Joe Barry'd again

[MrBobGray]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Is there somewhere that shows the average distance to go on 3rd down for each team?  Like Green Bay's defense is on average looking at 3rd and 7 to go, while NY Jets are 3rd and 2.5 yards to go?

Green Bay's defense isn't playing well by any means.  I don't think their horrific catastrophe they've been in past year, but with how much they've invested into the defense over the last few years there hasn't been significant improvement.

Unfortunately I can confirm to the best of my ability there isn't an easier way than @squire12 mentioned; I did it through Stathead, but it wasn't really faster than just going to the team pages.  And you have to calculate the total yardage for each split separately for each team, then add em all up which is a pain.  But it came out to:

• 49ers - 101 3rd downs against; 3rd and 6.85 yards to go on average. 
• Jets - 121 3rd downs against; 3rd and 7.37 yards to go on average.
• Packers - 116 3rd downs against; 3rd and 6.89 yards to go on average.

So yeah, the Packers and 49ers had basically equivalent numbers, with the Jets having a slightly easier 3rd down on average.  On top of this, the Packers actually had the most difficult to defend split of 3rd downs overall, having the highest number of 3rd and short and lowest of 3rd and long:

• 3rd and short (1-3 yards to go):
  • 49ers - 32 plays
  • Jets - 27 plays
  • Packers - 35 plays
• 3rd and long (10+ yards to go):
  • 49ers - 27 plays
  • Jets - 31 plays
  • Packers - 26 plays

So in short, the Packers have just been better on 3rd down (against their opponents, yes) across the board than the 49ers and Jets.

EDIT - Looking at the conversion for each split is really surprising to me.  I would have thought Green Bay would have a much worse 3rd and 7-9 yards to go % just given some of their recent games, but uh-

• 3rd and short (1-3 yards to go):
  • 49ers - 32 plays - 65.7% conversion allowed
  • Jets - 27 plays - 51.9% conversion allowed
  • Packers - 35 plays - 57.1% conversion allowed
• 3rd and 4-6 yards to go
  • 49ers - 26 plays - 38.5% conversion allowed
  • Jets - 36 plays - 52.8% conversion allowed
  • Packers - 22 plays - 45.5% conversion allowed
• 3rd and 7-9 yards to go
  • 49ers - 16 plays - 37.5% conversion allowed
  • Jets - 27 plays - 37% conversion allowed
  • Packers - 33 plays - 30.3% conversion allowed
• 3rd and long (10+ yards to go):
  • 49ers - 27 plays - 14.8% conversion allowed
  • Jets - 31 plays - 19.35% conversion allowed
  • Packers - 26 plays - 19.2% conversion allowed

The fact that the Packers and the Jets allowed the same number of conversions on 3rd and 7-9 (10 each) is wild.  The Packers having a better conversion rate against on 3rd and long than the Jets is somehow even more unexpected. 

Edited November 8, 2023 by MrBobGray

[AlexGreen#20]

5 hours ago, incognito_man said:

I'll never understand the small mindedness required to laugh at empirical mathematical results.

"Empirical"

[incognito_man]

22 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

"Empirical"

Yes. 

Explain how it is not anything but that, please.

[Mazrimiv]

On 11/8/2023 at 1:40 PM, vegas492 said:

But....what is interesting to me is Roquan Smith.  PFF never really liked him, yet he is killing it this year, score wise.

I haven't studied it, besides looking at the overall scores, and I won't.  But....it's almost like a better defensive scheme and better guys around the ILB makes them score better.

Who would have thunk that?

I wouldn't have thunk scheme and/or surrounding talent would have such a major impact on the PFF score.  Is the score based on individual performance or not?  I would expect some impact, but major impact?  PFF has always seemed to have specific traits they value in their grades.  If a player's role puts them in position to show those traits, they'll probably score well.  If not, they probably won't. 

There's also the issue of having a 3rd party review each play and interpret responsibilities for every player on the field.  PFF's interpretation is going to be wrong a not insignificant amount of the time.  It's unavoidable.  Just look at the active Josh Myers debate within this forum, with no way of knowing who is actually correct.  I would value PFF's data quite a bit if they posted grades at the snap level along with the game level.  They must have that data.  Is there a subscription tier that provides access to it?

Edited November 12, 2023 by Mazrimiv

[incognito_man]

On 11/8/2023 at 3:19 PM, incognito_man said:

On 11/8/2023 at 2:56 PM, AlexGreen#20 said:

"Empirical"

Yes. 

Explain how it is not anything but that, please.

The silence that meets a request to explain unexplainable criticism of DVOA is again deafening.

[AlexGreen#20]

On 11/8/2023 at 3:19 PM, incognito_man said:

Yes. 

Explain how it is not anything but that, please.

I'll be honest, I thought you were referring to PFF, DVOA has a place.

PFF is mostly nonsense. 

[MacReady]

We’re not soft, we just make incompetent offenses look efficient.

[Packerraymond]

Just now, MacReady said:

We’re not soft, we just make incompetent offenses look efficient.

I'm rooting for us to lose this game 42-38. You get your draft pick, I get my QB extension. We both get Joe Barry the **** out of town.

[Tperk]

wrong thread

Edited November 12, 2023 by Tperk

[VonKarman]

16 hours ago, Mazrimiv said:

I wouldn't have thunk scheme and/or surrounding talent would have such a major impact on the PFF score.  Is the score based on individual performance or not?  I would expect some impact, but major impact?  PFF has always seemed to have specific traits they value in their grades.  If a player's role puts them in position to show those traits, they'll probably score well.  If not, they probably won't. 

There's also the issue of having a 3rd party review each play and interpret responsibilities for every player on the field.  PFF's interpretation is going to be wrong a not insignificant amount of the time.  It's unavoidable.  Just look at the active Josh Myers debate within this forum, with no way of knowing who is actually correct.  I would value PFF's data quite a bit if they posted grades at the snap level along with the game level.  They must have that data.  Is there a subscription tier that provides access to it?

Yes, you have to be 1 of the 32 teams to have that data available. PFF does a lot of interesting things. PFF grade is the least interesting one of all of them, and that's why it's available to everyone for free.

[sgtcheezwiz]

Took him forever to commit to shutting down the run. I’m guessing that’s because his corners were Valentine and Ballentine, but still 

[vegas492]

21 hours ago, Mazrimiv said:

I wouldn't have thunk scheme and/or surrounding talent would have such a major impact on the PFF score.  Is the score based on individual performance or not?  I would expect some impact, but major impact?  PFF has always seemed to have specific traits they value in their grades.  If a player's role puts them in position to show those traits, they'll probably score well.  If not, they probably won't. 

There's also the issue of having a 3rd party review each play and interpret responsibilities for every player on the field.  PFF's interpretation is going to be wrong a not insignificant amount of the time.  It's unavoidable.  Just look at the active Josh Myers debate within this forum, with no way of knowing who is actually correct.  I would value PFF's data quite a bit if they posted grades at the snap level along with the game level.  They must have that data.  Is there a subscription tier that provides access to it?

I have a pretty expensive subscription to PFF...probably my last year buying it.

But...as I've looked around, no , i do not see grades at the snap level . Game level?  Yes.  I've posted that about Myers.  But not snap level.  

I agree, seeing a grade on a snap would be interesting, but it would also be a nightmare for them to make that data accessible.  And then obviously, it would lead to a whole lot of debate and questions on a per snap basis.

My hunch is this...if you are an NFL team or college team that buys their analytics, those per snap grading details are disclosed up front and I'll bet teams get access to the data points.  Unlike schmuks like me who pay a fee that is a whole lot less than a team pays.

[mikemike778]

4 hours ago, sgtcheezwiz said:

Took him forever to commit to shutting down the run. I’m guessing that’s because his corners were Valentine and Ballentine, but still 

Not a Barry fan and we can probably do better.

But there is a collective brain fart from the Barry haters in this game. The reality is this is a passing league and on paper our corners and secondary in general was heavily outmatched by the Steelers receivers. There was the potential for this to get seriously messy. 

The game plan was obviously to protect the secondary and that was probably right. Ultimately we stayed in the game. If we left the corners exposed then it probably gets out of hand very quickly.  Once I heard Alexander was out, I was looking for Steelers receivers in fantasy as I didn't think our secondary stood a chance.

The defence did its job to cover up the massive weakness in the secondary - more than that but they just about did their job. It was very frustrating watching them run through us but Barry has been left in a massive hole with what he is left to work with this year. 

I would probably move on from Barry but the abuse he gets is becoming more and more unfair from an increasingly toxic fanbase.

 

 

[{Family Ghost}]

5 hours ago, sgtcheezwiz said:

Took him forever to commit to shutting down the run. I’m guessing that’s because his corners were Valentine and Ballentine, but still 

I'd rather give up a quick strike on occasion than get gashed by the run for an entire half.  We gave up 17 first half points to a bad offense.  I'm pretty sure if we just would have committed to stuffing the run from the opening kickoff we would have given up less than 17, and allowed our offense more time on the field.

[PACKRULE]

1 hour ago, mikemike778 said:

Not a Barry fan and we can probably do better.

But there is a collective brain fart from the Barry haters in this game. The reality is this is a passing league and on paper our corners and secondary in general was heavily outmatched by the Steelers receivers. There was the potential for this to get seriously messy. 

The game plan was obviously to protect the secondary and that was probably right. Ultimately we stayed in the game. If we left the corners exposed then it probably gets out of hand very quickly.  Once I heard Alexander was out, I was looking for Steelers receivers in fantasy as I didn't think our secondary stood a chance.

The defence did its job to cover up the massive weakness in the secondary - more than that but they just about did their job. It was very frustrating watching them run through us but Barry has been left in a massive hole with what he is left to work with this year. 

I would probably move on from Barry but the abuse he gets is becoming more and more unfair from an increasingly toxic fanbase.

 

 

Against a team that wants to run..........while you are right he likely wanted to play 2deep looks early. WAs there anything wrong with playing 3dl against a 2wr 2te formation like we were getting. At some point Barry needs to believe and defend what he sees. Once he did wow what a difference. And amazing Pitt has crappy corners but continued to try to stop the run. 

Gone are the days of letting AR get a lead and let teams run on us to burn the clock while being ahead. We are not that team. We need to fight, but shoot first drive Pitt on what our 6 and Barry still played a light box after they are just run it what 70 yards down the field. Did he think they would just start passing it.