Jump to content
Hunter2_1

Notable Stats and Observations

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

@JustAnotherFan

Do you have a website or a place where your stats are viewable? 

The stats that I use are from a few different sites combined with my own, and unfortunately the two main sites are paid subs(FO & SIS). I've been using their sites for quite awhile, especially FO. Roughly 10 years or so?

Overall, I like looking at advance stats from other sites, but I like to check the validity of them even more by using my own eyes so that I can see where exactly they got there numbers from. That's why I do my own research. Each person sees things differently.

For instance, the individual pressure stats that I used earlier in this thread were by SIS and so I've started to go through every pass play by every team just to check and see if I'm seeing the same thing as they are. I also did the same thing with their team offense/defense pressure rate % in '15 and '16 and came away pretty impressed by them with how close our numbers matched up when I used their very same criteria - which I personally like as it helps weed out which teams' front 7 are simply getting credit for coverage sacks.

Quote

 

Pressure rate accounts for all pass plays including scrambles but not including spikes. Plays cancelled by Defensive Pass Interference are also included. Plays count as having pressure in the following situations:

a) any pass or scramble charted with pressure by a specific defender, or "overall pressure",
b) any sack charted as "rusher untouched," "blown block," or "overall pressure",
c) any sack charted as "coverage sack" or "failed scramble," but only if these sacks are also charted with a specific defender giving pass pressure. (For example, a "coverage sack" can also have pressure if a specific defender forces the quarterback out of the pocket immediately, but the sack takes a lot longer because of the coverage.)

 

 

Edited by JustAnotherFan
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Football Outsiders currently has the Chiefs with the league's best run blocking offensive line and the league's worst pass blocking offensive line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Jakuvious said:

Football Outsiders currently has the Chiefs with the league's best run blocking offensive line and the league's worst pass blocking offensive line.

You could have posted the tweet here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, onejayhawk said:

Here it is.

It comes courtesy of BJ Kissel of Chiefs dot com who ran the numbers on the quarterbacks the Chiefs have faced this year. This is how the four quarterbacks the Chiefs have faced this year (Tom Brady, Carson Wentz, Philip Rivers and Kirk Cousins) have fared playing against the Chiefs and against everyone else:

vs. Chiefs: 51%, 4 TDs, 4 INTs

vs. everyone else: 68%, 25 TDs, 3 INTs

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2017/10/5/16429438/kansas-city-chiefs-defense-turns-good-quarterbacks-into-bad-quarterbacks

J

 

Edited by onejayhawk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jakuvious said:

Football Outsiders currently has the Chiefs with the league's best run blocking offensive line and the league's worst pass blocking offensive line.

I’m sure having a great running back/QB that has so-so pocket presence, has something to do with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2017 at 8:00 PM, marshawn lynch said:

Rookie S Malik Hooker leading NFL in INTs

Rookie CB Tredavious White leading NFL in passes defensed.

The hype of the DB class so far seems to be real. It was obvious this was the deepest position entering the draft and its proving to be true so far.

Marlon Humphrey played surprisingly well for the Ravens. Gives up a couple of catches, but has also been great efforts from receivers. Puts my criticism/worries about him to shame thus far. Ravens allow a really really low YPA when he is in the game, which most likely though is a coincidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People have to remember that losing teams in the SB usually have miserable seasons the following year. See: Carolina.  I see the same fate for Atlanta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you may be able to add Dak to the list. Everything was easy for him last year with Elliott carrying the load, but I am not seeing a QB who can carry a team on his back.

Not at all sure, he really is a franchise QB???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2017 at 2:37 PM, cddolphin said:

o.O

He would be your #1. He would be every team's number #1, unless you are a Pittsburgh or Atlanta fan.

Or New York. Or Tampa Bay. Or Cincinnati. 

Like come on. Dude doesn't even have an 1,000 yard season to his name but he's better than All-Pro Receivers?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BlaqOptic said:

Or New York. Or Tampa Bay. Or Cincinnati. 

Like come on. Dude doesn't even have an 1,000 yard season to his name but he's better than All-Pro Receivers?!

He's certainly performed better or at the very least comparably this season, outside of maybe Brown, and from watching him through the first 4 games this season I could see him having a legitimate argument over those other guys you listed over the next couple seasons. I'm officially on the bandwagon.

Doesn't he lead the league in yards, TDs, and YPC over the last 6 regular season games?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BlaqOptic said:

Or New York. Or Tampa Bay. Or Cincinnati. 

Like come on. Dude doesn't even have an 1,000 yard season to his name but he's better than All-Pro Receivers?!

Nuk is debatable 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TheVillain112 said:

Woof...

Why do people cite QBR.. I'm sure there's a drop off but c'mon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, cddolphin said:

Why do people cite QBR.. I'm sure there's a drop off but c'mon

Barnwell is an ESPN guy. Pretty sure that they have to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, cddolphin said:

Why do people cite QBR.. I'm sure there's a drop off but c'mon

Ah, didn't even notice it was the dreaded QBR.  Eh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...