Here are the full efficiency rankings for week 9. Click on the table headers to sort.
| RANK | TEAM | LAST WK | GWP | Opp GWP | O RANK | D RANK |
| 1 | 1 | 0.75 | 0.51 | 1 | 2 | |
| 2 | 2 | 0.69 | 0.51 | 3 | 4 | |
| 3 | 3 | 0.67 | 0.50 | 6 | 3 | |
| 4 | 4 | 0.62 | 0.54 | 4 | 20 | |
| 5 | 13 | 0.60 | 0.51 | 13 | 14 | |
| 6 | 12 | 0.60 | 0.53 | 9 | 11 | |
| 7 | 6 | 0.58 | 0.55 | 19 | 6 | |
| 8 | 8 | 0.57 | 0.55 | 15 | 9 | |
| 9 | 7 | 0.56 | 0.50 | 17 | 15 | |
| 10 | 11 | 0.54 | 0.52 | 7 | 19 | |
| 11 | 5 | 0.53 | 0.50 | 12 | 13 | |
| 12 | 16 | 0.53 | 0.51 | 16 | 8 | |
| 13 | 17 | 0.53 | 0.50 | 2 | 27 | |
| 14 | 9 | 0.52 | 0.49 | 27 | 1 | |
| 15 | 14 | 0.51 | 0.50 | 5 | 23 | |
| 16 | 15 | 0.51 | 0.51 | 22 | 12 | |
| 17 | 10 | 0.50 | 0.53 | 14 | 18 | |
| 18 | 21 | 0.50 | 0.49 | 21 | 21 | |
| 19 | 18 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 8 | 26 | |
| 20 | 19 | 0.48 | 0.54 | 25 | 10 | |
| 21 | 20 | 0.48 | 0.46 | 26 | 7 | |
| 22 | 22 | 0.46 | 0.49 | 11 | 22 | |
| 23 | 23 | 0.46 | 0.46 | 10 | 25 | |
| 24 | 24 | 0.43 | 0.53 | 31 | 5 | |
| 25 | 26 | 0.42 | 0.46 | 29 | 17 | |
| 26 | 25 | 0.41 | 0.46 | 28 | 16 | |
| 27 | 28 | 0.39 | 0.46 | 24 | 28 | |
| 28 | 27 | 0.38 | 0.44 | 18 | 31 | |
| 29 | 29 | 0.37 | 0.49 | 23 | 30 | |
| 30 | 30 | 0.33 | 0.51 | 20 | 32 | |
| 31 | 31 | 0.30 | 0.50 | 30 | 24 | |
| 32 | 32 | 0.28 | 0.45 | 32 | 29 |
| TEAM | OPASS | ORUNSR% | OINT% | OFUM% | DPASS | DRUNSR% | DINT% | PENRATE |
| ARI | 4.8 | 35 | 2.3 | 1.2 | 5.6 | 59 | 3.2 | 0.47 |
| ATL | 6.8 | 35 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 6.2 | 52 | 4.4 | 0.22 |
| BAL | 6.4 | 45 | 2.4 | 0.6 | 6.8 | 55 | 2.8 | 0.53 |
| BUF | 6.1 | 46 | 4.6 | 2.1 | 6.7 | 49 | 2.5 | 0.35 |
| CAR | 7.0 | 40 | 3.7 | 2.1 | 6.2 | 61 | 2.5 | 0.35 |
| CHI | 5.7 | 37 | 3.7 | 0.8 | 5.4 | 60 | 5.6 | 0.39 |
| CIN | 6.9 | 40 | 4.1 | 1.4 | 6.5 | 52 | 1.3 | 0.38 |
| CLE | 5.9 | 38 | 3.3 | 0.8 | 6.3 | 55 | 3.2 | 0.47 |
| DAL | 6.8 | 40 | 4.4 | 1.6 | 6.3 | 61 | 1.5 | 0.44 |
| DEN | 7.6 | 46 | 1.6 | 2.6 | 5.5 | 59 | 2.8 | 0.41 |
| DET | 6.4 | 42 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 5.9 | 59 | 1.3 | 0.53 |
| GB | 6.2 | 40 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 5.8 | 56 | 3.0 | 0.48 |
| HOU | 6.9 | 42 | 2.2 | 0.3 | 5.2 | 57 | 3.6 | 0.39 |
| IND | 6.1 | 45 | 2.8 | 1.4 | 6.6 | 56 | 0.9 | 0.43 |
| JAC | 4.6 | 38 | 1.3 | 2.0 | 6.6 | 56 | 1.5 | 0.46 |
| KC | 5.6 | 43 | 5.2 | 3.1 | 7.7 | 59 | 2.6 | 0.37 |
| MIA | 6.3 | 39 | 2.7 | 1.9 | 6.0 | 64 | 2.6 | 0.30 |
| MIN | 5.9 | 40 | 2.7 | 1.7 | 5.6 | 59 | 1.3 | 0.39 |
| NE | 6.9 | 49 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 7.3 | 57 | 3.1 | 0.35 |
| NO | 6.7 | 34 | 2.5 | 0.3 | 8.3 | 56 | 1.2 | 0.43 |
| NYG | 7.4 | 40 | 2.7 | 0.7 | 7.2 | 53 | 5.7 | 0.30 |
| NYJ | 5.6 | 39 | 2.9 | 1.5 | 6.1 | 54 | 2.7 | 0.45 |
| OAK | 6.6 | 32 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 6.5 | 64 | 2.0 | 0.37 |
| PHI | 6.0 | 46 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 6.1 | 61 | 2.7 | 0.46 |
| PIT | 6.7 | 35 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 5.4 | 47 | 1.3 | 0.54 |
| SD | 5.8 | 40 | 3.7 | 1.6 | 6.3 | 63 | 2.7 | 0.39 |
| SF | 6.6 | 53 | 2.3 | 1.0 | 5.2 | 63 | 2.2 | 0.48 |
| SEA | 6.1 | 43 | 3.8 | 1.3 | 5.6 | 59 | 2.3 | 0.44 |
| STL | 6.1 | 43 | 3.2 | 0.8 | 6.2 | 57 | 2.8 | 0.49 |
| TB | 7.4 | 40 | 2.2 | 0.6 | 7.8 | 62 | 3.7 | 0.43 |
| TEN | 6.1 | 39 | 2.0 | 1.4 | 7.4 | 54 | 2.0 | 0.39 |
| WAS | 7.1 | 49 | 2.1 | 1.0 | 7.3 | 58 | 3.0 | 0.54 |
| Avg | 6.4 | 41 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 6.4 | 57 | 2.6 | 0.42 |
It's interesting how balanced 1-3 are on offense & defense; in recent years, almost all of the major contenders have favored one side of the ball.
ReplyDeleteTampa was 21 last week.
ReplyDeleteWe should test the prediction model with Pass Success Rate. I can't remember the exact values, but Pass SR was almost as predictive as Yards/Attempt. Could the prediction model be more effective with both SR & YPA? Carolina is 5th in pass yards per attempt but 23th in SR. Is there a statistical tool to calculate the coefficients so we do not double count?
ReplyDeleteSampo, you need an interdependence test, and as you said YPA and Pass SR will be very interdependent.
ReplyDeleteDenver at #1? They seem to have beaten a lot of medicore to bad teams this year (Saints defense is terrible, Pittsburgh is very iffy, Raiders are awful, Chargers as well). The two tough tests they had - Atlanta/Houston, both loses. Not to mention New England who aren't firing on all cylinders but still beat them.
ReplyDeleteThe Carolina thing continues to be a glaring embarrassment to this model that I think you need to look at to tweak it in the offseason. I've seen every snap of every game they've played, and they haven't just gotten unlucky. Maybe they should be 3-4 instead of 1-6, but they are very mediocre.
ReplyDeleteWhich means if you wiped the slate clean and started a nine game season right now, they would not make the NFC playoffs, although if you moved them to the AFC they might be able to pull a wild card there.
@ Alan
ReplyDeleteThe model is not designed to explain the past, but predict the future. I think the Carolina numbers are great because it shows evidence of the fallibility of statistical analysis in the NFL. If Carolina played 160 games this season, we should expect to see a win/loss record that better reflects their ranking.
Regarding the anonymous comment about Denver:
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't say they're the best team in the league literally, either, but them ranking high in efficiency makes sense. What the cherry picking commenter above misses is the point about how pretty much all their losses could very well have had different outcomes if they hadn't turned the ball over. Now, TOs seem like something that should make a team less efficient, but the point is in other facets of the game they've been very efficient.
Oh, and about schedule? They had literally the toughest schedule in the NFL up through first 6 games. If you thought their schedule was easy how do you feel about all the other teams ranking below them?
@tmk: Read my comment again and you'll see I was talking about the future. I said even if they got to start fresh right now, unencumbered by the poor record they have already amassed, they are still not good enough to make the NFC playoffs.
ReplyDeleteI have a much simpler prediction model that I've been using, and I also have Denver ranked #1. It simply looks at the the score of each game of each team relative to the average PF and PA of their opponents. This gives a measure (in points) of how much each team's offense and defense over- or underperformed relative to their opponent's opponents.
ReplyDeleteBy this measure, Denver is #1. In fact, they outperformed their opponent's opponents in EVERY GAME they played this season (including their three losses). They are the only team in the NFL for which that is true. Even undefeated Atlanta underperformed the average team in their wins against Oakland and Carolina.