Thursday, July 17, 2008

Team Ratings: Rushing Offense

[EDITORS NOTE: This is a classic post, and I am too lazy to fix the table format]

We have finally finished the work on entering all the game data for calculating True Player Value. The first by-product is that we have calculated the team ratings for rushing and passing offense and defense, adjusted for opponents.

The values for rushing offense are found below. A value of 1000 indicates an offense that is perfectly average. A higher value is better - a value of 1100 indicates an offense that rushes for 10% more yardage than an average offense against an average defense. Lower numbers indicate worse offenses.

Recall that these numbers are not taken directly from the actual yardage and touchdown totals, but rather take into account the defense faced in each game. Thus, rushing for 130 yards against the Vikings defense (the best rush defense in the league) is better than rushing for 150 yards against the Raiders defense (the worst rush defense in the league). The closest thing to a perfectly average rushing defense (both for yardage and TDs) is the New York Jets.

So without further ado, here are the numbers:







































































































































































RYDsRTDs
Vikings

1453



2000


Jaguars

1343



1750


Giants

1243



1333


Steelers

1174



583


Eagles

1169



1166


Titans

1151



1750


Broncos

1106



750


Redskins

1100



1250


Raiders

1097



833


Chargers

1085



1500


Browns

1057



1000


Buccaneers

1055



1500


Panthers

1032



500


Bills

1027



750


Patriots

1019



1750


Cowboys

1014



1083


Ravens

995



1333


Jets

979



250


Colts

965



1916


Seahawks

922



666


Dolphins

911



1416


Packers

908



1166


Falcons

902



500


Rams

883



416


Bengals

875



833


Texans

855



916


49ers

852



416


Saints

820



1083


Cardinals

811



750


Bears

781



666


Lions

728



1083


Chiefs

670



333



Looking at these numbers, we can tell a few things. First, it does not seem unusual for a team with a better than average rushing yardage offense to have an even better rushing TD offense (e.g. the Vikings, Jaguars, Giants, and Titans all fall into this category).

From this information, we can infer that Pittsburgh did not get nearly as many rushing TDs as their rushing yardage would indicate. Anyone who owned Willie Parker last season would know this, but the point is that the problem was not that Parker "lost touchdowns" to Najeh Davenport, but that the team as a whole just did not run for their touchdowns. Indeed, looking at Pittsburgh's passing offense ratings (more on these tomorrow), we can see that they had a disproportionately high number of TD passes for their passing yardage. This could be explained by 1) offensive philosophy, or 2) fluke. While I suspect it is a bit of both, I think it is safe to assume that TD production on the ground will increase for the Steelers next year, giving Fast Willie more touchdown opportunities in 2008.

The teams that were about average in rushing yardage were also about average in rushing TDs, with the notable exceptions of the Buccaneers (more TDs than expected) and the Panthers (fewer TDs than expected). Neither of these teams made up for these phenomina by showing a disproportionate number of passing TDs vs. passing yardage, which means we can safely predict fewer Buccaneer rushing TDs and more Panther rushing TDs next year.

The Colts are another interesting team here. It appears that they went heavy on the run in the red zone to get their touchdowns. Now that Tom Brady has broken Payton Manning's single-season TD record, I don't think they Colts will keep it on the ground in the red zone next year.

The Dolphins also showed an unusually high tendency to run the ball to get their scores, which makes sense if you don't trust your quarterback. In fact, we had thought all year that the Miami running game was the best thing they had going, but based upon defense-adjusted yardage, they were even below average in this category. It was merely their abnormally high amount of rushing TDs that gave their backs fantasy value. If there is stability in the quarterback position next year, that could change.

Finally, the Jets low scoring TD offense was ridiculously out-of-whack with their ability to get rushing yardage. Expect Thomas Jones' production to get a bump next year as this evens out.

How do these ratings stack up to just using yardage (not adjusted for opponent)? Most teams were within a few positions of where they ended up using total yardage. The most extreme cases where the Texans, who moved from 22nd to 26th when adjusting for opponents, and the Redskins, who moved from 12th to 8th.

0 comments: