DVOA on the Colts

by shake n bake on Dec 2, 2008 4:19 PM EST Comment 26 comments

The Colts DVOA dropped like you would expect. What you wouldn't expect is that it dropped less than a percent allowing them to rise up one place overall and in the AFC due to Arizona and the Jets taking big hits.

DVOA ranks the Colts as the 11th best team in the league (10th when weighted towards more recent games) and 4th in the AFC.

Offensively it's the same story. The Colts DVOA falls, but the teams around them fell harder, raising Indy up one spot to 6th in the league and 2nd in the AFC (to Denver).

The Running games poor performance, especially on short yardage where they had been successful, against a sub-par D and their first fumble of the year drops them to a more intutive ranking of 22nd. Despite what many have called a bad game for Peyton the Colts now have the top ranked pass O in the AFC, 5th overall.

The directional splits paint an odd picture in the run game. The Colts are at their best running wide left where they are about league average. That would probably be attributed to the Colts classic stretch play, except that they are at their worst running to right end. That would suggest that it's Ugoh and CJ outperforming Diem and Pollak, but the trend is reversed (but far less extreme) going behind right and left tackle. The Colts have been far better running outside to Ugoh and CJ's side, but are more successful running directly behind Diem and Pollak. My guess is that it's Ugoh and CJ's athletism that's making the difference. Both have played LT the elite athletic spot on the line. Ugoh has fantastic physical tools that he shows inconsistantly and CJ was converted from TE in college. Both players have been inconsistant though, which is likely why the Colts struggle to run behind the two of them.

Pass Protection has remained excellent. The Colts are ranked 2nd.

Defensively the Colts hop back into the top half of the league at 14th. The improved DB play has reopenned the traditional gap between the run D and pass D. The Pass D ranks 13th, while the run D trails a quarter of the league behind at 21st.

The Colts have the most consistant special teams in the league. Returns are sub-par, coverage is very good, kicking is mediocre.

Finally the playoff odds. Indy is a near lock according to FO. 96% chance of getting a wildcard spot, 0.7% chance of winning the division. Their numbers expect the Colts to get the 5 seed over the 6 seed in the AFC by a near 2:1 margin.

0 recs | Comment 26 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

One day I'm going to be able to articulate...

…my problem with DVOA.

Let me try it with 2 points.

1) My biggest problem is that football isn’t a game played with numbers. Its a game played with people. There is so much random shit that you can’t account for. Not just in game random shit. Like is there a DVOA column for ‘Our #1 WR just shot himself in the thigh and our star MLB tried to hide the gun’? There are just some intangible things that can’t be plugged into a computer.

2) DVOA doesn’t accound for an obvious rock-paper-scissors phenomenon. I can’t think of a great example right now, so I want you all to assume that Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are only half the QBs they really are, and take this back to last year, when both are at 100%. Tom Brady has always been better vs. pure zone defenses than man defenses. He picks zones apart. He’s great at the corner and the deep outs and the seems, and he’s always been one of the most patient QBs in the game, which has allowed him to take 4 yards a pass and never try to force it down field.

Peyton Manning, on the other hand, has always, always loved man teams. If you blitz him, he will score. He can carve zones up, but he has a tendency to get impatient. He’ll force a throw. If you’re a team that plays, for example, a 3-4, and you can stop the run with your front 3 and drop 8 into coverage, he’ll get tired of not being able to run the ball for 7 yards a pop and he’ll get tired of not having explosive plays. Then BAM interception. He’s still VERY GOOD against the zone, and if he was always 100% patient, he’d be zee bomb diggity.

Okay, so you have QB A who is better against zone than QB B and QB B is better against man than QB A. So QB A is playing the number 1 DVOA defense in the league, which happens to be a man coverage blitzing team. His team struggles, but gets the win. Meanwhile, QB B is playing the man team next week. He’s better suited for this game, because of the type of QB he is. They tear them up, and their offense gains more DVOA than QB As.

I realize as I’m typing it that its not coming out properly, but hopefully you can understand the crux of what I’m trying to say. Much like back in 03, 04…. The Pats were bad matchups for the Colts O. They weren’t necessarily the best defense ever, but they were the best defense in the NFL for matching up against one of the best offenses ever. The NFL is just a heavy matchup intense league…

by Nideak on Dec 2, 2008 6:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

03/04 Pats Ds were 2nd and 6th ranked in DVOA

but I know what you are talking about. No one says you should take the DVOA rankings blindly as the exact perfect strengths of every team, but they are a great tool. There are the things you mentioned that DVOA and other statistical systems don’t account for, but there are also a wealth of other things that a good statistical system can do far better than most fans.

Aaron Schatz the founder of FO was on Bill Simmons’ podcast last week and they talked about the AFC playoffs coming down to matchups.

Shonn Greene for Heisman
Big Ten's leading Rusher, Leads FBS
144 yards per game
6.2 yards per carry
08 TDs per game > 06 GPA

by shake n bake on Dec 2, 2008 6:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

for an example of DVOA's flaws

look no further than the raging hard on it has had for the eagles all year. the 6-5-1, tie the bengals, eagles. also the 8th ranked 5-7 packers (3rd in their division, the 2 teams ahead are ranked 15 and 16), ahead of 13 teams with better records. a record of 5-7 is ahead of 4 8-4 teams, and 6 7-5 teams. grain of salt required.

by hal41605 on Dec 2, 2008 10:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

DVOA has always loved the Eagles

Schatz addresses this almost every week in the little essay that goes along with the rankings. He always says he personally has no clue why the Eagles are always so high but is looking for ways to correct it. The Eagles have had some bad luck and are playing below their talent level though, everyone has to admit that. They are also in a very tough division, which DVOA adjusts for. They also have a horrendous game coach which stats really can’t account for. Their short yardage game has hurt them bad as well, which isn’t really accurately represented either.

by Jay Cutler's Barber on Dec 2, 2008 11:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Is part of the problem,

shake or JC’sB can correct me on this, but I think part of the problem with DVOA is having it at all in week 1. Their week 1 DVOA is based on their preseason ‘guess’ of how teams will be. To me, DVOA comes off a little too much like the BCS. I understand that DAVE is slowly phased out of the DVOA rankings, but I think I’d rather have them run a weekly paragraph talking about what trends they are seeing and then post their first actual DVOA rankings after every team has played atleast 4 games. I think it would be a little more accurate and would have no built in preseason notions.

by Nideak on Dec 3, 2008 12:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

false

They have a stat (DAVE) that incorporates their preseason projections, but DVOA considers nothing but the 12 games each team was played this year.

Here’s the link to the week 1 rankings where they are shocked Atlanta ranked at #2 because both conventional wisdom and their projections thought the Falcons would suck.

Shonn Greene for Heisman
Big Ten's leading Rusher, Leads FBS
144 yards per game
6.2 yards per carry
08 TDs per game > 06 GPA

by shake n bake on Dec 3, 2008 12:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

but DAVE is..

incorporated into the early season rankings, right?

by Nideak on Dec 3, 2008 12:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

they give rankings by DAVE and by DVOA

separate systems. The current years DVOA goes into DAVE, but not the other way around.

Shonn Greene for Heisman
Big Ten's leading Rusher, Leads FBS
144 yards per game
6.2 yards per carry
08 TDs per game > 06 GPA

by shake n bake on Dec 3, 2008 12:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ahhkeeyeah

I stand corwrongded. Thxinfo.

I will say this, looking at their week 1 DVOA, they are much better at projecting/picking/analyzing bad teams :D Their bottom 7 is just about right on, with the exception of Houston, who I think will be a real good team next year if Shaub can stay healthy and they can get an O-line and secondary…

by Nideak on Dec 3, 2008 12:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

DVOA hasn't always loved the Eagles

Schatz put up their Wins vs DVOA a while back. The last 3 years their DVOA has been better than their wins, but all three years before that is was worse. It’s not so much that is especially loves the Eagles, it’s just that it’s been off of their win total the same direction 3 years in a row (twice, but in opposite directions)

Shonn Greene for Heisman
Big Ten's leading Rusher, Leads FBS
144 yards per game
6.2 yards per carry
08 TDs per game > 06 GPA

by shake n bake on Dec 3, 2008 12:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The interesting thing this week is that...

DVOA thinks the Cards are a good team, so of course, the Eagles got another big boost from that lambasting…

Also, shake, the Colts are ranked 22nd in DVOA in STs… I’ve looked over the specific ST stats and the rankings for the colts just look bad. I agree with their basic idea: The Colts coverage units are better than their return units, but I don’t agree that their return units suck, which DVOA is saying. I also don’t agree that our FG kicking has been below average…

by Nideak on Dec 3, 2008 12:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Those problems still exist with every stat.

These problems are in no way specific to DVOA. No one is saying to blindly follow whatever DVOA says. You still have to analyze matchups somehow. DVOA is the best tool we have currently for analyzing teams as a whole.

by Jay Cutler's Barber on Dec 2, 2008 11:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree it has some use, but...

It’s obviously more accurate than the NFL rankings, which just factor in pure yardage. But I’m not sure that DVOA is all that necessary. I think there are some normally-kept stats that are more important than DVOA, and probably explain how good teams are a lot easier than DVOA.

Those would be (I knew you’d ask:P): 3rd down conversions (offense/defense), red zone conversion % (offense/defense), yards per attempt, both running and throwing.

I guess there are a few others – average starting field position on kick offs (o/d), its important from a ‘stop them from starting at the 40 yard line every possession), but, imo, not as important from the ’we start at the 22 every possession’ side of the ball. Not everyone has a joshua cribbs, but everyone should be able to fill gaps and stop returns with some regularity.

Anyhow, I just see DVOA have so many things that don’t pass the eye test. New Orleans is a top 10 team? Philly is a top 5 team? GB a top 10 team? I realize they spanked the Colts, but they are so up and down… which, I know, describes probably 31 of the 32 teams out there, but ick, winning games is always more important to me than tying cincinatti…

Anyhow, the one thing I do agree with DVOA about is Dallas. People have just gotten on their knees to love Dallas so freakin fast. Hey, guys, don’t hurt yourselves jumping off the bandwagon on Saturday, ok? They’ve played a crappy offensive team in the redskins, and two putrid teams in SF and SEA the past 3 weeks. Their O-line is pourous, Romo is going down about 6 times this week, there won’t be any running lanes, and if T.O. has a case of the dropsies, it’ll be a blowout. The only saving grace for the Cowboys is they have the two toughest players known to man in Jason Witten and Marion the Barbarian… oops, I’m rambling again, time for my meds.

by Nideak on Dec 2, 2008 10:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

with some of the stuff

it’s that it’s meant to be predictive not a summary of what teams have done. When a team has recovered an especially high percent of fumbles or been much better on 3rd down than on 1st and 2nd those thing certainly will have helped them win, but would be useful in predicting if they’ll win in the future, because by FO’s research fumble recovery isn’t a repeatable skill and teams that perform better (or worse) on the low sample, high leverage 3rd downs than on the larger 1st/2nd down sample tend to regress back to the 1st/2nd down level of performance (though the Peyton Manning Colts have been an exception to this, which I think is somewhat due to the Colts replacing a 2nd TE with a very talented 3rd WR the last few years on 3rd downs).

if DVOA was perfect they wouldn’t spend every offseason tweaking it so that it better describes the good and bad teams of the last 12 years.

Shonn Greene for Heisman
Big Ten's leading Rusher, Leads FBS
144 yards per game
6.2 yards per carry
08 TDs per game > 06 GPA

by shake n bake on Dec 2, 2008 10:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Also.....

One thing that shake didn’t touch on…..

DVOA definitely accounts for yards per play, but in a more effective way. In standard yards per play, a 15 yard pass on 3rd and 20 is good. In DVOA, its not so good, because it knows the defense is likely going to play back and make a tackle short of the sticks. Or for another example, DVOA knows that a two yard run on 4th and 1 is a successful play, whereas yards per rush would penalize a team for a two yard rush since its below average. Its all about context.

by Jay Cutler's Barber on Dec 2, 2008 11:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yes, i mean, I understand DVOA

I just think that football is so different from all of the other sports. There is so much randomness in football. I understand how it works, I’ve just never been a big fan of it. I admit, I enjoyed it more when they were part of foxsports.com and gave a paragraph on every team. Right now, as shake pointed out, most of the paragraphs are either talking about the iggles or talking about the historical DVOAs.

One other thing: Sometimes an unsuccessful DVOA play is a successful football play. Unless I’m totally wrong and they account for stuff like this, but a 15 yard run on 3rd and 25 with 3minutes left that gets you into position for a coffin corner and 40 seconds off the clock when you have a 4 point lead accomplishes a lot. Obviously not as much as a first down, etc…

Anyhow, I shouldn’t come off so hard on DVOA, it IS better than most websites who just go ‘woah, team x won today, they’re the best team ever!’ and then next week, when they lose, ‘woah, team x is horrid, they suck!’ etc… The only guy that I’ve ever seen that gets ranking teams or handicapping teams is Paul Zimmerman. He understands that its a year long process, that knee jerk +10 -5 +2 -20 rankings after each game are just stoopid.

I think part of the problem is, and I don’t listen/read him much (because I don’t listen to the BS report, and, like I said, he doesn’t have any website affiliated posts anymore) but in the past, Schatz has been really arrogant and condescending about DVOA. Maybe he gets a lot of ‘DVOA SUCKS!!!’ and no reasoning, etc… emails, but he just came off as holier-than-thou. And also, I hate bostonians, by rule.

by Nideak on Dec 3, 2008 12:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

they get so much hate for the rankings they invented a standardized complaint form

To save people some time, please use the following format for all complaints:

[team] is clearly ranked [too high/too low] because [reason unrelated to DVOA]. [subjective ranking system] is way better than this. [unrelated team-supporting or -denigrating comment, preferably with poor spelling and/or chat-acceptable spelling]

Shonn Greene for Heisman
Big Ten's leading Rusher, Leads FBS
144 yards per game
6.2 yards per carry
08 TDs per game > 06 GPA

by shake n bake on Dec 3, 2008 12:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Awesome.

by coltsfanawalt on Dec 3, 2008 1:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Baseball has about 100 times more randomness than football. Unless you hit a homerun you pretty much have no control over where the ball goes.

But you’re definitely right, football does have tons of things no statistical system could ever account for. Pretty much the only thing you said I disagree with is that 3rd down %, Red Zone % and YPP stats are better than DVOA. The rest of what you’re is correct as far as I can tell.

And Schatz does seem defensive occasionally. On Simmons podcasts, he seems to only use his rankings (which are sometimes pretty obviously a little funky). But I guess that’s what he’s there for, to provide the opinion his stats have about teams.

by Jay Cutler's Barber on Dec 3, 2008 12:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Part of the reason I prefer 3rd down %, YPA, and red zone % over DVOA is because I don’t care who you are playing – just get it done. That might sound over-simplistic, but for a lot of the DVOA offensive rankings, since it factors in adjustments for opponents (i realize there is an unadjusted, also) i have to have faith that the DVOA defensive ranks are accurate…

I don’t feel that, for example: I dont believe that SD has the 26th worse defense in the league. I also don’t feel that Philly has the 6th best defense in the league nor does minny have the 5th best defense in the league. Also, if you’ve watched Carolina over the past couple of weeks, the lions ran all over them and uhm the raiders ran all over them, and those were two games, that if they weren’t playing horrible teams, they would have lost.

So blah blah blah, I stopped my train of thought in the middle of typing this to look up the rushing yards put up on carolina in the oak and det games just to double check, and then i saw Jay’s new post and I totally lost any cohesiveness to this post.

I think my point was, with something like 3rd down %, red zone %, and ypa, it doesn’t matter who your opponent is, unadjusted, its just telling you whether you get it done. With DVOA, its adjusting for opponent, based on what DVOA thinks of that opponent… so if DVOA overrates a defense, then your adjustments going to make you overrated, and so on and so forth.

But maybe my point was, in fact, that hockey is a game of inches, you play to tie the game, and it ain’t over till Bud Selig calls it a tie in the 13th inning and the super bowl is played in guam.

by Nideak on Dec 3, 2008 1:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for this article.

Again, this is the stuff that keeps me coming back here. Alot of informative material to chew on. Thanks for doing the homework for us. Please keep it up.

by coltsfanawalt on Dec 2, 2008 11:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Advanced NFL Stats?

What do you guys think of Advanced NFL stats.com? His win probability figures always seem strange (this week, ATL # 1, PHI 4, SD, 5, Jets 19, etc) but he seems like an exceptionally smart guy and he gets most things right. I love all the supplementary articles he does about why teams should gamble on 4th down more and stuff like that, but I find it hard to trust him when he has ATL at # 1 for some reason.

Any thoughts?

by Jay Cutler's Barber on Dec 3, 2008 12:54 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I like his stuff

he really tries hard to separate out the not repeatable skills, even moreso than FO (I think), but his doesn’t break down play by play.

Shonn Greene for Heisman
Big Ten's leading Rusher, Leads FBS
144 yards per game
6.2 yards per carry
08 TDs per game > 06 GPA

by shake n bake on Dec 3, 2008 10:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I like to think that I know what I’m talking about most of the time, but everytime you post one of these DVOA threads I just laugh. I still have no idea what DVOA is, stands for, or does. I’m not really sure if I want to learn, but if anyone wants to waste about 5 minutes explaining what DVOA is and does I wouldn’t mind reading it.

Oh and don’t tell me to go to FO’s site and read it myself, because I refuse.

The King of Anti-Fail and Unofficial Moderator of Stupid People

by KingRichard on Dec 3, 2008 8:07 AM EST reply actions 0 recs