Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Pessimistic Pete, Oct 27, 2010.
Yet are 5-1.
I think one of the big keys to this season is the turnovers we've been creating.
thats why stats arent always a good way of judging a team, same with San Diego. We are 19th in YPG but have the best Points per game average. Lol, as long as we see wins, its all good.
YPG is a pretty terrible metric.
Why else would Pete be drawn to it?
I also made a topic about how the Patriots are #1 in PPG and people complained about that too...
The only stats that matter are W and L.
In pete's defense, it is the league metric for ranking and many posters here did throw much scorn at the 5th ranking of the defense in points allowed.
coldhardfootballfacts has developed an interesting array of measurements that are pretty interesting.
QB rating differential seems to be the most relavent.
The defense is ranked so low because teams throw at will against us - especially in the second half when it seems like they (except Baltimore) are playing from behind.
The Pats fell in O ranking because the sexy deep ball threat is pretty much gone. In its place, ball control dink and dunk.
We're +6 pal
Uh, why are you making stats up? We're +6
How the hell did you even get -1? Please tell me, I'd really like to know. If you watched the games this year you don't even have to have the stats in front of you to realize the Patriots wouldn't be -1 in the turnover department this year.
Seriously, how the hell are you posting -1?
The reason that the Pats didn't lose 363-179 to the Chargers is that yards don't count. Only scoring counts toward winning. You have have all the 90-drives you want, but if they end in FGs, you are going to lose to a team that only scores 1/2 as many times, but scores TDs.
Forget Fantasy Football.
I assume you jest...
Cold, Hard Football Facts.com: 2010 Passer Rating Differential
The Pats are tied for first in 'W's and tied for last in 'L's.
oops. not sure what I was looking at.
"Stats are for losers," The final score is for winners."
CHFF is a bunch of BS imo. You're better off just watching the games objectively and getting a feel for the team. Our defense is playing better than any stat or metric indicates.
What these stats mean: don't get Patriots on your fantasy team / it might be a good idea to start X if he's playing the Patriots.
Wasn't San Diego first in O and first in D.. how is that working out..
See my sig...
Notice I said one stat.
The fact is football is so complicated it's not condusive to one stat; especially after six games. Also, offense and defense have the input of special teams.
Needless to say, if they had a "situational football" index or rating; that would be most relavent. Maybe out of all the snaps, the percentage you did what you wanted?
Big plays differential is another good one.
Some make sense others not so much.
For instance, is gross net turnovers more important than having more games with a positive turnover variance?
The point is they are thinking of ways to quantify the game.
Maybe our coach is actually pretty smart about situational football.
Separate names with a comma.