Statapalooza: Our Powers Combined

by John Morgan on Jan 8, 2008 2:44 PM PST in Game Preview

Here's a brief one before I take some much needed down time. Okay, so in any given contest an inferior team may beat a superior team, because of luck and because of a few important mismatches. Since the Hawks are the inferior team (maybe), let's see if any one matchup pokes its head out and yells "boo".

Green Bay DVOA vs "Other" Receivers: 27.4% (31)

Football Outsiders' receiver by receiver DVOA can be a little dicey. For one, many if not most teams don't have a clear #2 receiver, and therefore it's pretty damn hard to know who their 3+ or "Other" receivers are. Case in point, DJ Hackett had the Wild Card Round's best DPAR, probably because he was designated by the Outsiders as Seattle's #2 receiver. The Skins have been dominant against #2 receivers all year (-45.7% (2)), but is Hackett really the Hawks #2 receiver? I mean, he's probably their second best receiver, sure, but his biggest play, the 35 yard touchdown reception, was against a slot corner, and barely that. Pierson Prioleau is to coverage as Charles Taylor is to not being a war criminal. But, if you take their data, the data's solid mind you, and analyze it, it's tremendously valuable. The Packers safety is an undrafted rookie, their 3rd, 4th and 5th string corners are all undrafted players with 62 combined career tackles. That's not a ton of talent, and not a ton of inexperience. Plus, Atari Bigby owns one of the worst reputations in coverage in all the NFL.

Here's why this is so cool, the Hawks receivers, with the possible exception of Deion Branch, are all "other" receivers. That is, they all play regularly out of the slot. Seattle must go into Green Bay, spread out their defense, and prey on their exceptionally weak second string secondary, and, you know what, this isn't wishcasting, they will. Last week, 4 of Seattle's first 5 plays featured 4 receiver sets, and 8 of Seattle's first 11 plays featured 3 or 4 receiver sets. Holmgren is buying into this new spread style offense, and with Branch back, Hackett healthy and Burleson coming around, the Walrus should be all the more emboldened to spread 'em, shred 'em and pull the upset.

0 recs | Comment 24 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

so we have the blue man group

actually on the field this week?

by Matthew on Jan 8, 2008 2:58 PM PST 0 recs

I wouldn't count on it

Branch and Hackett each still have time to injure themselves. Remarkable their struggles when compared to the health of Bobby Engram.

One question I have: what the hell happened to Marcus Pollard? Is it that he sucks getting open or that our scheme has just gone away from TE? We just never throw him the ball more than 10 yards downfield.

by jeager on Jan 8, 2008 4:25 PM PST 0 recs

Your advice is that the Hawks pray?

Shouldn't a good raptor prey on those weak Packers? Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I'm not sure what rookie safety you mean. Collins, who I really like, is third year I think. Fast and a sure tackler. Atari Bigby who is the one who draws the most criticism is second year after being an NFL Europa guy. He's definitely had some lowlights, but a big hitter and always seems to be around the ball. The rookie who was third round maybe - Aaron Rouse - doesn't start. I LOVE him. He's tall, fast and has great ball skills. There is constant competition for every roster spot. Every play by every player is evaluated and graded. Although McCarthy is known as a "player's coach," he can bend an ear when players screw up. I've got to believe that Bigby is playing pretty well in coverage, given that Rouse has done great in limited time. For example, Ryan Grant hit the bench after he nearly lost the first Vikings game with a fumble of a hand-off. Atari Bigby came through with an interception on a tipped ball right after that to secure the win.

I've got to hit the rack, but I would say that while the Packers aren't at the very top in most pass defense statistics, the one where they come in second in the league is opponents completion percentage. If they were chumps in coverage, they couldn't achieve that. Also, some of the yardage has come in garbage time and a lot of it is because games become shoot-outs. The Pack has whooped some people.

As a side note, I would add that Woodson will line up in the slot sometimes.

by olpete on Jan 8, 2008 10:23 PM PST 0 recs

Doesn't

DVOA correct for "garbage time" yards?

by Matthew on Jan 9, 2008 5:54 AM PST up 0 recs

Hey, I don't mind.

I rarely have time to proofread these, but as long as everyone can tell me my goof-ups, I can fix `em.

Thought Collins was likely to miss with a knee injury. I've read at a few places that a lot of Bigby's interceptions are just lucky bounces. I put almost no stock into interceptions as a barometer of a player's cover skills. Completion percentage can be influenced by all sorts of things, like playing in the same conference as Rex Grossman, Tarvaris Jackson and any Mike Martz coached team facing a good pass rush. I've also heard the Woodson has looked a lot poorer in the last few weeks because he's playing injured.

Garbage time stats are factored into DVOA, so that's not an influence.

FWIW, I think McCarthy is a great coach, and when Favre retires, that Rogers will step in and be a hit the ground running, top quarterback. The Packers look rebuilt and ready to enter a long run of contention.

by John Morgan on Jan 9, 2008 6:24 AM PST up 0 recs

Well...

Collins is a definite go and a bunch of Bigby's INTs were tipped balls. One criticism of Collins that is hard to refute is that he has dropped balls that should have been INTs.

Rouse the backup has started a couple games and in both he has covered exceptionally well and broke perfectly on players that looked open and intercepted balls. I suppose INTs as a crude statistic don't tell much. You could certainly say the same for QBs. Personally, I wouldn't put no stock in it.

Woodson hasn't played the last few weeks. It would be interesting to have stats with and without.

A Mike Martz team facing several good pass rushs won a superbowl not long ago.

As to DVOA... its part of the baseballification of football. Many of the classic stats are flawed, but like baseball, its replacements are always works in progress and have their own set of weaknesses. As an example, the Brewers have a pitcher Chris Capuano, an all star the season before last and a fan favorite. Since that all star game he has almost no victories. But criticize him and the stat heads wail about WHIP and 1-2-3 innings et cetera. If you watched him you could just as well say, 'gee a straight as string mid-80s fastball and a breaking ball that isn't a strike.' If the batters lay off the breaking ball, he gets pounded. Is he a good pitcher? I think he blows, but his fans have plenty of stat-heads. My argument about his lack of pitches and the weakness of the ones he has always lose to the assault of abbreviations and acronyms.

by olpete on Jan 9, 2008 8:50 AM PST up 0 recs

a stat-head that uses WHIP

isn't a stat-head, he or she is a moron

by Matthew on Jan 9, 2008 9:16 AM PST up 0 recs

How about DVOA?

Seems deficient and flawed other than generating revenue.

by olpete on Jan 10, 2008 10:02 AM PST up 0 recs

you'd have to state your reasons why you think so

by Matthew on Jan 10, 2008 10:26 AM PST up 0 recs

Not much doubt

that it is generating revenue. Those outsiders guys are all over the place. They ain't workin' for free.

Given that you haven't responded to any points yet, I'll pass on wasting time.

I guess low DVOA Jones has no chance. How ironic that the low rating can't even be analyzed.

by olpete on Jan 10, 2008 11:26 AM PST up 0 recs

Man, where's Graham when I need him?

by Matthew on Jan 10, 2008 6:43 PM PST up 0 recs

Who is Graham

and why do you need him?

by olpete on Jan 10, 2008 8:14 PM PST up 0 recs

Individual DVOA is still a work in progress

But Team DVOA does a good job of showing who the top teams really are.

Is DVOA the final solution? No, but its better than anything else out there.

V. 1.0, mutherf***er, know what I'm sayin'?

by Scruffy Lefty on Jan 10, 2008 9:04 PM PST up 0 recs

Just a quick note

DVOA rank of teams still in the playoffs

1 NE
2 IND
3 DAL
4 JAC
5 GB
6 SD
9 SEA
16 NYG

V. 1.0, mutherf***er, know what I'm sayin'?

by Scruffy Lefty on Jan 10, 2008 9:06 PM PST up 0 recs

Team DVOA

is still a work in progress. You would have to have some premises to support a conclusion that it is the best stat out there as well.

I'm still wondering if it accounts for garbage time stats.

by olpete on Jan 11, 2008 9:03 AM PST up 0 recs

What other combine stat then is better?

Than Team DVOA?

As for garbage time. I think it takes into account that it is garbage time but I'm not sure on this.

V. 1.0, mutherf***er, know what I'm sayin'?

by Scruffy Lefty on Jan 11, 2008 9:45 AM PST up 0 recs

Tried to verify

whether garbage time stats were adjusted for and failed. Are you sure?

by olpete on Jan 10, 2008 11:30 AM PST up 0 recs

Second string secondary

So, given my limited football knowledge, my question is this: how often will we see these guys on the field? 30% of plays? 10? In other words, how much opportunity is really presented by the backups being weak?

by The Alaskan on Jan 9, 2008 9:52 AM PST 0 recs

Quite a bit.

And in important situations like 3rd down. Any time the Hawks go 3 or 4 wide receiver, the Packers likely will be in a nickel defense. I'd say at least a third of all plays. If they don't go into a nickel, they have all sorts of other problems to contend with. Really, as the Pats, Cowboys and Bengals w/ Chris Henry have proven, it's damn tough to defend against deep receiving corps. Eventually, you just run out of DBs who are competent in coverage.

by John Morgan on Jan 9, 2008 9:58 AM PST up 0 recs

Excellent.

The success here, however, relies on the success of the Hawk O-Line, right? How do you feel about that?

by The Alaskan on Jan 9, 2008 10:05 AM PST up 0 recs

Seems like a wash...

We're 19th in adjusted sack rate over at Football Outsiders. Not great. Still, Green Bay's defensive line is 22nd in sacking the quarterback at FO. It's actually a fascinating matchup on both sides, as our 7th ranked adjusted defensive line takes on their 1st ranked adjusted offensive line. I think the first line means that Green Bay will need to blitz in order to get to Hasselbeck, and in general that's how teams (St Louis, Washington, etc) have gotten pressure. We're pretty good at blocking a front four.

"Hey, guess what? Nobody cares who would win in a crazy fantasy fist-fight between Anne Frank and Lizzie Borden." The Monarch

by crushedoptimist on Jan 9, 2008 10:19 AM PST up 0 recs