OK, in no particular order:
Run/Pass Ratios
Pittsburgh hasn't changed much in their run/pass split. They were a marginal passing team in the regular season (52.3%); in the post season they're a marginal running team (53.8%). Basically, the Steelers run a balanced offense - even though that offense is not one of the best in the league.
Here's the interesting bit though. During the regular season, the Cardinals were what I'd call a strong passing team: the overall split was 64.95/35.05 in favour of the pass. This changed dramatically during the postseason. Arizona has bee a marginal run first team during the post season (52%) - that's a 17% swing.
Stomps, Dominations and Mutual Opponents
Coined by the Football Outsiders, the definition of a stomp: a win by more than 14 points against an opponent with an overall losing record. A 'domination' is the same thing against an opponent with a winning record.
The Cardinals are slightly ahead here with three stomps and two dominant wins. Two of the stomps came over the 2-14 St Louis Rams (the other was over the Buffalo Bills), the dominations were over Miami in Week 2 and Carolina on the road in the playoffs. Pittsburgh has one less domination, stomping Cincinnati twice and dominating the Patriots on the road.
Not much between them in that respect, but what may be more significant is that Pittsburgh is 3-2 versus mutual opponents with wins over Washington, Dallas and New England. Arizona is 2-4 with wins over Dallas and Philadelphia. Both teams lost to the New York Giants and both beat the Cowboys, which probably says more about the Cowboys than anything else.
The Better QB Doesn't Always Win
Well, the one with better regular season rating over the last decade anyway. 40% of the last ten games were won by the player with the better rating but that's been skewed recently with three of the last five (60%) Superbowls being won by the player with the better regular season passer rating. Intriguingly, both Warner and Roethlisberger are amongst the players with better passer ratings who won Superbowls (Warner over Steve McNair in 2000 and Roethlisberger over Matt Hasselbeck in 2006), when the Patriots beat Warner's Rams in 2001, Warner's rating was much better than Tom Brady's - as indeed Brady's was when Eli Manning caused a major upset last season. Warner has a rating that's 16.8 points better than Roethlisberger's going into tonight's game - similar to that when he lost to Brady in 2001, but also similar to when he beat McNair the season before.
So if defense wins championships (and the Pittsburgh defense performs as well as the billing), the Steelers win - although they are not facing an average offense, they may actually be facing the return of the Greatest Show On Turf . Conversely, if offense wins games, the Cardinals win.
The key: Ken Whisenhunt. Three seasons as Steelers offensive co-ordinator, two seasons as Cardinals head coach. If he can prepare his defense to take care of the Pittsburgh offense, then it's an Arizona win. He''ll have some help: I counted six assistants with the Cardinals who have some recent knowledge of the Steelers.
Pittsburgh is the favourite. See you tomorrow.
Showing posts with label Superbowl. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Superbowl. Show all posts
Sunday, February 01, 2009
OMG New Post LOL
Good grief...I last posted in September.
Anyway, it's the Superbowl Edition.
Right, stats. I looked at the last four games that the Steelers and the Cardinals played and did some really basic number crunching. First thing to remember is that half of the Steelers last four games were during the regular season and they went 3-1. The Cardinals were 4-0 and their last three wins were in the play offs.
I once won a bet on first TD scorer when I decided Deion Branch would do that, so I thought I'd take a look at that first - but remember this is only over the last four games. For Pittsburgh, the stats like a Willie Parker rushing TD (30% of Pitt's scores overall, half of the Steelers rushing TDs), for the Cardinals it's actually even clearer. Larry Fitzgerald's numbers over the last four games are seven touchdowns (58% of Arizona's total TDs and a whopping 70% of the Cards receiving TDs).
Currently both Parker and Fitzgerald are about 6/1 for first score, but remember that the numbers in the paragraphs are how likely they are to score at some point during the game rather than whether they score first. The category where they're worth a punt is 'Anytime Touchdown Scorer' and at this point the odds drop to 8/11 - which is basically saying that it's highly likely that Parker and/or Fitzgerald will score at some point.
Looking at the first TD scorer for both teams over the last four games, there are some more clues. The first TDs for Arizona were all receptions and Fitzgerald had half of them (the others were snagged by Tim Hightower and Jerheme Urban), which points in the direction of a bet on Arizona's first scoring play being a pass.
There's some variance in Pittsburgh's stats. Two rushing scores for Willie Parker (no surprise there) but two receptions for scores by Santonio Holmes...who is about 8/1 for first score. Hmm. This fits my 'anything less than 14/1 in a big field isn't a bad bet' theory.
Right, on to my next pet theory number one: regular season v. post season QB ratings. Exactly two years ago I posted this: 'Here's a stat for y'all: over the last ten years, the average regular season rating for winning Superbowl QBs has been 91.8. Here are some players from 2006 that scored above that - Drew Brees, Damon Huard, Marc Bulger, Carson Palmer, Philip Rivers, Tony Romo, Donovan McNabb...and Peyton Manning.'
Since then, the average has dropped to 89.9 because last year's winner (Eli Manning) had the worst regular season rating (73.9) - worse than the much maligned Trent Dilfer had in 2000 (76.6). Here are this season's figures:
Kurt Warner first:
Regular season rating was 96.9,
'Last four games' rating was 114.5
Post season rating was 112.1.
Ben Roethlisberger:
Regular season rating 80.1
Last four games 85.2
Post season 90.7
Warner's regular season rating would take fourth place over the last ten years, behind Peyton Manning in 2006, Ben Roethlisberger in 2005...and Kurt Warner in 1999. In fact - despite the nine season difference - Warner is only playing at 1.4 points below his '99 level. Impressive.
Roethlisberger's rating beats Dilfer and Eli Manning; he's 18.5 points below his 2005 level. I know it's not really an indicator of how the game is going to go, but this is an alert for Steelers fans - remember the average passer rating of the victorious QB during the regular season is 89.9 and Big Ben is ten points below that. I have time (and I probably will) I'll do some numbers for the losing QB. I'm also going to post some more stuff before the game but I need to do some other stuff first.
But here's a stupid one. 90% of the winning QBs over the last decade have had two syllable last names. The only one that hasn't is Ben Roethlisberger. Make of that what you will!
Anyway, it's the Superbowl Edition.
Right, stats. I looked at the last four games that the Steelers and the Cardinals played and did some really basic number crunching. First thing to remember is that half of the Steelers last four games were during the regular season and they went 3-1. The Cardinals were 4-0 and their last three wins were in the play offs.
I once won a bet on first TD scorer when I decided Deion Branch would do that, so I thought I'd take a look at that first - but remember this is only over the last four games. For Pittsburgh, the stats like a Willie Parker rushing TD (30% of Pitt's scores overall, half of the Steelers rushing TDs), for the Cardinals it's actually even clearer. Larry Fitzgerald's numbers over the last four games are seven touchdowns (58% of Arizona's total TDs and a whopping 70% of the Cards receiving TDs).
Currently both Parker and Fitzgerald are about 6/1 for first score, but remember that the numbers in the paragraphs are how likely they are to score at some point during the game rather than whether they score first. The category where they're worth a punt is 'Anytime Touchdown Scorer' and at this point the odds drop to 8/11 - which is basically saying that it's highly likely that Parker and/or Fitzgerald will score at some point.
Looking at the first TD scorer for both teams over the last four games, there are some more clues. The first TDs for Arizona were all receptions and Fitzgerald had half of them (the others were snagged by Tim Hightower and Jerheme Urban), which points in the direction of a bet on Arizona's first scoring play being a pass.
There's some variance in Pittsburgh's stats. Two rushing scores for Willie Parker (no surprise there) but two receptions for scores by Santonio Holmes...who is about 8/1 for first score. Hmm. This fits my 'anything less than 14/1 in a big field isn't a bad bet' theory.
Right, on to my next pet theory number one: regular season v. post season QB ratings. Exactly two years ago I posted this: 'Here's a stat for y'all: over the last ten years, the average regular season rating for winning Superbowl QBs has been 91.8. Here are some players from 2006 that scored above that - Drew Brees, Damon Huard, Marc Bulger, Carson Palmer, Philip Rivers, Tony Romo, Donovan McNabb...and Peyton Manning.'
Since then, the average has dropped to 89.9 because last year's winner (Eli Manning) had the worst regular season rating (73.9) - worse than the much maligned Trent Dilfer had in 2000 (76.6). Here are this season's figures:
Kurt Warner first:
Regular season rating was 96.9,
'Last four games' rating was 114.5
Post season rating was 112.1.
Ben Roethlisberger:
Regular season rating 80.1
Last four games 85.2
Post season 90.7
Warner's regular season rating would take fourth place over the last ten years, behind Peyton Manning in 2006, Ben Roethlisberger in 2005...and Kurt Warner in 1999. In fact - despite the nine season difference - Warner is only playing at 1.4 points below his '99 level. Impressive.
Roethlisberger's rating beats Dilfer and Eli Manning; he's 18.5 points below his 2005 level. I know it's not really an indicator of how the game is going to go, but this is an alert for Steelers fans - remember the average passer rating of the victorious QB during the regular season is 89.9 and Big Ben is ten points below that. I have time (and I probably will) I'll do some numbers for the losing QB. I'm also going to post some more stuff before the game but I need to do some other stuff first.
But here's a stupid one. 90% of the winning QBs over the last decade have had two syllable last names. The only one that hasn't is Ben Roethlisberger. Make of that what you will!
Monday, February 05, 2007
Colts Win The Superbowl
Peyton Manning: MVP.Despite an electrifying opening kickoff return for a touchdown by Devin Hester, the Indianapolis Colts won Superbowl 41 by 29-17 in Miami last night. The score was arguably a reflection of the difference between the two teams, but a closer look at the numbers shows that there's a case to be made for the argument that the 'big win for the Colts' scenario was achievable.
On Thursday I questioned Rex Grossman's ability as a quarterback and my opinion not only seems to have been justified, but one of my favourite sportswriters also though it. To recap, here are his 2006 stats before the big game:
Regular Season:
262 for 480 (54%) for 3193 yards, 23 TDs and 20 INTs for a rating of 73.9
Post Season:
32 for 64 (50%) for 426 yards, 2 TDs and 1 INTs for a rating of 75.4
Now here's the line for Superbowl XLI:
20 of 28 (71%) for 165 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTS for a rating of 68.3. Remember, five of those completions were made with less than two minutes left at the end of the game when the result wasn't in doubt: he basically played at a level below both his regular season and post season performances - Joey Harrington and Jake Plummer territory in fact.
Again, the emphasis must be on team rather than individual performance, but it should be blindingly obvious to the Bears coaching staff that the one area which was a let down was passing offense. Grossman either needs to improve or Lovie Smith needs to find a new quarterback.
Run/Pass Ratios Revisited
Counting the rushing attempts by Manning and Dallas Clark (the first was a scramble, the second one looked like some sort of college option from Manning's days in the SEC), Indy ran 42 times and passed 38 times, a 52/48 ratio that had more in common with their regular season ratio when they were a far more balanced team offensively.
I deliberately made a note of the first fifteen plays for each team to see what - if any - pattern I could discern. The Colts passed on 9 of their first fifteen plays (60%) whereas the Bears had a 60/40 run/pass ratio - nine of their game total of 19 rushing attempts came in the first fifteen plays. On the day, the Bears run/pass ratio was 40/60; during the regular season it had been almost exactly 50/50.
It's probably too early to tell exactly how this affected both teams, but it looks very much as if the Colts returned to the style of play that got them to the Superbowl in the first place whereas the Bears sideline may - may - have panicked and decided to push the envelope with a player who is not known for that. I've been listening to ESPN radio this morning (Ron Jaworski has just referred to a 'positive play count' which is basically number of rushes plus completions - the higher the better, 50 is some kind of gold standard) and the Chicago coaches are not being lauded for their playcalling. I'll check out WSCR-AM later.
Last scoring play of the game: a interception return for a touchdown by Indy reserve defensive back Kelvin Hayden, who went to Illinois and grew up in Chicago.
Sometimes it's just not your day.
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Rex Grossman endears himself to the media
WSCR 670 The Score is currently commenting on the Jim McMahonesque stunt today that Rex Grossman pulled today: addressing the American media about '...how ignorant some of you guys are' (love to know who was laughing in the background!)
Apparently it's all about selling newspapers. Grossman is all about playing quarterback, so let's see how he shaped up:
Regular Season:
262 for 480 (54%) for 3193 yards, 23 TDs and 20 INTs for a rating of 73.9
Post Season:
32 for 64 (50%) for 426 yards, 2 TDs and 1 INTs for a rating of 75.4
This puts him in the same territory as Alex Smith and Matt Leinart (better ratings) plus Brett Favre and Charlie Frye (worse ratings). It may or may not be significant, but none of those players played for teams with winning records this season.
Here's Jim McMahon's stats for the '85 regular season:
178 for 313 (56.8%) for 2392 yards, 15 TDs and 11 INTs for a rating of 82.6, 10% better than Grossman this season and at the same kind of level as Chad Pennington, Steve McNair and Jake Delhomme in 2006. None of those three had a losing season; the Jets and the Ravens made the playoffs.
Here's a stat for y'all: over the last ten years, the average regular season rating for winning Superbowl QBs has been 91.8. Here are some players from 2006 that scored above that - Drew Brees, Damon Huard, Marc Bulger, Carson Palmer, Philip Rivers, Tony Romo, Donovan McNabb...and Peyton Manning.
OK, football is a team game and the result will not hinge on the performance of one player, but all things being equal it's obvious that Manning is a better quarterback than Grossman and I'd even go as far to say that Chicago has got this far despite Rex Grossman rather than because of him.
Another way of looking at both QB productivity is OL strength. I don't have the time or the resources to come up with a Football Outsiders style analysis but I do have a modified version of their OL stats that I use for the analysing OL performance in the EFL.
The Colts gave up the fewest sacks in the entire league during the regular season (15), but have already given up a third of this total in three post season games. Although the Bears have been inferior in this respect, they've actually been more consistent throughout (25 sacks given up in the regular season) and there's nothing much between them on average yards per rushing attempt; one possible reason for the difference between regular and post season sacks is that Indy have a 47/53 run/pass ratio in the post season as opposed to 56/44 ratio in the regular season - basically, Manning has had to pass more, so realistically the amount of sacks should increase.
Madame Zaza wants to interrupt again: if the Colts can get back to a more balanced offensive approach on Sunday, it might be the crucial difference. If Indy can establish the run early then Manning can run the offense that got them to the big show; if 'Bad Rex' turns up and all the Bears can do is run, then it could be a long afternoon for Chicago fans.
All I'm saying is that there is an 'Indianapolis winning a blow out' scenario.
Apparently it's all about selling newspapers. Grossman is all about playing quarterback, so let's see how he shaped up:
Regular Season:
262 for 480 (54%) for 3193 yards, 23 TDs and 20 INTs for a rating of 73.9
Post Season:
32 for 64 (50%) for 426 yards, 2 TDs and 1 INTs for a rating of 75.4
This puts him in the same territory as Alex Smith and Matt Leinart (better ratings) plus Brett Favre and Charlie Frye (worse ratings). It may or may not be significant, but none of those players played for teams with winning records this season.
Here's Jim McMahon's stats for the '85 regular season:
178 for 313 (56.8%) for 2392 yards, 15 TDs and 11 INTs for a rating of 82.6, 10% better than Grossman this season and at the same kind of level as Chad Pennington, Steve McNair and Jake Delhomme in 2006. None of those three had a losing season; the Jets and the Ravens made the playoffs.
Here's a stat for y'all: over the last ten years, the average regular season rating for winning Superbowl QBs has been 91.8. Here are some players from 2006 that scored above that - Drew Brees, Damon Huard, Marc Bulger, Carson Palmer, Philip Rivers, Tony Romo, Donovan McNabb...and Peyton Manning.
OK, football is a team game and the result will not hinge on the performance of one player, but all things being equal it's obvious that Manning is a better quarterback than Grossman and I'd even go as far to say that Chicago has got this far despite Rex Grossman rather than because of him.
Another way of looking at both QB productivity is OL strength. I don't have the time or the resources to come up with a Football Outsiders style analysis but I do have a modified version of their OL stats that I use for the analysing OL performance in the EFL.
The Colts gave up the fewest sacks in the entire league during the regular season (15), but have already given up a third of this total in three post season games. Although the Bears have been inferior in this respect, they've actually been more consistent throughout (25 sacks given up in the regular season) and there's nothing much between them on average yards per rushing attempt; one possible reason for the difference between regular and post season sacks is that Indy have a 47/53 run/pass ratio in the post season as opposed to 56/44 ratio in the regular season - basically, Manning has had to pass more, so realistically the amount of sacks should increase.
Madame Zaza wants to interrupt again: if the Colts can get back to a more balanced offensive approach on Sunday, it might be the crucial difference. If Indy can establish the run early then Manning can run the offense that got them to the big show; if 'Bad Rex' turns up and all the Bears can do is run, then it could be a long afternoon for Chicago fans.
All I'm saying is that there is an 'Indianapolis winning a blow out' scenario.
Monday, January 29, 2007
Superbowl Week: Monday
OK, straight to the point: head says Colts, heart says Bears.
For a while now, I think that Peyton Manning has been the best passing quarterback in the league and he has the supporting cast that could potentially make this a blowout if Ron Rivera's defensive scheme doesn't work. The knock against Indianapolis earlier in the season was that they couldn't stop the run but they have been unrecognisable recently and this is why head is going with them.
Heart is going for the Bears for a number of reasons. The first pro football game I ever saw live was the 1986 American Bowl at Wembley Stadium, at the beginning of the season following the triumph of Superbowl XX. So I saw Walter Payton, Jim McMahon, The Fridge and all the other luminaries on arguably one of the most complete football teams I think I've ever seen. This season I've had more fun following the Bears than the Raiders, but whereas the Raiders are an obligation the Bears have always been a way of enjoying the NFL without screaming blue murder at the TV.
In a lot of ways, the game is Old School as well. Until the re-organisation of the NFL in 1969, both the Colts and the Bears were in the NFC and the Colts were the first team to represent both conferences in the Superbowl: they lost to the Joe Namath inspired NY Jets in SB3 and beat Dallas in SB5 (in Miami when the Colts wore white!) with a Jim O'Brien field goal with five seconds left.
Madame Zaza time: will I be publishing a photo of Adam Viniateri doing something similar to this on Monday morning?
It's all very well considering the past, but here are some threads leading up to the game that are of interest.
Hardly surprisingly considering what happened to the team in 1984, the city of Baltimore isn't supporting the Colts. Neither are these old Baltimore Colt alums, but they seem to like Peyton Manning. This story is really sad; John Mackey was one of the pioneers at the Tight End position at roughly the same time Mike Ditka had a similar role with the Bears and Cowboys.
John Mackey
Mike Ditka
For a while now, I think that Peyton Manning has been the best passing quarterback in the league and he has the supporting cast that could potentially make this a blowout if Ron Rivera's defensive scheme doesn't work. The knock against Indianapolis earlier in the season was that they couldn't stop the run but they have been unrecognisable recently and this is why head is going with them.
Heart is going for the Bears for a number of reasons. The first pro football game I ever saw live was the 1986 American Bowl at Wembley Stadium, at the beginning of the season following the triumph of Superbowl XX. So I saw Walter Payton, Jim McMahon, The Fridge and all the other luminaries on arguably one of the most complete football teams I think I've ever seen. This season I've had more fun following the Bears than the Raiders, but whereas the Raiders are an obligation the Bears have always been a way of enjoying the NFL without screaming blue murder at the TV.
In a lot of ways, the game is Old School as well. Until the re-organisation of the NFL in 1969, both the Colts and the Bears were in the NFC and the Colts were the first team to represent both conferences in the Superbowl: they lost to the Joe Namath inspired NY Jets in SB3 and beat Dallas in SB5 (in Miami when the Colts wore white!) with a Jim O'Brien field goal with five seconds left.
Madame Zaza time: will I be publishing a photo of Adam Viniateri doing something similar to this on Monday morning?
It's all very well considering the past, but here are some threads leading up to the game that are of interest.
Hardly surprisingly considering what happened to the team in 1984, the city of Baltimore isn't supporting the Colts. Neither are these old Baltimore Colt alums, but they seem to like Peyton Manning. This story is really sad; John Mackey was one of the pioneers at the Tight End position at roughly the same time Mike Ditka had a similar role with the Bears and Cowboys.
John Mackey
Mike DitkaI stumbled across a fantastic Bears website at bearshistory.com while I was looking for bits and pieces to post here on youtube.
Having said that, I haven't seen any stories about Colt fans that travel the 500 or so mile trip to Indy to support the team rather than staying in Maryland to support either the Ravens or the Redskins. It's about the same distance from Oakland to Los Angeles as it is between Bristol and Glasgow; seeing as though I now seem to be locked into this, Chicago to Indianapolis is less than 200 miles.
Enough rambling.
Having said that, I haven't seen any stories about Colt fans that travel the 500 or so mile trip to Indy to support the team rather than staying in Maryland to support either the Ravens or the Redskins. It's about the same distance from Oakland to Los Angeles as it is between Bristol and Glasgow; seeing as though I now seem to be locked into this, Chicago to Indianapolis is less than 200 miles.
Enough rambling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
