I just feel like everyone is going to spend all week talking about Mahomes' ankle or Burrow being a Demigod or Chase against this young secondary or Lou Anarumo being a psychopath...and then in the end it's just going to Samaje Perine bludgeoning Bolton and Gay to death.
According to next gen stats, last year’s Chiefs team was the 19th best KC team of all time. Yet we won SB. This year’s team was the 28th best team. So there have been 27 KC Chiefs team since 1960 that were statistically better overall. Yet we won the SB. Why? We have the best QB in the NFL and it isn’t close.
You can say you’d rather have Burrow. Hell, you might even convince yourself that you believe it. But 31 GMs and 31 coaches in the NFL would take Patrick Mahomes over what they have now. It’s not even close.
Another interesting statistic: in the last 50 years, 26 QBs have lost their first trip to the SB, including Burrow. Guess how many went on to ever win the SB? 1. John Elway. No other QB has gone on to win the SB after losing their first time.
You also have only 2 more years under the 5 year rule. Josh Allen is already outside the 5 year rule window. Be interesting to see whether Burrow can validate that rule or prove the exception. He first has to stay healthy enough though. And so far he has not done a great job of staying healthy. [Reply]
Originally Posted by frozenchief:
According to next gen stats, last year’s Chiefs team was the 19th best KC team of all time. Yet we won SB. This year’s team was the 28th best team. So there have been 27 KC Chiefs team since 1960 that were statistically better overall. Yet we won the SB. Why? We have the best QB in the NFL and it isn’t close.
You can say you’d rather have Burrow. Hell, you might even convince yourself that you believe it. But 31 GMs and 31 coaches in the NFL would take Patrick Mahomes over what they have now. It’s not even close.
Change the hypothetical to either Patrick Mahomes or the best QB your franchise ever had. How many would take Mahomes? The number that do not choose Mahomes has to be extremely small. [Reply]
Originally Posted by frozenchief:
According to next gen stats, last year’s Chiefs team was the 19th best KC team of all time. Yet we won SB. This year’s team was the 28th best team. So there have been 27 KC Chiefs team since 1960 that were statistically better overall. Yet we won the SB. Why? We have the best QB in the NFL and it isn’t close.
You can say you’d rather have Burrow. Hell, you might even convince yourself that you believe it. But 31 GMs and 31 coaches in the NFL would take Patrick Mahomes over what they have now. It’s not even close.
Another interesting statistic: in the last 50 years, 26 QBs have lost their first trip to the SB, including Burrow. Guess how many went on to ever win the SB? 1. John Elway. No other QB has gone on to win the SB after losing their first time.
You also have only 2 more years under the 5 year rule. Josh Allen is already outside the 5 year rule window. Be interesting to see whether Burrow can validate that rule or prove the exception. He first has to stay healthy enough though. And so far he has not done a great job of staying healthy.
By what metrics? Cmon there weren't 18 fucking Chiefs teams better than last year's squad. People need to stop with the useless stats. [Reply]
Originally Posted by frozenchief:
According to next gen stats, last year’s Chiefs team was the 19th best KC team of all time. Yet we won SB. This year’s team was the 28th best team. So there have been 27 KC Chiefs team since 1960 that were statistically better overall. Yet we won the SB. Why? We have the best QB in the NFL and it isn’t close.
You can say you’d rather have Burrow. Hell, you might even convince yourself that you believe it. But 31 GMs and 31 coaches in the NFL would take Patrick Mahomes over what they have now. It’s not even close.
Another interesting statistic: in the last 50 years, 26 QBs have lost their first trip to the SB, including Burrow. Guess how many went on to ever win the SB? 1. John Elway. No other QB has gone on to win the SB after losing their first time.
You also have only 2 more years under the 5 year rule. Josh Allen is already outside the 5 year rule window. Be interesting to see whether Burrow can validate that rule or prove the exception. He first has to stay healthy enough though. And so far he has not done a great job of staying healthy.
Well, i've never said that. He's who we have. Anyone that would say that isn't being honest. Or, in their mind they're honest when actually they're kinda dumb.
Also, this is the last year under the 5 year rule. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pasta Little Brioni:
By what metrics? Cmon there weren't 18 fucking Chiefs teams better than last year's squad. People need to stop with the useless stats.
"Useless stats". I know how you're never wrong and all that... :-)
but
It's possible to have previous teams be better by combined offense and defensive rankings, or maybe even by metrics like efficiency and epa, without having the best QB and still be considered a "better team". [Reply]
Originally Posted by RealSNR:
Burrow isn't cool. He's not smarter than Mahomes. He's very good and better than 99% of NFL QBs. But he's not "more cerebral" in any way, shape, or form.
There IS one thing he's demonstrably better at than Mahomes, however: Breaking apart in midair
Originally Posted by rfaulk34:
"Useless stats". I know how you're never wrong and all that... :-)
but
It's possible to have previous teams be better by combined offense and defensive rankings, or maybe even by metrics like efficiency and epa, without having the best QB and still be considered a "better team".
Zip it spanky. My metrics also say Burrow never wins a title :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by rfaulk34:
"Useless stats". I know how you're never wrong and all that... :-)
but
It's possible to have previous teams be better by combined offense and defensive rankings, or maybe even by metrics like efficiency and epa, without having the best QB and still be considered a "better team".
The Chiefs have seventeen 11+ win seasons ever and 30 winning seasons.... so a 14-win SB team being rated two spots lower than all 11+ win teams, and this year's team being 28th of 30 winning seasons as an 11 win team is pretty unbelievable. And not "omg, that's unbelievable!" ...but literally not believable.
I think a big part of it is how they treat the regular season these days.... they were obviously a far better team this season once they stopped rotating 8 receivers and CEH started getting fewer touches (among other things), and even after that they rarely blow out teams and routinely shut it down.
Similar to all the chest thumping that rival fans do around here every postseason for being point differential champs and so forth... so many of those stats don't mean shit. And many of those Chiefs teams of the past were in the same shoes, wanting to prove themselves, fighting for their playoff lives, etc... which is apples and oranges compared to these Andy Reid and Mahomes teams. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
The Chiefs have seventeen 11+ win seasons ever and 30 winning seasons.... so a 14-win SB team being rated two spots lower than all 11+ win teams, and this year's team being 28th of 30 winning seasons as an 11 win team is pretty unbelievable. And not "omg, that's unbelievable!" ...but literally not believable.
I think a big part of it is how they treat the regular season these days.... they were obviously a far better team this season once they stopped rotating 8 receivers and CEH started getting fewer touches (among other things), and even after that they rarely blow out teams and routinely shut it down.
Similar to all the chest thumping that rival fans do around here every postseason for being point differential champs and so forth... so many of those stats don't mean shit. And many of those Chiefs teams of the past were in the same shoes, wanting to prove themselves, fighting for their playoff lives, etc... which is apples and oranges compared to these Andy Reid and Mahomes teams.
I'm hip. A lot of this kind of stuff has to do with someone being bored and crunching numbers to make a "new" point. I didn't look at this particular set at all so i have no idea, other than what you told me, how valid it is.
A lot of it comes down to the analytics generation. Take a previous team, compute their epa, compare them to today's team. If the raw numbers are better, the team was "better". Ultimate results don't really factor in a lot of the time. [Reply]
