Joe Miner Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Olivia is 36 & has a lot of miles on her. He's trading her in for a newer version. Good move. And there are still people who think Rodgers is overrated? Are they the same people who believe the earth is flat? I'd be more than happy to add a couple extra miles to her odometer. Hell even if her tires were flat and her interior was beat up, I'd still take it around the block a few times.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Inconsistent or beat up on bad teams? The only team with a winning record that the Bills held to less than 20 was the Pats with Brissett. So they weren't good enough to compete with competent teams? Pretty sure I've heard that as a knock on specific players on this board before.
JinxedBill1 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 You guys know statistics is the study of how you can make numbers support you hypothesis, right? All stats are loaded. No one ever omits what they should or includes what they should. I'm glad we kept Tyrod. No other option out there, but I look forward to drafting one too.
FireChan Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 So they weren't good enough to compete with competent teams? Pretty sure I've heard that as a knock on specific players on this board before. Well the context is 6/7 of our highest point totals also came against teams with losing records. The story really goes that the Bills offense and defense both beat down crappy teams, and played kinda bad against good teams.
KellyToughII Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Dont compare a running back who throws (taylor) to an all world QB in Rogers
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Well the context is 6/7 of our highest point totals also came against teams with losing records. The story really goes that the Bills offense and defense both beat down crappy teams, and played kinda bad against good teams. Kinda bad? Compared to the PPG rankings 27 would be good for bottom 4, and 30 would be good for dead last. So in half of our games our D was a bottom 4 D? Or to frame it with your context, We have a bottom 4 scoring D when we play teams with winning records? Yikes.
Alphadawg7 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 (edited) The bottom third of the NFL is teams' 22-32 (because a third of 32 is about 10). In what world is 16th "just beating that out"? We were about a FG a game or a TD about every other game from being a top ten OR bottom ten scoring defense. That is literally average, one standard deviation (approximately) from the top and bottom. When we use statistics and statistical vocabulary, its important to make sure you understand what you are saying. EDIT: So I went ahead and calculated the standard deviation and true average for scoring defense in the NFL in 2016 because all these false narratives here drive me nuts. True StDv: 3.380230415414 True AVG: 22.771875 Therefore, our Bills were .5 points PER game from being statistically in the middle for points given up in 2016 and about a FG per game from being part of the top third. Everything you just said is wrong. Want to know why? Week 4, New England. Our Defensive totals are HEAVILY skewed due to a fluke game with No Brady...No Jimmy...and a hurt rookie 3rd string QB who almost had to sit out and let Edelman play QB. Plus, Gronk didn't really play other than a few decoy snaps. We shut them out...but that was not because our D is capable of shutting out Brady, it was a fluke circumstance. When Brady was back a few weeks later they dropped 41 on us. So lets look at the other 15 games... We were 26th in the NFL in Points allowed...not 16th. We gave up an average of OVER 25 points per game, which is pathetic. Then if you factor in what WOULD have happened had Brady played week 4, lets say the Pats just score 30 (literally zero percent chance we hold them under 30 with Brady playing week 4), then we drop to 28th in the NFL on the season in points allowed. So what do you think is more important indicator of the quality of defense...using our year end finish with a fluke week 4 which had EXTREME circumstances that gave our D a fraudulent boost to our year end totals, or looking at the other 15 games, which was 94% of our season where our Defense was one of the worst performing units in the entire NFL? So you guys need to STOP with this we are 16th in the NFL non sense. We were not remotely close to be a top 16 defense, and the reality was we were one of the bottom 4 to 6 defenses in the NFL. On the other side of that coin, in the 15 games TT started, we were the 5th highest scoring team in the NFL at over 26 points per game, and 3rd in touchdowns scored behind only Atlanta and the Saints. When you average over 26 points per game, you should win a lot of games. When you give up over 25 points per game in 94% of your season games, you should lose a lot of games. Guess what, we did both, hence hovering around .500 all year until we sat TT week 17 and got crushed behind the atrocious play of EJ and Cardale. Edited April 7, 2017 by Alphadawg7
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Everything you just said is wrong. Want to know why? Week 4, New England. Our Defensive totals are HEAVILY skewed due to a fluke game with No Brady...No Jimmy...and a hurt rookie 3rd string QB who almost had to sit out and let Edelman play QB. Plus, Gronk didn't really play other than a few decoy snaps. We shut them out...but that was not because our D is capable of shutting out Brady, it was a fluke circumstance. When Brady was back a few weeks later they dropped 41 on us. So lets look at the other 15 games... We were 26th in the NFL in Points allowed...not 16th. We gave up an average of OVER 25 points per game, which is pathetic. Then if you factor in what WOULD have happened had Brady played week 4, lets say the Pats just score 30 (literally zero percent chance we hold them under 30 with Brady playing week 4), then we drop to 28th in the NFL on the season in points allowed. So what do you think is more important indicator of the quality of defense...using our year end finish with a fluke week 4 which had EXTREME circumstances that gave our D a fraudulent boost to our year end totals, or looking at the other 15 games, which was 94% of our season where our Defense was one of the worst performing units in the entire NFL? So you guys need to STOP with this we are 16th in the NFL non sense. We were not remotely close to be a top 16 defense, and the reality was we were one of the bottom 4 to 6 defenses in the NFL. On the other side of that coin, in the 15 games TT started, we were the 5th highest scoring team in the NFL at over 26 points per game, and 3rd in touchdowns scored behind only Atlanta and the Saints. When you average over 26 points per game, you should win a lot of games. When you give up over 25 points per game in 94% of your season games, you should lose a lot of games. Guess what, we did both, hence hovering around .500 all year until we sat TT week 17 and got crushed behind the atrocious play of EJ and Cardale. Instead of removing certain events I like to go by Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings, which put the 2016 Bills Defense at 26th in the NFL and the 2016 Bills Offense at 10th in the NFL. In case you're wondering, here's some past rankings too: 2015: O-9th, D-24th 2014: O-26th, D-2nd 2013: O-25th, D-4th 2012: O-20th, D-27th
Alphadawg7 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Instead of removing certain events I like to go by Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings, which put the 2016 Bills Defense at 26th in the NFL and the 2016 Bills Offense at 10th in the NFL. In case you're wondering, here's some past rankings too: 2015: O-9th, D-24th 2014: O-26th, D-2nd 2013: O-25th, D-4th 2012: O-20th, D-27th Yeah, I am not big on removing events unless they are extreme. In this case, it was VERY extreme where we got a shutout in one game due to extreme circumstances but gave up over 25 points per game in the other 15 which was 94% of our total games played. It does the team no good to shut out a broken team one week if it then gives up 25 points per game or more the rest of the season. And the week 17 removal from the offensive side is also clearly extreme too for us since we started a scrub QB and a raw QB finished the game, so wasn't really our offense out there. Other than that, yeah I totally agree with you on Football Outsiders DVOA rankings, its a pretty good metric.
row_33 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 You guys know statistics is the study of how you can make numbers support you hypothesis, right? All stats are loaded. No one ever omits what they should or includes what they should. I'm glad we kept Tyrod. No other option out there, but I look forward to drafting one too. stats are useful when they show glaring deficiencies that you can improve upon. sadly that is the use of them about 1% of the time
HappyDays Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Yeah, I am not big on removing events unless they are extreme. In this case, it was VERY extreme where we got a shutout in one game due to extreme circumstances but gave up over 25 points per game in the other 15 which was 94% of our total games played. It does the team no good to shut out a broken team one week if it then gives up 25 points per game or more the rest of the season. And the week 17 removal from the offensive side is also clearly extreme too for us since we started a scrub QB and a raw QB finished the game, so wasn't really our offense out there. Other than that, yeah I totally agree with you on Football Outsiders DVOA rankings, its a pretty good metric. To be fair most teams only have to play the Pats once, or zero times, so adding in a hypothetical 2nd game against Brady isn't really correcting for anything. I think the DVOA ranking makes the point on its own in any case.
YoloinOhio Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Will he go on the Bachelor now like his brother?
FireChan Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Kinda bad? Compared to the PPG rankings 27 would be good for bottom 4, and 30 would be good for dead last. So in half of our games our D was a bottom 4 D? Or to frame it with your context, We have a bottom 4 scoring D when we play teams with winning records? Yikes. Wait what? That's a strange analysis. Take out all of our defenses' easy games, then compare them to the rest of the league? The offense and defense both had their best games on the whole against crap teams.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Wait what? That's a strange analysis. Take out all of our defenses' easy games, then compare them to the rest of the league? The offense and defense both had their best games on the whole against crap teams. I find it amusing that this particular analysis is the one you find strange, but not garbage time, or 'when it counts' time, or in the 4th quarter down by 1, etc. Look, all I'm saying is the Defense allowed 27 or more points in half of the games they played and that is not good. And, as mentioned 23.6 PPG was the average for the year in the NFL and our defense failed to meet that mark 8 times. Comparatively, the average NFL offense scored 22.9 PPG. Our offense failed to meet that mark 5 times.
FireChan Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 (edited) I find it amusing that this particular analysis is the one you find strange, but not garbage time, or 'when it counts' time, or in the 4th quarter down by 1, etc. Look, all I'm saying is the Defense allowed 27 or more points in half of the games they played and that is not good. And, as mentioned 23.6 PPG was the average for the year in the NFL and our defense failed to meet that mark 8 times. Comparatively, the average NFL offense scored 22.9 PPG. Our offense failed to meet that mark 5 times. That's cursory at best. Arizona, a good defense, ranked 14th in points allowed, 2nd in yards, failed to meet that 23.6 PPG mark 7 times. Philly, 12th in points, 13th in yards, failed to meet the 23.6 PPG mark 9 times. That's the thing about averages. Allowing 10 points and then allowing 30 means you have a better average than allowing 21 points twice. It's why eliminating the good games, or only comparing the bad games makes no sense. Edited April 7, 2017 by FireChan
Figster Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Packers should dump his azz Where the heck is ice bowl when you need him, this is all his fault
thebandit27 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Where the heck is ice bowl when you need him, this is all his fault Ice Bowl is a female just FYI
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 That's cursory at best. Arizona, a good defense, ranked 14th in points allowed, 2nd in yards, failed to meet that 23.6 PPG mark 7 times. Philly, 12th in points, 13th in yards, failed to meet the 23.6 PPG mark 9 times. That's the thing about averages. Allowing 10 points and then allowing 30 means you have a better average than allowing 21 points twice. It's why eliminating the good games, or only comparing the bad games makes no sense. So, based on my statements, I would consider both (Philly especially) inconsistent as well. Is that incorrect? AZ won 1 of those 7 games if I'm not mistaken. How many did Philly win?
FireChan Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 So, based on my statements, I would consider both (Philly especially) inconsistent as well. Is that incorrect? AZ won 1 of those 7 games if I'm not mistaken. How many did Philly win? But both defenses were better than ours. Almost all teams are inconsistent. Which is why setting the barometer at an arbitrary average is crazy. Better off doing a game by game analysis and letting the gross numbers fall where they may.
davspo Posted April 7, 2017 Posted April 7, 2017 Does this somehow make Tyrod better? I'm confused by the post.
Recommended Posts