Chiefs Please define "sustainable" - Page 6

Valiant · 12-07-2016, 10:51 AM

I would look at the last 2 seasons games. All of them. Then break them between playoff teams and non playoff teams. Look at record against. Then take the average of both for turnovers, pts off turnovers, and points the offense created on their own.

That is where if our method is sustainable or not. Denver did drive through the playoffs with it though. They out reid andy reid.

Marcellus · 12-07-2016, 01:35 PM

Somebody needs to keep stats that differentiate between random turnovers and forced turnovers.

A muffed punt or bad QB Center exchange isn't the same as a pressure on the QB causing a shitty pass that gets picked or a defensive player ripping a ball out or a sack strip fumble.

Is Alex Smith less likely to turn the ball over than any other QB in football? Yes.

Are some turnovers random? Yea.

Are all of them? No freaking way.

Its not as cut and dry as saying turnovers are all chance etc...

ThaVirus · 12-07-2016, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Somebody needs to keep stats that differentiate between random turnovers and forced turnovers.

A muffed punt or bad QB Center exchange isn't the same as a pressure on the QB causing a shitty pass that gets picked or a defensive player ripping a ball out or a sack strip fumble.

Is Alex Smith less likely to turn the ball over than any other QB in football? Yes.

Are some turnovers random? Yea.

Are all of them? No freaking way.

Its not as cut and dry as saying turnovers are all chance etc...

Definitely. That would be awesome to see.

I don't think anyone is arguing your last point, by the way.

O.city · 12-07-2016, 02:03 PM

Recovering fumbles is mostly luck.

I'm not sure about interceptions.

Either way, it does get tougher to rely on turnovers in the olayoffs, but when you have elite players that generally cause them, I'm not sure how much tougher.

If it were sabby piscatellI leading us in picks or something, maybe. But this staff seems to push turnovers and taking the ball away.

Similar to Seattle but Seattle's d is much better in most other categories

RunKC · 12-07-2016, 02:07 PM

Houston, Tamba and Ford were big parts of creating turnovers. Unfortunately 2 of those guys were hurt and we STILL dropped INT's in NE.

Mr. Laz · 12-07-2016, 02:10 PM

You generally can't count on turnovers to consistently win games over an entire season.

Just like back in 2003(i think) under Dick Vermeil. We kept winning games because of Dante Hall touchdown returns etc.

Playoffs = toast

You can't count on special teams to win games consistently either.

at some point your offense and defense has to just line up and win.

Our offense right now doesn't score consistently
Our defense right now gives up a lot of yards (29th in league)

it's a risky and inconsistent way to win

Marcellus · 12-07-2016, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

You generally can't count on turnovers to consistently win games over an entire season.

Just like back in 2003(i think) under Dick Vermeil. We kept winning games because of Dante Hall touchdown returns etc.

Playoffs = toast

You can't count on special teams to win games consistently either.

at some point your offense and defense has to just line up and win.

Our offense right now doesn't score consistently
Our defense right now gives up a lot of yards (29th in league)

it's a risky and inconsistent way to win

You could easily argue we lost in the playoffs in 2003 because of a turnover so.......

Mr. Laz · 12-07-2016, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

You could easily argue we lost in the playoffs in 2003 because of a turnover so.......

Typical Marcellus post

ignore the focal point, does his best to take a shot regardless of how irrelevant it is

sustainable
consistency
reliability

Marcellus · 12-07-2016, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

Typical Marcellus post

ignore the focal point, does his best to take a shot regardless of how irrelevant it is

sustainable
consistency
reliability

Irrelevant? Losing the turnover battle is irrelevant to this discussion?

Wow. Ok.

Mr. Laz · 12-07-2016, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Irrelevant? Losing the turnover battle is irrelevant to this discussion?

Wow. Ok.

It's not just about winning the turnover battle, you ****ing tool.

It's about winning a game with a 2 pt conversion return.

It's about these wild,spectacular plays that you can't count on happening with any "consistency"

If we were scoring on offense and forcing a bunch of 3 and outs on defense nobody would be saying shit. We aren't.

We are hanging by a thread for most of the game and then pulling it out of our ass with big turnovers late.

That is almost never sustainable ... which is what the thread is about.

(countdown until marc tries to move the goalposts ....... 3 ... 2 ... )

O.city · 12-07-2016, 02:28 PM

Scoring defense is all that really matters there. Yards aren't really a good way to determine that.

The offense needs to score more points, but I feel like we're in year 4 of this regime and they're 41 and 22.

63 games in the nfl is a pretty good sample size

Mr. Laz · 12-07-2016, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

Scoring defense is all that really matters there. Yards aren't really a good way to determine that.

The offense needs to score more points, but I feel like we're in year 4 of this regime and they're 41 and 22.

63 games in the nfl is a pretty good sample size

When your defense consistently allows long drives it changes the game in ways not in a stat box. It puts more pressure on your offense and it allows the other team's defense to rest.

Bend but don't break defenses tend to start breaking in the playoffs. Unless they are coupled with a proficient offense that forces the other team to start taking risks that lead to turnovers.

O.city · 12-07-2016, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

When your defense consistently allows long drives it changes the game in ways not in a stat box. It puts more pressure on your offense and it allows the other team's defense to rest.

Bend but don't break defenses tend to start breaking in the playoffs. Unless they are coupled with a proficient offense that forces the other team to start taking risks that lead to turnovers.

If you keep the opposing team from scoring, you're not putting pressure on your offense.

The Chiefs figure with the play makers they have, eventually teams are gonna be forced into a mistake.

Fish · 12-07-2016, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

If you keep the opposing team from scoring, you're not putting pressure on your offense.

The Chiefs figure with the play makers they have, eventually teams are gonna be forced into a mistake.

The Chiefs defense is

#24 in Points/game
#24 in Total Points
#29 in Yds/game

Not exactly keeping the opposing team from scoring.

12-07-2016, 10:51 AM	#1
Valiant Valiant 'The Thread Killer' Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Kansas City Casino cash: $4572380	I would look at the last 2 seasons games. All of them. Then break them between playoff teams and non playoff teams. Look at record against. Then take the average of both for turnovers, pts off turnovers, and points the offense created on their own. That is where if our method is sustainable or not. Denver did drive through the playoffs with it though. They out reid andy reid.
Posts: 18,550

12-07-2016, 02:03 PM	#4
O.city In Search of a Life Join Date: Jul 2009 Casino cash: $-535936	Recovering fumbles is mostly luck. I'm not sure about interceptions. Either way, it does get tougher to rely on turnovers in the olayoffs, but when you have elite players that generally cause them, I'm not sure how much tougher. If it were sabby piscatellI leading us in picks or something, maybe. But this staff seems to push turnovers and taking the ball away. Similar to Seattle but Seattle's d is much better in most other categories
Posts: 84,156

12-07-2016, 02:07 PM	#5
RunKC Andy Reid Supporter Join Date: Apr 2012 Casino cash: $-1410389	Houston, Tamba and Ford were big parts of creating turnovers. Unfortunately 2 of those guys were hurt and we STILL dropped INT's in NE. __________________ Mike Greenberg@Espngreeny I can’t fathom what it must be like to be a fan of the #Chiefs. Adopt a Chief: Jared Wiley
Posts: 52,054

12-07-2016, 02:10 PM	#6
Mr. Laz Don't Tease Me Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: KS Casino cash: $11047037	You generally can't count on turnovers to consistently win games over an entire season. Just like back in 2003(i think) under Dick Vermeil. We kept winning games because of Dante Hall touchdown returns etc. Playoffs = toast You can't count on special teams to win games consistently either. at some point your offense and defense has to just line up and win. Our offense right now doesn't score consistently Our defense right now gives up a lot of yards (29th in league) it's a risky and inconsistent way to win __________________
Posts: 95,626

12-07-2016, 02:28 PM	#11
O.city In Search of a Life Join Date: Jul 2009 Casino cash: $-535936	Scoring defense is all that really matters there. Yards aren't really a good way to determine that. The offense needs to score more points, but I feel like we're in year 4 of this regime and they're 41 and 22. 63 games in the nfl is a pretty good sample size
Posts: 84,156

12-07-2016, 01:35 PM	#2
Marcellus Diablo Negro Join Date: Sep 2003 Casino cash: $-307338	Somebody needs to keep stats that differentiate between random turnovers and forced turnovers. A muffed punt or bad QB Center exchange isn't the same as a pressure on the QB causing a shitty pass that gets picked or a defensive player ripping a ball out or a sack strip fumble. Is Alex Smith less likely to turn the ball over than any other QB in football? Yes. Are some turnovers random? Yea. Are all of them? No freaking way. Its not as cut and dry as saying turnovers are all chance etc...
Posts: 74,275