Toggle sidebar

Interesting stats on our defense this year from NOrthwestern fan...

1

121Josey

Redshirt
Oct 30, 2012
7,503
0
0
Great find! "This stat would suggest that Mississippi State's defense is quite poor." My eyeball test confirms this conclusion.
 
T

tenureplan

All-Conference
Dec 3, 2008
8,426
1,026
113
I thought you said it was interesting and I wanted to read it. I'll save everyone the time and paraphrase - MSU's defense did not cause very many negative plays. This came as a total surprise to me...
 
1

121Josey

Redshirt
Oct 30, 2012
7,503
0
0
It's even worse. That stat counts incomplete passes. We were the fifth worse defense at holding the line of scrimmage (#114?). 3 of 4 plays are going for positive yardage (opposed to 2 of 3 of the opponent's opponents). The chances are excellent that the opposing offense is going to stay on the field.

Plus, we were ranked #112 in comparison to the benchmark of opponents' opponents. It means that our offense saved our booties on many occasions.
 
M

MSUDawg4Life

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
235
0
0
I saw that yesterday. There's a gaping hole in that analysis, but they don't need to know what it is. I also knew some of our fans would agree with the analysis and try to use it to justify their feelings about the defense. Felt no need to encourage that conversation.

Ten days. We'll see how it plays out.
 
1

121Josey

Redshirt
Oct 30, 2012
7,503
0
0
Are they going to tell their coaches? Will you let us know after the Gator Bowl? Win or lose?

If you would have shot it down from the beginning we wouldn't be having this conversation.
 
M

MSUDawg4Life

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
235
0
0
121Josey said:
Are they going to tell their coaches? Will you let us know after the Gator Bowl? Win or lose?

If you would have shot it down from the beginning we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to be a smartass with me, boy?
 
M

Maroonthirteen

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
1,975
0
0
This game will come down to our Offense vs their defense for us to win. Our defense will give up points and yards. we know this. So, if Tyler is off and we drop passes, it will be similar to the Egg Bowl. We will need 40 points to win.
 
M

MSUDawg4Life

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
235
0
0
Like I said, we shall soon see if our defense is substantially worse than theirs. I won't need to answer. It will be displayed on the field during the game.
 
1

121Josey

Redshirt
Oct 30, 2012
7,503
0
0
But turnover margin is relative to your offense. I guess that turnovers count the same as a zero play in this model. I would look at average plays per drive. In reality a 3-n-out is better than a turnover if you're not taking into account offensive field position.
 
T

tenureplan

All-Conference
Dec 3, 2008
8,426
1,026
113
I wasn't arguing for turnover margin. That was just the "gaping hole" 4life was referring to.
 
1

121Josey

Redshirt
Oct 30, 2012
7,503
0
0
I understand. That's the only thing it could be statistically speaking. Otherwise, just the fact that we have superior talent to them and play in the SEC. (I hope that he wasn't trying to suggest that our defensive scheme isn't crappy.)

But I figured the boy just wanted a little credit for sitting on the find.
 
A

Arvydas Sabonis

Redshirt
Dec 15, 2012
13
0
0
Here's the flaw in the analysis, and, consequently, the problem with looking at statistics in a vacuum.

Mississippi State faced 31.5 passes, and 38.7 runs a game this season. (Being the SEC, a more traditional style is to be expected)

Northwestern faced 39.0 passes and 33.9 runs a game this season. So, statistically speaking, there was a 44.9% chance we faced a pass, while theres was a 53.5% chance. Given an average scale of ~60% passer completion, it can be assumed 40% of those passes end up as a no gain play, which would be encompassed in their analysis. So, 40% of the 8.6% difference is 3.44%. (I understand runs are also a factor in this equation, but the % for a 0 to negative carry is less than a pass, so there's a dilution no matter what.)

Plus, there's a flaw in his statistical analysis which adjusted for a teams "spike factor" based on relative opponents. If there's any weight to the theory that the Big Ten is overrated, than this is a terrible method to use. It supposes that if 2 team's opponents have the same spike percentage, where one team plays Big Ten opponents every week, and another team plays SEC opponents every week, than they are a comparable measurable. A high school team's opponents and college team's opponent's may both have an average of 30% spike, but that doesn't mean if you were to play both, your own spike performance against either should be weighted equally. It doesn't get rid of strength of schedule discrepancies, it merely dilutes them.

Lastly, MSU gave up 389.9 yards a game to an SEC schedule, while Northwestern gave up 385.3 yards a game to a Big Ten schedule. No matter how arbitrary that number may seem to advanced statistics, the fact of the matter is MSU had comparable basic numbers against a harder schedule. This, "AHA! We stopped you on a play" method is just a statistical argument to bolster one team and diminish another. The teams are extremely even on paper, and any analysis that STRONGLY favors another is simply a person that has a conclusion and is trying to find statistics to support it.

Sorry for the rant.
 
R

RocketDawg

All-Conference
Oct 21, 2011
18,943
2,065
113
I read the post a couple of days ago on their board (or at least the Cliff's Notes version), and I think he said that their strength of schedule was comparable to ours. I don't think that's even close to being correct.
 
P

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,384
25,595
113
The only ranked teams they faced were #16 Nebraska and #18 Michigan. They lost both in close games. On the other hand, they did play a decent non-conference schedule and their best win, Michigan St., is a lot better than our best win.
 
1

121Josey

Redshirt
Oct 30, 2012
7,503
0
0
Arvydas Sabonis said:
Here's the flaw in the analysis, and, consequently, the problem with looking at statistics in a vacuum. Mississippi State faced 31.5 passes, and 38.7 runs a game this season. (Being the SEC, a more traditional style is to be expected)
Northwestern faced 39.0 passes and 33.9 runs a game this season. So, statistically speaking, there was a 44.9% chance we faced a pass, while theres was a 53.5% chance. Given an average scale of ~60% passer completion, it can be assumed 40% of those passes end up as a no gain play, which would be encompassed in their analysis. So, 40% of the 8.6% difference is 3.44%. (I understand runs are also a factor in this equation, but the % for a 0 to negative carry is less than a pass, so there's a dilution no matter what.)
Click to expand...
A little vacuum cleaning is what this post needs.

A run would get you positive yards at a greater percentage (greater than ~60%). It helps your defense if they pass. Plus, the system is not designed to distinguish rush from pass. It's based on inefficient plays (gaining positive yards).

Arvydas Sabonis said:
Plus, there's a flaw in his statistical analysis which adjusted for a teams "spike factor" based on relative opponents. If there's any weight to the theory that the Big Ten is overrated, than this is a terrible method to use. It supposes that if 2 team's opponents have the same spike percentage, where one team plays Big Ten opponents every week, and another team plays SEC opponents every week, than they are a comparable measurable. A high school team's opponents and college team's opponent's may both have an average of 30% spike, but that doesn't mean if you were to play both, your own spike performance against either should be weighted equally. It doesn't get rid of strength of schedule discrepancies, it merely dilutes them.
Click to expand...

This is how MSU performed vs. the rest of MSU's opponents' opponents. That means...
On average, we played the Alabama offense worse than all UA opponents. We played TAMU worse than all the other opponents. TSUN, Troy, Tenn, Auburn, LSU, etc. NW played their opponents better than the other competition. We may play in the SEC, but we did not compete in the SEC (at least defensively).

Arvydas Sabonis said:
Lastly, MSU gave up 389.9 yards a game to an SEC schedule, while Northwestern gave up 385.3 yards a game to a Big Ten schedule. No matter how arbitrary that number may seem to advanced statistics, the fact of the matter is MSU had comparable basic numbers against a harder schedule. This, "AHA! We stopped you on a play" method is just a statistical argument to bolster one team and diminish another. The teams are extremely even on paper, and any analysis that STRONGLY favors another is simply a person that has a conclusion and is trying to find statistics to support it.
Click to expand...

SOS MSU 26 NWU 44 But they did beat Vandy.

We were one of the worse teams against the pass this season. We ranked #110 in opponents completion percentage (even worse our last three games!). If ~60% was average, they actually ranked below average.

Bonus: yards per pass attempt ranking: #70; Last 3 games #119
Yards per Pass Play (Season)
JSU 20-38 (53%) 4.1
AU 13/22 (59%) 5.7
TU 34-47 (72%) 7.4
USAL 22-43 (51%) 5.2
UK 15-27 (56%) 5.3 *Towles 5-6 11.8 before injury
UT 25-39 (64%) 7.9
MTSU 20-32 (63%) 5.2
UA 17-24 (71%) 9.8
TAMU 32-39 (82%) 8.5
LSU 19-30 (63%) 9.1
UPIG 24-30 (80%) 7.8
TSUN 15-22 (68%) 13.4


<tbody>
</tbody>
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.