Week 12 updated statistics rankings

[teeray]

Hopefully PFFL won't get this one locked like he did last week :lol:

General team rankings:

Offensive DVOA: 6th

Defensive DVOA: 32nd

Special Teams DVOA: 31st

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff

Important Offensive Statistics:

Yards per drive: 7th (34.9 ypd)

Points per drive: 9th (2.01 ppd)

TDs per drive: 8th (.228)

Punts per drive: 9th (.388)

Turnovers per drive: 24th (.116) :prrr:

Average starting line of scrimmage: 19th (27.64)

Drive success rate (avoiding three and outs): 8th (.718)

Red Zone attempts per game: 7th (3.6)

Red Zone TDs per game: 10th (1.8)

Red Zone TD percentage: 15th (50%)

If you look across the board it is very encouraging and our offense continues to play very, very well. With the one glaring exception. Turnovers. But that is also a product of having a rookie QB and a new downfield passing offense. As Cam matures and gains experience that number will dwindle and when it does there is every reason to believe we will have one of the best offenses in the NFL. We are already in the top 10 in PPD and TDPD. Imagine what we would be ranked in those categories if we were able to limit our turnovers and with this explosive QB once he actually has some experience :eek:

Important defensive stats:

Yards allowed per drive: 31st (36.82)

Points allowed per drive 32nd (2.48)

TDs allowed per drive percentage: 32nd (.286)

Forced punts per drive percentage: 30th (.357)

Takeaways per drive percentage: 18th (.125)

Average starting opponents field position: 16th (27.76)

Opposition Drive Success Rate (forced three and outs): 32nd (.735)

Opponent red zone attempts per game: 24th (3.6)

Opponent red zone TDs per game: 30th (2.2)

Opponent red zone TD percentage: 26th (60%)

The defense is still very pooty and the sad thing is that those number above are improvements over previous weeks :nonod:

One thing our defense has been soaring in the last 3 weeks is takeaways thanks to 6 takeaways the last 3 games. If they can continue to do those type of things it will go along way to us being more successful.

I still believe in the defensive system Rivera and McDermott are trying to put in place but we need an overhaul in talent to make it work as effectively as we would like (or effectively at all :lol:).

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestats

http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/team-stats/

I almost forgot :troll:

OYPP: 22nd (17.4)

DYPP: 30th (13.3)

[Dex]

We suck. We get it.

[teeray]

We suck. We get it.

Not sure that is what I would take away from those stats but to each their own. I have done this every week and some Huddlers suggested I post these every week so i am obliging them.

Plus I think it is interesting.

[Dex]

Not sure that is what I would take away from those stats but to each their own. I have done this every week and some Huddlers suggested I post these every week so i am obliging them.

Plus I think it is interesting.

The top half made me go...:hurray:

Then the bottom half made me go...:mad2:

If this happens next season....

[AceMan]

I almost forgot :troll:

OYPP: 22nd (17.4)

DYPP: 30th (13.3)

Wait..wait...this doesn't make sense to me

I thought our defense was at least average and our offense was worst! :troll:

[teeray]

The top half made me go...:hurray:

Then the bottom half made me go...:mad2:

If this happens next season....

Let me try to explain why I think these statistics are actually very encouraging for the future of this franchise (even the defensive stats)

When you look at other teams with rookies starting at QB they aren't even sniffing the top ten in TD per drive or points per drive. Minnesota is closest in TD per drive at 15th (Cincy 19th, Jax 31st).

Also none of them are in the top half of the league in red zone attempts per game. The closest is again Minnesota at 17th.

The one thing that Dalton, Ponder, and Gabbert have done better than Cam Newton is with turnovers. All three of their offenses are in the top 7 in turnovers per drive. That bodes well for them this season.

But how far are those three QBs form their ceilings? While they are taking better care of the football none of them are sniffing the top 10 in points per drive, TDs per drive, or red zone attempts per game. We are already in the top ten in all three categories despite turning the ball over at a fairly high rate.

Point being, if Cam Newton and this offense is already top 10 in those categories despite all the turnovers imagine where those rankings will be if or when those turnovers begin to dwindle. Top 5? Top 3?

However, when you look at Dalton, Ponder, or Gabbert it is hard to imagine their turnovers will dwindle much over time seeing that they are already in the top ten in turnovers per drive. Sure with experience they may make better decisions when they pass and create more plays just off of their experience but how big of a jump will they make?? If they continue to take care of the ball and become better at making decisions after the snap they may get their teams to the top 10 in TD per drive, points per drive, and red zone attempts. But we are already their!! Despite rookie mistakes by our QB.

In a nutshell it is very exciting that our offense is top ten in TDs per drive, points per drive, and red zone attempts despite being ranked 23rd in turnovers per drive. That tells me we already have a good offense and it has a lot higher ceiling than the other rookie QBs do.

The other encouraging thing is that despite our below average turnover per drive statistic and terrible defensive statistics we have still had realistic chances to win 10 of our 11 games. So if we can get this defense operating at even an average team's pace we will be playoff contenders year in and year out. If they develop into a top 10 defense we will be a Super Bowl contender year in and year out. Especially if our offense takes better care of the ball in future seasons!!

So while those stats may not be pleasant for this season I look at them as a reason to be incredibly encouraged and excited about the future of this franchise!!!

[teeray]

Wait..wait...this doesn't make sense to me

I thought our defense was at least average and our offense was worst! :troll:

Just ask PFFL. He will tell you that your defense can only help OYPP and only your offense can only hurt DYPP :lol:

So basically if you DYPP is terrible it is because of your offense. If your OYPP is terrible it is because or your offense.

:troll:

[CatGrowl]

More useless stats buring the most important ones at the bottom of the post aet another comment from someone that doesn't understand ypp(defensive ypp isn't a defensive measurement. It's your opponent's offense efficiency against your entire team. If you calculate yards per point for Indianapolis, you will see it's exactly the number opponent yards per point allowed listed under our scoring defense. Just like offensive efficiency is your offense's efficiency against your opponent's entire team. Takeaways make you efficient. Turnovers make the other team efficient. That's what that number represents. The other team's offense + gifts our offense gave them.

If you don't want to listen to me, at least listen to the guys you keep quoting stats from. From ESPN:

The red zone efficiency myth

Chargers and Chiefs are on opposite ends of red zone efficiency. Will it stay that way?

* Email

Schatz By Aaron Schatz

Football Outsiders

Archive

When the Kansas City Chiefs play the San Diego Chargers on Monday night, one of the biggest mismatches will take place once the Chiefs reach the red zone.

Based on Football Outsiders' DVOA ratings (explained here), San Diego ranks 16th in defense until it hits the 20-yard line, and then it becomes the league's worst D in the red zone. The Chargers are only slightly better in the conventional measure of red zone efficiency, giving up touchdowns on 60 percent of red zone drives.

Kansas City's offense works the opposite way: The Chiefs rank a dismal 30th in DVOA on the first 80 yards of the field, but are second in DVOA inside the red zone. When it comes to turning drives into touchdowns, they are just middle of the pack at 50 percent. However, that conventional measure doesn't account for the fact the Chiefs haven't turned the ball over inside the red zone and have yet to run a play inside the 10-yard line that lost yardage. When they don't get the ball in the end zone, the Chiefs at least set things up for a high-percentage field goal try.

No matter which measure of red zone success you use, the Chiefs' offense is much better inside the 20 than it is overall, and the Chargers' defense is much worse inside the 20 than it is overall. That would seem to suggest a big advantage for Kansas City inside the red zone.

But what if there is no such thing as a team that is better or worse in the red zone?

Become an ESPN Insider and read the full article about the truth behind red zone efficiency, as well as Insider's full NFL coverage.

http://insider.espn.go.com

By Aaron Schatz

Football Outsiders

Archive

Drive stats. Vacuum stats. Useless. They know it. They are telling you why. If you don't take into consideration what turnovers and field position does to every single one of those stats you list, they just don't matter that much. Yards per point. Total offensive efficiency. Fixes all those problems.

The only important stats are:

Wins-Losses

Offensive efficiency/Scoring ability

Turnovers.

Points Allowed

Points scored

Pretty much in that order. The rest are for fantasy football.

[TheRealDeal]

Teeray, if I suggest you don't post these every week would you oblige?

[Davidson Deac II]

The turnovers stat is huge because it means fewer chances to score, and more short fields to go against a defense that isn't very good. Improve it to at least middle of the pack and we probably have 3 more wins.

[CatGrowl]

The turnovers stat is huge because it means fewer chances to score, and more short fields to go against a defense that isn't very good. Improve it to at least middle of the pack and we probably have 3 more wins.

Someone gets it.

It's the third most important stat in football. W's & L's, Efficiency, and turnovers.

That's it. That's all you really ever need.

[The_Mango55]

Points per drive is a better indicator of how well your offense is playing, in a vaccum.

Yards per point is a better indicator of how good your entire team is playing.

[teeray]

The turnovers stat is huge because it means fewer chances to score, and more short fields to go against a defense that isn't very good. Improve it to at least middle of the pack and we probably have 3 more wins.

I don't disagree. My main point is that if we are top 10 in points per drive and TDs per drive imagine how good this offense will be once those turnovers dwindle.

Also those turnover are considerably more punitive when your defense is terrible.

[teeray]

More useless stats buring the most important ones at the bottom of the post aet another comment from someone that doesn't understand ypp(defensive ypp isn't a defensive measurement. It's your opponent's offense efficiency against your entire team. If you calculate yards per point for Indianapolis, you will see it's exactly the number opponent yards per point allowed listed under our scoring defense. Just like offensive efficiency is your offense's efficiency against your opponent's entire team. Takeaways make you efficient. Turnovers make the other team efficient. That's what that number represents. The other team's offense + gifts our offense gave them.

If you don't want to listen to me, at least listen to the guys you keep quoting stats from. From ESPN:

By Aaron Schatz

Football Outsiders

Archive

Drive stats. Vacuum stats. Useless. They know it. They are telling you why. If you don't take into consideration what turnovers and field position does to every single one of those stats you list, they just don't matter that much. Yards per point. Total offensive efficiency. Fixes all those problems.

The only important stats are:

Wins-Losses

Offensive efficiency/Scoring ability

Turnovers.

Points Allowed

Points scored

Pretty much in that order. The rest are for fantasy football.

You are going to quote Aaron Schatz to make your point?? Let's see what he had to say about YPP shall we?

And there's one more problem with yards per point. The goal is to pick out teams that are better than raw yardage would otherwise indicate, but what works for the 2001 Patriots doesn't work for that other team from the past few years that won despite unimpressive numbers, the 2003 Panthers. The Panthers were 17th in offensive yards per point (15.7) and 14th in defensive yards per point (15.5).

So what's the problem? While yards per point does a good job of indicating teams that can turn yardage into points (or prevent yardage from turning into points), it misses, or misattributes, three very important reasons why teams win football games: field position, special teams, and turnovers.

The appearance of the Baltimore offense in the 2003 top five makes the field position problem fairly apparent. I've discussed this numerous times: field position is fluid, and often the offense has a better chance to score because the defense gives them a better opportunity. This is, in fact, the entire point of the Baltimore Ravens. As long as their defense can stop people, and their special teams can provide good returns and long punts and kickoffs, it doesn't matter that their offense doesn't gain that many yards at a time (except when running an unexpected flea flicker). Each time they get the ball, they'll be closer and closer to the goal line, until at some point even a mediocre set of downs will result in a score. The Ravens' average drive in 2003 started at their 35.5-yard line, the best in the league and a yard-and-a-half closer to scoring than the second place team (surprisingly, the San Francisco 49ers, whose average start came on the 34-yard line).

So if the Ravens defense stops the opponent, and the Ravens get the punt back at midfield, now they need only 50 yards to score six points. Even better, let's say that Ray Lewis whacks the opposing receiver into the next county, and the ball comes loose, and now the offense gets to start from the opposing 25-yard line. Hey, the Ravens' offense is efficient -- they need only 25 yards to get six points!

Special teams create the same dilemma. Oakland, whose offense completely broke down last year and was eventually stuck with Rick Mirer at quarterback, ends up ranked ninth in the league in offensive yards per point. Efficiency? No, good special teams. The Raiders rank fourth overall in our special teams ratings for 2003, including first in the league in punt returns. So they were getting a lot of good field position that had nothing to do with offense or defense. They also have a very good kicker, which means that more of those drives turn into three points instead of zero points and a line of scrimmage change eight yards back. That may be a good indicator of overall team quality, but it isn't a good indicator that the offensive unit per se is efficient.

SUMMARY

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." It is not as accurate as our ratings at Football Outsiders. But it is more accurate than the NFL's standard rankings of team offense and team defense by raw yardage.

Yards per point often gives a team's offense credit for the quality of the defense, because the defense delivers short field position that leads to more points on less offensive yardage gained.

Yards per point also overlooks a team that consistently turns the ball over less than its opponents, or has great special teams.

Here, there is more. It is in this article where he explains why DVOA (in which our offense is ranked 6th) is superior to YPP.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2004/dvoa-vs-yards-point