Jump to content

Billy Claude

Community Member
  • Posts

    396
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Billy Claude

  1. If you count a first for Diggs you also need to count a third for Kelvin Benjamin as a day 2 investment.
  2. Thanks for the clarification. Seems much more reasonable.
  3. A 33-23 record when trailing at the end of the 3rd is not likely since I would guess 85-90% of the time, the team winning after 3 quarters wins the game. I like data so I was curious what the actual record is. Here is the Bills' record under McDermott when trailing, tied, and leading after 3 quarters: TOTAL trailing 4 - 25 (0.139) tie 4 - 2 (0.667) leading 44 - 6 (0.880) Here is the breakdown by year: 2017 trailing 0 - 6 tie none leading 9 - 1 (L = CIN) 2018 trailing 1-9 (W = DET) tie 1 -0 ( W = JAC) leading 4-1 (L = NYJ) 2019 trailing 3-4 (W = NYJ, MIA, PIT) tie 1-1 (W = TEN, L=NYJ) leading 6 - 1 (L = NE) 2020 trailing 0-3 tie 1-0 (W = NE) leading 12 - 0 2021 trailing 0 - 3 tie 0 - 1 (L=JAC) leading 11-2 (L = PIT, TEN) 2022 trailing none tie 1 - 0 (W = BAL) leading 2 - 1 (L = MIA)
  4. Definitely a made up stat. The Bills are 52-33, not counting playoffs under McDermott. If they went 33-23 that means 60% of their wins came when trailing at the beginning of the 4th.
  5. They definitely use to be able to do it. I couldn't find the data for 2020 but In 2018 and 2019 Allen was 23 out of 24 QB sneaks which was the best in the NFL https://billswire.usatoday.com/2020/06/08/pro-football-focus-josh-allen-qb-sneak/ This was behind Russell Bodine and Ryan Groy as center in 2018 and Mitch Morse in 2019. One hopes that this season's O-line is better than the 2018 o-line. That season Vlad Ducasse was the Bills' highest rated interior lineman according to PFF. Also the refs/NFL is out to get us.
  6. How is this any different from this board after a lost?
  7. Encouraging losses are only for teams in rebuild mode (i.e., the previous lost against Miami in Allen's first year), but I agree that this lost is not discouraging, as long as any injuries are not serious and they bounce back next week. At least it puts to bed all that 17-0 nonsense.
  8. They seem to be scared of calling QB sneaks since last year's Titans game. Weird, since I think Allen was something like 29 out of 30 before that. I personally was hoping for three QB sneaks in a row, if necessary, at the end of the game.
  9. Looking at the Jaguar game, the Bills had a 1st and goal from the 3 that eventually became a field goal, a third and 3 that ended up as an interception and a third and 2 which led to -1 yard run and fumble by Allen. So not quite 1 yard to go but still pretty short yardage. Against the Steelers, they had a failed 3rd and 1 flea-flicker, a 3rd and 3 incompletion, a 3rd and 3 run for two yards which led to a failed 4th and 1. There were times last year that I felt more confident they would convert on a 3rd and 7 than a 3rd and 2 especially before they started running Allen at the end of the year.
  10. I think they mentioned on the broadcast that the Bills were 32nd in the league last year in 3rd and 4th and one. Plus, their short yardage troubles was one of the main reason they lost all those close games last year. It is definitely something that they should be working on.
  11. I do not wish to get into an argument about this again but it is simply not true. The Verros study for QB injuries from 2016-2020 shows 274 injuries out of 98294 dropbacks (not including spikes) or 0.28% injury rate (these are numbers from the study). For non-kneeldown designed runs, Verros gets 21 injuries out of 3264 plays, which is a 0.64% injury rate, so approximately twice the rate of designed passes. It is not clear where to include scrambles but if you include it in dropbacks, that makes it 309 injuries out of 101,558 plays which would correspond to a 0.304% injury rate, still less than half the rate for designed runs. So based on Verros study, on a per play basis, the probability of injury is twice as high for designed runs as for dropbacks. Obviously, if one gets sacked the injury rate is higher but than compared to a run but that is not the valid comparision. Verros does note that there were about twice as many season ending injuries in dropbacks but on designed runs but that is, again, because there are many more dropbacks and also running QBs tend to be younger and recover faster.
  12. Not sure I agree about the actor part -- the ads I have seen has been pretty cringy -- though it might be the script.
  13. Well I appreciate your contributions, no matter how you do it.
  14. Holy cow. I think this must have been asked before, but do you actually sleep? You do all this detailed analysis (which I greatly appreciate and learn a lot from) and I am assuming that you do the same level of analysis for Arsenal and the Premier League. You also seem to have a pretty high position in the UK government bureaucracy . When do you have time to do all this?
  15. Or more likely, Allen has been so obviously good it's been pretty much impossible to ignore unless you are an obvious troll like Skip Bayless or his apprentice, Nick Wright. (I do realize the original comment was mostly kidding.)
  16. Yes, I did read the study you presented and I am accepting the data they present as true. I simply disagree with some of the conclusions and I have explained why. Yes, a sacks and knockdowns definitely more dangerous than a designed run. However, no offensive coordinator designs a play to get their quarterback sacked or knockdown. To compare the injuries per sack to injuries per designed run is unreasonab;le. If I misunderstood the study please tell me how.
  17. How does the data not back up the claims? You said there were 90 injuries out of 5135 sacks -- since sacks are 6.3% of passing plays that corresponds to about 82,000 passing plays. You give a total of 90 (sacks) + 52 (knockdowns) + 23 (scrambles) = 165 injuries in that time span. So 165 out of the 82,000 passing plays resulted in a injury. This means 2 injuries out of every 1000 passing plays or 0.2%. You quoted injuries at 0.6% per running play so that says, per play, one is three times as likely to be injured on a designed run than a designed pass. It is very straightforward math.
  18. The only source I am using is your data so you have already provided the data to back up my claims and, yes, you provided both totals and per play. The only thing I added was that 6.3% of the drop backs last year ended in sacks to estimate the total number of dropbacks during the range of the data you provided. This can be looked up anywhere. Unless you want me to go through the math, there is nothing extra for me to provide.
  19. Link? I am just using the data you quoted on # of injuries per sack, knockdown, and designed run. I would be glad to listen to why my analysis is wrong. I am actually surprised that the difference was so large. However, I am sure that comparing injuries per sack to injuries per run is not the right comparison to make. Quarterback knockdowns were included. I am not sure what that means but I assume that means QB hits.
  20. The author of original study does not appear to have any background in statistics. Any conclusions based on 10% differences between groupings of 10 has zero statistical significance since changing one data point can completely change your conclusions. The best you can say from her data is that the QBs that runs the least (lowest 30 percentile) are less likely to get hurt while there is no obvious correlation between run rate and games missed for those in the upper 70 percentile. The comparison regarding injury rates per type of play are apples to hamburgers. You have to compare the average injury per drop back to average designed run play. In 2021 there were 2.3 sacks per team per game and 34.4 passes per team per game so about 6.3% of dropbacks end up with sack. If we assume this same ratio for her 10 years of data -- this would mean 165 injuries out 82000 dropbacks or 0.2% of dropbacks result in injuries.* So based on this data, a designed QB run is three times as likely to lead to a QB injury than a designed pass play. The reason more injuries happen in the pocket is simply because there are a lot more dropbacks than designed QB runs. On a per play basis, a QB is still much more likely to get hurt on a run play than a pass play. *I have left out injuries that occur when the QB is not sacked or knockdown (Allen hitting his hand on a helmet his rookie year) but I find it hard to believe that would change it to any more than 0.25% of dropbacks.
  21. Zach Wilson also faked going out of bounds during a big run against the Bucs last year. If QBs do junk like that, they definitely deserved to be hit.
  22. Highly doubtful 350 would give much different results than 300. As noted numerous times in this thread, teams throw a lot because they are behind. A really big passing game is not indicative of a team winning. It would be better to look at just first half stats which presumably would not be affected as much by the game score. I am not sure how one can extract those. The fallacy is to use the correlation between 100 yards rushing and winning to conclude that a lot of running yards lead to winning so a team should emphasize building a good running game. Actually it is winning that leads to a lot of running yards, i.e., the cause and effect is reversed.
  23. I thought Bill Walsh settled this argument in the 1980's. This is statistics so there are always exceptions. It's like using the 90 year old pack a day smoker to say that smoking isn't unhealthy. So pointing out exceptions is not a valid argument by itself -- you need to look at reasonably large numbers. Here is the rushing yards rankings for the 14 playoff teams last year. Some takeaways. 3 out of the top 4 rushing teams did not make the playoffs. The teams in the Super Bowl finished 23 and 25th in rushing. Half of the playoff teams ranked in the bottom half in rushing. A really good running game guarantees you about 8 wins (see Ryan, Rex). 1. PHI 5. TENN 6. BUFF (obviously a lot of that is Josh Allen) 8. NE 9. DAL 10. ARI 16. KC 18. GB 21. LAC 23. CIN 25. LAR 26. TB 28. LV 29. PITT For comparison, here are the passing rankings. Takeaways: The top 10 passing teams all made the playoffs. 12 out of the 14 playoff teams finished in the top half passing The five lowest ranked playoff passing teams did not win a single playoff game. You won't get far in the playoffs without a very good passing game unless you have both a top rushing game and a dominant defense (see 2019 49ers and Jimmy Garoppolo). 1. TB 2. DAL 3. LAC 4. KC 5. LAR 6. LV 7. CIN 8. GB 9. BUF 10. ARI 14. NE 15. PITT 24. TENN 25. PHI
  24. Not really surprised. He is tied for the 47th highest paid CB. Considering players on rookie contracts and that the newest contracts are larger, this is pretty much high end backup CB money.
  25. It is really not unreasonable for Allen to have a better year this year than in 2021. All he has to do is return to his 2020 level. His 2021 peak may be better but there is no doubt Allen was much much more consistent in 2020. Almost all his 2020 numbers were better, some significantly, even with the mid-season shoulder injury.
×
×
  • Create New...