For some reason, sportswriters find it impossible to accept that some times good players are on bad teams, and sometimes bad players are on good teams. Jeffri Chadiha should hardly be blamed for doing something that has become the industry's bread-and-butter, but then again, the world is not fair.
Chadiha compiled a list of the 10 Most Indispensible Players in the NFL. Some of them are picks that he simply has to make: Peyton, Brady, both fine. Some are sort of unconventional. Sure Antonio Gates is a man of spectacular ability, but he's still a tight end and by last years DVOA (via Football Outsiders), not even the most valuable. Even so, Chadiha makes a good point. Likewise, four is Adrian Peterson. He is great, but he is also one of very few running backs to be have fewer in Football Outsider's adjusted yards than actual yards. His five fumbles are steep for someone with so few carries, and he shares the team with a top 20 DVOA back.
Enough of that, let's get completely crazy. Scroll down to number ten and you'll see, of all people, Eli Manning. I'll give you a moment to pick your jaw up off the floor. I'll admit Manning put together a pretty good playoff run, but when you look at the larger sample size of the regular season, he was just awful. Football Outsiders has him listed as roughly the 35th best quarterback. His real performance was possibly not even good enough to start. Just because his team put together a remarkable run and was inspirational and beautiful all that crap doesn't change the fact that Eli Manning was bad. He really was quite bad. It has nothing to do with him not being intense, or being too intense or whatever, he was just bad. He is not the 10th most indispensible player, he is actually, seemingly, very dispensible.
Showing posts with label Chadiha. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chadiha. Show all posts
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Friday, July 6, 2007
Most indispensable player
Peyton Manning? Tom Brady? LaDainian Tomlinson? No!
Jeffery Chadiha thinks its Larry Johnson.
The Chiefs wouldn't win three games if Johnson wasn't available this season.
The Chiefs respect Chadiha's analysis so much, that they seem perfectly content in forcing Johnson to play under his rookie deal this year, even if the alternative is a holdout.
If the Chiefs were to start a replacement level back instead of Larry Johnson, Football Outsiders estimates that it would cost them about 42 points, or roughly 2.5 wins.
Michael Bennett is a better than replacement back, to the tune of 1.5 wins above replacement if he had seen the carries that Johnson saw last year.
2006 Kansas City: an 8-8 team without Larry Johnson. Jeffery Chadhia: a total moron.
He set an NFL record with 416 carries in 2006 and their offense seems to deteriorate a little more with each passing season.
And will likely deteriorate significantly this season because Larry Johnson did carry the ball more times last year than any player in NFL history. Ever. Johnson would have to be some freak of nature to get more than halfway into this season without breaking down a la Curtis Martin and Shaun Alexander the last two seasons.
Right now, Kansas City likely will have a first-time starter at quarterback (second-year veteran Brodie Croyle), a depleted offensive line that lost its two best players over the past two years (offensive tackle Willie Roaf and guard Will Shields) and a corps of wide receivers that ranks near the bottom of the NFL. In other words, the Chiefs had better give Johnson the new contract he covets if they want to have any optimism about their offense this coming season.
If the goal is to generate optimism, Chadiha might have a point. However, if I were to build a sports franchise, my goal would be to get the best players on the field I could. And while Johnson is a great runner, history suggests that hes doomed to injury or ineffectiveness this year. But, hey, thats nothing $56 million can't fix, right?
Jeffery Chadiha thinks its Larry Johnson.
The Chiefs wouldn't win three games if Johnson wasn't available this season.
The Chiefs respect Chadiha's analysis so much, that they seem perfectly content in forcing Johnson to play under his rookie deal this year, even if the alternative is a holdout.
If the Chiefs were to start a replacement level back instead of Larry Johnson, Football Outsiders estimates that it would cost them about 42 points, or roughly 2.5 wins.
Michael Bennett is a better than replacement back, to the tune of 1.5 wins above replacement if he had seen the carries that Johnson saw last year.
2006 Kansas City: an 8-8 team without Larry Johnson. Jeffery Chadhia: a total moron.
He set an NFL record with 416 carries in 2006 and their offense seems to deteriorate a little more with each passing season.
And will likely deteriorate significantly this season because Larry Johnson did carry the ball more times last year than any player in NFL history. Ever. Johnson would have to be some freak of nature to get more than halfway into this season without breaking down a la Curtis Martin and Shaun Alexander the last two seasons.
Right now, Kansas City likely will have a first-time starter at quarterback (second-year veteran Brodie Croyle), a depleted offensive line that lost its two best players over the past two years (offensive tackle Willie Roaf and guard Will Shields) and a corps of wide receivers that ranks near the bottom of the NFL. In other words, the Chiefs had better give Johnson the new contract he covets if they want to have any optimism about their offense this coming season.
If the goal is to generate optimism, Chadiha might have a point. However, if I were to build a sports franchise, my goal would be to get the best players on the field I could. And while Johnson is a great runner, history suggests that hes doomed to injury or ineffectiveness this year. But, hey, thats nothing $56 million can't fix, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)