Pats D still Number 2 in AFC points against

[Mack Herron]

This is backwards. Defensive performance is black and white. Points allowed and takeaways.
Looking at statistics to judge a defense is simply trying to use a formal or informal model to predict what will happen in the future.
Statistics that say a defense that allowed more points should be better than one that allowed fewer does not alter the result and so far no one had an accurate model of the future and probably never will because statistics cannot account for matchups and how teams react to situations they have not been in before.

You disagree but disregard the substance of his arguments.

 

[Ring 6]

You disagree but disregard the substance of his arguments.

I disagree because football is about results, and how you get those results is meaningless, and truly does not transfer across different games.
The result is winning and losing, and for a unit scoring and takeaways/giveaways because they contribute to the other units scoring.
Parsing numbers to try to put a different value on the result, is simply wrong. The assumption that if the Patriots defense started 3 yards deeper in field position on each drive they would allow x more points is unfounded. The assumption that how you perform against one team means you can take that teams statistics and compare them to another teams statistics and know how you will perform against that other team is wrong.
The substance of his argument is the assumption that statistics in football, garnered in games vs one team, with different players, skillsets, matchups, game plans, play calling, situations, scoreboard status, etc can predict what you will do against a different team, and that's not only wrong, it has never been proven to be accurate.

 

[Ring 6]

You disagree but disregard the substance of his arguments.

Here is an example of what I am talking about.

In 2015 the Patriots faced 4 top 10 scoring offenses.

Against all of the non top 10s they allowed 19.9 ppg
Against team in the bottom half they allowed 16.5

So based upon current discussion on this board, when they faced a top 10 offense it will expose that these numbers which look really good against the bottom half and ok against the bottom 22, are a sham and when they face good offense they will get torched.

In 4 games against top 10 offenses they allowed 19.25 points.

Statistical modeling of football says that is impossible.

 

[Mack Herron]

What makes the defensive situation so frustrating is that the team returned almost every key player on defense from 2015, other than Chandler Jones, they’ve faced an extremely easy slate of opposing quarterbacks, and yet they’ve clearly taken a step backwards.

 

[PatsFan2]

You know what have come back to hurt this Defense the Loss of a First Round Pick plus a wasted one on D. Easley.

 

[FCB02062]

I'm starting to think that perhaps Belichick is a clairvoyant here - putting more emphasis on offensive "talent" and spending more of their cap there - Brady, Gronkowski, Edelman, perhaps Bennett - because he sees the direction in which the league is going. It is getting harder and harder to "play" defense.
I'm as big a critic of the defense as there is, but taking a step back, they did put up 24 against Seattle's vaunted defense and "should" have been 31 or 34. And Belichick designs his roster each season based on the schedule, he probably thinks he doesn't "need" a great defense to get to the SB based on the schedule...next year might be a different story...next year is shaping up to be a killer schedule...

 

[Ring 6]

Here is another example:

Myth: We let crappy QBs look like HOFers, and will get killed by good ones.

FACT
We faced 4 QBs in the top 11 in rating. Yes, I get that rating is not a good judge of QB but it is a good judge of their stats, which is the discussion, and the only impartial way of ranking them.

In the other 12 games, against QBs either not in the top 11, or did not play enough to qualify, we allowed an average game of:

22/37.7 (58.3%) 264 yards 1.6 TDs 0.6 Ints, we allowed an average of 19.9 points and were 8-4

Against the top 4 rated QBs we played we allowed
24.3/36 (67.5) 261 1.25/1.25 we allowed 19 ppg and went 4-0

Statistical modeling says that would be impossible

 

[Ring 6]

How have they clearly taken a step backward?

 

[Keyser Söze]

This defense has all the looks as one that won't be able to get off the field come January. Sadly we've been there before.

 

[Ring 6]

Here is another example:

Myth: We let crappy QBs look like HOFers, and will get killed by good ones.

FACT
We faced 4 QBs in the top 11 in rating. Yes, I get that rating is not a good judge of QB but it is a good judge of their stats, which is the discussion, and the only impartial way of ranking them.

In the other 12 games, against QBs either not in the top 11, or did not play enough to qualify, we allowed an average game of:

22/37.7 (58.3%) 264 yards 1.6 TDs 0.6 Ints, we allowed an average of 19.9 points and were 8-4

Against the top 4 rated QBs we played we allowed
24.3/36 (67.5) 261 1.25/1.25 we allowed 19 ppg and went 4-0

Statistical modeling says that would be impossible

Here is another.
Since 2010 the Patriots are 25-6 when allowing 300 or more passing yards.

No statistical model can predict that.


FYI the rest of the NFL is 307-346-3 in those games, an average of 9.9-11.2.

 

[neuronet]

Simple numbers like points against, and turnover ratios, are useless! We need DVOA, we need UZR, we need ABS (A=advanced)! Give me highly processed data (PCA, ICA, spectrograms: time domain isn't enough, just ask @FourierSeries ! Quick, can someone please set up Schrodinger equation for the extra point kick-- @QuantumMechanic get on that **** stat, it will solve Gostkowski's issues!). Look how great all the statistical models were at predicting the presidential election, we need this now guys!

Plus, Belichick loves all the stuff from the analytics people, why would we ignore what he obviously makes use of every day in his coaching decisions. From what I hear, he isn't awake more than fifty seconds before he is looking at an advanced metrics website:
Bill Belichick On Advanced Metrics Websites: 'What The Hell Is That?'

Better yet, just use your gut. If they are only allowing 18 points per game, but your gut says they suck, then they must suck! F numbers!

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

With as many problems as the D has, they seem to be really tough in the red zone.

 

[Joey007]

If this defense can just be a little below average, I think it will be good enough. I do think we have enough on this defense to at least get to that.

 

[Ring 6]

The 2003 Patriots allowed 14.9 ppg. The league average was a little under 20.

BUT, they played 8 of 16 games against offenses ranked in the bottom 10, and 5 ranked in the bottom 5 of the league in scoring.
They allowed 12 ppg to bottom 5 teams.
They allowed 13.3 ppg to bottom 10 teams.

Clearly the defense sucked and only had good ppg because of playing a weak schedule.
In fact they played 13 of 16 against teams ranked outside of the top 10 and only allowed 12.6 ppg.

My God, that defense is going to suck when it plays good offenses.
Oh no, they allowed 30 ppg in the 3 games against top 10 offenses.

Analytics have spoken, take away the SB trophy because that defense clearly wasn't good enough to win the SB.

 

[Ring 6]

If this defense can just be a little below average, I think it will be good enough. I do think we have enough on this defense to at least get to that.

So you are hoping they can find a way to give up about a TD more per game?

 

[fightingirish595]

If I also have to take Denver's joke of an offense then I obviously take the Pats D. Because you know.. it's a full team sport.

That joke of an offense was also apart of superbowl win last year. But that was not the point of the question. The point was is the New England Defense better than the Denver defense because it was giving up .9 points ppg at the time

 

[Ring 6]

That joke of an offense was also apart of superbowl win last year. But that was not the point of the question. The point was is the New England Defense better than the Denver defense because it was giving up .9 points ppg at the time

No, the point of the question was has New englands defense, by allowing almost a point a game less, PLAYED BETTER than Denver's. The answer would obviously be yes, except that Denver's defense has done more to help its team win, because it has a lot more takeaways, which is part B of the equation.

You want to look at HOW they played to extrapolate that into who would be better on some unknown day against some unknown opponent and in football you just can't do that.

 

[IllegalContact]

buncha *****es have decided the bottom line is irrelevant

 

[fightingirish595]

No, the point of the question was has New englands defense, by allowing almost a point a game less, PLAYED BETTER than Denver's. The answer would obviously be yes, except that Denver's defense has done more to help its team win, because it has a lot more takeaways, which is part B of the equation.

You want to look at HOW they played to extrapolate that into who would be better on some unknown day against some unknown opponent and in football you just can't do that.

Wait so you think New Englands defense has played better than Denvers this year?

 

[Ring 6]

Wait so you think New Englands defense has played better than Denvers this year?

Denver's defense has played better because they have more takeaways.