2017 Football Outsiders DVOA Rankings

[jimmy10]

-We have played the 14th hardest schedule so far, and we have the 3rd easiest schedule remaining.

 

This is why I chuckle at the beginning of every offseason when the boo-birds all exclaim "HARDEST SCHEDULE EVER NEXT SEASON L,L,L,L,L,L, W (Fish at home), L,L,L....."

 

You never really know what teams are what until the season is well underway.

Edited October 12, 2017 by jimmy10

[NewEra]

QBR...DVOA...all I care about is 4th qtr comebacks. That's where he fails miserably.

[GoBills808]

Okay? That scenario must account for like .01% of total plays. Do you understand statistics at all? It's starting to sound like willful ignorance on your part.

DVOA says that losing by 4 points with 30 seconds left on 3rd and goal from the 8, a 7.5 yard run to the half yard line to put you in a position to score a TD is not a successful play.

[HappyDays]

DVOA says that losing by 4 points with 30 seconds left on 3rd and goal from the 8, a 7.5 yard run to the half yard line to put you in a position to score a TD is not a successful play.

That isn't a successful play unless you actually score the TD, so you're saying their metrics are mostly correct? Honestly same goes for the FG example you provided above. It isn't successful unless the FG is actually made, and that would go to special teams. If you're looking for a 100% perfect stat that accurately grades each and every possible scenario there isn't one. But DVOA correlates well with how teams perform. You're not arguing against DVOA, you're arguing against the entire concept of statistical rankings in football.

[GoBills808]

That isn't a successful play unless you actually score the TD, so you're saying their metrics are mostly correct? Honestly same goes for the FG example you provided above. It isn't successful unless the FG is actually made, and that would go to special teams. If you're looking for a 100% perfect stat that accurately grades each and every possible scenario there isn't one. But DVOA correlates well with how teams perform. You're not arguing against DVOA, you're arguing against the entire concept of statistical rankings in football.

DVOA says on third and 99, a 98 yard pass is not a successful play.

[HappyDays]

DVOA says on third and 99, a 98 yard pass is not a successful play.

Come up with your own algorithm, let me know how it goes

[BuffaloHokie13]

DVOA says on third and 99, a 98 yard pass is not a successful play.

If there's only 3 seconds left on the clock before the play starts then it isn't a successful play.

Edited October 12, 2017 by BuffaloHokie13

[GoBills808]

If there's only 3 seconds left on the clock before the play starts then it isn't a successful play.

 

That would go for any point in the game.

 

Come up with your own algorithm, let me know how it goes

 

I choose to be able to see these advanced football statistics for what they really are...moderately informative, often flawed, and usually referenced by fans who find them in accordance with their personal beliefs.

[BuffaloHokie13]

 

That would go for any point in the game.

 

 

I choose to be able to see these advanced football statistics for what they really are...moderately informative, often flawed, and usually referenced by fans who find them in accordance with their personal beliefs.

Despite the flaws, I find DVOA to be significantly more aligned with reality than, say, PFF grades, which would grade in context as you suggest. The items you brought up are things that rarely if ever happen in a week of football, let alone a game.

 

At some point with these statistics you need to accept that anomalies are either:

a) Rare enough to be statistically irrelevant

b) Common enough that they can be ignored as a common factor among all entities being judged

Edited October 12, 2017 by BuffaloHokie13

[HappyDays]

...moderately informative, often flawed, and usually referenced by fans who find them in accordance with their personal beliefs.

The eye test however is none of these things! Of course.

 

Some stats correlate with winning and some don't. QBR is predictive within a season, so is passer rating, so is DVOA. Passing yards are not. We're in a golden age of statistics where everything is tracked and analyzed by someone. Barstool logic doesn't work anymore. We can see, mathematically, what works and what doesn't. Choosing to ignore a proven metric because some rare one-off result doesn't match up with reality is just silly.

 

DVOA isnt even saying Tyrod is playing well this year. It says he's played like the 18th best QB on the 18th best passing offense. The one thing DVOA can't capture is the weapons around him. An incompletion to Zay Jones counts the same as an incompletion to Julio Jones, which I think you'll agree is wrong. That's not just a one-off flaw, it's a consistent flaw that they even admit to on their website. That particular flaw is true of every statistic though.

 

So if you think Tyrod is a bottom 5 QB in the league of course you will ignore DVOA. I really don't care what your eyes see when a couple seasons worth of advanced stats say something else.

[GoBills808]

The eye test however is none of these things! Of course.

 

Some stats correlate with winning and some don't. QBR is predictive within a season, so is passer rating, so is DVOA. Passing yards are not. We're in a golden age of statistics where everything is tracked and analyzed by someone. Barstool logic doesn't work anymore. We can see, mathematically, what works and what doesn't. Choosing to ignore a proven metric because some rare one-off result doesn't match up with reality is just silly.

 

DVOA isnt even saying Tyrod is playing well this year. It says he's played like the 18th best QB on the 18th best passing offense. The one thing DVOA can't capture is the weapons around him. An incompletion to Zay Jones counts the same as an incompletion to Julio Jones, which I think you'll agree is wrong. That's not just a one-off flaw, it's a consistent flaw that they even admit to on their website. That particular flaw is true of every statistic though.

 

So if you think Tyrod is a bottom 5 QB in the league of course you will ignore DVOA. I really don't care what your eyes see when a couple seasons worth of advanced stats say something else.

You joined this site in March, you've already got 2,344 posts, and I'm guessing about 75% of them are in defense of Tyrod Taylor. It's pretty safe to say I'm not offended that you don't value my opinion on passing statistics.

[GoBills808]

Also just noticed DVOA puts Taylor above Stafford. For reference:

 

Stafford: 111/173 for 1,116 @ 64.2%, 9 TDs/1 INT

 

Taylor: 85/136 for 910 @ 62.5%, 6 TDs/2 INTs

[BuffaloHokie13]

Also just noticed DVOA puts Taylor above Stafford. For reference:

 

Stafford: 111/173 for 1,116 @ 64.2%, 9 TDs/1 INT

 

Taylor: 85/136 for 910 @ 62.5%, 6 TDs/2 INTs

I do not like DVOA for QB/Individuals, that's for sure. For QBs I like ANY/A and my rating system. Have to imagine the discrepancy is due to strength of opposing defenses?

[GoBills808]

I do not like DVOA for QB/Individuals, that's for sure. For QBs I like ANY/A and my rating system. Have to imagine the discrepancy is due to strength of opposing defenses?

But at only 5 games into the season, a bad passing offense (like ours) would have undue weight in a system that factored in strength of opponent's defense, wouldn't it? Accounting for 20% of the variable? I don't think it's a coincidence that after 5 games we've played 4 of the top 9 pass defenses as ranked by yards against.

I do not like DVOA for QB/Individuals, that's for sure. For QBs I like ANY/A and my rating system. Have to imagine the discrepancy is due to strength of opposing defenses?

And I'm with you on ANY/A. I think we've had this conversation before, actually. Your system is another one I find more intuitive.

[HappyDays]

I do not like DVOA for QB/Individuals, that's for sure. For QBs I like ANY/A and my rating system. Have to imagine the discrepancy is due to strength of opposing defenses?

By DVOA the Lions offense has faced the 7th easiest schedule. The Bills offense has faced the 8th hardest schedule. In any other efficiency stat Stafford is not that far ahead of Tyrod. He's 5 spots better in passer rating, 3 spots better on ANY/A, 2 spots worse in YPA. They've played about equally if you're talking about efficiency, DVOA gives a slight edge to Tyrod because of the strength of schedule. This is another case of a name, Matt Stafford, getting in the way of looking at things objectively.

 

It's also only week 5. DVOA isn't that great yet. The only stat that predicts future wins well is QBR. In that Stafford is 13th and Tyrod is 16th. I don't know why Stafford is the go-to for proving DVOA sucks, he simply hasn't been that great this year. He's extremely inconsistent. He's thrown almost 40 more times than Tyrod but only thrown about 200 more yards. With a much better receiving corps too.

 

What's so crazy about saying they're not that far off from each other thus far in 2017? If Stafford starts to pull ahead that will reflect itself in DVOA too.

Edited October 12, 2017 by HappyDays

[GoBills808]

By DVOA the Lions offense has faced the 7th easiest schedule. The Bills offense has faced the 8th hardest schedule. In any other efficiency stat Stafford is not that far ahead of Tyrod. He's 5 spots better in passer rating, 3 spots better on ANY/A, 2 spots worse in YPA. They've played about equally if you're talking about efficiency, DVOA gives a slight edge to Tyrod because of the strength of schedule. This is another case of a name, Matt Stafford, getting in the way of looking at things objectively.

 

It's also only week 5. DVOA isn't that great yet. The only stat that predicts future wins well is QBR. In that Stafford is 13th and Tyrod is 16th. I don't know why Stafford is the go-to for proving DVOA sucks, he simply hasn't been that great this year. He's extremely inconsistent. He's thrown almost 40 more times than Tyrod but only thrown about 200 more yards. With a much better receiving corps too.

 

What's so crazy about saying they're not that far off from each other thus far in 2017? If Stafford starts to pull ahead that will reflect itself in DVOA too.

Because anyone who knows anything about football can watch the games and conclude it's crazy to say they're not far off from each other. Because they absolutely are.

 

Let me ask you the same question I asked BuffaloHokie13: do you think it's a coincidence we've faced 4 of the top 9 passing defenses already?

[HappyDays]

 

Let me ask you the same question I asked BuffaloHokie13: do you think it's a coincidence we've faced 4 of the top 9 passing defenses already?

We haven't? In DVOA Jets are 21st, Panthers are 12th, Broncos are 7th, Falcons are 24th, Bengals are 2nd. We're 5 weeks into the season. We're only 20% of these rankings (or 25% for the Falcons). Not sure why you think our games alone are having some huge effect? Our offense was fine in 3 out of our 5 games.

 

If you're predicting that our rankings will fall that is more than fair. I think Deshaun Watson, currently 4th in DVOA, will start falling hard in week 7. I predict our offense will stay about where it is now. DVOA isn't really predictive (only QBR is) but it is good for analyzing what's happened so far. You can't just say "well I've watched the games so I know Stafford is much better." That means nothing to me. Stats are "watching" the games too but without your biases.

Edited October 12, 2017 by HappyDays

[GoBills808]

We haven't? In DVOA Jets are 21st, Panthers are 12th, Broncos are 7th, Falcons are 24th, Bengals are 2nd. We're 5 weeks into the season. We're only 20% of these rankings (or 25% for the Falcons). Not sure why you think our games alone are having some huge effect? Our offense was fine in 3 out of our 5 games.

 

If you're predicting that our rankings will fall that is more than fair. I think Deshaun Watson, currently 4th in DVOA, will start falling hard in week 7. I predict our offense will stay about where it is now. DVOA isn't really predictive (only QBR is) but it is good for analyzing what's happened so far. You can't just say "well I've watched the games so I know Stafford is much better." That means nothing to me. Stats are "watching" the games too but without your biases.

Stafford is a better quarterback playing better at quarterback than Taylor is. Pointing to a statistic that says otherwise is YOUR bias, not mine, when 99% of reasonable people would agree with my assessment over yours.

 

I was obviously talking about yards. If you don't think 20% of any statistic has a huge effect I don't know what to tell you.

[dave mcbride]

Stafford is a better quarterback playing better at quarterback than Taylor is. Pointing to a statistic that says otherwise is YOUR bias, not mine, when 99% of reasonable people would agree with my assessment over yours.

 

I was obviously talking about yards. If you don't think 20% of any statistic has a huge effect I don't know what to tell you.

Man. Actually go and look at qb dvoa over stretches that are more than just 5 games. Stafford in 2015 and 2016 was a top ten dvoa qb (9th both seasons) and far higher than taylor, a mid-high teens guy both seasons (14th in 2015 and 19th in 2016). ALL of those numbers match up with reality, at least as I perceive it. FO's stats are good; cherrypicking to make a crusade-like argument isn't. Dig a little deeper. Seriously. Everyone with half a brain here knows stafford is better. Suggesting otherwise is a straw man argument. But taylor is better than a bunch of other guys. He's average.

 

Bottom line: the dvoa numbers need larger sample sizes to work; like all small sample sizes, they are subject to spikiness.

Edited October 12, 2017 by dave mcbride

[GoBills808]

Man. Actually go and look at qb dvoa over stretches that are more than just 5 games. Stafford in 2015 and 2016 was a top ten dvoa qb (9th both seasons) and far higher than taylor, a mid-high teens guy both seasons (14th in 2015 and 19th in 2016). ALL of those numbers match up with reality, at least as I perceive it. FO's stats are good; cherrypicking to make a crusade-like argument isn't. Dig a little deeper. Seriously. Everyone with half a brain here knows stafford is better. Suggesting otherwise is a straw man argument. But taylor is better than a bunch of other guys. He's average.

 

Bottom line: the dvoa numbers need larger sample sizes to work; like all small sample sizes, they are subject to spikiness.

Talking to the wrong guy.