My vote for NFL MVP through six weeks (1 Viewer)

[Chase Stuart]

No one has put up numbers like Tom Brady this year, and Manning has played flawlessly despite losing his star WR. But neither gets my vote for NFL MVP through six weeks.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/wordpress/?p=403

Two months ago, I blogged on one of my favorite statistics: rearview adjusted yards per attempt. Adjusted yards per attempt is a statistic most of us are familiar with by now — its calculated by simply adding 10 “yards” for every touchdown pass, and subtracting 45 “yards” for every interception. Then you divide passing “yards” by pass attempts, so it’s basically a more precise version of yards per attempt. Quarterbacks that throw for a lot of yards per attempt with a good number of interceptions get rightly penalized (think Ben Roethlisberger last year), while quarterbacks that don’t throw any interceptions get a nice boost even if they have a low yards per attempt ratio (think David Garrard this season).

So what does “rearview” add to the equation? It adjusts the performance for strength of schedule. This is particularly important to do when we’re looking at mid-season numbers, which are more heavily susceptible to radically different strength of schedule numbers. When you combine the rearview adjustment with the change by adjusting the yards per attempt, you’ve got rearview adjusted yards per attempt.

So who are the leaders in that category this year?

For starters, all NFL QBs averaging 5.97 adjusted yards per attempt, so that should be considered our baseline for good performance. I’ve subtracted that number from every QB’s results, so you can get a better sense of who is doing better and worse than average. Here are the results for all QBs with a minimum of 40 pass attempts this season:

Player RAY/A AY/A SOSTom Brady 3.13 3.30 -0.16David Garrard 3.10 2.33 0.77Jeff Garcia 2.63 2.63 0.01Peyton Manning 2.23 2.08 0.15Kurt Warner 2.15 2.42 -0.27Jon Kitna 1.97 0.83 1.14Derek Anderson 1.67 0.96 0.71Tony Romo 1.63 1.29 0.34Jake Delhomme 1.59 1.61 -0.03Donovan McNabb 1.58 0.99 0.58Matt Schaub 1.30 1.39 -0.09Jay Cutler 0.84 0.13 0.71Brett Favre 0.80 0.24 0.56Philip Rivers 0.79 0.02 0.77Jason Campbell 0.57 0.40 0.16Ben Roethlisberger 0.54 1.42 -0.88Kelly Holcomb 0.52 -0.18 0.70Eli Manning 0.43 -0.21 0.64Joey Harrington 0.31 -0.13 0.44Trent Green 0.18 -0.85 1.03Chad Pennington 0.12 -0.73 0.85Carson Palmer -0.10 0.19 -0.29Matt Hasselbeck -0.24 0.97 -1.22Damon Huard -0.39 -0.09 -0.30Daunte Culpepper -0.78 -0.21 -0.57Trent Edwards -0.89 -1.14 0.25Brian Griese -0.89 -0.39 -0.50J.P. Losman -0.95 -1.50 0.56Alex Smith -1.33 -0.90 -0.43Drew Brees -1.74 -2.22 0.48Steve McNair -1.80 -0.55 -1.26Marc Bulger -1.88 -1.42 -0.46Kyle Boller -1.96 -1.02 -0.94Kellen Clemens -2.06 -1.40 -0.66Josh McCown -2.33 -1.43 -0.90Cleo Lemon -2.37 -1.80 -0.57Vince Young -2.53 -1.91 -0.62David Carr -2.65 -1.78 -0.87Matt Leinart -2.73 -1.62 -1.11Rex Grossman -2.74 -3.28 0.53Tarvaris Jackson -3.55 -2.68 -0.87Trent Dilfer -4.92 -3.49 -1.43Gus Frerotte -5.45 -3.98 -1.47What’s that mean exactly? Let’s take Mr. Brady as an example. He’s thrown for 1771 yards, 21 TDs and 2 INTs, a total of 1891 adjusted yards. He’s thrown 204 passes, giving him an average of 9.27 AY/A. Since the league average QB is at 5.97 adjusted yards per attempt, Brady’s 3.30 adjusted yards per attempt better, represented in the middle column. Tom has had a slightly easier than average schedule, though, as shown by the -0.16 number in the right column. Therefore, his rearview adjusted yards per attempt is 3.13 AY/A better than the league average....

Below are the rankings for the defenses, using rearview adjusted yards per attempt allowed:

Team RAY/A AY/A SOSWashington Redskins 3.00 2.02 0.98Tennessee Titans 2.42 1.45 0.97Oakland Raiders 2.07 0.87 1.20New England Patriots 1.82 1.28 0.54Buffalo Bills 1.19 0.00 1.20Philadelphia Eagles 1.19 0.25 0.94Indianapolis Colts 1.17 1.35 -0.19Kansas City Chiefs 1.01 0.70 0.32Pittsburgh Steelers 0.88 1.20 -0.32New York Giants 0.71 -0.05 0.76Dallas Cowboys 0.60 0.73 -0.14Green Bay Packers 0.47 0.05 0.42Houston Texans 0.43 -0.43 0.86Denver Broncos 0.11 -0.67 0.78Tampa Bay Buccaneers 0.03 1.19 -1.15Carolina Panthers -0.08 0.37 -0.44Cincinnati Bengals -0.21 -0.54 0.34Minnesota Vikings -0.21 -0.25 0.04San Diego Chargers -0.27 -0.57 0.30St. Louis Rams -0.40 -0.98 0.58Atlanta Falcons -0.50 -0.50 -0.01Chicago Bears -0.73 -1.05 0.32Miami Dolphins -0.76 -1.73 0.97Jacksonville Jaguars -0.95 -0.63 -0.32Cleveland Browns -1.20 -0.73 -0.47Detroit Lions -1.22 -0.09 -1.13New York Jets -1.26 -1.61 0.36Baltimore Ravens -1.33 0.60 -1.93Seattle Seahawks -1.48 -0.22 -1.27San Francisco 49ers -1.77 -0.37 -1.40Arizona Cardinals -1.88 0.05 -1.93New Orleans Saints -3.15 -3.03 -0.12

Garrard has played a very difficult schedule against the pass, yet he hasn't thrown a single interception all season. After adjusting for SOS, his AY/A ratio -- which correlates better with winning than any other passing statistic -- is nearly as good as Brady's! That's mind-boggling, considering: 1) how good Brady is; 2) how well Brady has played; and 3) how much better Brady's targets are than Garrard's. Garrard has also run for 131 yards, which further adds to his MVP value. To be doing what he's doing with Dennis Northcutt as his main target is pretty incredible. When you factor in his difficult schedule, his incredible passing numbers (66% completion rate, 6 TDs, 0 INTs), his awful targets and what he adds on the ground, Garrard is my through-six-weeks MVP.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

Garrard has played a very difficult schedule against the pass, yet he hasn't thrown a single interception all season. After adjusting for SOS, his AY/A ratio -- which correlates better with winning than any other passing statistic -- is nearly as good as Brady's! That's mind-boggling, considering: 1) how good Brady is; 2) how well Brady has played; and 3) how much better Brady's targets are than Garrard's. Garrard has also run for 131 yards, which further adds to his MVP value. To be doing what he's doing with Dennis Northcutt as his main target is pretty incredible. When you factor in his difficult schedule, his incredible passing numbers (66% completion rate, 6 TDs, 0 INTs), his awful targets and what he adds on the ground, Garrard is my through-six-weeks MVP.

:(

 

[Pocket Joker]

:(

Well, at least we know what David Garrard's screen name is now!

 

[shadyridr]

meh

If you're gonna think outside the box on this one I like Jeff Garcia better than Garrard. The Bucs have had a ton of injuries yet are still in the thick of that division race. Plus JAX has a better running game and a better defense than the Bucs.

 

[xenith]

wow, just wow

 

[Pocket Joker]

mehIf you're gonna think outside the box on this one I like Jeff Garcia better than Garrard. The Bucs have had a ton of injuries yet are still in the thick of that division race. Plus JAX has a better running game and a better defense than the Bucs.

I agree with this. Garcia has single-handedly saved Gruden's head, and has the Bucs thinking playoffs. I'm not sure if it's enough to call him the MVP over Brady, though....

 

[The Man Who Met Andy Griffith]

Imagine how much better the Patriots would look so far if they had Garrard

 

[Chase Stuart]

mehIf you're gonna think outside the box on this one I like Jeff Garcia better than Garrard. The Bucs have had a ton of injuries yet are still in the thick of that division race. Plus JAX has a better running game and a better defense than the Bucs.

I agree with this. Garcia has single-handedly saved Gruden's head, and has the Bucs thinking playoffs. I'm not sure if it's enough to call him the MVP over Brady, though....

Has Garrard not saved JDR's head, too? If not for losing their placekicker and a fluke MJD fumble, Jacksonville could be 5-0 right now. Garrard has been the perfect game manager this year.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Imagine how much better the Patriots would look so far if they had Garrard

The MVP award isn't given to the best player, it's given to the player who has played the best. Obviously Brady is a way better QB than Garrard.Exactly what has Garrard done wrong this year?

 

[tombonneau]

When you factor in his difficult schedule, his incredible passing numbers (66% completion rate, 6 TDs, 0 INTs), his awful targets and what he adds on the ground, Garrard is my through-six-weeks MVP.

To call those numbers incredible is quite a stretch. 66% completions is good, but expected when you are running a low-risk, conservative passing offense.And let's not break out the Popsicles just yet as far as the TD/INT ratio goes. To put it in perspective, if Garrard throws 0 TDs and 2 INTs this week (very realistic) his ratio is all of a sudden 33%. Not so hot.

 

[Warpig]

As a Jags fan, I would never think of Garrard as anywhere near MVP worthy.

He's basically Trent Dilfer when Dilfer was in Baltimore.

"We're gonna run, and run, and run some more. Then we might sprinkle in a throw here and there." If he were a MVP candidate, he should be making atleast one of his WR's respectable...but he's not.

Any QB that doesn't throw is not worthy of MVP. Now Brady on the other hand (and I hate the Pats) would be MVP worthy I think.

 

[Chase Stuart]

When you factor in his difficult schedule, his incredible passing numbers (66% completion rate, 6 TDs, 0 INTs), his awful targets and what he adds on the ground, Garrard is my through-six-weeks MVP.

To call those numbers incredible is quite a stretch. 66% completions is good, but expected when you are running a low-risk, conservative passing offense.And let's not break out the Popsicles just yet as far as the TD/INT ratio goes. To put it in perspective, if Garrard throws 0 TDs and 2 INTs this week (very realistic) his ratio is all of a sudden 33%. Not so hot.

I'm not predicting the future. I'm talking about what he's done. There's a big difference there.It may be a low risk offense, but Garrard has made some big plays, too. He's averaging nearly 8.0 yards per pass, which isn't easy in a conservative passing offense.

 

[Chase Stuart]

As a Jags fan, I would never think of Garrard as anywhere near MVP worthy. He's basically Trent Dilfer when Dilfer was in Baltimore."We're gonna run, and run, and run some more. Then we might sprinkle in a throw here and there." If he were a MVP candidate, he should be making atleast one of his WR's respectable...but he's not.Any QB that doesn't throw is not worthy of MVP. Now Brady on the other hand (and I hate the Pats) would be MVP worthy I think.

Garrad is playing nothing like Dilfer. Dilfer completed fewer than 60% of his passes, threw a ton of interceptions, and couldn't run. He also had a HOF target to throw to.Do you think Vick was not a worthy MVP candidate in 2002? Garrard is nowhere near the runner Vick is, but to say that a QB that doesn't throw well or often isn't worthy of MVP votes seems short-sighted.

 

[tribecalledjeff]

mehIf you're gonna think outside the box on this one I like Jeff Garcia better than Garrard. The Bucs have had a ton of injuries yet are still in the thick of that division race. Plus JAX has a better running game and a better defense than the Bucs.

At least the OP didn't blindly spit out what some guy on ESPN told them.

 

[bcr8f]

Imagine how much better the Patriots would look so far if they had Garrard

The MVP award isn't given to the best player, it's given to the player who has played the best. Obviously Brady is a way better QB than Garrard.Exactly what has Garrard done wrong this year?

Ask that next week.

 

[Tau837]

Imagine how much better the Patriots would look so far if they had Garrard

The MVP award isn't given to the best player, it's given to the player who has played the best. Obviously Brady is a way better QB than Garrard.Exactly what has Garrard done wrong this year?

Actually, I wouldn't say it goes to the player who has played the best. In your example, I don't think Garrard has played better than Brady.I think the MVP award is supposed to go to the player who is most valuable to his team. That may or may not be the player who has played the best, because it implies context. First off, it typically requires a winning team, since part of determining who is most valuable to his team implies looking at the team and its performance. From there, you can go literal - if Garrard went down, Quinn Gray would be starting - or generic - how Garrard has compared to the average NFL QB.To specifically compare Garrard to Brady at this point, if one argues that Garrard has been more valuable, it is based largely on the supporting cast on offense being better for Brady and the overall team, including coaching, defense, and special teams, being better for Brady, thus making Garrard's lesser statistical performance more impressive than Brady's. And one might argue that the Pats would be better with Cassell than the Jags would be with Gray. I'm not saying I agree with these points, just saying that would be the start of the Garrard is more valuable perspective.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Any QB that doesn't throw is not worthy of MVP. Now Brady on the other hand (and I hate the Pats) would be MVP worthy I think.

This hyperbole has to go. First of all, Garrard does throw. Chase threw some very cool stats at us to prove that. Secondly, Garrard does some things that other QBs like Brady doesn't...how many critical plays has Garrard accomplished with his feet? He's not Vick...he doesn't look to run first. But when he runs, he turns incompletions into first downs. You can't look past that kind of skill.BTW--I typed this in red, so you know it's awesome.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Imagine how much better the Patriots would look so far if they had Garrard

lol

 

[SR388]

Um, Tony Romo is going to be the MVP.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

Garrard has been the perfect game manager this year.

"Game manager" doesn't exactly scream "MVP", does it?

 

[Tarkin]

Any QB that doesn't throw is not worthy of MVP. Now Brady on the other hand (and I hate the Pats) would be MVP worthy I think.

This hyperbole has to go. First of all, Garrard does throw. Chase threw some very cool stats at us to prove that. Secondly, Garrard does some things that other QBs like Brady doesn't...how many critical plays has Garrard accomplished with his feet? He's not Vick...he doesn't look to run first. But when he runs, he turns incompletions into first downs. You can't look past that kind of skill.BTW--I typed this in red, so you know it's awesome.

 

[Keys Myaths]

BTW--Happy birthday, Chase.

 

[djcolts]

mehIf you're gonna think outside the box on this one I like Jeff Garcia better than Garrard. The Bucs have had a ton of injuries yet are still in the thick of that division race. Plus JAX has a better running game and a better defense than the Bucs.

I've seen the Bucs a couple of times this year, and I think they'd be 1 and 5 without Garcia. They definitely would have lost last week to the Titans without him.

 

[Sheriff66]

Um, Tony Romo is going to be the MVP.

You mean 5 picks that should have been 7 and a fumble against the Bills Tony Romo ?

 

[Wadsworth]

Imagine how much better the Patriots would look so far if they had Garrard

The MVP award isn't given to the best player, it's given to the player who has played the best. Obviously Brady is a way better QB than Garrard.Exactly what has Garrard done wrong this year?

.... if Garrard went down, Jonathan Quinn would be starting....

Quinn Gray

 

[Liquid Tension]

Imagine how much better the Patriots would look so far if they had Garrard

The MVP award isn't given to the best player, it's given to the player who has played the best. Obviously Brady is a way better QB than Garrard.Exactly what has Garrard done wrong this year?

Actually, I wouldn't say it goes to the player who has played the best. In your example, I don't think Garrard has played better than Brady.I think the MVP award is supposed to go to the player who is most valuable to his team. That may or may not be the player who has played the best, because it implies context. First off, it typically requires a winning team, since part of determining who is most valuable to his team implies looking at the team and its performance. From there, you can go literal - if Garrard went down, Jonathan Quinn would be starting - or generic - how Garrard has compared to the average NFL QB.To specifically compare Garrard to Brady at this point, if one argues that Garrard has been more valuable, it is based largely on the supporting cast on offense being better for Brady and the overall team, including coaching, defense, and special teams, being better for Brady, thus making Garrard's lesser statistical performance more impressive than Brady's. And one might argue that the Pats would be better with Cassell than the Jags would be with Quinn. I'm not saying I agree with these points, just saying that would be the start of the Garrard is more valuable perspective.

Soap box: (maybe we need an icon for this?) I really hate the "most valuable to your team" comparison to the best player. As far as I am concerned, if you are the best player you are the MVP because by definition you are more valuable to your team. People will look only at wins and say so so and so finished 8-8 instead of 5-11, but so and so got them to the playoffs. I think that is silly, but I am in the minority on this one.The only issue I have with the formula Chase is using is that all int's are not alike. A 3rd and 20 bomb that is picked off is not the same as a slant picked off or the dreaded side line throw that is picked. Sometimes an INT is a good punt. I think it should be penalized based on the average, but possibly the context of the INT is important (I know where do you draw the line). Bottom line is that I would make the picks slightly less of a penalty.Just wanted to make these two points.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Imagine how much better the Patriots would look so far if they had Garrard

The MVP award isn't given to the best player, it's given to the player who has played the best. Obviously Brady is a way better QB than Garrard.Exactly what has Garrard done wrong this year?

Actually, I wouldn't say it goes to the player who has played the best. In your example, I don't think Garrard has played better than Brady.I think the MVP award is supposed to go to the player who is most valuable to his team. That may or may not be the player who has played the best, because it implies context. First off, it typically requires a winning team, since part of determining who is most valuable to his team implies looking at the team and its performance. From there, you can go literal - if Garrard went down, Jonathan Quinn would be starting - or generic - how Garrard has compared to the average NFL QB.To specifically compare Garrard to Brady at this point, if one argues that Garrard has been more valuable, it is based largely on the supporting cast on offense being better for Brady and the overall team, including coaching, defense, and special teams, being better for Brady, thus making Garrard's lesser statistical performance more impressive than Brady's. And one might argue that the Pats would be better with Cassell than the Jags would be with Quinn. I'm not saying I agree with these points, just saying that would be the start of the Garrard is more valuable perspective.

Soap box: (maybe we need an icon for this?) I really hate the "most valuable to your team" comparison to the best player. As far as I am concerned, if you are the best player you are the MVP because by definition you are more valuable to your team. People will look only at wins and say so so and so finished 8-8 instead of 5-11, but so and so got them to the playoffs. I think that is silly, but I am in the minority on this one.The only issue I have with the formula Chase is using is that all int's are not alike. A 3rd and 20 bomb that is picked off is not the same as a slant picked off or the dreaded side line throw that is picked. Sometimes an INT is a good punt. I think it should be penalized based on the average, but possibly the context of the INT is important (I know where do you draw the line). Bottom line is that I would make the picks slightly less of a penalty.Just wanted to make these two points.

This is an incredibly good post.

 

[Modog814]

Interesting stuff.

You can blame Chase for trying to look at different angles and not just handling the MVP to Brady and Superbowl to the Patriots like everyone else is doing.

And let's also remember that MVP is Most Valuable Player, not best player. Brady >>>> Garrard no questions asked, but is he more valuable????

Is NE w/o Brady >>>> Jacksonville w/o Garrard?

 

[Mr. Fusion]

If Jax wins on Monday night, Garrard is an MVP candidate. If they don't, he's just playing good football.

 

[switz]

Is NE w/o Brady >>>> Jacksonville w/o Garrard?

Easily, and by alot. In fact, NE-Brady is still better than JAX+Garrard, by quite a bit.IMO, league MVP is player at the top of his game, leading his team to wins. Whether that's Brady or Manning, both qualify. Garcia is a close third IMO. No other players even belong in the discussion.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Numbers lie.

 

[gigantor]

If it went to the most valuable player to your team, Devin Hester would have won last year.

This year's MVP should go to Randy Moss.

 

[delusional]

i was expecting to see like garica or anderson but not him

 

[Wadsworth]

Is NE w/o Brady >>>> Jacksonville w/o Garrard?

Easily, and by alot. In fact, NE-Brady is still better than JAX+Garrard, by quite a bit.IMO, league MVP is player at the top of his game, leading his team to wins. Whether that's Brady or Manning, both qualify. Garcia is a close third IMO. No other players even belong in the discussion.

I can't decide if you hate on the Jags because you haven't seen enough of them or... or I don't know what. If you remove the QBs, NE has better WRs, Jags have better RBs, the O-lines are similar. Defensively both teams have outstanding players at various positions, but you'd be hard pressed to claim the Pats were "quite a bit" better on defense. Yea, the Pats are an amazing team and maybe they could beat the Jags without Tom Brady playing, but "quite a bit" better? That really is showing either a bias or a lack of information.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Fantastic post. Don't know that I can "agree" really, but this is great in-season food for thought.

 

[moleculo]

I take issue with adjusting for SOS at this point. As originally pointed out, Brady has benefited from an easier SOS, and therefore his score is normalized, or reduced, due to the SOS.

unless the SOS score accounts for this, this really isn't fair. Brady's opponents will appear to be weak thus far because they have each given up 3>TD's in at least one game - the week when they had the Pats! Simply by having a dominant season, Brady has made his opponents appear weaker, and therefore reduces his own SOS.

It gets into a bit of a chicken-egg debate eventually, and it's tough to do SOS normalization, especially so early in the season.

 

[Wu-banger]

Garrad has been doing the things for his team not to lose.....

....... an MVP does the things to make his team win.

 

[Sheriff66]

It was a nice read but completely silly....

Brady is the MVP, like it or not.

 

[MCguidance]

You can't see me, but I'm laughing.

 

[stevegamer]

I'm not sure Favre isn't in the mix, as GB's run game has been pretty poor.

Romo cooked his own goose against the Bills - that kind of a meltdown on national TV is impossible to overcome.

 

[switz]

Is NE w/o Brady >>>> Jacksonville w/o Garrard?

Easily, and by alot. In fact, NE-Brady is still better than JAX+Garrard, by quite a bit.IMO, league MVP is player at the top of his game, leading his team to wins. Whether that's Brady or Manning, both qualify. Garcia is a close third IMO. No other players even belong in the discussion.

I can't decide if you hate on the Jags because you haven't seen enough of them or... or I don't know what. If you remove the QBs, NE has better WRs, Jags have better RBs, the O-lines are similar. Defensively both teams have outstanding players at various positions, but you'd be hard pressed to claim the Pats were "quite a bit" better on defense. Yea, the Pats are an amazing team and maybe they could beat the Jags without Tom Brady playing, but "quite a bit" better? That really is showing either a bias or a lack of information.

Actually, your reply smacks of homerism. Sure the Jags have some good RBs, but other than that they haven't much talent at the offensive skill positions, and I include Garrard in that. I've seen plenty of the Jags, and am not a hater, just unimpressed. And as far as their RBs go, outside of the last two games, they haven't lit the field on fire.Pats have tons of weapons on offense, so much so that even the Pats backup (Cassells?) would be able to produce big stats. Plus they have a tremendous coach, far better than JDR.

 

[Pipes]

Interesting stuff.You can blame Chase for trying to look at different angles and not just handling the MVP to Brady and Superbowl to the Patriots like everyone else is doing.And let's also remember that MVP is Most Valuable Player, not best player. Brady >>>> Garrard no questions asked, but is he more valuable????Is NE w/o Brady >>>> Jacksonville w/o Garrard?

And Jacksonville is what really? A borderline playoff team.Brady is on pace to have the greatest season ever by a QB and to argue that anyone else at this point is MVP is downright laughable.

 

[Wadsworth]

Is NE w/o Brady >>>> Jacksonville w/o Garrard?

Easily, and by alot. In fact, NE-Brady is still better than JAX+Garrard, by quite a bit.IMO, league MVP is player at the top of his game, leading his team to wins. Whether that's Brady or Manning, both qualify. Garcia is a close third IMO. No other players even belong in the discussion.

I can't decide if you hate on the Jags because you haven't seen enough of them or... or I don't know what. If you remove the QBs, NE has better WRs, Jags have better RBs, the O-lines are similar. Defensively both teams have outstanding players at various positions, but you'd be hard pressed to claim the Pats were "quite a bit" better on defense. Yea, the Pats are an amazing team and maybe they could beat the Jags without Tom Brady playing, but "quite a bit" better? That really is showing either a bias or a lack of information.

Actually, your reply smacks of homerism. Sure the Jags have some good RBs, but other than that they haven't much talent at the offensive skill positions, and I include Garrard in that. I've seen plenty of the Jags, and am not a hater, just unimpressed. And as far as their RBs go, outside of the last two games, they haven't lit the field on fire.Pats have tons of weapons on offense, so much so that even the Pats backup (Cassells?) would be able to produce big stats. Plus they have a tremendous coach, far better than JDR.

This is what I don't understand. So you are ignoring that the same JAG RBs got around 2,800 rushing/receiving yards and 21 TDs combined last season and judging them based on only the first 3 out of 5 games this season?

 

[Team Legacy]

Numbers lie.

I was thinking the SAME THING Jeff. These formula type studies are really crap IMHO. WAY too much analysis of the numbers. There's simply WAY too many variables.OLine, Defense, Avg Drive Starting position, effective ground game, clock management, score, all these are factors that lead to a QBs stats. Plain and simple:Garcia with 5 TDs and 0 Ints just doesn't make the cut for an MVP. Nice, but certainly not MVP.Garard with 6 TDs and 0 Ints just doesn't make the cut for an MVP. Nice, but certainly not MVP. Romo --- 9 ints... WAY too much. Peyton 10 tds and 2. Typical Peyton year, a top performer..way up the list, dominating everyone else for MVP...Tom Brady. 21 TDs and 2 ints. Let's not overcomplicate it folks. Brady has been nothing short of amazing. Hands down, walkaway winner if there's ever been one.A+ effort on the stats summary Chase. I wouldn't have thought Garard was as efficient as he is without it, but he's simply not MVP material.

 

[Pat Patriot]

Interesting stuff.

You can blame Chase for trying to look at different angles and not just handling the MVP to Brady and Superbowl to the Patriots like everyone else is doing.

And let's also remember that MVP is Most Valuable Player, not best player. Brady >>>> Garrard no questions asked, but is he more valuable????

Is NE w/o Brady >>>> Jacksonville w/o Garrard?

And Jacksonville is what really? A borderline playoff team.Brady is on pace to have the greatest season ever by a QB and to argue that anyone else at this point is MVP is downright laughable.

This argument is ridiculous. This isnt Baseball. We dont MAKE UP new stats to fit some little agenda that we might have (we know how much Chase loves to try and discredit the Patriots, how are those Jets doing this year? ).

And dont worry about SOS at this point. NE has on their schedule:

SD

at Dallas

Washington

at Indy

Steelers

Eagles

at Baltimore

at NY Giants

Plenty of breathers in there as well playing Miami twice, Buffalo again, and of course the Jets but the Patriots do play every single top team in the league before the year is over.

The Patriots and Brady will have plenty of time to prove themselves before the year is done. If the Pats throw up a 14-2 year and best record in the AFC, it almost doesnt matter what Brady does the rest of the year. He is your MVP.

 

[Tau837]

Imagine how much better the Patriots would look so far if they had Garrard

The MVP award isn't given to the best player, it's given to the player who has played the best. Obviously Brady is a way better QB than Garrard.Exactly what has Garrard done wrong this year?

.... if Garrard went down, Jonathan Quinn would be starting....

Quinn Gray

Well, at least I got the Quinn part right...

 

[Tau837]

Is NE w/o Brady >>>> Jacksonville w/o Garrard?

Easily, and by alot. In fact, NE-Brady is still better than JAX+Garrard, by quite a bit.IMO, league MVP is player at the top of his game, leading his team to wins. Whether that's Brady or Manning, both qualify. Garcia is a close third IMO. No other players even belong in the discussion.

I can't decide if you hate on the Jags because you haven't seen enough of them or... or I don't know what. If you remove the QBs, NE has better WRs, Jags have better RBs, the O-lines are similar. Defensively both teams have outstanding players at various positions, but you'd be hard pressed to claim the Pats were "quite a bit" better on defense. Yea, the Pats are an amazing team and maybe they could beat the Jags without Tom Brady playing, but "quite a bit" better? That really is showing either a bias or a lack of information.

Coaches are part of the teams, too. HTH.

 

[Tau837]

Soap box: (maybe we need an icon for this?) I really hate the "most valuable to your team" comparison to the best player. As far as I am concerned, if you are the best player you are the MVP because by definition you are more valuable to your team. People will look only at wins and say so so and so finished 8-8 instead of 5-11, but so and so got them to the playoffs. I think that is silly, but I am in the minority on this one.

I disagree. Consider:Team A has the second best player in the league this season.

Team B has the rest of the top 10 players in the league this season, including the best player.

Does that mean the best player is more valuable to Team B than the second best player is to Team A? I would argue no. It is an extreme example, of course, but IMO it disproves your statement. Once disproven, it cannot simply be applied across the board as you suggest.

 

[Keys Myaths]

This argument is ridiculous. This isnt Baseball. We dont MAKE UP new stats to fit some little agenda that we might have

Clearly even after all your baseball posting, you have no idea what the principles behind sabremetrics are. Fit some agenda? Sorry for the hijack, but this is stupid. Football Outsiders is trying to find ways to do the same thing in a much more team-oriented sport. What's wrong with thinking outside the box and looking for new ideas? What's wrong with coming in here and posting some of those ideas to have a discussion about something that many people in here might not have seen/heard of before, to open their eyes to a new way of thinking?There is none. Period. You don't have to agree with it, but laughing it off is the kind of thinking that's going to stifle real creativity and thought. God forbid we have some of that in here.

 

[Modog814]

Interesting stuff.

You can blame Chase for trying to look at different angles and not just handling the MVP to Brady and Superbowl to the Patriots like everyone else is doing.

And let's also remember that MVP is Most Valuable Player, not best player. Brady >>>> Garrard no questions asked, but is he more valuable????

Is NE w/o Brady >>>> Jacksonville w/o Garrard?

And Jacksonville is what really? A borderline playoff team.Brady is on pace to have the greatest season ever by a QB and to argue that anyone else at this point is MVP is downright laughable.

This argument is ridiculous. This isnt Baseball. We dont MAKE UP new stats to fit some little agenda that we might have (we know how much Chase loves to try and discredit the Patriots, how are those Jets doing this year? ).

And dont worry about SOS at this point. NE has on their schedule:

SD

at Dallas

Washington

at Indy

Steelers

Eagles

at Baltimore

at NY Giants

Plenty of breathers in there as well playing Miami twice, Buffalo again, and of course the Jets but the Patriots do play every single top team in the league before the year is over.

The Patriots and Brady will have plenty of time to prove themselves before the year is done. If the Pats throw up a 14-2 year and best record in the AFC, it almost doesnt matter what Brady does the rest of the year. He is your MVP.

I'm not claiming that Brady isn't the MVP at this point in the season, b/c he's the obvious favorite and in no way do I think that Garrard is the MVP. My point was if you're thinking about the MVP in terms of Most Valuable to their teams and let's say NE with Brady = a, Jack with Garrad = b, and a - b = c

Now NE w/o Brady = d and JAck w/o Garrard = e and d - e = f.

Now if you subtract f from c do you get a positive number or a negative number. If you get a positive number you could argue that Garrard is theoretically more valuable to his team than Brady is. If you get a negative number, then Brady is theoretically more valuable.