07 Jul 2011
Jeremy Norris: Yahoo has introduced some new scoring categories for this year's fantasy football season. Among the new options for Team Defenses are Three-and-Outs and Tackles For Loss. I, at least, would be very interested in using these categories, but doing so would risk unbalancing the value of DEFs relative to the other positions unless you can look at the history of those numbers to see what the averages are, how much separates the good DEFs from the average ones, etc. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find either of those stats online (having checked espn, pfr, yahoo, and nfl.com). Are you guys able to grab those numbers from your DVOA database from last year? Not just for my sake: there are a lot of FF commissioners who read the site.
By the way, other new Yahoo categories this year include Pick Sixes Thrown, Fourth Down Stops on defense, and Defensive Yards Allowed per Game.
Aaron Schatz: Well, those are some interesting categories. I know KUBIAK already projects how many games a team will allow 100-199 yards, 200-299 yards, 300-399 yards, and so forth. We do track three-and-outs, as part of our drive stats, although the numbers don't fit on the drive stats page on the site. We usually run the top 10 and the bottom 10 in the statistical appendix of Football Outsiders Almanac. The rankings somewhat follow the rankings for the best defensive DVOA ratings, except that teams which get a lot of turnovers and sacks will rank lower on the frequency of three-and-outs. Pittsburgh, for example, was just average in three-and-outs per drive.
Here are the rates of three-and-outs per drive for 2010, along with defensive DVOA ratings for comparison purposes.
Right now, the one new item we're trying to put into KUBIAK for 2011 is the ability to give different point values to receptions at different positions. Are people interested in projections of three-and-outs? Will you use those in your leagues? What other new stats would people like to see us try to project?
8 comments, Last at 14 Jul 2011, 9:47am by Sha-blam-o
This week’s Futures is devoted to what Matt Waldman thinks the first round should look like based on his perspective of the game.