Advanced look: How Brady bested Flacco

[seven]

Timing of the errors was critical.

Advanced look: How Brady bested Flacco - Stats & Info Blog - ESPN
FTA:
it may appear Joe Flacco outplayed Tom Brady on Sunday at Foxboro, but a deeper look shows this simply is not true.

Flacco took three sacks, all on third down, twice with blitzers coming, which is when a quarterback needs to make a quick read and throw. Brady was sacked once. And it happened when only four rushers were coming, which is more on his offensive line.


Flacco’s one inteception cost his team more than Brady’s two combined.
Flacco’s pick came when down three, midway through the fourth quarter, when the Baltimore Ravens were in Patriot territory and led to the New England Patriots having the ball at midfield. Brady’s first pick was early in the game when up three and left the Ravens at their own 30. His second one was a 50 yard heave into the endzone that got tipped and returned to the Ravens’ own 38.

From an expected points view this play cost the Ravens 4.3 points, the second-worst interception of the playoffs. From a win probability standpoint this sent Baltimore’s win probability from 43.2% to 23.0%, the second biggest swing on an interception this postseason. At the time of the interception, Flacco’s QBR was 79.4. After the pick it fell to 55.4.

 

[oldrover]

Wow... this is an eye-opener. Maybe Brady DIDn't suck.

 

[Triumph]

Wow... this is an eye-opener. Maybe Brady DIDn't suck.

It was like a punt pushing the Ravens offense back.

Points would have nice, a TD would have basically sealed the game.

 

[BSR]

Brady sucked by his standards. He never really plays well against the Ravens, so his overall numbers don't come as a big surprise. The more remarkable thing was that he was able to move the ball fairly well after the first couple of possessions. In the end what made his performance sub par was two bad throws (missing an open Gronk up the seam and the Webb pick) and two bad decisions (the throw to Slater and the last throw to a covered Hernandez). Otherwise he was pretty good. He'll need to be better for the superbowl.

 

[RodThePat]

Brady sucked by his standards. He never really plays well against the Ravens, so his overall numbers don't come as a big surprise. The more remarkable thing was that he was able to move the ball fairly well after the first couple of possessions. In the end what made his performance sub par was two bad throws (missing an open Gronk up the seam and the Webb pick) and two bad decisions (the throw to Slater and the last throw to a covered Hernandez). Otherwise he was pretty good. He'll need to be better for the superbowl.

The throw to Hernandez wasn't a bad decision. Replays showed there was nobody open, so he tried to stick the ball in there and Reed made a great play.

 

[BSR]

The throw to Hernandez wasn't a bad decision. Replays showed there was nobody open, so he tried to stick the ball in there and Reed made a great play.

It was a bad decision in that Hernandez wasn't even past the sticks and was covered by Ed Reed. If you have to pick your poison, you don't pick Reed. Granted, he didn't have very many better options, but he did have some time and that was a critical first down. That was a first down to end the game.

 

[Triumph]

It was a bad decision in that Hernandez wasn't even past the sticks and was covered by Ed Reed. If you have to pick your poison, you don't pick Reed. Granted, he didn't have very many better options, but he did have some time and that was a critical first down. That was a first down to end the game.

Thats right.

Curious play calling on that drive.

 

[40yrpatsfan]

I think where Brady's play suffered doesn't show up in any stat or QBR. The first INT was just a great recovery by the DB, so it was hard to be mad at TB even though that was a damaging interception that led to Baltimore points. 9 time out of 10 that's a completion.

On the 2nd pick, it wasn't so much that it was intercepted, cause the actual pick was pretty flukey. But he never should have risked throwing into coverage at that point in the game, and his throw should have 5-10 yards further left. So it was just horrible execution of a play call that the Ravens had sniffed out. That had to be Brady's worst play in years.

And on the 3rd and 3 that Reed broke up, I was disappointed that Brady and Hernandez didn't have something a little more clever planned like an out and up. There was nobody behind Hernandez, and with a pump fake and double move he'd have been behind Reed and taken it to the house.

 

[Patradomous]

Brady didn't best anybody. The Pats won in spite of Brady.Misses Gronk wide open.Throws into triple coverage 50 yards down the field.Floats a ball up to Edleman double coverage.
He has been an average QB in the playoffs at best.And don't tell me about Denver. Brian Hoyer could have won that game.
He's thrown about 8 picks in last 4 playoff games.
He throws 2 picks aginst the Giants they have no shot.

 

[letekro]

Brady didn't best anybody. The Pats won in spite of Brady.Misses Gronk wide open.Throws into triple coverage 50 yards down the field.Floats a ball up to Edleman double coverage.
He has been an average QB in the playoffs at best.And don't tell me about Denver. Brian Hoyer could have won that game.
He's thrown about 8 picks in last 4 playoff games.
He throws 2 picks aginst the Giants they have no shot.

This is the hard truth. He needs to man up against a quality defense the way he did in SB 38 and 39. He has let them down with poor play against Denver in 06, Indy in 07 (couldn't move the ball in the second half), Baltimore in '10, NYJ in '11, and was bailed out from doing it again last week.

 

[RayClay]

Could it be that, since Slater only ever lines up to go long, they guessed Slater was in there to go long?

Didn't parse the statistics, but i think it's fair to say that, even in a poor game, Brady is usually more situationally aware than any QB making the OPs point well taken.

 

[BSR]

Brady didn't best anybody. The Pats won in spite of Brady.Misses Gronk wide open.Throws into triple coverage 50 yards down the field.Floats a ball up to Edleman double coverage.
He has been an average QB in the playoffs at best.And don't tell me about Denver. Brian Hoyer could have won that game.
He's thrown about 8 picks in last 4 playoff games.
He throws 2 picks aginst the Giants they have no shot.

The Pats would have been on the golf course and deciding what to do with their top 10 draft pick if it wasn't for Brady. Get a clue.

The reality is that this is an offense based team now. This means that the offense needs to produce at a much higher rate and the QB has to take more risks than he ever has before. Bad games happen against good defenses, which is why Brees and Rodgers are sitting at home right now.

 

[Patradomous]

The Pats would have been on the golf course and deciding what to do with their top 10 draft pick if it wasn't for Brady. Get a clue.

I'm talking about this last game.When you throw two horrendous picks and and one right after the defense bust their ass getting the ball back and a chance to grind the clock down which they've always done in those situations to throw thatball up when he had time was Sanchez like.
They are lucky to be playing in 12 days and I hope Brady realizes that.
To win that game says more about the team than it does Brady.

 

[DefenseRules]

Look, I am the biggest Brady fan around, but my boy did not play well on Sunday. He bested no one. What we saw on Sunday is that this team no longer needs him to be at his best to win. That says to me that we have a damn good football TEAM. If they win the Super Bowl they will need all three units to contribute. Offense, Defense and Special Teams, not just one player. That's what happened on Sunday. All three units were critical to winning that game.

 

[letekro]

The Pats would have been on the golf course and deciding what to do with their top 10 draft pick if it wasn't for Brady. Get a clue.

The reality is that this is an offense based team now. This means that the offense needs to produce at a much higher rate and the QB has to take more risks than he ever has before. Bad games happen against good defenses, which is why Brees and Rodgers are sitting at home right now.

Since 2004, Brady has failed far more often than he has succeeded against quality defenses in the playoffs. No one is disputing his greatness or his value to the franchise, but that's just a fact.

 

[PatriotSeven]

Yeah this is what I noticed too. Brady and his coaches have been doing this for some time now. He knows when and where to take the risk. He very rarely throws a pick in his own half. This is how they have won 4 games with a - turnover margin. The Pats and Tom's understanding of football is excellent so the play calling always matches up with expected points.

Even if you look at it from a yard per point perspective, it agrees with that article. If you consider that the field is 100 yards, then each first down is 0.7 points, although it's not exactly linear, so some first downs are worth slightly more than others, depending on where you are on the field.

If you're at your 10 yard line for example and you had the type of cannon arm to throw it 100 yards, endzone to endzone, it would only cost you 0.7 if it got intercepted in their endzone and someone was to tackle the defender at the spot of the interception. A 3 and out, followed by a punt return back to the 30 yard line would cost you:

-the 0.7 points you accumulated + the 2.1 they gained = 2.8 points.

It would hurt you more than the interception and cost you more points.

In Tom's case it was even better than that. Because the interception followed a turnover at the 50 yard line, and they gained absolutely no yards, they basically had 3.5 points to work with at that point that were given to them by the Ravens. So when he threw that interception, not only did it not actually cost the Patriots any points, but as long as you stop them before they get back to the same spot they were at, you STILL gain points compared to what you originally had before the first interception.

So Flaco's interception was enough to cover:

-a free shot taken downfield
-an interception by Tom
-field position worth about 45 yards.

All at 0 or nearly 0 expense to the Patriots. It cost them nothing because it was all "gifted" to them in the first place. And still gained a little.

The worst possible turnover is in your own half of the field, or after you move up the field and "gained points", like for example in the endzone with a first down in their red-zone. So when looking at turnovers, the number itself is not enough while leaving the location out of the picture.

As a quick rule of thumb(in a tied or up game):

"OK" interceptions:
-Following an interception, deep inside their 30(people hate this one, but it's not bad at all)
-From inside your 20 yard line thrown deep inside their 30.
-From before midfield, deep inside their 20

"Killer" interceptions-
-pick 6
-Inside your own 50
-In the endzone with a first down in their redzone.
-With a first down in their own territory, followed by a return.

So it's not really about turnovers. That's just an easy way to point out their importance. Turnovers themselves don't kill you. More accurately, it's actually the amount of field position lost and gained by the opponent as a result of a turnover.

Another way to look at it is in term of win probability:

Before Flacco's interception, Patriots had a 52% win probability with Batimore driving.
After Flaccos, interception, Patriots shot up to 83%
After Tom's interception, Patriots were 61%.

So the Patriots actually went from 52% to 61% that included that whole play where they threw the interception and everything that happened on it.

Advanced NFL Stats Win Probability - Current Games

But the success of that completion would have all but guaranteed the win. They would have gone from 83% to 97-99%. Somewhere around there.

It should be noted though that throwing an interception following a takeaway as a result of forced fumble by your defense is not the same as one that follows a takeaway as a result of an interception. The forced fumble required work by your defense. Interceptions are giveaways. So if you throw a pick after your defense forced a fumble, you crap on their hard work. If you throw one after a your D picks off the quarterback, you're only giving up what you were gifted by that QB in the first place.

 

[DefenseRules]

Since 2004, Brady has failed far more often than he has succeeded against quality defenses in the playoffs. No one is disputing his greatness or his value to the franchise, but that's just a fact.

So have many other great QBs throughout the history of NFL. It happens. It doesn't mean that he's a scrub.

 

[PatriotSeven]

Brady didn't best anybody. The Pats won in spite of Brady.Misses Gronk wide open.Throws into triple coverage 50 yards down the field.Floats a ball up to Edleman double coverage.
He has been an average QB in the playoffs at best.And don't tell me about Denver. Brian Hoyer could have won that game.
He's thrown about 8 picks in last 4 playoff games.
He throws 2 picks aginst the Giants they have no shot.

Other than the fact he scored the winning points?

You should read the article because you are throwing out numbers that show you have no understanding of what is being talked about.

 

[BSR]

I'm talking about this last game.When you throw two horrendous picks and and one right after the defense bust their ass getting the ball back and a chance to grind the clock down which they've always done in those situations to throw thatball up when he had time was Sanchez like.
They are lucky to be playing in 12 days and I hope Brady realizes that.
To win that game says more about the team than it does Brady.

Saying it was a team win and saying they won "in spite of" Brady are two different things. Brady made his share of mistakes but lets not pretend that the rest of the team played some perfect game to make up for his short comings.

And even in that game, if it isn't Brady back there the Pats don't win that game. The only reason that the Ravens are playing those coverages and allowing those running lanes is because of Brady.

 

[BSR]

Since 2004, Brady has failed far more often than he has succeeded against quality defenses in the playoffs. No one is disputing his greatness or his value to the franchise, but that's just a fact.

Its really a meaningless fact. What do you think that implies? Is it that he is losing it? Is it that his teams are flawed? Could he have done more? Is it that he is regressing to the mean? What? As a "fact" it is pretty useless.