Author Topic: 2016 NFL Season  (Read 12694 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #45 on: September 12, 2016, 05:25:45 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23009
  • Tommy Points: 941
  • What a Pub Should Be
Also, Blount is a beast.  He's the most impressive 3.2 YPC you'll ever see.  A lot of 1-2 yard lurches with the occasional 8-12 yard burst with three guys draped all over him.
I thought the running game was awful. Except for a couple of big gains, it was mostly running into a brick wall on some of the most predictable handoffs ever.

Seemed to me that the Pats knew their offensive line was suspect.  Especially on the run and that they really only called the run stuff to keep the D honest to an extent and to really try & set up the play action.   Basically, I think anything they got out of the running game last night was a bonus.  I have to imagine they had pretty tempered expectations about how the running game would perform against that Arizona front.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #46 on: September 13, 2016, 09:55:42 PM »

Offline Cman

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12205
  • Tommy Points: 341
Nice job, ESPN.


to be fair, Arizona should have won the game on the FG.

On a 47 yard field goal? Not really. That's like saying an NBA team should have won on a last second three pointer. It wasnt a free throw type of situation.

Yeah I checked and a 47 yard FG is very hard to make (less than 20%).
http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2013/01/chances-of-making-an-nfl-field-goal.html

Cardinals were basically making a desperation play there, and, not surprisingly, it didn't work.

Even if it did, Pats would get the ball back with 30+ seconds and a chance for their own desperation FG to win it.
Celtics fan for life.

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #47 on: September 14, 2016, 10:37:12 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15787
  • Tommy Points: 1096
Yeah I checked and a 47 yard FG is very hard to make (less than 20%).
http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2013/01/chances-of-making-an-nfl-field-goal.html

Cardinals were basically making a desperation play there, and, not surprisingly, it didn't work.

Even if it did, Pats would get the ball back with 30+ seconds and a chance for their own desperation FG to win it.
I haven't had time to fully review (and redo) the data work, but I guarantee you this is bogus. There is no way that there is virtually no chance to convert a 50-yard FG.

edit: I think the distance in the model refers to where the ball was snapped from. In this particular case, we should be looking at D=29 (rather than 47), which is a 75% conversion rate; 47-yard FGs are a routine play for any placekicker that's not awful.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2016, 10:51:09 AM by kozlodoev »
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #48 on: September 14, 2016, 01:44:33 PM »

Offline Cman

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12205
  • Tommy Points: 341
Yeah I checked and a 47 yard FG is very hard to make (less than 20%).
http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2013/01/chances-of-making-an-nfl-field-goal.html

Cardinals were basically making a desperation play there, and, not surprisingly, it didn't work.

Even if it did, Pats would get the ball back with 30+ seconds and a chance for their own desperation FG to win it.
I haven't had time to fully review (and redo) the data work, but I guarantee you this is bogus. There is no way that there is virtually no chance to convert a 50-yard FG.

edit: I think the distance in the model refers to where the ball was snapped from. In this particular case, we should be looking at D=29 (rather than 47), which is a 75% conversion rate; 47-yard FGs are a routine play for any placekicker that's not awful.

My bad, thanks for the catch (no pun intended). After digging some more, 538 has some nice graphs (based on others' data). http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/kickers-are-forever/
You are right, it is closer to 75% (eyeballing, probably about 70%).

So the Pats got luckier than I thought ;)
Celtics fan for life.

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #49 on: September 14, 2016, 04:23:09 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4956
  • Tommy Points: 870
Yeah I checked and a 47 yard FG is very hard to make (less than 20%).
http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2013/01/chances-of-making-an-nfl-field-goal.html

Cardinals were basically making a desperation play there, and, not surprisingly, it didn't work.

Even if it did, Pats would get the ball back with 30+ seconds and a chance for their own desperation FG to win it.
I haven't had time to fully review (and redo) the data work, but I guarantee you this is bogus. There is no way that there is virtually no chance to convert a 50-yard FG.

edit: I think the distance in the model refers to where the ball was snapped from. In this particular case, we should be looking at D=29 (rather than 47), which is a 75% conversion rate; 47-yard FGs are a routine play for any placekicker that's not awful.

My bad, thanks for the catch (no pun intended). After digging some more, 538 has some nice graphs (based on others' data). http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/kickers-are-forever/
You are right, it is closer to 75% (eyeballing, probably about 70%).

So the Pats got luckier than I thought ;)

Luck might be a matter of perspective. Kicks from 47 yards are made pretty frequently, but they're also missed often enough, and Catanzaro has one of the weaker legs in the league—last year he was perfect from under 47 yards, but only 1-4 from 47 and beyond (though the one make was a 47-yarder). It wasn't like missing a chip shot.

It could also be argued easily enough that the Cardinals shouldn't have even allowed the Patriots to be within striking distance of a win, much less having the lead with a minute left in the game. No Brady, no Gronk, two rookies starting at the tackle positions, on the road, with a QB making his first NFL start. The Cardinals might've taken the Pats lightly, but the Pats were well-prepared, too.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis


Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #50 on: September 15, 2016, 08:35:06 AM »

Offline eja117

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17029
  • Tommy Points: 1060

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #51 on: September 15, 2016, 09:31:25 AM »

Offline Cman

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12205
  • Tommy Points: 341
Yeah I checked and a 47 yard FG is very hard to make (less than 20%).
http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2013/01/chances-of-making-an-nfl-field-goal.html

Cardinals were basically making a desperation play there, and, not surprisingly, it didn't work.

Even if it did, Pats would get the ball back with 30+ seconds and a chance for their own desperation FG to win it.
I haven't had time to fully review (and redo) the data work, but I guarantee you this is bogus. There is no way that there is virtually no chance to convert a 50-yard FG.

edit: I think the distance in the model refers to where the ball was snapped from. In this particular case, we should be looking at D=29 (rather than 47), which is a 75% conversion rate; 47-yard FGs are a routine play for any placekicker that's not awful.

My bad, thanks for the catch (no pun intended). After digging some more, 538 has some nice graphs (based on others' data). http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/kickers-are-forever/
You are right, it is closer to 75% (eyeballing, probably about 70%).

So the Pats got luckier than I thought ;)

Luck might be a matter of perspective. Kicks from 47 yards are made pretty frequently, but they're also missed often enough, and Catanzaro has one of the weaker legs in the league—last year he was perfect from under 47 yards, but only 1-4 from 47 and beyond (though the one make was a 47-yarder). It wasn't like missing a chip shot.

It could also be argued easily enough that the Cardinals shouldn't have even allowed the Patriots to be within striking distance of a win, much less having the lead with a minute left in the game. No Brady, no Gronk, two rookies starting at the tackle positions, on the road, with a QB making his first NFL start. The Cardinals might've taken the Pats lightly, but the Pats were well-prepared, too.

Oh, I totally agree. The Patriots outplayed the Cardinals. They worked hard for the win and deserved it. I was merely trying to humble myself after my mess up on the stats front earlier.
Celtics fan for life.

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #52 on: September 15, 2016, 09:36:51 AM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23009
  • Tommy Points: 941
  • What a Pub Should Be
Shocking.  Absolutely shocking that something the NFL would institute would backfire on them.

https://sports.yahoo.com/news/bill-belichick-isnt-bending-to-nfl-kickoff-rule-and-others-may-follow-suit-001819719.html

Don't know why they're singling out Belichick here, though.  Any head coach with half a brain should be taking the same approach.  It's not exactly genius.  Its common sense & good strategy.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #53 on: September 15, 2016, 11:45:07 AM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4956
  • Tommy Points: 870
Yeah I checked and a 47 yard FG is very hard to make (less than 20%).
http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2013/01/chances-of-making-an-nfl-field-goal.html

Cardinals were basically making a desperation play there, and, not surprisingly, it didn't work.

Even if it did, Pats would get the ball back with 30+ seconds and a chance for their own desperation FG to win it.
I haven't had time to fully review (and redo) the data work, but I guarantee you this is bogus. There is no way that there is virtually no chance to convert a 50-yard FG.

edit: I think the distance in the model refers to where the ball was snapped from. In this particular case, we should be looking at D=29 (rather than 47), which is a 75% conversion rate; 47-yard FGs are a routine play for any placekicker that's not awful.

My bad, thanks for the catch (no pun intended). After digging some more, 538 has some nice graphs (based on others' data). http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/kickers-are-forever/
You are right, it is closer to 75% (eyeballing, probably about 70%).

So the Pats got luckier than I thought ;)

Luck might be a matter of perspective. Kicks from 47 yards are made pretty frequently, but they're also missed often enough, and Catanzaro has one of the weaker legs in the league—last year he was perfect from under 47 yards, but only 1-4 from 47 and beyond (though the one make was a 47-yarder). It wasn't like missing a chip shot.

It could also be argued easily enough that the Cardinals shouldn't have even allowed the Patriots to be within striking distance of a win, much less having the lead with a minute left in the game. No Brady, no Gronk, two rookies starting at the tackle positions, on the road, with a QB making his first NFL start. The Cardinals might've taken the Pats lightly, but the Pats were well-prepared, too.

Oh, I totally agree. The Patriots outplayed the Cardinals. They worked hard for the win and deserved it. I was merely trying to humble myself after my mess up on the stats front earlier.

 :)
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis


Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #54 on: September 15, 2016, 02:12:47 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9226
  • Tommy Points: 2000
Shocking.  Absolutely shocking that something the NFL would institute would backfire on them.

https://sports.yahoo.com/news/bill-belichick-isnt-bending-to-nfl-kickoff-rule-and-others-may-follow-suit-001819719.html

Don't know why they're singling out Belichick here, though.  Any head coach with half a brain should be taking the same approach.  It's not exactly genius.  Its common sense & good strategy.

They're singling out Belichek because he was willing to openly talk about the strategy.  And not all head coaches have half a brain -- if the Colts had done that against the Lions, they might have won.

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #55 on: September 15, 2016, 02:24:35 PM »

Offline kraidstar

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1663
  • Tommy Points: 468
Shocking.  Absolutely shocking that something the NFL would institute would backfire on them.

https://sports.yahoo.com/news/bill-belichick-isnt-bending-to-nfl-kickoff-rule-and-others-may-follow-suit-001819719.html

Don't know why they're singling out Belichick here, though.  Any head coach with half a brain should be taking the same approach.  It's not exactly genius.  Its common sense & good strategy.

It also speaks to BB's trust is Gostkowski as well. Not every kicker is going to be able to consistently execute that play. You can bet some of the lesser talents will boot a few balls out of bounds for penalties because they're pressing trying to kick the ball short.

The play also requires pretty good coordination and timing on special teams, which thankfully we usually possess.

This could become yet another advantage for us.

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #56 on: September 15, 2016, 02:42:53 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16209
  • Tommy Points: 1415
Also, Blount is a beast.  He's the most impressive 3.2 YPC you'll ever see.  A lot of 1-2 yard lurches with the occasional 8-12 yard burst with three guys draped all over him.
I thought the running game was awful. Except for a couple of big gains, it was mostly running into a brick wall on some of the most predictable handoffs ever.

Don't get me wrong, the running game wasn't very good at all, but Blount is just so slow yet so huge it's really impressive to watch him manage to get 70 yards. 

He mostly looks like a DE or LB that found his way onto the field and got the ball by accident, but occasionally he picks up 7-8 yards and a first down or touchdown despite a crowd of defenders hanging all over him. 
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #57 on: September 15, 2016, 03:05:13 PM »

Offline BitterJim

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4293
  • Tommy Points: 604
Also, Blount is a beast.  He's the most impressive 3.2 YPC you'll ever see.  A lot of 1-2 yard lurches with the occasional 8-12 yard burst with three guys draped all over him.
I thought the running game was awful. Except for a couple of big gains, it was mostly running into a brick wall on some of the most predictable handoffs ever.

Seemed to me that the Pats knew their offensive line was suspect.  Especially on the run and that they really only called the run stuff to keep the D honest to an extent and to really try & set up the play action.   Basically, I think anything they got out of the running game last night was a bonus.  I have to imagine they had pretty tempered expectations about how the running game would perform against that Arizona front.

On the bright side, it seems like once our line is healthy, the addition of Bennett will help a lot on run plays.  I knew he was a good receiver from his time in Chicago, but seeing him blocking is really encouraging, too.  Between him, Gronk, and Blount, our goal line rushes should look a lot better this year

Gotta get that OLine healthy, though, which is a lot easier said than done
I'm bitter.

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #58 on: September 15, 2016, 03:34:27 PM »

Offline Cman

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12205
  • Tommy Points: 341
Also, Blount is a beast.  He's the most impressive 3.2 YPC you'll ever see.  A lot of 1-2 yard lurches with the occasional 8-12 yard burst with three guys draped all over him.
I thought the running game was awful. Except for a couple of big gains, it was mostly running into a brick wall on some of the most predictable handoffs ever.

Seemed to me that the Pats knew their offensive line was suspect.  Especially on the run and that they really only called the run stuff to keep the D honest to an extent and to really try & set up the play action.   Basically, I think anything they got out of the running game last night was a bonus.  I have to imagine they had pretty tempered expectations about how the running game would perform against that Arizona front.

On the bright side, it seems like once our line is healthy, the addition of Bennett will help a lot on run plays.  I knew he was a good receiver from his time in Chicago, but seeing him blocking is really encouraging, too.  Between him, Gronk, and Blount, our goal line rushes should look a lot better this year

Gotta get that OLine healthy, though, which is a lot easier said than done
Add Develin to that mix as well.
Celtics fan for life.

Re: 2016 NFL Season
« Reply #59 on: September 15, 2016, 05:55:05 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15787
  • Tommy Points: 1096
Shocking.  Absolutely shocking that something the NFL would institute would backfire on them.

https://sports.yahoo.com/news/bill-belichick-isnt-bending-to-nfl-kickoff-rule-and-others-may-follow-suit-001819719.html

Don't know why they're singling out Belichick here, though.  Any head coach with half a brain should be taking the same approach.  It's not exactly genius.  Its common sense & good strategy.
My favorite solution to the kickoff issue is to replace it with a drop kick from the 50-yard line.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com