RichardSeymour Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 I did this for fun on KFFL.... thought I might bring it over here since it took half an hour to fully work up (There's probably an elegent way but I did all the number crunching by hand.) Notably these numbers suggest that by a very reasonable measure (Expected Points Allowed Based On Oppositionb vs Expected Points Allowed) YOU had the best scoring defense in 2004. Given that I decided it was definitely worth bringing over here... All numbers have been adjusted. The numbers have been... uh... not sure of the elegent way to describe this, but for 2004 NE I didn't count the games teams actually played against NE when calculating their average scoring, instead I removed those games and replaced them with "ghosts" equivilent to the average. I did this for all teams. I did all this sort of on the fly in my head and with the windows calculator. There may be a specific or methodological error. No promises. Below are the average Points Scored for the combined opponents for some of the best defenses from '04, and some all time greats (the intent is NOT to compare '04 defenses to all time greats, it's just that these are the two groups of greatest interest, IMO.). (AEOPS= Average Expected Opponents Points Scored) Teams sorted by AEOPS (Team PA in paretheses) Higher number means higher scoring average opponents 354.8 -- 2004 NE (260) 352.0 -- 2004 NYJ (261) 330.3 -- 2004 WAS (265) 328.4 -- 2004 PIT (251) 315.9 -- 2004 PHI (231)** 361.5 -- 2002 TB (196) 348.0-- 1985 CHI (198) 318.2 -- 1976 PIT (158)* 311.8 -- 2003 NE (238) 310.9 -- 1996 GB (210) 295.7 -- 1975 LA (154)* 286.2 -- 2000 BAL (165) 260.1 -- 1972 MIA (195)* One interesting measure then would be the gap between AEOPS and the points allowed by the particular defenses. By that measure... (AEOPS= Average Expected Opponents Points Scored) Gap between teams PA and AEOPS Higher number means better defense (presumably) 94.8 -- 2004 NE 91.0 -- 2004 NYJ 84.9 -- 2004 PHI 77.4 -- 2004 PIT 65.3 -- 2004 WAS 165.5 -- 2002 TB 160.2 -- 1976 PIT* 150.0 -- 1985 CHI 141.7 -- 1975 LA* 121.2 -- 2000 BAL 100.9 -- 1996 GB 73.8 --- 2003 NE 65.1 --- 1972 MIA* While it's perfectly possible I've made a howling logical error, if these numbers are consistant then they are very interesting (though, like any number, far from absolute proof of quality). They only indicate quality relative to the rest of the league (and more specifically their opponents in that year) but they do suggest a few interesting things: (I do not necessarily agree with these, there are many qualifications that should be made, but I'm just going to list the "obvious assumptions" one would make based on these numbers) 1) NE was the best defense last year among the 3 most widely cited candidates. The New York Jets' was the 2nd best. 2) NE's 2003 defense has been overrated, and does not deserve comparison to the Bears, Buccs, Steelers, Rams, & Ravens all time Ds. NE was actually better defensively in 2004. 3) TB 2002 was the best among these defenses, and significantly better than BAL 2000. 4) BAL 2000 was quite good, but has been overrated due to facing weak opponents. 65) '76 PIT and '75 LA defenses were freaking good. *= "stretched" to 16 games: numbers adjusted for fair comarison **= Last two games excluded, season then "stretched" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LionelRichie Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 I did this for fun on KFFL.... thought I might bring it over here since it took half an hour to fully work up (There's probably an elegent way but I did all the number crunching by hand.) Notably these numbers suggest that by a very reasonable measure (Expected Points Allowed Based On Oppositionb vs Expected Points Allowed) YOU had the best scoring defense in 2004. Given that I decided it was definitely worth bringing over here... All numbers have been adjusted. The numbers have been... uh... not sure of the elegent way to describe this, but for 2004 NE I didn't count the games teams actually played against NE when calculating their average scoring, instead I removed those games and replaced them with "ghosts" equivilent to the average. I did this for all teams. I did all this sort of on the fly in my head and with the windows calculator. There may be a specific or methodological error. No promises. Below are the average Points Scored for the combined opponents for some of the best defenses from '04, and some all time greats (the intent is NOT to compare '04 defenses to all time greats, it's just that these are the two groups of greatest interest, IMO.). (AEOPS= Average Expected Opponents Points Scored) Teams sorted by AEOPS (Team PA in paretheses) Higher number means higher scoring average opponents 354.8 -- 2004 NE (260) 352.0 -- 2004 NYJ (261) 330.3 -- 2004 WAS (265) 328.4 -- 2004 PIT (251) 315.9 -- 2004 PHI (231)** 361.5 -- 2002 TB (196) 348.0-- 1985 CHI (198) 318.2 -- 1976 PIT (158)* 311.8 -- 2003 NE (238) 310.9 -- 1996 GB (210) 295.7 -- 1975 LA (154)* 286.2 -- 2000 BAL (165) 260.1 -- 1972 MIA (195)* One interesting measure then would be the gap between AEOPS and the points allowed by the particular defenses. By that measure... (AEOPS= Average Expected Opponents Points Scored) Gap between teams PA and AEOPS Higher number means better defense (presumably) 94.8 -- 2004 NE 91.0 -- 2004 NYJ 84.9 -- 2004 PHI 77.4 -- 2004 PIT 65.3 -- 2004 WAS 165.5 -- 2002 TB 160.2 -- 1976 PIT* 150.0 -- 1985 CHI 141.7 -- 1975 LA* 121.2 -- 2000 BAL 100.9 -- 1996 GB 73.8 --- 2003 NE 65.1 --- 1972 MIA* While it's perfectly possible I've made a howling logical error, if these numbers are consistant then they are very interesting (though, like any number, far from absolute proof of quality). They only indicate quality relative to the rest of the league (and more specifically their opponents in that year) but they do suggest a few interesting things: (I do not necessarily agree with these, there are many qualifications that should be made, but I'm just going to list the "obvious assumptions" one would make based on these numbers) 1) NE was the best defense last year among the 3 most widely cited candidates. The New York Jets' was the 2nd best. 2) NE's 2003 defense has been overrated, and does not deserve comparison to the Bears, Buccs, Steelers, Rams, & Ravens all time Ds. NE was actually better defensively in 2004. 3) TB 2002 was the best among these defenses, and significantly better than BAL 2000. 4) BAL 2000 was quite good, but has been overrated due to facing weak opponents. 65) '76 PIT and '75 LA defenses were freaking good. *= "stretched" to 16 games: numbers adjusted for fair comarison **= Last two games excluded, season then "stretched" that is pretty interesting. the thing w/NE is you have to take into account Gillette field. that field is responsible for some of the gap b/w avg scoring and points in NE. you should do a home and away for NE, see just how much home field advantage means there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickkotite Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 I did this for fun on KFFL.... thought I might bring it over here since it took half an hour to fully work up (There's probably an elegent way but I did all the number crunching by hand.) Notably these numbers suggest that by a very reasonable measure (Expected Points Allowed Based On Oppositionb vs Expected Points Allowed) YOU had the best scoring defense in 2004. Given that I decided it was definitely worth bringing over here... All numbers have been adjusted. The numbers have been... uh... not sure of the elegent way to describe this, but for 2004 NE I didn't count the games teams actually played against NE when calculating their average scoring, instead I removed those games and replaced them with "ghosts" equivilent to the average. I did this for all teams. I did all this sort of on the fly in my head and with the windows calculator. There may be a specific or methodological error. No promises. Below are the average Points Scored for the combined opponents for some of the best defenses from '04, and some all time greats (the intent is NOT to compare '04 defenses to all time greats, it's just that these are the two groups of greatest interest, IMO.). (AEOPS= Average Expected Opponents Points Scored) Teams sorted by AEOPS (Team PA in paretheses) Higher number means higher scoring average opponents 354.8 -- 2004 NE (260) 352.0 -- 2004 NYJ (261) 330.3 -- 2004 WAS (265) 328.4 -- 2004 PIT (251) 315.9 -- 2004 PHI (231)** 361.5 -- 2002 TB (196) 348.0-- 1985 CHI (198) 318.2 -- 1976 PIT (158)* 311.8 -- 2003 NE (238) 310.9 -- 1996 GB (210) 295.7 -- 1975 LA (154)* 286.2 -- 2000 BAL (165) 260.1 -- 1972 MIA (195)* One interesting measure then would be the gap between AEOPS and the points allowed by the particular defenses. By that measure... (AEOPS= Average Expected Opponents Points Scored) Gap between teams PA and AEOPS Higher number means better defense (presumably) 94.8 -- 2004 NE 91.0 -- 2004 NYJ 84.9 -- 2004 PHI 77.4 -- 2004 PIT 65.3 -- 2004 WAS 165.5 -- 2002 TB 160.2 -- 1976 PIT* 150.0 -- 1985 CHI 141.7 -- 1975 LA* 121.2 -- 2000 BAL 100.9 -- 1996 GB 73.8 --- 2003 NE 65.1 --- 1972 MIA* While it's perfectly possible I've made a howling logical error, if these numbers are consistant then they are very interesting (though, like any number, far from absolute proof of quality). They only indicate quality relative to the rest of the league (and more specifically their opponents in that year) but they do suggest a few interesting things: (I do not necessarily agree with these, there are many qualifications that should be made, but I'm just going to list the "obvious assumptions" one would make based on these numbers) 1) NE was the best defense last year among the 3 most widely cited candidates. The New York Jets' was the 2nd best. 2) NE's 2003 defense has been overrated, and does not deserve comparison to the Bears, Buccs, Steelers, Rams, & Ravens all time Ds. NE was actually better defensively in 2004. 3) TB 2002 was the best among these defenses, and significantly better than BAL 2000. 4) BAL 2000 was quite good, but has been overrated due to facing weak opponents. 65) '76 PIT and '75 LA defenses were freaking good. *= "stretched" to 16 games: numbers adjusted for fair comarison **= Last two games excluded, season then "stretched" dude, find a girlfriend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn306 Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 You really need to get a job at Elias. Good stuff though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Well I haven't fully digested all of this yet. But I will say this....points allowed is how I judge a defense. Some of these conversations that take into account other factors (specifically yardage) mean nothing to me. How many points did they give up. Certainly a defense benefits from its offense (time of possession, field position etc). But I want to know...did they keep them out of the end zone. That's all that really matters IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardSeymour Posted July 27, 2005 Author Share Posted July 27, 2005 dude, find a girlfriend She gets back today from six weeks in Iceland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjets Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 She gets back today from six weeks in Iceland. with a new boyfriend....lol.. j/k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawngnome o-line Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Good info...but i follow the general consensus find something, a hobby, another girl, pickup playing crossword puzzles; anything to keep you from wasting hours of you day with numbers and the calculator from Windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 If the Patriots were ranked lower than the Jets, this would have never been posted. Read between the lines, people, this is just another attempt by RS to rub it in Jets fans faces that we're only 2nd best in the East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 If the Patriots were ranked lower than the Jets, this would have never been posted. Read between the lines, people, this is just another attempt by RS to rub it in Jets fans faces that we're only 2nd best in the East. It's not all that bad 80. 2nd place is 1st loser. :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 It's not all that bad 80. 2nd place is 1st loser. :wink: True, but according to you, we will be finishing last this season...like every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenBeans Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 It's not all that bad 80. 2nd place is 1st loser. :wink: Dale? Dale Earnhardt? Is that you? Hey, tell your son to stop being a big wuss, okay? And is heaven really in Texas, #3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 True, but according to you, we will be finishing last this season...like every year. Not last, just 8-8 and 3rd place in the AFCE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.