Week Two DVOA Rankings: Chargers take a plummet

The Chargers production (DVOA) is not looking good after two weeks. Their projection (DAVE) is still hanging in there. There's also some hidden value here. DVOA hasn't being adjusted for opponents yet. When all is said and done I think the Baltimore and Oakland defenses will come out as above average squads and the Chargers offensive DVOA will get adjusted accordingly. Can't say the same for the defense though, maybe a little boost for the Ravens, but the Raiders offense will most likely stay below average. I can't complain too much, you don't usually expect to get a lot of respect after a loss (even from a computer).

about 1 month ago Wonko 5 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I don’t expect their defense to perform too well in the numbers game this year. Without Jamal, I’m thinking it may be a “bend but don’t break” defense similar to what we had last year.

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

by John (obviousman) on Sep 23, 2009 8:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Here's something interesting that was said about FO's stats on the UT board.

Talking about Rivers’ day: FO said it was the tenth best passing game of the day.

The second of our three aforementioned (over 350 yards passing) quarterbacks, Rivers’ whopping 436-yard day wasn’t as good as it looked. He had more big plays than Schaub, but while Schaub had 12 first downs on 40 attempts, Rivers had only 13 first downs on 47. Fewer first downs means more stalled drives. Schaub also threw four touchdowns to Rivers’ two, with the latter adding two sacks and a costly interception deep in his own territory. Finally, Rivers dropped back eight times in the red zone. The result: Two completions for 6 yards, five incompletions, a sack, and exactly zero “successful” plays. Blame Norv Turner if you want, but Rivers didn’t come through when needed.

OK, first, anyone with half an eye could see a total screw job on the interception. Pass interference all the way.

Second, I’m not sure how Rivers getting sacked was his fault.

Third, yes, back to blaming Turner – where are the fade routes in the red zone?

Fourth, I’m not sure an incomplete pass in the red zone is a bad thing. Is a quarterback responsible for getting his receivers open?

So again, while their stats are interesting, I once again state my case that Football Outsiders’ stats are a data point, not a burning bush.

Greg Maddux for manager.

by maestro876 on Sep 23, 2009 10:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The point being that FO is attempting to make football stats as meaningful as baseball stats

and it just can’t be done. They’re reading box scores without actually watching the game.

Greg Maddux for manager.

by maestro876 on Sep 23, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed, but FO is better than any other stat compilation out there

At least they’re trying.

But to your point, until somebody starts recording stats for every play (e.g. intentionally throwing the ball away vs. incomplete pass), the way it’s done in baseball, stat Nirvana won’t be reached.

by CoastalBronco on Sep 24, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Which is why I agree that it's a good data point to be considered

but it isn’t absolute truth. Football is too team-oriented to reduce everything to stats. For example, many of FO’s negatives (taking a sack, throwing an incomplete pass) could in the real world of the game be a positive—taking a sack instead of throwing it up for grabs, or throwing the ball away instead of taking a sack.

Greg Maddux for manager.

by maestro876 on Sep 24, 2009 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs