Roundup 12/4/10

Quantifying the importance of the Jets-Patriots game. I suppose many of the same insights could apply to the Steelers-Ravens game.

Is John Elway really the comeback king?

The Patriots are a second-half team this year. Last year they were a first-half team. I wonder if it's just a 'splits happen' phenomenon or something more?

Peyton Hillis and one of the most lopsided trades in recent memory.

Weekly playoff projections from

Which is the better team, the one that's 7-4 or the one that's 4-7? Or is it a team that's 2-9?

Checking in on the progress of Sanchez, Freeman and Bradford.

There are three 9-2 teams right now. What are their prospects for a championship?

Is a return to play-calling balance responsible for the righting of the Bears offensive ship?

An update to the break down of 'lucky plays' at the Community Site.

Ranking teams by their performance against the same opponent. Confusing at first, but interesting.

QB hurries by player. It would be interesting to add the hurry data into the WPA or EPA models and figure out what a hurry is worth. I do have QB hit data, so I can quantify that.

This article is wrong, wrong, wrong. Comparing a 2010 team to long-gone days of leather-helmeted playing-both-ways gridiron football is misguided. A team with a weak defense and even weaker running game, but with possibly the greatest QB to ever live, who plays in an age of the pass...should run more? Sure, a team with a 3 YPC running average can win a Super Bowl, as long as the rest of the league is even more anemic. The bottom line is that the 2010 Colts have been playing catch-up a lot and have not generated many large leads this year. That's why they have (wisely) relied on the pass.

The Packers and Chiefs may not be what they appear.

  • Spread The Love
  • Digg This Post
  • Tweet This Post
  • Stumble This Post
  • Submit This Post To Delicious
  • Submit This Post To Reddit
  • Submit This Post To Mixx

7 Responses to “Roundup 12/4/10”

  1. Kiran says:

    Brian - where can I find game win probabilities for this week's games?

  2. Randy says:

    Isn't pretty much everything CHFF posts "wrong, wrong, wrong."

  3. Neil says:

    The link for the "what are their prospects for a championship" article points to the Bradford/Sanchez/Freeman article on p-f-r.

  4. Brian Burke says:

    Thanks, Neil. Fixed.

  5. Brian Burke says:

    Kiran--Sorry-they're at the NYT just like always. Forgot to put up links to them this week.

  6. Jim Glass says:

    Isn't pretty much everything CHFF posts "wrong, wrong, wrong."

    Yeah, but they were particularly proud of ingorance here. Apart for having an "orgasm" over discovering that passing and scoring existed in the days of Don Hutson and Bob Waterfield, one just can't compare rushing rates in 1970 to later years without mentioning the rule changes of 1978 that so opened the passing game. In 1977 the run pass ratio was 60-40, it immediately went to 50-50, and after coaches got a chance to reinvent short passing to take advantage of the new rules it went to today's 45-55. IOW, *of course* the '70 Colts ran a whole lot more than today's. The real reason why they went 11-2-1 wasn't because they ran so much, it was because they played one of the weakest schedules ever, their opponents were 6 points per game weaker than this year's version. Equalize that and the '70 Colts are an estimated 9-7, or today's are a probable 8-3.

  7. Alex says:

    The article linked in "Ranking teams by their performance against the same opponent. Confusing at first, but interesting" is certainly confusing. I'd say almost indecipherable. Brian, could you explain it briefly? I have a feeling you'd do a better job than the author of that article. Thanks!

Leave a Reply

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.