Stats abour our play patterns

John63 · Jan 11, 2019

https://mobile.twitter.com/minakimes/status/1083855608586002433/photo/1

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/you-called-a-run-on-first-down-youre-already-screwed/

XxXdragonXxX · Jan 11, 2019

I was just going to post that fivethirtyeight article. Run run pass was among our least succesful play sequences, but yet it was our most used play sequence. The 2 combinations involving passing on 1st down and running on 3rd down were by far the most succesful...and also the 2 least used combinations.

Scorpion05 · Jan 11, 2019

Don’t worry, this is the part where John Clayton and others jump in to deny the obvious. This offense is capable of dominating the league with some self awareness by Schotty/Pete and a few tweaks

KARAVARUS · Jan 11, 2019

If you’re still of the opinion that Seattle didn’t need to make adjustments in the second half, it’s only because you can’t accept that the coaches are fallible or you’re trying to preserve something within that performance make yourself feel better. ‘We did what we did all year.’ No we didn’t. Go watch the KC game. That was a mightily coached affair. Russell Wilson is on fire this time of year and the overthrows and misses he struggled with early on were over. He has been money for the last month, when given the chance.

MontanaHawk05 · Jan 11, 2019

Whatever you guys say.

Can't call a first down run, so it MUST be a first down pass - well, that's predictable, too.

AgentDib · Jan 11, 2019

Not one of 538's better articles. Montana points out one of the flaws, which is that what is currently optimal depends on the opponent's expectations. A related error is when people argue that plays should be called more often based on their current high efficiency. Often times the efficiency is the result of a play being called rarely.

However, there is a much bigger flaw to this article in my opinion. Did you notice that running on third down in their analysis is slightly more effective than passing on third down? Why might that be the case? The reason is that if teams are running on third down it is much more likely to be a shorter distance (ie.. 3rd and 2), whereas when teams are passing on third down it's usually a much longer down and distance. This analysis could well have cause and effect completely backwards.

Field position, score differential, and down/distance should be critical pieces of any run/pass analysis. You can't just average in garbage time passing against prevent defenses with the pre-planned opening drive plays and call it a day. Similarly, a first and 10 on your 10 yard line with 2 minutes left in the half is very, very different from first and 10 on the opponent's 10 yard line with 8 minutes left.

erik2690 · Jan 11, 2019

MontanaHawk05":2da0guk3 said:
Whatever you guys say.

Can't call a first down run, so it MUST be a first down pass - well, that's predictable, too.

I mean kinda, it's about proportionality mainly though. And also by any metric I've ever seen an average pass is a more successful than an average run. As in like EPA per play, yards per attempt, all the sort of scoring probability stats. Obviously everything is fluid based on situation, but as an average I think that's the case. So yes you can't in reality do either at such a high frequency that it becomes too easy to cover.

John63 · Jan 12, 2019

erik2690":nfz3tfyf said:
MontanaHawk05":nfz3tfyf said:

Whatever you guys say.

Can't call a first down run, so it MUST be a first down pass - well, that's predictable, too.

Click to expand...

I mean kinda, it's about proportionality mainly though. And also by any metric I've ever seen an average pass is a more successful than an average run. As in like EPA per play, yards per attempt, all the sort of scoring probability stats. Obviously everything is fluid based on situation, but as an average I think that's the case. So yes you can't in reality do either at such a high frequency that it becomes too easy to cover.

No one is saying go pass first all the time, but there needs to be a better balance between starting with a pass and starting with a run, That stats clearly show this.

Uncle Si · Jan 12, 2019

John63":2fi3tc3q said:
erik2690":2fi3tc3q said:

MontanaHawk05":2fi3tc3q said:

Whatever you guys say.

Can't call a first down run, so it MUST be a first down pass - well, that's predictable, too.

Click to expand...

I mean kinda, it's about proportionality mainly though. And also by any metric I've ever seen an average pass is a more successful than an average run. As in like EPA per play, yards per attempt, all the sort of scoring probability stats. Obviously everything is fluid based on situation, but as an average I think that's the case. So yes you can't in reality do either at such a high frequency that it becomes too easy to cover.

Click to expand...

No one is saying go pass first all the time, but there needs to be a better balance between starting with a pass and starting with a run, That stats clearly show this.

the stat that matters is the overall efficiency of the offense, not extrapolated sequences.

yes there certainly needs to be more balance. I doubt anyone is arguing that. This article ignores, however, how the success of one sequence is more than naught built by the other sequence. Go "run-run" enough times for grinding yards and the defense will adjust to that expectation, opening up other options.

Ideally, the OC with an offseason and a year of experience with this group can use the strength of the run to more effect, especially earlier in games.

MD5eahawks · Jan 12, 2019

While I think the 538 article was an interesting read, I don’t necessarily feel it’s weight is as heavy as others feel. Pete has been successful with his system and that success has come even with the opponent knowing what was coming. He’s always said we’re gonna do what we do. The way those stats are talked about in the article is almost the same as saying 88% of all books are bought at a bookstore.

I don’t get the over analyzing of that loss. Pete himself has said he should have thrown more. I have seen thread after thread in here arguing about the same crap over that game and it all boiled down to that. That’s it. The only thing left to do now is to wait until next season and see if they learned anything.

Don’t get me wrong. I agree it gets tiresome watching RRP but I’m not quite tired of winning 10 games a year.

Scorpion05 · Jan 12, 2019

Watching this Dallas-Rams game is just further boiling my frustration that we could have definitely beaten the Cowboys with more passing. The Cowboys defense knew we'd be ridiculously stubborn, whereas the Rams have them on their heels guessing whether the pass or run is coming up next. Cowboys are getting killed with play action.

Just unbelievable. We should be playing out there today. We didn't get beat just because we weren't capable, it was all coaching

HawkGA · Jan 12, 2019

AgentDib":akq6w979 said:
Not one of 538's better articles. Montana points out one of the flaws, which is that what is currently optimal depends on the opponent's expectations. A related error is when people argue that plays should be called more often based on their current high efficiency. Often times the efficiency is the result of a play being called rarely.

However, there is a much bigger flaw to this article in my opinion. Did you notice that running on third down in their analysis is slightly more effective than passing on third down? Why might that be the case? The reason is that if teams are running on third down it is much more likely to be a shorter distance (ie.. 3rd and 2), whereas when teams are passing on third down it's usually a much longer down and distance. This analysis could well have cause and effect completely backwards.

Field position, score differential, and down/distance should be critical pieces of any run/pass analysis. You can't just average in garbage time passing against prevent defenses with the pre-planned opening drive plays and call it a day. Similarly, a first and 10 on your 10 yard line with 2 minutes left in the half is very, very different from first and 10 on the opponent's 10 yard line with 8 minutes left.

Pretty much this. 538 should be better than this. Sadly, it looks like they're not.

I've always hated the simplistic analysis like "when a team runs X number of times, they win Y percent of the time." Well no crap. A team that is in the lead is likely to be running it at the end of the game to burn clock and will rack up rushing attempts and yards. Causality is all backwards.

Scorpion05 · Jan 12, 2019

AgentDib":399oug24 said:
Not one of 538's better articles. Montana points out one of the flaws, which is that what is currently optimal depends on the opponent's expectations. A related error is when people argue that plays should be called more often based on their current high efficiency. Often times the efficiency is the result of a play being called rarely.

However, there is a much bigger flaw to this article in my opinion. Did you notice that running on third down in their analysis is slightly more effective than passing on third down? Why might that be the case? The reason is that if teams are running on third down it is much more likely to be a shorter distance (ie.. 3rd and 2), whereas when teams are passing on third down it's usually a much longer down and distance. This analysis could well have cause and effect completely backwards.

Field position, score differential, and down/distance should be critical pieces of any run/pass analysis. You can't just average in garbage time passing against prevent defenses with the pre-planned opening drive plays and call it a day. Similarly, a first and 10 on your 10 yard line with 2 minutes left in the half is very, very different from first and 10 on the opponent's 10 yard line with 8 minutes left.

Of course situational factors matter, and can expose the flaw in statistics. But we have a clear pattern that speaks more to our lack of diversity in playcalling, in comparison to other teams. The bottom line is that our play calling pattern sticks out like a sore thumb, and other teams are not as predictable. I don't really see how your point negates what the article is highlighting. Which isn't unique situational play-calls, but rather poor patterns that obviously cost us the game

justafan · Jan 13, 2019

Those stats really arent proving much to me. Our pass run ratio on 1st down wasnt that far off.

As far as the Rams proving we didnt pass enough I dont get. They trashed the Cowboys by running down their throats all night. All I take away from that is we need to build our Oline into a unit that is stronger and smarter to take the team to the next level.

John63 · Jan 13, 2019

Guys this is not the only article that has said this, most experts have, and our own HC and OC said it stop trying to ignore it. We waited to long to adjust period deal with it.

chris98251 · Jan 13, 2019

John63":pwa58qo9 said:
Guys this is not the only article that has said this, most MEDIOTS have, and our own HC and OC said it stop trying to ignore it. We waited to long to adjust period deal with it.

There fixed it for you, maybe it's because your pretty new but history has shown the Mediots are almost clueless about what makes this team work. Remember these same Mediots were the ones picking us to be 4 - 12 or 6 - 10 almost across the board. Most here seem to jump on their coat tails like yourself and think of it as gospel. Then there are those that use their own eyes, look at the roster and what Pete and John have done and continue to do and make their assessments based on what THEY see not what someone tells them.

The people that I respect more then most of them and their opinions are right here, members that are tuned in and see the day to day struggles and successes of this team and what players and coaches do day in and day out.

They typically are a minority becasue again they form an opinion based on what the see and know about the game or have expeierinced playing and coaching the game. They get shouted down by those claiming the Mediots are right, by advanced stats and all. But thats not the whole game.

Just like Billy Beane in Oakland and Money Ball, used it to evaluate players to a degree but damn I am trying to remember the last time the A 's won a world series...

Heart. desire, and willingness to sacrifice is something not on a stat sheet. It's also something the players Pete bring's in have in a large amount.

John63 · Jan 13, 2019

chris98251":1gi5x6z1 said:
John63":1gi5x6z1 said:

Guys this is not the only article that has said this, most MEDIOTS have, and our own HC and OC said it stop trying to ignore it. We waited to long to adjust period deal with it.

Click to expand...

There fixed it for you, maybe it's because your pretty new but history has shown the Mediots are almost clueless about what makes this team work. Remember these same Mediots were the ones picking us to be 4 - 12 or 6 - 10 almost across the board. Most here seem to jump on their coat tails like yourself and think of it as gospel. Then there are those that use their own eyes, look at the roster and what Pete and John have done and continue to do and make their assessments based on what THEY see not what someone tells them.

The people that I respect more then most of them and their opinions are right here, members that are tuned in and see the day to day struggles and successes of this team and what players and coaches do day in and day out.

They typically are a minority becasue again they form an opinion based on what the see and know about the game or have expeierinced playing and coaching the game. They get shouted down by those claiming the Mediots are right, by advanced stats and all. But thats not the whole game.

Just like Billy Beane in Oakland and Money Ball, used it to evaluate players to a degree but damn I am trying to remember the last time the A 's won a world series...

Heart. desire, and willingness to sacrifice is something not on a stat sheet. It's also something the players Pete bring's in have in a large amount.

Again Peta and Schotty said it, so that's it, you can try as you like to ignore it, but when your head coach, OC, and your QB all say the same thing that means that is what it is.

chris98251 · Jan 13, 2019

John63":3n6qu0kf said:
chris98251":3n6qu0kf said:

John63":3n6qu0kf said:

Guys this is not the only article that has said this, most MEDIOTS have, and our own HC and OC said it stop trying to ignore it. We waited to long to adjust period deal with it.

Click to expand...

There fixed it for you, maybe it's because your pretty new but history has shown the Mediots are almost clueless about what makes this team work. Remember these same Mediots were the ones picking us to be 4 - 12 or 6 - 10 almost across the board. Most here seem to jump on their coat tails like yourself and think of it as gospel. Then there are those that use their own eyes, look at the roster and what Pete and John have done and continue to do and make their assessments based on what THEY see not what someone tells them.

The people that I respect more then most of them and their opinions are right here, members that are tuned in and see the day to day struggles and successes of this team and what players and coaches do day in and day out.

They typically are a minority becasue again they form an opinion based on what the see and know about the game or have expeierinced playing and coaching the game. They get shouted down by those claiming the Mediots are right, by advanced stats and all. But thats not the whole game.

Just like Billy Beane in Oakland and Money Ball, used it to evaluate players to a degree but damn I am trying to remember the last time the A 's won a world series...

Heart. desire, and willingness to sacrifice is something not on a stat sheet. It's also something the players Pete bring's in have in a large amount.

Click to expand...

Again Peta and Schotty said it, so that's it, you can try as you like to ignore it, but when your head coach, OC, and your QB all say the samethign that means that is what it is.

How often do you buy Coach speak, they should have said neither Fluker or Sweezy should have been out there normally, no scheme can compensate for guys that can't play at the level needed.

Thats not their style however.

If they said they had beach front property in Death Valley for sale for pennies on the dollar you would say count me in as well I suppose. Because Pete and Schotty said so.

John63 · Jan 13, 2019

chris98251":17bgkp78 said:
John63":17bgkp78 said:

chris98251":17bgkp78 said:

John63":17bgkp78 said:

Guys this is not the only article that has said this, most MEDIOTS have, and our own HC and OC said it stop trying to ignore it. We waited to long to adjust period deal with it.

Click to expand...

There fixed it for you, maybe it's because your pretty new but history has shown the Mediots are almost clueless about what makes this team work. Remember these same Mediots were the ones picking us to be 4 - 12 or 6 - 10 almost across the board. Most here seem to jump on their coat tails like yourself and think of it as gospel. Then there are those that use their own eyes, look at the roster and what Pete and John have done and continue to do and make their assessments based on what THEY see not what someone tells them.

The people that I respect more then most of them and their opinions are right here, members that are tuned in and see the day to day struggles and successes of this team and what players and coaches do day in and day out.

They typically are a minority becasue again they form an opinion based on what the see and know about the game or have expeierinced playing and coaching the game. They get shouted down by those claiming the Mediots are right, by advanced stats and all. But thats not the whole game.

Just like Billy Beane in Oakland and Money Ball, used it to evaluate players to a degree but damn I am trying to remember the last time the A 's won a world series...

Heart. desire, and willingness to sacrifice is something not on a stat sheet. It's also something the players Pete bring's in have in a large amount.

Click to expand...

Again Peta and Schotty said it, so that's it, you can try as you like to ignore it, but when your head coach, OC, and your QB all say the samethign that means that is what it is.

Click to expand...

How often do you buy Coach speak, they should have said neither Fluker or Sweezy should have been out there normally, no scheme can compensate for guys that can't play at the level needed.

Thats not their style however.

If they said they had beach front property in Death Valley for sale for pennies on the dollar you would say count me in as well I suppose. Because Pete and Schotty said so.

Well you add in nearly every expert out there also I am sorry I know your opinion is the only that in your mind is right, but the facts, stats, experts, and HC, OC and QB all disagree. Since they know a lot more than you or I will go with them. Oh and by the way, no scheme and yet when they finally did adjust we moved the ball and had a chance HMm makes you stance moot.

AgentDib · Jan 13, 2019

I don't know what you're trying to debate here but you aren't participating in any sort of discussion. You posted an article with an assertion you obviously were backing, a bunch of people discussed why that article was not done particularly well, and your reply has nothing to do with the article or any points made, but rather that other people exist who agree with you.

Stats abour our play patterns

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

New member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads