Reviews on Flip Oeke Wild Thing Trumpet Youtube

Calendar week xiv DVOA Ratings

Week fourteen DVOA Ratings

Photograph: United states of america Today Sports Images

by Aaron Schatz

Hey, look who's back on top this week! The undefeated Green Bay Packers slip into the height spot in DVOA, which now agrees with pretty much every other power ranking system on the Internet either subjective or objective. It'due south still close though -- in reality, what nosotros have is a pack of four teams who are very tight at the summit: Green Bay, Houston, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore. Although Green Bay had its best single-game DVOA of the season confronting Oakland (+55.half-dozen%), the balmy pass up of the previous few weeks means the Packers are not number one in Weighted DVOA. That honor belongs to Pittsburgh. Houston is second in Weighted DVOA, although that's a scrap of a mirage, as their rating is by and large built by the 4-game cord of games before Matt Schaub was injured. Houston's DVOA over the last three games is just v.5%. By the end of the season, the Week 7-10 games will drib a chip in forcefulness in the Weighted DVOA formula, which will drib Houston a little scrap.

It's also interesting to note that Green Bay'south offensive DVOA drops out of the number one slot this week -- ever so slightly behind New England. The departure is tiny, and both teams along with New Orleans rank among the nigh powerful offenses nosotros've ever measured.

Top 12 Offensive DVOA equally of Calendar week 14, 1992-2011
YEAR	TEAM	OFF DVOA
2007	NE	50.6%
2010	NE	48.seven%
2002	KC	41.8%
2004	IND	39.0%
1998	DEN	35.vi%
2011	NE	35.three%
1995	DAL	35.2%
2011	GB	35.1%
2004	KC	33.8%
2011	NO	33.7%
1993	SF	33.0%
1992	SF	33.0%

The current offensive ratings are much like the current total ratings, with the elevation 3 reversed in Weighted DVOA. By Weighted DVOA, the top offense correct at present belongs to New Orleans, then Green Bay and New England.

* * * * *

This week, I decided to only produce the playoff odds report which is adjusted for injured quarterbacks in Chicago and Houston. It's pretty obvious at this point that the offenses have declined for both teams. What's interesting is that the offenses have declined roughly the same corporeality, even though they started from different places. Houston has dropped from 25.v% offensive DVOA to -4.0%, a drop of 29.5%. Chicago has dropped from -1.5% offensive DVOA to -34.0%, a drib of -32.v%.

Terminal calendar week'due south adjustments were based on the difference betwixt each team's offensive DVOA before the quarterback change and after. I reduced each team's Weighted DVOA by half that amount. This week, I did the aforementioned affair, only I reduced each team'due south Weighted DVOA by three-fourths of the amount. Adjacent calendar week, I'll adjust by the entire amount. It's non very scientific, but we've never done this sort of affair with the playoff odds before, so I'm but sort of playing information technology by ear.

By the fashion, we're no longer adjusting Kansas City, as the driblet with Tyler Palko hasn't been very large. Kansas Metropolis had -17.four% offensive DVOA through Week xi, -24.0% subsequently, a drop of less than seven per centum points.

* * * * *

I don't have anything else particularly interesting to say about the DVOA ratings today and then I thought instead I would look through and bespeak out some of the interesting numbers in our offensive and defensive line stats.

• New Orleans is the top team in offensive Adjusted Line Yards, by a healthy amount. Tennessee is the squad on the bottom, past a similarly salubrious corporeality.
• If you look at the directional numbers, you'll meet that New Orleans has been excellent running left or eye, but not and then swell running to the right. New England, which ranks second in ALY, is the contrary: excellent running correct or center, not so swell running to the left. And Houston, which ranks third in ALY, is at its best running straight up the gut.
• Chicago leads the league in ALY on defense, but they're actually non very skillful in short-yardage situations (67 pct conversions, which ranks 21st). They also accept given upward some actually long runs, so they're 19th in Second Level Yards per carry and 27th in Open Field Yards per carry.
• San Francisco, on the other hand, has given up well-nigh no runs of notation. They rank second in ALY, first in short-yardage success, first in SLY immune and second in OFY immune. The weird affair is that they don't stuff a lot of runners behind the line -- only 16 per centum of runs stopped for a loss or no gain, which ranks 29th in the NFL.
• Looking for maybe the biggest reason why the Packers' pass defense has struggled this year? Look at the pass up in the pass rush. The 2010 Packers ranked fourth in Adjusted Sack Rate. The 2011 Packers are only 30th. Full numbers hide the drop a lilliputian bit because Green Bay opponents take to throw and then many passes.
• Baltimore has moved in the other direction. Nosotros said during the offseason that the Ravens' biggest problem was finding a pass rush later they ranked just 27th in ASR in 2010. This year, the Ravens are first overall.

* * * * *

These are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings through xiv weeks of 2011, measured by our proprietary Defense-adjusted Value Over Average (DVOA) system that breaks downwardly every single play and compares a team'south performance to the league boilerplate based on situation in order to make up one's mind value over average. (Explained farther here.)

OFFENSE and DEFENSE DVOA are adjusted to consider all fumbles, kept or lost, as equal value. SPECIAL TEAMS DVOA is adjusted for blazon of stadium (warm, cold, dome, Denver) and week of flavor. WEIGHTED DVOA represents an effort to effigy out how a team is playing right now, as opposed to over the season as a whole, by making recent games more important than earlier games.

As always, positive numbers represent more points and then Defense force is better when it is NEGATIVE.

To save people some time, please employ the following format for all complaints:

<team> is conspicuously ranked <besides high/also low> because <reason unrelated to DVOA>. <subjective ranking organisation> is way better than this. <unrelated team-supporting or -denigrating comment, preferably with poor spelling and/or chat-acceptable spelling>

	Team	Total DVOA	Final WEEK	WEIGHTED DVOA	RANK	Westward-L	Criminal offense DVOA	OFF. RANK	DEFENSE DVOA	DEF. RANK	Due south.T. DVOA	S.T. RANK
ane	GB	28.viii%	two	26.v%	three	thirteen-0	35.1%	2	ix.1%	21	ii.9%	7
two	HOU	27.8%	1	30.v%	2	10-three	18.4%	half dozen	-8.4%	vi	1.i%	13
3	PIT	27.v%	3	32.4%	one	10-3	19.4%	5	-5.ix%	9	two.3%	9
4	BAL	27.1%	4	26.2%	4	10-iii	9.four%	x	-21.1%	i	-3.v%	29
5	NE	23.3%	v	20.vii%	five	ten-3	35.3%	1	15.0%	29	3.0%	6
half-dozen	NYJ	23.0%	6	19.9%	seven	8-5	6.0%	15	-12.3%	2	iv.7%	4
7	ATL	17.eight%	9	twenty.5%	six	viii-v	nine.3%	11	-8.1%	vii	0.4%	18
8	SF	17.6%	seven	15.1%	9	x-3	-two.3%	21	-11.v%	three	viii.4%	2
9	NO	17.one%	8	17.3%	8	x-3	33.seven%	iii	xvi.ane%	30	-0.four%	19
10	10	12.3%	11	7.9%	11	7-6	eight.9%	12	ane.7%	13	5.i%	3
xi	CHI	10.eight%	10	12.seven%	10	7-6	-8.6%	26	-9.4%	five	10.0%	1
12	DET	8.0%	13	vii.v%	12	8-5	vi.two%	xiv	-7.vii%	eight	-five.9%	31
13	NYG	seven.1%	12	7.5%	13	7-half dozen	xv.five%	7	nine.vii%	23	i.2%	11
14	DAL	6.iv%	fourteen	5.1%	14	vii-half-dozen	eleven.6%	9	three.9%	fifteen	-1.3%	23
xv	CIN	4.0%	16	4.8%	15	seven-half-dozen	5.vii%	16	iii.seven%	fourteen	2.0%	x
sixteen	PHI	two.9%	fifteen	3.6%	17	5-eight	seven.0%	13	four.5%	16	0.5%	17
	Squad	TOTAL DVOA	Concluding Week	WEIGHTED DVOA	RANK	Westward-L	Criminal offense DVOA	OFF. RANK	Defence DVOA	DEF. RANK	Southward.T. DVOA	South.T. RANK
17	SD	-0.three%	21	3.6%	xvi	6-vii	14.6%	8	12.5%	26	-ii.iv%	25
18	MIA	-2.5%	17	ane.iv%	18	4-9	-3.4%	22	0.3%	xi	1.ii%	12
19	DEN	-2.viii%	19	-0.two%	20	8-5	-1.five%	19	five.0%	eighteen	3.seven%	5
xx	Sea	-four.4%	23	1.1%	nineteen	half-dozen-7	-six.3%	24	-1.0%	ten	i.0%	fourteen
21	Motorcar	-4.8%	20	-ane.5%	21	four-9	19.vii%	iv	18.half-dozen%	31	-6.0%	32
22	OAK	-six.five%	eighteen	-x.5%	22	7-half-dozen	1.7%	xviii	vii.2%	nineteen	-1.0%	22
23	WAS	-10.9%	25	-xiii.9%	24	4-9	-9.1%	27	ane.3%	12	-0.5%	21
24	BUF	-11.v%	22	-21.8%	29	5-viii	5.1%	17	14.8%	28	-1.eight%	24
25	JAC	-xiii.3%	28	-11.two%	23	4-ix	-21.two%	31	-10.eight%	iv	-ii.9%	27
26	TB	-xvi.seven%	24	-22.3%	30	four-nine	-3.viii%	23	13.eight%	27	1.0%	xv
27	CLE	-16.8%	26	-xv.ii%	25	four-9	-seven.1%	25	9.ii%	22	-0.5%	xx
28	MIN	-sixteen.ix%	27	-20.0%	28	2-11	-2.3%	20	11.6%	25	-3.0%	28
29	ARI	-xix.ane%	30	-17.seven%	27	vi-7	-12.ix%	28	8.five%	xx	2.3%	8
30	KC	-22.8%	29	-16.5%	26	5-8	-xviii.ix%	30	4.half-dozen%	17	0.vii%	xvi
31	STL	-38.9%	31	-38.6%	31	two-11	-26.ane%	32	9.9%	24	-ii.8%	26
32	IND	-39.1%	32	-41.vii%	32	0-13	-xiii.viii%	29	19.vii%	32	-5.half dozen%	30

• Non-ADJUSTED TOTAL DVOA does not include the adjustments for opponent strength or the adjustments for conditions and distance in special teams, and only penalizes offenses for lost fumbles rather than all fumbles.
• ESTIMATED WINS uses a statistic known as "Forest Index" that emphasizes consistency equally well as DVOA in the most important specific situations: red zone defense, first quarter criminal offense, and performance in the second one-half when the score is close. It then projects a number of wins adjusted to a league-average schedule and a league-average rate of recovering fumbles. Teams that have had their bye week are projected as if they had played i game per week.
• By SCHEDULE lists average DVOA of opponents played this flavour, ranked from hardest schedule (#i, most positive) to easiest schedule (#32, most negative). It is non adapted for which games are home or road.
• FUTURE SCHEDULE lists boilerplate DVOA of opponents still left to play this season, ranked from hardest schedule (#1, most positive) to easiest schedule (#32, most negative). It is not adjusted for which games are home or road.
• VARIANCE measures the statistical variance of the team'south weekly DVOA performance. Teams are ranked from most consequent (#1, everyman variance) to least consequent (#32, highest variance).

	Squad	TOTAL DVOA	W-L	NON-ADJ TOT VOA	ESTIM. WINS	RANK	Past SCHED	RANK	FUTURE SCHED	RANK	VAR.	RANK
1	GB	28.8%	thirteen-0	31.2%	x.eight	one	-two.0%	29	-1.four%	18	3.9%	ii
2	HOU	27.8%	ten-iii	xxx.4%	9.0	five	-1.1%	25	-10.5%	31	fifteen.9%	25
iii	PIT	27.v%	ten-iii	27.0%	ix.vi	3	-0.ii%	20	-12.seven%	32	fourteen.9%	21
4	BAL	27.i%	10-3	24.6%	ix.viii	two	2.ane%	11	-4.4%	24	20.1%	28
5	NE	23.3%	10-3	24.5%	9.v	4	-ii.1%	30	-5.6%	27	10.5%	ten
6	NYJ	23.0%	8-5	23.4%	eight.1	8	-0.2%	nineteen	2.five%	xvi	12.viii%	fourteen
vii	ATL	17.8%	8-five	xv.6%	8.7	half dozen	one.vi%	12	-4.3%	23	3.1%	1
viii	SF	17.6%	ten-iii	22.5%	8.i	9	-4.6%	32	-five.iii%	26	5.8%	4
ix	NO	17.1%	10-3	17.8%	eight.vi	7	-2.7%	31	-1.3%	17	12.viii%	15
ten	10	12.3%	7-half-dozen	fourteen.seven%	7.vii	10	0.ix%	xv	-8.2%	29	sixteen.4%	26
11	CHI	ten.8%	7-half-dozen	xi.5%	7.5	xi	0.ix%	sixteen	2.5%	15	12.9%	16
12	DET	8.0%	viii-five	10.6%	7.4	12	0.eight%	17	7.3%	7	8.three%	7
13	NYG	7.1%	7-six	iv.4%	7.2	fourteen	ane.1%	14	six.2%	10	16.9%	27
14	DAL	6.iv%	7-6	9.nine%	vii.2	15	-i.ix%	28	-2.2%	19	xv.v%	23
15	CIN	4.0%	7-6	7.vi%	7.four	thirteen	v.7%	3	-x.3%	30	half-dozen.9%	vi
16	PHI	ii.9%	5-8	4.7%	6.4	18	-0.3%	21	6.2%	eleven	thirteen.6%	19
	TEAM	TOTAL DVOA	Westward-L	NON-ADJ TOT VOA	ESTIM. WINS	RANK	By SCHED	RANK	Future SCHED	RANK	VAR.	RANK
17	SD	-0.iii%	half-dozen-7	5.ix%	6.0	21	-0.7%	23	ix.5%	4	15.8%	24
18	MIA	-ii.5%	four-9	-1.9%	6.vi	xvi	i.5%	xiii	11.vi%	3	11.viii%	12
19	DEN	-2.8%	8-5	-2.2%	6.5	17	2.9%	nine	-3.7%	22	6.6%	5
20	SEA	-4.four%	half dozen-7	-i.9%	half-dozen.4	19	-one.6%	27	three.1%	fourteen	13.five%	18
21	CAR	-iv.8%	4-9	-4.2%	5.9	22	-i.half dozen%	26	ix.4%	five	fourteen.9%	twenty
22	OAK	-6.5%	7-half-dozen	-3.four%	half dozen.3	20	2.ix%	eight	-5.one%	25	23.5%	31
23	WAS	-10.9%	4-9	-fifteen.7%	5.five	24	-0.nine%	24	-2.3%	20	12.six%	13
24	BUF	-11.v%	5-8	-11.iv%	5.6	23	4.0%	vi	6.0%	12	30.3%	32
25	JAC	-13.3%	iv-9	-13.iii%	4.9	27	six.8%	ii	-3.0%	21	xv.two%	22
26	TB	-16.7%	4-ix	-21.vii%	5.ane	26	nine.four%	1	6.iv%	9	21.8%	29
27	CLE	-16.eight%	four-9	-xi.vi%	5.1	25	-0.two%	18	11.8%	2	4.8%	3
28	MIN	-16.nine%	two-11	-17.vii%	4.7	29	four.0%	v	five.seven%	13	13.3%	17
29	ARI	-xix.ane%	half dozen-7	-14.seven%	4.7	28	-0.vii%	22	-5.7%	28	ten.8%	11
30	KC	-22.8%	five-8	-22.eight%	four.half dozen	30	2.iii%	10	6.v%	8	22.6%	30
31	STL	-38.ix%	two-xi	-43.6%	2.six	31	4.0%	7	16.3%	1	8.vi%	viii
32	IND	-39.1%	0-13	-44.2%	2.ii	32	5.0%	iv	8.9%	6	9.ix%	ix

pyleearelleth.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.footballoutsiders.com/comment/592687

Share this post