BillsBackersChicago Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) So we scored 20 points off 6 turnovers against the Jets. I was getting very frustrated in the first quarter that we weren't scoring off the picks, but as I look at the final statistic, I am not entirely disappointed. It got me thinking, how many points SHOULD we be scoring off turnovers? I found this article from football outsiders where someone analyzed this and figured that all turnovers should equal roughly 4 points. http://www.footballo...-turnover-worth The way they came to four was by combining the effect of the turnover if you were on offense and the effect if you were on defense. This does not apply to what I wanted to know for the Jets game but they also noted that the number of points off turnover depend on where on the field the turnover occurs in a range from 2 to 6 points. Because I can't remember exactly where each turnover occured and our average drive start was around the 49 (IIRC), I am just splitting the difference and saying that we should have had roughly 4 points for each of the turnovers our defense created. So with 6 turnovers, we should have scored 24 points off turnovers. Now they mention that the number of points that a team scores off turnover also depends on the quality of the offense. Since we know our offense is not a high powered Broncos like offense, and may be a bit below average, I don't think that it is completely ridiculous that we only scored 4 points less than expected (one turnover's worthhttp://espn.go.com/n..._/stat/givetake). BTW - They talk about the 2003 bills as an example of how turnovers and field position turn into points even if the offense sucks. Because that article is from 2003 (but uses several seasons worth of data), I wanted some updated info. Looking at the table below, it looks like the bills are 10th in the league in net points off turnovers (given up vs taken). In terms of the number of points our offense has scored off turnovers (since defense has created turnovers but has not scored off any (IIRC) we are fourth in the league. http://www.sportingc...tatistics/2014/ This is not surprising as we currently lead the league in turnovers and have only an average/below average offense http://espn.go.com/n..._/stat/givetake Anyways, point is, it turns out out offense did not score enough points off turnovers in the Jets game, but they were not far off the mark and if we are realistic about how good our offense is, then they probably did just what they were expected to. Edited October 31, 2014 by BillsBackersChicago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBillsWillRiseAgain Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 It gets harder to move the ball the closer you get to an opponent's endzone. I think the 20 points we got was fine. Of course I would have liked to see more but I'm not going to rip on an offense for "only" scoring 43 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 We should have scored 48 points off of those 6 turnovers. Anything less is a disappointment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Buffalo should have scored 120 points off of turnovers. The Jets had 15 drives. Each drive should have had only a single play, each resulting in a turnover. Each turnover should have resulted in a touchdown, and each touchdown should have been followed by a successful 2 point converstion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Nice work. But, keep your head down. There are bound to be posters who will not like this thread one bit. Especially the part about the Bills only scoring 4 point less than what your efforts in this thread have defined as rational expectations. You can take comfort however, in the key word in that last sentence: rational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsBackersChicago Posted October 31, 2014 Author Share Posted October 31, 2014 It gets harder to move the ball the closer you get to an opponent's endzone. I think the 20 points we got was fine. Of course I would have liked to see more but I'm not going to rip on an offense for "only" scoring 43 points. yes, harder to move the ball, but easier to score points. That's not my opinion, that's what the data that I provided shows. On the second point, I agree, I think the offense scored just about what we should have expected We should have scored 48 points off of those 6 turnovers. Anything less is a disappointment! Yes, that would be nice, and I suppose anything less is a DISAPPOINTMENT, but so is not winning the Super Bowl every year, but I don't think anyone would expect us to do this. I just wanted to see what a REASONABLE number of points would be. Buffalo should have scored 120 points off of turnovers. The Jets had 15 drives. Each drive should have had only a single play, each resulting in a turnover. Each turnover should have resulted in a touchdown, and each touchdown should have been followed by a successful 2 point converstion. ok then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 INDIAN LANDING! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Yes, that would be nice, and I suppose anything less is a DISAPPOINTMENT, but so is not winning the Super Bowl every year, but I don't think anyone would expect us to do this. I just wanted to see what a REASONABLE number of points would be. Oh, you want a real answer? I consider 20 reasonable, slightly disappointing, but reasonable. Especially with our terrible line, and the Jets strong front seven. But I mean, c'mon, it's way more fun to be unrealistically outraged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsBackersChicago Posted October 31, 2014 Author Share Posted October 31, 2014 Nice work. But, keep your head down. There are bound to be posters who will not like this thread one bit. Especially the part about the Bills only scoring 4 point less than what your efforts in this thread have defined as rational expectations. You can take comfort however, in the key word in that last sentence: rational. Thanks for the support, That being said, I did find a flaw in my argument. In the article they disregard the extra point as a forgone conclusion but the 20 points we scored includes extra points after TDs. I have no desire to figure out how incorporate extra points in, so I am just gonna give that disclaimer and move on. INDIAN LANDING! racist. But I mean, c'mon, it's way more fun to be unrealistically outraged. I completely agree, reality is a total drag. and come to think of it, I am OUTRAGED by that fact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 You score every time you get the ball. /thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) Oh, you want a real answer? I consider 20 reasonable, slightly disappointing, but reasonable. Especially with our terrible line, and the Jets strong front seven. But I mean, c'mon, it's way more fun to be unrealistically outraged. the only thing i would say is that several of the turnovers occurred in scoring position - including getting the ball at 1 once. we had 3 drives that produced 13 points and a combined -4 yards. a 4th drive would bring that to 16 points on 5 total yards. it would have been nice to see more than 20 out of 6 turnovers. instead of points off turnovers, id be curious to see the expected points from drives starting at X yard line totaled up. Heres a link - surprisingly, based on 2000-2010 stats the total is pretty darn close to 24 it looks like. id tack on an extra point or 2 bad on how far offense have come since 2000, but not quite as far below average as i wouldve guessed. wouldve liked to see atleast one more of those drives be a TD, if not 2. its a small sample size but its a spot we left points on the board. http://www.nflstatsblog.com/2011/08/fun-fact-chances-of-scoring-based-on.html Edited October 31, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) the only thing i would say is that several of the turnovers occurred in scoring position - including getting the ball at 1 once. we had 3 drives that produced 13 points and a combined -4 yards. a 4th drive would bring that to 16 points on 5 total yards. it would have been nice to see more than 20 out of 6 turnovers. Ideally yes we would have produced more yardage (and thus points), but we have major problems on our line, our play calling is questionable, and we still weren't too far from average... so I'd say our results fall under reasonable. Edited October 31, 2014 by Dorkington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah John Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 How many points? Enough to win. Box checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Buffalo should have scored 120 points off of turnovers. The Jets had 15 drives. Each drive should have had only a single play, each resulting in a turnover. Each turnover should have resulted in a touchdown, and each touchdown should have been followed by a successful 2 point converstion. Isn't some sort of human sacrific part of it after the 2pt conversion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) I'm not disappointed in the amount of points. I'm disappointed in the way they approached the situation. One more time.... With the way big leads are overcome these days, I think it's way too uptight and conservative to sit on a 2 score lead, in the 3rd quarter, while in the red zone. I have no problem with the run/pass ratio. I wouldn't have cared if they ran it every play, if that was working...but it wasn't. Like, not at all. I like plenty about Marrone, but his "play not to lose" approach, and his poor game management approaching halftime, are bad, bad, bad. Worked out against the Jest's, Vikes...won't work against the top tier. I hope he gets better. Edited October 31, 2014 by HoF Watkins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah John Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 The point is, they were playing the Vikes and the Jets. I assume Hackett has plays ready to go that he doesn't want to reveal to opponents until he needs them. So he went boring and conservative, and bled the clock away against the Jets, and turned things over to the defense to win. Worked out. The question is, can they raise their game when they're playing a better team? Everyone is assuming that because they didn't do more against the Jets, that they couldn't have done more. Remember back to the preseason when they looked like a trash fire, and everyone was panicking. Then they went to Chicago and beat the Bears. Perhaps we should consider that the Bills are approaching games professionally, as opportunities to win with the least cost and without giving any edge to future opponents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 It's strange to think, but it seems like the prevailing thought is that we got all those turnovers but "settled" for FGs. But we scored 5 TDs and 3 FGs in that game. Can't really ask for much more than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 the only thing i would say is that several of the turnovers occurred in scoring position - including getting the ball at 1 once. we had 3 drives that produced 13 points and a combined -4 yards. a 4th drive would bring that to 16 points on 5 total yards. it would have been nice to see more than 20 out of 6 turnovers. This ^. From the half yard line, that almost shouldn't be factored in. Yes, sometimes teams don't score TDs first and goal from the one, but when talking about how many points should have been scored off 6 turnovers it's essential to talk about where you got the ball. We started drives off turnovers at the Jet 33, 50, 1, 31, 10, and 14. Maybe the better question is how many points should an offense score if you get six possessions from these spots on the field. And that's not counting the momentum shift at all. It's more than 20 I would say. It should be at least 24. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) The point is, they were playing the Vikes and the Jets. I assume Hackett has plays ready to go that he doesn't want to reveal to opponents until he needs them. So he went boring and conservative, and bled the clock away against the Jets, and turned things over to the defense to win. Worked out. The question is, can they raise their game when they're playing a better team? Everyone is assuming that because they didn't do more against the Jets, that they couldn't have done more. Remember back to the preseason when they looked like a trash fire, and everyone was panicking. Then they went to Chicago and beat the Bears. Perhaps we should consider that the Bills are approaching games professionally, as opportunities to win with the least cost and without giving any edge to future opponents. I agree to a certain extent, but I really doubt that the reason they weren't more aggressive was because they didn't want to show their hand to future opponents. There are plenty of plays they could have run, that they have used in previous games. No one mentions that putting the defense out there repeatedly after 3 and outs is NOT good strategy. That is how teams end up making comebacks. Get some first downs at least, if you are planning on milking the clock! You mention the Vikings game like they were holding back? They barely won the game on the last second of play! The Bears suck. The Pats are good. They have beaten only 2 teams with winning records. We shall see how differently they approach higher powered teams. I'm hopeful. Edited October 31, 2014 by HoF Watkins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah John Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Style points don't count. Margin of victory doesn't count except sometimes in tiebreakers. What counts is winning the game you're playing, and positioning yourself to win later games. Also, very few injuries came from this game. Another advantage to the boring, conservative approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts