Scoring points rank

[Royale with Cheese]

[jrober38]

34 minutes ago, freddyjj said:

good stuff here HBF!

 

Interesting that 7/10 of the top passer rating teams are in top 10 of Power ratings and the Falcons, Raiders and Detroit are all .500 teams or worse.  I believe that the Bills need to score 25 pts per game and hold opponents to under 18 ppg to make it to playoffs and be a factor in playoffs this year.

 

Currently Bills average 19 ppg scored and are given up 17 ppg.  The offense must improve dramatically and average at least one more TD per game on a go forward basis to have the ability to win each game handily.  Josh Allen and Daboll have some work to do.  The Offense is healthy now and has a full complement of parts so lets see what they can do to improve.  

 

I agree here.

 

There are a few outliers for sure, but there's a correlation between passer rating and winning games. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it exists to some extent.

If you pass the ball efficiently (which is what passer rating effectively measures), you'll probably have a good offense.

 

If you pass the ball inefficiently, you'll probably have a bad offense.

 

8 of the bottom 10 teams in passer rating score less than 20 points per game. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

We should be aiming for a QB who does that.

Saying we shouldn't is really sad.

 

Where has someone said that?

 

I said that you moved the posts.  You started out with two statements:

"We have one of the worst passing games in the league. Points will remain at a premium until Josh Allen's cumulative QB Rating surpasses 90."

 

The first statement is correct.  I am asking you to support and defend the 2nd statement you made.  I think it's arbitrary and I'd like to know if there is evidence supporting it.  You followed up saying actually, it should be more than 100.

 

As a counter point, I offer a list of the top-10 scoring offenses currently and the >100 passer rating offenses.  One can see they are not the same; several of the top passer rating offenses are not top scoring offenses and vice versa.  Clearly there is something going on to build a top scoring offense that is not captured by an arbitrary passer rating number.

 

Do you wish to discuss your initial contention, or do you wish to change the topic of convo from "how to score more points", to "what we should be aiming for in our QB"?  Because they're related, but they're not the same tppic.

[blacklabel]

2 hours ago, teef said:

 

I love the nightlife... I got to boogie...

[r00tabaga]

We were in the Red Zone against the Giants the Titans and I think there's one other when we were ice in the game so you could add easily 21 more points to this and be right in the pack where you should be. That is unless you hate Victory formation

....

[Hapless Bills Fan]

12 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

There are a few outliers for sure, but there's a correlation between passer rating and winning games. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it exists to some extent.

 

There's a correlation, but it's weak sauce.  The important thing is, it's not "predictive".  For the current season, it has an R-squared value of 0.406, which translates to if you suggested it to a professional statistician as a valid predictive model he or she would give you the stink-eye.  If I give you the passer ratings of 4 QB, you can not, using their passer ratings, predict how successful their teams are in terms of wins.

 

Here, picture worth several sentences.  My work, taken from NFL.com and pro-football-reference, 2019 season to date.  If you follow passer rating across horizontally, you'll see that the number of wins varies by about 4 games for the same passer rating.

 

[jrober38]

6 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Where has someone said that?

 

I said that you moved the posts.  You started out with two statements:

"We have one of the worst passing games in the league. Points will remain at a premium until Josh Allen's cumulative QB Rating surpasses 90."

 

The first statement is correct.  I am asking you to support and defend the 2nd statement you made.  I think it's arbitrary and I'd like to know if there is evidence supporting it.  You followed up saying actually, it should be more than 100.

 

As a counter point, I offer a list of the top-10 scoring offenses currently and the >100 passer rating offenses.  One can see they are not the same; several of the top passer rating offenses are not top scoring offenses and vice versa.  Clearly there is something going on to build a top scoring offense that is not captured by an arbitrary passer rating number.

 

Do you wish to discuss your initial contention, or do you wish to change the topic of convo from "how to score more points", to "what we should be aiming for in our QB"?  Because they're related, but they're not the same tppic.

 

Your rankings list for scoring offenses isn't accurate. Dallas is 6th in the league in scoring but isn't on your top 10.

 

Rankings are silly because the 11th best team averages 0.4 PPG less than 10th place. That difference equates to less than a field goal over a 7 game span which is inconsequential.

 

I don't know where to cut things off. Odds are we won't agree on anything.

 

25 PPG seems like a good target. Looking at the rankings, things begin to drop off quickly from that mark. 

 

Of the 14 teams in the NFL who average over 25 PPG, 6 of them have a QB Rating over 100, and 11 of them have a QB Rating of 91.7 or higher.

 

I want my offense to be there even if it's not based on anything. I think that's where you begin to find the good offenses in the NFL whose teams will contend for the Super Bowl.

[Boatdrinks]

The OP believes that Beane thinks the Bills have the pieces already ? This is doubtful. They still need a WR, Pass rusher and OT most likely. Many reports that the Bills were actively looking to trade for a WR support this notion. The Bills offense needs to do better, but it’s not yet a complete unit. The offense needs to be around the top half of the league in scoring points. They’re not there yet, but they can improve their output this year. Fewer mistakes by Allen and a commitment to the running game by Daboll should help in this area. Will Daboll do this ? That’s another story, and may ultimately decide where the Bills stand in week 17. The passing game has improved from last year’s horrible output, but it’s not good enough to carry the offense right now. 

[Ramza86]

2 hours ago, Cuboirs said:

Only 7 teams have scored less points than Buffalos 134...and that includes teams that are clearly tanking.....Great job Beane thinking we have the right peices already

 

Our pieces are good enough not to be desperate and potentially dig us in a deeper hole.

 

Listen this team was hot garbage last year. They are WAYYY better than last year. Unfortunately the record is giving people a little too much hope. This team just needs to continue on improving itself. The wins against good teams should eventually come.

Edited October 31, 2019 by Ramza86

[jrober38]

8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

There's a correlation, but it's weak sauce.  The important thing is, it's not "predictive".  For the current season, it has an R-squared value of 0.406, which translates to if you suggested it to a professional statistician as a valid predictive model he or she would give you the stink-eye.  If I give you the passer ratings of 4 QB, you can not, using their passer ratings, predict how successful their teams are in terms of wins.

 

Here, picture worth several sentences.  My work, taken from NFL.com and pro-football-reference, 2019 season to date.  If you follow passer rating across horizontally, you'll see that the number of wins varies by about 4 games for the same passer rating.

 

 

I'm not saying a high passer rating guarantees wins. That's not what I'm arguing.

 

I'm saying our point production is really bad primarily because our passing game is really bad, this year. 

 

If our passing game had a QB Rating of over 90, I'm certain we'd score more points. 

 

If you disagree, that's your choice. 

7 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

The OP believes that Beane thinks the Bills have the pieces already ? This is doubtful. They still need a WR, Pass rusher and OT most likely. Many reports that the Bills were actively looking to trade for a WR support this notion. The Bills offense needs to do better, but it’s not yet a complete unit. The offense needs to be around the top half of the league in scoring points. They’re not there yet, but they can improve their output this year. Fewer mistakes by Allen and a commitment to the running game by Daboll should help in this area. Will Daboll do this ? That’s another story, and may ultimately decide where the Bills stand in week 17. The passing game has improved from last year’s horrible output, but it’s not good enough to carry the offense right now. 

 

I disagree with this.

 

They might want an Alpha #1 receiver but I'd guess they think they have everything else they need on offense given how many guys they signed in the offseason and what some of those contracts look like in terms of the player's salary. 

 

They need to keep improving, but I'd bet that inside OBD they think they gave Allen a pretty good hand to work with. One that is significantly better than the one he had as a rookie. 

Edited October 31, 2019 by jrober38

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

Your rankings list for scoring offenses isn't accurate. Dallas is 6th in the league in scoring but isn't on your top 10.

 

I am always willing to take corrections.  The data came from pro-football-reference.com because it's easier to play with.  They currently list the Cowboys as #13 in the league for scoring with 190 points which matches the rank order and data currently on NFL.com.  Please feel free to provide correct data and source if you have better.

 

 

 

[jrober38]

2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I am always willing to take corrections.  The data came from pro-football-reference.com because it's easier to play with.  They currently list the Cowboys as #13 in the league for scoring with 190 points which matches the rank order and data currently on NFL.com.  Please feel free to provide correct data and source if you have better.

 

 

 

 

Are you factoring that they've played 7 games?

 

190 / 7 = 27.1 PPG which is 6th best in the league. 

 

You must be looking at total points vs points per game. 

 

Given some teams have played 8 and some 7 total points is useless. 

Edited October 31, 2019 by jrober38

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

Your rankings list for scoring offenses isn't accurate. Dallas is 6th in the league in scoring but isn't on your top 10.

Rankings are silly because the 11th best team averages 0.4 PPG less than 10th place. That difference equates to less than a field goal over a 7 game span which is inconsequential.

 

I don't know where to cut things off. Odds are we won't agree on anything.

 

If you want to assert that something matters (like reaching a specific passer rating in order to score more points) it's important to show somehow that it matters.

Demonstrating that the two are correlated or that one can draw a threshold and say "this is what we gotta reach", is how one does this.

 

Just for a free bonus, I'll do something that's a better correlation than passer rating and wins: passer rating and points.  It's still weak sauce (R squared of 0.524) but it's better.

 

But you can also see that there's a pretty good variation in points scored with the same passer rating, so there must be strategies that can score more points without higher passer rating.

 

Look, there's a reason that Football Outsiders and Cold Hard Football Facts and ESPN and all those outfits keep boiling up "special sauce" parameters which they hope will better predict winning, and it isn't because passer rating is a particularly useful stat.

 

5 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Are you factoring that they've played 7 games?

 

190 / 7 = 27.1 PPG which is 6th best in the league. 

 

You must be looking at total points vs points per game. 

 

Given some teams have played 8 and some 7 total points is useless. 

 

Like I said, please feel free to provide better data.  I am open about where I'm getting my data, and what I'm doing with it.

You're making assertions and then when they're questioned, slamming what I've done as useless.

 

Feel free to do your own slicing and dicing that backs up your point.

[jrober38]

4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

If you want to assert that something matters (like reaching a specific passer rating in order to score more points) it's important to show somehow that it matters.

Demonstrating that the two are correlated or that one can draw a threshold and say "this is what we gotta reach", is how one does this.

 

Just for a free bonus, I'll do something that's a better correlation than passer rating and wins: passer rating and points.  It's still weak sauce (R squared of 0.524) but it's better.

 

But you can also see that there's a pretty good variation in points scored with the same passer rating, so there must be strategies that can score more points without higher passer rating.

 

Look, there's a reason that Football Outsiders and Cold Hard Football Facts and ESPN and all those outfits keep boiling up "special sauce" parameters which they hope will better predict winning, and it isn't because passer rating is a particularly useful stat.

 

 

Like I said, please feel free to provide better data.  I am open about where I'm getting my data, and what I'm doing with it.

You're making assertions and then when they're questioned, slamming what I've done as useless.

 

Feel free to do your own slicing and dicing that backs up your point.

 

Our data is the same.

 

Dallas' 27.1 PPG is 6th best in the league.

 

You seem to only be looking at total points, which makes no sense if not everyone has played the same number of games. 

 

In terms of total points, Dallas is 13th, but 9 of the teams ahead of them have played an extra game so obviously they're going to have more points. 

 

I'm not slamming your data. I'm just showing you that your rankings for Points PER Game is wrong.

 

If the stat you've used is flawed, it's hard to accept the charts and graphs you've shown.

Edited October 31, 2019 by jrober38

[Boatdrinks]

20 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

I'm not saying a high passer rating guarantees wins. That's not what I'm arguing.

 

I'm saying our point production is really bad primarily because our passing game is really bad, this year. 

 

If our passing game had a QB Rating of over 90, I'm certain we'd score more points. 

 

If you disagree, that's your choice. 

 

I disagree with this.

 

They might want an Alpha #1 receiver but I'd guess they think they have everything else they need on offense given how many guys they signed in the offseason and what some of those contracts look like in terms of the player's salary. 

 

They need to keep improving, but I'd bet that inside OBD they think they gave Allen a pretty good hand to work with. One that is significantly better than the one he had as a rookie. 

So the number of FAs signed indicates that all of those players have panned out as hoped thus far? That all holes were addressed ? Salary is one thing, and long term commitment is another. Many of these signings are of the variety that the team can walk away from relatively painlessly in short order. The signings were necessary because so many players on last year’s offense weren’t good enough to start in the league. Bottom line; when upgrading the 31st ranked passing offense from last year ( which they have : currently 23rd ) there are too many holes to fill in one FA period/ draft. Still a couple pieces to add. They’ve given Allen a better hand to be sure, but it’s not exactly a flush. The best thing they can do now is find their running game and stick with it. The passing game ( and thereby Allen ) will get a direct benefit. 

Edited October 31, 2019 by Boatdrinks

[BananaB]

I’m not a stats guy, so what’s  the percentage of our scoring drives when Devin Singletary is the feature RB compared to Gore the feature RB. Just curious because when Devin is on the field it seems good ***** happens. Jets, Giants and Eagles game come to mind where our O looked better when he was on the field. 

[reddogblitz]

Had Hyde gone down instead of running the onsides kick in for a TD, we would be 27th in points per game.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

11 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

Our data is the same.

 

Dallas' 27.1 PPG is 6th best in the league.

 

You seem to only be looking at total points, which makes no sense if not everyone has played the same number of games. 

 

In terms of total points, Dallas is 13th, but 9 of the teams ahead of them have played an extra game so obviously they're going to have more points. 

 

I'm not slamming your data. I'm just showing you that your rankings for Points PER Game is wrong.

 

If the stat you've used is flawed, it's hard to accept the charts and graphs you've shown.

 

So great.  Present your own data and make your own argument.  The point I’m making is that the top passer ratings and top point scoring offenses are not a congruent set.  There is overlap, but the one doesn’t predict the other. 

 

If you can show that they are more power to you - do it.

[Nextmanup]

Bills points DIFF is +18 right now.  Baltimore, another 5-2 team, is +58.  

 

New England's is +189.  SF is +133. 

 

Redskins is -89.

 

The reality is that Josh Allen is something like the 25th best QB in the league depending on how you want to slice and dice it and what you look at or value.

 

Don't expect a better passing attack without a better QB.

 

 

[BananaB]

4 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

Bills points DIFF is +18 right now.  Baltimore, another 5-2 team, is +58.  

 

New England's is +189.  SF is +133. 

 

Redskins is -89.

 

The reality is that Josh Allen is something like the 25th best QB in the league depending on how you want to slice and dice it and what you look at or value.

 

Don't expect a better passing attack without a better QB.

 

 

Do you guys just expect every player in this league to step in and look like a seasoned vet? 
 

Our offense is full of castoffs. A bunch a guys who came here to get more playing time then they could somewhere else. It’s better then last year but we are still not very talented. 

Edited November 1, 2019 by BananaB