Kelly the Dog Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 EDIT: These are "Adjusted Line yards" which put different weight on carries but very interesting Teams are ranked according to Adjusted Line Yards. Based on regression analysis, the Adjusted Line Yards formula takes all running back carries and assigns responsibility to the offensive line based on the following percentages: * Losses: 120% value * 0-4 Yards: 100% value * 5-10 Yards: 50% value * 11+ Yards: 0% value These numbers are then adjusted based on down, distance, situation, and opponent, and normalized so that the league average for Adjusted Line Yards per carry is the same as the league average for RB yards per carry (current baseline: 4.08). These stats are explained further here. The following stats are not adjusted for opponent: * RB Yards: Yards per carry by that team's running backs, according to standard NFL numbers. * 10+ Yards: Percentage of a team's rushing yards more than 10 yards past the line of scrimmage. Represents yardage not reflected in Adjusted Line Yards stat. * Power Success: Percentage of runs on third or fourth down, two yards or less to go, that achieved a first down or touchdown. Also includes runs on first-and-goal or second-and-goal from the two-yard line or closer. This is the only statistic on this page that includes quarterbacks. * Stuffed: Percentage of runs that result in (on first down) zero or negative gain or (on second through fourth down) less than one-fourth the yards needed for another first down. Since being stuffed is bad, teams are ranked from stuffed least often (#1) to most often (#32). And in the adjusted ratings it was a whopping 5.79 yards a carry, and a full yard and a half more than running around right end. If you look at the Gamebooks for the games Peters missed, in game one we had about 100 total yards rushing and we had a decent game running around left end. But it was pretty much 40 yards on those two plays. Still a decent game running left. Game #15 against the Broncos we could run for sh-- the entire game and had 87 or so total yards with a 3.3 per carry average, so we weren't chewing up yards off left tackle at all when he was out. Game #16 against the Pats we were shut out but Freddy Jackson had a great game rushing. About 90% of his yards were up the middle or the right side. So we didn't run up any kind of average in that game either. So it was pretty much when Peters was there. http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol http://www.nfl.com/scores?season=2008&week=Week+1 http://www.nfl.com/liveupdate/gamecenter/2...EN_Gamebook.pdf http://www.nfl.com/scores?season=2008&week=Week+17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 He gave up a league-leading # of sacks for a LT. He didn't report to camp despite being under contract for 3 years. Chronically gimpy groin. I'll take the picks, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest three3 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 where was jason peters on 3rd and short, 4th and short? where was he when the glove wearing mary kept getting pummeled by right defensive ends? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Yeah, but I thought that he did not have a good year according to what I have read here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Lynch ran better to the right than the left last year (6.1 versus 5.1). For Freddy, he ran much better to the left (6.2 versus 3.2) but ran only 10 times to the left and 6 times to the right, compared to 20 times each side for Lynch. What does this mean? Who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 17, 2009 Author Share Posted April 17, 2009 Yeah, but I thought that he did not have a good year according to what I have read here. This was when he was miserable, and played horribly. Think of how good it would have been when he was happy and playing well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 This was when he was miserable, and played horribly. Think of how good it would have been when he was happy and playing well. Or before he shredded his groin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glass To The Arson Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 id take the picks thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endless Ike Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 This is a bad trade that's only going to look worse as time goes by Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 This was when he was miserable, and played horribly. Think of how good it would have been when he was happy and playing well. Exactly. The guy saw how much we paid Dockery and others and wondered why he was not getting what he was worth. As others have mentioned, he did not want to leave Buffalo, he just wanted to get paid what he thought he was worth -- just like every other player in the NFL and every guy on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In space no one can hear Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 EDIT: These are "Adjusted Line yards" which put different weight on carries but very interesting And in the adjusted ratings it was a whopping 5.79 yards a carry, and a full yard and a half more than running around right end. If you look at the Gamebooks for the games Peters missed, in game one we had about 100 total yards rushing and we had a decent game running around left end. But it was pretty much 40 yards on those two plays. Still a decent game running left. Game #15 against the Broncos we could run for sh-- the entire game and had 87 or so total yards with a 3.3 per carry average, so we weren't chewing up yards off left tackle at all when he was out. Game #16 against the Pats we were shut out but Freddy Jackson had a great game rushing. About 90% of his yards were up the middle or the right side. So we didn't run up any kind of average in that game either. So it was pretty much when Peters was there. http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol http://www.nfl.com/scores?season=2008&week=Week+1 http://www.nfl.com/liveupdate/gamecenter/2...EN_Gamebook.pdf http://www.nfl.com/scores?season=2008&week=Week+17 There are no statistics you can research that will convince these defeatists fans that it's not worthwhile to trade your best players for picks. They will never understand that Jason Peters was the Bills most valuable commodity, is signed for 2 more years and if we were a team that was aspiring to build greatness we would not consider trading him- much less for the underwhelming bounty that was received. If our franchise had direction and vision- I don't think this situation would have ever gotten to the point of no return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endless Ike Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 There are no statistics you can research that will convince these defeatists fans that it's not worthwhile to trade your best players for picks. They will never understand that Jason Peters was the Bills most valuable commodity, is signed for 2 more years and if we were a team that was aspiring to build greatness we would not consider trading him- much less for the underwhelming bounty that was received. If our franchise had direction and vision- I don't think this situation would have ever gotten to the point of no return. 100% correct...i seriously feel liek the team is run by stadium wall posters who just exist in an echo chamber and are capable of convincing themselves anything is a good idea if they hear it repeated enough times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 You're really stretching now. Just give up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 There are no statistics you can research that will convince these defeatists fans that it's not worthwhile to trade your best players for picks. They will never understand that Jason Peters was the Bills most valuable commodity, is signed for 2 more years and if we were a team that was aspiring to build greatness we would not consider trading him- much less for the underwhelming bounty that was received. If our franchise had direction and vision- I don't think this situation would have ever gotten to the point of no return. I think we can easily find a rookie who can give up a sack per game. And pay him a lot less. The real victims in this trade are the local area Mighty Taco, Ted's, Anderson's, and Duff's restaurants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBillsDB Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 where was jason peters on 3rd and short, 4th and short? where was he when the glove wearing mary kept getting pummeled by right defensive ends? He was watching Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest three3 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 watching the d end zoom right past him you mean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In space no one can hear Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 I think we can easily find a rookie who can give up a sack per game. And pay him a lot less. The real victims in this trade are the local area Mighty Taco, Ted's, Anderson's, and Duff's restaurants. The Eagles have been a very successful franchise the past decade. It's telling that the Eagles had plenty of cap room and extra picks this year and could have obtained Braylon Edwards or Anquan Boldin with the picks they traded us---but instead targeted Peters. The Eagles feel he is worthy of 3 picks(including a first rounder) AND probably the 11 million a year he is seeking. I'd pefer to keep our most valued players and build a foundation for success rather than continually rebuilding year to year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 I may be totally off base with this...but it looked to me like the run blocking was better when Chambers was in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Exactly. The guy saw how much we paid Dockery and others and wondered why he was not getting what he was worth. As others have mentioned, he did not want to leave Buffalo, he just wanted to get paid what he thought he was worth -- just like every other player in the NFL and every guy on this board. So you are saying he played poorly because he was worried about what other players were making? Yeah thats a guy i want on my team. He was still getting paid 3 million dollars. Yes he was underpaid, but that tells you something about a guys character. If he wont try hard because he thinks he isn't making enough money. How about work hard and you will get paid. Part of the reason the Bills let him walk was because of his attitude. Thanks for proveing that point with your statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 100% correct...i seriously feel liek the team is run by stadium wall posters who just exist in an echo chamber and are capable of convincing themselves anything is a good idea if they hear it repeated enough times Boy, does that cut both ways... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts