Just how good ARE the Chiefs?

[Morpheus]

You guys are fantastic!! You ask for stats because originally I wasnt looking at enough metrics and was only focused on the W-l aspect ( you know, the most important part) and now when I provide stats you tell me the stats dont really prove anything. LOL. Awesome.

The stats you are using don't prove the points you are trying to make.

 

[rmilia1]

I find you very knowledgeable and appreciate your insight and find your name very fitting. You are right though there is a nice group here that is very impressive. I still have no idea why a Falcons fan who says he doesn't care about Alex Smith is on here going so crazy about Alex Smith and seems genuinely upset that we will not say "Alex Smith is an amazing stupendous quarterback in this league." I could understand if it was a Chiefs homer just going crazy as we all go a little crazy for our own team but a Falcons fan?? Hmm something seems a little fishy about that. Probably just excited somebody actually gave him a bit of attention even if it is to show how idiotic most of his arguments have been.

For the last time. I dont give a shit about Alex Smith. I care about intelligent genuine debate which has been impossible to have here because my opposing opinion has resulted in me being called an idiot, that I dont know anything about football and have probably never watched a game.. Yikes. Its OK if I think SMith is a top 10 QB and you dont. I have provided reasons and you disagree. Difference is I dont impugn your knowledge or intelligence simply because you disagree with me. You guys can believe whatever you like and some of the points you have made are valid so Im just going to agree to disagree. The good news is we will find out just how good KC is in the next month.

 

[rmilia1]

The stats you are using don't prove the points you are trying to make.

??? Jesus christ really?? All I provided was exactly what I was asked to provide and it showed KC being a good second half team that had been more than adept at putting teams away as they had done it in 4 or 5 of their 8 wins.

 

[iknowftbll]

Dude I played college football so Im pretty sure I know the game. As to the Elway to Smith comarison it was ONLY meant to drive home the point that stats dont mean everything since Elways stats sucked but the Broncos were still winning. The first thing used to combat my assertion that he sucked his first 3 years was his record of 23-7 in years 2 aand 3 ( which I knew). I simply asked why it was OK to use his record as means of determining his worth but not OK to do so for Smith. Thats not wrong, it simply suckered people into saying exactly what I wanted them to say and then instead of saying "Hey nice point" I got told how I was still wrong.

I pointed out earlier that Elway's record was brought in only as a concession. Essentially it was a Broncos fan saying, "If record is what you want to discuss..." It doesn't mean you scored a major debate point. It simply means that for the sake of discussion, someone cherry picked one little tiny corner of the overall picture in order to converse with you at the level at which you felt comfortable.

Im all for debate but in order to debate both sides have to be open to others oopinions.

This must be why you opened a post with "you guys are out of your minds..." You sound really open to other's opinions, don't you?

Clearly my opinion of Smith as a top 10 QB ( which IMO he is right now) is not shared by Bronco fans and nothing I use stats wise, common sense wise or whatever will make a difference. You wanted stats to show he can lead KC to late wins and I provided them, they are not used incorrectly they are exactly what I was asked to provide.

How many game winning or game icing drives has Smith led this year?

 

[rmilia1]

Why wouldn't you take away DEFENSIVE touchdowns when talking about the OFFENSIVE production of the QB? If a team only scores by returning turnovers for points does that mean the QB is great? Rex Grossman and Trent Dilfer must be in your hall of fame.

Bottom line, neither side is going to paint a complete picture with stats, team or individual. That forces us then to go by what we have seen which is subjective in its own right. So we boil this down to an opinion; is Alex Smith a great QB? You say yes. We say he is good and won't lose games for you but doubt he will win games.

Let me ask this, if Smith is so good and the chiefs defense is so good (giving the offense plenty of possessions) why do the chiefs not win by 14+ points a game? Why does Smith not regularly score 20 points a game? Why does the chiefs' offense not regularly score 30+ points a game?

We werent talking about offensive production of the QB. We were talking about KC being able to put teams away late in game.

 

[Morpheus]

Dude I played college football so Im pretty sure I know the game. As to the Elway to Smith comarison it was ONLY meant to drive home the point that stats dont mean everything since Elways stats sucked but the Broncos were still winning. The first thing used to combat my assertion that he sucked his first 3 years was his record of 23-7 in years 2 aand 3 ( which I knew). I simply asked why it was OK to use his record as means of determining his worth but not OK to do so for Smith. Thats not wrong, it simply suckered people into saying exactly what I wanted them to say and then instead of saying "Hey nice point" I got told how I was still wrong. Im all for debate but in order to debate both sides have to be open to others oopinions. Clearly my opinion of Smith as a top 10 QB ( which IMO he is right now) is not shared by Bronco fans and nothing I use stats wise, common sense wise or whatever will make a difference. You wanted stats to show he can lead KC to late wins and I provided them, they are not used incorrectly they are exactly what I was asked to provide.

AND THERE IT IS!

Because he played college football, he knows the game, especially at the pro level.

Pray tell. What illustrious football program did you have the fortune of attending and gleaning all of this expert knowledge from?

 

[iknowftbll]

For the last time. I dont give a shit about Alex Smith. I care about intelligent genuine debate which has been impossible to have here because my opposing opinion has resulted in me being called an idiot, that I dont know anything about football and have probably never watched a game.. Yikes. Its OK if I think SMith is a top 10 QB and you dont. I have provided reasons and you disagree. Difference is I dont impugn your knowledge or intelligence simply because you disagree with me. You guys can believe whatever you like and some of the points you have made are valid so Im just going to agree to disagree. The good news is we will find out just how good KC is in the next month.

Then how do you explain this:

You guys are out of your mind if you think its the defenses solely that have been winning games for Smith. Chiefs had the same defensive guys last year and went 2-14. Id tend to agree with you if we were talking about a small sample size of games that Smith has been winning but 2 years worth??? Come on now. If going 27-5-1 in your last 33 starts was as simple as having a great D then Russell Wilson wouldnt have lost a game at QB yet. I know this is the Broncos board so you have to downplay the Chiefs but a guy doesnt win 85% of his games over 2 years only because he doesnt turn it over much.

This is the post that sort of raised this discussion to another level. You are the one who fired the first shot. Game on after that. Now you are whining about how close minded we are here. Re-read the first few posts. It was a point-counter point discussion before you posted this.

 

[cdumler7]

Dude I played college football so Im pretty sure I know the game. As to the Elway to Smith comarison it was ONLY meant to drive home the point that stats dont mean everything since Elways stats sucked but the Broncos were still winning. The first thing used to combat my assertion that he sucked his first 3 years was his record of 23-7 in years 2 aand 3 ( which I knew). I simply asked why it was OK to use his record as means of determining his worth but not OK to do so for Smith. Thats not wrong, it simply suckered people into saying exactly what I wanted them to say and then instead of saying "Hey nice point" I got told how I was still wrong. Im all for debate but in order to debate both sides have to be open to others oopinions. Clearly my opinion of Smith as a top 10 QB ( which IMO he is right now) is not shared by Bronco fans and nothing I use stats wise, common sense wise or whatever will make a difference. You wanted stats to show he can lead KC to late wins and I provided them, they are not used incorrectly they are exactly what I was asked to provide.

First off you playing in college means jack squat when it comes to the game. There are plenty of idiotic college players who in reality know very little of the game. I used to play interleague basketball with K-State players all the time and some of them I worried about their ability to find their way back to the dorm room. Now a days I coach football as a side job where you actually have to know the ins and outs of the game not just one single position or just rely on athletic ability.

Again as we have been saying though when you started trying to use your John Elway argument to "sucker us in?" you are hitting on just the very surface level stats and records to try and prove your point. I would think with today's metric statistics that record every little detail in sports that you would see there is so much that plays into how "Good" or "Bad" a player is. Throw in when comparing Elway's stats to that of Smith you are comparing two very different generations of football and two very different types of teams and in reality two very different playing styles. All of that figures into this. I don't know how else to get that across to you. I'm sorry but ESPN is not the greatest place to go to try and find out stats that matter a whole lot in getting the full picture of a player.

 

[Morpheus]

For the last time. I dont give a shit about Alex Smith. I care about intelligent genuine debate which has been impossible to have here because my opposing opinion has resulted in me being called an idiot, that I dont know anything about football and have probably never watched a game.. Yikes. Its OK if I think SMith is a top 10 QB and you dont. I have provided reasons and you disagree. Difference is I dont impugn your knowledge or intelligence simply because you disagree with me. You guys can believe whatever you like and some of the points you have made are valid so Im just going to agree to disagree. The good news is we will find out just how good KC is in the next month.

Other than win-loss record (which does not mean anything individually) and TD to INT ratio (which only suggests he is careful with the football) you have not provided any evidence that supports your claim that Alex Smith is a top 10 QB.

Sure, you are entitled to your opinion, but when we give evidence to prove that Alex Smith is not in the top 10 in any meaningful individual QB statistic, your opinion starts to lack validity.

 

[iknowftbll]

AND THERE IT IS!

Because he played college football, he knows the game, especially at the pro level.

Pray tell. What illustrious football program did you have the fortune of attending and gleaning all of this expert knowledge from?

I think you mean, "what program had the good fortune of rmilia playing for them?"

 

[Morpheus]

??? Jesus christ really?? All I provided was exactly what I was asked to provide and it showed KC being a good second half team that had been more than adept at putting teams away as they had done it in 4 or 5 of their 8 wins.

And those "quality wins" where they put teams away in the 2nd half or 4th quarter were against teams who are in the bottom 3rd of the league in offensive production and the Chiefs were in the + category in turnovers.

That only proves that a good defense keeps a poor offense from being able to compete.

It does not tell the whole story. Like the actual facts of the individual games like I posted earlier.

"but they have won 2 games 17-16, and 2 by 10 points or less. The 2 games they won by a point were at home, and we all know how huge a factor the noise is at Arrowhead."

They are not exactly blowing out quality opponents. They won 2 close games against so-so teams. Dallas is the toughest opponent they have faced and the Cowboys have a propensity for shooting themselves int eh foot. Their offense is not that good and 40% of their offensive production is Charles.

 

[cdumler7]

We werent talking about offensive production of the QB. We were talking about KC being able to put teams away late in game.

So you are trying to argue about how Alex Smith is helping this team win games but now you want to focus on the whole picture just like we have been trying to get you to see this whole time? Now if we want to talk about Alex Smith and his direct ability to help this team in the 4th quarter then yes you have to look at 4th quarter production by the offense. Now again this only gives a small piece of the full picture because then you have to look at how many times the defense stopped the offense, how much Smith was actually having to pass in the 4th quarter to impact the game, the score and situations, field position for the offense and defense, OL efficiency, and so many more things. See there is so much that plays into all of this.

Now a great site that actually just looks at the individual player and how much that one individual impacts the game is profootballfocus. Right now they have Alex Smith ranked 28th in the league. He has a positive grade as a runner but as a passer he has struggled some this year. Now yes some of what they do is subjective but most teams in the NFL have used this site to really break down themselves the players on their own team and that of other teams. IF you want I can show you how they came to the conclusion that they did for Alex Smith.

 

[Morpheus]

KC being a good second half team that had been more than adept at putting teams away as they had done it in 4 or 5 of their 8 wins.

Was it 4 or 5?

Because the only 3 decisive wins where they were able to put opponents away at ANY point in the game I see KC having this year are against Jacksonville, Oakland and the Giants. And those wins were LARGELY due to the defensive performance. (note how I did not say all due to the defense)

The offense only averaged 19.5 PPG. The defense held off teams in close games, not the offense sealing it with decisive scoring like say...hmmm...The Broncos?

 

[Broncosr0k]

Oh man, did you all see Mr. Elite2, Alex Smith, light up the Bills' D? A whole 9 points. The dude is money in games where he has to outplay a backup QB.

 

[iknowftbll]

Oh man, did you all see Mr. Elite2, Alex Smith, light up the Bills' D? A whole 9 points. The dude is money in games where he has to outplay a backup QB.

Yesterday's game was a ringing endorsement of what we have been saying here. The defense is what made the difference in this game. That defense has some weaknesses, too. They got run over by the Bills on the ground. In the remaining 7 games the Chiefs are going to face some offenses that are actually going to be able to exploit this weakness and score some touchdowns.

I don't see the Chiefs unravelling, but I do see them looking mediocre through the second half of the season en route to their #5 playoff dead and wild card playoff exit.

 

[cdumler7]

Yesterday's game was a ringing endorsement of what we have been saying here. The defense is what made the difference in this game. That defense has some weaknesses, too. They got run over by the Bills on the ground. In the remaining 7 games the Chiefs are going to face some offenses that are actually going to be able to exploit this weakness and score some touchdowns.

I don't see the Chiefs unravelling, but I do see them looking mediocre through the second half of the season en route to their #5 playoff dead and wild card playoff exit.

There just is no vertical passing game to this offense. Smith is not trusted to be able to go down field, the OL is not trusted to be able to block long enough for that to develop, and I just don't know if they have the personnel to be able to do it. Now my guess is during the bye week they will work on some wrinkles to throw in against the Broncos after the Bye but for now teams know they can have 11 men within 15 yards of the LOS and be fine. Throw in Charles is on record pace for touches in a season if I remember right. He cannot keep going at the pace he is going if they want him to be explosive here at the end of the year.

Very excited to see what a starting quarterback (fingers crossed Manning doesn't get hurt Sunday) can maybe do against this defense as they do seem to be struggling a little more over the last couple of weeks.

 

[iknowftbll]

Very excited to see what a starting quarterback (fingers crossed Manning doesn't get hurt Sunday) can maybe do against this defense as they do seem to be struggling a little more over the last couple of weeks.

I was thinking the same thing about Manning actually. The way the Chiefs season has gone it would be par for the course if they got to play the Broncos with Osweiler making his first NFL start!

I also think you are making a sound observation about the Chiefs defense. It will help them they get re Broncos after the bye week, so they get to rest up. But assuming the Broncos go into that game healthy on both sides of the ball I give the Chiefs maybe a 10% chance to win that game in Denver.

Getting through the Chargers healthy is important. I would say it's even more important than actually winning that game.

 

[cdumler7]

I was thinking the same thing about Manning actually. The way the Chiefs season has gone it would be par for the course if they got to play the Broncos with Osweiler making his first NFL start!

I also think you are making a sound observation about the Chiefs defense. It will help them they get re Broncos after the bye week, so they get to rest up. But assuming the Broncos go into that game healthy on both sides of the ball I give the Chiefs maybe a 10% chance to win that game in Denver.

Getting through the Chargers healthy is important. I would say it's even more important than actually winning that game.

The injury bug does definitely seem to be hitting the Broncos harder than usual. Thankfully only a couple have been season ending so far but definitely ready for a game where some player (or coach) doesn't go down with some kind of injury.

The Chiefs game is one where I feel like they would need maybe 3-4 turnovers at least to keep the game close against us. That offense of theirs is just looking pretty pathetic and for the most part has looked that way all season. I"ve seen where some post that they are middle of the pack when it comes to scoring but it definitely helps when the defense is forcing so many turnovers and giving the offense a short field to have to work with. In reality they lead the league in points off turnovers and around 40% of their offensive output this year in points is off of turnovers. Highest in the league by a large margin. Pretty much the key to beating the Chiefs is don't turn the ball over and there is a very good chance you win that game.

 

[iknowftbll]

I agree with the turnovers for the Chiefs. You do have to credit them on some level for building a team that can help it's offense by giving them a short field or the defense authentic the scoreboard themselves. There is certainly nothing wrong with that. But it does raise the question of how viable that team is as a contender if their opponents take care of the ball.

Turnovers have been a problem for the Broncos, too. In fact, turnovers are why I give the Chiefs a 10% chance to win in Denver. But the Broncos turned it over 3 times and gave up a safety to the Colts and still managed 33 points. It would really take the perfect storm for the Chiefs to win this game.

Assuming health of key players (which may not be a safe assumption), there are two factors that to me really will shape the remainder of the season. One is the Broncos getting control of these turnovers. If they reign that in, they limit the opportunities for their opponents and potentially add to their own point total instead of contributing to the opponents. The second is the defense. We finally saw a glimpse of how good they are with all the pieces available. Going forward they may be a much bigger factor.

If the broncos contol the turnover issue and play defense the rest of the way the way they did against the Redskins they will not lose again this season. Not in the regular seasonor the playoffs. That's a big "if" though. Certainly they are not going to go 8 ges without a turnover, and they still have some challenging offenses ahead. But if it all comes together at the right time, this team won't be making an early playoff exit like last year's team did.

 

[cdumler7]

I agree with the turnovers for the Chiefs. You do have to credit them on some level for building a team that can help it's offense by giving them a short field or the defense authentic the scoreboard themselves. There is certainly nothing wrong with that. But it does raise the question of how viable that team is as a contender if their opponents take care of the ball.

Turnovers have been a problem for the Broncos, too. In fact, turnovers are why I give the Chiefs a 10% chance to win in Denver. But the Broncos turned it over 3 times and gave up a safety to the Colts and still managed 33 points. It would really take the perfect storm for the Chiefs to win this game.

Assuming health of key players (which may not be a safe assumption), there are two factors that to me really will shape the remainder of the season. One is the Broncos getting control of these turnovers. If they reign that in, they limit the opportunities for their opponents and potentially add to their own point total instead of contributing to the opponents. The second is the defense. We finally saw a glimpse of how good they are with all the pieces available. Going forward they may be a much bigger factor.

If the broncos contol the turnover issue and play defense the rest of the way the way they did against the Redskins they will not lose again this season. Not in the regular seasonor the playoffs. That's a big "if" though. Certainly they are not going to go 8 ges without a turnover, and they still have some challenging offenses ahead. But if it all comes together at the right time, this team won't be making an early playoff exit like last year's team did.

I agree on the turnovers for the Broncos. Right now for the Broncos the biggest thing in games is not that the other team goes out and beats them (only game that was close was the Cowboys played a heck of a game on offense) it is that they beat themselves with stupid stupid penalties (looking at you Vickerson) and stupid turnovers at the worst possible moments (looking at you Holiday). How many fumbles have the Broncos had now around the goal line where they were about to go in for a touchdown? More than I care to look up that is for sure. Just so ready for this Chiefs game to happen so this whole stupid debate between who is better can be done for. I respect all that the Chiefs have done this year and think that defense has some major talent on it. Kudos to them for finally finding a coach that knows how to use all those pro bowl players. Once they get to the playoffs though where turnovers seem to come few and far between for most I think they just don't have the offensive output to keep up at this point. Honestly I don't know if a good draft would help much with that if Alex Smith is still the quarterback. The guy is a good quarterback just not one that is going to make an offense explosive.