SpeightTheVillain Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 16 hours ago, skibrett15 said: That's how that works, yep/ Limiting points isn't how defense works? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibrett15 Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 2 hours ago, SpeightTheVillain said: Limiting points isn't how defense works? What is your point? That the packers are better than the cardinals? He cherry picked silly examples which make no sense given the context of the conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeightTheVillain Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 2 hours ago, skibrett15 said: What is your point? That the packers are better than the cardinals? He cherry picked silly examples which make no sense given the context of the conversation. The point is AZ is not some defensive behemoth. Averaged .3 offensive TDs less per game then GB last year. He wasn't playing in a substantially better defense last year as you posited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibrett15 Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 Just now, SpeightTheVillain said: The point is AZ is not some defensive behemoth. Averaged .3 offensive TDs less per game then GB last year. He wasn't playing in a substantially better defense last year as you posited. 3rd best defense in the NFL per FO. Playing the Rams eagles boys seahawks texans lions etc. didn't help them. He was playing in a substantially better defense last year as I posited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeightTheVillain Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 1 minute ago, skibrett15 said: 3rd best defense in the NFL per FO. Playing the Rams eagles boys seahawks texans lions etc. didn't help them. He was playing in a substantially better defense last year as I posited. The scoring numbers do not back up that conclusion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibrett15 Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 Just now, SpeightTheVillain said: The scoring numbers do not back up that conclusion yes they do when you look at context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeightTheVillain Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 21 minutes ago, skibrett15 said: yes they do when you look at context. AZ average opponent offensive TDs per game: 2.26 GB average opponent offensive TDs per game: 2.21 Massive .05 difference there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibrett15 Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 33 minutes ago, SpeightTheVillain said: AZ average opponent offensive TDs per game: 2.26 GB average opponent offensive TDs per game: 2.21 Massive .05 difference there. K. Lemme know which parts of this you disagree with and go ahead and post it on their message board. Never thought I'd see such a vehement support for our defense. Point being, you're taking the worst player from a good secondary and good defense and adding it to our trash secondary. I don't expect that to work out. https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 1 hour ago, SpeightTheVillain said: The point is AZ is not some defensive behemoth. Averaged .3 offensive TDs less per game then GB last year. He wasn't playing in a substantially better defense last year as you posited. .3 offensive TDs is 2.1 points per game. That's not insubstantial. Cardinals were 11th in points per drive at 1.69 Packers were 32nd in points per drive at 2.13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeightTheVillain Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 25 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: .3 offensive TDs is 2.1 points per game. That's not insubstantial. Cardinals were 11th in points per drive at 1.69 Packers were 32nd in points per drive at 2.13 13-19th in offensive TDs per game. 19th in points per play allowed. .3 is within 27% of each-other. 2.1 points is substantial game to game but comparing their placement within the league at large it is not that substantial. But that's all well and good. I was in no way claiming that the Packers had a great defense. Or that AZ was worse. Only that they weren't an amazing defense last season that blows GB out of the water. AZ was average to below average, GB was below average to horrible. 36 minutes ago, skibrett15 said: K. Lemme know which parts of this you disagree with and go ahead and post it on their message board. Never thought I'd see such a vehement support for our defense. Point being, you're taking the worst player from a good secondary and good defense and adding it to our trash secondary. I don't expect that to work out. https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef I have no problem with their methodology but it measures what it measures. Points win games. AZ had a fair amount of points scored on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 1 hour ago, SpeightTheVillain said: 13-19th in offensive TDs per game. 19th in points per play allowed. .3 is within 27% of each-other. 2.1 points is substantial game to game but comparing their placement within the league at large it is not that substantial. But that's all well and good. I was in no way claiming that the Packers had a great defense. Or that AZ was worse. Only that they weren't an amazing defense last season that blows GB out of the water. AZ was average to below average, GB was below average to horrible. I have no problem with their methodology but it measures what it measures. Points win games. AZ had a fair amount of points scored on them. Arizona was in no way a below average offense. They were top 3rd of the league (albeit the bottom of the top third). Points per possession is a way better measure than points per game because teams with bad offenses don't get punished for playing 100 more defensive drives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeightTheVillain Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 56 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Arizona was in no way a below average offense. They were top 3rd of the league (albeit the bottom of the top third). Points per possession is a way better measure than points per game because teams with bad offenses don't get punished for playing 100 more defensive drives. They have a strange statistical artifact. They are decent in points per drive but 19th in points per play. They obviously forced points coming it at 5th in Punts per score. So how does this happen? They obviously gave up scores in a short amount of plays. Turnovers on offense? Came in ranked 10th-18th (T) in turnovers on their side of the field. Penalties on D? Came in ranked 4th most. But with only 204 penalty yards. Big Plays given up? Came in ranked 11th with plays 25+ yards. Bad special teams? Don't have stats for this. I am way off track now but I don't get how this happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 17 hours ago, skibrett15 said: ...Never thought I'd see such a vehement support for our defense..... Tangent, as bad as the defense was and looked, there were an awful lot of games where the actual points-allowed weren't prohibitively high. ***IF*** we had had a great offense, the kind of unstoppable top-of-league great offense that can score 30 points more often than not, there weren't many games where we were allowing 30. So **IF** we were to somehow conjure up a great offense, we could win a lot of games without reducing the point-allowed by all that much. Think the chronic defensive woes points all attention and most good draft picks towards defense. But might be some value in trying to allocate some resources towards building up the offense and perhaps making that great? Points-allowed is probably deceptive, though. Our offense was so bad that in a lot of games (Vikings, for example), the opposing team had little urgency to pile up points, so often played very conservatively. It's well possible that if our offense was scoring 30 per game, that opponents would have scored considerably more if necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjwpack Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 2 hours ago, ArthurPensky said: Looks like a 3.625 cap hit in 2018 and 6.375 in year 2. Right in line with the 3-4 mil people were expecting for Trammon this year. Maybe he can be the next Newman and continue to play well till he's 40, sure takes care of his body well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.