In depth statistical analysis of the Pats-Ravens (via FO)

[Patriot_in_NY]

Found this today stumbling around the web today. Not sure how many of you read Football Outsiders but they are a bunch a stats nerd that take an objective look at teams/games from a statistical perspective.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | AFC Conference Championship Preview

As typical, it's about as deep a look into the guts of a football game as you can get without having to wear protective gear. A great analysis. For those that don't want to tax the brain that hard on a Saturday night. I'll summarize. Contrary to what some moron mediots say, statistically, the most favorable matchups in this game belong to the Patriots. They predict a hard fought win.

My apologies if this has been posted elsewhere. Though it was interesting enough to deserve its own thread.

 

[TealSox]

Talk about depth... but I'm don't agree with the idea that Brady will certainly be sacked in this game. Based on what numbers I've seen, the vaunted Raven's pass rush excelled against bad offensive lines and was average against good offensive lines.

Maybe there is part of the answer of the "do they play to the level of their opponents" question.

I think the key to winning the game lies in the following:

1. Neutralize Terrell Suggs - Suggs had a total of (1) sack in all four losses.

2. Limit Ray Rice to either (1) less than 13 carries, (2) less than 3.5 YPC and/or (3) less than 90 total yards.

3. Sack Joe Flacco - In games where Flacco was sacked (3) or more times, the Ravens lost three of them (SD, TEN, and JAX) and won the other two by a field goal (AZ and PIT).


I don't think it is out of the question that the Patriots can dominate this game, but its hard to bet against one the top defenses in the league - especially when the Patriots defense has been a liability this season.

 

[jmt57]

One interesting note in their statistical analysis applies directly to those that keep repeating the stat of the Pats and Ravens records versus teams with winning records as some truly meaningful indicator of what is likely to happen in the future.

FO analyzes whether or not the Ravens losses can simply be chalked up to their playing down to the level of their competition.

Does this really matter for predicting who will win this game, or is it better to just look at overall performance in all games this season -- adjusted for opponent, of course, but including all opponents?

Let's start with the first question. The answer is "somewhat." The Ravens lost four games this year, but they were not all to bad teams. Yes, they lost to Jacksonville and Seattle, but they also lost to an average team (San Diego) and an above-average team (Tennessee). They escaped with a narrow victory in their second game against Cleveland, but they easily won their first game against Cleveland, and they sure didn't play down to the level of the St. Louis Rams. They stomped them 37-7.

Let's see if we can measure the concept of "playing to the level of competition" with more than just anecdotal evidence. I took each team in 2011 and found the correlation of single-game DVOA to the season DVOA of the opponent in that game. A team that plays its best games against teams with positive DVOA and its worst games against teams with negative DVOA will have a positive correlation. A team that plays its best games against its worst opponents will have negative correlation.

Baltimore's correlation for 2011 is .27. That's fifth in the NFL, so it does indicate that the Ravens tended to play to the level of their opponents. But you may be surprised which two teams are one-two in correlation for 2011: Green Bay and New Orleans. Did this help them in the playoffs? Apparently not. The Giants, 49ers, and Patriots are all very close to zero using this measure.

Meanwhile, that whole thing about the Patriots not beating an over-.500 team all season? You could also say that about the 1999 Rams. They won the Super Bowl anyway. It's important to adjust for opponent when you judge a team's performance, but evidence suggests that you don't get a better idea of a team's playoff future by only looking at how they did against the best teams on their schedule. You need to look at the whole picture.

 

[TealSox]

One interesting note in their statistical analysis applies directly to those that keep repeating the stat of the Pats and Ravens records versus teams with winning records as some truly meaningful indicator of what is likely to happen in the future.

FO analyzes whether or not the Ravens losses can simply be chalked up to their playing down to the level of their competition.

I think this should had been a given, since they played a tough schedule and only lost 4 games. I think the media and fans are making too much of their near loss at AZ and their losses against JAX and SEA.

TEN is a good team and the Chargers played extremely well in a game that the Ravens had to fly across the country to play.

Also helps the stats, when you beat the Bengals and Steelers each twice this season - a season in which they both go to the playoffs.

My hope is that the team is banged up just enough and take some of the edge off that defense. Maybe a half step slower or an extra ache or two in the morning.