Checking the Numbers Preview: Chargers-Steelers Week 4 Game

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Oct 2, 2009 4:58 AM PDT Comment 22 comments

Hello, Bolts From The Blue Readers! Here is a post previewing the upcoming game. It's a statistical comparison of the Steelers and Chargers. If you enjoy this, you can check out similar posts at my site, Checking the Numbers. Many thanks to John for letting me post this here.

This weekend, on Sunday Night Football, we will see what looked like one of the top matchups of the year prior to this season. In another matchup of top quarterbacks, the San Diego Chargers will travel to Pittsburgh to play the Steelers. I'm sure there will be some discussion about Ben Roethlisberger and Philip Rivers being in the same draft class, and many previews will talk about how this is the third meeting in less than a year between these teams. But, to me, the main story is that both teams have struggled early in the season, with the Chargers winning a very close game in Oakland in week 1 and losing to the Ravens in week 2, and the Steelers twice losing second half leads in the last two weeks. While it has become expected almost for San Diego to struggle early in the year under Norv Turner, Pittsburgh has generally started strong since Mike Tomlin has taken over. So, will we see the Steelers get back to their winning ways this weekend, or will they find another way to lose? Or, will the Chargers just play outstanding football and overpower the ailing champs? More... Who knows? We'll find that out soon enough. But, perhaps by reviewing the statistics for each team (from Pro-Football-Reference.com) up to this point in the season, we may get a better idea of who will win this game.

For this preview, I have pulled the per game numbers for each team so that we can do a head to head comparison of their respective offensive and defensive numbers so far this year. I also have each team's offensive and defensive ranks in both points and yards after the first 3 weeks. Then, to help give context these numbers, I have the average offensive and defensive rankings of both teams' opponents, again for both yards and points.

First, the head to head comparisons:

	San Diego Chargers	Pittsburgh Steelers	SD - Pit
Offense
Points	24.33	15.67	8.67
Yards	382	346	36
Passing Yds	315.67	265	50.67
Passing TD	1	1	0
INTs	1	1.33	-0.33
Rushing Yds	66.33	81	-14.67
Rushing TD	1	0.67	0.33
Rush Y/A	2.8	3.3	-0.5
Fmb Lost	0.67	0.67	0
Turnovers	1.67	2	-0.33
Defense
Points	21.33	16.67	4.67
Yards	322	289.33	32.67
Passing Yds	179.67	212.67	-33
Passing TD	1	1.33	-0.33
INTs	1.33	0.33	1
Rushing Yds	142.33	76.67	65.67
Rushing TD	1.33	0.33	1
Rush Y/A	4.5	3.8	0.7
Fmb Rec	0.67	0.33	0.33
Turnovers	2	0.67	1.33

Per Game Averages So Far This Season

The table above shows the offensive and defensive per game averages for both teams this season. Then, the third column contains the differences between those averages, found by subtracting the Steelers' number from the Chargers' number. San Diego has the edge in most offensive statistics. They have passed for about 50 yards more a game and gained 36 more per game overall. The Steelers have rushed more effectively (surprising to Steelers fans, I'm sure), averaging about 15 yards more per game. But, in the stat that counts, the Chargers are scoring nearly 9 more points per game than Pittsburgh.

Defensively, somewhat to be expected, Pittsburgh has the edge. They have averaged allowing about 33 fewer total yards and 66 fewer rushing yards per game. San Diego has allowed an average of 33 fewer passing yards per game, though. The Chargers' main advantage in this category is in turnovers, where they have forced almost 4 times as many as the Steelers. But, in the category that counts, points, Pittburgh is averaging about 5 points less allowed per game.

Having looked at raw stats, here are team rankings in terms of offense and defense for both points and yards.

	San Diego Chargers	Pittsburgh Steelers
Offense Pts Rk	8	25
Offense Yds Rk	8	12
Defense Pts RK	19	7
Defense Yds Rk	14	8

Based just on these rankings, the Chargers are doing a much better job of finishing drives. Only 4 spots separate them in offensive yards rankings, Chargers 8 and Steelers 12. But, the Steelers are ranked 25th in points scored. Both teams' defensive rankings are more consistent. If the Chargers win, it seems likely that part of the reason will be that the Steelers' offense ws settling for field goals instead of scoring touchdowns.

Finally, let's look at their opponents' average rankings to this point in the season.

2009 Opponents' Average Ranks
	San Diego Chargers	Pittsburgh Steelers
Offense Pts	19.33	18.67
Offense Yds	17.33	18.33
Defense Pts	15.33	16
Defense Yds	15.67	14.33

These numbers are pretty close, showing that the teams' opponents so far this year are not drastically different. That would suggest that we can trust the raw stats comparison and rankings comparison more directly without making allowance for differences in opponent strength. One thing that does strike me, though, is that with virtually identical average opponents' offensive rankings, the Chargers' defense is ranked significantly lower than the Steelers'. This may suggest that San Diego's defense is more susceptible than we first think. However, on the other hand, the Steelers' opponents have an overall lower average ranking in defensive points allowed than defensive yards. Yet, the Steelers offense is ranked drastically lower in points scored than yards gained. This suggests that the Steelers' offense is going to continue to really struggle to score points, even if they move the ball effectively.

This data does not really give a clear favorite in this game. Both teams are averaging within about 3 points when looking at their own points scored and points allowed. I would expect that playing at home will be an advantage for Pittsburgh, particularly since it is such a long trip for San Diego. And, being a night game, it will be colder than it would if the game were at 1pm or 4 pm. I guess I would lean toward the Steelers winning based on home field, if nothing else.

This FanPost was written by a member of the Bolts From The Blue community and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Bolts From The Blue editors or SB Nation.

2 recs | Comment 22 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Nice post

But I think the string ends here.

If the thunder don't get ya then the lightning will!!

Robert Hunter

by Buck Melanoma on Oct 2, 2009 6:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Rec'd

if only because it’s very similar to the game preview that’s going up later today. It’s important to note that the Steelers are still 1-0 at home and 9-2 at home since the start of the 2008 season.

I think, so far this season, that the Chargers remind me a lot of the 2008 Arizona Cardinals. While that team came close to defeating the Steelers in the SB, they did so on a neutral field.

"I did not invent the wheel, I was the crooked spoke adjacent." - Aesop Rock

by John (obviousman) on Oct 2, 2009 8:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Is WolfPack the Steel Curtain's equivalent to our Richard?

Chance favors the prepared mind.......

by Gorditoe1 on Oct 2, 2009 8:58 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I doubt it

These are not very advanced numbers.

I get the feeling that the average football fan is either confused, intimidated or scared of numbers in spreadsheets. So, in that regard, he is acting like Richard.

However, these numbers provide no analysis whatsoever and are just a bunch of data points strung together.

Wisdom can not be cultivated through ignorance of information.

by Wonko on Oct 2, 2009 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not that there is anything wrong with that

Stringing data points together can be fun and it leaves it up to the user to analyze what the numbers could mean.

Wisdom can not be cultivated through ignorance of information.

by Wonko on Oct 2, 2009 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not too sophisticated

You’re right, there isn’t a ton of sophisticated analysis here. This isn’t Football Outsiders type stuff, where I might assign an adjustment to every yard on a situational basis. But, part of the reason why is that, while I can appreciate their work, when I see how the players are ranked, I can’t see and quickly comprehend the process that they followed in arriving at those numbers. As you say, I think a simpler approach makes it easier to follow, and it just gives a little more area for discussion and debate.

For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Oct 2, 2009 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's not that you're missing that level of sophistication

It;s just that some of the numbers here are presented without context. It doesn’t do much good to know passing yards without passing attempts. Same goes with rushing yards and rushing attempts. And since 50% of fumbles are recovered by the fumbling team, it’s better to show fumbles and forced fumbles instead of fumbles lost and fumbles recovered. And you probably have to use some pretty fancy convincing to make me understand what the importance of comparing two teams passing and rushing touchdowns is. And then comparing the rankings in pts and yards is a very misleading comparison since it eliminates all context.

Basically, I simply don’t understand how to process these numbers since they are all taken out of context. I guess that’s why I put so much stock in Football Outsiders, because you want to know who plays better football and not who can accumulate statistics. That is the goal of looking at the numbers, right?

Wisdom can not be cultivated through ignorance of information.

by Wonko on Oct 2, 2009 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Context

I don’t know how you can say that taking raw numbers themselves removes the context. I’m simply looking at what each team has done so far. And, honestly, I don’t see how comparing rankings in points and yards is misleading. Again, it’s simply a reflection of how the teams have performed against the teams that they’ve played so far. The context comes in by looking at the average ranks of opposing teams, because that gives an idea of the level of competition each team has faced.

When you say context, are you saying that determining whether an 8 yard gain is on a 1st and 10 or a 3rd and 13 is the only method of determining context that’s valid? I certainly think it has its place, but I don’t think that it completely invalidates a more big picture view of the numbers, which is what I was trying to show. Football Outsiders does a great job of looking at each play in a very detailed way that provides insight into players’ and teams’ performances. But, I don’t think that it’s the be all end all of providing context.

And, I think you may be reading too much into the inclusion of passing TDs and rushing TDs. Again, it simply shows how many of each the respective teams have scored. If one of the teams averages twice as many rushing TDs per game as the other, wouldn’t it seem significant, especially if they each average about the same number of passing TDs? I mean, that would tell me that the team that averages twice as many is probably very good at imposing their will on other teams in the redzone.

Your criticism about not including the number of passing attempts is valid. If a team has 300 yards passing on 20 attempts, that’s much more efficient than if it was on 40 attempts. But, I think the main concern in fumbles is whether they were lost or not. Sure, anytime a team has a fumble, the coach won’t be happy, but if his team recovers, he considers that having dodged a bullet. I don’t really see how whether it was a forced fumble or the player just lost makes it any better or worse for the team. A turnover is a turnover. Yes, you can say that some teams are better at forcing fumbles than others.

Sure, you want to know who plays better football. I still think that these statistics can give you an idea of that. If a team offense is highly ranked in yards gained but not points scored, they probably have trouble finishing drives, but at least you know their is more a potential than a team that is very low in both. If a team defense is highly ranked in yards allowed, but not points, that probably means that their offense turns it over too much. I’m just saying that these stats are not completely devoid of context or meaning.

For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Oct 3, 2009 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Context

It’s pretty easy to understand what I mean when I say things are missing context. Look at the first numbers presented. Points per game. Who were the teams playing? Were they playing against good defenses or bad defenses? Were those points scored by the offense or defense? Did the defense take advantage of a bad offense to get points? Were the points scored when there was a big lead already? Every number has a context and these ones are just very raw. It’s like trying to read tea leaves, you end up seeing stuff that’s not there.

It sounds like you understand the flaw in removing the context of passing/rushing attempts. That’s good.

Your response to the rushing/passing TDs sounds like you’re reaching for an answer there, which is exactly my point. There’s not much of a conclusion to draw from those.

It still seems like you don’t understand that there is no skill is recovering fumbles. Its a random event. The coach may “enjoy” the result, but the process by which the fumble occurred is the thing that truly matters. The coach is enjoying how good his luck is and there’s nothing wrong with that. But, it doesn’t make his team any more or less capable because they recovered the football just as it would make me more skilled than someone else at calling heads/tails on a coin flip just because I got it right.

Wisdom can not be cultivated through ignorance of information.

by Wonko on Oct 3, 2009 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here's my point

My goal in this piece was to just take a look at the raw numbers (yes, I guess more raw than you like) of each team on a per game basis. I don’t see how comparing each team’s rankings in yards and points removes context. Yes, I’m looking at it from an entire game basis, rather than digging into the details of each game played itself. But, I intended it that way.

But, I still think that looking at the average rankings of opposing teams’ offenses and defenses gives a measure of context because it tells you whether these per game numbers were put up against higher quality or lesser quality opponents. Of course, that is not the kind of detailed context that you’re talking about here, but I still believe that it give context, at a high level.

As far as including some statistics that may have less meaning, I figured that some people (not you apparently) would still like to see them, whether I analyzed them in depth or not.

For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Oct 3, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not get offensive

The only reason I said anything was because of the Einstein picture. I don’t think even you think you discovered anything here. Just perusing the facts.

Wisdom can not be cultivated through ignorance of information.

by Wonko on Oct 3, 2009 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmm

That title was supposed to be Don’t Get Offended, not sure how it turned out how it did.

Wisdom can not be cultivated through ignorance of information.

by Wonko on Oct 3, 2009 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tumor

That or swine flu

A kid who has a unicorn ranch in his room cannot call other people weird. Yes, we know about "Rancho Unicorno."

by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Oct 3, 2009 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The commenting system sometimes flares up when it sees contractions.

"I did not invent the wheel, I was the crooked spoke adjacent." - Aesop Rock

by John (obviousman) on Oct 3, 2009 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh ok

Then I pretty much agree. Perusing facts, with a little analysis, was my intent all along.

For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Oct 4, 2009 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Richard would have done advanced calculus to find certain advantages

Formerly, thats a no-go.

I apologize for my ignorant and blatant lack of refinement in terms of my cursage. I did not know much of this Tuel feller so I accidentally used another innocent mans picture. Believe me, IT WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN!

by CaDuck on Oct 2, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ha. The numbers I present are simple ones. They’re just presented in the context of the down and distance.

Bolts from the Blue // "Game over." - Jamal Williams
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken

by Richard Wade on Oct 4, 2009 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice analysis.

One thing I might suggest on the Chargers Points Allowed. I think we gave up a few later touchdowns during trash time. I think that maybe overstating PA.

See this statistical anomaly all goes back to our team’s penchant for not being able to hold a lead. As a Charger fan – I consider the game tied if my team does not have a lead of 13 points or more at the 2 minute warning.

I hate it but its true, our Defense routinely folds up like a cheap suit when we have the lead late in the game. And we fold in so many ways: they go into the prevent; they’ll send 3 D Linemen to create pressure; The Safeties will stand around and point at the open Receivers behind them….

Funny thing is they do none of that silly stuff if they are behind at the end of the game. So watch out. If the Steelers have a slim advantage at the end of this game IT IS ON!

by Trendsearcher on Oct 2, 2009 9:28 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Yeah

That’s one thing that never seemed to happen in 2006 for some reason.

"I did not invent the wheel, I was the crooked spoke adjacent." - Aesop Rock

by John (obviousman) on Oct 2, 2009 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know how you feel

The Steelers have seemed to have been the same way this year. They won the game that they trailed most of the game and lost the two that they had late leads.

For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Oct 2, 2009 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We don't even necessarily lose...

… it’s not EVERY TIME: they held down the Pats and Raiders for a spanking last year… but very frequently, these Chargers will just eat a team’s lunch in the first 2 or 3 quarters, then let them back into the game. Often enough, they hold on to win anyway (Indy 2007, last year vs. Chiefs in SD), or even just mutilate them after they’ve had their comeback (the Jets, Bucs, Broncos last year), but it’s like the team is allergic to maintaining a lead. It makes for good TV, at least.

by Neoplatonist Bolthead on Oct 3, 2009 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sometimes I've wondered about that

It seems very common these days for teams to lose a lead. At least, it has been much more common in the last few years than it was when I started watching the NFL in the 80’s. Back then, if you down by more than 10 in the 4th quarter, it was over, unless Elway, Montana, or Marino were your QB.

I know that the NFL has made many rules changes aimed at increasing offensive output, particularly in the passing game. So, if I had to guess as to reason, that’s probably it.

For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Oct 3, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs