I need a true stat geek for this.

Mklangelo

Feng Shui Debunker
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
578
Reaction score
33
Location
Florida
I've heard some talk that the Hawks have not faced very good Defensive lines in the final quarter of the season and the Packers have.

Well I went over to Football Outsiders and did some digging.

Here is what I found: The average Adjusted Line Yards for the Packers and Seahawks last 4 regular season opponents are: Packers: 3.75 ypc Seahawks: 3.67 ypc. In my mind that is a statistically insignificant difference.

Adjusted Line Yards as defined by Football Outsiders:

"Teams are ranked according to Adjusted Line Yards. Based on regression analysis, the Adjusted Line Yards formula takes all running back carries and assigns responsibility to the offensive line based on the following percentages:

  • Losses: 120% value
  • 0-4 Yards: 100% value
  • 5-10 Yards: 50% value
  • 11+ Yards: 0% value
These numbers are then adjusted based on down, distance, situation, opponent, and the difference in rushing average between shotgun compared to standard formations. Finally, we normalize the numbers so that the league average for Adjusted Line Yards per carry is the same as the league average for RB yards per carry. Defensive line stats (more accurately, defensive front seven stats) represent the performance of offensive lines against each defense, adjusted for the quality of offensive opponents."

So my question is where does this perception come from and if I'm missing info that makes it true, I'd love to see it.

GPG
 

yooperpackfan

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
137
Location
Upper Michigan
I've heard some talk that the Hawks have not faced very good Defensive lines in the final quarter of the season and the Packers have.

Well I went over to Football Outsiders and did some digging.

Here is what I found: The average Adjusted Line Yards for the Packers and Seahawks last 4 regular season opponents are: Packers: 3.75 ypc Seahawks: 3.67 ypc. In my mind that is a statistically insignificant difference.

Adjusted Line Yards as defined by Football Outsiders:

"Teams are ranked according to Adjusted Line Yards. Based on regression analysis, the Adjusted Line Yards formula takes all running back carries and assigns responsibility to the offensive line based on the following percentages:

  • Losses: 120% value
  • 0-4 Yards: 100% value
  • 5-10 Yards: 50% value
  • 11+ Yards: 0% value
These numbers are then adjusted based on down, distance, situation, opponent, and the difference in rushing average between shotgun compared to standard formations. Finally, we normalize the numbers so that the league average for Adjusted Line Yards per carry is the same as the league average for RB yards per carry. Defensive line stats (more accurately, defensive front seven stats) represent the performance of offensive lines against each defense, adjusted for the quality of offensive opponents."

So my question is where does this perception come from and if I'm missing info that makes it true, I'd love to see it.

GPG
I'm not a stat fan.
My football perception is based on the eye test.
The team that scores the most points wins.
End of story.
 

Sky King

158.3
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
2,817
Reaction score
329
Location
Out of the clear blue western skies...
I've heard some talk that the Hawks have not faced very good Defensive lines in the final quarter of the season and the Packers have.

Well I went over to Football Outsiders and did some digging.

Here is what I found: The average Adjusted Line Yards for the Packers and Seahawks last 4 regular season opponents are: Packers: 3.75 ypc Seahawks: 3.67 ypc. In my mind that is a statistically insignificant difference.

Adjusted Line Yards as defined by Football Outsiders:

"Teams are ranked according to Adjusted Line Yards. Based on regression analysis, the Adjusted Line Yards formula takes all running back carries and assigns responsibility to the offensive line based on the following percentages:

  • Losses: 120% value
  • 0-4 Yards: 100% value
  • 5-10 Yards: 50% value
  • 11+ Yards: 0% value
These numbers are then adjusted based on down, distance, situation, opponent, and the difference in rushing average between shotgun compared to standard formations. Finally, we normalize the numbers so that the league average for Adjusted Line Yards per carry is the same as the league average for RB yards per carry. Defensive line stats (more accurately, defensive front seven stats) represent the performance of offensive lines against each defense, adjusted for the quality of offensive opponents."

So my question is where does this perception come from and if I'm missing info that makes it true, I'd love to see it.

GPG
And I'm fairly certain that this should clear it up for you:

2+(x-7)+4x-2x+(4x+4)2= -11x+14-2-6x(4-5)+13(x-5)-7

2+x-7+4x-2x+8x+8= -11x+14-2-24x+30x+13x-65-7

2+x-7+10x+8= -11x+12+6x+13x-72

x+10x+2-7+8= -11x+6x+13x+12-72

11x+3= 8x-60

11x-8x= -60-3

3x= -63

x= -21
 
OP
OP
Mklangelo

Mklangelo

Feng Shui Debunker
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
578
Reaction score
33
Location
Florida
:)Why do sports fans do this to themselves?
Once in awhile I actually enjoy diving into stats. I'm certainly no expert at it but I do enjoy working and analyzing figures from time to time. In my job math is very important so...
 
OP
OP
Mklangelo

Mklangelo

Feng Shui Debunker
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
578
Reaction score
33
Location
Florida
And I'm fairly certain that this should clear it up for you:

2+(x-7)+4x-2x+(4x+4)2= -11x+14-2-6x(4-5)+13(x-5)-7

2+x-7+4x-2x+8x+8= -11x+14-2-24x+30x+13x-65-7

2+x-7+10x+8= -11x+12+6x+13x-72

x+10x+2-7+8= -11x+6x+13x+12-72

11x+3= 8x-60

11x-8x= -60-3

3x= -63

x= -21


That's 8th grade math. Just so you know.
 

weeds

Fiber deprived old guy.
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
4,677
Reaction score
1,013
Location
Oshkosh, WI
Once in awhile I actually enjoy diving into stats. I'm certainly no expert at it but I do enjoy working and analyzing figures from time to time. In my job math is very important so...

Mine too, Mik ... that's why I don't understand it. :) I've always subscribed to the theory that numbers never lie, but, liars use numbers. :) I am a banker after all. ;) Hahaha...
 
OP
OP
Mklangelo

Mklangelo

Feng Shui Debunker
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
578
Reaction score
33
Location
Florida
Mine too, Mik ... that's why I don't understand it. :) I've always subscribed to the theory that numbers never lie, but, liars use numbers. :) I am a banker after all. ;) Hahaha...
Eh... I guess I just like to get my geek on once in awhile. :tup:

GPG
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I've heard some talk that the Hawks have not faced very good Defensive lines in the final quarter of the season and the Packers have.

Well I went over to Football Outsiders and did some digging.

Here is what I found: The average Adjusted Line Yards for the Packers and Seahawks last 4 regular season opponents are: Packers: 3.75 ypc Seahawks: 3.67 ypc. In my mind that is a statistically insignificant difference.

Adjusted Line Yards as defined by Football Outsiders:

"Teams are ranked according to Adjusted Line Yards. Based on regression analysis, the Adjusted Line Yards formula takes all running back carries and assigns responsibility to the offensive line based on the following percentages:

  • Losses: 120% value
  • 0-4 Yards: 100% value
  • 5-10 Yards: 50% value
  • 11+ Yards: 0% value
These numbers are then adjusted based on down, distance, situation, opponent, and the difference in rushing average between shotgun compared to standard formations. Finally, we normalize the numbers so that the league average for Adjusted Line Yards per carry is the same as the league average for RB yards per carry. Defensive line stats (more accurately, defensive front seven stats) represent the performance of offensive lines against each defense, adjusted for the quality of offensive opponents."

So my question is where does this perception come from and if I'm missing info that makes it true, I'd love to see it.

GPG
This is a closed system with some circularity built into it; the formulas by which they measure offensive line performance against the run appear to be identical to the ones used in measuring defensive lines against the run. So why not first consider the flip side, i.e., Football Outsiders' rankings of defensive line adjusted run performance, in questioning your starting assumption about the quality of the competition?

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl

Seattle's last 4 opponents ranked 11th., 25th. 6th. and 3rd. on the season, a pretty strong set of opponents according to FO's defensive line run rating.

Green Bay's last 4 opponents ranked 24th., 4th., 8th. and 1st., a somewhat stronger set of opponents, but not appreciably so. Further, I would suspect that Buffalo's late season rankings were weaker than their overall season ranking when they went heavy to 6-in-the-box alignments with their beast short yardage run stopper Spikes seeing fewer snaps, as was the case against GB. Gerald McCoy played the first 14 games for Tampa but was sidelined for game 15 against Green Bay; their season ranking does not reflect the diminished D-Line the Packers faced.

I have a few questions regarding the value of these stats:

1. The formulas are evidently proprietary given the lack of information about how the various adjustments are calculated. That lack of transparency makes then largely a "black box" that prevents analysis of the methodology.

2. I think it's a dubious assumption that only 50% credit (or debit on the defensive side) is given in the 5-10 yard range, and particularly that 0% credit is attributed to the lines on 11+ yards of gain. 5+ yard gains, and particularly long gainers, often begin with a decent hole with the the back getting through the line clean and/or a good second level block.

3. For what it's worth, the stats are not measuring "line play" per se; on the offensive side of the ball the play of the FBs, HBs, TEs and even WRs figure into the stats. More significantly, on the defensive side of the ball, the LB play is critical in limiting yards in 10 or less yard gains which is what these stats are measuring exclusively.
 
OP
OP
Mklangelo

Mklangelo

Feng Shui Debunker
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
578
Reaction score
33
Location
Florida
Green Bay's last 4 opponents ranked 24th., 4th., 8th. and 1st., a somewhat stronger set of opponents, but not appreciably so.

I did an average ranking on the last 4 regular season opponents of each team defensively speaking with weight to run defense. Avg ranking were: GB 9.25 and Seattle 11.25.

I think it's a dubious assumption that only 50% credit (or debit on the defensive side) is given in the 5-10 yard range, and particularly that 0% credit is attributed to the lines on 11+ yards of gain. 5+ yard gains, and particularly long gainers, often begin with a decent hole with the the back getting through the line clean and/or a good second level block.

Yea. I thought about that stat is completely non-transparent and subjective.

For what it's worth, the stats are not measuring "line play" per se; on the offensive side of the ball the play of the FBs, HBs, TEs and even WRs figure into the stats. More significantly, on the defensive side of the ball, the LB play is critical in limiting yards in 10 or less yard gains which is what these stats are measuring exclusively.

I could have sat there for several hours and broken it down to Defensive effectiveness on left side, right side and by TE and RB and god knows what else.

I've just heard some talk several times over the last few weeks about how GB has faced better Defenses or Defensive lines than Seattle and questioned the validity of that assertion. I didn't look too deeply into the Pass Defense side of it but as it stands right now, I don't see a great statistical variance in the assertion.

I appreciate the input!
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I've just heard some talk several times over the last few weeks about how GB has faced better Defenses or Defensive lines than Seattle and questioned the validity of that assertion.
It goes to show...people just say stuff because they can.

Another point about the FO stats I forgot to mention: these are RB stats. In the absence of info to the contrary, it would not include option runs by Wilson, which kind of invalidates the comparisons for the purposes of this game.
 
OP
OP
Mklangelo

Mklangelo

Feng Shui Debunker
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
578
Reaction score
33
Location
Florida
Another point about the FO stats I forgot to mention: these are RB stats. In the absence of info to the contrary, it would not include option runs by Wilson, which kind of invalidates the comparisons for the purposes of this game.

Which is exactly why I went no further with my little expedition. 10 min til' it's on baby. Let's get this done!
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top