Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:04 pm 
NET Practice Squad
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 10:09 pm
Posts: 61
my thoughts on the reason Falcons O is going to have more success than what a lot of people are willing to admit

Hawks pass O's played against:
1st half:(in order)
28th 3rd 9th 18th 16th 4th 23rd 2nd
2nd Half "the hot streak"(in order)
31st 30th 26th 29th 28th 25th 23rd 18th.

3 in the top 5, 4 in the top 10, 7 in the top 20, 9 outside the top 20

Falcons pass D played against:
1st half:(in order)
#12, #3, #18, #13, #30, #20, #9, #19,
2nd Half:(in order)
#31, #5, #32, #31, #13, #28, #14, #32

2 in the top 5, 3 in the top 10, 10 inside the top 20, 6 games against D's outside the top 20,

now while the Hawks passing D is the 6th ranked vs the pass, its something when you look at the passing offenses played against up to this point


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:09 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 3:38 pm
Posts: 1111
keepertd wrote:
my thoughts on the reason Falcons O is going to have more success than what a lot of people are willing to admit

Hawks pass O's played against:
1st half:(in order)
28th 3rd 9th 18th 16th 4th 23rd 2nd
2nd Half "the hot streak"(in order)
31st 30th 26th 29th 28th 25th 23rd 18th.

3 in the top 5, 4 in the top 10, 7 in the top 20, 9 outside the top 20

Falcons pass D played against:
1st half:(in order)
#12, #3, #18, #13, #30, #20, #9, #19,
2nd Half:(in order)
#31, #5, #32, #31, #13, #28, #14, #32

2 in the top 5, 3 in the top 10, 10 inside the top 20, 6 games against D's outside the top 20,

now while the Hawks passing D is the 6th ranked vs the pass, its something when you look at the passing offenses played against up to this point


What stat are you considering here? Point against, I can tell you know if I look up DVOA defenses this will be flat wrong.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:12 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 11:36 am
Posts: 1111
Location: Spanaway, WA
What I HATE HATE HATE about stats is that they don't take into account other factors or situations. Stats can be cherry picked for anything you want to support an argument. Factors like drops, length of drives (i.e. field position,) play selection (rush/pass,) injuries, weather conditions (most of the Falcons' games were in a dome,) yada-yada-yada.

_________________
Image
"Make good teams look bad and make bad teams look terrible!" -Michael Robinson


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:15 pm 
NET Rookie
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:01 am
Posts: 267
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
they must be rankings based on yardage stats... all those passing yards did a lot of good for the Lions didn't they!

_________________
"Hard work beats talent when talent fails to hard work"


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:15 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 3:38 pm
Posts: 1111
BlueTalons wrote:
What I HATE HATE HATE about stats is that they don't take into account other factors or situations. Stats can be cherry picked for anything you want to support an argument. Factors like drops, length of drives (i.e. field position,) play selection (rush/pass,) injuries, weather conditions (most of the Falcons' games were in a dome,) yada-yada-yada.


Ya but then we are stuck just arguing Philosophy. :D


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:19 pm 
NET Practice Squad
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 10:09 pm
Posts: 61
Shock2k wrote:
keepertd wrote:
my thoughts on the reason Falcons O is going to have more success than what a lot of people are willing to admit

Hawks pass O's played against:
1st half:(in order)
28th 3rd 9th 18th 16th 4th 23rd 2nd
2nd Half "the hot streak"(in order)
31st 30th 26th 29th 28th 25th 23rd 18th.

3 in the top 5, 4 in the top 10, 7 in the top 20, 9 outside the top 20

Falcons pass D played against:
1st half:(in order)
#12, #3, #18, #13, #30, #20, #9, #19,
2nd Half:(in order)
#31, #5, #32, #31, #13, #28, #14, #32

2 in the top 5, 3 in the top 10, 10 inside the top 20, 6 games against D's outside the top 20,

now while the Hawks passing D is the 6th ranked vs the pass, its something when you look at the passing offenses played against up to this point


What stat are you considering here? Point against, I can tell you know if I look up DVOA defenses this will be flat wrong.


congrats, i can also go with the stat of throwing td's etc etc, this is strictly ypg


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:22 pm 
* Gangnameister *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 11083
Location: PoCompton, BC Canada
Atlanta's a good team no doubt, they earned that #1 seed and deserve to be a little confident about it. They should be allowed to have some fun with it. They didn't stumble into the playoffs like a drunk into the champagne room by winning a garbage division on the last day of the season (lookin at you washington fans lurking behind the ban-hammer) but without that cushy schedule they're a 10-6 or 11-5 team just like the rest of us above average mortals. My point; they're good, but not great. They aren't a legit scary team like the 86 Bears or something, they're just another team with a winning record. Just like us. Nothing about them besides some unfavorable matchups on offense (Gonzo and Harry Douglass) really concern me.

If we show up and play our A-Game, we can beat this team. If we underestimate them, they have more than enough tools to roll us. Have to wait and see what happens on Sunday.

_________________
I <3 Nunchucks


Last edited by CANHawk on Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:22 pm 
NET Practice Squad
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 10:09 pm
Posts: 61
CHawks4L wrote:
they must be rankings based on yardage stats... all those passing yards did a lot of good for the Lions didn't they!

so because the defense was incapable of stopping other teams its the offense fault? look at the games, almost all of the losses they had were one score games, 4 out of 12 losses were larger than one score...


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:33 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
Posts: 2064
Location: Marysville, WA
keepertd wrote:
my thoughts on the reason Falcons O is going to have more success than what a lot of people are willing to admit

Hawks pass O's played against:
1st half:(in order)
28th 3rd 9th 18th 16th 4th 23rd 2nd
2nd Half "the hot streak"(in order)
31st 30th 26th 29th 28th 25th 23rd 18th.

3 in the top 5, 4 in the top 10, 7 in the top 20, 9 outside the top 20

Falcons pass D played against:
1st half:(in order)
#12, #3, #18, #13, #30, #20, #9, #19,
2nd Half:(in order)
#31, #5, #32, #31, #13, #28, #14, #32

2 in the top 5, 3 in the top 10, 10 inside the top 20, 6 games against D's outside the top 20,

now while the Hawks passing D is the 6th ranked vs the pass, its something when you look at the passing offenses played against up to this point


I don't know where you get your numbers, but our last 6 we played:

Miami: 21st overall, 27th passing, 13th rushing, 19.8/a game against(7th overall)
Chicago: 5th overall, 8th passing, 8th rushing, 17.3/a game against(3rd overall)
Arizona: 12th overall, 5th passing, 28th rushing, 22.3/a game against(17th overall)
Buffalo: 22nd overall, 10th passing, 21st rushing, 27.2/a game against(26th overall)
San Fran: 3rd overall, 4th passing, 4th rushing, 17.1/a game against(2nd overall)
St. Louis: 14th overall, 15th passing, 15th rushing, 21.8/a game against(14th overall)

_________________
Image Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:13 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:29 pm
Posts: 1554
but, its not about the NFC wests strength its about who they played outside the division, pretty sure everyone will agree when it comes to division rivals anything can happen regardless (rams/niners hawks/cards/rams)

its a fact the NFC west has played higher caliber teams outside their division but what that means who knows? I think it would be safe to say the NFC west is used to playing and beating tougher teams, if that doesn't mean anything then it deosnt mean anything..

the rest are just stats... ;)

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:24 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am
Posts: 2038
Shock2k wrote:
BlueTalons wrote:
What I HATE HATE HATE about stats is that they don't take into account other factors or situations. Stats can be cherry picked for anything you want to support an argument. Factors like drops, length of drives (i.e. field position,) play selection (rush/pass,) injuries, weather conditions (most of the Falcons' games were in a dome,) yada-yada-yada.


Ya but then we are stuck just arguing Philosophy. :D


Actually we have those stats, they're called Advanced Metrics. They take into account all those things he mentioned and complained about. They are so much better at determining quality, they have completely changed the philosophy of scouting for baseball by miles. Rewrote the book.

Football uses them too. They are very helpful, but people scowl at them because they dont understand them or presume to understand them. Stats like DVOA and QBR take into account all these situations on a play by play grid. They predict very well the better teams. Im not going to list the DVOA or QBR stats, im sure we have all seen them. But everyone needs to stop disregarding these because they dont understand complex algorithms coupled with a plethora of statistical data.

_________________
Time of possession is the most meaningless statistic in football. -RolandDeschain


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 6:03 pm 
* Handsome *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:37 pm
Posts: 2858
Location: Tri Cities, WA
Algorithms, plethora, DVOA?!

Who do you think I am, Alvin Einstein?

_________________
"it'd be a newborn deer" - pehawk


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Note in regards to SoS Argument
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 6:07 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 2:12 pm
Posts: 850
Random aside. We all know that teams when they get behind start throwing the ball. They also do this when their running game sucks, or is stopped.

Anyone can come in here anytime and start throwing around how good or how bad a particular pass defense is, but if you are using yards per game as a metric, that's a crappy metric. If your run defense sucks, your pass defense may look elite, because no one needs to put the ball in the air. Same goes for pass TDs allowed... if anytime someone gets inside the five, they only need two rushes to score, well, you're going to look like a world beater when it comes to giving up zero pass TDs.

I agree with PP that some of the new systems are much much better when trying to grade defenses... the basic idea is kind of similar to contract bridge, you look at a particular type of situation, see what the average defense in the NFL manages to do in that situation, and then score the defense for doing better or worse than the average. It's still not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better.

Oh, and another aside, the idea that one should throw out divisional games when making comparisons is just idiotic. Steel sharpens steel. Playing six games against tough divisional opponents -- especially when winning the division gets you a home game in the playoffs, and is necessary to get a bye -- well, those games are super super important in terms of team identity and how your team works in the macro picture. We happen to be in one of the most physical divisions in football, and as a result, we have to be physical, it's part of our nature. The Falcons don't have the same type of requirements, they have a division that seems a bit more wide open in terms of the styles of offense that are played, and that's fine, but football is a physical game, and is usually won on the line of scrimmage. I think our divisional games are SUPER important for that exact reason, and the idea that they should be dismissed or undervalued just because we know our opponent well... that's silly!


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]



 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.