Peter King is Stupid

[karmarooster 0]

here's something from his MMQB Tuesday Edition.

 

First of all here are his picks for MVP: 1. Brady 2. Garrad 3. Jarred Allen. Ok Brady is the most vanilla pick possible, but Garrard and Allen aren't crazy picks. relatively speaking.

 

Then, Offensive Player of the Year. 1. Peterson 2. Brady 3. Matt Hasselbeck. Does this make sense to you? Why wouldn't it be Garrard at number 3 here? I guess he assumes that Garrard will have a better win-loss record, but Hasselbeck will have better stats. OK, but still, Hasselbeck?

 

 

• MVP: 1. QB Tom Brady, New England. 2. QB David Garrard, Jacksonville. 3. DE Jared Allen, Minnesota. The best quarterback for the best team should almost invariably win this award.

• Offensive Player of the Year: 1. RB Adrian Peterson, Minnesota. 2. QB Tom Brady, New England. 3. QB Matt Hasselbeck, Seattle. I had Garrard higher in the MVP voting here by virtue of the Jags surpassing Indianapolis. Hasselbeck will have a 4,300-yard passing season.

 

That part is the craziest of all. Keep in mind Hasselbeck's two best statistical seasons: 2003 - 3841 yards, and 2007 - 3966.

 

Nevermind that Holmgren's version of the WCO is based on 3 and 5 step drops, short high-percentage completions. Suddenly, throwing the ball to Nate Burleson and Courtney Taylor and NO ONE ELSE, for at least a few weeks until surgically repaired Deion Branch can make cuts again and Engram heals, beck is going to add another game and a half of yardage to his total.

 

dude is stupid.

[Mmueller 0]

his offensive weapons have been downgraded since last year.

 

I bump up Burleson but downgrade Hassleback.

 

Peter King'd

[gocolts 300]

here's something from his MMQB Tuesday Edition.

 

First of all here are his picks for MVP: 1. Brady 2. Garrad 3. Jarred Allen. Ok Brady is the most vanilla pick possible, but Garrard and Allen aren't crazy picks. relatively speaking.

 

Then, Offensive Player of the Year. 1. Peterson 2. Brady 3. Matt Hasselbeck. Does this make sense to you? Why wouldn't it be Garrard at number 3 here? I guess he assumes that Garrard will have a better win-loss record, but Hasselbeck will have better stats. OK, but still, Hasselbeck?

 

 

 

 

That part is the craziest of all. Keep in mind Hasselbeck's two best statistical seasons: 2003 - 3841 yards, and 2007 - 3966.

 

Nevermind that Holmgren's version of the WCO is based on 3 and 5 step drops, short high-percentage completions. Suddenly, throwing the ball to Nate Burleson and Courtney Taylor and NO ONE ELSE, for at least a few weeks until surgically repaired Deion Branch can make cuts again and Engram heals, beck is going to add another game and a half of yardage to his total.

 

dude is stupid.

That is certainly a leap by this tool on Hass and 4300 yards crap.

[Big_Pete 0]

yeah, I think King just likes to take flying leaps of nonsensical faith on players so he can look like a genius if it pans out (which it never does)