SI Ranks Offensive Backfields

[GMScud]

Really all I'm saying is there are a few statistical metrics on both sides of the ball that should get just as much consideration as the "total" (just yardage) stat that gets so much praise.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Really all I'm saying is there are a few statistical metrics on both sides of the ball that should get just as much consideration as the "total" (just yardage) stat that gets so much praise.

#1. Dude, you posted at 2am. I hope you went to bed instead of talking about the same topic all night. LOL.

#2. I simply felt they marked us lower then teams with lesser talent or lower then teams that will be questionable this yr due to change of coaching, and loss of valuable players.

#3. Apparently the writer was not talking about "the backfield" alone cause usually that's refered to RB's and FB's and teams with HB's. I usually don't include the QB in that discussion. If the writer was going to talk about QB's also then he might as well talked about the whole offense and especially the O-line giving the said QB time to throw the ball if they were going to use passing statistics. Simply put a better topic heading would have been "SI Ranks Offenses and their Backfields." I guess I was just being picky about how they ranked the teams, where the Skins were placed and the topic heading.

#4. Whatever statistical data they used to get their conclusion sucks. I presume they are using last yrs stats. Accounting for all the injuries each team had, not counting any additions teams made and then figuring that's how they will be again this yr. I believe adding AH and Orakpo will considerably make our defense better. Whether 4th ranked or not. I think the Skins keeping most of the offensive players, beefing up the O-line, Hopefully a change of pace back, and two WR's and a TE with something to prove makes for a huge change. Truthfully it all amounts to a hill of beans untill the team goes out and proves they can be good. I felt they did that in the first 8 games even though they didn't score 40 points a game. What mattered was they scored more then their opponant. A win was a win. Yes the last 8 games can't be discounted. I just thin a lot played into why we were 2-6 in the last 8 games especially against teams like San Fran who had a mediocre yr like us. We had a new offense, we had a new HC, we had injuries, perhaps became predictable due to the injuries, had a terrible 2 min drill, plus probably a half a dozen other issues. People can blast JC but the O-line sucked in the last 8 games. People say teams figured out what Zorn was doing, maybe, or possibly teams figured out where the O-line kept breaking down and attacked it. Perhaps they realized JC was only partially confortable in his new offensive scheme and decided to blitz to make him get rid of the ball faster. Hopefully Zorn has figured out the problem and has fixed it. If not I'm betting he's gone also. I don't want him gone for consistancy sake but I bet he's gone.

Originally Posted by GMScud

I don't totally disagree with your assessment. But you say the offense's job is to score TD's. Ok. I won't argue against idea that their #1 job is to score, just like it's the D's primary job is to prevent scoring. Well, if said offense has a dominant defense on the other side of the ball, they will not only get more total possessions to perform their job (due to 3 and outs, turnovers, sacks), they will more often than not have a shorter than average field with which to do so.

Yeah I knew you would say that. I agree you can very easily take why I like the offensive ppg stat and flip it and ask why I dont like the defensive one.

I just dont like how defenses can play great but be in bad field position all game and give up 3 or 4 FGs that they wouldnt have given up if the offense helped them out a little. The reason I like the offensive ppg stat is that even if they are given short fields its no lock they will score TDs off of it. If the offense still doesnt make plays to score their ppg isnt as messed up. They would still have to make plays to score a TD.

Really it just comes down to that I dont mind some cheap FGs messing with the offensive ppg stat because if they cant score TDs it doesnt matter they still suck. I do mind cheap FGs messing with the defensive ppg stat though because a defense can play lights out all game can still give up 3 pts a pop if they start inside their own territory.

Originally Posted by GMScud

Really all I'm saying is there are a few statistical metrics on both sides of the ball that should get just as much consideration as the "total" (just yardage) stat that gets so much praise.

I went ahead and made a new defensive ranking that adds in sacks and turnovers.

What I did was I took the defensive ypg rankings for 2008 for each team and put them on one side. Then I took the sack rankings and turnover rankings for 2008 and averaged them out. This gave me each teams big play ranking for 2008.

Heres the Big Play Rankings List for 2008.....

ten 4
pit 5.5
bal 6
nyj 6
phi 6
mia 6.5
ari 9.5
min 9.5
dal 10.5
car 12
chi 12
tb 12.5
nyg 13
ind 14.5
stl 14.5
oak 15
cle 16.5
ne 17
sea 18
gb 18.5
atl 19.5
sd 19.5
kc 20.5
det 21
no 21
sf 22
cin 23.5
hou 23.5
buf 24
jac 25.5
was 28
den 29

The Skins ranked next to last in Big Plays last year. The good news is with Haynesworth in DC now maybe he can help us like he did Tennessee in this department.

When I take these numbers and average them out with the defensive ypg stat ranking for 2008 heres what I came up with.....

New Adjusted Defensive Rankings for 2008

1. pit 3.25
2. bal 4
3. phi 4.5
4. ten 5.5
5. min 7.75
6. nyg 9
7. dal 9.25
8. mia 10.75
8. tb 10.75
10. nyj 11
11. ind 12.75
12. ne 13.5
13. ari 14.25
14. car 15
15. was 16
16. chi 16.5
17. sf 17.5
18. cin 17.75
19. buf 19
20. gb 19.25
21. oak 21
22. cle 21.25
22. jac 21.25
22. stl 21.25
25. atl 21.75
26. no 22
27. sd 22.25
28. hou 22.75
29. sea 24
30. kc 25.75
31. det 26.5
32. den 29

So you are right that the Redskins defense if you factor in the big plays on defense last year (sacks/turnovers) wasnt as good as other stats that dont factor in big plays suggest. While I dont think the Skins defense was 15th last year it is a pretty interesting stat if you like to factor in sacks and turnovers.

Hopefully with the additions we have made on defense we will have alot more sacks and turnovers in 2009.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

I went ahead and made a new defensive ranking that adds in sacks and turnovers.

What I did was I took the defensive ypg rankings for 2008 for each team and put them on one side. Then I took the sack rankings and turnover rankings for 2008 and averaged them out. This gave me each teams big play ranking for 2008.

Heres the Big Play Rankings List for 2008.....

ten 4
pit 5.5
bal 6
nyj 6
phi 6
mia 6.5
ari 9.5
min 9.5
dal 10.5
car 12
chi 12
tb 12.5
nyg 13
ind 14.5
stl 14.5
oak 15
cle 16.5
ne 17
sea 18
gb 18.5
atl 19.5
sd 19.5
kc 20.5
det 21
no 21
sf 22
cin 23.5
hou 23.5
buf 24
jac 25.5
was 28
den 29

The Skins ranked next to last in Big Plays last year. The good news is with Haynesworth in DC now maybe he can help us like he did Tennessee in this department.

When I take these numbers and average them out with the defensive ypg stat ranking for 2008 heres what I came up with.....

New Adjusted Defensive Rankings for 2008

1. pit 3.25
2. bal 4
3. phi 4.5
4. ten 5.5
5. min 7.75
6. nyg 9
7. dal 9.25
8. mia 10.75
8. tb 10.75
10. nyj 11
11. ind 12.75
12. ne 13.5
13. ari 14.25
14. car 15
15. was 16
16. chi 16.5
17. sf 17.5
18. cin 17.75
19. buf 19
20. gb 19.25
21. oak 21
22. cle 21.25
22. jac 21.25
22. stl 21.25
25. atl 21.75
26. no 22
27. sd 22.25
28. hou 22.75
29. sea 24
30. kc 25.75
31. det 26.5
32. den 29

So you are right that the Redskins defense if you factor in the big plays on defense last year (sacks/turnovers) wasnt as good as other stats that dont factor in big plays suggest. While I dont think the Skins defense was 15th last year it is a pretty interesting stat if you like to factor in sacks and turnovers.

Hopefully with the additions we have made on defense we will have alot more sacks and turnovers in 2009.

You may have just made GTripp's day.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

I went ahead and made a new defensive ranking that adds in sacks and turnovers.

What I did was I took the defensive ypg rankings for 2008 for each team and put them on one side. Then I took the sack rankings and turnover rankings for 2008 and averaged them out. This gave me each teams big play ranking for 2008.

Heres the Big Play Rankings List for 2008.....

ten 4
pit 5.5
bal 6
nyj 6
phi 6
mia 6.5
ari 9.5
min 9.5
dal 10.5
car 12
chi 12
tb 12.5
nyg 13
ind 14.5
stl 14.5
oak 15
cle 16.5
ne 17
sea 18
gb 18.5
atl 19.5
sd 19.5
kc 20.5
det 21
no 21
sf 22
cin 23.5
hou 23.5
buf 24
jac 25.5
was 28
den 29

The Skins ranked next to last in Big Plays last year. The good news is with Haynesworth in DC now maybe he can help us like he did Tennessee in this department.

When I take these numbers and average them out with the defensive ypg stat ranking for 2008 heres what I came up with.....

New Adjusted Defensive Rankings for 2008

1. pit 3.25
2. bal 4
3. phi 4.5
4. ten 5.5
5. min 7.75
6. nyg 9
7. dal 9.25
8. mia 10.75
8. tb 10.75
10. nyj 11
11. ind 12.75
12. ne 13.5
13. ari 14.25
14. car 15
15. was 16
16. chi 16.5
17. sf 17.5
18. cin 17.75
19. buf 19
20. gb 19.25
21. oak 21
22. cle 21.25
22. jac 21.25
22. stl 21.25
25. atl 21.75
26. no 22
27. sd 22.25
28. hou 22.75
29. sea 24
30. kc 25.75
31. det 26.5
32. den 29

So you are right that the Redskins defense if you factor in the big plays on defense last year (sacks/turnovers) wasnt as good as other stats that dont factor in big plays suggest. While I dont think the Skins defense was 15th last year it is a pretty interesting stat if you like to factor in sacks and turnovers.

Hopefully with the additions we have made on defense we will have alot more sacks and turnovers in 2009.

Nice insight, BO. I think last year overall we fell somewhere in between 4th and 15th, probably around the 8-10 range. Good post.

[Monksdown]

this thread is an example of why i hate mile long quotes. please stop quoting the statistics that probably have atleast a 30% margin of error in relation to next year's 'skins.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Monksdown

this thread is an example of why i hate mile long quotes. please stop quoting the statistics that probably have atleast a 30% margin of error in relation to next year's 'skins.

but why does the long quote matter for that part? you could always just scroll past it.

Originally Posted by Monksdown

please stop quoting the statistics that probably have atleast a 30% margin of error in relation to next year's 'skins.

If you are referring to the statistics I listed it has no relation to this years Skins. Those stats were talking about the 2008 Redskins and how good their defense was if you factor in sacks and turnovers.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Monksdown

this thread is an example of why i hate mile long quotes. please stop quoting the statistics that probably have atleast a 30% margin of error in relation to next year's 'skins.

So if not statistics then do you want people to give you opinions, hunches, and/or speculations?

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Monksdown

this thread is an example of why i hate mile long quotes. please stop quoting the statistics that probably have atleast a 30% margin of error in relation to next year's 'skins.

Sorry, didn't mean to give your scrolling finger such a tough workout. Care to add anything to the thread?

Originally Posted by redskins1974

To me, the fact the Defense didnt get alot of sacks and turnovers was annoying, but ultimately they didnt give up alot of yards or points - bottom line. Now turnovers would have been nice because Gods knows our struggling offense could have used some short drives, but the D still managed to be top 6 for both pts and yards allowed.

I agree with everything you said. At the end of the day the defense did its job compared to most teams in the NFL. I do think that with the moves the Skins have made the team has the potenial to jump from a defense that "does its job" into a defense that can be a true force.

Originally Posted by GMScud

Nice insight, BO. I think last year overall we fell somewhere in between 4th and 15th, probably around the 8-10 range. Good post.

Id agree. The 8-10 range is about right.

I cant wait til this season starts because I really believe the defense can be the best in the NFL with the moves we have made. Albert Haynesworth imo was the biggest reason for the Titans big play defense last year. With him in the middle letting guys like Andre Carter and Brian Orakpo get 1 on 1 looks is going to be huge. The pressure our front 7 can create will lead to more INTs from the DBs. I really believe this defense has the potenial to be as good as the Steelers defense was last year if certain things break the right way.