Winning Stats Power Rankings - Week 15

by mgrex03 on Dec 17, 2009 12:08 AM EST in Stampede Blue Power Rankings Comment 9 comments

It's time once again for our weekly installment of Power Rankings based on the Winning Stats. There wasn't much movement at the top of the rankings, with the Saints maintaining the top spot, followed by the Patriots, Vikings, and Colts.

Follow me after the jump for the full rankings, Strength of Schedule, and Consistency...

Power Rankings (click on headers to sort):

Team	Power Rankings
	Non-Adjusted			Adjusted
	Offense	Defense	Total	Offense	Defense	Total
Saints	1	6	1	3	8	1
Patriots	3	12	4	2	10	2
Vikings	5	3	2	5	9	3
Colts	2	21	5	1	18	4
Packers	8	2	3	8	3	5
Ravens	11	8	6	12	5	6
Bengals	15	4	8	15	6	7
Giants	10	19	14	11	12	8
Dolphins	12	18	16	10	15	9
Eagles	14	7	9	16	7	10
Jets	21	1	13	22	1	11
Cowboys	6	17	10	7	24	12
Steelers	9	11	7	9	20	13
Broncos	18	10	15	20	4	14
Texans	13	14	12	13	14	15
Chargers	4	26	11	4	30	16
Cardinals	20	9	18	18	11	17
Redskins	17	15	17	17	19	18
Falcons	7	31	21	6	31	19
Titans	19	24	22	19	22	20
49ers	25	5	20	27	2	21
Jaguars	16	27	19	14	28	22
Panthers	24	20	24	23	16	23
Bears	22	22	25	21	23	24
Seahawks	23	16	23	26	17	25
Bills	28	13	26	28	13	26
Chiefs	29	23	27	31	21	27
Buccaneers	30	25	29	30	25	28
Lions	27	32	30	24	29	29
Rams	26	30	28	25	32	30
Browns	31	29	32	29	27	31
Raiders	32	28	31	32	26	32

A few thoughts:

Like I mentioned, the Colts are 4th in the Adjusted Power Rankings, ranking 1st Offensively, and 18th Defensively. The Colts probably won't get much higher, especially playing without some key players in the last 3 games.
Based on these rankings, the teams I'd like the Colts to play in the Playoffs are this week's opponent, Jacksonville (22nd), and San Diego (16th). A loss this week might not be all that bad for this exact reason.
Speaking of the Chargers, they have the 3rd worst defense in the NFL. But some writers say you shouldn't laugh when they are called the best team in the NFL.
The Dolphins have played a tough schedule, and look much better statistically when you adjust for that tough schedule (16th vs. 9th). If you had told me Chad Henne would be the QB for most of the season with those numbers, I would have laughed in your face.

Strength of Schedule:

Team	Schedule Strength
	Past			Future
	Offense	Defense	Total	Offense	Defense	Total
Buccaneers	2	3	1	10	11	7
Patriots	1	13	2	12	23	22
Browns	5	4	3	30	29	31
Dolphins	9	5	4	20	7	13
Falcons	3	10	5	1	31	16
Lions	8	6	6	7	25	21
Titans	20	2	7	31	14	25
Panthers	12	8	8	6	1	1
Colts	7	12	9	2	28	18
Ravens	21	7	10	32	30	32
Broncos	30	1	11	24	21	27
Raiders	14	11	12	18	26	26
Bills	4	23	13	28	2	9
Jets	15	15	14	26	4	12
Rams	13	16	15	11	22	20
49ers	28	9	16	29	24	29
Giants	24	17	17	3	10	3
Bears	18	19	18	15	6	4
Texans	11	22	19	21	13	19
Bengals	16	24	20	8	12	11
Jaguars	6	27	21	23	5	10
Chiefs	31	14	22	14	32	28
Saints	25	20	23	22	16	23
Cardinals	17	25	24	25	27	30
Seahawks	29	21	25	13	19	17
Cowboys	22	26	26	16	3	2
Eagles	32	18	27	4	15	5
Vikings	19	30	28	5	17	8
Chargers	10	32	29	9	9	6
Redskins	26	28	30	27	8	15
Packers	27	29	31	19	20	24
Steelers	23	31	32	17	18	14

A couple things:

The Colts have played the 9th toughest schedule in the league so far, and it won't get too much easier for the rest of the season. Where is that other undefeated team? 23rd.
The Steelers have absolutely no excuse for losing 5 games in a row, and being 6-7, as they have had the easiest schedule in the league. Maybe they need the high level of competition to actually win games, like they had last year.
I'd say the Broncos and Ravens are in the Driver's seat for the 2 Wild Card spots, seeing as they have the easiest schedules going forward. In the NFC I think the Packers will keep the spot they currently enjoy as a Wild Card team.

Consistency:

Team	Consistency
	Non-Adjusted			Adjusted
	Offense	Defense	Total	Offense	Defense	Total
Colts	2	11	2	1	12	1
Eagles	13	17	3	12	5	2
Cowboys	8	3	6	2	7	3
Chiefs	5	25	18	6	15	4
Panthers	25	5	4	17	1	5
49ers	1	24	17	3	24	6
Falcons	9	14	12	9	16	7
Buccaneers	20	2	10	20	11	8
Bears	10	29	22	5	31	9
Lions	23	1	11	18	6	10
Texans	11	23	16	10	20	11
Redskins	17	6	1	23	4	12
Cardinals	28	12	13	24	23	13
Vikings	4	10	7	11	8	14
Rams	21	9	9	27	2	15
Packers	12	15	24	13	17	16
Saints	3	19	5	7	25	17
Browns	30	16	21	21	26	18
Dolphins	19	13	14	30	22	19
Ravens	29	22	30	26	3	20
Chargers	7	27	23	8	27	21
Raiders	15	21	15	14	30	22
Bills	27	18	20	29	10	23
Steelers	16	4	8	19	21	24
Patriots	6	32	25	4	32	25
Seahawks	22	20	27	15	14	26
Giants	18	31	29	16	29	27
Jets	31	30	28	31	28	28
Bengals	14	7	19	25	13	29
Jaguars	26	8	26	28	9	30
Titans	32	26	31	32	18	31
Broncos	24	28	32	22	19	32

My thoughts:

The Colts continue to be the most consistent team in the league, besting the Eagles and Cowboys. I'm still not surprised by that ranking at all.
The Colts last 5 opponents of the season (Titans, Broncos, Jaguars, Jets, and Bills) are all in the ten most inconsistent teams in 2009. Not sure it says much, but it is interesting nonetheless.

1 recs | Comment 9 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The only way to settle this is a Saints-Colts SB…. but who would archie cheer for

by M F on Dec 17, 2009 2:51 AM EST reply actions

That's easy, Peyton of course.

"You can't defend the perfect throw, what can I say?" Peyton quoting Marino
"As I grow older, the list of people who can kiss my ass grows longer"-Ancient Hoosier Proverb.

by Indy Lori on Dec 17, 2009 9:52 AM EST up reply actions

ESPN AND AP reporting

Chris Henry died this morning from injuries sustained in accident yesterday. sad day

by Thedreamthejohn on Dec 17, 2009 10:32 AM EST reply actions

Ok...

I am used to normal stats – you know – sacks, INTs, tackles, W/L record, completion percentage, ypc, ypg. What is all this DVOA and “adjusted” stuff. What does it measure and why is it reliable?

by SupermanWearsBobSander'sPJs on Dec 17, 2009 12:55 PM EST reply actions

SMWBSPJs, I'll let mgrex03 answer more fully, but

DVOA stands for Defense-adjusted Value Over Average and was originated by the folks at footballoutsiders.com. Years ago they were unhappy with the standard stats and rankings (yardage!) and even pts for/against (though their pythagorean projections are based on that).

It’s stats-heavy math looking at every single play in every single game. Just as an example, you can look at Brees and Manning the past few years and say Brees had more yards and whatever, so he’s better. But one of FO’s pages is “drive success rate” and it turns out that Manning had, last time I checked, 121 drives to Brees’s (and Favre’s) 137. That’s 16 more opportunities for them to get yardage and TDs! Essentially they played for 7 more quarters than Manning.

That kind of break-down is just the tip of the ice berg. They also measure play success (roughly speaking, do you get 60% of the yardage you need on 1 & 2 downs, and a 1st down conversion or TD on 3rd and 4th downs. Getting 9 yards on 3rd and 10 looks good on the stat sheet, but does not help your team, so DVOA counts it for less than getting 4 yards on 3rd and 2, since that moves the chains and buys your team a new set of downs.

That starting to make sense? It’s a pretty dense mathematical jumble, but if yo visit ther4e and read some of their “how and why we do this” pages, you should get a better idea. It’s proven to be a pretty good way to measure individuals and teams. Not perfect, but good.

I hate Joe Namath. That's how long I've been a Colts fan.

by Bobman on Dec 17, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions

IMO, it's decent for players, but not quite so effective for the teams overall.

by diagenesis on Dec 17, 2009 1:44 PM EST up reply actions

I like the team components aspect (actually I like it all)

But they break down the kicking, KO, kick rtn, punting, and punt rtn games, play by play, plus measure the luck factor. That kind of stuff you just can’t find anywhere else. You can maybe compile it if you want to take forever…

I like the line stats breakdowns—run tendencies, and the rate stats they use for sacks and sacks allowed, instead of just using raw sack numbers. (i.e. Freeney’s 10 sacks might = Jared Allen’s 12 because so few teams run on MN but so many do on the Colts, so Freeney has fewer sack opportunities—therefore he has a higher rate of sacks per play. Garbage time yardage and scoring is counted for with less weight than the rest of the game—do you really think Seattle honestly earned those two late TDs against us? So using just the Seattle game, FO would say our D is better than traditional stats which rely on the garbage time yards and pts, and IMO they’d be right. This is the kind of stuff most pundits and talking heads don’t even consider! They just look at the PPG and ran us 1 or 2 or 27, without digging into the context too much.)

Of course in the end it comes down to players and matchups—we might be miles ahead of a team like Cinn on paper (DVOA or otherwise), but if we face them in the AFCCG and their excellent corners can neutralize our passing game (which is what gives us the huge advantage on paper), then it’s a different game entirely. Two even teams slugging it out. That’s all hypothetical, but I bring it up to show you I’m not drinking the FO Kool-aid without thinking of the bigger picture.

I also like that they keep refining it, asking why certain things look wrong and what they can do to fix them, etc. I STILL think they overweight special teams values when coming up with a total team value—for most teams with STs ranked between 5 and 27, the weight should be X%, but for the outlier teams, the really good or bad ST really do have a bigger impact, so they should get the full weight that FO uses, say X+2%. Or something like that.

I hate Joe Namath. That's how long I've been a Colts fan.

by Bobman on Dec 17, 2009 5:44 PM EST up reply actions

Are the Jets the only reason we have such a high future offensive schedule?

I’m pretty sure the Jets defensive schedule will drop as more of their early games get taken out of the picture. They’ve not been quite the dominant team they were then.

by diagenesis on Dec 17, 2009 1:48 PM EST reply actions