Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

Most Recent FO Features

WentzCar16-1.jpg

» Week 11 DVOA Ratings

DVOA has finally climbed on board the Wentz Wagon! The Eagles move into the No. 1 spot, but they aren't the only strong, well-balanced team in the NFL this year. New Orleans, Pittsburgh, and the Los Angeles Rams make this one of the best seasons ever for multiple teams over 30% in DVOA, and Minnesota isn't far behind.

17 Oct 2017

Week 6 DVOA Ratings

by Aaron Schatz

The Kansas City Chiefs remain on top of the Football Outsiders DVOA ratings, but things have condensed heavily after an upset-filled Week 6. The fact that there are only two 5-1 teams and no 6-0 teams is a hint that the league has some heavy parity this year, and our ratings certainly don't disagree.

At least the Chiefs are still above 30% DVOA after their loss to the Steelers... thanks in large part to opponent adjustments. The Chiefs have played the No. 1 toughest schedule in the league so far. In some years, it seems like the schedule strength ratings are just reflecting which teams are good in bad -- in other words, that bad teams have low DVOA because they've played good teams, and vice versa. That's very much not the case in 2017, where six of the current top 10 in DVOA have played top-10 schedules so far while the easiest schedules in the league so far belong to the No. 31 Indianapolis Colts and the No. 28 New York Jets.

2011 was the only season in DVOA history where no team managed to rate above 30% after Week 6. The top team that year was 5-1 San Francisco at only 25.8%. Four other seasons had a No. 1 team after Week 6 lower than the current Kansas City Chiefs. You may recognize some similarities between these seasons and the current one, particularly an "anyone can win, no clear favorite" atmosphere caused by major injuries:

  • In 2000, the top team after Week 6 was the 5-1 Miami Dolphins at 31.1%.
  • In 2010, the top team after Week 6 was the 4-1 Pittsburgh Steelers at 30.7%.
  • In 1989, the top team after Week 6 was the 4-2 Chicago Bears at 30.6%.
  • In 2008, probably the most "who the hell knows" parity year of the last two decades, the top team after Week 6 was the 3-3 (!) Philadelphia Eagles at 30.4%.

The strong parity of 2017 is even clearer if we look at No. 2 Philadelphia compared to other teams ranked No. 2 after Week 6. With the Eagles at 24.5% and the Steelers at 24.3%, we only have one team right now above 25%. There's only been one other season like that: 2011, when the No. 2 team after Week 6 was the 4-1 Ravens at 22.5%.

The Steelers are also one of the four weakest No. 3 teams ever. The only years where the No. 3 team after Week 6 was lower than the current Seelers are 1989 (5-1 Rams at 21.1%), 2011 (6-0 Packers at 22.0%), and, you might be surprised to learn, last year (the 4-2 Bills at 22.6%; boy, did that not last).

Parity is not quite as strong at the bottom of the league, where the Cleveland Browns and Indianapolis Colts are way back behind everyone else. However, the parity is pretty strong once we get above those two teams, starting with the fact that the team currently ranked No. 30 has a winning record: 3-2 Miami with -28.3% DVOA. There are also 3-3 teams ranked 27th (Arizona) and 28th (New York Jets).

Most of the time, the team ranked third from the bottom after Week 6 has a much worse rating than the Dolphins. There are only four exceptions, and interestingly, three of them were very recent:

  • In 1990, the No. 26 team (in a 28-team league) after Week 6 was the 2-3 Indianapolis Colts at -27.3%
  • In 2013, the No. 30 team after Week 6 was the 1-4 Washington Redskins at -26.9%.
  • In 2015, the No. 30 team after Week 6 was the 2-4 Chicago Bears at -25.7%.
  • In 2016, just like this year, the No. 30 team after Week 6 had a winning record despite playing poorly in the first month and a half: the 4-2 Houston Texans at -23.2%.

Another symbol of this year's parity is a team that is 0-6 despite only getting outscored by 33 points. San Francisco ranks No. 26 in DVOA, and its points scored and allowed numbers would usually point to a 2-4 team rather than a winless squad. Are they the best 0-6 team in DVOA history? Nope, but they're near the top. (And once again I have to apologize that we have yet to run the "DVOA as of Week X" for 1986-1988, so these lists of past teams only go back to 1989.)

Best 0-6 Teams by DVOA, 1989-2017
Year Team DVOA Rank Final
W-L
Final
DVOA
Final
Rank
Y+1
W-L
Y+1
DVOA
Y+1
Rank
2013 TB -12.9% 24 4-12 -5.1% 19 2-14 -28.3% 30
2007 MIA -14.7% 22 1-15 -21.4% 27 11-5 6.2% 14
1997 IND -18.4% 24 3-13 -19.6% 26 3-13 -17.2% 26
2001 DET -20.1% 26 2-14 -22.5% 29 3-13 -34.5% 30
2017 SF -21.0% 26 -- -- -- -- -- --
2014 OAK -22.3% 29 3-13 -27.4% 29 7-9 0.1% 14
2011 MIA -22.8% 28 6-10 -1.3% 18 7-9 -7.2% 21
1991 CIN -23.2% 25 3-13 -24.3% 24 5-11 -19.4% 24
2010 BUF -26.6% 30 4-12 -21.3% 29 6-10 -9.7% 23
2016 CLE -27.9% 31 1-15 -30.4% 31 Oh no, the pain. The PAIN.
1994 CIN -28.6% 26 3-13 -25.7% 27 7-9 -7.0% 20
1998 CAR -28.7% 27 4-12 -13.1% 22 8-8 1.5% 19
2011 IND -29.6% 30 2-14 -32.8% 31 11-5 -16.0% 25

The teams near the top of the list didn't quite match San Francisco's record of five straight losses by a field goal or less, but they did lose a lot of close games. The 2013 Buccaneers, 2007 Dolphins, and 1997 Colts each lost three of their first six games by a field goal or less. I wish I could give 49ers some optimism by explaining that every one of these teams improved the following year, but that's not quite the case. Some of the teams played better, some didn't, and then you have the crazy case of the 2011 Colts, whose record in close games completely reversed when Andrew Luck showed up in 2012.

The parity this season does not extend to our offensive ratings. Kansas City and New England have offensive DVOA similar to what the best offenses usually have at this point, and Indianapolis and Cleveland resemble the typical worst offenses. But the parity does extend to the defensive ratings. For the second straight week, the Jacksonville Jaguars are sitting on top of the defensive DVOA ratings. But at -20.7% DVOA, the Jaguars have the lowest-rated No. 1 defense in DVOA history. (The previous record-holder was also Jacksonville, back in 1999.) The parity isn't quite as extreme on the other end, where the Patriots are still dead last in defensive DVOA. However, the Patriots have moved a lot closer to the league over the last two weeks, going from 30.9% defensive DVOA through Week 4 to 21.1% defensive DVOA through Week 6. Part of what's going on here is better play -- despite the close final score, the win over the Jets this week was New England's top single-game DVOA of the year -- and part of what's going on is the gradual increase in opponent adjustments. The Patriots defense looks even worse than it really has been because the Patriots have played the second-toughest schedule of opposing offenses in the league.

And who has played the toughest schedule of opposing offenses? The Kansas City Chiefs, who despite facing so many strong offenses are 5-1 and No. 1 in DVOA. As we keep mentioning, this has been a very strange season so far.

Two other notes:

  • It's a bit of a shock to see the Baltimore Ravens climb from 18th to 12th after losing to a bad Chicago team. Some of the surprise comes from fumble recoveries. This was the second game this year where Chicago had an overtime win over an AFC North team in part thanks to great fumble recovery luck. The Bears fumbled four times, but recovered two of those; the Ravens fumbled only once, but the Bears recovered that one too. The other driver of Baltimore's DVOA rise is special teams, because the Ravens had touchdowns on both a kickoff and a punt. As a result, the Ravens zoom up from No. 18 to No. 1 in special teams. That seems a bit extreme. The value of long special teams returns are not tapered down in the same way that DVOA treats long passes and runs, and that's probably something I will need to look at when I next get some offseason time to improve the special teams ratings method.
  • For DAVE, we changed the Green Bay projection to incorporate Brett Hundley instead of Aaron Rodgers at quarterback. The DAVE used in the playoff odds simulation adjusts things even further. Combine this with a divisional loss to Minnesota, and our odds of Green Bay making the postseason have dropped over 40 percentage points, from 69.6 percent to just 28.0 percent.

* * * * *

Once again this season, we have teamed up with EA Sports to bring Football Outsiders-branded player content to Madden 18. This year, our content for Madden Ultimate Team on consoles comes monthly, while our content for Madden Mobile comes weekly. Come back to each Tuesday's DVOA commentary article for a list of players who stood out during the previous weekend's games. Those players will get special Madden Mobile items branded as "Powerline, powered by Football Outsiders," beginning at 11am Eastern on Friday.

The Football Outsiders stars for Week 6 are:

  • RG David DeCastro, PIT (HERO): Pulled and paved the way for Le'Veon Bell to gain 179 yards on 32 carries.
  • RB Orleans Darkwa, NYG: Led Week 6 RB with 48 DYAR (21 carries for 117 yards vs. league's No. 1 run defense).
  • LT D.J. Humphries, ARI: Helped lead Arizona RB to 7 left-side carries for 56 yards.
  • DE Alex Okafor, NO: End zone sack and forced fumble leading to touchdown.
  • S Harrison Smith, MIN: Sack, interception, and PD, all on third downs.

* * * * *

All stats pages should now be updated through Week 6, including snap counts, playoff odds, and the FO Premium DVOA database.

* * * * *

These are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings through six weeks of 2017, measured by our proprietary Defense-adjusted Value Over Average (DVOA) system that breaks down every single play and compares a team's performance to the league average based on situation in order to determine value over average. (Explained further here.)

OFFENSE and DEFENSE DVOA are adjusted to consider all fumbles, kept or lost, as equal value. SPECIAL TEAMS DVOA is adjusted for type of stadium (warm, cold, dome, Denver) and week of season. Because it is early in the season, opponent adjustments are only at 60 percent strength; they will increase 10 percent every week through Week 10. As always, positive numbers represent more points so DEFENSE is better when it is NEGATIVE.

DAVE is a formula which combines our preseason projection with current DVOA to get a more accurate forecast of how a team will play the rest of the season. Right now, the preseason projection makes up 19 percent of DAVE for teams that have played six games and 27 percent of DAVE for teams that have played five games.

To save people some time, please use the following format for all complaints:

<team> is clearly ranked <too high/too low> because <reason unrelated to DVOA>. <subjective ranking system> is way better than this. <unrelated team-supporting or -denigrating comment, preferably with poor spelling and/or chat-acceptable spelling>

TEAM TOTAL
DVOA
LAST
WEEK
TOTAL
DAVE
RANK W-L OFFENSE
DVOA
OFF.
RANK
DEFENSE
DVOA
DEF.
RANK
S.T.
DVOA
S.T.
RANK
1 KC 31.8% 1 25.7% 1 5-1 32.4% 1 6.8% 21 6.3% 4
2 PHI 24.5% 5 20.7% 3 5-1 12.1% 5 -5.2% 14 7.2% 3
3 PIT 24.3% 4 22.8% 2 4-2 11.8% 6 -15.4% 4 -2.9% 23
4 LARM 21.6% 7 17.9% 4 4-2 5.7% 13 -9.8% 9 6.0% 7
5 HOU 18.2% 6 12.7% 7 3-3 7.3% 12 -12.8% 6 -1.8% 21
6 WAS 18.1% 2 13.5% 6 3-2 10.6% 8 -9.5% 10 -1.9% 22
7 NO 18.1% 9 11.4% 8 3-2 18.3% 3 -3.9% 15 -4.2% 25
8 MIN 17.5% 14 13.8% 5 4-2 10.2% 9 -8.3% 11 -1.0% 20
9 BUF 12.4% 10 5.9% 15 3-2 -7.9% 22 -16.1% 2 4.3% 8
10 JAC 12.2% 3 8.1% 13 3-3 2.1% 16 -20.7% 1 -10.6% 31
11 DET 11.7% 8 9.3% 11 3-3 -10.1% 24 -12.4% 7 9.3% 2
12 BAL 10.6% 18 8.6% 12 3-3 -13.7% 26 -14.4% 5 9.9% 1
13 SEA 9.1% 12 11.3% 9 3-2 0.3% 18 -7.6% 12 1.2% 17
14 CIN 8.3% 15 6.8% 14 2-3 -9.5% 23 -15.8% 3 2.0% 16
15 NE 7.4% 21 11.3% 10 4-2 26.1% 2 21.1% 32 2.4% 14
16 CAR 7.2% 17 5.7% 16 4-2 -1.3% 20 -6.1% 13 2.5% 13
TEAM TOTAL
DVOA
LAST
WEEK
TOTAL
DAVE
RANK W-L OFFENSE
DVOA
OFF.
RANK
DEFENSE
DVOA
DEF.
RANK
S.T.
DVOA
S.T.
RANK
17 ATL 6.0% 13 5.1% 17 3-2 15.8% 4 12.4% 27 2.5% 12
18 GB 3.8% 11 2.5% 18 4-2 4.0% 14 1.3% 18 1.1% 18
19 TEN 0.5% 20 -0.4% 20 3-3 8.9% 11 11.4% 26 3.0% 11
20 DEN -0.3% 16 -2.3% 21 3-2 -1.2% 19 -11.3% 8 -10.5% 30
21 DAL -2.5% 23 1.7% 19 2-3 9.4% 10 15.9% 30 4.0% 9
22 LACH -8.0% 24 -7.0% 23 2-4 3.7% 15 0.8% 17 -10.8% 32
23 OAK -8.0% 22 -5.5% 22 2-4 1.2% 17 15.2% 28 6.0% 6
24 TB -9.7% 19 -8.6% 24 2-3 10.6% 7 17.0% 31 -3.4% 24
25 NYG -16.8% 26 -12.5% 25 1-5 -2.6% 21 7.2% 22 -6.9% 26
26 SF -21.0% 27 -19.5% 27 0-6 -18.0% 28 9.3% 24 6.2% 5
27 ARI -21.6% 30 -18.3% 26 3-3 -10.2% 25 2.1% 19 -9.3% 28
28 NYJ -21.7% 25 -20.6% 28 3-3 -14.9% 27 8.9% 23 2.1% 15
29 CHI -26.8% 28 -22.8% 30 2-4 -20.0% 29 -2.8% 16 -9.6% 29
30 MIA -28.3% 29 -22.7% 29 3-2 -22.7% 30 6.7% 20 1.0% 19
31 IND -41.9% 31 -36.4% 31 2-4 -29.6% 32 15.6% 29 3.3% 10
32 CLE -47.8% 32 -42.1% 32 0-6 -29.1% 31 10.8% 25 -7.9% 27
  • NON-ADJUSTED TOTAL DVOA does not include the adjustments for opponent strength or the adjustments for weather and altitude in special teams, and only penalizes offenses for lost fumbles rather than all fumbles.
  • ESTIMATED WINS uses a statistic known as "Forest Index" that emphasizes consistency as well as DVOA in the most important specific situations: red zone defense, first quarter offense, and performance in the second half when the score is close. It then projects a number of wins adjusted to a league-average schedule and a league-average rate of recovering fumbles. Teams that have had their bye week are projected as if they had played one game per week.
  • PAST SCHEDULE lists average DVOA of opponents played this season, ranked from hardest schedule (#1, most positive) to easiest schedule (#32, most negative). It is not adjusted for which games are home or road.
  • FUTURE SCHEDULE lists average DVOA of opponents still left to play this season, ranked from hardest schedule (#1, most positive) to easiest schedule (#32, most negative). It is not adjusted for which games are home or road.
  • VARIANCE measures the statistical variance of the team's weekly DVOA performance. Teams are ranked from most consistent (#1, lowest variance) to least consistent (#32, highest variance).



TEAM TOTAL
DVOA
W-L NON-ADJ
TOT VOA
ESTIM.
WINS
RANK PAST
SCHED
RANK FUTURE
SCHED
RANK VAR. RANK
1 KC 31.8% 5-1 26.9% 5.4 1 14.1% 1 -8.1% 31 8.1% 13
2 PHI 24.5% 5-1 26.8% 4.6 3 1.8% 12 -2.9% 23 9.1% 15
3 PIT 24.3% 4-2 22.7% 4.4 4 -0.4% 18 -2.1% 22 6.3% 6
4 LARM 21.6% 4-2 25.4% 4.2 5 -4.3% 23 0.7% 17 15.9% 26
5 HOU 18.2% 3-3 12.5% 3.7 9 2.1% 10 -4.8% 29 15.5% 24
6 WAS 18.1% 3-2 17.5% 3.6 10 9.8% 2 0.1% 19 13.3% 18
7 NO 18.1% 3-2 17.0% 5.4 2 3.1% 8 -2.0% 21 21.3% 28
8 MIN 17.5% 4-2 14.6% 3.7 8 3.6% 7 1.3% 16 6.7% 8
9 BUF 12.4% 3-2 20.5% 3.6 11 -0.1% 15 -7.4% 30 10.0% 17
10 JAC 12.2% 3-3 16.9% 2.8 22 8.9% 3 -14.6% 32 39.3% 32
11 DET 11.7% 3-3 9.3% 3.8 6 1.7% 13 -4.3% 27 7.2% 10
12 BAL 10.6% 3-3 14.8% 3.3 16 -6.3% 26 -3.4% 24 32.7% 30
13 SEA 9.1% 3-2 19.6% 3.2 18 -7.4% 29 1.5% 14 9.2% 16
14 CIN 8.3% 2-3 3.5% 3.5 13 -0.5% 19 -1.4% 20 33.8% 31
15 NE 7.4% 4-2 7.7% 3.2 17 7.3% 6 -4.0% 26 7.6% 11
16 CAR 7.2% 4-2 6.9% 3.4 15 8.8% 4 -4.5% 28 13.7% 19
TEAM TOTAL
DVOA
W-L NON-ADJ
TOT VOA
ESTIM.
WINS
RANK PAST
SCHED
RANK FUTURE
SCHED
RANK VAR. RANK
17 ATL 6.0% 3-2 11.1% 3.5 12 -5.4% 25 3.7% 8 2.7% 1
18 GB 3.8% 4-2 1.5% 3.7 7 1.9% 11 1.7% 13 8.8% 14
19 TEN 0.5% 3-3 3.7% 3.4 14 -6.5% 27 -3.7% 25 24.3% 29
20 DEN -0.3% 3-2 6.6% 3.0 19 -4.6% 24 1.3% 15 6.4% 7
21 DAL -2.5% 2-3 -0.2% 2.8 20 -2.7% 22 7.1% 3 16.1% 27
22 LACH -8.0% 2-4 -3.4% 2.0 25 0.5% 14 0.2% 18 2.8% 2
23 OAK -8.0% 2-4 -1.0% 2.4 23 -0.1% 16 5.2% 6 15.3% 23
24 TB -9.7% 2-3 -2.4% 2.8 21 -8.0% 30 3.7% 9 14.9% 22
25 NYG -16.8% 1-5 -14.2% 1.8 26 2.6% 9 7.0% 4 7.2% 9
26 SF -21.0% 0-6 -18.4% 1.4 28 -1.2% 21 1.8% 12 5.5% 4
27 ARI -21.6% 3-3 -15.1% 1.6 27 -6.5% 28 7.3% 2 14.4% 20
28 NYJ -21.7% 3-3 -17.4% 2.0 24 -8.7% 31 3.7% 10 14.7% 21
29 CHI -26.8% 2-4 -31.2% 1.3 30 8.7% 5 3.4% 11 5.2% 3
30 MIA -28.3% 3-2 -23.6% 1.3 29 -1.0% 20 4.5% 7 6.3% 5
31 IND -41.9% 2-4 -34.7% 0.6 31 -9.9% 32 11.7% 1 15.7% 25
32 CLE -47.8% 0-6 -47.0% 0.0 32 -0.4% 17 5.4% 5 8.0% 12

Posted by: Aaron Schatz on 17 Oct 2017

49 comments, Last at 20 Oct 2017, 2:59pm by PatsFan

Comments

1
by theslothook :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 7:40pm

The Jags low defensive ranking somewhat hides the fact that their pass defense is the stuff of legends. I'll be very interested to see how they finish by years end.

16
by Alexander :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 3:01am

They are the #`1 ranked defense.

45
by jgibson_hmc95 :: Thu, 10/19/2017 - 10:02am

#1 for this year but historically weak for a #1 defense. It's only -20.7% DVOA. OTOH, their pass defense only is -45.7% with #2 Baltimore at -20.3%. Their run defense is +8.8%, which is 2nd worst in the league to Dallas.

2
by DezBailey :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 7:45pm

The Week 6 BES Rankings went out earlier - http://besreport.com/week-6-bes-rankings-2017/

The BES is very much in agreement with DVOA on the Chiefs, Eagles and Steelers. Also in agreement on the overall top-10 teams aside from the Redskins, Texans and Jaguars. The BES swaps them out for the Packers (7th), Patriots (8th) and Panthers (10th). however, DVOA's depiction of the Packers seems far more accurate moving forward given the loss of Rodgers for the season.But who knows? Hundley could surprise us all...

3
by jmaron :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 7:51pm

something seems odd with the Vikings QBs and pass catchers...the two QBs have DVOA of:

Keenum 29.3
Bradford 36.9

The receivers

Diggs 30.8
Thielen 6.2
Treadwell 8.5
Wright -3.3
Rudolph 2.3
Cook -23.1
McKinnon -8.1

How can QBs be operating at 30+% but only 1 receiver is even close to that efficiency?

6
by Dan :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 8:32pm

Vikings QBs have been among the best in the league at avoiding negative plays with only 1 interception, 9 sacks, and 0 fumbles. Those stats count towards QB DVOA but not towards WR DVOA.

8
by Will Allen :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 8:43pm

Among the luckiest as well; Keese may well have thrown 2 or 3 more ints if the Packer defensive backfield wasn't an infirmary. Hopefully, the luck holds until Dr. Frankenstein gets the Samddy Bridgeford monster sewn together.

21
by thewhitesnake8 :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 9:21am

Samddy Bridgeford - LOL

But that creature would still have weak knees ...

35
by jmaron :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 2:58pm

that makes sense. For me, from an eye test, Theilen has been way better than Keenum. Hard to quantify individual success in football with numbers.

37
by Will Allen :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 3:18pm

Our boy Keese is long (and I mean this with sincerity and admiration) on heart and courage, but a little short on throwing talent. We'll see what happens.

38
by Will Allen :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 3:18pm

Our boy Keese is long (and I mean this with sincerity and admiration) on heart and courage, but a little short on throwing talent. We'll see what happens.

4
by t.d. :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 7:53pm

Jacksonville 32nd in variance, 31st in special teams, 32nd in future schedule. With one game left against a team with a winning record (and that being Seattle in a 1pm game on the east coast), you'd think they're well situated, but with Bortles, the offense is liable to crater in any given game, and Houston and Tennessee both look decent

5
by Raiderfan :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 8:23pm

Break up the Rams!

7
by Will Allen :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 8:34pm

Keese Cane'im; Leader of Men and Top 10 Offenses!

22
by thewhitesnake8 :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 9:29am

The fact that the Vikings have been so highly rated offensively gives me a lot of confidence in their coaching staff. But boy are they going to have an awkward contract situation at the end of the year.

26
by hoegher :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 10:00am

Not really, just drop Bradford/bury his mangled corpse in the backyard.

27
by Will Allen :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 10:11am

The fact that Bradford was 16 in passing by dvoa last year, after being ańŹded to the roster a few days before the season began, with Shurmur taking over for Norv at midseason, with a destroyed offensive line, no Adrian Peterson, and Stefan Diggs hurt, was a tremendous accomplishment by Bradford and Shurmur.

10
by Will Allen :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 8:49pm

My impression is that there is more big movements in rankings, in the span of a week or two, compared to past years, but I acknowledge that it might be closer to a hallucination on my part. Then again, if everybody is bunched together, that would be expected.

9
by Anon Ymous :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 8:48pm

Wow, NE went from twice as bad as the #31 defense two weeks ago to being only a few percentage points from climbing out of the basement. #1 here we come!

11
by PirateFreedom :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 9:48pm

sweet dreams of mediocrity!

33
by Anon Ymous :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 2:23pm

LOL, quite!

41
by Alternator :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 5:57pm

Top-2 offense, league average defense, and above-average special teams (which I'm sure the team will end up at), plus an all-time great coach? That's a championship-caliber team, so give me the mediocrity!

12
by D :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 11:12pm

This was the second game this year where Chicago had an overtime win over an AFC North team in part thanks to great fumble recovery luck. The Bears fumbled four times, but recovered two of those; the Ravens fumbled only once, but the Bears recovered that one too.

Is recovering 3 fumbles out of 5 really "great" recovery luck? Obviously it is bad to fumble 4 times, but is recovering half of them actually that unusual?

13
by turbohappy :: Tue, 10/17/2017 - 11:42pm

It depends on the situations involved. If they were 5 low percentage fumbles, then yes. But if it's 5 high percentage fumbles, then not at all unusual. I didn't see the game so I don't know, but not all fumbles are treated the same.

14
by theslothook :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 12:48am

I know muffed punts and kickoffs are often recovered by the offense a high probability of the time. The rest of open field fumbles I think are 50 50

17
by Richie :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 3:04am

I believe QB fumbles are more often recovered by the offense.

31
by TomC :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 1:54pm

Yeah, that statement is way off. I assume Aaron was just talking about raw fumble numbers, in which case 3 of 5 is not anywhere close to "great" luck. In fact, for completely random outcomes, you recover at least 3 of 5 fumbles EXACTLY HALF OF THE TIME.

But it's worse, because two of the Bears' four fumbles were aborted shotgun snaps, which the offense recovers much more than half the time. The other three fumbles in the game were actual forced fumbles, and the Bears only recovered one of those.

So the fact that the Ravens shot up in DVOA after that game is, in my opinion, exceptionally weird and not explained by that bullet point at all.

15
by Cythammer :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 1:17am

Half of the bottom six teams being at least .500 is pretty nuts.

18
by MC2 :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 3:46am

So, I wonder what happened to that Sleet guy that kept complaining about DVOA dissing the Raiders?

40
by Richie :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 4:17pm

LOL

19
by BJR :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 8:33am

How much did New Orleans' defensive DVOA jump after scoring three defensive TDs in one game? I'm guessing they won't be able to sustain their current defensive rating, but if they do they are legit contenders.

20
by Will Allen :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 8:41am

The tds are generally considered non-predictive by DVOA, so they don't move the number, whereas the turnovers themselves do.

24
by BJR :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 9:48am

Right, so they aren't getting a wildly artificial boost from that game. Interested to see how they continue from here, Marshon Lattimore looks like a stud. Next up: the Hundley Packers.

42
by Alternator :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 5:58pm

Three takeaways still gives a nice boost, and when the starting point is "New Orleans Saints defense" then the improvement could well be massive.

23
by Xexyz :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 9:45am

Maybe. If Bradford can't play then it clears things up a lot; the Vikes won't resign him. It was only going to be awkward if both Bradford and Bridgewater showed enough to merit both being resigned. As it stands right now if Bridgerwater comes back and shows competence while Bradford stays injured, it'll be a pretty simple decision for the Vikes.

25
by Will Allen :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 9:59am

Even if they both prove healthy come February, age will dictate an offer to only Bridegwater.Bradford will only get an offer if Bridgewater can't play, and Bradford can.

29
by galactic_dev :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 1:26pm

Is there really much hope for a Bridgewater comeback at this point? His gruesome injury was a non-contact injury, and I didn't hear about him getting any bionic parts installed, so I'm not hopeful that he can stay together.

30
by Will Allen :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 1:42pm

He started practicing this week. Lots of guys these days have extreme non contact injuries, and go on to be productive. It's a much different world than was the case even just a decade ago.

39
by LyleNM :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 3:30pm

Jordy Nelson, for example.

43
by MilkmanDanimal :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 6:06pm

I was under the impression that Bridgewater's injury was significantly more extreme than anything Jordy Nelson dealt with, and the Teddy had ruptured all three major knee ligaments and dislocated his kneecap, meaning his lower leg was basically being held on by skin. I've heard of lots of player injuries, but very few of them that cause teammates to start vomiting on the field right when they see it.

I'm hopefully Bridgewater comes back, but, man, that sounded like an horrifying injury.

28
by Jim C. :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 10:27am

The Ravens' kickoff return touchdown was one of those weird plays where everyone but the runner thought the play was dead. Plays like that don't have a lot of predictive value.

32
by TomC :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 1:56pm

Agreed, but it's impossible for DVOA to know that unless someone goes in and manually tweaks it, and I'm not sure this situation warrants manual tweaking.

34
by bravehoptoad :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 2:57pm

The teams near the top of the list didn't quite match San Francisco's record of five straight losses by a field goal or less, but they did lose a lot of close games.

That sure is a depressing slate of Y+1 stats. Looks like the way to have a genuinely good next year after starting 0-6 is 1) bring in Bill Parcells, 2) draft Andrew Luck.

44
by jimbohead :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 11:27pm

Yeah not a lot of these stories end happily. I'd add 1997 IND as one that improves dramatically as a result of that season's draft position (PFM). It just takes a little while longer.

I guess the moral of the story is, if you're going to suck, you better get a T1 QB out of the deal. And then not mess that QB up developmentally.

46
by MC2 :: Thu, 10/19/2017 - 5:21pm

And of course, the '08 Dolphins were also aided tremendously by Brady's getting injured. Otherwise, they would have been 9-7, no playoffs -- which is still an impressive turnaround, but nowhere near as impressive as 11-5, division champs.

47
by jtr :: Thu, 10/19/2017 - 6:37pm

The Patriots and Dolphins split their season series in 2008, so even if we assume the Pats would have swept the series, that's only a change of one game.
It's a lousy assumption anyways. Since Brady took over as stater, the Pats and Dolphins split their season series in 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2013, 2014, and 2015. That's 10 season splits to only 6 season sweeps. There's a big misconception floating around that the Brady Patriots go 6-0 in the AFC East every season and it just isn't true.

48
by MC2 :: Thu, 10/19/2017 - 7:21pm

You're right. They did split. I didn't bother to look it up, because I remembered that the Dolphins won the division by virtue of a tiebreaker, and I just assumed that was because they swept the Patriots.

As to your larger point, while the Patriots domination of the other AFC East teams may be overstated, I feel pretty confident in saying that if not for Brady's injury, they would have dominated the AFC East in '08. They had essentially the same team that, in '07, had outscored their division rivals by a combined margin of 229-76 (including 77-35 against the Dolphins). I don't think the Wildcat would have been able to keep up with Brady/Moss/Welker.

49
by PatsFan :: Fri, 10/20/2017 - 2:59pm

Yup. I think in the Brady era the Pats have gone 6-0 in the AFCE only 2-4 times. 2007 certainly, but a pretty small number of times besides that.

36
by jtr :: Wed, 10/18/2017 - 3:04pm

Glad to see DeCastro getting the credit for Pittsburgh's success on the ground. In power schemes like Pittsburgh's, it isn't as simple as looking at the direction the run and assigning credit. Most of the run success DeCastro was responsible is when he pulled to the left side. So those will go down in the o-line charts in the Almanac next year as runs off left tackle, but they're actually largely the right guard's responsibility. Of course, they partially rely on the left tackle to not completely blow his block, but he isn't making the key block. In a zone running scheme, it's probably pretty safe to assume that a team that runs well off left tackle has a good run blocking left tackle. But on power schemes it's not so simple. Just something to keep in mind while you're scanning the FOA o-line tables next year.