Mvp

[ChadCollins]

a topic of good discussion. What does MVP mean and who is the mvp so far?

In my opinion, the mvp means a player most valuable to your team. Or do you think its most valuable all around player? I think the MVP would have to be Priest Holmes or Favre. If you take Favre or Holmes away from there teams, their teams would not do a thing. I would say for Favre especially. If the Packers dont have Favre, they win 5 games. If KC doesnt have Holmes, Id say they win 6 or 7 games. I would also consider Peyton Manning and Mcnair in the same regard. Now if your talking the most valuable or "best overall player", I think thats a different story. There are still players who can change games in a drop of a hat that play on bad teams. I will still say Marshall Faulk is a MVP player even though he has had some injury problems, and how about players like Issac Bruce? If Bruce played for the Chiefs he would be considered for MVP. I guess its how you look at the word MVP. In my opinon, the best overall player in the NFL is Harrison. The MVP or player most valuable to a team would be Favre

[Javalon]

Re: Mvp

Originally posted by ChadCollins
a topic of good discussion. What does MVP mean and who is the mvp so far?

In my opinion, the mvp means a player most valuable to your team. Or do you think its most valuable all around player? I think the MVP would have to be Priest Holmes or Favre. If you take Favre or Holmes away from there teams, their teams would not do a thing. I would say for Favre especially. If the Packers dont have Favre, they win 5 games. If KC doesnt have Holmes, Id say they win 6 or 7 games. I would also consider Peyton Manning and Mcnair in the same regard. Now if your talking the most valuable or "best overall player", I think thats a different story. There are still players who can change games in a drop of a hat that play on bad teams. I will still say Marshall Faulk is a MVP player even though he has had some injury problems, and how about players like Issac Bruce? If Bruce played for the Chiefs he would be considered for MVP. I guess its how you look at the word MVP. In my opinon, the best overall player in the NFL is Harrison. The MVP or player most valuable to a team would be Favre

If you're talking about the most important players to their team, why not Jake Plummer? Look at what happened to the Broncos after he went down.

Actually, people rarely look at the defensive side of the ball when talking about the MVP. Why not Ray Lewis? I'm not a fan of his but I fully respect the kind of player he is. That Ravens' defense would be completely average or worse without him.

[bklynbronco]

there should be two awards

most valuable player to me means that if that player wasn't on the team, the team would lose or at least be a 500 team. that's a valuable player. that player could be on defense or offense. i also think that another award should go to the player with the best numbers and they should get awarded player of they year. a most valuable player might not have the great numbers but does everything to help his team win while a player of the year might have the numbers but the team doesn't make the playoffs.

[broncos4ever]

Re: Re: Mvp

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Javalon
[B]If you're talking about the most important players to their team, why not Jake Plummer? Look at what happened to the Broncos after he went down.

Jake has my vote for MVPf if we are keeping this to the Broncos. We have lost three games since he went down. Look at our record before he quit playing, we had lost one game and it was a close one. Since he went down we have lost three games using two quarterbacks. Sure we won one, but there is something that a MVP brings to the team.

We definitely need Jake back. Clinton is important, but we are not winning games, even with him healthy and running for 100 yards per game.

[BroncoCy]

MVP=Steve McNair. The dude has brass balls and brings it week in and week out. The Titans would blow without him.

[BroncoCy]

Originally posted by tahuya man
As much as you don't like it, Dante Hall has to be a prime candidate so far.

He should be...but I just don't think he's on the field enough to get it. I don't think he'll be considered much though because everyone is kicking away from him now. The dude is a playmaker though.

[Javalon]

Originally posted by tahuya man
As much as you don't like it, Dante Hall has to be a prime candidate so far.

I disagree. And it's not because I don't like the Chiefs.

I think Priest Holmes is a viable candidate for MVP. But it's nearly impossible for a return man like Hall to to compete with full time offensive stars.

For instance, Holmes has 12 TD's while Hall has 5 (1 off. + 4 ret.). Priest has a ton of offensive yards while Hall has very little. Yeah, Hall has a ton of kick return yards but it's hard to to compare that to offensive yards because most kick returners get decent chunks of yardage on every return.

Now, I'll admit that Hall is probably the best return man in the game right now but he can't win the game every week. Even in the case of the Chiefs, if you replace Hall with an average kick returner, the Chiefs probably still have a 6-2 record and that's only because Priest helped keep them in a position to win. However, replace Priest with an average back and the Chiefs could be 4-4 or worse. I base that not just on his stats but on the fact that he opens up the Chiefs offense just by making defenses gameplan with the specific intent of shutting him down.

And I'll reiterate that Dante Hall's game winning kick returns didn't specifically win the games for the Chiefs. He just got the final big play that looks real glamorous but wouldn't have mattered if the rest of the team hadn't done their job.

If you had to pick a single player to build a team around would you pick Holmes or Hall? Holmes, no question. Same goes for Steve McNair, Randy Moss, Peyton Manning, Brett Favre, etc. There are a ton of players I would pick over Hall because they are more valuable to a team than Hall is. MVP = Most VALUEABLE Player.

But again. I think Hall is great and I'm not putting him down. I just feel he's not even close (and no kick returner is) to being an MVP.

[BroncoCy]

Originally posted by tahuya man
Hall is not only a kick/punt returner. He has more receptions than a lot of other wide receivers. Hall can instantly change a game. He's dangerous any time he touches the ball. He just might be a guy to pick to build a team. I wouldn't doubt that the current NFL players would have him in the top 2 or three as I do.

I don't think I'd go so far to pick him as a guy to build a team around. I would want a guy that touches the ball atleast 20 times a game like a QB or RB.

[Javalon]

Originally posted by tahuya man
Hall is not only a kick/punt returner. He has more receptions than a lot of other wide receivers. Hall can instantly change a game. He's dangerous any time he touches the ball. He just might be a guy to pick to build a team. I wouldn't doubt that the current NFL players would have him in the top 2 or three as I do.

According to the NFL's rankings, Hall is listed as the #66 receiver. I don't think that qualifies him as one of the better WR's.

He's a great kick returner. But returners can only return so many kicks in a game. If a returner got TD's in 1/2 of his games, it would freakin' incredible. If Hall get 8 TD's this season he'll be considered possibly the best ever (although I doubt it will happen).

But a great running back or receiver could be expected to average at least 1 TD a game. In fact there are 6 of them doing it right now and a bunch that are close. A great QB could be expected to throw 2 TD's a game.

A kick returner can't compare to that. After Hall got his last TD return lots of people said they'd consider him for MVP. But everybody knew Hall couldn't keep getting TD's every game...and he hasn't. It's just not possible.

And I truly doubt you'd find anybody, including players, who would put Hall anywhere close to the top of their list to build a team around.

[Javalon]

Originally posted by tahuya man
Did I say he was one of the better WRs? No I did not, I said that he has more catches than a lot of WRs. Don't misrepresent what I said. Also I said that I would be willing to bet that a lot of players would pick him to be the MVP based on the first half of the season.

My mistake. I assumed that by bringing up his catches relative to other receivers you were implying his receiving skills contributed to his potential as an MVP candidate or as a reason to build a team around him.

I still think that 4 weeks ago the players and/or analysts would have considered him as a serious MVP candidate...but not now. And the longer he goes without another TD the further down the list he'll fall.

[Elway]

I'm going with McNair, Hall has some returns big deal. McNair has been bringing it evergame, everytime his offense is on the field. Tennessee is never out of it with him at QB. He took them from their poor start last year to the AFC Championship game and has them going string this year even with a deteriorated Eddie George and his anemic runs.

[Captain Kirk]

Originally posted by tahuya man
As much as you don't like it, Dante Hall has to be a prime candidate so far.

No, believe it or not, I am going to agree with you on this. The Cheifs are riding on this young man and would be lucky to have a winning record without him. Even when I take in to account the uncalled illegal blocks he got in the famous return against our Broncos, nobody can deny he is the best returner in the NFL today, and possibly if he stays healthy, perhaps ever.

[Return of Lava]

Originally posted by klund
No, believe it or not, I am going to agree with you on this. The Cheifs are riding on this young man and would be lucky to have a winning record without him. Even when I take in to account the uncalled illegal blocks he got in the famous return against our Broncos, nobody can deny he is the best returner in the NFL today, and possibly if he stays healthy, perhaps ever.

what? without hall, the chiefs are still a good 6-2 at the worst

[Javalon]

Originally posted by klund
No, believe it or not, I am going to agree with you on this. The Cheifs are riding on this young man and would be lucky to have a winning record without him. Even when I take in to account the uncalled illegal blocks he got in the famous return against our Broncos, nobody can deny he is the best returner in the NFL today, and possibly if he stays healthy, perhaps ever.

Heh. Ok, I want to see how many Chiefs fans agree with you that they "would be lucky to have a winning record without him."

They would have lost maybe 2 games without Hall: Denver & Baltimore.

We all know that Hall's TD return against Denver shouldn't have counted...but I guess we should give him credit for having the refs so star-struck they failed to see at least 2 clips.

And against the Ravens his return just broke a 10-10 tie. The Chiefs would have had the ball even if Hall doesn't return it all the way. They still have a 50-50 shot at winning that game.

I think Hall is not only NOT a legitimate MVP candidate, I don't even think he's the Chiefs' MVP. There's no way Hall is more important to the Chiefs than is Priest Holmes.

[Javalon]

Originally posted by tahuya man
HAll has had some good returns which did not score, but got KC out of very poor field position in close games. He's simply incredible. Under 5'10" and 185 lbs? he's a tough little fella too.

Hey, there's no doubt he's a great returner. I'd love to have him on the Broncos. I just don't think he's a legitimate MVP candidate.