How to Win in the Modern NFL! Drafting a Dynasty!

[Stranger]

There is hope! Lots and lots of hope. The Rams defense was dead last in the NFL, when it came to yards per pass attempts. And we won 7 games. The Rams were 31st in the NFL in overall YDS/A pass differential . What does it all mean? On the statistical surface we should have lost more games. Why didn't we?

I believe we are 4 players away from becoming a perennial playoff machine. We got Greg Williams, and I'm sure our pass defense will improve! We got a sack machine and that's a good thing, and I'm sure that's one of the reasons we didn't lose more games. If we can get a #1 Wide Receiver, and a few weapons for Greg Williams, then we will be well on our way to multiple playoff visits.

I'm not a huge Schotty fan, and I noticed someone pointed out that his offenses have never generated many yards per pass attempt. I'm not sure Schotty knows how to accentuate his players strengths and hide their weaknesses. Take Sam Bradford for instance.

In college Sam thrived in an uptempo no huddle offense. Right? I've seen Bradford thrive the few times the Rams have run an untempo no huddle offense! The problem was, we ran uptempo after we were 20 points down. I'm not advocating running uptempo no-huddle all the time. But I'd love to shock a few teams and come out in the first quarter running uptempo no huddle for a few series. Mix up Schotty!

I could make similar arguments for my perceived incorrect utilization of Tavon Austin, Cook, Quick, and Givens by Schotty.

Addressing my data size. I agree that the Rams sack data was an extremely small sample to draw conclusions from. But my main point was a positive YDS/A passing differential equals wins. Thus I feel that 115 out of the last 132 playoff teams is a sufficient sample size. And every team in entire 2013 NFL season is a reasonable sample size.

correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation, that's all I'm sayin'

 

[Zaphod]

I love this post. You've basically articulated what I couldn't even quantify for the value of defense over offense, and in particular the importance of our secondary in the grand scheme of things.

No two ways about it, I'll always say that you can't play copycat, because it's more expensive to chase the same strategy and it's where you see things get overvalued.

But mathematically, it's obvious. Passing plays simply win more games during the season because less can go wrong.

I just disagree on us taking Clowney over Mack because I think Clowney would suffer at everything but stuffing the run as an OLB. Having three line backers that can drop into pass coverage just makes our version of the 4-3 defense that much more unpredictable in the long run.

I very strongly agree with taking Matthews over Robinson because regardless of what the stats say about our offensive line, they need to improve pass protection in obvious spread formation passing plays, not running the I formation to set up play action fakes.

 

[RamsAndEwe]

correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation, that's all I'm sayin'

Oh my god! I know. Believe me, I know! And yes you're right Stranger! But that statement reminds me of a problem I had on another site.

I wrote a series of articles last year on another site, and this guy kept slinging misogynist, sexist slurs at me. At the same time he would shroud the sexual slurs in a cloud of truth, and claim correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation. Which is true. Basically he would attack me on two fronts. A personal front and with the scientific axiom that correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation.

I felt I was researching my butt off, and publishing fairly lengthy detailed articles, and this guy would spread rumors about me. And it's easy to say "Wrong!" or "Correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation." It only takes one breath. Finally I posted a lengthy and very boring reply, on scientific method and how I used T-tests to built my hypothesis. I got a degree in biology, but I've always been a scientist in my body, mind, and heart!

I would never claim any conclusion I make is fact. I wouldn't even claim my conclusions are theory. Because of the rigid and multitudinous repeatable experiments which must take place, over decades to award a hypothesis theory status. A scientific theory is something that has never been disproved. Millions of repeatable experiments and never once disproved!

On occasion I run T-tests to test my hypothesis. And for this article I ran t-tests on the correlation between YDS/A passing differentials and won loss records. So I allow myself to say that my results suggests a high correlation between passing differential and won loss records. Suggests is a key scientific word. If I wished, I could have added T-test formulas and math work, along with plus or minus degrees of freedom to my article. But, I would have lost my reader. My hypothesis is a dim flashlight in a ginormous cavern. It's not much, but it's all I have to light my way.

I will continue to assemble data during the 2014 season to test my hypothesis. I will attempt to disprove my hypothesis, because that's what scientific method is all about!

I dig your style Stranger!

 

[Faceplant]

Excellent read Ewe. Unfortunately, Schotty just does not inspire confidence in me that he can change his stripes. How many times have we seen the dreaded 3rd and 5 or less with Sam firing a way to hot fastball off the hands of a WR on a 3yd slant route?? Too many times I say.... TOO MANY!!!!!

 

[Alan]

RamsAndEwe with the lesser details:
I will attempt to disprove my hypothesis, because that's what scientific method is all about!

Well, that and pristine lab coats with really cool pocket protectors.

Just saying.

 

[RamsAndEwe]

I love this post. You've basically articulated what I couldn't even quantify for the value of defense over offense, and in particular the importance of our secondary in the grand scheme of things.

No two ways about it, I'll always say that you can't play copycat, because it's more expensive to chase the same strategy and it's where you see things get overvalued.

But mathematically, it's obvious. Passing plays simply win more games during the season because less can go wrong.

I just disagree on us taking Clowney over Mack because I think Clowney would suffer at everything but stuffing the run as an OLB. Having three line backers that can drop into pass coverage just makes our version of the 4-3 defense that much more unpredictable in the long run.

I very strongly agree with taking Matthews over Robinson because regardless of what the stats say about our offensive line, they need to improve pass protection in obvious spread formation passing plays, not running the I formation to set up play action fakes.

Thanks Zaphod. I feel more comfortable with my data than I am drafting Clowney or Jake Mathews. I am proponent of trading back for extra picks. Let me say three things that bother me about Mack.
Khalil Mack is 23 years old. Clowney just turned 21, while Watkins and Mike Evans are 20. Khalil Mack is a year and half older than Alec Ogletree.

Against Ohio State Khalil Mack collected his 2.5 sacks Ohio State's right tackle Taylor Decker. Who is Taylor Decker? Exactly! Taylor graduated from high school in 2012. I think his game against Khalil Mack was Decker's first start ever at the University level. Decker is teenager.

I saw a bunch of Clowney and Mack film. On film Clowney is vastly superior. Mack disappeared for long period's of time against teams like the Stoney Brook Seawolves. Cool mascot name!

 

[Stranger]

Oh my god! I know. Believe me, I know! And yes you're right Stranger! But that statement reminds me of a problem I had on another site.

I wrote a series of articles last year on another site, and this guy kept slinging misogynist, sexist slurs at me. At the same time he would shroud the sexual slurs in a cloud of truth, and claim correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation. Which is true. Basically he would attack me on two fronts. A personal front and with the scientific axiom that correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation.

I felt I was researching my butt off, and publishing fairly lengthy detailed articles, and this guy would spread rumors about me. And it's easy to say "Wrong!" or "Correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation." It only takes one breath. Finally I posted a lengthy and very boring reply, on scientific method and how I used T-tests to built my hypothesis. I got a degree in biology, but I've always been a scientist in my body, mind, and heart!

I would never claim any conclusion I make is fact. I wouldn't even claim my conclusions are theory. Because of the rigid and multitudinous repeatable experiments which must take place, over decades to award a hypothesis theory status. A scientific theory is something that has never been disproved. Millions of repeatable experiments and never once disproved!

On occasion I run T-tests to test my hypothesis. And for this article I ran t-tests on the correlation between YDS/A passing differentials and won loss records. So I allow myself to say that my results suggests a high correlation between passing differential and won loss records. Suggests is a key scientific word. If I wished, I could have added T-test formulas and math work, along with plus or minus degrees of freedom to my article. But, I would have lost my reader. My hypothesis is a dim flashlight in a ginormous cavern. It's not much, but it's all I have to light my way.

I will continue to assemble data during the 2014 season to test my hypothesis. I will attempt to disprove my hypothesis, because that's what scientific method is all about!

I dig your style Stranger!

Well, first off, you can be certain that I won't be shrouding sexual slurs at you as truth, mostly cause I don't dig bigotry and secondly cause "truth" is a positivist's form of B.S.

Sounds like we're on a similar page, and perhaps even have similar backgrounds & perspective. So, as someone who got a degree in bio, you know that we can't predict the future from the past, and that bio is a nonlinear system that human frameworks can kinda sorta model, at least only as well as we ourselves observe weak patterns through the noise. So, while a T-test can alert us to the SD between two groups, it doesn't necessarily tell us that those two groups will perform as they have, or that those two groups can even be grouped in the future - small changes can create big results in a nonlinear system. Hence, I think you're right to suggest Suggest as a compromise.

Just keepin' it real, even though real isn't real, it's only what we agree on.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I would be interested in researching the numbers when teams use play action. It stands to reason that when a team like Seattle uses the run game to set the tone and uses a lot of play action that their yards/pass would be fairly high.
Not a lot of check downs when teams go to the play action pass. It's usually a play pass designed to go down the field aggressively.

 

[Thordaddy]

Listen Ewe ( been dien' to say that) ,thanks for the hard work, for me turnovers are the stat,it was widely reported during the run up to the Super Bowl how the Seahawks had "turnover Thursday",it seems to have worked well for them.
FWIW it's one of the reasons I stand with Sam , he doesn't turn the ball over,give him a defense like the Hawks have and Stacy running like he did last year and he won't need the 12th asshole to put up a better season than Wilson Kaepernick or Palmer

 

[Zaphod]

Thanks Zaphod. I feel more comfortable with my data than I am drafting Clowney or Jake Mathews. I am proponent of trading back for extra picks. Let me say three things that bother me about Mack.
Khalil Mack is 23 years old. Clowney just turned 21, while Watkins and Mike Evans are 20.

Against Ohio State Khalil Mack collected his 2.5 sacks Ohio State's right tackle Taylor Decker. Who is Taylor Decker? Exactly! Taylor graduated from high school in 2012. I think it was Decker's first start ever at the University level. Decker is teenager.

I saw a bunch of Clowney and Mack film. On film Clowney is vastly superior. Mack disappeared for long period's of time against teams like the Stoney Brook Seawolves. Cool mascot name!

I sure wouldn't cry if we did draft Clowney. I just feel like Mack is a ridiculous athlete and football player with a crazy motor in his own right, just with a skill set that better compliments our needs.

I think Fisher may want Watkins over anyone else in the draft. The prospect of throwing Watkins, Bailey and Austin at teams on a consistent basis just makes you want to roll the dice on the offensive line for one more season.

I also wouldn't be upset with them taking Matthews as a long term solution at left tackle.

IMO, in all areas but the secondary, they really did a great job filling holes via. free agency, so in a lot of ways they can take the BPA at any position in this critical draft.

 

[RamsAndEwe]

Well, first off, you can be certain that I won't be shrouding sexual slurs at you as truth, mostly cause I don't dig bigotry and secondly cause "truth" is a positivist's form of B.S.

Sounds like we're on a similar page, and perhaps even have similar backgrounds & perspective. So, as someone who got a degree in bio, you know that we can't predict the future from the past, and that bio is a nonlinear system that human frameworks can kinda sorta model, at least only as well as we ourselves observe weak patterns through the noise. So, while a T-test can alert us to the SD between two groups, it doesn't necessarily tell us that those two groups will perform as they have, or that those two groups can even be grouped in the future - small changes can create big results in a nonlinear system. Hence, I think you're right to suggest Suggest as a compromise.

Just keepin' it real, even though real isn't real, it's only what we agree on.

Hey Stranger, I didn't mean to put you in a compound sentence with a misogynist male! I know your a groovy dude! In fact, in fiction, and even myth you're inseparable groovy Dudes! I love your avatar Stranger!

When I was just a little girl, my big brothers took me to the movies one summer, and we watched a creature double feature of FROGS and The Abominable Dr. Phibes! Since then, I've loved Vincent Price and Sam Elliott. Sam Elliott shares my last name. I'm Cindy Elliott. a big fan of Sam Elliott, the Stranger, TS Eliot, Tombstone, and Draft Day!

You and I are on the same page scientifically and scorning bigotry. There are words I can't say out loud to myself. I won't type them, say them, and I feel uncomfortable even thinking them. Can ya dig where I'm coming from Stranger? It's weird. You know that word Aldon Smith said in an airport? I have a hard time typing that word when referencing football and a very long pass. The sad thing is that word has OM in the middle of it! Universal vibration! The om of your Mom, grooming a QB, in a moment, om stuck in a room, blossoming bloom, weep by a tomb, in the sound of a boom, deep in a womb. Om is cool word woven inside a dangerous word! What was Aldon Smith thinking?

 

[LesBaker]

Oh my god! I know. Believe me, I know! And yes you're right Stranger! But that statement reminds me of a problem I had on another site.

I wrote a series of articles last year on another site, and this guy kept slinging misogynist, sexist slurs at me. At the same time he would shroud the sexual slurs in a cloud of truth, and claim correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation. Which is true. Basically he would attack me on two fronts.

I have an idea what poster it was, that won't happen here though you can be assured of that. In fact when Flipper got a little flip (haha see what I did there) he got enough flak that he felt bad and apologized. Username dick punched him anyway just for good measure.

There was a great poster at the Herd many years ago, LadyRamFan13, that was run off by a couple of guys giving her crap about being a woman.

You're safe here.

 

[RamsAndEwe]

I have an idea what poster it was, that won't happen here though you can be assured of that. In fact when Flipper got a little flip (haha see what I did there) he got enough flak that he felt bad and apologized. Username dick punched him anyway just for good measure.

There was a great poster at the Herd many years ago, LadyRamFan13, that was run off by a couple of guys giving her crap about being a woman.

You're safe here.

I forgive flipper, and I hope he forgives me if I misunderstood him. Everybody loves flipper! We just started off on the wrong foot....err or flipper. It's all good! If you see a movie, where a man and a woman start off antagonistically, they always end up compadres in the end. Life imitates art! Let bygones be bygones. Don't beat a dead horse. And in social intercourse, of course "Get thee to a Punnery woman! And leave your worn out clichés at the door!" Doh!

 

[bomebadeeda]

Great stuff you are throwing out.
But I do have one question. You are advocating having a higher Yards per attempt and use Seattle as an example. But aren't you arguing against yourself when it's obvious their rushing game sets up their longer downfield attempts. When Lynch is at his best, teams have to bring someone extra down in the box and it leaves their receivers (for the most part...) in man coverages. And in that scenerio teams would certainly push their patterns down the field, taking advantage of making teams cover for longer periods of time. (also Wilson being elusive outside the pocket helps....). A better offensive line that can block the front 7 allows a team to do this as well. If Olines can line up in any formation and run or pass at will either would compliment the other making both be more successful.
I like you were able to put things into perspective as you see them. But I think things work together from both an offensive and defensive perspective where success is obtainable by attacking a weakness. But identifying the weakness is the trick. Both your own....and your opponents. And what works one week is game planned the following one. I think Seattle's (and many other team's ) success was more a symptom, than a rule.
But I love the discussion you have brought forth......

 

[Stranger]

Hey Stranger, I didn't mean to put you in a compound sentence with a misogynist male! I know your a groovy dude! In fact, in fiction, and even myth you're inseparable groovy Dudes! I love your avatar Stranger!

When I was just a little girl, my big brothers took me to the movies one summer, and we watched a creature double feature of FROGS and The Abominable Dr. Phibes! Since then, I've loved Vincent Price and Sam Elliott. Sam Elliott shares my last name. I'm Cindy Elliott. a big fan of Sam Elliott, the Stranger, TS Eliot, Tombstone, and Draft Day!

You and I are on the same page scientifically and scorning bigotry. There are words I can't say out loud to myself. I won't type them, say them, and I feel uncomfortable even thinking them. Can ya dig where I'm coming from Stranger? It's weird. You know that word Aldon Smith said in an airport? I have a hard time typing that word when referencing football and a very long pass. The sad thing is that word has OM in the middle of it! Universal vibration! The om of your Mom, grooming a QB, in a moment, om stuck in a room, blossoming bloom, weep by a tomb, in the sound of a boom, deep in a womb. Om is cool word woven inside a dangerous word! What was Aldon Smith thinking?

Yup, I can dig ya. But I'll never censor my own use of language, at least not based upon upon some institution's set of rules. Stranger follows his own rules.

 

[Alan]

bomebadeeda with his understanding:
But I do have one question. You are advocating having a higher Yards per attempt and use Seattle as an example.

I don't believe that is true. She's arguing for a higher differential, achieved by increasing your own average, decreasing the average of you opponent or doing both.

 

[bomebadeeda]

I don't believe that is true. She's arguing for a higher differential, achieved by increasing your own average, decreasing the average of you opponent or doing both.

But wouldn't what I pointed out, show that she's looking at thing from a symptoms perspective. Instead of actually a reason or a trend? (Maybe not the best term....but it's the best example I can do w/ my limited vocabulary.....)

 

[blackbart]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/yardsPerPassAttempt

http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-yards-per-pass-attempt

Washington 7.6 allowed worst in league RG 7.02 Cousins 5.51
StL 7.4 Clemens 6.91 Bradford 6.44 Austin 0.0 Hekker 0.0
Seattle 5.4 Jackson 11.62 Wilson 8.25

I'm not sure how the team numbers are being figured but have Jackson throw 13 times for that average vs 2 attempt by Austin and Hekker seem to skew the numbers some.

I'm all for having a dominant defense and good to very good offense just not sure how some of these things come in to play like Bilal Powell having a 30 yard average?

 

[RamsAndEwe]

But wouldn't what I pointed out, show that she's looking at thing from a symptoms perspective. Instead of actually a reason or a trend? (Maybe not the best term....but it's the best example I can do w/ my limited vocabulary.....)

Great stuff you are throwing out.
But I do have one question. You are advocating having a higher Yards per attempt and use Seattle as an example. But aren't you arguing against yourself when it's obvious their rushing game sets up their longer downfield attempts. When Lynch is at his best, teams have to bring someone extra down in the box and it leaves their receivers (for the most part...) in man coverages. And in that scenerio teams would certainly push their patterns down the field, taking advantage of making teams cover for longer periods of time. (also Wilson being elusive outside the pocket helps....). A better offensive line that can block the front 7 allows a team to do this as well. If Olines can line up in any formation and run or pass at will either would compliment the other making both be more successful.
I like you were able to put things into perspective as you see them. But I think things work together from both an offensive and defensive perspective where success is obtainable by attacking a weakness. But identifying the weakness is the trick. Both your own....and your opponents. And what works one week is game planned the following one. I think Seattle's (and many other team's ) success was more a symptom, than a rule.
But I love the discussion you have brought forth......

I'm not advocating copying OR not copying the Seattle Seahawks.

I'm trying to make a convincing argument that, teams who average more yards per pass attempt than their defenses allow per pass attempt win more games. The rushing equivalent of the YDS/A differential stat, does not correlate significantly with Won-Loss records. 6 out of the 9 worst rushing defenses made the playoffs. What else do these stats suggest? If you wish to win in the modern NFL it is more efficient to allocate Salary Cap resources and coaching hires toward establishing superior passing offensive and defensive units.

I found passing YDS/A correlates with won loss record better than any other stat, outside of out scoring your opponents. This stat enables you look under the hood of your favorite football team. What I call YDS/A passing differential is a stat symptom and has an abstract relationship to winning football. I could have delved deeper into non abstract causation in my article, like play action passes, QB progressions, and shutdown cornerbacks, but I didn't have enough room in my article.

That doesn't mean I haven't pondered why Sam Bradford always has a low passing YDS/A. I wrote an article last year listing 21 possible reasons contributing to Bradford's low pass YDS/A. One of my reasons was how a superior rushing attack opens up a more efficient passing attack. So I agree with you. A great rushing attack and rushing defense doesn't hurt, it helps. But the modern Salary Cap makes it difficult to have your cake and eat it too. For example:

The 49'er and the Seahawks have minimum wage quarterbacks. Both Kaepernick and Russell Wilson can extend plays with their legs easier than Sam Bradford, thus exploiting broken coverage downfield. That ability does wonders for your YDS/A. If I was GM, with unlimited job security,of a modern mythical NFL team.

I would use a first round draft pick on a quarterback, who has the ability to extend plays with his legs, yet displays ability to pass from the pocket. Why? First round, because I have an extra option year on him. If my QB is good, I have a winning cheap QB for 5 years, and my saved salary cap money, which I can distribute among elite positional players. If I hit the jackpot and draft an elite QB like Peyton Manning, A Rodgers, or Tom Brady, I will of course extend my elite QB's contract. If my QB is not a top 8 QB I would trade him or not resign him after his 5 year contract is up. Then do it all over again. If I have an average QB after 5 years is up, and our team is close to competing for a Super Bowl, then I would franchise tag the QB.

I'm not saying Wilson or Kaepernick are better than Bradford. I am saying the 49er's and Seahawks have a better QB Salary Cap situation than the Rams at present.

 

[Alan]

bomebadeeda following a single path:
But wouldn't what I pointed out, show that she's looking at thing from a symptoms perspective. Instead of actually a reason or a trend? (Maybe not the best term....but it's the best example I can do w/ my limited vocabulary.....)

There are usually multiple paths you can choose to either prove your theory or discover if there is a trend or even a repeatable conclusion. Including starting from a conclusion and working your way backwards to see if the facts support it. In any case, some methods may be better than others.

She didn't just approach the problem from one direction either. She also looked at other reasons for success that might be more important than the stat you're questioning. Her research appears to show that other factors are not as significant. You may be correct in your assumption that either her methods or conclusion is flawed, but in order to convince anyone else, shouldn't you provide an alternative view or at least something that refutes her conclusion?

More to the point though, you're merely giving reasons why the Seahags are able to enjoy that high differential. That really doesn't have anything to do with what the effect of having a high differential has on winning does it? The methods you use to achieve that high differential don't affect the conclusion, it just shows you one way of achieving the stat that leads to the conclusion. Or in this case, how to be a winner.

Of course that doesn't mean her conclusion is correct. The data she used to arrive at her conclusion might not have been the pertinent data she needed or there could be a completely different set of data that would prove something else is more important. Go for it.