Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Dispelling the new myth about our offense and defense


teeray

Recommended Posts

The new narrative amongst some on here is that:

"you are being misled. Our defense is fine but we have an inefficient offense that puts too much undue pressure on our defense. That is why our defense is ranked 18th in YPG but is giving giving up 26 points per game. It is because we have a very inefficient offense that is 5th in YPG but only averages 23.5 PPG!! Only smart people can see this!!11!1"

Well according to www.advancednflstatistics.com this new narrative simply doesn't hold water.

According to advanced statistics we are actually ranked 4th in overall offensive efficiency and we are ranked 29th in defensive efficiency.

http://wp.advancednflstats.com/teampage.php

Now this website uses a formula a little more complex than the YPG + PPG = efficiency formula that some are trying to push as an example of efficiency.

This website will breakdown offenses and defenses to every single snap. They take into consideration turnovers, field position (in other words scoring on a long field is weighted more heavily than scoring with a short field and vice versa for the defensive analysis), penalties, point per possession, third down conversion percentage (also weighted by third down distance), and just a ton of different variables that should go into properly evaluating and offense or defense.

Our offense hasn't been perfect. But it isn't the main problem either.

The good news is our defense is improving. We are up to 29th. We were 32nd three weeks ago.

Spin away if you must PFFL/Pantherball/ProBowler/TheOneThatStungDelhommey/Stew23/whatever new alt you come up with after your inevitable ban once again :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
    • These are the three deep throw attempts that Will Levis made in week 12. His first one is a beauty; Levis and Westbrook-Ikhine gets the safety to bite on a deep dig only to go over the top for the score. His second throw is another beauty: a crosser to Calvin Ridley reminiscent of Bryce to XL (though Ridley has noticeably more separation on his route). His third and final deep shot was an incompletion from his own endzone on 3rd & 14 with pressure coming down on him (to me, this seems like a solid throw).   Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-02.mp4 Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-01.mp4 Film Room Playlist NFL Pro.mp4 Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-01.mp4 Levis took half of the deep shots that Young did. The differences are: Ridley had much better separation than XL, which is why his deep crosser turned into a 63yd play since he was able to scamper for another 15+ after the catch. Westbrook-Ikhine holds on to his TD pass. Bryce had to throw one away to preserve time for a field goal. Bryce had two more throws that were incomplete due to the WR Are we really holding the three WR errors and clock management decision against Bryce in order to say that Will was better throwing deep in week 12? That's not passing the eye test nor is it confirmed by the data.
×
×
  • Create New...