Pats have 3rd best defense since 2000

[MrNathanDrake]

 

[Fencer]

What's being measured here? It looks like points allowed.

 

[fnordcircle]

Gonna need some nerd to explain this to me, I'm too cool for math.

 

[MrNathanDrake]

Points per game, Points per season, Total points since 2000

 

[MrNathanDrake]

Gonna need some nerd to explain this to me, I'm too cool for math.

tl:dr - look at the title

 

[fnordcircle]

Ok like, is this a prediction? Because 2003, 2006 and 2004 look to be the years when we had the lowest Points allowed.

 

[pdangle]

Most peeps these days don't care too much about points allowed when talking defense. Probably because NE looks terrible doing it, letting up those all those small gainer but time consuming plays, and not risking getting burnt jailhouse style to stop every long 3rd down. Terrible idea. Defense... Points allowed, pfffffft! Who cares that NE is #3 in points over a 10 years. What have they done lately? Call me when they are #3 in sacks over a single season, THEN you'd have my attention.

 

[Fencer]

My first three modifiers for points-allowed are:

1. Pace. How many drives per game did each side have? I'd conjecture that the Pats had relatively few possessions per game early in the BB/Brady era, but have been on the high side in recent years.

Note that drives/game is the important metric, not plays, although the latter has a lot to do with the former.

2. Offensive TOs. If an offense frequently turns over the ball deep in its own territory, the defense can be excused for giving up more points. Since it's hard to get stats that measure just TOs leading to bad field position, it's natural to look at all TOs as a proxy.

The Pats' defense has had an easy time by this metric during the Brady years.

3. Defensive TOs. Defenses actually have two jobs. The more important is preventing scoring. The other is getting the ball with good field position. Some defensive TOs have that effect.

If memory serves, the defense has been quite up-and-down by this metric.