|
Title: "Unit Efficiency: Penn State game" In-depth; how the team played (by unit). Post by: Chechem on September 15, 2011, 05:44:13 AM Quote Scoring Defense | 47.7% Efficiency | Very Good Once again, the defense led the way from a statistical standpoint. On the day, the Penn State offense had 11 non-garbage-time possessions. Thanks to a solid day overall from the offense and kick coverage units (more on them below), none of the Nittany Lions' possessions began in Alabama territory, and their average starting field position on the 11 drives was their own 30 yard-line. Because of the weak starting field position and the relatively low number of possessions, the total expected value on the day for the Lions offense was only 20.41 points. Of the 11 possessions, only the opening drive (a 43-yard field goal attempt valued at 1.74 points) and the final drive (a touchdown valued at 8.00 points thanks to a successful 2-point conversion) resulted in scoring chances. In total, the Bama defense gave up only 9.74 points in scoring value to the Penn State offense, meaning they only allowed 47.7% of the expected scoring value given Penn State's number of possessions and starting field position on each possession. This is an excellent stat for any defense against almost any opponent from a BCS conference. http://www.rollbamaroll.com/2011/9/14/2424245/a-statistical-look-at-alabama-penn-state Title: Re: "Unit Efficiency: Penn State game" In-depth look how the team played (by unit). Post by: 2Stater on September 15, 2011, 05:45:40 AM Quote Scoring Defense | 47.7% Efficiency | Very Good Once again, the defense led the way from a statistical standpoint. On the day, the Penn State offense had 11 non-garbage-time possessions. Thanks to a solid day overall from the offense and kick coverage units (more on them below), none of the Nittany Lions' possessions began in Alabama territory, and their average starting field position on the 11 drives was their own 30 yard-line. Because of the weak starting field position and the relatively low number of possessions, the total expected value on the day for the Lions offense was only 20.41 points. Of the 11 possessions, only the opening drive (a 43-yard field goal attempt valued at 1.74 points) and the final drive (a touchdown valued at 8.00 points thanks to a successful 2-point conversion) resulted in scoring chances. In total, the Bama defense gave up only 9.74 points in scoring value to the Penn State offense, meaning they only allowed 47.7% of the expected scoring value given Penn State's number of possessions and starting field position on each possession. This is an excellent stat for any defense against almost any opponent from a BCS conference. http://www.rollbamaroll.com/2011/9/14/2424245/a-statistical-look-at-alabama-penn-state ??? Title: Re: "Unit Efficiency: Penn State game" In-depth look how the team played (by unit). Post by: bamaphil on September 15, 2011, 05:50:17 AM Quote Scoring Defense | 47.7% Efficiency | Very Good Once again, the defense led the way from a statistical standpoint. On the day, the Penn State offense had 11 non-garbage-time possessions. Thanks to a solid day overall from the offense and kick coverage units (more on them below), none of the Nittany Lions' possessions began in Alabama territory, and their average starting field position on the 11 drives was their own 30 yard-line. Because of the weak starting field position and the relatively low number of possessions, the total expected value on the day for the Lions offense was only 20.41 points. Of the 11 possessions, only the opening drive (a 43-yard field goal attempt valued at 1.74 points) and the final drive (a touchdown valued at 8.00 points thanks to a successful 2-point conversion) resulted in scoring chances. In total, the Bama defense gave up only 9.74 points in scoring value to the Penn State offense, meaning they only allowed 47.7% of the expected scoring value given Penn State's number of possessions and starting field position on each possession. This is an excellent stat for any defense against almost any opponent from a BCS conference. http://www.rollbamaroll.com/2011/9/14/2424245/a-statistical-look-at-alabama-penn-state I'm a moderately intelligent guy but I'm lost here. Title: Re: "Unit Efficiency: Penn State game" In-depth look how the team played (by unit). Post by: Chechem on September 15, 2011, 06:02:51 AM Quote Scoring Defense | 47.7% Efficiency | Very Good Once again, the defense led the way from a statistical standpoint. On the day, the Penn State offense had 11 non-garbage-time possessions. Thanks to a solid day overall from the offense and kick coverage units (more on them below), none of the Nittany Lions' possessions began in Alabama territory, and their average starting field position on the 11 drives was their own 30 yard-line. Because of the weak starting field position and the relatively low number of possessions, the total expected value on the day for the Lions offense was only 20.41 points. Of the 11 possessions, only the opening drive (a 43-yard field goal attempt valued at 1.74 points) and the final drive (a touchdown valued at 8.00 points thanks to a successful 2-point conversion) resulted in scoring chances. In total, the Bama defense gave up only 9.74 points in scoring value to the Penn State offense, meaning they only allowed 47.7% of the expected scoring value given Penn State's number of possessions and starting field position on each possession. This is an excellent stat for any defense against almost any opponent from a BCS conference. http://www.rollbamaroll.com/2011/9/14/2424245/a-statistical-look-at-alabama-penn-state I'm a moderately intelligent guy but I'm lost here. I like this. It scores the team units on their efficiency (production vs. potential) instead of just by production (in yards and tackles). Title: Re: "Unit Efficiency: Penn State game" In-depth; how the team played (by unit). Post by: BAMAWV on September 15, 2011, 03:10:05 PM Unit smunit! I'm smelling subjectivity all over the assignation of values. Someone trying to act real smart when they should be at work. Just sayin'...
Title: Re: "Unit Efficiency: Penn State game" In-depth; how the team played (by unit). Post by: Leroy on September 15, 2011, 03:41:54 PM Quote Scoring Defense | 47.7% Efficiency | Very Good Once again, the defense led the way from a statistical standpoint. On the day, the Penn State offense had 11 non-garbage-time possessions. Thanks to a solid day overall from the offense and kick coverage units (more on them below), none of the Nittany Lions' possessions began in Alabama territory, and their average starting field position on the 11 drives was their own 30 yard-line. Because of the weak starting field position and the relatively low number of possessions, the total expected value on the day for the Lions offense was only 20.41 points. Of the 11 possessions, only the opening drive (a 43-yard field goal attempt valued at 1.74 points) and the final drive (a touchdown valued at 8.00 points thanks to a successful 2-point conversion) resulted in scoring chances. In total, the Bama defense gave up only 9.74 points in scoring value to the Penn State offense, meaning they only allowed 47.7% of the expected scoring value given Penn State's number of possessions and starting field position on each possession. This is an excellent stat for any defense against almost any opponent from a BCS conference. http://www.rollbamaroll.com/2011/9/14/2424245/a-statistical-look-at-alabama-penn-state ??? I either drank too much or not enough before reading that excerpt...all I know is I gots such a bad case of the confused from reading it that I'm skeered to click on the link :o Title: Re: "Unit Efficiency: Penn State game" In-depth; how the team played (by unit). Post by: BAMAWV on September 15, 2011, 03:49:27 PM Quote Scoring Defense | 47.7% Efficiency | Very Good Once again, the defense led the way from a statistical standpoint. On the day, the Penn State offense had 11 non-garbage-time possessions. Thanks to a solid day overall from the offense and kick coverage units (more on them below), none of the Nittany Lions' possessions began in Alabama territory, and their average starting field position on the 11 drives was their own 30 yard-line. Because of the weak starting field position and the relatively low number of possessions, the total expected value on the day for the Lions offense was only 20.41 points. Of the 11 possessions, only the opening drive (a 43-yard field goal attempt valued at 1.74 points) and the final drive (a touchdown valued at 8.00 points thanks to a successful 2-point conversion) resulted in scoring chances. In total, the Bama defense gave up only 9.74 points in scoring value to the Penn State offense, meaning they only allowed 47.7% of the expected scoring value given Penn State's number of possessions and starting field position on each possession. This is an excellent stat for any defense against almost any opponent from a BCS conference. http://www.rollbamaroll.com/2011/9/14/2424245/a-statistical-look-at-alabama-penn-state ??? I either drank too much or not enough before reading that excerpt...all I know is I gots such a bad case of the confused from reading it that I'm skeered to click on the link :o Title: Re: "Unit Efficiency: Penn State game" In-depth; how the team played (by unit). Post by: sbo1971 on September 15, 2011, 06:06:09 PM His a stat that makes better sense; 27-11, nuff said.
|