Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

A scary stat for the offense...


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
152 replies to this topic

#31 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,492 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 12:32 PM

By far one of the most retarded and false arguments you will hear on the Huddle. Everything you just posted is wrong.

We don't need more possessions. We need to stop turning over the ball. Do you read all the way across? You see the 17th by turnovers and 24th in interceptions per drive?

We don't score enough points. We don't win our close 4th quarter games. We don't put the games away. None of what you are talking about matters when our offense isn't capable of finishing off a team late in the 4th quarter. We go for as much as 25 minutes in the second half without scoring in some games, and our defense is keeping the score within 1, so our O can tie or win. And they don't do it.

And btw, you are wrong once again because our defense is ranked 11th in time of possession.

http://www.teamranki...n-pct-net-of-ot

They're rushing on us all right, but the defense isn't on that field very long. It's the offense. Too bad most of that time is spend on penalties due to holds. Primary reason for that being not getting the ball out of your hands fast enough.

The easiest math is the one that's not required.
See this stat? :http://www.teamranki...yards-per-point

Everyone except the Patriots and Pittsburg ranked below 15th are either tied or losers. All the top 10 teams in this category have winning records, with the exception of 1 which is tied. We're ranked 21st in efficiency and because of that we lose. It comes from the 4th quarter. What makes it worse is that we are 21st in efficiency while playing against the worst defenses in the league.


I said that if we took better care of the ball our point per possession would go up. But the fact is we are still 6th in the entire NFL in points per possession. If we took better care of the ball maybe we would be 1st. But 6th in points per possession is pretty damn good and proves that when we have the ball we are scoring and that you can hardly blame the offense for our troubles. Again that is not to say our offense can't get better. Just that it has been pretty darn good so far.

It is not surprising that you don't seem to understand that time of possession has nothing to do with the number of possessions each team gets. :nonod:

The facts are we are currently 29th in total possessions. That is why we only average @23PPG. Basic math says that if you are 6th in points per possession and TD per possession, if you have more possessions (and certainly better than 29th in the league) than you will score more points.

And as mush as you want to say our defense is doing its job. Scroll down the same page to the defensive statistics.

We are 30th in defensive yards per possession, 31st in points per possession, 31st in TDs per possession, 29th in forced punts per possession, 27th in defensive TOs per drive, and are 29th in drive success rate. All that leads to a 31st ranking for our defense in DVOA.

Oh yeah. And our defense has managed all that with the least amount of defensive possessions in the league at 78. So you have an offense and defense that are last or near the bottom of the league in total possessions. Why is that?? Because our offense is sustaining drives and our defense can't stop our opponents. Thus reducing the game time and the possessions. Pretty simple and plain!!

It doesn't take a genius to figure this out PFFL.

Oh and please stop trying to tie YPP into an exclusively offensive statistic. It isn't true. It is a statistic for some gamblers to use to give a generalization of how certain teams are performing as a whole. No one except you views it as an offensive or defensive efficiency scale. It is used because it encompasses so much more than just the offense. It is mainly used by a gambler to create a score predictor for the game. It is also not a very good tool in college football for gamblers because it is so misleading. It is there to try to eliminate some of the guesswork and make betting more mathematical. In other words it simplifies things.

For example:

Cincy is 28th in yards per poss, 20th inn PPP, 23rd in TD per possession, 27th in punts per drive. Yet their YPP is through the roof.

And before you say "Yeah but Cincy doesn't turn the ball over so..." That in some ways actually makes those statistics look even worse because they aren't turning the ball over and still not scoring efficiently on a per possession basis.

I know you want me to be wrong so bad but the facts are right there in front of you. You just don't want to see them.

Edited by teeray, 11 November 2011 - 01:00 PM.


#32 SteelSix

SteelSix

    Born a moron

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 543 posts
  • LocationAsheville

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:02 PM

I understand that different people will have different analysis as to what is plaguing our team (for those who actually support our team). I remember from my statistics class that there are lies, darn lies and statistics. I hate the team ranking numbers simply because they look like numbers you should believe in, but they are outright meaningless when it comes to trying to evaluate any team. The numbers they are based on are correct and true, but the outcome they make is contrived and specious.

Team with tougher schedules will appear to be worse and teams with easier schedules will appear to be better than they actually are. Team rankings are then further skewed by posters offering a mis-mash of measurables (YPP, PPG, etc.) that really offer little if any insight into what is or will happen, no matter how loudly the poster proclaims that his insight is on the same par as the Amazing Kreskin.

I believe that the most honest way to evaluate our team is by breaking down game film and watching to see how a player is getting beat and what he does game to game to correct it. Of course this takes time and a fair amount of dedication since the TV tapes aren't the same as the "eye in the sky" tapes the NFL uses to evaluate talent. Not to mention reliving the gut wrenching moments of every 4th quarter collapse we keep engineering, it nearly makes me sick sometimes but it's worth it.

#33 WilliamsR

WilliamsR

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:11 PM

Just gonna add one more thing to break it down to the lowest level for those that may not have a good familiarity with our play this year:

Offensive Efficiency Rank = 6
Defensive Efficiency Rank = 31
Special Team Efficiency Rank = 32

All rankings per Football Outsiders using their DVOA analysis


Scoring efficiency = 21st.

WIN/LOSS RECORDS OF TEAMS RANKED BY OFFENSIVE SCORING EFFICIENCY ONLY(negative turnover margin in bold):

W1 Detroit 11.9 11.9
W2 San Francisco 12.1
W3 Green Bay 12.1 Defense: 30
W4 NY Jets 12.3
W5 Cincinnati 13.0
W6 Baltimore 13.2
W7 Buffalo 13.3 18.1 Defense: 27
W8 Chicago 13.7 Defense: 23
W9 New Orleans 14.0
W10 Atlanta 14.7 12.8
L11 Denver 14.9
W12 Houston 15.0
W13 NY Giants 15.0 Defense: 19
L14 Arizona 15.4
L15 Minnesota 15.5
W16 New England 15.8 Defense : 32
T17 Tennessee 15.9
L18 San Diego 16.5
W19 Oakland 16.7 Defense: 26
L20 Philadelphia 17.1
L21 Carolina 17.7 Defense: 18
W22 Pittsburgh 17.9
T23 Dallas 17.9 18.0
T24 Tampa Bay 18.7 Defense: 29
L25 Miami 18.7 13.7
T26 Kansas City 19.1 Defense: 21
L27 Seattle 19.4
L28 Cleveland 19.4
L29 Jacksonville 19.8
L30 Indianapolis 19.9
L31 Washington 20.0
L32 St Louis 25.1


-There is only one team ranked lower than us in efficiency with a winning record: Pittsbugrh.
-There are 8 teams with a defense worse than us with winning records. Even Oakland.
-There are only 2 teams ranked below 15th in scoring efficiency with a winning record that have a negative turnover margin.
-10 out of the top 10 teams in scoring efficiency are winners.
-YPP is the only stat that correlates directly to winning.
-There are a total of 6 teams with defenses ranked lower than ours with winning records
-There are a total of 8 teams with defenses ranked lower than ours with tied or winning records

It is also the only stat defined as:

But there's another statistic that football bettors have used for years that hasn't caught on with the public yet and that's Yards Per Point. YPP is a quick and easy method that lets football bettors access the offensive and defensive strength of a particular team.

It's important to note that while YPP can be used for college football, its primary use is for the NFL, as there is less of a difference in the relative strength of schedule in the professional game than there is in the college game.


*Clear and indisputable connection to the reality of what happens on the field.

*Clear delineations between quality and a lack of quality.

*An ability to reflect on offense and defense at the same time.

*Not much vulnerability to relatively random points that are scored by special teams or the defense.

*An inherent consistency over time that lines up with the reality as we know it. Scores can be very misleading. A team may score a bunch of points because of lucky breaks. It’s yard to “luck” your way into good or bad YPP numbers.


END. OF. ARGUMENT.

Edited by WilliamsR, 11 November 2011 - 01:28 PM.


#34 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,492 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:20 PM

*An ability to reflect on offense and defense at the same time.


* refuses to acknowledge that his own definition includes this very important caveat. :lol: :rofl: OMG it is too easy!!

YPP is used for broad generalizations because it encompasses more than offense. It isn't an offensive efficiency stat. It says so right in PFFL's own definition!!

In other words it is exceptable to say "Generally speaking a team with a good YPP is successful". What would be a gross error would be to say "YPP is a good stat for judging an offense"

By the way the website that provided you with that definition doesn't even exist anymore. Do you have a working link??

Edited by teeray, 11 November 2011 - 01:24 PM.


#35 WilliamsR

WilliamsR

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:27 PM

* refuses to acknowledge that his own definition includes this very important caveat. :lol: :rofl: OMG it is too easy!!

YPP is used for broad generalizations because it encompasses more than offense. It isn't an offensive efficiency stat. It says so right in PFFL's own definition!!

In other words it is exceptable to say "Generally speaking a team with a good YPP is successful". What would be a gross error would be to say "YPP is a good stat for judging an offense"

By the way the website that provided you with that definition doesn't even exist anymore. Do you have a working link??


Dude how many times do I have to keep repeating to you they are two separate stats? Just read the damn post title at least. It's right there it says RANKED BY OFFENSIVE SCORING EFFICIENCY ONLY!

Are you that thick?

There is also a defensive YPP. That is ONLY. ONLY. OFFENSE.

I went back and bolded it just for you and underlined it.

#36 Sword

Sword

    Ninja Pirate

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,174 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:31 PM

why do you always have to feed them teeray..

#37 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 23,641 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:31 PM

the eyeball test is better than any stat.

stats lie, stats tell part truths, stats can be spun.

ST and defense is why we aren't winning more games. Simple and plain.

#38 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • 29,575 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:34 PM

END. OF. ARGUMENT.

doubt it. the whole point of your existence on this planet is to argue some little tiny point on the internet.

the day you stop arguing this is the day you cease to exist.

oh...and thanks for making my list of ignored trolls so long. half of them are dedicated to you.

#39 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,492 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:36 PM

Dude how many times do I have to keep repeating to you they are two separate stats? Just read the damn post title at least. It's right there it says RANKED BY OFFENSIVE SCORING EFFICIENCY ONLY!

Are you that thick?

There is also a defensive YPP. That is ONLY. ONLY. OFFENSE.

I went back and bolded it just for you and underlined it.


I know they have both. As I have said they both encompass more than offense and defense. They are used for score predictors for gamblers. Neither is used for offensive or defensive efficiency.

Let me repeat what your own definition said (which was talking about offensive YPP):

*An ability to reflect on offense and defense at the same time.


That is from your provided definition. Are you now saying that the guy from a random blog who said that was wrong?? And do you have a working link to that site? It now says the page doesn't exist.

Edited by teeray, 11 November 2011 - 01:39 PM.


#40 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • 29,575 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:36 PM

why do you always have to feed them teeray..

it's not a them...it's a him that keeps coming back with different alts. and teeray does it because he likes poking at rabid possums in cages with sharp pointed sticks.

#41 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,492 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:36 PM

why do you always have to feed them teeray..


;)

#42 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,492 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:48 PM

Hey out of curiosity how good is our YPP for our defense?? It must be around middle of the pack since our offense is so bad. Do you have a link for that??


edit: I think he got banned again. So I will just put it out there.

Our defense is 29th in YPP.

http://www.teamranki....ards-per-point

Again this stat encompasses more than just our defense. I just think it is funny that he has hung so much of his argument on this one measure and our defense is 29th in that stat as well!!

Edited by teeray, 11 November 2011 - 01:54 PM.


#43 raleigh-panther

raleigh-panther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,165 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:53 PM

Debates come, debates go, supported by statistics.

The only statistic that matters is Ws and Ls.

The two obvious things to me:

1. Offense's starting field position....the statistics on drives that end in scoring starting
on the 20 yard line back are fairly telling; the longer the drive, the less probability of
a score..
2. Offensive drives that have to only go 50 yards or less have a greater probability of scoring.

The Panthers' consistently get crappy field position by either kick-offs or punts because:

1. on punts, the defense very seldom picks up a 3 and out, thus moving the ball
deeper for our offense to go forward.

2. kick-offs, why even bother to discuss this one.

Add in the obvious of penalities and turn-overs and questionable redzone offensive calls and execution of the same and these things are most probably the answer.

Good teams find a way to win despite inadequacies with one of the 3 parts of the team.

Bad teams don't.

The Panthers haven't found that way as of yet and they are what their record says they are.

Edited by raleigh-panther, 11 November 2011 - 01:55 PM.


#44 wcuCATZ

wcuCATZ

    Junior Member

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 80 posts
  • LocationAsheville

Posted 11 November 2011 - 02:07 PM

Easy explanation for the low scoring

1. Terrible field position
2. A defense that can't get off the field or force TOs
3. Penalties

The explanation for people not being able to understand this

Racism.

#45 Camdemonium

Camdemonium

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,111 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 02:09 PM

I'll take Racism, Alex.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.