Pats 4th in scoring O, 7th in scoring D

[Nikolai]

(pray for) timely turnovers

This is a pure hawt taekish sentiment I'm about to make, but I feel those were a staple of the 2001-2009 teams, and they greatly enabled success.

That this team has quite a few takeaways gives me hope we might just get one or two to help us along the way during the playoffs.

 

[goheels22002]

No they suck.

They hate their coach.

 

[goheels22002]

I feel like the defensive stats are misleading (though not as much as in 2011, more like 2016). It's a decent defense overall, but certainly not great. The offense isn't as strong as in years past to bail it out. And yet somehow, this will probably be the year we finally get our first Super Bowl blowout win.

In five of their last 6 games the Patriots defense allowed 13-10-17-12-3 points. The outlier was that stupid Dolphins game where they gave up 34 to a team they held to 7 at home. This is a tough team to score on.

 

[goheels22002]

Wins and losses... wins and losses

You were right in your thread title - you win by scoring more points than the other guys. It's about scoring points and not allowing points.

KC and LA are mirages - KC is last in points allowed among all playoff teams. LA Rams are 2nd to last.

9 of the top 12 teams in points allowed are in the playoffs. The only three playoff teams outside the top 12 are the Saints (14), LA Rams (20), and KC (24).

NFL Football Stats - NFL Team Opponent Points per Game on TeamRankings.com

 

[DarrylS]

As much as there are the nattering nabobs of negativity out there who will criticize this team ad infinitum the reality is they are not as bad as portrayed by all the naysayers out there. This whole thing can be overthought and over-analyzed, and this stat can be criticized.. but bottom line is that they are good enough to be in the "tournament".

Despite a lackluster performance in the most recent SB, the fact is that they made it to the Superbowl.. 30 other teams did not. The armchair QB's will spout pompous rhetoric and claim that if they do not win a Superbowl this has been a piss poor season or tell us about how this stat is misleading or this stat reflects this team better.

Maybe I am somewhat of anomaly as getting this far and getting another opportunity on the biggest stage is all I can hope for, we are very fortunate fans to be witnessing this great run.. you never know what will happen.

 

[Uptown]

 

[PatsFan2]

Definitely with Flash Gordon and not without.

 

[PatsFan2]

And the 2018 Edelman is doing that with a average Gronk and Hogan plus no Amendola. A Testament to how important he is I would give Edelman a two year Extension he's far from done. Also having a year off because of that ACL could work wonders for his longevity going forward.

 

[PatsFan2]

I have always felt that Edelman was > Gronk even when Gronk was Gronk. That was my personal opinion no denying that Today.

 

[Kontradiction]

For starters they activated more beef on the game day roster in Shelton and Kamalu the past 2 games and they were better.

Aye. Shelton was so good that he was a healthy scratch for about a quarter of the season and Kamalu, all 295 lbs of him, was so good that the Patriots waited until 12/21 to sign him to the active roster. He also played 8 snaps. Neither of them fixes the run defense. What did you see? Did you see them change their gap responsibilities? More two gapping or one gapping? Was Kamalu, Shelton, or Brown regularly double teamed? Did they "shade the defensive line" more to one gap or another?

My bad I just assumed the context of scoring was pretty clear that's how you actually win by out scoring the other guys.

The following should tell me how high quality your education was. Yes or no - you need context when analyzing any kind of statistic?

Wait so now your calling wins and losses a misleading stat?

Three posts in and you're already setting up straw men. Scoring rankings can be very highly misleading. You know this, which is why you're already trying to pivot to wins and losses. I'm aware that you know this because none of the questions in my first couple of posts got answered. Please just stop.

 

[mosslost]

Which has nothing to do with the fact that this is a fantastic example of stats without context.

Why?

 

[mosslost]

Which has nothing to do with the fact that this is a fantastic example of stats without context.

Respectfully disagree. Wins are only stat that matters. Points scored and points allowed pretty much directly impact wins.

You could say well if you win one game 40-3 thAt “skews” the data maybe. But that is really all you can say about it imo.

 

[mosslost]

Yes. To admit that this isn’t the 4th best offense and the 7th best defense would be to admit an inconvenient truth. It doesn’t surprise me that you want to hold on to that belief. Every season, we have this conversation. Stats without context are absolutely misleading. You learn that in Intro to Stats. It’s literally one of the first things any professor will tell you. Case and point from a recent example - how did the 5th best defense do in the Super Bowl last year? Furthermore, tell me what they did, from a schematic standpoint, to sure up the run defense? Please be specific.

Ok I get what you mean for example.

Made up:

Pats beat Oakland at home 38-3

Pats beat Saints 28-24 on road.

Context? Easy opponent at home, and best in league in road.

Both are one win.

If the context of the “who” and “where” are both unknown, analysis of those scores or wins is meaningless.

Is that close?

 

[Kontradiction]

Respectfully disagree. Wins are only stat that matters. Points scored and points allowed pretty much directly impact wins.

You could say well if you win one game 40-3 thAt “skews” the data maybe. But that is really all you can say about it imo.

Context is the most important thing in statistics. Simplifying things a bit, if the null hypothesis is that B1 = B2 = B3 = B4 and the alternative is that at least one game/opponent/whatever is different, you're more than likely going to go with the alternative in sports (especially football) because no one opponent is the same. The Patriots, through their stretch in October, were allowing more PPG because of the caliber of offensive opponent they were playing. At the end of the year, through the last six games, the average offensive PPG ranking for their opponents was 22nd. Therefore, their PPG ranking expectedly improved. This happens every year, with every team. We saw it last year with a supposedly top five defense getting completely exposed in the Super Bowl because they could not stop the run and had a weakened secondary to boot. Top five defenses simply should not have issues with stopping the run. Therefore, context is key when you're breaking down a statistic like scoring offense or scoring defense (or, in this case, both). Simply saying "wins and losses" is irrelevant when we're analyzing a statistic like the one in the title of this thread.

 

[signbabybrady]

Aye. Shelton was so good that he was a healthy scratch for about a quarter of the season and Kamalu, all 295 lbs of him, was so good that the Patriots waited until 12/21 to sign him to the active roster. He also played 8 snaps. Neither of them fixes the run defense. What did you see? Did you see them change their gap responsibilities? More two gapping or one gapping? Was Kamalu, Shelton, or Brown regularly double teamed? Did they "shade the defensive line" more to one gap or another?

Their gap integrity was much better yes.

Most of the season I've seen them run a base out of the nickel and expectedly they struggled vs the run. The last two games they added the beef back in and got better results. Since your so brilliant why don't you explain to us when they've actually been in 3-4, 4-3, or goal line how they've actually struggled? What are the problems? Be specific?

The following should tell me how high quality your education was. Yes or no - you need context when analyzing any kind of statistic?

Yes. As I said the context of scoring should be obvious to anyone. But please tell us how high quality your education was?

Three posts in and you're already setting up straw men. Scoring rankings can be very highly misleading. You know this, which is why you're already trying to pivot to wins and losses. I'm aware that you know this because none of the questions in my first couple of posts got answered. Please just stop.

I'm not setting anything up your the one who answered a qoute about "Wins and losses... wins and losses" with "Which has nothing to do with the fact that this is a fantastic example of stats without context." You seem to forget what you post quite often.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

I think the last two games certainly padded the stats if we’re being honest

 

[Kontradiction]

Their gap integrity was much better yes.

1. Define this.

2. Whose gap integrity was much better?

3. Specific examples?

Most of the season I've seen them run a base out of the nickel and expectedly they struggled vs the run. The last two games they added the beef back in and got better results. Since your so brilliant why don't you explain to us when they've actually been in 3-4, 4-3, or goal line how they've actually struggled? What are the problems? Be specific?

Actually, the snap counts indicate heavy dime usage throughout the season as well. The "base" is actually the nickel or the dime, depending on who they play. Against the Jets, they played mostly nickel. Especially after Devin left the game and they basically couldn't go into dime. Why they've struggled is fairly obvious to anyone with eyes - their DTs are not very good. This has not only been widely talked about here, but it's also been widely reported in film breakdowns. It's the reason why Shelton was a healthy scratch through roughly a quarter of the season. Brown has been mostly a bust as well (part of the reason they had to promote Kamalu) and Guy is at best a rotational DT. The DT position was a need last season as well, which is why Shelton was brought in in the first place.

Yes. As I said the context of scoring should be obvious to anyone. But please tell us how high quality your education was?

I'm sorry, is this a yes? Yes, context is important when analyzing statistics? Or no, context is not important when analyzing statistics? Because the fact that you're even debating this with me seems to indicate that you believe the answer is no, context is not important in statistics. So please, yes or no - is it important?

I'm not setting anything up your the one who answered a qoute about "Wins and losses... wins and losses" with "Which has nothing to do with the fact that this is a fantastic example of stats without context." You seem to forget what you post quite often.

Sure you are. The thread's title talks specifically about the scoring stats for the O and D, which is clearly what I was referring to. Wins and losses are irrelevant to breaking down a team's scoring ranking. But, again, you know this. That's why you're constructing this flimsy straw man in an attempt to finally "win a point." This recent act of your's (clearly borne out of some combination of anger and frustration) is like a kid that continually gets spanked by dad and keeps acting out to get his attention.

 

[Kontradiction]

I think the last two games certainly padded the stats if we’re being honest

Absolutely. That's what happens when you're analyzing a stat. This is context. One was against one of the worst offenses in the NFL and the other was against a team that quit on the field with a coach that was getting issued his walking papers immediately after the game.

 

[signbabybrady]

1. Define this.

2. Whose gap integrity was much better?

3. Specific examples?



Actually, the snap counts indicate heavy dime usage throughout the season as well. The "base" is actually the nickel or the dime, depending on who they play. Against the Jets, they played mostly nickel. Especially after Devin left the game and they basically couldn't go into dime. Why they've struggled is fairly obvious to anyone with eyes - their DTs are not very good. This has not only been widely talked about here, but it's also been widely reported in film breakdowns. It's the reason why Shelton was a healthy scratch through roughly a quarter of the season. Brown has been mostly a bust as well (part of the reason they had to promote Kamalu) and Guy is at best a rotational DT. The DT position was a need last season as well, which is why Shelton was brought in in the first place.



I'm sorry, is this a yes? Yes, context is important when analyzing statistics? Or no, context is not important when analyzing statistics? Because the fact that you're even debating this with me seems to indicate that you believe the answer is no, context is not important in statistics. So please, yes or no - is it important?



Sure you are. The thread's title talks specifically about the scoring stats for the O and D, which is clearly what I was referring to. Wins and losses are irrelevant to breaking down a team's scoring ranking. But, again, you know this. That's why you're constructing this flimsy straw man in an attempt to finally "win a point." This recent act of your's (clearly borne out of some combination of anger and frustration) is like a kid that continually gets spanked by dad and keeps acting out to get his attention.

Kontra strikes again. Spanked by dad lol, heavy on words lol but avoided my actual question. Your responses are predictable and devoid of useful content. Please explain to us when they've actually been in 3-4, 4-3, or goal line how they've actually struggled? What are the problems? Be specific?

 

[Kontradiction]

Kontra strikes again. Spanked by dad lol, heavy on words lol but avoided my actual question. Your responses are predictable and devoid of useful content. Please explain to us when they've actually been in 3-4, 4-3, or goal line how they've actually struggled? What are the problems? Be specific?

I was about as specific to your question as I could possibly get. Highlighted what they've been in for the majority of the season, which has been their "base" for the last few years - dating back to around 2013 - and highlighted what the problem has been and continues to be - personnel and not personnel packages. So this accusation that I've avoided your question doesn't hold water. As for when they've been in the 43 or 34? Not much at all. Only the Buffalo game two weeks ago is where they've showed a heavier front for a significant portion of the game. Again, the snap counts and film breakdowns show this to be the case. One would think you would know that goal line packages means they use them on the goal line.

Nope, the only person avoiding questions here is you now. So I'll make it simple and just copy and paste mine from the last post that you just quoted. See below...

1. Define this. (Gap integrity)

2. Whose gap integrity was much better?

3. Specific examples?

I'm sorry, is this a yes? Yes, context is important when analyzing statistics? Or no, context is not important when analyzing statistics? Because the fact that you're even debating this with me seems to indicate that you believe the answer is no, context is not important in statistics. So please, yes or no - is it important?