Performance per Drive

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Performance per Drive

    In case anyone else finds this interesting, I've compiled our dynasty era statistics per drive, courtesy of Football Outsiders.  Rank in the league for each figure is indicated in parentheses.  Bold indicates when Pats were #1 in the league in the category that year.  Interesting how the offense and defense have changed over the years.

    Offense:

     

    Drives

    Yds/Dr

    Pts/Dr

    TDs/Dr

    2001

    178

    28.50 (9)

    1.82 (7)

    .202 (6)

    2002

    178

    28.10 (20)

    1.91 (16)

    .208 (17)

    2003

    191

    25.69 (20)

    1.57 (16)

    .168 (17)

    2004

    169

    33.96 (6)

    2.37 (5)

    .260 (5)

    2005

    180

    31.71 (6)

    2.04 (7)

    .244 (5)

    2006

    178

    30.79 (8)

    2.11 (5)

    .253 (5)

    2007

    158

    41.63 (1)

    3.37 (1)

    .424 (1)

    2008

    166

    35.67   (4)

    2.42   (3)

    .253   (5)

    2009

    174

    36.93   (1)

    2.34   (5)

    .270   (6)

    2010

    158

    36.11   (2)

    2.90   (1)

    .354   (1)

    2011

    43

    46.58   (1)

    3.12   (1)

    .395   (1)



    Defense:

     

    Drives

    Yds/Dr

    Pts/Dr

    TDs/Dr

    2001

    185

    29.36 (23)

    1.32 (6)

    .119 (3)

    2002

    183

    29.09 (19)

    1.86 (20)

    .219 (23)

    2003

    197

    23.75 (4)

    1.13 (1)

    .107 (1)

    2004

    172

    28.01 (15)

    1.36 (4)

    .157 (8)

    2005

    177

    29.92 (28)

    1.83 (22)

    .203 (22)

    2006

    178

    27.14 (13)

    1.20 (3)

    .118 (2)

    2007

    173

    26.43 (8)

    1.42 (3)

    .173 (12)

    2008

    167

    28.98 (15)

    1.77 (13)

    .210 (18)

    2009

    172

    29.60 (17)

    1.51   (7)

    .180 (13)

    2010

    175

    33.79 (30)

    1.73 (16)

    .200 (18)

    2011

    42

    45.95 (32)

    2.19 (28)

    .262 (29)



     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    This is a league wide phenomenon, scoring is at an all time high due to rule changes, Cam Newton is breaking all time rookie records because it's easier to.  I suggest you stop reading footballoutsiders.com, they're so outside they don't have a clue... 

    Also it's no revelation that we've been rebuilding this D since 2007.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    Good numbers. Good find. They pretty much drive a stake into the black heart of the notion that the O is the problem rather than the D.

    1, 1, 1 place for the O vs 32, 28, 29 place for the D vanquishes any claim that scoring being up this particular season is the reason for the abysmal defensive numbers. This is just a bad bad bad D at this point. Which of course the whole world knows except for a handful of kool-aide guzzlers that like to kid themselves.

    And to think some tried to sell the spin that the O wasn't getting results on drives often enough. You can't do better than be #1 - better than any other year than 2007.

    And scoring isn't up relatively speaking. In 2002, 2004, 2007, 2008 and 2010 NFL total scoring was 11,000 points or better. So far this year projects to 11,664, and that will likely come down a bit when the cold weathert hits. This is no dramatic difference from earlier this decade.

    Facts are the holy water in the face of a vampire named BS.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from startrightnow. Show startrightnow's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    In Response to Re: Performance per Drive:
    [QUOTE]Good numbers. Good find. They pretty much drive a stake into the black heart of the notion that the O is the problem rather than the D. 1, 1, 1 place for the O vs 32, 28, 29 place for the D vanquishes any claim that scoring being up this particular season is the reason for the abysmal defensive numbers. This is just a bad bad bad D at this point. Which of course the whole world knows except for a handful of kool-aide guzzlers that like to kid themselves. And to think some tried to sell the spin that the O wasn't getting results on drives often enough. You can't do better than be #1 - better than any other year than 2007. And scoring isn't up relatively speaking. In 2002, 2004, 2007, 2008 and 2010 NFL total scoring was 11,000 points or better. So far this year projects to 11,664, and that will likely come down a bit when the cold weathert hits. This is no dramatic difference from earlier this decade. Facts are the holy water in the face of a vampire named BS.
    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]

    That's the problem with homers. They have no real insight as to what's really going on. Stats matter , but only to an extent. You don't need stats to tell you what your eyes can see. Right now our defense hasn't been playing well. I'm hoping and confident we can get it together.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    Ok Wozzy all I did was post some numbers, don't know why you have to attack me.  And I indicated the Pats rank compared to the league in each category, so that already takes into account whether something is a league wide phenomenon or not.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    Interesting numbers Mighty--2003 is especially interesting since it's our worst year on offense during that span but best year on defense.  We were a pretty good team that year, if I recall correctly.  Something about a Super Bowl win . . . 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    The thing a lot people are missing is that while scoring is up slightly league wide (a little under a point per game) and yards are up as well (about 20 yards per game). The Patriots ranking vs the rest of the league is getting worse. 

    Look at those defensive rankings. In the championship seasons we were 3rd, 1st and 8th in TD/Dr. In 2003, less than one in every nine drives was ending in a TD against that team. Now we are 29th and teams are scoring a TD more that at rate over once every four drives.

    When this team was a championship team, the defense was better than the offense. When need to get back to that.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    I love FootballOutsiders. Most of their stats add meaning to the game we watch. 

    A couple stats I liked from the them the past few seasons are the power running and Defense vs WR1/2/3 stats. 

    There is a limited use for stats that rely on subjective measurement, and that site really doesn't push many of those stats. 

    At any rate, the DSR is a really cool stat in their "drive" stats book. It's any drive that results in anything from a first down to a TD. 

    @Prolate: Yeah. 2003 is such an illustrative season. It was remarkably close to last season in many ways, but the big difference was the defense. It was one that could be relied upon tremendously. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    The Patriots just played 4 games in a row where they ran off to a big lead.  In such situations, the defense has late-game marching orders to let the other team get into field goal range, let them drive (slowly!!) to the 1 yard line if necessary, just keep them out of the endzone if possible and let them eat the clock themselves.  The Pats have a huge win-loss record over the years with this endgame strategy, although it occasionally fails.

    All of the late yardage polluted the Patriots defensive yardage numbers, and this trend may continue to the end of the season.

    The offensive production of 46 yards a drive is a bit higher because the Patriots start 5 yards deeper after a kickoff this year.  However, that's a historically huge average.  They are driving down the field at will, keeping their defense on the bench.  Opposing defenses are flopping on the field in order to buy gasp gasp gasp time from the refs.  Odds are that all opposing defenses are wearing out as the game progresses and can't stop spit in the fourth quarter, but Brady usually doesn't need to test this theory. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    Easy enough to see why we didn't threepeat in 2005 from this chart.

    It is also easy to see how easy the scedule was in 2008 from it.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    In Response to Re: Performance per Drive:
    [QUOTE] Opposing defenses are flopping on the field in order to buy gasp gasp gasp time from the refs.  Odds are that all opposing defenses are wearing out as the game progresses and can't stop spit in the fourth quarter, but Brady usually doesn't need to test this theory. 
    Posted by Paul_K[/QUOTE]

    Haha. I've noticed that too! I think NE as a whole, Woody, Hern, Gronk, are older and more experience, and as such NE can go to "no huddle" more often. They are simply devastating in this mode, because Brady can move the personell around to catch the defense in mismatches. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    Paul – the garbage time argument doesn’t work.  We have been a winning team and have gotten out to leads over other teams all decade.  And I think you are exaggerating the “huge leads” we’ve gotten out to this year.  Just look at 2007 where the “huge leads” were even bigger – we gave up almost 20 fewer yards per drive and nearly .8 fewer points per drive.

    And the offensive yards measures yards gained by the offense, not special teams.  So the starting position of the offense doesn’t affect this number.

    Of course there have only been 4 games this season, and the numbers on defense will get much better as the team comes together in the coming months.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    Well . . .  count me among those who think you can find (or invent) a number to support whatever fool notion pops into your head, and I would certainly agree with wozzy to a certain extent. TV money drives the bus, and the networks believe -- rightly or wrongly -- that people want offense . . .   so offense the people shall get. Couple that with the "fantasy" football explosion that has even the most casual fan tuning into games he would otherwise ignore looking for his "numbers," and you've got a recipe for the demise of defense as we know it.

    I don't know what will have to happen to reverse this abomination. When baseball trod this path it took a steroid scandal that has besmirched an entire generation with fake stats to put a stop to it. My guess is that as long as the money keeps rolling in, we'd all better get used to 45-38.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    In Response to Re: Performance per Drive:
    [QUOTE]The Patriots just played 4 games in a row where they ran off to a big lead.  In such situations, the defense has late-game marching orders to let the other team get into field goal range, let them drive (slowly!!) to the 1 yard line if necessary, just keep them out of the endzone if possible and let them eat the clock themselves.  The Pats have a huge win-loss record over the years with this endgame strategy, although it occasionally fails. All of the late yardage polluted the Patriots defensive yardage numbers, and this trend may continue to the end of the season. The offensive production of 46 yards a drive is a bit higher because the Patriots start 5 yards deeper after a kickoff this year.  However, that's a historically huge average.  They are driving down the field at will, keeping their defense on the bench.  Opposing defenses are flopping on the field in order to buy gasp gasp gasp time from the refs.  Odds are that all opposing defenses are wearing out as the game progresses and can't stop spit in the fourth quarter, but Brady usually doesn't need to test this theory. 
    Posted by Paul_K[/QUOTE]

    Two years ago Pauly completely disregarded the 4th quarter in his power ranking methodology.  Now we know why.  It made the pats look worse than he thought they were.

    What Pauly failed to recognize was that the 4th quarter is 25% of the game and trailing teams actually use that time to come back from deficits to win games. 

    There was one team that Pauly's rankings didn't find all that good although they won 14 games and went to the super bowl. It just so happened that the team had a significant number of unconsidered 4th Q comebacks that year.  

    Regardless, Pauly will always find statistics to tell him that the pats are the best.  Just be careful taking his rankings seriously. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    In Response to Re: Performance per Drive:
    [QUOTE]The Patriots just played 4 games in a row where they ran off to a big lead.  In such situations, the defense has late-game marching orders to let the other team get into field goal range, let them drive (slowly!!) to the 1 yard line if necessary, just keep them out of the endzone if possible and let them eat the clock themselves. 
    Posted by Paul_K[/QUOTE]

    In none of the 4 games this season did the Pats have more than a 2 score lead at the end of 3 quarters, so claims that the ungodly yardage this D has given up is the result of them playing "prevent" are spurious.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    As for the idea that there has been some horrible demise of the defense over the past decade, consider the following chart showing the yards and points per drive each year of the NFL's #1 defense and the NFL's median defense (#17):

     

    #1 Yards

    #1 Points

    Median Yards

    Median Points

    2001

    22.53

    0.96

    27.76

    1.62

    2002

    20.30

    0.91

    28.97

    1.74

    2003

    19.81

    1.13

    27.58

    1.69

    2004

    22.53

    1.16

    28.90

    1.78

    2005

    22.73

    1.02

    27.38

    1.68

    2006

    22.50

    1.05

    28.67

    1.74

    2007

    24.24

    1.39

    28.12

    1.72

    2008

    20.60

    1.11

    29.74

    1.84

    2009

    21.42

    1.04

    29.60

    1.71

    2010

    24.03

    1.24

    29.94

    1.77

    2011

    20.33

    0.84

    31.62

    1.98


    I submit that this shows that there has not been a meaningful increase in points or yards allowed per drive this decade.  Although the median defense's performance has slipped a bit through the first 4 games this season, I don't think that proves a trend.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    Yards is trending. The highest median yards of the last ten are 2011, 2010, 2008, and 2009 according to your numbers. It's a small sample size but statistically the odds that the last 4 years happen to also be the highest yard years ever is not normal.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

     Great stats. Proves that in 2003 there was no evidence of a "bend but don't break" style of play. That team had an amazing defense. Probably the best defense this franchise ever had. They played a very tough schedule that year too (they were 6-0 against playoff teams in the regular season).
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive


    2001 -Super Bowl

    2003 - Super Bowl

    2004 - Superbowl

    During this time frame all we did was draft highly toted defensive stand outs, and made defense our priority. We had a 6th round QB, a 7th round WR(Troy) and a few role playing rbs. This resulted in 3 Superbowls.

    2007 - best offense in history = 14 points in the Superbowl, acquired Moss WW Stalworth etc...running game no where to be found, had an aging defense trying to hold it together.


    2009 - Same offense bounced in 1st round of playoffs,  defense in rebuilding period but strangely the only front 7 additions are older veterans through FA. All we did was draft CB's as the league has shifted to pass heavy. Running game not utilized.

    2010 - Load up with more offense, 2 TE's a wr and an 0-linemen in the first 4 rounds. Defense an after thought, Highly explosive offense puts up 3 points in the 1st half of 1st rd playoff exit....fans can't understand why? 4 ft 7 Danny Woodhead  is teams main RB in playoffs?

    2011 - Draft a bunch more skill position players, add a few late aging veterans into the defensive line mix. Gone are the days of drafting 1st round studs like Richard Seymour, Warren and Wilfork. We don't rush the opposing teams Qbs, We keep drafting CB's.. Best offense in the league... Needed to throw a 2-1 pass to run ratio and have the best QB in the game throw 4 picks with a lead to remember we have a run game.

    What happens if the offense folds in the playoffs for the 4rth time sense 2007? Is it the after thought defense's fault that we lose, or could it be where we have placed all of our eggs?

    If a team shifts focus to the offensive side of the ball then that team needs to make sure they utilize the entire offense. Don't be one dimensional, run the ball and keep the after thought defense off the field.

    Defense used to win championships, but not in todays NFL. Our team is offensive driven. If this statement is true then the same offense that has been the focal point must play well in the post season. Otherwise we will lose. Our defense isn't going to hold guys like Peyton Manning to 3 points in a playoff game ever again. Because that is not how this team is built. It is built to outscore the Peyton Mannings of the NFL.

    Like it or not it is what it is.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    In Response to Re: Performance per Drive:
    [QUOTE]Yards is trending. The highest median yards of the last ten are 2011, 2010, 2008, and 2009 according to your numbers. It's a small sample size but statistically the odds that the last 4 years happen to also be the highest yard years ever is not normal.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    Good point.  Prior to 2008, median yards per drive hovered around 2.80.  Since then, it has increased to consistently 29.6 or above.  Still, an extra 0.8 yards per drive is pretty marginal and hardly an indication that recent rule changes have led to the demise of the defense.  

    Edit:  Sorry, the difference is 1.6 yards per drive.  I would still say it is a marginal difference.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    In Response to Re: Performance per Drive:
    [QUOTE]Ok Wozzy all I did was post some numbers, don't know why you have to attack me.
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]

    You may have a persecution complex methinks, nowhere in my post is there an attack unless you're referring my dismissal of the website.

    Or maybe my pointing out that we all know the defense has been rebuilding since 2007 irked you.  I have already stated ad nauseam that we we need to improve on third downs. 

    If you expect me to backtrack on "yards" being important forget it.  We've always had a "bend don't break" philosophy, the only thing differen't with the great D's of the 2000's was that eventually during the season we became lights out on third down stops, we stopped bending, but it was always a work in progress.  

    This defense will either become solid in situational defense like those early Super Bowl D's or collapse due to injury, either way we will judge the entire season as a complete body of work, not 4 games in with a reactionary zeal.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    I'm not judging anything based on 4 games.  I know the D will get better and win a championship.  I just think per drive statistics are the most useful and was trying to start a discussion about them.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from mnp3a. Show mnp3a's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    In Response to Re: Performance per Drive:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Performance per Drive : In none of the 4 games this season did the Pats have more than a 2 score lead at the end of 3 quarters, so claims that the ungodly yardage this D has given up is the result of them playing "prevent" are spurious.
    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]


    Well said.

    i hate those 'prevent' arguments:  teams are scoring  REALLY FAST against that 'pseudo-prevent'
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from mnp3a. Show mnp3a's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    mighty,

    great post!

    i remember reading a few days ago that the defense was actually playing __great__ in the red zone...

    thing is: their good RZ play doesn't mean much since teams reach it too often
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Performance per Drive

    In Response to Re: Performance per Drive:
    [QUOTE]mighty, great post! i remember reading a few days ago that the defense was actually playing __great__ in the red zone... thing is: their good RZ play doesn't mean much since teams reach it too often
    Posted by mnp3a[/QUOTE]

    They have given up 10 touchdowns on 19 red zone drives this year which ranks them 22nd in the NFL in terms of touchdowns allowed per red zone drives. They are also allowing the most trips into the red zone per game (tied with the NY Giants at 4.8).  

    Two of their red zone stops are on downs which I would contend has as much to do with the pressure the Patriots offense puts on other teams to keep up with their scoring (San Diego's decision to go for it in the second quarter of a 10-7 was just plain bad coaching).
     

Share