Jump to content

Why are AFC challengers considered frauds when the "advanced" numbers suggest otherwise?


wackywabbit

Recommended Posts

The Steelers and Patriots are the two strongest teams in the AFC. Can't really argue that. But, why is the gap between them and the rest of the field considered so large? The two team race concept seems a lot less viable for this year's AFC than most conferences in most years, but I've never heard that narrative pushed harder. It's not even a foregone conclusion that those are the two bye teams. 

Seems like the near-consensus opinion that the Jaguars, Ravens, Chargers, and Chiefs would be fraudulent/undeserving playoff teams that pose no threat to the top 2. It's easy to point to win/loss and say there are more  deserving teams in the NFC cuz "you are what your records says you are". But in terms of predicting future outcomes pythagoreon wins (based on point differential) is better than win/loss and DVOA is probably the best numerical ranking of team strength.***

(***This would be a very long post it I got into why. Here's a quick article making the case for this. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20114211/the-nfl-stats-matter-most-2017-offseason-bill-barnwell, and there are many others out there. Strangely, as much as I like Barnwell's opinions including that article, he, like most football observers, seems to be ignoring his own logic/process in how he sees the AFC this year)

The Jaguars should be considered legit period. Their defense is one of the very top units in the league. Defense in the playoffs... leads to good things. They have the best point differential in the AFC, and near the best in the nfl. They are 8th in DVOA. Legit playoff team.

What I say about the Ravens will be written off as homerism, so I'll just state the facts: 6th in the league in DVOA. Slightly better point differential than Pittsburgh with basically the same run of small name QBs everyone will point to first. The SOS of .521 is actually 2nd in the conference.

The Chargers also have a better point differential than Pittsburgh, a healthy +73 and a 13th (and rising) DVOA rank. If the top 12 teams "deserve" to be in the playoffs, what's the problem here? I think people accept that this team is dangerous on both sides of the ball, and their unsustainable point differential to win/loss record from earlier is correcting fast. 

I wrote the Chiefs off before the season, so I'm going to delay on writing them off during the season after the hot start. They were so good earlier that there has got to be a chance they recapture some of that magic for a games or 2 if they get into the playoffs. They are 10th in the league in DVOA and have a +42 point differential, largely carried by their dominant start. 

None of this applies to Titans (8-5 with a -27 point differential and a 19th and falling DVOA rank). Yea, they are fraudulent. THIS is what a fraudulent team looks like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, wackywabbit said:

The Steelers and Patriots are the two strongest teams in the AFC. Can't really argue that. But, why is the gap between them and the rest of the field considered so large? The two team race concept seems a lot less viable for this year's AFC than most conferences in most years, but I've never heard that narrative pushed harder. It's not even a foregone conclusion that those are the two bye teams. 

Seems like the near-consensus opinion that the Jaguars, Ravens, Chargers, and Chiefs would be fraudulent/undeserving playoff teams that pose no threat to the top 2. It's easy to point to win/loss and say there are more  deserving teams in the NFC cuz "you are what your records says you are". But in terms of predicting future outcomes pythagoreon wins (based on point differential) is better than win/loss and DVOA is probably the best numerical ranking of team strength.***

(***This would be a very long post it I got into why. Here's a quick article making the case for this. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20114211/the-nfl-stats-matter-most-2017-offseason-bill-barnwell, and there are many others out there. Strangely, as much as I like Barnwell's opinions including that article, he, like most football observers, seems to be ignoring his own logic/process in how he sees the AFC this year)

The Jaguars should be considered legit period. Their defense is one of the very top units in the league. Defense in the playoffs... leads to good things. They have the best point differential in the AFC, and near the best in the nfl. They are 8th in DVOA. Legit playoff team.

What I say about the Ravens will be written off as homerism, so I'll just state the facts: 6th in the league in DVOA. Slightly better point differential than Pittsburgh with basically the same run of small name QBs everyone will point to first. The SOS of .521 is actually 2nd in the conference.

The Chargers also have a better point differential than Pittsburgh, a healthy +73 and a 13th (and rising) DVOA rank. If the top 12 teams "deserve" to be in the playoffs, what's the problem here? I think people accept that this team is dangerous on both sides of the ball, and their unsustainable point differential to win/loss record from earlier is correcting fast. 

I wrote the Chiefs off before the season, so I'm going to delay on writing them off during the season after the hot start. They were so good earlier that there has got to be a chance they recapture some of that magic for a games or 2 if they get into the playoffs. They are 10th in the league in DVOA and have a +42 point differential, largely carried by their dominant start. 

None of this applies to Titans (8-5 with a -27 point differential and a 19th and falling DVOA rank). Yea, they are fraudulent. THIS is what a fraudulent team looks like. 

Brady and Roethlisberger are multiple SB winners and when push comes to shove down the stretch, they carry a lot of weight and confidence that they will win the big games. Of course, Brady is playing on a very sore Achilles and Roethlisberger isn't the player he once was, but in the clutch, they have proven that they will come through, so why would anybody question them???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Iamcanadian said:

Brady and Roethlisberger are multiple SB winners and when push comes to shove down the stretch, they carry a lot of weight and confidence that they will win the big games. Of course, Brady is playing on a very sore Achilles and Roethlisberger isn't the player he once was, but in the clutch, they have proven that they will come through, so why would anybody question them???

Did you not read the first two sentences of my post? Or do you think they are upset proof? I'm talking about 4 of the other 5 teams in the AFC playoff picture and their viability as playoff teams.

Also, whatever you mean by the phrase "in the clutch" the have also both not come through "in the clutch" multiple times. Although usage of concepts like "in the clutch" over things like DVOA and point differential is kind of why I felt like making a thread. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mostly since they're the big name teams and more often than not Brady and friends destroy every team in the playoffs. 

The Jaguars have serious question marks at QB and are more likely than not a case of one and done.

The Chiefs have faded for quite a bit and clearly have problems on offense and defense.

The Chargers have no fans so one's talking about them but they've sneakily been one of the best teams this year since they started 0-4. 

The Ravens nearly took down the Steelers at home so I'd say they've proven they're a quality playoff team but I fully expect them to lose to the browns this week because it's a classic ravens trap game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who knows?  the Jags could be in the conference championship  game. But its already a stone cold lock that they won't  win it. 

There's no maybe .there's no - anything can happen etc stupid slogan. It won't happen. 

The Ravens Make the playoffs every other year too.theyre no surprise but it's not their year. 

The conf championhip will involve both or one of NE/Pitt. Nothing else is happening. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BleedTheClock said:

Jaguars are legit IMO. I really like their chances against Pittsburgh if it comes to that. NE is a different story.

 

Speaking as a Patriots fan, I dread the thought of facing the Jaguars. They have the sort of defense that's been able to terrorize Brady in the past, and their running game should be able to exploit the Pats' weakness in the front-7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

Jaguars are legit IMO. I really like their chances against Pittsburgh if it comes to that. NE is a different story.

 

NE-GB Super Bowl? I could see a real late magic push from Rodgers.

Not saying we would beat the Pats but the fact we generate most of our pressure with the front 4 and drop 7 is huge against a guy like Brady. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've got the Patriots and Steelers, quarterbacked and coached by men who have dominated the AFC the past decade+, at 11-2 and 10-3. They're going to be favored over inexperienced teams having less stellar seasons, and deservedly so. I don't see the narrative being pushed any harder than usual. The Jags and Chargers are hardly even dark horses at this point, most people see the threat they each pose.

 

Although the AFC is looking to have at least one fairly weak playoff team in the Bills or Titans, possibly two depending on how you judge the Ravens. Whereas the NFC is probably going to be doing the opposite and leaving out a very deserving team, if not two. That is pretty significant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

What I say about the Ravens will be written off as homerism, so I'll just state the facts: 6th in the league in DVOA. Slightly better point differential than Pittsburgh with basically the same run of small name QBs everyone will point to first. The SOS of .521 is actually 2nd in the conference.

The only teams the Ravens have beaten with a winning record are the Hundley-led Packers and Lions, who most would consider the weakest of the playoff eligible teams in the NFC.  Not trying to hold it against the Ravens, but I don't see why SOS matters and should be used in their defense when they haven't beaten anyone impressive.  

There are a lot of reasons why some of the teams are dismissed easily.  Quarterbacks being one of the top ones.  Fair or unfair, a lot of people don't think a team led by Bortles, Flacco, Mariota, Taylor, or Smith stands much of a chance against the Steelers and Patriots.  I don't necessarily agree (if it wasn't for the fact the game would probably take place in Foxborough, I would be very tempted to take the Jaguars over the Patriots), but it isn't a stretch to think that way.   

For me, I see a lot of underwhelming teams.  If the playoffs started today, the Bills, Titans, and Chiefs would be in.  2 of those teams have a negative point differential (Bills at -50, which is horrible) and the other team has looked bad for the last month and a half.  Does anyone really think those teams have much of a chance to win 3 straight games and make the Super Bowl, much less win it?  Chargers are getting a lot of hype and rightfully so.  They have a QB capable enough and a defense that could cause teams problems.  But a lot of people still see them as the team that started 0-4 with losses to the Broncos and Dolphins.  The best team they have beaten so far are the Zeke-less Cowboys.  I'm not dismissing them myself because I do think they are a good team, but its another example of why I think it is easy to see why a lot of people don't take the AFC too seriously.  They haven't really had a statement win yet, which is an issue for a lot of these teams outside of the Patriots/Steelers/Jaguars.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably predicated on earlier season form, where there was genuinly 6 NFC teams that you could predict in the Superbowl, but only 2 from AFC. Now, however, it's completely not the case. If you were ranking them, you could come up with something like;

Steelers

Pats

Eagles

Vikings

Saints

Jags

Chargers

Rams

 

or something. Playing field has been levelled. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, iknowcool said:

The only teams the Ravens have beaten with a winning record are the Hundley-led Packers and Lions, who most would consider the weakest of the playoff eligible teams in the NFC.  Not trying to hold it against the Ravens, but I don't see why SOS matters and should be used in their defense when they haven't beaten anyone impressive.  

Their entire schedule shows up in the point differential/DVOA, not just the wins. Close wins over good teams are over-weighted in predicting future success, so "who have you beaten" isn't that significant, unless you are convincingly beating those teams. That's what the analytics say.

Old but still often referenced article:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2005/fo-fox-guts-and-stomps

Another one: http://community.advancednflstats.com/2010/12/is-close-game-clutch-play-story.html

TLDR: Having close wins over "good" does not correlate with future (in playoffs for example) success as much as having multi-score victories over bad teams. This is contrary to a lot of commentary out there that makes a big deal when potential top seed A pulls off an exciting last second victory over top seed B, but completely ignores playoff team C beating a bad tam by 20 points and writing it off as doing what they are supposed to do, but not impressing anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

Jaguars are legit IMO. I really like their chances against Pittsburgh if it comes to that. NE is a different story.

 

NE-GB Super Bowl? I could see a real late magic push from Rodgers.

GB needs us to play spoiler and beat the Saints, Falcons, and Panthers the last three weeks. And I don't see that happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...