Wins and Point Diff Around the League

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I've tucked this data from previous weeks into various threads.

Thought I'd give it a shot with its own thread and see what folks make of it.

 

Around the league, the average of points scored/points given up per game is holding steady at 22.6 with a standard deviation of 5.3.

That means a "typical" NFL team scores or gives up between 17-28 points. 

Our D, giving up now an average of 16.6 ppg is still above average.

Our O, scoring19.3 ppg is below average, but not horrid - it's basically 1 score per game below average.  (3.3 points to be specific, or just over 1 FG per game).

 

Data are sorted by Wins.  From NFL.com

With Week 10 in the books, we can see that things are starting to sort themselves out, but the wins still don't totally align with the point differential per game. 

 

For example, the 4th best team on point differential is Dallas.  Beware of the 'Boys.

 

Green Bay and Seattle, on the other hand, are running significantly lower net points/game not only than NE and SF, but a number of teams that have fewer wins including Baltimore, Minnesota, Houston, and (for Seattle) KC, LA, and Buffalo.  That says to me that they're overperforming - their defense in the case of Seattle.

 

Buffalo has the lowest point differential of the 6 win teams, but better than all but two 5 win teams and one each of the 7 and 8 win teams.  So we are certainly not the "worst 6 win team in the history of the league" but we're verging on overperforming our offense.

 

OK hope this is interesting to someone, let me know how you see it.  Will answer any questions, but I think it's pretty stump simple in terms of what I did.

 

I think the bottom line is that most NFL games are a lot closer in score than people think.

 

 

 

Edited November 12, 2019 by Hapless Bills Fan
correct mistake in difference between league average and Bills scoring

[The Frankish Reich]

Very good points. 

Over the long haul point differential says a lot: at the end of the season, the teams with the greatest positive point differential are almost always the objectively “best” teams. 

Right now we’re overperforming our point differential considerably, and even though 9 games is not an adequate sample, it’s suggestive of the Bills being a .500 team at best that may be very fortunate to get to 10 wins and a playoff spot. It’s to Beane’s and McDemott’s credit that they saw this and held back on making a significant deadline trade deal. We are not “one player away” from anything valuable right now. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

I dunno what to make of it overall.  

 

KC 4.5,  Seattle 2.1,  GB 4.5, NO 2.4  ALL good teams compared to   "crappy"   Buffalo 2.7.  

sounds more like they play crappy defenses and score more points

 

on both sides 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I'll bump my own thread, but hopefully legit because I'll put more data out there.

It also came up a while back, someone was expressing that the top-scoring teams are the top-winning teams. 

I put out raw data from NFL.com or pro-football-reference that I thought made the point "ain't necessarily so" but someone objected strongly that it was invalid because not corrected for games played (I thought it could be seen it still was, and the objector didn't want to grind the corrected data).

 

Since I have a spreadsheet rocking, here is the corrected data sorted by points for/game and wins.

What you can see, I think, is that while there's a correlation, and generally the top scoring teams are the top winning teams, it's not strong or predictive.

The #3 scoring team right now has 3 wins. 

If you tell me a team scores on average, 20-25 PPG (league average), I can tell you they have somewhere between 2 and 8 wins^^

 

^^ the same can be said of point differential/game, actually, but it's a better correlation because it's taking into account both sides of the ball
Since I was asked: R2 on point diff vs wins 0.759 vs R2 on points scored vs wins 0.544

Edited November 12, 2019 by Hapless Bills Fan
added r2

[section122]

3 minutes ago, SlimShady'sGhost said:

I dunno what to make of it overall.  

 

KC 4.5,  Seattle 2.1,  GB 4.5, NO 2.4  ALL good teams compared to   "crappy"   Buffalo 2.7.  

sounds more like they play crappy defenses and score more points

 

on both sides 

 

They have crappier defenses but better offenses.  I opined this in another thread but it is because winning with defense is not sexy that people think the Bills are bad.  The Bills have a very good defense and as the numbers show a below average offense.  

 

I was just talking yesterday that if the Bills scored 21 points in each game they would only have 1 loss.  That is what they need to improve on and it really isn't that far from where they are now.  It works out to be an extra field goal per game.  They haven't arrived yet but they are not as far away as some people think.

 

I don't know if this is the place for it but the defense isn't getting enough love imo.  Last year they were the #2 defense by yards but people were mad that they were 18th in ppg against and that was the stat that really mattered.  Now they are 21st in rush defense and 3rd in ppg against and people are still blaming them for the loss against Cleveland.  In my mind if the offense doesn't score 24 they aren't doing their jobs.  If the defense gives up more than 21 they aren't doing theirs.  Are we still doing heat maps?

 

Win against Jets - Defense

Win against Giants - Team

Win against Bengals - Defense

Loss against Patriots - Offense

Win against Titans - Defense

Win against Fins - Team

Loss against the Eagles - Team

Win against Redskins - Team

Loss against Browns - Offense

 

So I have the defense responsible for 3 wins on their own, 4 more games where they did their job, and 1 game they didn't

The Offense I have responsible for 0 wins on their own, 2 losses on their own, 4 games where they did their job.

 

Defensively we are a 7-1 team.

Offensively we are a 4-4 team.

 

Sounds about right to me.  

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

4 minutes ago, section122 said:

They have crappier defenses but better offenses.  I opined this in another thread but it is because winning with defense is not sexy that people think the Bills are bad.  The Bills have a very good defense and as the numbers show a below average offense.  

 

I was just talking yesterday that if the Bills scored 21 points in each game they would only have 1 loss.  That is what they need to improve on and it really isn't that far from where they are now.  It works out to be an extra field goal per game.  They haven't arrived yet but they are not as far away as some people think.

 

I don't know if this is the place for it but the defense isn't getting enough love imo.  Last year they were the #2 defense by yards but people were mad that they were 18th in ppg against and that was the stat that really mattered.  Now they are 21st in rush defense and 3rd in ppg against and people are still blaming them for the loss against Cleveland.  In my mind if the offense doesn't score 24 they aren't doing their jobs.  If the defense gives up more than 21 they aren't doing theirs.  Are we still doing heat maps?

 

This is kind of what I was getting at ....

 

is the offense better because they play crappier defenses? 

 

I am not saying Dabolls offensive play calling ISN'T offensive ....  but all those things matter.  

[section122]

Just now, SlimShady'sGhost said:

 

This is kind of what I was getting at ....

 

is the offense better because they play crappier defenses? 

 

I am not saying Dabolls offensive play calling ISN'T offensive ....  but all those things matter.  

 

No the 4 teams you mentioned (KC, Seattle, GB, and NO) all have elite play at the QB position.  The Bills don't have that (yet).  QBs are sexy and teams with those qbs will always be favored or thought higher of because of it.

 

I really don't think Daboll's play calling is as bad as people think.  I think the execution is poor.  I think Frank Gore is washed so not getting Singletary more involved is a sore spot for me.  However I think the Bills need a #1 WR to bump everyone down a spot.  John Brown has played great and exceeded my expectations outside of him though there are no threats at the position.  Beasley is a dink and dunk guy, there is no "big WR", and they need to improve their RB room. 

 

I keep going back to the Bills have no game breakers.  The Browns have OBJ, Landry, Hunt, and Chubb at the skill position who are all better than their Bills counterpart.  Eagles got Wentz Alshon Jeffery and spent a first on wr (agholor), Rams got Goff Cooks and Robert Woods, KC has an obscene plethora of weapons for Mahomes.  The Bills need to get Josh some talent to take some of the pressure off of him.  They need to get Daboll some better talent to work with.  Hopefully this off season those things happen.

 

On a side note if Daboll is fired I will be hoping and praying for Jay Gruden but fear we will see Ken Whisenhunt.

 

[row_33]

51 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

 

Over the long haul point differential says a lot: at the end of the season, the teams with the greatest positive point differential are almost always the objectively “best” teams. 

 

 

duh....

 

 

when you win you have more points

 

and if you win 13 or 14 times it would take a heck of a lopsided set of losses to upset standing for point differential

 

the stat adds NOTHING of use.

 

 

Edited November 12, 2019 by row_33

[ticketssince61]

Two things that need to be kept in mind when reviewing these "statistics"

 

1. Quality of opposition - scoring 21 points against NE is much better than 21 against the Bengals

 

2. The points per game can get skewed over 1 or 2 blow out wins (or losses). e.g. The Ravens' 59 points against the Dolphins can make up for a few below average scoring games

 

The more important measure is consistency (i.e. Standard Deviation) in the points (scored or allowed). 

 

As an extreme case, a team that alternately scores either 0 or 50 may have a vastly different record than a a team that scores 25 every game

 

Also, important to take into account TD's on turnovers and by special teams (which we are sorely lacking)

 

To show points #1 and #2, The Cowboys should have a really good record, but their points were mostly piled up in a few blow out wins against very inferior opponents

    Giants       35 and 37

    Redskins  31

    Dolphins   31

 

 

[Big Turk]

55 minutes ago, section122 said:

 

They have crappier defenses but better offenses.  I opined this in another thread but it is because winning with defense is not sexy that people think the Bills are bad.  The Bills have a very good defense and as the numbers show a below average offense.  

 

I was just talking yesterday that if the Bills scored 21 points in each game they would only have 1 loss.  That is what they need to improve on and it really isn't that far from where they are now.  It works out to be an extra field goal per game.  They haven't arrived yet but they are not as far away as some people think.

 

I don't know if this is the place for it but the defense isn't getting enough love imo.  Last year they were the #2 defense by yards but people were mad that they were 18th in ppg against and that was the stat that really mattered.  Now they are 21st in rush defense and 3rd in ppg against and people are still blaming them for the loss against Cleveland.  In my mind if the offense doesn't score 24 they aren't doing their jobs.  If the defense gives up more than 21 they aren't doing theirs.  Are we still doing heat maps?

 

Win against Jets - Defense

Win against Giants - Team

Win against Bengals - Defense

Loss against Patriots - Offense

Win against Titans - Defense

Win against Fins - Team

Loss against the Eagles - Team

Win against Redskins - Team

Loss against Browns - Offense

 

So I have the defense responsible for 3 wins on their own, 4 more games where they did their job, and 1 game they didn't

The Offense I have responsible for 0 wins on their own, 2 losses on their own, 4 games where they did their job.

 

Defensively we are a 7-1 team.

Offensively we are a 4-4 team.

 

Sounds about right to me.  

 

Would help if their kicker had enough leg to hit NFL FGs still and didn't force the coach to go for it when presented with a 53 yard FG during the game....that is a pretty basic FG distance these days, and if your kicker can't reach that he is really hurting you.

Edited November 12, 2019 by matter2003

[Hapless Bills Fan]

56 minutes ago, section122 said:

 

They have crappier defenses but better offenses.  I opined this in another thread but it is because winning with defense is not sexy that people think the Bills are bad.  The Bills have a very good defense and as the numbers show a below average offense.  

 

I was just talking yesterday that if the Bills scored 21 points in each game they would only have 1 loss.  That is what they need to improve on and it really isn't that far from where they are now.  It works out to be an extra field goal per game.  They haven't arrived yet but they are not as far away as some people think.

 

I don't know if this is the place for it but the defense isn't getting enough love imo.  Last year they were the #2 defense by yards but people were mad that they were 18th in ppg against and that was the stat that really mattered.  Now they are 21st in rush defense and 3rd in ppg against and people are still blaming them for the loss against Cleveland.  In my mind if the offense doesn't score 24 they aren't doing their jobs.  If the defense gives up more than 21 they aren't doing theirs.  Are we still doing heat maps?

 

Win against Jets - Defense

Win against Giants - Team

Win against Bengals - Defense

Loss against Patriots - Offense

Win against Titans - Defense

Win against Fins - Team

Loss against the Eagles - Team

Win against Redskins - Team

Loss against Browns - Offense

 

So I have the defense responsible for 3 wins on their own, 4 more games where they did their job, and 1 game they didn't

The Offense I have responsible for 0 wins on their own, 2 losses on their own, 4 games where they did their job.

 

Defensively we are a 7-1 team.

Offensively we are a 4-4 team.

 

Sounds about right to me.  

 

Good post.

 

That's exactly what the data show.  We are 3.3 points below league average as an offense.  Just over 1 FG per game.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

37 minutes ago, section122 said:

 

No the 4 teams you mentioned (KC, Seattle, GB, and NO) all have elite play at the QB position.  The Bills don't have that (yet).  QBs are sexy and teams with those qbs will always be favored or thought higher of because of it.

 

I really don't think Daboll's play calling is as bad as people think.  I think the execution is poor.  I think Frank Gore is washed so not getting Singletary more involved is a sore spot for me.  However I think the Bills need a #1 WR to bump everyone down a spot.  John Brown has played great and exceeded my expectations outside of him though there are no threats at the position.  Beasley is a dink and dunk guy, there is no "big WR", and they need to improve their RB room. 

 

I keep going back to the Bills have no game breakers.  The Browns have OBJ, Landry, Hunt, and Chubb at the skill position who are all better than their Bills counterpart.  Eagles got Wentz Alshon Jeffery and spent a first on wr (agholor), Rams got Goff Cooks and Robert Woods, KC has an obscene plethora of weapons for Mahomes.  The Bills need to get Josh some talent to take some of the pressure off of him.  They need to get Daboll some better talent to work with.  Hopefully this off season those things happen.

 

On a side note if Daboll is fired I will be hoping and praying for Jay Gruden but fear we will see Ken Whisenhunt.

 

 

1. the O Line isn't protecting Josh's blind side 
2. Elite QB's are scoring points.  20 game Josh is not.  Nothing shocking there. 
3.  Execution is poor and there have been too many dropped balls.  
4. ONLY 20 total rushes vs Cleveland in NOT poor execution but crappy play calling. 
5. Not as many but still DUMB penalties.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

31 minutes ago, ticketssince61 said:

Two things that need to be kept in mind when reviewing these "statistics"

 

1. Quality of opposition - scoring 21 points against NE is much better than 21 against the Bengals

 

2. The points per game can get skewed over 1 or 2 blow out wins (or losses). e.g. The Ravens' 59 points against the Dolphins can make up for a few below average scoring games

 

The more important measure is consistency (i.e. Standard Deviation) in the points (scored or allowed). 

 

As an extreme case, a team that alternately scores either 0 or 50 may have a vastly different record than a a team that scores 25 every game

 

Also, important to take into account TD's on turnovers and by special teams (which we are sorely lacking)

 

To show points #1 and #2, The Cowboys should have a really good record, but their points were mostly piled up in a few blow out wins against very inferior opponents

    Giants       35 and 37

    Redskins  31

    Dolphins   31

 

Valid points, except what's up with putting "statistics" in quotes - is that supposed to indicate these are not really statistics or something? 

They are.  Seems extra.

 

I don't know about standard deviation being "more important".  I can't think of an example where standard deviation is interpretable without the context provided by the mean and the values relative to mean. I grant you it would provide additional insight.

 

The PF/PA on NFL.com actually include all points scored, including by ST and on turnovers.

 

Of course, that's the fundamental genesis of the Frankenstats like DVOA and etc.    Folks look at something simple like "points scored" and say "well, no, that doesn't tell the whole story, what about points given up?"  So someone like myself comes along and says "Let's just look at the difference between points scored and points given up and see what that tells us".  And it tells us stuff, but it's clearly not predictive, since teams with the same record have the same diff.

 

Then someone thoughtful like yourself comes along and tries to capture all that stuff - quality of opposition, standard deviation of the PF and PA, points scored on turnovers or off turnovers as a special category - whatever they argue may influence the result. 

 

Then you wind up with a special sauce statistic that is said to be predictive, but gets continually (in private) revamped and reweighted because it isn't quite quite

 

My key points from all this are:

1) this is a reasonable, simple and straightforward way to look at the relative quality of offense and defense on a team

2) nope it's not perfect

3) the Bills are in fact not the worst winning team in the league when both offensive and defensive performance are considered.

4) we are the equivalent of a bit over a FG per game away from being an "average" offense.  1 extra TD every 2 games would do it.

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

You can over analyze it to death. The Bills have a winning record because they’ve played a very weak schedule....but because they’ve played a weak schedule their point differential should be much higher. In other words they’re just barely getting by now. Wait until they play Dallas, Pittsburgh, New England, etc

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

19 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

That's exactly what the data show.  We are 3.3 points below league average as an offense.  Just over 1 FG per game.

not good enough, below average is going to continue to bite them in close games. if they don't pick it up pronto, like sunday pronto, they will not win many out of the next 7 games.

 

the browns game showed me they just can't get it done. 16 points

[Boatdrinks]

9 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

You can over analyze it to death. The Bills have a winning record because they’ve played a very weak schedule....but because they’ve played a weak schedule their point differential should be much higher. In other words they’re just barely getting by now. Wait until they play Dallas, Pittsburgh, New England, etc

Yes, in a nutshell the Bills are half a football team. The defense is above average, and the offense is below. In today’s NFL, it seems better to be strong on offense and weaker on D than the other way around. The game favors offense so much now, that most assets are best spent on that side of the ball. An elite pass rusher and a top CB / cover LB should be the major investments on D. 20 years ago a top D could carry a team. 

[saundena]

46 minutes ago, ticketssince61 said:

Two things that need to be kept in mind when reviewing these "statistics"

 

1. Quality of opposition - scoring 21 points against NE is much better than 21 against the Bengals

 

 

This is the key point.  It would be interesting to plot this against opponents win loss record

Edited November 12, 2019 by saundena

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Just now, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

not good enough, below average is going to continue to bite them in close games. if they don't pick it up pronto, like sunday pronto, they will not win many out of the next 7 games.

 

the browns game showed me they just can't get it done. 16 points

 

They did miss a FG from chip shot XP distance.

 

I'm not saying the offense doesn't need to improve, nor that below average offense won't bite us

But I'm puzzled at the "just can't get it done" conclusion.

 

The facts are, the Bills at Browns game was very close statistically.  The Browns had ~3.5m edge on TOP, which is big.  44 more offensive yards.  A missed FG from makeable distance, 0-2 on 4th down conversions vs 1-2.  No turnovers.

 

We lost.

 

But the roots of how we could have won are there, and they don't seem out of reach.

2 minutes ago, saundena said:

 

This is the key point.  It would be interesting to plot this against opponents win loss record

 

Go For It!  I can send you my point diff spreadsheet to start with if that helps out.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

21-20 is a guaranteed Win 

 

the rest is ALL noise 

you think NE gave a shite winning the SB 13-3?

 

you think they are still worried they only had 3 points by the half? 

 

[whatdrought]

Which really makes you wonder what happens if our defense keeps playing with low % but our offense finds itself. Could be good. Could never happen, but could be really good. 

[DasNootz]

so we should bet the under?

[LABILLBACKER]

Just play Singletary more if you want your point differential to go up. Get rid of scrubs like Lee Smith, Star, Murphy and Wallace. You'll see differential movement.

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

6 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

They did miss a FG from chip shot XP distance.

 

I'm not saying the offense doesn't need to improve, nor that below average offense won't bite us

But I'm puzzled at the "just can't get it done" conclusion.

 

The facts are, the Bills at Browns game was very close statistically.  The Browns had ~3.5m edge on TOP, which is big.  44 more offensive yards.  A missed FG from makeable distance, 0-2 on 4th down conversions vs 1-2.  No turnovers.

 

We lost.

 

But the roots of how we could have won are there, and they don't seem out of reach.

 

Go For It!  I can send you my point diff spreadsheet to start with if that helps out.

puzzled are you? keep an eye on the next seven games and see if they get it done with this porous offense. I don't like to jump too far ahead but I'm not looking forward to turkey day when the nation will have eyes on a team that can not score enough points up against the the cowgirls who presently sit at the top of total (27.9 Pts/G) offense, 3rd passing, 5th rushing. I do not see any kind of shoot out in that game and if the bills get behind early I don't see them catching up.

 

hence, why I feel they can not get it done. hey, I was as optimistic about this team as anyone else but they soured my outlook last week and looking back, they never did win a game aside from maybe the giants, in convincible fashion.

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

19 minutes ago, SlimShady'sGhost said:

21-20 is a guaranteed Win 

 

the rest is ALL noise 

you think NE gave a shite winning the SB 13-3?

 

you think they are still worried they only had 3 points by the half? 

thing is, those 3 points you you claim that are "only 3 points" is the stat showing they are 3 points below average.

 

that is not noise, it's a fact.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

puzzled are you? keep an eye on the next seven games and see if they get it done with this porous offense. I don't like to jump too far ahead but I'm not looking forward to turkey day when the nation will have eyes on a team that can not score enough points up against the the cowgirls who presently sit at the top of total (27.9 Pts/G) offense, 3rd passing, 5th rushing. I do not see any kind of shoot out in that game and if the bills get behind early I don't see them catching up.

 

hence, why I feel they can not get it done. hey, I was as optimistic about this team as anyone else but they soured my outlook last week and looking back, they never did win a game aside from maybe the giants, in convincible fashion.

 

Whoa, Big Fella! 

 

Little fact, Dallas is not at the top for pts/game.  #6 currently. 

Baltimore is currently at the top, with 33 pts/game.  NE is second with 30.

 

But that's really a digression.  I'm not talking about winning a particular game, or even those particular games, though it's a point that the Bills did hold NE to 16 points, and that was WITH the help of 4 interceptions, 2 fumbles (0 lost) and a knock-out blow to our starting QB.  There's more blueprint out there on how to work against our D now, and you can bet 'ol Hoody**** is taking notes. 

 

The question is why you believe it is out of scope for our offense to improve to average?  Foaming on about the great offenses of other teams really doesn't address that.

 

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

1 minute ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

thing is, those 3 points you you claim that are "only 3 points" is the stat showing they are 3 points below average.

 

that is not noise, it's a fact.

you mistook my post 

 

NE 3  Rams  0 

 

Josh is NOT an elite QB 20 games in.   Midling is fine by me.  

[IgotBILLStopay]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I'll bump my own thread, but hopefully legit because I'll put more data out there.

It also came up a while back, someone was expressing that the top-scoring teams are the top-winning teams. 

I put out raw data from NFL.com or pro-football-reference that I thought made the point "ain't necessarily so" but someone objected strongly that it was invalid because not corrected for games played (I thought it could be seen it still was, and the objector didn't want to grind the corrected data).

 

Since I have a spreadsheet rocking, here is the corrected data sorted by points for/game and wins.

What you can see, I think, is that while there's a correlation, and generally the top scoring teams are the top winning teams, it's not strong or predictive.

The #3 scoring team right now has 3 wins. 

If you tell me a team scores on average, 20-25 PPG (league average), I can tell you they have somewhere between 2 and 8 wins^^

 

^^ the same can be said of point differential/game, actually, but it's a better correlation because it's taking into account both sides of the ball

Thanks. Good to know that the way to win is not to just get playmakers on Offense (like the Browns did last offseason). A coach very familiar to this forum once said - "There's three parts to football: offense, defense, and special teams. You'd no more ignore special teams than you would offense or defense."

[The Frankish Reich]

1 hour ago, row_33 said:

 

duh....

 

 

when you win you have more points

 

and if you win 13 or 14 times it would take a heck of a lopsided set of losses to upset standing for point differential

 

the stat adds NOTHING of use.

 

 

row33, I know math is hard...

... that’s ok. I’ll explain: teams with W-L records better than what their point differentials suggest tend to fall back, and vice versa. The Bills W-L record is better than what their meager positive point differential would suggest. Therefore, we may infer that they won’t keep winning games at a .670 rate. 

Got it?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

15 minutes ago, IgotBILLStopay said:

Thanks. Good to know that the way to win is not to just get playmakers on Offense (like the Browns did last offseason). A coach very familiar to this forum once said - "There's three parts to football: offense, defense, and special teams. You'd no more ignore special teams than you would offense or defense."

 

I'm not sure that's the take-home I get from it?

 

We need playmakers on offense, there's no question.  We need a better offense that can execute better.  I think some rejuvenation salts for Haushka or a new FG kicker would not come amiss either.

 

But the key is always the relative quality of all 3 phases of the team, as you say.  (Since ST miscues and points scored/given up get folded into offense or defense I just look there)

 

The take home I have is that because our defense is relatively stout, an improvement to "average" offense would take us a long way.  Not to a Superbowl championship, but into the playoffs.  And I think it is feasibly in reach.

 

But I could be wrong.  Been wrong about lots of stuff here over the last 10 years.

 

 

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

The question is why you believe it is out of scope for our offense to improve to average?  Foaming on about the great offenses of other teams really doesn't address that.

foaming on? nice

 

I was basing it off nfl.com team stats. must of read it wrong. it was yds per game where they sit at 1st position (437.4)

 

have they improved in the last three games? 2-1, sure. points 13, 24 and 16. improvement?

 

they have 7 games to improve as you say. I'd like to believe it isn't out of scope but they haven't shown much improvement in the last 3 games to lead me to believe they will.  

Edited November 12, 2019 by DaBillsFanSince1973

[section122]

2 hours ago, SlimShady'sGhost said:

 

1. the O Line isn't protecting Josh's blind side 
2. Elite QB's are scoring points.  20 game Josh is not.  Nothing shocking there. 
3.  Execution is poor and there have been too many dropped balls.  
4. ONLY 20 total rushes vs Cleveland in NOT poor execution but crappy play calling. 
5. Not as many but still DUMB penalties.  

 

I think 1 and 3 for sure show that it isn't all Daboll and I would even put 5 in there.  At the pro level you shouldn't need coaching to avoid penalties.  For a team that preaches accountability Lee Smith continuing to get PT is a head scratcher.

 

I agree with you about 2 but that goes to my point that the QB is what drives people's opinions about a team.  Have a good one and people think you can win any game.  

 

#4 for me is certainly on play calling but I have seen elsewhere that the Browns stacked the box and forced Josh to beat them with his arm and he couldn't.  Now some of that is drops, some of that is lack of talent, and some of that is play calling.  He tested Denzel Ward a ton for some reason and he is their best cb.  I would have loved to see them pound the rock but Gore is showing his age.  I don't know why they are handling Singletary the way they are.  He should be the starting rb and get runs early and often, that we agree on.

 

If I am going to question the coordinator Singletary's lack of pt and Lee Smith's amount of pt are the 2 places I am most sore about!

 

Bills added talent but they still are not one of the more talented teams.  That is the biggest problem with this team imo.  Apparently last week talent trumped culture .  The phrase he took that from is hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard.  When talent works hard they are unstoppable and that's what the offense needs.  Not just process guys but tops of the league talent process guys.  Tre White is a great example of that and the Bills need more of that imo.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

foaming on? nice

 

I was basing it off nfl.com team stats. must of read it wrong. it was yds per game where they sit at 1st position (437.4)

 

have they improved in the last three games? 2-1, sure. points 13, 24 and 16. improvement?

 

they have 7 games to improve as you say. I'd like to believe it isn't out of scope but they haven't shown much improvement in the last 3 games to lead me to believe they will.  

 

But the question wasn't whether what the Bills have done on offense has been good enough.  That's what you're going on about, and it's whacking a dead equine.  We all agree.  They're 3.3 points below the league average for scoring points.  Not good enough.

 

The question is, why you feel it is out of scope, unlikely, that the Bills offense could improve even a modest amount? 

 

Josh Allen is developing as a QB and may never be what we want, but it seems to me that we're a missed FG or 2, a dropped pass here and there, and maybe a couple different playcalls away from a modestly better outcome.

 

Now make no mistake, we'll still get our clock cleaned by the best teams at this point, but we should be able to hold our own and win the ones we should with just a scootch better execution.  It doesn't seem too unreasonable a hope.

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

11 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

Now make no mistake, we'll still get our clock cleaned by the best teams at this point, but we should be able to hold our own and win the ones we should with just a scootch better execution.  It doesn't seem too unreasonable a hope.

too bad that scootch wasn't there last week against the 2-6 brownies.

 

maybe they can gain that scootch against the 2-7 fins?

 

we shall see.

 

edit: as for whether I believe they can improve or not. not saying they can't but not real confident they can?

Edited November 12, 2019 by DaBillsFanSince1973

[EmotionallyUnstable]

Cool stuff. 
 

I can’t help but consider the fact that we’ve played terrible teams. You look at games where we’ve score well and/or held teams to minimal scoring, and it’s usually clear. 
 

I think averaging 19 points a game is most frustrating to me in two parts:

 

1) I know they can be better. Between the drops, penalties, missed open WRs lack of a deep threat, it’s clear that if they click, they can be an average to slightly above average offense. 
 

2) If they HAD managed to average out about middle of the pack, they’d likely be 8-1 right now. 
 

Anyone trying to blame the defense for not stepping up or playing poorly is nuts. Forget all the rushing yards, or long drives, or lack of turnovers, they are statistically playing well in the most important category: score.

 

its time to put up or shut up for Allen and Co. 
 

 

[ColoradoBills]

Fascinating statistical data.

Question:  Do we suck again?

[ILBillsfan]

I also like DVOA’s on teams offense/defense to get a good picture of the team

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, EmotionallyUnstable said:

Cool stuff. 
 

I can’t help but consider the fact that we’ve played terrible teams. You look at games where we’ve score well and/or held teams to minimal scoring, and it’s usually clear. 
 

I think averaging 19 points a game is most frustrating to me in two parts:

 

1) I know they can be better. Between the drops, penalties, missed open WRs lack of a deep threat, it’s clear that if they click, they can be an average to slightly above average offense. 
 

2) If they HAD managed to average out about middle of the pack, they’d likely be 8-1 right now. 

 

Agreed.

 

We can do better with the guys we have, and it's frustrating to not see it on Sunday.

[BADOLBILZ]

9 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 

Buffalo has the lowest point differential of the 6 win teams, but better than all but two 5 win teams and one each of the 7 and 8 win teams.  So we are certainly not the "worst 6 win team in the history of the league" but we're verging on overperforming our offense.

 

 

 

 

Whenever we hear this kind of thing.........and every so often the Bills get off to a hot start...........I remember the 1996 Redskins that came in to Buffalo at a surprising 7-1.

 

 Bills kicked their ass and they staggered to a 9-7 finish.

 

THAT was a team that wasn't anywhere near as good as their record.

 

This year's Bills have had a great schedule advantage but it wouldn't have been a shocking turn of events for them to be a 10 win team in a transition year in the AFC that included 2 teams in their own division in major turmoil.

[NoSaint]

9 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I've tucked this data from previous weeks into various threads.

Thought I'd give it a shot with its own thread and see what folks make of it.

 

Around the league, the average of points scored/points given up per game is holding steady at 22.6 with a standard deviation of 5.3.

That means a "typical" NFL team scores or gives up between 17-28 points. 

Our D, giving up now an average of 16.6 ppg is still above average.

Our O, scoring19.3 ppg is below average, but not horrid - it's basically 1 score per game below average.  (3.3 points to be specific, or just over 1 FG per game).

 

Data are sorted by Wins.  From NFL.com

With Week 10 in the books, we can see that things are starting to sort themselves out, but the wins still don't totally align with the point differential per game. 

 

For example, the 4th best team on point differential is Dallas.  Beware of the 'Boys.

 

Green Bay and Seattle, on the other hand, are running significantly lower net points/game not only than NE and SF, but a number of teams that have fewer wins including Baltimore, Minnesota, Houston, and (for Seattle) KC, LA, and Buffalo.  That says to me that they're overperforming - their defense in the case of Seattle.

 

Buffalo has the lowest point differential of the 6 win teams, but better than all but two 5 win teams and one each of the 7 and 8 win teams.  So we are certainly not the "worst 6 win team in the history of the league" but we're verging on overperforming our offense.

 

OK hope this is interesting to someone, let me know how you see it.  Will answer any questions, but I think it's pretty stump simple in terms of what I did.

 

I think the bottom line is that most NFL games are a lot closer in score than people think.

 

 

 

Is there a reason you are blending a per game with an overall net? Wouldn’t win percentage Jake more sense than total wins?

7 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Good post.

 

That's exactly what the data show.  We are 3.3 points below league average as an offense.  Just over 1 FG per game.

that’s not a small amount though. Go back through many of our 6-10 type seasons and toss a touchdown on it score every other week and that record would shoot up often times.

[Seoulofstone]

3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

But the question wasn't whether what the Bills have done on offense has been good enough.  That's what you're going on about, and it's whacking a dead equine.  We all agree.  They're 3.3 points below the league average for scoring points.  Not good enough.

 

The question is, why you feel it is out of scope, unlikely, that the Bills offense could improve even a modest amount? 

 

Josh Allen is developing as a QB and may never be what we want, but it seems to me that we're a missed FG or 2, a dropped pass here and there, and maybe a couple different playcalls away from a modestly better outcome.

 

Now make no mistake, we'll still get our clock cleaned by the best teams at this point, but we should be able to hold our own and win the ones we should with just a scootch better execution.  It doesn't seem too unreasonable a hope.

 

Last year Bills averaged 16.8 pts per game. This year, this year 19.3 with 9 worse teams in the league. Gradual improvement.

 

teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/points-per-game

Edited November 13, 2019 by Seoulofstone