 8.2 YPP, respectively against the Vikings/Bengals. TOs and the defense unable to get off the field was the biggest problem. 

[Soko]

12 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Huh? I'm talking about all the supporting cast arguments used against him....no one used the OL being arguably the WORST in the league for him when the team went on a losing streak. So which one is it? I mean you are correct in saying the OL even with Williams is not good. Without him? AWFUL. 

You either way then both heavily or both lightly, but they have to be the same. You said in your last post that no one talks about how bad the OL was. Is that supposed to help Purdy’s case? If it does, then having CMC and the rest of the playmakers (when healthy) has to hurt. It can’t be one and not the other.

I don’t use either case to kill his MVP case, but both things are true. Turning blind to either side (the OL being overrated/the amazing offense + coaching) seems biased, one way or the other.

12 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Sure, in terms of scoring points the team was not great. But they moved the ball at will and Purdy was averaging over 11 YPA even without Williams and Deebo. The other MVP candidate on the Niners had a fumble inside the 20 yard line against the Vikings and Moody missed a 41 yard FG. Moody missed a FG against the Browns. Things happen like that for all teams throughout the season. It just happened in consecutive weeks for the Niners and defense was dog sh*t against the Vikings/Bengals. The Vikings also had some poor luck on offense as they should have put up far more than 22 points against the Niners. 
 

Again, agree to disagree. Sans garbage time, the 49ers had 200 yards of offense and Purdy turned it over 3 times in the second half vs Cincy. Vs the Vikings it was two back to back drives ending in picks to seal the game. 17 points and 4 INTs for a guy that’s only got 7 on the season, that’s flat to me. 

And you’re right, if they were 3 random games, then they’d be a lot less relevant, but they’re not 3 random games. They’re a stretch where some injuries took place and Purdy dropped off compared to what he was doing when they were all healthy. 

12 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

If Purdy had played like he did against the Browns in the next two games? The argument would be stronger. The team legit was moving the ball at about the same rate but were not finishing drives with TDs. That was with CMC and the run game being nonexistent. The offense averaged 6.1 and 8.2 YPP, respectively against the Vikings/Bengals. TOs and the defense unable to get off the field was the biggest problem. 

“Turnovers were the problem” and who was committing most of those turnovers?

Its not the end of the world, it really isn’t, but let’s call a spade a spade.

[J-ALL-DAY]

10 minutes ago, Soko said:

You either way then both heavily or both lightly, but they have to be the same. You said in your last post that no one talks about how bad the OL was. Is that supposed to help Purdy’s case? If it does, then having CMC and the rest of the playmakers (when healthy) has to hurt. It can’t be one and not the other.

I don’t use either case to kill his MVP case, but both things are true. Turning blind to either side (the OL being overrated/the amazing offense + coaching) seems biased, one way or the other.

Again, agree to disagree. Sans garbage time, the 49ers had 200 yards of offense and Purdy turned it over 3 times in the second half vs Cincy. Vs the Vikings it was two back to back drives ending in picks to seal the game. 17 points and 4 INTs for a guy that’s only got 7 on the season, that’s flat to me. 

And you’re right, if they were 3 random games, then they’d be a lot less relevant, but they’re not 3 random games. They’re a stretch where some injuries took place and Purdy dropped off compared to what he was doing when they were all healthy. 

“Turnovers were the problem” and who was committing most of those turnovers?

Its not the end of the world, it really isn’t, but let’s call a spade a spade.

That's just not true at all lol. Purdy DID turn it over and those were killer TOs...The first two. The last one was whatever with the game all but over. But the offense did not just have 200 yards "sans garbage time" lol. The offense had 294 yards through three quarters after Purdy threw an INT in the RZ. 

So Purdy is expected to produce at the same level with arguably the worst OL in the league? Because again, if any QB had Moore/Banks/Brendel/Burford/McKivitz, they would be lighting it up? And in terms of yards per play, the team was still very effective even with that OL. CMC against the Vikings/Bengals had 99 yards on 27 carries. Did he all of a sudden forget how to run the ball without Trent Williams? Or maybe it is not as easy to run the ball with the worst OL in the league?

My point is for those that knock Purdy for the great supporting cast don't bring up him playing in that losing streak with the worst OL in the league. For THOSE that want to use that argument of the great supporting cast, how can you not use the other argument for the offense not producing at the same level? Deebo is a great weapon but he's not what makes the offense go. He just happened to be hurt at the same time as Williams. The offense last year had Williams and Deebo was hurt and they were still putting up 30+ points. 

[Soko]

1 minute ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

That's just not true at all lol. Purdy DID turn it over and those were killer TOs...The first two. The last one was whatever with the game all but over. But the offense did not just have 200 yards "sans garbage time" lol. The offense had 294 yards through three quarters after Purdy threw an INT in the RZ. 

70 of those yards came with under 30 seconds left and down two scores. That’s garbage time. 

1 minute ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

So Purdy is expected to produce at the same level with arguably the worst OL in the league? Because again, if any QB had Moore/Banks/Brendel/Burford/McKivitz, they would be lighting it up? And in terms of yards per play, the team was still very effective even with that OL. CMC against the Vikings/Bengals had 99 yards on 27 carries. Did he all of a sudden forget how to run the ball without Trent Williams? Or maybe it is not as easy to run the ball with the worst OL in the league?

I mean, in a vacuum, yes, we have seen great QBs light it up with bad OLs in the past. But that’s besides the point. 

No, you do expect some drop off, but I never contended the opposite. What I’m saying is you can’t give him excuses for having bad OL play and passes for having the best RB in the league, an elite TE, maybe the best coaching on offense, and great receivers. You can’t do both.

1 minute ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

My point is for those that knock Purdy for the great supporting cast don't bring up him playing in that losing streak with the worst OL in the league. For THOSE that want to use that argument of the great supporting cast, how can you not use the other argument for the offense not producing at the same level? Deebo is a great weapon but he's not what makes the offense go. He just happened to be hurt at the same time as Williams. The offense last year had Williams and Deebo was hurt and they were still putting up 30+ points. 

Because they wanted to see how Purdy performs without the weapons. Great with the weapons, but in the limited sample size without, not so great. People are going to weigh that on a case by case basis, but you can’t sit here and pretend like it doesn’t hold any water. 

[incognito_man]

Purdy is just absolutely lapping the field in key efficiency stats. And he's also leading in TD passes. 

This should be an absolute no-brainer at this point.

[J-ALL-DAY]

1 minute ago, Soko said:

70 of those yards came with under 30 seconds left and down two scores. That’s garbage time. 

I mean, in a vacuum, yes, we have seen great QBs light it up with bad OLs in the past. But that’s besides the point. 

No, you do expect some drop off, but I never contended the opposite. What I’m saying is you can’t give him excuses for having bad OL play and passes for having the best RB in the league, an elite TE, maybe the best coaching on offense, and great receivers. You can’t do both.

Because they wanted to see how Purdy performs without the weapons. Great with the weapons, but in the limited sample size without, not so great. People are going to weigh that on a case by case basis, but you can’t sit here and pretend like it doesn’t hold any water. 

So 70 of the 460 total yards came in garbage time? You just said the offense had 200 yards of offense before garbage time lol. So they had 391 yards on 54 plays before the last possession so they averaged 7.2 YPP the rest of the game...when it was not in "garbage time." 

Pretend it doesn't hold any water? Nah, that's not it. I'm pointing to folks are acting like the offense was a complete dude and couldn't move the ball at all during the losing streak. That's not what happened. Purdy deserves his blame for the turnovers, never said otherwise. 

We keep going in circles. But if he is going to get credit for playing with a great supporting cast, then it needs to at least be noted that the OL is the WORST in the league without Williams. The run game is damn near completely reliant on running behind Williams. CMC didn't all of a sudden get worse when Williams got hurt. 

Anyways, the game on Monday night is going to likely end up determining the MVP so all these arguments are moot. 

[Soko]

11 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

So 70 of the 460 total yards came in garbage time? You just said the offense had 200 yards of offense before garbage time lol. So they had 391 yards on 54 plays before the last possession so they averaged 7.2 YPP the rest of the game...when it was not in "garbage time." 

I said in the second half. You even bolded it in the quote.

11 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Pretend it doesn't hold any water? Nah, that's not it. I'm pointing to folks are acting like the offense was a complete dude and couldn't move the ball at all during the losing streak. That's not what happened. Purdy deserves his blame for the turnovers, never said otherwise. 

I would say committing >50%~ of your season’s worth of turnovers in 3 games and 3 consecutive season lows in scoring, is flat. You think because the offense could move but not score, while turning it over more frequent than ever, means the performances weren’t flat. Agree to disagree.

11 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

We keep going in circles. But if he is going to get credit for playing with a great supporting cast, then it needs to at least be noted that the OL is the WORST in the league without Williams. The run game is damn near completely reliant on running behind Williams. CMC didn't all of a sudden get worse when Williams got hurt. 

Anyways, the game on Monday night is going to likely end up determining the MVP so all these arguments are moot. 

I mean, as soon as you brought up the line, I acknowledged that not only do I consider that Trent-less line horrible, but I also consider the fully healthy line a bit overrated too. Said that right away, so I’m not sure what more acknowledgment you’re asking for. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

3 minutes ago, Soko said:

I said in the second half. You even bolded it in the quote.

I would say committing >50%~ of your season’s worth of turnovers in 3 games and 3 consecutive season lows in scoring, is flat. You think because the offense could move but not score, while turning it over more frequent than ever, means the performances weren’t flat. Agree to disagree.

I mean, as soon as you brought up the line, I acknowledged that not only do I consider that Trent-less line horrible, but I also consider the fully healthy line a bit overrated too. Said that right away, so I’m not sure what more acknowledgment you’re asking for. 

But you throwing out 200 yards of offense in the 2nd half before garbage time was implying what? Having 200 yards of offense in any half is....very good? Not sure what you were trying to get at there.

I mean correct, you will have more turnovers when you are down and needing to come back, especially with a poor pass blocking OL. That goes for all QBs. And one thing I want to see from Purdy is being able to perform the same way down the stretch in a deficit. 

But my initial statement was not only directed towards you. It is a point no one makes when talking about the losing streak. Anyways, we have both said what needed to say here.

On to Monday night....