PDA

View Full Version : Football Defensive Rankings


Ralphy Boy
02-08-2010, 11:13 PM
Okay, so I'm a bit of a numbers guy and I was working on a "NFL Teams Needs Analysis" for a mock draft. We all have seen plenty of mock drafts where some guy projects X player, going to whatever team, based on what he thinks he knows about them. Instead of doing that, I decided to take a stats approach and so I've started working on some spreads. Given my belief that we need more help on defense, I started with a defensive spreadsheet. Since the numbers are not necessarily just something someone might want to know for the draft, I thought I'd post the attached spreadsheet and some of the info here. You'll need Microsoft Excel to open it.

To keep the initial post short, I'll explain the details in another post. In short, I've compiled a score for each team where the lowest score equates to less need for a defensive playmaker. The score can be found in column "AK" in the Overall Ranking.

There is a lot of information and I know I'm a dork for spending as much time as I have on it.

While doing this and looking at the numbers, there were several things that surprised me. For instance; I couldn't help but notice that in spite of the 48 sacks that Minnesota got, their pass defense still wasn't that good. They allowed a 63.7% completion % to opposing QB's with 26 TD's to 11 INT's.

KC's pass defense only allowed a 59.3% completion % to opposing QB's with 25 TD's & 15 INT's. You can tell from the rest of our stats that we have a whole lot of other needs so I'm not reading too much into that.

Ralphy Boy
02-08-2010, 11:34 PM
Defensive stats, taking into account just about every significant stat I can think of including:
Rushing Attempts, Rushing Yards & YPG, Average Yards per carry, Rushing TD's, Rushing First Downs and Rushes of 20+.
Passing Attempts, Completions, Completion %, Passing yards & yards per game, Passing TD's, Interceptions, Sacks and Passing First Downs.

Wilson8
02-09-2010, 03:55 AM
Looks like a lot of work. I like numbers too. So what conclusions did you discover after looking at this info? The first thing I thought of was the teams that have the best D have invested pretty heavily in the draft to make that area strong. But then when I was looking at teams at the bottom. They also invested pretty heavily there. So I got nothing...

Ralphy Boy
02-09-2010, 04:18 PM
Looks like a lot of work. I like numbers too. So what conclusions did you discover after looking at this info? The first thing I thought of was the teams that have the best D have invested pretty heavily in the draft to make that area strong. But then when I was looking at teams at the bottom. They also invested pretty heavily there. So I got nothing...

Well its an ongoing process and there is obviously a lot of information to digest so I guess I'm looking to it, along with other sites such as Pro Football Focus, as a tool for multiple things. You can draw a lot of different conclusions from it, whether its evaluating coaching staff or particular areas of a defense like the secondary or linebacking corps. I'm going to continue to look at other things such as individual stats to see how they factor in.

As I mentioned earlier about Minnesota's pass defense being worse than ours, it would seem to be because they have horrible coverage in their secondary. The year end CB rankings (http://profootballfocus.com/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2009&pos=CB&stype=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=25&numgames=1) show that Brandon Flowers allowed only 53.8% of passes to be completed on him and Carr 56.0%, while over in Minnesota Winfield allowed opposing QB's to complete 63.3%, Cedric Griffen 69.9% and Benny Sapp 70.2%.

I just looked at 3-4 OLB's (http://profootballfocus.com/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2009&pos=OLB4&stype=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=25&numgames=1)and saw that Tamba is ranked #2 in pass rush with 9 sacks, 13 hits and 36 pressures. Unfortunately in coverage he is a huge liability allowing 105.5 QB rating and a 72.7% completion %.
The standard bearer for the position this season being DeMarcus Ware, who actually ranked lower overall at #3 but, had 12 sacks 17 hits & 6 pressures while only allowing a 39.6 QB rating and 28.6% completion %.

Ron Edwards ranked # 76 on the DT/NT rankings (http://profootballfocus.com/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2009&pos=DT&stype=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=25&numgames=1).
Tyson Jackson ranked # 39 on the 3-4 DE Ranking (http://profootballfocus.com/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2009&pos=DE4&stype=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=25&numgames=1), while Glenn Dorsey ranked # 31 and Wallace Gilberry #19.

Chocolate Hog
02-09-2010, 04:19 PM
The game isn't played on paper it's played on the field. Last year the Chiefs defense sucked, this thread also sucks.

Tango&Cash
02-09-2010, 04:21 PM
RYPG allowed - This correlates with TOP.
Turnover ratio
PPG allowed


These 3 things are the most important IMO.

I dont put in passing yards because if you're up by 20 pts in the 4th quarter the other team isn't going to run the ball, unless their coach is Herm Edwards.

Ralphy Boy
02-09-2010, 05:24 PM
The game isn't played on paper it's played on the field. Last year the Chiefs defense sucked, this thread also sucks.

Wow! I had no idea. Thanks for letting me know. I feel like such a fool.

RYPG allowed - This correlates with TOP.
Turnover ratio
PPG allowed


These 3 things are the most important IMO.

I dont put in passing yards because if you're up by 20 pts in the 4th quarter the other team isn't going to run the ball, unless their coach is Herm Edwards.

Not sure I'm tracking you.

milkman
02-10-2010, 09:52 AM
Wow! I had no idea. Thanks for letting me know. I feel like such a fool.

I think his point is that you really don't need to go through this time consuming statisical data to see that the Chiefs defensive problems are at the nose, the LB positions (all four) and the safeties.

Ralphy Boy
02-10-2010, 11:13 AM
I think his point is that you really don't need to go through this time consuming statisical data to see that the Chiefs defensive problems are at the nose, the LB positions (all four) and the safeties.

Yeah but he was a dick about it and like I said you could use it for several things. Didn't really care if it was a popular thread with a bunch of posts, just some data I thought I would share.

I get what your saying about the positions we need help in, but how would you rank the greatest area of need? Don't try to pretend that we'll just stay where we are slotted and draft the BAA, since obviously we learned last year that isn't going to happen.

Those in the Berry camp rank him top, McClain camp rank him top, Dan Williams camp (few if any) rank him top, some want a trade down to get a pass rushing OLB or to pay Peppers big money and of course there are those that want a OT.

Here's how I see it.
We had the 12th lowest completion % allowed, yet were ranked 31st in sacks. In years past the standing POV here on CP has been that if you give a QB all day to throw, no secondary can cover them. Obviously that is, at least in part, BS. For a change we actually have capable corners and I shudder to think how good they could be with more of a pass rush or a dominant safety playing over the top, but I wouldn't say that is our greatest need. What good does an elite secondary do us if opposing teams can run over us? We were ranked 7th in fewest opposing passing attempts & 9th in fewest passing completions simply because we had the 31st ranked run defense. We were ranked #26 in allowing 15 yards of 20+ yard runs, 27th in rushing TD's & 28th in rushing first downs allowed.

I've already mentioned that I really like Eric Berry but unless we address the LB & NT needs effectively some other way, I don't think anyone would see any real improvement of our defense next year. Unless he played up in the box and he wouldn't. Then all the haters would start saying what a waste of a pick he was, Pioli doesn't know what he's doing, etc.

Like I said, you can draw a lot of different conclusions from it, if you actually take the time, instead of just blankly stating "this thread sucks" and while I didn't necessarily expect everyone to want the data I put out there, I figured there were some that would.