ESPNs Lundblad breaks down the Pats D

[onegameatatime]

Obviously, it is much better to allow zero yards, but the correlation between yards allowed and winning games has almost completely disappeared. the best teams have always had a defense that compliments there offense and gets the job done in important areas.

Obviously, teams that spend more on defense need to keep games lower scoring and chew clock, for instance. those with high powered offenses might dare teams to run (Colts) or to march down the field consistently and score touchdowns (Patriots). Colts outgun, we outlast and tighten up in the redzone.

But this year? I'd love some statistician to take a crack at this. obviously, less is better than more, but the results this year are pretty close to random, regarding ypg and winning.

Take a look.

NFL Stats: by Team Category

Top three, by record Are NE (32) GB (31) NO (26)

Tied for third is SF (4) then Pitt (1), Balt. (3)

That's a wash.

(5th) in ypg is Jacksonville, (10th) is Cleveland. They are 4-11.

(8th) is Philly, at 7-8.

(13) is the Skins at 5-10
-----

(28th) and (29th) are nyg and oak with 8-7 records, not great, but winning.

Our secondary sucks, but it only needs to execute a few game plans along with the rest of the defense, which is actually pretty good IMO. I've got a lot of faith in the guy who has our together some of the best game plans ever and don't care if the other team dances around between the 20s as long as we score a point more.

I was looking at these numbers recently. It's fascinating -- most of the best teams are at the top or bottom of this stat.

I think SOME of the yards allowed are misleading -- for all the denigration of the "prevent," the Pats have been playing it for years and often give up garbage points. Lately, the Pats have been giving up a lot in the first half, then few points in the second.

 

[RayClay]

I was looking at these numbers recently. It's fascinating -- most of the best teams are at the top or bottom of this stat.

I think SOME of the yards allowed are misleading -- for all the denigration of the "prevent," the Pats have been playing it for years and often give up garbage points. Lately, the Pats have been giving up a lot in the first half, then few points in the second.

It's misleading in that we've given up many yards but been in control before. I wouldn't say that now, but we do adjust.

 

[supafly]

While your statement is very true, there are those outside of the N.England area who talk of the one and done's post-Spygate.



They went to the Super Bowl in 2007-08 season, post spy gate.

Thank you for the clarification, my friend.

I must have slept through that post-season

I was referring to the many who speak of our current one-and-done's, and the ignorance that they show with the whole "post-spygate" argument.

The bottom line is that this will be one of Belichick's better accomplishments in my eyes, assuming that they have a successful post-season of course. To me, that means going to the SB, even if it does not produce a victory.

 

[supafly]

This is much better thread than its getting credit for.

Supe. Don't worry about the "monkey our back". The only one's with a "monkey on their backs" is US....the fans The media and opposing fans have put that monkey on OUR backs. One of the things I've come to realize abou the Pats is that EVERY year is completely different in he mind of BB and how he programs his players.

None of the good stuff, AND none of the bad stuff carries over year to year. There are too many changes each year to do more than specualate how something that happened last year can effect THIS one....and all the dynamics of then current team. The personality of the team is never the same....good or bad.

Nothing brings this out more than all the comments concerning the Ravens. More than half the roster in that 2009 game is gone. How can that possibly affect a player on this squad, it was over 2 years ago. That's a lifetime in NFL years. Its even less important when you think that the Ravens haven't beaten the Pats SINCE that game. Yet still the mediots yap about the Ravens of 2009 like they have anything to do with the the group there today

There's no Monkey Supe. Why would the NE Patriots remotely "fear" the coming of a team who already has proven NUMEROUS times they can't win on the road. That their offence is annemic, and if you stop Ray Rice you can stop the Ravens offense....period When have the Pats failed to stop their #1 target on defense

Afraid of the Ravens....."Hell NO!" In fact I'm hoping they somehow manage to find their way to NE next month. I'd rather play that sorry group of over the hill UNDER acheivers than some other teams I can think of. Let me know when you can think of who on the Ravens is going to cover Gronk and Hernandez.....and oh yeah, Welker

This isn't the 2009 Patriots who would wilt under a bright light, give up 24 in a quarter then skulk away until next year. This is the 2011 Patriots who have proven OVER and OVER again that you can beat them down and their come right back at you.

I have an idea. Why don't we let THEM think of ways they will be able to keep us under 30 and and let THEM figure out how they will manage to equal that, even against "our" D

How's THAT monkey, Supe

Ken, I certainly agree that there is no talk of having a monkey on the backs of the players, the coaches or inside the locker room. That is obviously a good point.

I was however, referring to the possibility of a harder game vs PIT or BAL etc in the divisional round, and how much the media will play that up. Like it or not, we will likely hear about it all week long.

Do I think it will have a negative effect on the players? NO, I don't, especially the resiliency of this 2011 team, as you correctly point out. On the other hand, I don't think it will help either.

As many will point out, it will come down to execution and gameplanning, but I would rather try to avoid one of the ACFN teams as in PIT/BAL in the first game. In a close game, should the Pats lose, I personally wouldn't think it was fair to them to have to hear about that proverbial "monkey" all off-season long...especially, as you point out, those losses were from very different teams/different years/different circumstances.

You make many good points, and I am certainly not saying that I believe there is one single player who 'fears' any team, none at all. What I wouldn't want though, is a tough matchup that results in a close loss..then it will appear as though a pattern is developing. There are many (even here) who are terribly ignorant in some ways, and already feel as though a pattern has been set. That's just not fair, as the 09 loss was with a weak team with many flaws + the loss of Welker (the icing on the cake). Last yr was just about a good gameplan from the Jets, combined with the average playoff loss. I don't see a relation with the two personally, and I certainly don't see a relation to the 2011 version.

 

[supafly]

450+ yards is not telling because all of them were blowouts.

These stat based articles miss the two key/critical factors on judging a defense:

Can they execute a gameplan.

Ability for making adjustments.

Look at the Denver game. The fixation was on the first quarter when the defense was "gashed". Now even ESPN asks if the Patriots provided the blueprint.

The reality is, a critical component of finding what works is often finding what doesn't work. Philly, Washington, Miami all have a common theme.

I think, like some topics here, we will have to agree to disagree on this point--at least on some level anyway. I do however, hear what you're saying.

As another poster pointed out, the close BUF game was 448 yards, so they weren't 'all' blowouts. Of course, the turnover factor played a big part in that game, and probably many others of high yardage too. I do think it's somewhat telling that the 2011 Patriots have almost as many wins just this yr alone, as they had in the previous 38 games when allowing 450 yards. That was pretty much the point, right or wrong. However you look at it, it's still a telling stat in the sense that this team is utilizing other resources to win games and stay extremely competitive, despite what we've seen from the NFL in yrs past. I think the most telling stat of any would be the turnover ratio, showing that when we win the turnover battle in the Belichick era, the record is 101-5. That would be a much more relevant stat for sure, but the 450 yardage one did catch my eye; although it likely was not for the reasons that you may have thought it was.

You are right that most likely came under bad circumstances, and you are also likely right that the specific number of 450 does not have nearly the significance that the writer is portraying. I do think the main point of the article is that this Pats team is winning in different ways, as opposed to before. I also think that the subject of 'potent offense' and the ability to win in shootouts is a good thing, and shows that they are bucking a lot of NFL standards and trends that we've seen in the past; mostly by continuing to win the turnover battle and limit their opponents effectiveness inside the red area.

I certainly do see your general point and agree with the ability to adapt being a very key component of this current 2011 team. That does speak volumes in regards to their resiliency and committment to staying the course. I think that is a huge plus that we haven't seen around here in a while, and that alone should lead to a nice post-season run.