POST GAME GB at MIN week 12 (24-17 Loss, 4-6-1)

[incognito_man]

2 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

You can cite DVOA.  I'll take yards and points per game.  Especially points as they win games

Ok. I will. It's vastly superior to raw numbers.

Why would you prefer to work with inferior metrics? Because they support what you want to believe?

[vegas492]

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

It's not IMO.

I've pointed to Sean Payton repeatedly. He had a bad stretch (which resulted in improved draft capital, which resulted in an improved roster, which resulted in success).

I still think it'd be a mistake to let MM go.

We're on pace for a top 11 pick, another first rounder. Loads of cap space and a really good crop of YR2 players in 2019.

I still think a McCarthy led GB team in 2019 is probably our best chance for success.

Could use another assistant coach reboot though....

Since 2009...

13-3

11-5

13-3

7-9

11-5

7-9

7-9

7-9

11-5

10-1 (season still underway)

When you cite BAD STRETCH would you rather I have taken stats from years when they won 11 games or more, or 7 games?

[skibrett15]

6 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

If DVOA says this is the 6th best offense in the NFL, I can confidently say I'm done buying anything that "stat" is trying to sell me.

we rose a good bit after posting big numbers vs their #1 ranked defense (seattle)

We have the 2nd ranked rushing offense and 8th ranked passing offense.  I think most are really underrating how great our run game has been this year.

14th in pts/drive, 1st in turnovers/drive (fewest), 21st in starting field position, 11th in yards/drive.

 

Heres the top 16 by weighted:

RK	TEAM	OFFENSE DVOA	LAST WEEK	WEI. OFFENSE ▴	RK	PASS OFF	RK	RUSH OFF	RK	NON-ADJ TOTAL	NON-ADJ PASS	NON-ADJ RUSH	VAR	RK	SCHED	RK
1	KC	39.5%	1	38.9%	1	74.7%	1	9.2%	5	36.2%	66.8%	12.1%	10.6%	27	-4.2%	3
2	LAR	31.3%	2	31.7%	2	48.1%	4	17.4%	1	31.7%	48.7%	17.7%	7.0%	18	-1.0%	15
3	NO	24.1%	4	25.7%	3	53.5%	2	0.3%	8	24.6%	53.6%	1.3%	2.3%	2	3.1%	24
4	LAC	22.4%	3	21.4%	4	50.4%	3	0.9%	7	25.5%	52.2%	5.5%	2.5%	4	0.5%	20
5	PIT	16.8%	5	18.4%	5	31.1%	6	-1.5%	11	16.8%	26.6%	6.0%	9.0%	24	1.7%	22
7	ATL	14.3%	6	16.1%	6	40.0%	5	-16.2%	26	17.7%	41.7%	-9.7%	10.6%	28	3.8%	27
6	GB	15.1%	8	15.5%	7	22.2%	8	14.4%	2	12.7%	17.7%	15.3%	2.0%	1	-2.8%	7
9	NE	9.9%	9	10.6%	8	22.9%	7	-1.0%	9	9.9%	23.7%	-1.9%	5.2%	12	-2.8%	6
8	CAR	10.1%	7	10.5%	9	18.4%	13	10.9%	4	17.3%	28.0%	15.4%	7.0%	19	6.7%	32
10	IND	6.8%	14	9.2%	10	19.0%	12	-3.3%	14	5.9%	17.3%	-3.1%	6.2%	17	-1.2%	13
12	CHI	5.7%	10	8.3%	11	19.6%	11	-1.1%	10	5.9%	21.3%	-2.4%	5.3%	14	0.3%	19
11	DEN	6.4%	13	7.7%	12	5.4%	20	12.3%	3	7.9%	4.8%	16.7%	2.4%	3	-1.1%	14
14	SEA	3.4%	11	4.7%	13	21.9%	9	1.6%	6	6.2%	29.4%	0.8%	4.2%	9	-0.6%	16
13	BAL	4.1%	12	3.3%	14	21.3%	10	-5.9%	17	-0.7%	13.4%	-6.8%	3.4%	7	-1.5%	12
15	TB	1.0%	15	-1.0%	15	17.2%	14	-14.8%	23	0.9%	15.4%	-12.2%	6.0%	15	1.6%	21
16	CIN	0.0%	16	-1.3%	16	10.6%	18	-4.9%	16	4.1%	17.1%	-4.4%	8.2%	22	4.2%	29

[PACKRULE]

13 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Our Oline is not still together. Cobbled together maybe. We haven't anywhere near recovered from losing Sitton and Lang

 

Up until Bahk got hurt we've been ok we have 3 really good pieces and 2 ok guards. Is the SAint's line any better? The pats let their starting LT walk they are above .500. Lets not act like we can't work are way around the Oline's slight issues. Bahk came back last night too. Odd how our cobbled together Oline has it's starting LT, LG, C and RT from last year still starting? UP until Taylor got hurt last night also. I say that's BS not recoving from losing Sittun. Taylor has been fine, and our RB was AVG over 5 YPC was he not.

[incognito_man]

7 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said:

That is just false. The facts support my opinion not yours. The lowest the Saints have even been in PTS is 9th, the Packers have been 16th, 21st and 15th in 3 out of the last 4 years. The Saints have never finished worse than 6th in Yards the Packers have finished worse than that 7 times with Rodgers as the

Raw stats are an inferior comparison. Your ranks also appear to be wrong. GB was 13th in scoring OFFENSE in 2015, 4th in '16 and 13th in '18.

Please tell me you're not seriously including 2017.

[PACKRULE]

6 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Since 2009...

13-3

11-5

13-3

7-9

11-5

7-9

7-9

7-9

11-5

10-1 (season still underway)

When you cite BAD STRETCH would you rather I have taken stats from years when they won 11 games or more, or 7 games?

There is very little point in putting up your numbers to support what quite a few folks see. Incog won't have it our 4-6-1 record based on his information has us really in contention for the playoffs. We are just fine and sit 2 games under .500 because we have no talent apparently. Nothing at all to see here regards to MM and our coaching staff.

[incognito_man]

7 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Since 2009...

13-3

11-5

13-3

7-9

11-5

7-9

7-9

7-9

11-5

10-1 (season still underway)

When you cite BAD STRETCH would you rather I have taken stats from years when they won 11 games or more, or 7 games?

I don't know what you're complaining about. I've been comparing the bad stretch of 7-9 NO seasons against recent McCarthy (2015-2018).

 

[incognito_man]

Just now, PACKRULE said:

There is very little point in putting up your numbers to support what quite a few folks see. Incog won't have it our 4-6-1 record based on his information has us really in contention for the playoffs. We are just fine and sit 2 games under .500 because we have no talent apparently. Nothing at all to see here regards to MM and our coaching staff.

Only a fool would ignore the effect roster talent has on results.

[KFP7]

So is our bad 3rd down conversion rate the main reason our advanced metrics show a 6th ranked offense but our points/game seems so low?  It seems our overall play count per game is way lower than recent years.

[TheBitzMan]

1 minute ago, incognito_man said:

Raw stats are an inferior comparison. Your ranks also appear to be wrong. GB was 13th in scoring OFFENSE in 2015, 4th in '16 and 13th in '18.

Please tell me you're not seriously including 2017.

No they are not wrong according to pro football reference.

2017 is obviously an outlier. 

Is it not the goal of the offense to score points? Outside of time killing drives every drive's goal is to score points. Points are the ultimate measure of a productive offense, to disregard that in favor of DVOA is just nonsense. Yards are less valuable if they don't end in points. 

[PACKRULE]

1 minute ago, incognito_man said:

Only a fool would ignore the effect roster talent has on results.

So if you continue to ignore our talent who is the so called fool?

How much is our roster worth? Is our QB not the highest paid player in the NFL. Brees is up there as well I believe, so what are you taking about? We have millions wrapped up in players and some dam good players. Why are we so void of talent? Please enlighten me? Why in a league that values QB's like no other position are we 4-6-1? Is it our lack of WR talent, RB talent, Oline talent? Again Brees had a game last week where he tossed 4 TD's to UFA's? Dam they have the best UFA's ever.

[skibrett15]

Just now, TheBitzMan said:

No they are not wrong according to pro football reference.

2017 is obviously an outlier. 

Is it not the goal of the offense to score points? Outside of time killing drives every drive's goal is to score points. Points are the ultimate measure of a productive offense, to disregard that in favor of DVOA is just nonsense. Yards are less valuable if they don't end in points. 

you're using points not points scored by the offense though.  That's his point.  Pun intended.

Go look up points scored by offense, or points per drive.

[incognito_man]

11 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

we rose a good bit after posting big numbers vs their #1 ranked defense (seattle)

We fans have a stronger emotional memory for negative events, it's why many here perceive the offense as being worse than it is in reality.

Our offense is Jekyll and Hyde this year. Sometimes elite, sometimes bad. But on average still a dangerous unit.

[TheBitzMan]

Just now, skibrett15 said:

you're using points not points scored by the offense though.  That's his point.  Pun intended.

Go look up points scored by offense, or points per drive.

I got it, I just realized this. He is right. 

[skibrett15]

1 minute ago, incognito_man said:

We fans have a stronger emotional memory for negative events, it's why many here perceive the offense as being worse than it is in reality.

Our offense is Jekyll and Hyde this year. Sometimes elite, sometimes bad. But on average still a dangerous unit.

this is the best running offense I think we've ever had.  Somehow the pitch/toss plays everyone hated before are working and actually our best RZ play the past 4 weeks