Joe Barry'd again

[beekay414]

10 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

How do you earn a -53.5 against a practice squad QB? So we're 32/32 based on the Cardinals being +16% if not for a game against a practice squad QB. 

Serious question @incognito_man is the quality of QB a consideration for DVOA score? Or do we get credit for stopping the Rams offense (with Stafford's DVOA) when we aren't playing the Rams with Stafford?

No. This is the point I made back when discussing during the "progress" period. That performance, where DVOA doesn't account for the fact that the Rams highly rated offense played a practice squad QB, weighed significantly on our overall performance in DVOA and it helped elevated us to just "below average" (18th of 32) as the sign of progress. It's the fatal flaw in DVOA. The only response I got was "everyone benefits from playing back-ups, we're not special." 

[Mazrimiv]

13 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

How do you earn a -53.5 against a practice squad QB? So we're 32/32 based on the Cardinals being +16% if not for a game against a practice squad QB. 

Serious question @incognito_man is the quality of QB a consideration for DVOA score? Or do we get credit for stopping the Rams offense (with Stafford's DVOA) when we aren't playing the Rams with Stafford?

Just to clarify something, the -53.5 is an excellent score.  For DVOA defense, a + score is bad.

[Packerraymond]

3 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

Just to clarify something, the -53.5 is an excellent score.  For DVOA defense, a + score is bad.

I know, if you hold a terrible QB to 3 points, you shouldn't get such a high score, as most of the rest of the league could do the exact same thing. Maybe +15-25, but 53.5? That's nuts.

[KFP7]

3 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

Just to clarify something, the -53.5 is an excellent score.  For DVOA defense, a + score is bad.

right, I believe the argument is that since Rypien is so bad, it shouldn't be possible to score that well 

[Mazrimiv]

Some pretty wild scores vs NYG and TB

[KFP7]

so we've performed better than average 3 times all year?

With one being against Rypien.

Basically Detroit on Thanksgiving is the only game our defense looked good

[BluePacker]

Dream scenario: Packers can Barry today and bring on Leonhard today. He brings fire fire to the defense for the last games, sets up his playbook right away in the off season, and gets a voice in the draft room for that side of the ball. 

 

Edit: Meant to put this in the who do you want thread, but I guess it is relevant here too. 

Edited December 18, 2023 by BluePacker
Clarification

[incognito_man]

43 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

You saw the flaw play out live this year. It's just another analytic without contextual meaning. Great tool to add to the belt, nothing beats analyzing the film.

What lol

What flaw

[incognito_man]

33 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

How do you earn a -53.5 against a practice squad QB? So we're 32/32 based on the Cardinals being +16% if not for a game against a practice squad QB. 

Serious question @incognito_man is the quality of QB a consideration for DVOA score? Or do we get credit for stopping the Rams offense (with Stafford's DVOA) when we aren't playing the Rams with Stafford?

This was discussed at length already. I don't think you're being sincere.

[Packerraymond]

4 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

What lol

What flaw

There's absolutely no way this defense should've ever been ranked 18th, it was never close to the 18th best defense. 

Flawed logic led to that ranking, and we immediately fell back to the cellar.

[Mazrimiv]

Something I do find kind of funny is that GB's pass defense (29) is now ranked lower than its run defense (26)

[incognito_man]

3 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

There's absolutely no way this defense should've ever been ranked 18th, it was never close to the 18th best defense. 

Flawed logic led to that ranking, and we immediately fell back to the cellar.

Reporting the results is not a flaw. They ranked 18th because they ranked 18th. Everyone has always acknowledged the number is simply a collation of the actual results (with the primary weakness being it doesn't account for what players are in the field).

This was explicitly acknowledged the entire time. To pretend it wasn't is extremely dishonest.

[Packerraymond]

6 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Reporting the results is not a flaw. They ranked 18th because they ranked 18th. Everyone has always acknowledged the number is simply a collation of the actual results (with the primary weakness being it doesn't account for what players are in the field).

This was explicitly acknowledged the entire time. To pretend it wasn't is extremely dishonest.

So it wasn't a valuable tool at that time yet was used as a tool to say our DC was making a case to keep his job? We were "artificially" improving based on a flaw of the metric.

[packfanfb]

lmao

[incognito_man]

5 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

So it wasn't a valuable tool at that time yet was used as a tool to say our DC was making a case to keep his job? We were "artificially" improving based on a flaw of the metric.

it's a valuable tool

it wasn't used as a case for Barry to keep his job. That has always been an invented 'point' you and others feigned outrage over.

it's so weird lol