Week 12 updated statistics rankings

[MichaelJackson]

Wrong again. Points for versus points against are the only stats that matters. Yards per point is not useful given that yards don't win anything and it really doesn't matter how many yards you give up or get ,only the points for and points against. And if you have 200 yards and 20 points or 600 yards and 20 points, you have 20 points regardless. Even a fifth grader knows that.

Turnovers are also not a great stat in isolation. Points off turovers is a much better stat. If you turnover the ball 4 times and give up no points as a result. there is little harm but field position. if you turnover the ball one time and give up 7 points it hurts you alot.

I hope that one of the PFFL alias comes here with more IQ points. The same

Uhm...

If you have 1000 yards or 600 yards like you say and only scored 20 points that means what you wasted a lot of freaking drives and possessions. You had at least 12-13 possessions right to get that many yards?

Well in between each one of those drives the other team's offense ALSO got the ball. That doesn't mean they're going to waste and not score on all of their possessions you gave them. Understand? They don't have to be as incompetent as your offense just because yours is. That's why teams with lots of yards and inefficient offenses lose. To get that many yards you had to have multiple possession. If the other team is more efficient on theirs, they will score more points.

They do better than 20 points per however many posessions it took you to get 1000 yards. So yes, yards DO matter. Points matter and yards matter. That's why yards per point is better than both. Cause it IS both in one. It's not a vacuum stat! And yes, you are at the level of a 5th grader. Sorry.;)

[panthers55]

Uhm...

If you have 1000 yards or 600 yards like you say and only scored 20 points that means what you wasted a lot of freaking drives and possessions. You had at least 12-13 possessions right to get that many yards?

Well in between each one of those drives the other team's offense ALSO got the ball. That doesn't mean they're going to waste and not score on all of their possessions you gave them. Understand? They don't have to be as incompetent as your offense just because yours is. That's why teams with lots of yards and inefficient offenses lose. To get that many yards you had to have multiple possession. If the other team is more efficient on theirs, they will score more points.

They do better than 20 points per however many posessions it took you to get 1000 yards. So yes, yards DO matter. Points matter and yards matter. That's why yards per point is better than both. Cause it IS both in one. It's not a vacuum stat! And yes, you are at the level of a 5th grader. Sorry.;)

Once again you appear limited in either your logic or perspective. If you put up 200 yards and 20 points and have a ypp of 10 or a YPP of 30, the result is the same. As for wasted drives, it really depends on what happens. If your defense for example stop a drive by the other team on your five and you drive the ball for 50 yards and flip the field, you aren't wasting those yards. That was an incredible 2 series for your team that shows up negatively in the offensive YPP although the stop would be reflected in defensive YPP. Nonetheless the team would be very excited whereas if they had gone 3 and out the YPP would be great but the team would be in big trouble.

You also keep going down bunny trails to obfurscate the issue. Again if you gain 600 yards or 200 yards and score 20 points the result is the same- 20 points. If the defense gives up 200 yards or 600 yards and give up 15 points you win the game. If you give up 24 points you lose no matter what. All the rest about drives and how many posessions are only bunny trails and tangential to the argument. Like usual your strategy is to try and win a point instead of stick to the argument. While obviously yards and points are positively correlated, there are a number of factors like turnovers, field position, special teams scores, defensive scores, that all factor in. But in the end, YPP is only a directional stat whereas points for versus points against in a particular ballgame is a conclusive stat that 100% of the time determines who won.

[MichaelJackson]

Once again you appear limited in either your logic or perspective. If you put up 200 yards and 20 points and have a ypp of 10 or a YPP of 30, the result is the same. As for wasted drives, it really depends on what happens. If your defense for example stop a drive by the other team on your five and you drive the ball for 50 yards and flip the field, you aren't wasting those yards. That was an incredible 2 series for your team that shows up negatively in the offensive YPP although the stop would be reflected in defensive YPP. Nonetheless the team would be very excited whereas if they had gone 3 and out the YPP would be great but the team would be in big trouble.

You also keep going down bunny trails to obfurscate the issue. Again if you gain 600 yards or 200 yards and score 20 points the result is the same- 20 points. If the defense gives up 200 yards or 600 yards and give up 15 points you win the game. If you give up 24 points you lose no matter what. All the rest about drives and how many posessions are only bunny trails and tangential to the argument. Like usual your strategy is to try and win a point instead of stick to the argument. While obviously yards and points are positively correlated, there are a number of factors like turnovers, field position, special teams scores, defensive scores, that all factor in. But in the end, YPP is only a directional stat whereas points for versus points against in a particular ballgame is a conclusive stat that 100% of the time determines who won.

No. Sorry but you are wrong. I think I have stuck to my argument.

You don't understand that in reality the only way to get 600 yards is to have multiple possessions. Every time you have a possession, afterwards the opponent has a possession.

So if you have 10-15 drives in order for you to get 600 yards.....and only scored 20 points...what the hell did you do on all those other drives? Nothing.

You turned over the ball. Your opponent's offense also gets 10-15 drives. If you suck ass that bad that you only score 20 points off of 25 drives and 600 yards, rest assured you will NOT be a winning team. No offense is that inefficient. Not even ours.

The other team WILL score more than 20 points off of that many chances. Bunny trail my ass dude. You have flawed thinking.

And FYY, 30ypp is seriously terrible offense and losing team. The average offense is at 16ypp. ST Louis last in the league is at 23.2. You are starting to approach Titans level inefficiency there. Not 3 points per game, but about 9. That's what 30ypp means in the real world.

Unrealistic examples is what you are talking about, which not only would have an effect, but just don't apply to real life football. The worst part of it? Was when you said a defense would stop them. Yeah...in real life...once, twice....but that's the point you guys ALL miss. Turning over the ball HURTS your defense. It makes it HARDER for them to defend.

Just like a takeaway makes it easier for us to score. When you keep EXPECTING your defense to make these stops no matter what the offense does(turns over the ball, 3 and outs, bad punts) you are talking outside the boundaries of realistic football. Sorry, but that's just the truth.

That just doesn't happen. No defense does this. None. Not in the real world. Ideally maybe. But not in reality. Realistically it improves the other team's efficiency. They score more points. Not just against the Carolina Panthers defense. But against any defense.

PS: In other words it's not the same. You put up 20 points at 10ypp, the other team is going to have about 10-20 points at most too. You put up 20 points at 30 ypp, the other team is likely to have 70 points. In reality, 20 points at 30 ypp means losing your ass off. You're not going to win with 20 points at 30 ypp efficiency. There is no offense that terrible in the NFL except for example in our case when we were playing the Titans. We had 93 ypp that day. So you say there is no difference, but in fact there is a HUGE difference.

[teeray]

Just like a takeaway makes it easier for us to score. When you keep EXPECTING your defense to make these stops no matter what the offense does(turns over the ball, 3 and outs, bad punts) you are talking outside the boundaries of realistic football. Sorry, but that's just the truth.

That just doesn't happen. No defense does this. None. Not in the real world. Ideally maybe. But not in reality. Ideally it improves the other team's efficiency. They score more points. Not just against the Carolina Panthers defense. But against any defense.

You act like our offense has put undo pressure on our defense forcing them to make stop after stop on short field position. The reality is they are 16th in defensive starting field position. Our defense is also dead last in number of opposing team's possessions.

So they have had average starting field position and have had less possessions to defend yet rank last or next to last in every measurable statistic including yards per drive and three and outs which have little to do with field position.

So what are you talking about?

[panthers55]

You act like our offense has put undo pressure on our defense forcing them to make stop after stop on short field position. The reality is they are 16th in defensive starting field position. Our defense is also dead last in number of opposing team's possessions.

So they have had average starting field position and have had less possessions to defend yet rank last or next to last in every measurable statistic including yards per drive and three and outs which have little to do with field position.

So what are you talking about?

He is just too dense to be able to change his thinking to reflect new material. Like in my discussion with him, he goes downs a bunny trail and just beats it up with a number of inane arguments without addressing that it was a bunny trail to begin with. I keep getting reminded that the point is to try and argue not have a football discussion. Everyone here but him knows you are right, but going down each point he makes and refutting it just leads to him changing the argument the next post and arguing down another bunny trail. For example he ignores the whole argument that points for versus points against tells all you need to know and that if you score more points, the other team can have 3 times the yards and it doesn't matter. Instead we get a diatribe about how important yards are and a whole bunch of speculation about if a team scored this many yards it would mean this many drives and blah blah blah.

Useless.

[panthers55]

PS: In other words it's not the same. You put up 20 points at 10ypp, the other team is going to have about 10-20 points at most too. You put up 20 points at 30 ypp, the other team is likely to have 70 points. In reality, 20 points at 30 ypp means losing your ass off. You're not going to win with 20 points at 30 ypp efficiency. There is no offense that terrible in the NFL except for example in our case when we were playing the Titans. We had 93 ypp that day. So you say there is no difference, but in fact there is a HUGE difference.

Do you really have only concrete logic and lack the ability to use abstract thinking? Do you really think the issue is a YPP of 10 versus 30?? Seriously?? You went down the road a full page and obviously lack the ability to understand the 200 yards versus 600 yards example was simply an extreme example to make a point. No one this year has had a 600 yard game, everyone knows that. Are you really that concrete you can't see beyond the words to grasp the concept???? The issue is that yards are irrelevant compared to points for versus points against. One os a directional stat while the other is a conclusive stat. And that is the point. Do you understand a bunny trail is veering off from the main point to address a tangential issue as if that is the point. Exactly what you did with the 10 YPP versus the 30 YPP. You get so hung on a simple leaf on a single branch on a single tree that you miss the whole forest.

Problem is that this type of problem isn't fixable, you simply lack the insight to use higher order thinking. Which is why this argument is a waste of time. Not trying to be hurtful but there it is.

[Smitharound]

Do you really have only concrete logic and lack the ability to use abstract thinking? ? You went down the road a full page and obviously lack the ability to understand the 200 yards versus 600 yards example was simply an extreme example to make a point. No one this year has had a 600 yard game, everyone knows that. Are you really that concrete you can't see beyond the words to grasp the concept???? The issue is that yards are irrelevant compared to points for versus points against. One os a directional stat while the other is a conclusive stat. And that is the point. Do you understand a bunny trail is veering off from the main point to address a tangential issue as if that is the point. Exactly what you did with the 10 YPP versus the 30 YPP. You get so hung on a simple leaf on a single branch on a single tree that you miss the whole forest.

Problem is that this type of problem isn't fixable, you simply lack the insight to use higher order thinking. Which is why this argument is a waste of time. Not trying to be hurtful but there it is.

I think you are too dense to understand what I say man. I got your example. I assimilated it. I responded to you. I get what you are saying.

What I am saying is....listen very carefully...your extreme example is simply wrong. Yes it does matter. Yards do matter, even IF in the end you get the points. Your points stat? Is a one directional stat AS WELL. Your example would be incorrect even at smaller levels. Clear?

In your idealistic world, that would be possible. To score a lot of points in an inefficient way and still win, irrelevant of yards. That's what you are trying to say. I GOT IT! RIGHT? That was your point no?

I also used extreme examples to explain to you why yards do matter. Even if you score the points. The amount of yards you get say something about your ability to win that football game and who would actually win that football game in REALITY.

In reality getting the points and winning while inefficient, happens only when you face another inefficient offense and you both suck that day or very very rarely. Try looking at Baltimore vs Jacksonville and you might find it there. In reality those teams who win, are efficient. They get the points and the yards in an efficient way. The most efficient ones win. The consistently efficient ones have winning records.

And finally...

Do you really think the issue is a YPP of 10 versus 30?? Seriously?

YES! Is it NOT obvious by now? Start learning about it.

[rayzor]

guy who creates 100 alts because they keep getting banned is calling someone else dense?

:lol:

[Smitharound]

Why even have a DYPP if scoring defense = offense pretty much?

That's for prediction purposes. But it's also kind of like asking why have total defense yards allowed if you have total offense yards?

Scoring offense YPP is our offensive efficiency versus their team. And defensive ypp is their offense against your team. The reason you have it is because that's where the inefficiency from our offense goes as well as our total scoring defense. So it needs to be kept track of for one thing. And if you really wanted to get technical and correct with YPP, and be really really, you'd use a YPP differential.

Offensive ypp - defensive ypp, or you could divide it. Now that's a pretty powerful stat as far as your total team efficiency combined.

And what aaron was talking about in his article if Teeray would just finish reading to the bottom is just simply this fact. First of all he even states yards per point is an accurate measurement of offensive efficiency. You are only bolding select parts. He then proceeds to sell his website's stats over it in a round about way. Offensive ypp is two stats. Offensive turnovers go on the yards allowed ypp , or defensive ypp and takeaways on the offensive side. That's why he mentions Net YPP. Read the summary.

PS: Now I am not sure if he is talking about scoring offense, or offensive ypp in that article, he never makes it clear but regardless he is also 100% wrong that field position isn't accounted for and I'd love to write him a letter and explain to him how it does it cause he's clueless on that end and of course turnovers are as well(and he finally comes around and admits this with net ypp at the bottom). But you don't need net ypp to account for field position. He's wrong. Even YOU should know this now. But please note the article was written in 2004 and he's mainly selling his site in that article and buries the truth in the summary at the very bottom of the article. He's saying each stat "individually" is not as accurate separate than when looking at both(DUH!), and less accurate than VOA or so he claims and then finally also goes on to mention it's primarily defensive ypp that's inaccurate from one season to the next(so are his stats). He was selling hot air. All stats are inaccurate from one season to the next. He's also cleverly comparing schedule UN-adjusted YPP to schedule adjusted prioprietary stats. Of course you always should do that with YPP too. I always do. Don't ever not take into consideration the schedule of teams you have played, even with YPP.

[panthers55]

guy who creates 100 alts because they keep getting banned is calling someone else dense?

:lol:

I have worked with a number of folks like him over the years. He appears to be a very left brained individual who is very rigid in his thinking similar to what we would call a black and white thinker. Very concrete, can see the facts but lacks the ability to assimilate contrasting information, doesn't understand metaphors, sarcasm, abstract reasoning etc. Couple that with obsessive compulsive personality traits and you have someone who could be a good computer technician, accountant or worker bee. A bulldog with little insight. I would think not easy to live with though and certainly not someone to talk philosophy or esoteric matters.

[teeray]

PS: Now I am not sure if he is talking about scoring offense, or offensive ypp in that article, he never makes it clear but regardless he is also 100% wrong that field position isn't accounted for and I'd love to write him a letter and explain to him how it does it cause he's clueless on that end and of course turnovers are as well(and he finally comes around and admits this with net ypp at the bottom). But you don't need net ypp to account for field position. He's wrong. Even YOU should know this now. But please note the article was written in 2004 and he's mainly selling his site in that article and buries the truth in the summary at the very bottom of the article. He's saying each stat "individually" is not as accurate separate than when looking at both(DUH!), and less accurate than VOA or so he claims and then finally also goes on to mention it's primarily defensive ypp that's inaccurate from one season to the next(so are his stats). He was selling hot air. All stats are inaccurate from one season to the next.

You don't know if he was talking about YPP??? Does the title help you out??

DVOA vs. Yards Per Point

And now you are discrediting the guy you were quoting just a few posts ago?? :lol:

The whole article was highlighting the flaws of YPP as either an offensive stat or a defensive stat. And nowhere does he mention that using DYPP is an offensive measure. He mentions using both stats as a better measure of team efficiency, not just offensive efficiency. And he mentions it very briefly in the summary.

[panthers55]

I think you are too dense to understand what I say man. I got your example. I assimilated it. I responded to you. I get what you are saying.

What I am saying is....listen very carefully...your extreme example is simply wrong. Yes it does matter. Yards do matter, even IF in the end you get the points. Your points stat? Is a one directional stat AS WELL. Your example would be incorrect even at smaller levels. Clear?

In your idealistic world, that would be possible. To score a lot of points in an inefficient way and still win, irrelevant of yards. That's what you are trying to say. I GOT IT! RIGHT? That was your point no?

I also used extreme examples to explain to you why yards do matter. Even if you score the points. The amount of yards you get say something about your ability to win that football game and who would actually win that football game in REALITY.

In reality getting the points and winning while inefficient, happens only when you face another inefficient offense and you both suck that day or very very rarely. Try looking at Baltimore vs Jacksonville and you might find it there. In reality those teams who win, are efficient. They get the points and the yards in an efficient way. The most efficient ones win. The consistently efficient ones have winning records.

And finally...

YES! Is it NOT obvious by now? Start learning about it.

No you missed my point and went down some more bunny trails. It is like you say you recognize my point and still argue the same inane point.

My point is simple. Points for versus points against are the only stats that matter. They totally explain winning and losing. Nothing else is better or comes close.

Everything else is a bunny trail and while interesting statistically doesn't explain winning and losing. There are plenty of examples where efficiency comparisons don't tell you who won or who lost. Points for versus points against explain who won and who lost with 100% accuracy, 100% of the time.

I don't want an explanation simple a yes or no answer.

Does points for versus points against explain with 100% accuracy who won the game???

[teeray]

My personal favorite line from the article is this:

While yards per point is a useful statistic, and sometimes a better measure of efficiency than total yards, it is not the mythical "one number that tells you all you need to know."

[panthers55]

You don't know if he was talking about YPP??? Does the title help you out??

And now you are discrediting the guy you were quoting just a few posts ago?? :lol:

The whole article was highlighting the flaws of YPP as either an offensive stat or a defensive stat. And nowhere does he mention that using DYPP is an offensive measure. He mentions using both stats as a better measure of team efficiency, not just offensive efficiency. And he mentions it very briefly in the summary.

Look at his post to me, he is still calling YPP offensive efficiency instead of team scoring efficiency. He just refuses to concede a point that his quoted author so eloquently pointed out is not offensive efficiency as you noted. I think the problem here is that he doesn't want to admit the reality because it would invalidate all the alts and 1000s of posts he has made for weeks. He is too invested in being right to admit what we all know which is that his thinking is flawed and has been since the start. He can't admit it now so his continued attempts just appear as constant troliing.