1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Red Zone defense key to Dolphins success

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Colmax, Dec 30, 2016.

  1. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    In Joseph's presser this week, he noted that in the major statistical categories, Miami doesn't look that good. But those aren't the ones he and the team are really concerned about. He would certainly like them lower, but it's not a huge concern.

    He said while he was in Houston, they were number 1 in those same statistics and had a W-L record of 2-14.

    What does this tell us?

    It's not all about the major stats. His defensive philosophy is more concerned with yards on third down and conversions, QB pressures/sacks, turnovers, and (as the article shows above) red zone TDs.

    The yards certainly do not help, but his defensive philosophy, when right, holds more weight than overall yardage.
    _____________

    I read a blog (if you will) that was written prior to Joseph's hiring stating the reasons why Miami should not hire Joseph. One of the main sticking points were the yards allowed. While reading this, I got the feeling that Gase knows more given he wanted Joseph on his staff when he was interviewing with SF.

    Then I do a little more digging and find out that Cincy blocked interviews not once, but twice, regarding Joseph.

    Gase was asked about Joseph and basically said that when they went head-to-head, Joseph seemed to know exactly what Gase was doing.

    They were both on the same staff in SF under Mike Nolan in '08.
    _____________

    While the major numbers aren't exactly where anyone wants them to be (Joseph acknowledges this), the ones that matter in this defense are.

    He has been a good DC so far with what he's had to work with (esp. considering injuries). I think he could really be a good one moving forward in the future.

    From all accounts, he seems to be a hot name for potential HC positions this year. I read that he has not answered any questions regarding this and is focused on the task at hand.

    What's interesting is that in his presser, he said that the defense needs to work on athletic/running QBs, and that's something they will "work on in the spring" moving forward. :wink2:

    I don't think he goes anywhere for a couple of years. I think he knows exactly where he is in his football life and he knows his work here isn't done.

    He's a good one.

    Link: HERE

     
    mlb1399, smahtaz, PhinFan1968 and 3 others like this.
  2. dolfan7171

    dolfan7171 Well-Known Member

    18,065
    3,629
    113
    Jun 12, 2009
    Arizona
    I agree that the defense will get better in the seasons to come. I think they get depth in linebackers and secondary positions. Then the defense improves dramatically. But that's just my opinion.

    Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
     
    danmarino likes this.
  3. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Which stats is he referring to? I think the most important is points allowed per game. Vance Joseph was at Houston as defensive backs coach from 2011-2013.

    In 2011 Houston's defense was ranked 4th in the league in points allowed per game and they had a 10-6 record with first place in the division. In 2012, Houston's defense was ranked 9th in the league in points allowed per game, had a 12-4 record and won the division. The ONE year Houston had bad stats was 2013 where they were 25th in points allowed per game. That was the year they went 2-14!

    Same with some other stats like rushing yards allowed per game: 4th in 2011, 7th in 2012 and 23rd in 2013. It's only with passing stats where I see something they were good at in 2013: they were ranked 3rd that year.

    Point is.. in general the better you are in major statistical categories the better your team will do. It's why correlations between such stats and wins is positive. So yeah I do think it's a real concern that we are ranked 3rd WORST in run defense!.. that better not be the reason we lose a playoff game!
     
    danmarino likes this.
  4. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    I'm assuming overall defense (pass yds and rush yds combined) the year they went 2-14. I did not look it up.

    I do know, however, his defensive philosophy does not put as much of an emphasis on total yards gained by the opposing offense versus these other "deeper" statistics.

    The statistics Joseph are referring to correlate better to the overall success of the team (wins vs losses) than the general pass/rush yards combined.

    It's not that the overall yards combined do not matter, because they do. But they hold less weight than the ones he is referring to in this defensive philosophy.

    EDIT:

    I don't know if you remember, cbrad, but Joseph did say earlier in the year that he doesn't care how many yards opposing offenses get "between the 20's". It's the Red Zone yards that matter the most (in his scheme). This was after a reporter brought up how many yards the defense was allowing.

    It's by no means perfect this year for various reasons, but the defense is doing pretty good in the areas that matter more than overall yards gained.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2016
  5. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    The point the reporter made was overall yards. For a lot of us, that's the measuring stick for a successful season.

    In the year in which you were referring ('13), Houston ranked 11th in overall offense and 7th in overall defense.

    Sounds pretty good except for the record: 2-14.
     
  6. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Gase mentioned it too...it is the following:

    1. Defense Red Zone TDs Allowed; we're 16th at 55.32%.
    2. Scoring; we're 10th at 23 ppg.
    3. 3rd Down Conversions Allowed; we're 1st at 34.8%.
     
  7. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Well.. I guess that's when a statistician might help. Yards gained/allowed is very weakly correlated to wins (<0.15 from 1990-2011) so it shouldn't be a "major statistical category" in Joseph's mind.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2016
    danmarino, PhinFan1968 and Colmax like this.
  8. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Any idea how the 3 stats they're focusing on correlates to wins?
     
  9. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Oh those are good stats for sure.

    I don't know precisely for #1 and #2, but let's be clear: you get a perfect correlation to wins if you look at points scored minus points allowed, and #2 is half that equation so that's got to be really high. Red zone scoring is really high at over 0.6 but that's all scoring and not just TD's, so I guess TD's is a bit lower.

    3rd down rate depending on year is in the 0.4 range. All good stats.
     
    dolfan7171, danmarino and PhinFan1968 like this.
  10. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Thanks!
     
  11. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,361
    20,989
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    I've never understood the "yards allowed or gained" being a major stat. Points for and against are what matters the most.
     
    smahtaz and cbrad like this.
  12. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah.

    In general, other than points for/against, efficiency stats are far better at predicting wins than volume stats. So "yards" and "attempts" each have low correlations, but "yards per attempt" say for passing is over 0.4, etc.. And stats like passer rating and ANY/A are just weighted efficiency stats (correlations well over 0.5 and often 0.6). So efficiency in general matters most.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  13. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    You and Joseph would then be in agreement, yes?

    I think so.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  14. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah if the context was the importance of "yards" vs. those other stats I agree with him. Here's a link with a direct quote:
    http://www.miamidolphins.com/news/a...e-Joseph/4219764e-5367-42e9-ad18-24062a0a59b5

    "If I had two stats after points allowed, it would be third downs and takeaways. Those are direct reflections of keeping the point total down. It all comes back to getting off the field. Can I have red zone defense, too, because that’s so important in keeping points off the board."

    ..

    INT rate and I think you mentioned sack rate are all around -0.3 correlation so including those are fine too.

    One thing I don't understand is whether you can't also target yards per passing attempt because statistically speaking playoff teams tend to be above average in passing Y/A both on offense and defense. That's something that matters a lot more than most of the non-scoring stats he's mentioning and really helps distinguish playoff vs. non-playoff teams.
     
  15. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    So if you were to use those figures you talk about to determine how Miami looks, as far as if they're a playoff team or not, what would they show you?
     
  16. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I've tried a bunch of combinations of what helps predict playoff teams best, but nothing so far works as well as passer rating ranking vs. points allowed ranking so for now that's what I use:
    https://i.imgsafe.org/701c8038e8.png

    The data is from 2015 and as you can see that line almost perfectly separates playoff vs. non-playoff teams. In 2016 the Dolphins are #9 in passer rating ranking and #14 in points allowed ranking. Since the x-axis is for defense, plug in x = 14 into the equation for the dotted line, y = -2.15x + 39.6, that separates playoff/non-playoff teams.

    You get y = 9.5 for required passer rating ranking, and we're just below that! So the Dolphins in 2016 lie almost exactly on the line that separates playoff and non-playoff teams from the best predictor I can find, at least based on 2015 stats. Kind of fits with where we perceive the team to be.
     
    PhinFan1968 and Colmax like this.
  17. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    So he's singing the same tune today as back then, which is good because he's staying consistent. Definitely shows where his mind is.

    The passing Y/A on either side seems to make sense, but I have to wonder (from a defensive standpoint) if those numbers can be skewed just a bit (e.g. teams playing from behind, etc.)?

    Enlighten me a little. I couldn't say either way, and am genuinely interested in understanding it better from that perspective.
     
  18. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    Hey brad, what do the values of 2.15 and 39.6 represent?
     
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Wish I could answer your question.. I don't know what causes passing Y/A to go up (though increasing completion percentage helps because there are fewer 0's you average over) which is why I asked the question myself of how one could design a defense to truly increase passing efficiency without necessarily increasing/decreasing overall passing yards.

    I will say this to the "skewed" question. Whatever skew there may be for playing from behind, the fact you get a good correlation between passing Y/A for offense/defense and making the playoffs means any such skew isn't dominating whatever it is that most increases Y/A.

    For reference.. here are the stats that got me looking at that:
    https://i.imgsafe.org/705d0921a1.png
    https://i.imgsafe.org/705b632498.png

    Green circles are playoff teams, red circle is the SB winner and blue diamond is the league average. You can see how each playoff or non-playoff team fares in passing Y/A for offense and defense through these graphs:
    https://i.imgsafe.org/7074b7ab31.png
    https://i.imgsafe.org/7078d558d1.png

    The upper left quadrant is where the most efficient teams are on both offense and defense, and you can clearly see with the first graph for playoff teams that they tend to be in the upper left quadrant.

    Point is.. one can collect stats to show passing Y/A on offense and defense is a stat you want to improve on, but how to actually improve it? That's beyond my knowledge and maybe someone who knows the football side more can help answer that.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2016
  20. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    y = -2.15x + 39.6 is the equation of a line. It basically says the slope of the line is -2.15 and the intercept is 39.6.

    The interpretation: -2.15 means that for each defensive rank you lose (say you go from defensive rank #12 to #13 on the x-axis).. you have to increase passer rating rank by 2.15 to remain a borderline playoff team.

    The intercept of 39.6 just tells you where the line crosses the y-axis. It doesn't really have a meaningful interpretation because the line crosses the y-axis when x=0, but x=0 is meaningless because you can't be ranked 0 on defense (0 rank is better than a rank of 1 haha). But IF you could have x=0 then you can be a playoff team with the impossible passer rating rank of 39.6 (impossible because there are only 32 teams in the league!).
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2016
  21. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Cool stuff.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  22. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    I'm an idiot. Sorry man. I should've known better. Thanks for schooling me a little. It's been 10 years.

    Totally on the page now. :up:
     
    cbrad likes this.
  23. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    From a pure numbers standpoint, I agree, the yards just count.

    The "skew" now doesn't make too much sense now because the relation to passing efficiency; while a team can catch fire (say, in the fourth quarter of a game), the average will simply bring everything back.

    So whatever that relation is between playoffs and passing Y/A is a mystery. Seems there is something there, though. I kind of want to get into this now. Hopefully that can come out in a later discussion.

    (I know I'm kind of regurgitating what you said, but it's more of my just thinking aloud after reading your response. Thanks, bud!)
     
  24. mlb1399

    mlb1399 Well-Known Member

    3,893
    3,087
    113
    Mar 6, 2010
    I think he's done a fine job with the hand he's been dealt.

    Going into this season, we all knew that our LB's and CB's would struggle. That was before we lost a pro bowl safety, another starting safety and 2 starting LB's.

    I'm optimistic about the future seeing guys like Lippett and Howard develop. Alonso has played better than anyone expected and Maxwell has been Serviceable. Watching guys step in for injured players and see them elevate their game tells me someone is doing a good job of coaching.

    Another offseason and hopefully drafting or binging in a good LB in the draft or FA, seeing our corners develop and actually being healthy should make this defense top half to third in the league, if not better.

    If the OL can stay healthy next year, run the ball, protect Tanny and our defense plays better, there's no reason we can't compete for the division and playoffs.
     
  25. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Here's a question I've been kicking around. What do you think of Football Outsiders' DVOA stuff? They currently have Miami's Defense at 17th; 14th vs pass, 19th vs run (NE at 16th; 24th vs pass, 5th vs run) heading into this game, and it seems to me their info strikes a bit closer to reality than how sites like ESPN and others rank defenses.
     
  26. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    The short answer is I'd treat it like any proprietary "stat": until FO is willing to be totally transparent and show their methodology, it can't be justified as a good method for doing what they're trying to do which is to adjust raw stats for down, distance, game situation and opponent, etc..

    In other words, it's no better/worse than ESPN's QBR which I think you've seen rightfully panned on these boards. Any method that isn't transparent should be immediately discarded as a candidate for accurately adjusting for the factors they're trying to adjust for. The one justification for ESPN's QBR and FO's DVOA is that whatever they are doing, it turns out to predict things better (not by that much though) than simple, standard stats like passer rating or just using wins (e.g. DVOA does predict future wins a bit better than just using past wins, etc...)

    So for the question you're asking (is it closer to reality) the answer is it's not even worth considering for that purpose.

    To be clear though, the specific reasons (based on what is known publicly) for panning QBR and DVOA are different. QBR starts off well by asking how a given play in a given situation changes "team expected points added". That is.. how that play changed the average net points your team will gain/lose on the next scoring drive. The problem with QBR is that it then tries to divide up credit among players (e.g. a QB that just hands off the ball to a RB should get less credit than if he passes). In principle good idea, but how you do that in practice is the devil in the details, and as you can see in this conference where ESPN gives some idea of how they do it, they basically make arbitrary methodological choices for different situations:
    http://www.sloansportsconference.com/content/total-qbr-what-espn-analytics-learned/

    It's that arbitrariness that would be immediately ripped apart if they published their methodology.

    Same thing with DVOA. Look at the description on FO's website:
    http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods

    The one thing that should stand out to you is they don't describe their methodology!! They give you nuggets like this:

    "A successful play is worth one point; an unsuccessful play, zero points with fractional points in between (e.g., eight yards on third-and-10 is worth 0.54 “success points”). Extra points are awarded for big plays, gradually increasing to three points for 10 yards (assuming those yards result in a first down), four points for 20 yards, and five points for 40 yards or more. Losing three or more yards is -1 point. Interceptions occurring on fourth down during the last two minutes of a game incur no penalty whatsoever, but all others average -6 points..."

    Now.. it's not that FO just pulled those numbers out of thin air.. yet essentially that's what they're doing because those aren't numbers that are inferred from data with no additional assumptions made. Specific choices on what the anchor point should be (so relative to what situation are you computing change in expected points, etc..) or how you interpolate between different values, or even whether you use actual data to adjust any analysis for the probability of that play occurring in the first place (to my knowledge none of these methods do that even though they should) all affect those final numbers.

    So, in summary.. both ESPN's QBR and FO's DVOA are better described as "models" not "stats" because they aren't directly inferred from data (includes all kinds of essentially arbitrary assumptions) and should not even be considered for accurately describing things until they publish their methodology. The one thing they ARE useful for is for prediction purposes. Just don't attach much meaning to the rankings.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2016
    Colmax and PhinFan1968 like this.
  27. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Silly Brad...you can't "see" transparency!

    Kidding, of course...thanks for the info.
     

Share This Page