the difference in the defense between this week and last

[Ring 6]

umm, this is the entire point behind DPAR and DVOA. perhaps you should read up on it.

I'll paste it again:

THE SHORT VERSION: DVOA is a method of evaluating teams, units, or players. It takes every single play during the NFL season and compares each one to a league-average baseline based on SITUATION. DVOA measures not just yardage, but yardage towards a first down: five yards on 3rd-and-4 are worth more than five yards on 1st-and-10 and much more than five yards on 3rd-and-12. Red zone plays are worth more than other plays. Performance is also adjusted for the quality of the opponent.



Theo is smart enough to know luck from skill

You are conflicting with yourself all over the page.
What does DVOE or DPAR have to do with the drive by the Steelers?

Context does not mean complex mathematical model. Just what you posted shows the potential tainting of the numbers by numerous assumptions.
HOW MUCH do you weight for down and distance? How much do you weight for red zone? How accurate is the adjustment for quality of opponent? Who assesses quality of opponent. If quality of opponent is calculated by the exact same system you have a conflict.

The point is that football isnt player on a computer. If Laurence Maroney rips off an 80 yard run on his next carry, his ypc goes up 0.6 per rush. Do you really think that his season improves from 4.3 being a bit above average, to 4.9 being excellent based on that one play? What if he had done that the LAST play of the Pitt game when it was already over? This is the problem with statistics. You cannot judge a game where 11 players need to make plays against other individuals solely by accumulating the average result of all of their other plays. This is why teams focus on MATCHUPS, not statistics.

 

[Ring 6]

if you don't count the long one, the average goes down.

but, the long one happened.

if you're argument is "the run defense was good except for 1 terrible play", then I agree.

But you are saying it was bad.
There is a huge difference between allowing 4.8 yards per rush with everyone being 3-8 than to play good run D on all but 1 play. You just can't use an average, call it bad, then say it was good for all but 1 play, and that means bad.

 

[Ring 6]

jesus, you guys keep acting like the game was over at that point.

When Hines Ward was stopped at the 1, the clock was at 13:32. that drive started int he 3rd quarter!

and the score was 31-13. it's not like the Pats main strategy in the 3rd quarter was to kill the clock. I mean they aren't against it, but they're much happier getting the ball back at that point with a 3 and out so they can score more.

You really cant be serious.

You are missing the ENTIRE POINT.
In order to get a 3 and out, or in order to play a defense that will stuff the run, you are SACRIFICING SOMETHING ELSE. That is the big play.

BB has said many times, in order to take something away, you sacrifice something else.
How diffiuclt is it for you to understand that in order to take away the big play (which is basically Pitts only chance of getting back in the game) the Patriots played a defense that SACRIFICED THEIR ABILITY to clamp down on the run. In other words: ANY defensive call exposes a weakness. The Patriots chose to expose the weakness that we will give you the running game and short pass,IN ORDER TO take away the big play. If you don't think eliminating the big play was 10 times more important at that juncture than getting a 3 and out, you are nuts.

Answer the question I asked before, and I think we get somewhere near the same page: Do you think if it was a 7point game, we would have played the same defenses we did on that drive?