Turnover Differential

[crowell33]

Reiss says the Patriots are 8-0 when they win the turnover battle this season and 78 - 3 during the Tom Brady era.

Two thoughts. This defense gives up a ton of yards, but they do create a lot of turnovers.

Secondly, BJGE helps win the turnover battle. NY Giant fans have watched their lead back, Bradshaw, fumble 6 times this season, losing five of them to the other team. IMHO, what makes BJGE a solid RB, is less about his 4.3 ypc, or his 9 touchdowns in his last ten games. What makes him solid, is that he has never once put the football on the ground during his NFL career, allowing the Pats an advantage in winning the turnover battle.

Link:Turnover differential is the key - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

 

[crowell33]

Having just reread my post, I would be remiss if I did not mention that Tom Brady is second only to Mike Vick in fewest interceptions / per attempt this season. This is obviously a huge factor in winning the turnover battle as well.

 

[SuperPatsFan]

There are 32 running backs with at least 100 carries this season.

Only six have no fumbles.

• BenJarvus Green-Ellis
• Ray Rice
• Michael Turner
• Steven Jackson
• Adrian Peterson
• Marion Barber

Furthermore, no running back in the NFL has scored more touchdowns than BJGE, while still having zero fumbles.

 

[jmt57]

For whatever reason, many fans (and media) seem to be focusing primarily, if not almost exclusively in yards allowed or gained in assessing how 'good' a defense or offense is. It's a stat that has somehow evolved into the 'official' ranking of defenses and offenses. Yardage is one thing, but other aspects such as turnovers should be given just as much, if not more weight in determining how good an offense or defense is.

Games are determined by what team scores the most points, not the most yards. Why is there not a direct correlation between yardage and w-l? The most obvious answer is turnovers. If I was told I could only pick one of those two stats to be better in, I would rather have my team win the turnover battle than gain more yards than my opponent.

At this point the Pats defense has 15 interceptions; only Philadelphia has more. On offense the Pats have turned the ball over just nine times; that is also second best in the NFL.

Protect the ball on offense and create turnovers on defense seems to be a pretty good formula for success.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

...
Games are determined by what team scores the most points, not the most yards. Why is there not a direct correlation between yardage and w-l? The most obvious answer is turnovers. If I was told I could only pick one of those two stats to be better in, I would rather have my team win the turnover battle than gain more yards than my opponent.

...

The statistics maven in me wants to run ginormous, multivariable regressions on wins vs. points allowed, yards-conceded and turnovers created for all 32 teams over the last, say, five years. The normal person in me wants to say "You're probably right" and take a nice "Friday after Thanksgiving" nap before heating up Leftovers for the family for dinner....

Nap wins..."You're probably right."

 

[Calciumee]

Having just reread my post, I would be remiss if I did not mention that Tom Brady is second only to Mike Vick in fewest interceptions / per attempt this season. This is obviously a huge factor in winning the turnover battle as well.

And Brady has played in every game, I believe Vick has not!

 

[jmt57]

The statistics maven in me wants to run a ginormous, multivariable regression on wins vs. points allowed, yards-conceded and turnovers created for all 32 teams over the last, say, five years. The normal person in me wants to say "You're probably right" and take a nice "Friday after Thanksgiving" nap before heating up Leftovers for dinner....

Nap wins..."You're right."

After I typed that I figured somebody would come up with some statistical analysis and show my theory is full of crap, and that yardage matters more than turnovers. I'm with you, I'm feeling a little too lazy to look too deep into stats right now, never mind running a regression analysis.

Regardless, even if that does turn out to be the case that yardage is a better indicator than turnovers, it still seems to me that turnovers tend to be overlooked by many when discussing how good an offense or defense is.

 

[RayClay]

What makes him solid, is that he has never once put the football on the ground during his NFL career, allowing the Pats an advantage in winning the turnover battle.

And he runs it up the gut too.

 

[ATippett56]

After I typed that I figured somebody would come up with some statistical analysis and show my theory is full of crap, and that yardage matters more than turnovers. I'm with you, I'm feeling a little too lazy to look too deep into stats right now, never mind running a regression analysis.

Regardless, even if that does turn out to be the case that yardage is a better indicator than turnovers, it still seems to me that turnovers tend to be overlooked by many when discussing how good an offense or defense is.

At the end of the day, it is points that matter! I didn't know the team that accumulated the most yardage won the game. As for the New England Patriots defense, I would have hoped the red zone defense would have improved heading into the Jets game.

 

[andrewgarrr]

Brady has always been about 0 INT more so than 35+ TD. As much as the defense helps in the positive turnover differential, Brady's decision making has always been pretty good this year. He's had some dropped interceptions these past few weeks though. Whew~~

 

[Fencer]

TOs affect the game primarily in two ways:

1. A drive that ends in a turnover necessarily ends in 0 points scored.
2. Turnovers often (not always) lead to excellent field position for the offense, or (more rarely) an outright defensive score.

If we say that points scored are the obvious first-approximation measure of an offensive unit, the first three adjustments I'd like to see would be for:

A. Number of drives.
B. Field position relinquished (or some proxy such as TOs allowed).
C. Starting field position enjoyed.

That could be flipped around to measure a defensive unit as well.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

After I typed that I figured somebody would come up with some statistical analysis and show my theory is full of crap, and that yardage matters more than turnovers. I'm with you, I'm feeling a little too lazy to look too deep into stats right now, never mind running a regression analysis.

Regardless, even if that does turn out to be the case that yardage is a better indicator than turnovers, it still seems to me that turnovers tend to be overlooked by many when discussing how good an offense or defense is.

While no statistic is perfect, if I had to pick one, turnovers might be the one I'd want.

Here are the top 5 teams currently in turnovers, along with their records:

1. Philadelphia Eagles +15, 7-3, lead NFC East.
2. New England Patriots +11, 9-2, tied for AFC East and best record in football.
3. Pittsburgh Steelers +10, 7-3, tied for AFC North lead.
4. Atlanta Falcons +10, 8-2, lead NFC South
5. Green Bay Packers +8, 7-3, tied for NFC North lead.

All top 5 teams are tied for or leading their division, with a combined record of 38-13, a .745 winning percentage which projects to 12 wins.

The only teams currently tied for or leading their division with a negative turnover ratio are Baltimore (-1) and Jacksonville (-11, no that's not a typo).

In 2009, top 5 teams were Green Bay, Philly, New Orleans, Baltimore, and San Fran, a combined 52-28 with no team with a losing record and 4 of the 5 making the play-offs.

In 2008, top 5 teams were Miami, Tennessee, Baltimore, Indy, and the Giants, a combined 59-21 with 3 teams winning the division and all 5 teams making the play-offs.

Obviously turnovers aren't the only thing that matter, but they are a significant factor, perhaps the single-most significant one.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

After I typed that I figured somebody would come up with some statistical analysis and show my theory is full of crap, and that yardage matters more than turnovers. I'm with you, I'm feeling a little too lazy to look too deep into stats right now, never mind running a regression analysis.

Regardless, even if that does turn out to be the case that yardage is a better indicator than turnovers, it still seems to me that turnovers tend to be overlooked by many when discussing how good an offense or defense is.

...back from nap and dinner...

I agree...and you're still probably right...

Now, where's that leftover pie...

 

[jmt57]

TOs affect the game primarily in two ways:

1. A drive that ends in a turnover necessarily ends in 0 points scored.
2. Turnovers often (not always) lead to excellent field position for the offense, or (more rarely) an outright defensive score.

If we say that points scored are the obvious first-approximation measure of an offensive unit, the first three adjustments I'd like to see would be for:

A. Number of drives.
B. Field position relinquished (or some proxy such as TOs allowed).
C. Starting field position enjoyed.

That could be flipped around to measure a defensive unit as well.

True. Or to look at it in another similar way, turnovers almost always have either a positive effect on the scoreboard for the team with the takeaway, or a negative effect on the scoreboard for the team with the giveaway - or both.

Typical effects of a turnover as opposed to not turning ball over:

• Leads to recovering team scores a TD
• Leads to recovering team scores a FG
• Team turning ball over fails to score TD they would have scored
• Team turning ball over fails to score FG they would have scored
• Punt or missed FG, no harm done

When an offense turns the ball over in their opponent's territory, those are points they probably would have or could have scored had they not turned the ball over. And when an offense turns the ball over in their own territory, that sets up the opponent with great field position, which usually leads to point against your team.

Though it can and does happen on occasion, it is rare that a turnover does not result in either points being scored, or points being erased that would have been scored later on that drive.