Very interesting article that will stimulate much debate here. It's entire premise is based on the Net Expected Points (NEP) metric. Brief summary:
Every single situation on the football field has an expected point value; that is, how many points an average team would be expected to score in that situation (given down, distance-to-go, and yard line). For example, the Chiefs may be facing the Pittsburgh Steelers, with a third-and-two on the 50-yard line. That's a ton of variables, but luckily, numberFire has data from the past dozen years of every single play, so most situations have come up at least once. According to our data, an average team may be "expected" to score 1.23 (estimated number) points on that drive. However, Jamaal Charles reels off a 32-yard run to bring the Chiefs into the red zone, increasing the "expected" point value of the next play to 4.23 (still an estimated number) points. Jamaal Charles then gets credit for the difference, in this case 2.96 points, as his NEP total. That's Net Expected Points.
Since passing is often more efficient than running the ball, you'll usually see running backs with negative NEP per play scores, meaning that they are losing their team expected points every time they touch the ball. Receivers and tight ends, meanwhile, will usually have high, positive NEP per play scores, since receivers don't touch the ball unless it's a high-yardage completion. Quarterbacks can be in the middle, either positive or negative: completions typically help their score, while incompletions lower it. So when you're looking at NEP, it's important to look at the numbers based on position. Expected points do not take score and time left into account like win probability, and as a result, are a better measure of pure efficiency (since teams will alter their game plan significantly based on score and time).
The article makes three fundamental points:
1. The Giants need to improve their play in the trenches
2. The running game must improve its consistency. This is partly due to health issues as well as OL issues.
3. A modest improvement in consistency (in the passing game and pass defense) substantially increases the chances for the Giants to have a dramatic turnaround.
Bottom line is if the Giants improve their passing offense consistency and passing defense consistency they will win.
Where I disagree:
1. The article doesn't seem to make the connection between the importance of run defense as it relates to pass defense. If you can't defend the run and have to routinely put 8 in the box, you leave yourself open to big plays. Secondly, your pass rush effectiveness is diminished when the opposing team rarely faces third and long.
2. Little harsh on Eli's inconsistency. The article mentions the poor rushing attack and inconsistent pass protection, but doesn't seem to take that into account when evaluating Eli.
What does this mean?
1. Solidify the OL (doesn't have to be with the #9 pick guys)
2. Commit to improving the rushing attack
3. Rebuild the defensive front
4. Make sure Eli never lacks for weapons.
Seems to summarize what we all know, now the question is how do you get there.
How The Giants Can Get Back to The Super Bowl - (
New Window )
^^^very well put
Do them very well, and a SB win will come.
The Giants on offense
What they do
Always look to establish the run. Even vs strong run defense or weak pass defenses.
What they should do
Attack the weakness of the defense. This may set up the run with passing or set up passing with running. Do not "give away" plays just to prove a point. Don't run as much if they can't stop the pass. Don't pass as much if they can't stop the run.
The Giants on defense
What they do
They try to be disciplined. Stop the big play. Rely mostly on 4 man rush with occasional blitz. It is a defensive attitude.
What they should do
Play aggressive defense. Have an attacking attitude. Play with more emotion and less fear. Try to increase the three and out percentage by taking some chances. Don't be afraid of allowing the big play. They seem to allow a bunch anyway even when they play "safer" coverage.
Special teams
What they do
The Giants special teams seem to focus on technique and assignment. They try to be disciplined.
What they should do
They should get a new coach - but basically playing with more energy should be the priority. Assignments and discipline are important, but superior effort can overcome imperfect technique, perfect technique can not overcome inferior effort. IMO - The best special teams are a little reckless.
BTW, analyzing the past is BS. You need to analyze the present, but that is very very hard because it is so subjective and subject to differences of opinion.
I'm not fan of excessive analysis, and this article really just confirms what we all know. But at least we can back it up.
I'm not fan of excessive analysis, and this article really just confirms what we all know. But at least we can back it up.
I don't think any of us were poking at you. But sometimes these things are pretty obvious to anyone who has watched football and our team for as long as all of us have.
Quote:
At least it proves the numbers back up our observations.
I'm not fan of excessive analysis, and this article really just confirms what we all know. But at least we can back it up.
I don't think any of us were poking at you. But sometimes these things are pretty obvious to anyone who has watched football and our team for as long as all of us have.
No sweat man, I didn't take it that way. I agree, some of these things are obvious. About as obvious as running Marshawn Lynch from the half yard line in fact.