The Dude Abides...The Stats That Don't Lie, Week 7
"The Stats That Don't Lie are gonna eat lightning and crap thunder!"
---Burgess Meredith
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Week 7 brought a well deserved break for the Broncos (God even rested on the 7th day), no less than 6 bona fide blowouts (an average night for a Raider at a singles bar), and 3 more interceptions from new Bears' mascot Jay Cutler (2 more and he can tie Orton's season total from 2008 in less than half the games).
In other words, a decent weekend
Welcome to the Week 7 Stats That Don't Lie, your statistical pint of Guinness, your stripper's pole of stats, and the stats that don't cut and run at the first sign of trouble. These are the stats that launched a thousand ships and the stats that make a good girl go bad. They are the stats that don't return your phone calls. They are Turnovers, Field Position, Time of Possession, and 3rd Down Efficiency.
As always, for those that need a primer, or want to look at the stats from previous weeks, just click on the following links (Raiders' fans, just grunt a lot and I'm sure your computer will figure out it):
Since Denver didn't play this week, their rankings in these 4 categories of statistics will simply be influenced by what other teams have done in Week 7. Nevertheless, it's still worth looking at from the 10,000 foot perspective.
WEEK 6 - Broncos' Rankings
Average Turnovers/Game: 2nd (3 teams tied for 1st)
Average Starting Field Position: 20th
Average Time of Possession: 7th
Average 3rd Down Efficiency: 11th
WEEK 7 - Broncos' Rankings
Average Turnovers/Game: 1st (tied with Green Bay)
Average Starting Field Position: 23rd
Average Time of Possession: 9th
Average 3rd Down Efficiency: 12th
Despite the two touchdown runs by Eddie Royal, Denver can still improve in its special teams play. Many interesting comments have already been made by MHR members about how the release of Kern will help field position on both sides of the ball (a punter doesn't just influence where your opponent gets the ball, but where you also get it back), so I have nothing more astute than they do to say about it. However, let's hope this move is another in a long line of good calls by McDaniels. The stats certainly back up his decision through 7 weeks.
Because so many teams got clobbered in Week 7, the stats in most of this week's games were very one sided, but there are still a few worth exploring further. Last week I noted that I thought the Chiefs were a much better team than people realized, but that their trouble was on third down. I'm still of this view. I watched the entire SD/KC game and it is simply amazing that the Chiefs continue to hover (on average per game) at 20% on 3rd downs this year. That is simply unacceptable. It's just killing their drives. They rank 13th in field position, but even this can't help when you can only convert 2 out of every 10 third downs in a league that averages about 37%.
The next worse in the league on third downs? The horrific Raiders, of course, who are at 27%. Keep on truckin', JaMarcus!
Another team that is impressive is New England, and not because they are putting up a lot of points, nor because the MSM likes to kiss their butts (pucker up, John Clayton). After week 7, these cats rank 2nd in turnovers/game, 1st in time of possession, 4th in 3rd-downs, and 7th in field position. They are simply well balanced, and if you are looking for absolute proof that Denver is for real, it's not the San Diego game that demonstrates it, it's the New England game. The Patriots game against the Bucs was simply another week in which they dominated all four statistical categories.
The week wouldn't be complete without looking at another Chicago game, wouldn't it? Many of us had a bit of fun in the game threads on Sunday with our weekly Cutler Pick Watch. It was like watching Halloween and Christmas come on the same day. From a statistical point of view, the Bengals simply carved Chicago up like a pumpkin in all four categories, specifically, field position. Even though Chicago still ranks number 1 in average starting field position, the Bengals were the ones who one this battle on Sunday. It's clear that if you can stop Chicago from getting good field position, they are not a good enough team to sustain long drives. They turn the ball over too much (averaging 2.17 turnovers per game) and they can't run enough to eat clock (average time of possession per game is under 30 minutes).
As bchiper (hail MHR elders!) mentioned in another post, the Min/Pit game is a perfect example of what can happen if you lose the turnover battle, if only by 1 turnover. Earlier last week, I made the assertion that it's not the first turnover in a game that kills you, it's the 2nd turnover. Teams that turn the ball over only once in a game still have a winning percentage of almost 60%. However, those that commit two have a 40% chance. This game was the poster child for both losing the turnover battle and also for the 2nd turnover rule (I guess I am going to just make this a rule now).
Another way to think about the 2 turnover rule is that it's like giving a Raider Fan two sharpened pencils. With the first pencil he's probably dangerous, but might use the utensil for writing. But giving him the 2nd pencil will certainly mean a visit to the ER later in the day for either brain or torso surgery (and for a Raider fan, they are one in the same).
The 2 turnover rule is so interesting to me that I am going to start keeping track of winning percentages each week as a reflection of the numbers of turnovers. In week 7:
- 7 teams had 0 turnovers. All 7 won (100%)
- 3 teams had 1 turnover. All 3 won (100%)
- 6 teams had 2 turnovers. Only 2 won (33%)
- 4 teams had 3 turnovers. 0 won (0%)
- 6 teams had 4 turnovers. 1 team won (17%)
Now, let's give you what you came for, the Stats that Never Lie:
Week 7 Summaries:
- The team that won the turnover battle won 12 of 13 games played (92%).
- In the previous category, remove the ties and this remains at 92%
- The team that won the time of possession battle won 8 of the 13 games played (62%).
- The team that had better third down efficiency won 9 of the 13 games played (69%).
- The team that had better average starting field position won 10 of the 13 games played (77%).
- There were 5 games this week in which a team won all four categories. In 5 of the 5, the same team won on the scoreboard (100%). For the season, this stat is 37 out of 38 games.
- The winning teams this week averaged .85 turnovers, 31:02 in time of possession, 42.99% on 3rd downs, and their average starting field position was the 33.21 yard line.
Top 5 in Week 7:
- Top 5 in giveaways: 7 tied with 0
- Top 5 in time of possession: 1.MIN 2.CIN 3.NYJ 4. GB 5.CAR
- Top 5 in 3rd downs: 1.IND 2.CIN 3.NYJ 4. Four teams tied at 50%
- Top 5 in avg. starting field position: 1.MIA 2.SD 3.BUF 4.CIN 5.NE
Running Totals, Season (through 7 weeks):
- 103 games have been played this season
- 85.44% were won by the team with less turnovers (counting ties as wins)
- 68.93% with a better time of possession
- 66.99% by the team who won on 3rd down
- 72.82% by the team that won the field position battle.
7-week Averages for Benchmarking This Week's Games:
And finally, the numbers with an obligatory meaningless comment:
Score TOs TOP Third Down Field Pos Comment
GB 31 0 35:54 40.00% 25.78 Cleveland plays limbo on 3rd down
CLE 3 2 24:06 16.67% 34.20
SF 21 2 29:31 36.36% 21.50 Houston wins all 4, but kills on field position
HOU 24 1 30:29 46.15% 35.58
SD 37 0 32:45 47.06% 38.69 KC continues to vomit on 3rd down
KC 7 3 27:15 20.00% 29.46
MIN 17 2 36:58 50.00% 24.00 Victim of the 2 turnover rule
PIT 27 1 23:02 33.33% 31.00
IND 42 0 30:38 66.67% 22.50 Peyton on 3rd down scary. Ranked #1 through 7.
STL 6 2 29:22 30.77% 26.18
NE 35 2 33:15 50.00% 36.77 NE wins all 4...again.
TB 7 3 26:45 26.67% 27.14
BUF 20 0 25:20 21.43% 37.64 Can Car. be any worse on 3rd down and field position?
CAR 9 4 34:40 15.38% 19.46
NYJ 38 0 35:57 60.00% 32.27 Blitz all day, Cable...it can't help when you give it away.
OAK 0 4 24:03 41.67% 18.10
CHI 10 4 23:38 50.00% 28.80 The return of the JC of yore (okay maybe just last week)
CIN 45 0 36:22 66.67% 37.22
ATL 21 3 31:08 50.00% 23.36 Matt Ryan w/INTs and a bad field....you see the result.
DAL 37 1 28:52 46.15% 35.36
NO 46 4 33:02 33.33% 28.71 NO doesn't give up on run, but still lucky to escape alive.
MIA 34 3 26:58 44.44% 39.94
ARZ 24 2 29:44 21.43% 34.87 Manning or Warner? Who cares...it's about TOs.
NYG 17 4 30:16 26.67% 27.13
PHI 27 0 28:17 26.67% 35.31 Turnovers...and a helmet throw from Clinton Portis!
WAS 17 4 31:43 25.00% 30.15
Just how do the Broncos and Ravens stack up in these 4 stats? Let's take a look.
Team Turnovers Time of Possession 3rd Downs Field Position
Denver .83/game 31:36 39.53% 27.98
Baltimore 1.17/game 29:18 43.60% 29.29
From these statistics, the Broncos are in for a tough fight. While they are giving the ball away less and winning the time of possession battle, the Ravens are certainly moving the chains better and getting better field position. In many ways this is the same statistical situation in which they found themselves against the Patriots. Normally, the home field advantage averages out to an extra 3 points a game, so we have to factor this in as well. For Denver to win this game, they MUST not give the ball away. They simply can't afford turnovers.
For those interested my predictive model for picking games using these four stats, I was 8/13, which is a horrible 62%. Another week of this and Raiders' fans may start making fun of me. So I better man up. This week I am changing my system to weight all four of these stats, plus wins. And this week I'm adding another factor (did I say that simpler models are better?) in an attempt to take advantage of prediction market theory. I can thank Zappa/Tim Lynch for giving me this idea as I read his column on upset specials, and it dawned on me I was looking at a prediction market without realizing it.
And as always, my final stat of the week: 92.3% (percentage chance that an Oakland fan sucker punches a Charger fan in Qualcomm Stadium on Sunday).
Go Broncos!!!!
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
42 comments
|
18 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ponderosa, that is what happens when you have too many sips of old granddaddy's cough syrup!
Thanks for catching that, I went through the body so fast and wanted to get this out by Wed. that I did not read the title! Perhaps I should be blogging at Silver and Black Pride for this!
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Well it could be stats that bad teams don't like. HaHa
My granny gave us Irish whisky in milk for any ailment. Probably just as good as cough syrup.
Imagination is more important than knowledge. A. Einstein
+1 as always
I noticed a few more typos in there….but I will let you find them after you sleep it off :)
Great job, and here’s to our avg. field position improving by 3-5 yards.
Thanks again Dude
Another excellent edition.
Of the 37 (out of 38) teams this season that won all four categories and won on the scoreboard – who was the one team that didn’t get all four and still won?
Cant wait ta see how predictability-wise, these stats illustrate how close a game it’ll be against the Ravens. Thanks again Duder! ( =
First team to three consecutive SB wins!!!! and then some, right? I think four and we oughtta let someone else have a fair shot : )
by PearlJamBroncoGFunk on Oct 28, 2009 12:58 AM MDT reply actions
Wasn't it Houston week 5 vs the Cards?
The won all four categories and still lost. Actually, if you want to be technical, they tied in the TO battle…
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Oct 28, 2009 10:15 AM MDT up reply actions
Thanks, CK, that is the one
I did not give them the win because they tied in Turnovers. I suppose I could have called it 38-38.
Last year, the game that violated this was the NO-Den game. Denver won, despite losing all 4. I guess that is what happens when your QB throws harder than Elway. There was one other game in 2008 like this, but I´ll have to go back and look. It is very very rare (about as rare as a Raider and a toothbrush)
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Nothing is ever 100% certain...
I’ll take 98% certain though. ;)
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
The guy formerly known as ZAPPA
Zappa
You haven´t happened to have been keeping track of the results of the yahoo pick ems of each game and how the ¨public¨ has been doing have you? I know you are doing well, but how has the thousands and thousands of people been doing 8 out of 14? 12? Do you know by chance?
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
BTW Dude
LOVE this series…and your wit is delightful, along with the raider digs. :-)
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Oct 28, 2009 2:21 PM MDT up reply actions
I sometimes forget to take a swipe at Oakland and then I remember, on no, people look for this now
There are only so many ways I can call a Raider fan a drunk or pyscho. And I WILL find all of them!
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
It's a neverending journey of hatred.
You learn new ways to hate every day. Just when you think you’ve heard them all, you hear a beauty that inspires you to continue your search for Raider jokes.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by Troy Hufford on Oct 29, 2009 9:39 AM MDT up reply actions
Hey KB, I know you are good Christian Dude and a Product of Clean Living
You are the opposite of a Raider Fan.
It really is good vs. evil. hahahahaha
My personal Axis of Evil:
1) Oakland
2) San Diego
3) Kansas City
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Amen lebowski
My personal axis of evil
1)raiders
2)chargers
3)KC
4)whoever plays the broncos next on the schedule
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by Troy Hufford on Oct 29, 2009 12:46 PM MDT up reply actions
I used to have Pats
on my list, but they did “give” us Josh McDaniels.
It is amazing how many people mistake a certain hip snideness for sophistication. -- Thomas Sowell
True. That was nice of them........
Was it so nice that you didn’t burninate the country side???
NAHHHHHH
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by Troy Hufford on Oct 30, 2009 1:00 PM MDT up reply actions
It also happens
when your QB leads the league in grit.
by T.Dot_Bronco on Oct 28, 2009 5:03 PM MDT up reply actions
Excellent as always, Dude
My neighbor used to give us Cuban Coffee when we were in High school. Don’t know what was in it, but who needs Red Bull when you got Cuban Coffee.
Make those miracles happen - Jon Keyworth
Cafe con Leche!
Used to get one every morning on my way into work when I lived in Tampa. MAN they were good. It was just a latte with cuban coffee and steamed milk, but something about them were SSOOOO good….
Thanks for bringin that memory back
"Change is inevitable - except from vending machines."
by EastCoastBronco on Oct 28, 2009 6:45 AM MDT up reply actions
A request
I brought this up in the comments of one of your other posts, but I don’t know if you saw it. I’m of the mind that turnover margin is an even better indicator of your odds of winning a game. I suppose I could do the same thing, but it would be interesting to see your win /turnovers graph redone for win %/turnover margin. It would probably be similar, but it might have an even steeper plunge to 0.
Great post, BTW. Rec’d.
BB
Sorry, my friend I totally forgot this. I want to do it too, it will be interesting for sure. I will try to get it done soon. It´s a great suggestion!
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Good stuff.
I too agree that stats never lie….when backed up by reason. :) And you have the reason.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
The guy formerly known as ZAPPA
Wow thanks for the the props
the NYG/Ari game was another great example of what happens in the TO dept. Half time NYG has 1 TO and Ari 2. NYG is winning. Second half NYG has 3 TOs and loses the game.
But, I really have to agree on your example of NE about balance. Win all phases of the game and your odds of winning are definitely great.
Love the new icon as well………..:o)
thanks, bchiper, no problem on the props...MHR is a good place for Bronco fans of all generations
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I'm gonna
buy a pack of #2 pencils, sharpen ‘em up real good and hand them out to all the little ghools on Halloween. I’m also gonna carve me a JAY-O-LANTERN! HA AHAAAA!!!! Funny stuff Dude!
MARK IT ZERO!!!!
Dude, this is a league game, this determines who enters the next round robin. Am I wrong? Am I wrong?
You mark that frame an 8, and you're entering a world of pain.
by waltersobchakbronco on Oct 28, 2009 9:45 AM MDT reply actions
great post
i love your analysis of the games each week. its amazing the effect simply things such as third down percentage and field position have on the outcomes of a game.
to help you out, there is a reason your predictions have not been more accurate. turnovers are the single greatest indicator of why a team wins, but a terrible predictor of future success. the same can be said about field position, while very analytical, it is not good at prediction success.
i am testing out some of the same things you are, but using some better indicators of success to predict games. this past week, I compared each team and their opponent in 7 categories and picked the team with the best-of-seven score.
Here are some other really good indicators of success:
Net Yards Per Play
Net Passer Rating
Yards / Attempt (including sack yards lost)
Hope this helps
DStats
I have also been toying with rush yards instead of passing yards after reading this several months ago:
http://www.twominutewarning.com/g13.htm
Always good to get feedback. How successful have your predictions been, my friend?
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
post tonight
after i finish having dinner and taking my sister to church im going to do an article on stats and their purpose along with some common errors when using them
i will post my comparison chart for each game last week and show you how it went.
i originally had 9 categories, TOs and TOP, but they were not accurate at all – so i went to a 7 category comparison. i also showed the 4 games where a team had a close 4-3 advantage. in all cases, regardless of who had the “advantage”, the home team won all 4.
record w/ 9 categories: 9-4
record w/ 7 categories: 11-2
record w/ 7 categories, then siding with home team in 4-3 games: 12-1
again, it is just one week, but i will be doing this for the rest of the season to see how it averages out. tonight i will probably work on my picks for this week for each game, but i may not finish until tomorrow morning.
hope that helps.
by DenverStats10 on Oct 28, 2009 2:51 PM MDT up reply actions
Well that is the holy grail, to get a predictive model
I am thinking that 7 variables still might be too much. Also, I am not sold completely that the turnovers can’t be used effectively to predict games. In the first week I used this method, I was 14-0. The last two weeks have been 8 out of 13 and 8 out of 14, so I can’t certainly claim any superiority.
I am fascinated lately with prediction markets and want to try and incorporate them in as well
Have you seen the accustats stuff, where the guy runs monte carlo simulations to predict the outcome of games?
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I think I'll tweek my model through Friday, but I will share anything with you that I can find out this week
…and through the season
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Dude
You make me proud to be a raider Hater. The rest of the league may have my civility, but raider Nation is fair game!
Re: Chicago - They turn the ball over too much (averaging 2.17 turnovers per game) and they can’t run enough to eat clock (average time of possession per game is under 30 minutes).
If Jay would hand the ball off instead of Hogging it, things would be a lot better for the Bears overall.
Re: The Ravens game – For Denver to win this game, they MUST not give the ball away.They simply can’t afford turnovers. I agree wholeheartedly.
Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks
What about Defense?
Do you think you should include defensive stops on 3rd down as an additional stat? I know you’ve talked about the turnover differential, but is it included? Should a teams defensive takeaways be included as well? Just a few thoughts.
Hey G4, Good evening to you
Let’s say Denver is 5/10 on 3rd downs
and then let’s say San Diego is 0/10 on third downs
Denver is 50%
San Diego is 0%
We can say Denver “won” the third down stat for two reasons:
1) Their offense was better
2) Their defense held San Diego to 0%
So when you look at these 3rd down stats, remember if you see a team at 0% on 3rd down (like the Chargers in this example) you can reverse this and think, Denver had 10 third down stops or if you want to think about it the other way, Denver’s defense was 10 for 10 or 100% in stopping SD on 3rd downs?
Does this make sense?
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Yeah,
that makes sense. You’re looking at it on a per game basis between two teams. How does this factor in when you’re doing a comparison against all other teams? Or in your model for predicting the winners of the next weeks games? You said in a previous post that had a spreadsheet for this. I don’t suppose you could send that to me so I could understand some of your logic better.
This is why I took differential equations in college rather than statistics.
GO BRONCOS!!!
third down percentage
that is one my indicators for future success in my comparison chart, which went 9-4 last week.
i use the net value, so if Team A is 50% for this on offense, and 35% on defense (15) they will be picked to win over Team B that goes 55% on offense and 45% on defense (10)
thankfully, Denver is the best on 3rd down percentage for defense (they’re ok on offense)
I can’t help but feel that these stats are mostly a hindsight thing that just serves to point out maybe how dominant a team was in a certain game. There’s nothing to do with technique in them, or the way teams play, which might help make them predictive. I don’t see much difference in these stats from point differential. It’s not the sort of thing a player could take onto the field to help them be more productive, nor is it the sort of thing a fan can look at to predict whether a team will win. I imagine I could have more success predicting games based on the rushing/passing offense and defense rankings of the teams.
Anyway, I guess it’s somewhat interesting. Thanks for doing this, at any rate.
A side note. I think our turnover ratio is probably too high because of that hail mary pick, and our time of possession probably took a hit from the two Royal touchdown returns. Hopefully maybe the Larsen/Hiliis combo can help with third downs. I guess we’ll see.
Hey OR. Thanks for reading at least. Hope it was just more than a passing fancy.
I’ll file your comments under, “They gave me some value on some level.” So for that, I say cool.
I hope I did not assert that these weekly stats were somehow Xs and Os material for players. If I gave that impression, I apologize for it.
Regarding the predictive nature of such stats, I just don’t know. Part of the reason I am doing this is to see if there is such a way I can do this (thus far with mixed results). If it falls flat on its face, I’ll be the first to tell everyone about it. Another reason I am doing it is just because I am curious and enjoy presenting the material to Bronco fans.
Overall, I think these stats reinforce both the Offensive and Defensive philosophy of Josh McDaniels. When I listen to him talk on a substantive level, he is constantly referring to turnovers, 3rd downs, and field position. The Erhardt Perkins system in very congruent with these stats, as is Mike Nolan’s aggressive 3-4/5-2.
Although it’s easy to say everyone’s offensive and defensive systems are congruent with these stats, they really aren’t. For example, our last 2 defensive coordinators rarely played with an attacking style, so our turnover margin simply was never going to cut it. This is why Mike Nolan probably blitzed 10 times in the first quarter alone in the San Diego game. He knows the correlation between winning and turnovers.
When I looked at the entire 2008 season, I did notice a high correlation between winning and total net yards, even though the correlation was higher with winning the turnover battle. Yet, somehow, this still rang hollow to me when looking at the 2008 Broncos. So many yards, so little points. So many yards, but so many interceptions. So many yards, but such bad field position.
Well it should be interesting to say the least. If you have some good predictive information, I am going to for sure want to give it a spin!
Stay cool, OR! Look forward to more of your posts!!
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Side notes
yes, I’m still lobbying for Lebowski to calculate in two Starting Field Positions of 100 yards for the Royal Returns.
And as far as something players can take onto the field? How about “HANG ON TO THE BALL”! And maybe even, Dive for the sticks!
It is amazing how many people mistake a certain hip snideness for sophistication. -- Thomas Sowell
Alright, Trog, next week, I will go through each week and for every TD return or KO I will add 100 for field position
It just makes sense. I know the cats over at football outsiders also take away drives in which the QB takes a knee. Perhaps I can do this to. Both ideas make sense!
You are right about the take away. Two hands and fight for every yard (because statistically your chances of scoring go up for each yard) would be two things as a player you could take from all of this. Also, from a player personnel standpoint, get a kicker who has a lot of touchbacks and a punter who specializes in pinning an opponent inside the 20.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
One scenario I can imagine that could skew time of possession is a pick six that comes after a few minutes of an opposing team’s drive. You score 7 points, then that team drives for another 6 minutes and gets a field goal. They just dominated you like 9 minutes to 0, but you came out 4 points ahead. Any special teams score will have a similar result.
There’s no arguing over turnover ratio as an important stat. It can give a team more possessions than the opponent, which in any close fight could be the difference maker.
Third down percentage could matter less for an explosive offense that doesn’t see third down as often as a dink and dunk team.
As for field position, I think of the Eagles/Redskins game monday night. The Redskins had great starting field position… over and over and over and over. Their defense was just about lights out, but their offense was stumbling in the dark.

by 



























