DVOA: #25

[Mikie2times]

So much debate about how good we really are. It's indicative of every hot start we have had since the start of the playoff drought. Expectations rise and crash just as fast.

 

DVOA is disgustingly accurate KPI brought to you by Football Outsiders. It is to the NFL what KenPom is to College Basketball.

 

DVOA has us ranked 25th in the league with wins against, TEN 24th, NYG 26th, NYJ 30th, CIN 31st, and Miami 32nd. DVOA estimates us at 3-4. Which when you review each game and evaluate each teams DVOA against ours seems spot on. That's not to turn this into a negative thread. We will make the playoffs. I Babe Ruth'ed my shot on that one during the off-season. 

 

While I do believe we are accurately pegged on DVOA I also believe the way this team plays is designed to win swing games. Our defense is no bend and snap, ranking 2nd in the league in most third down attempts by offenses, 12th in 3rd down %, 3rd in yards per play Allowed, 5th in first downs per game, 5th in red zone attempts per game. Then dear gawd, 28th in RZ touchdown %. In sum, teams do not drive on us. We make that very difficult. If they do, they generally score touchdowns. Most of the league has below average QB play. So even getting in a position to impact our biggest weakness is not common. 

 

On the offensive side I will site one statistic. We rank first in the league in RZ TD scoring % and I put a lot of that on the very tangible impact of Josh Allen in the RZ. His ability to run, extend plays, and make very challenging throws (while seemingly improving his decision making) is all very abnormal in a condensed part of the field. But again, the way he plays, I see him being a Red Zone match up nightmare. He is also one of the few non franchise (current) QB's that seems to be a closer on the final drive.  

 

I think we will see the occasional dud on defense as better teams get deeper into the RZ. Just as we will see our offense struggle to ever reach the RZ and take advantage of it's best strength. In a league built with a lot of truly porous defenses and low quality QB play we will beat most the teams within 5-10 rankings of our DVOA that fit that description . End result is a Wild Card team and a chance at potentially winning a road playoff game. Prior to the year that would have been considered a smashing success. Even if we beat Philadelphia it was still far and away the most probable outcome as far as a road wild card team. Enjoy the ride guys. It's usually never as good or bad as it seems.        

Edited October 31, 2019 by KzooMike

[Jay_Fixit]

DVOA

 

 

 

Lol

[fansince88]

We won 5 games and lost 2. 

[Seven-N-Nine]

30 minutes ago, fansince88 said:

We won 5 games and lost 2. 

 

Yeah that's it, bury your head in the sand, typical...

[cwater10]

War Is Peace

Freedom Is Slavery

Ignorance Is Strength

5-2 Is 3-4

1984 is 2-12

Then Came Bruce

2019 Is NOT 1984

Football Outsiders are Not Football

[JoPar_v2]

I mean, why is DVOA “disgustingly accurate?” Apparently it’s not if it predicts the bills at 3-4 when, in real life, they’re 5-2. I am not anti-analyics. Far from it. But these numbers need to, at some point, be predictive and they dont seem to be. Call it an outlier maybe, but there’s only so many outliers until the model starts breaking down

Edited October 31, 2019 by JoPar_v2

[Giuseppe Tognarelli]

If we had the Browns' schedule, we would probably be 2-5... The same record that has everyone calling them a tire fire.

 

As much as I hate to admit it... It really is the schedule. ?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

So many people claiming to be fans desperate to prove this team, that's 5-2, is bad.

 

Fans.

 

Right.

 

[cwater10]

What was the DVOA of the 1990 Buffalo Bills vs that of the NY Giants?  How about the 1991 Bills vs Redskins?  How many rings do we really have?

[Seven-N-Nine]

On 10/31/2019 at 6:47 AM, Joe in Winslow said:

So many people claiming to be fans desperate to prove this team, that's 5-2, is bad.

 

Fans.

 

Right.

 

 

Data shows they are not a good team, just like data showed in the late 80's there might be exoplanets.  Those scientists were derided for their takes and some of them even kept quiet in fear of losing their careers ultimately missing out on a Nobel prize.  The data has been proven out year after year the Bills are not a good team, yet year after year the fight is the same.  It's math & science vs. religion season after season it seems.

Edited November 1, 2019 by Seven-N-Nine

[Green Lightning]

17 minutes ago, Seven-N-Nine said:

 

Data shows they are not a good team, just like data showed in the late 80's there might be exoplanets.  Those scientists were derided for their takes and some of them even kept quiet in fear of losing their careers ultimately missing out on a Nobel prize.  The data has been proven out year after year the Bills are not a good team, yet year after year the fight is the same.  It's match & science vs. religion season after season it seems.

Data shows that data can show anything you want. The fancy stat boys treat it like a religion. We're 5-2, deal with it.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

21 minutes ago, Seven-N-Nine said:

 

Data shows they are not a good team, just like data showed in the late 80's there might be exoplanets.  Those scientists were derided for their takes and some of them even kept quiet in fear of losing their careers ultimately missing out on a Nobel prize.  The data has been proven out year after year the Bills are not a good team, yet year after year the fight is the same.  It's match & science vs. religion season after season it seems.

 

What a buffoon.

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

the day DVOA actually indicates a Win let me know.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BillnutinHouston]

8 hours ago, KzooMike said:

DVOA estimates us at 3-4. Which when you review each game and evaluate each teams DVOA against ours seems spot on. 

 

No its doesn't.

 

DVOA says 3-4, and we're actually 5-2.  I'd think an analytics worshiper would understand that the model isn't accurate at all.

[plenzmd1]

14 minutes ago, SlimShady'sGhost said:

the day DVOA actually indicates a Win let me know.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

it does not GUARANTEE wins, but it is a good projection of how teams are performing. I use his stats a ton in playing my moneylines, and i must say i am having a great year so far. 

2 hours ago, JoPar_v2 said:

I mean, why is DVOA “disgustingly accurate?” Apparently it’s not if it predicts the bills at 3-4 when, in real life, they’re 5-2. I am not anti-analyics. Far from it. But these numbers need to, at some point, be predictive and they dont seem to be. Call it an outlier maybe, but there’s only so many outliers until the model starts breaking down

i would not say they are disgustingly accurate, but they do help to form a picture. Over time these things start to play out to form. Think of it as flipping a coin..stats say it should come out 50/50...but sometimes it can go 8 straight one way...but over 100 flips will most likely come back to expected results

[GimmeSomeProcess]

DVOA is a system created by a nerd in Schotz, nothing I dislike more in football are these judge mental rankings. PFF, FO and etc.. do what they want to fit their narrative 

[cwater10]

59 minutes ago, Seven-N-Nine said:

 

Data shows they are not a good team, just like data showed in the lat 80's there might be exoplanets.  Those scientists were derided for their takes and some of them even kept quiet in fear of losing their careers.  The data has been proven out year after year the Bills are not a good team, yet year after year the fight is the same.  It's match & science vs. religion season by season it seems.

Are you effing serious right now?  Did you just equate data collection and application methods used by astronomers and physicists to the recreational junk science known as Football Outsiders?  Queue perspective any time you feel inspired for your next revelation.  Data does not show anything.  Data DOES inform our interpretation!  You have yours.  I find it depressing and self flagellating as a fan.

[Jrb1979]

Its funny. Last year when DVOA had the Bills defense ranked as one of the best, everyone agreed. This year they rank near the bottom and now most think data like this means little. 

 

Those of you upset or disagreeing with the ranking probably come from a time when this stuff didn't exist. So all that mattered was the end score and if they won.  Doesn't matter how they got there or if how bad they looked. 

[Dablitzkrieg]

1 hour ago, Seven-N-Nine said:

 

Data shows they are not a good team, just like data showed in the late 80's there might be exoplanets.  Those scientists were derided for their takes and some of them even kept quiet in fear of losing their careers ultimately missing out on a Nobel prize.  The data has been proven out year after year the Bills are not a good team, yet year after year the fight is the same.  It's match & science vs. religion season after season it seems.

Shut up with your data BS.  The team is 5-2!  Drop your agenda

[dave mcbride]

 

14 minutes ago, Jrb1979 said:

Its funny. Last year when DVOA had the Bills defense ranked as one of the best, everyone agreed. This year they rank near the bottom and now most think data like this means little. 

 

Those of you upset or disagreeing with the ranking probably come from a time when this stuff didn't exist. So all that mattered was the end score and if they won.  Doesn't matter how they got there or if how bad they looked. 

Who is “most”? These numbers have been raised in other threads to relatively little criticism. I also think you’re looking at it incorrectly. Like fielding independent pitching (FIP), which isn’t an accurate indicator of past ERA but a great one for future ERA, DVOA offers you an idea of where the team is headed next. The issue is that the Bills schedule is SO easy — like, historically easy, as in the next 4 games are against bottom tier DVOA teams — that the win loss record won’t show you how mediocre the team really by week 11. If they get blown out by Dallas, Baltimore, and NE while getting to 11-5/10-6,  you’ll have a sense of who they really are.

Edited October 31, 2019 by dave mcbride