[stupac2]

Here's the table for this week:

Team	O YPP	D YPP	Net YPP
UW	6.62	3.58	3.04
Oregon	6.36	4.57	1.79
Stanford	7.67	6.01	1.66
ND	6.44	4.83	1.61
WSU	6.02	4.47	1.55
Arizona	6.8	5.55	1.25
USC	6.44	5.25	1.19
Utah	5.74	4.71	1.03
UCLA	7.15	6.41	0.74
SDSU	5.85	5.11	0.74
Colorado	5.7	5.87	-0.17
California	4.79	5.47	-0.68
ASU	5.6	6.92	-1.32
ORST	5.17	6.56	-1.39
Rice	4.84	6.35	-1.51

The matchup this week is clearly a big one. As I posted elsewhere Oregon's apparently strong run defense is mostly a result of having played crappy run teams, of course we said the same about Utah and they did a good (although not good enough!) job containing our rushing attack for most of the night. Hopefully we'll be swapping spots next week.

I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something? Leach doesn't turtle on offense, so it's not a bunch of 1-yard runs dragging the average down, I wouldn't think.

[stupac2]

Here's the table for this week:

Team	O YPP	D YPP	Net YPP
UW	6.62	3.58	3.04
Oregon	6.36	4.57	1.79
Stanford	7.67	6.01	1.66
ND	6.44	4.83	1.61
WSU	6.02	4.47	1.55
Arizona	6.8	5.55	1.25
USC	6.44	5.25	1.19
Utah	5.74	4.71	1.03
UCLA	7.15	6.41	0.74
SDSU	5.85	5.11	0.74
Colorado	5.7	5.87	-0.17
California	4.79	5.47	-0.68
ASU	5.6	6.92	-1.32
ORST	5.17	6.56	-1.39
Rice	4.84	6.35	-1.51

The matchup this week is clearly a big one. As I posted elsewhere Oregon's apparently strong run defense is mostly a result of having played crappy run teams, of course we said the same about Utah and they did a good (although not good enough!) job containing our rushing attack for most of the night. Hopefully we'll be swapping spots next week.

I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something? Leach doesn't turtle on offense, so it's not a bunch of 1-yard runs dragging the average down, I wouldn't think.

[Spiny_Norman]

I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something? Leach doesn't turtle on offense, so it's not a bunch of 1-yard runs dragging the average down, I wouldn't think.

Two stats provide some insight.

WSU is #6 in the country in 3rd down defense.  Opponents only converting 24.7% of the time on 3rd down.
WSU defense is #5 in the country in takeaways with 15 takeaways in 6 games.

U.SC was 2 for 11 on 3rd down. Oregon was 2 for 17 on 3rd down.  A defense can give up some big plays, but they can be very successful if they stop the opponent on 3rd down (and also get turnovers).

As a point of contrast, Stanford is #111 in the country in 3rd down defense at 45.9%

[Spiny_Norman]

I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something? Leach doesn't turtle on offense, so it's not a bunch of 1-yard runs dragging the average down, I wouldn't think.

Two stats provide some insight.

WSU is #6 in the country in 3rd down defense.  Opponents only converting 24.7% of the time on 3rd down.
WSU defense is #5 in the country in takeaways with 15 takeaways in 6 games.

U.SC was 2 for 11 on 3rd down. Oregon was 2 for 17 on 3rd down.  A defense can give up some big plays, but they can be very successful if they stop the opponent on 3rd down (and also get turnovers).

As a point of contrast, Stanford is #111 in the country in 3rd down defense at 45.9%

[CTcard]

I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something?

Well, I had a theory, but not sure how well it stands up to scrutiny.

For a pass-all-the-time team, WSU has surprisingly few big plays and surprisingly high amount of ball control. That happens with a mostly dink and dunk approach.

So, WSU has the second highest number of first downs per game in the Pac 12.
WSU has the second highest time of possession in the Pac 12.
WSU does have a lot of 10+ plays, but they drop to ninth in number of 30+ yards plays.
[Stanford is 8th in 10+ yard plays, but #1 in 20+, 30+, 40+, 50+, and 60+ yard plays - the Love effect.]

However, one might think this should mean WSU would look much better in FEI (which is drive based) than S&P+ (which is play based). However, WSU is #32 in FEI, #17 in S&P+.
Fremeau hasn't yet released his more detailed per drive stats, so it is hard to break that down much.

Also of note on WSU, they appear to be stronger on defense than offense.
Note that they are #2 on your list in defensive yds/play, but only #8 on offense.

Stanford in contrast, is #1 on the list in offense yds/play, but #11 on defense.
[at least on the offense side, more of the Love big-play efffect}

[CTcard]

I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something?

Well, I had a theory, but not sure how well it stands up to scrutiny.

For a pass-all-the-time team, WSU has surprisingly few big plays and surprisingly high amount of ball control. That happens with a mostly dink and dunk approach.

So, WSU has the second highest number of first downs per game in the Pac 12.
WSU has the second highest time of possession in the Pac 12.
WSU does have a lot of 10+ plays, but they drop to ninth in number of 30+ yards plays.
[Stanford is 8th in 10+ yard plays, but #1 in 20+, 30+, 40+, 50+, and 60+ yard plays - the Love effect.]

However, one might think this should mean WSU would look much better in FEI (which is drive based) than S&P+ (which is play based). However, WSU is #32 in FEI, #17 in S&P+.
Fremeau hasn't yet released his more detailed per drive stats, so it is hard to break that down much.

Also of note on WSU, they appear to be stronger on defense than offense.
Note that they are #2 on your list in defensive yds/play, but only #8 on offense.

Stanford in contrast, is #1 on the list in offense yds/play, but #11 on defense.
[at least on the offense side, more of the Love big-play efffect}

[needle]

This chart suggests that while we've all written so, so much about the offense and its limitations, it's really defensively where the team has struggled this year.

[needle]

This chart suggests that while we've all written so, so much about the offense and its limitations, it's really defensively where the team has struggled this year.

[BostonCard]

This chart suggests that while we've all written so, so much about the offense and its limitations, it's really defensively where the team has struggled this year.

Yup.  That's what was nice about Saturday's game.

BC

[BostonCard]

This chart suggests that while we've all written so, so much about the offense and its limitations, it's really defensively where the team has struggled this year.

Yup.  That's what was nice about Saturday's game.

BC

[stupac2]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=17637.msg205339#msg205339 date=1507566239]
I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something? Leach doesn't turtle on offense, so it's not a bunch of 1-yard runs dragging the average down, I wouldn't think.

Two stats provide some insight.

WSU is #6 in the country in 3rd down defense.  Opponents only converting 24.7% of the time on 3rd down.
WSU defense is #5 in the country in takeaways with 15 takeaways in 6 games.

U.SC was 2 for 11 on 3rd down. Oregon was 2 for 17 on 3rd down.  A defense can give up some big plays, but they can be very successful if they stop the opponent on 3rd down (and also get turnovers).

As a point of contrast, Stanford is #111 in the country in 3rd down defense at 45.9%
[/quote]

That's interesting to me because it points toward them getting lucky. I don't believe there's anything special about 3rd down defense that allows you to be particularly good at it compared to other downs. And turnovers are really random, you can create more chances for them but actually getting them involves some luck.

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=17637.msg205339#msg205339 date=1507566239]
I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something?

Well, I had a theory, but not sure how well it stands up to scrutiny.

For a pass-all-the-time team, WSU has surprisingly few big plays and surprisingly high amount of ball control. That happens with a mostly dink and dunk approach.

So, WSU has the second highest number of first downs per game in the Pac 12.
WSU has the second highest time of possession in the Pac 12.
WSU does have a lot of 10+ plays, but they drop to ninth in number of 30+ yards plays.
[Stanford is 8th in 10+ yard plays, but #1 in 20+, 30+, 40+, 50+, and 60+ yard plays - the Love effect.]

However, one might think this should mean WSU would look much better in FEI (which is drive based) than S&P+ (which is play based). However, WSU is #32 in FEI, #17 in S&P+.
Fremeau hasn't yet released his more detailed per drive stats, so it is hard to break that down much.

Also of note on WSU, they appear to be stronger on defense than offense.
Note that they are #2 on your list in defensive yds/play, but only #8 on offense.

Stanford in contrast, is #1 on the list in offense yds/play, but #11 on defense.
[at least on the offense side, more of the Love big-play efffect}

[/quote]

The difference in FEI and S&P+ could be due to pre-season expectations, I believe FEI is still using them and S&P+ might not be. Could also be something like opponent adjustments or that sort of thing. But I think there's a more direct analysis of this, looking up Connelly's team profile for WSU. Interestingly WSU (offensively at least) is middling, in the 40's or 50's at everything, including efficiency and explosiveness. It's the defense where he agrees with you, #14 in efficiency but #50 in explosiveness.

Also of note: he has them as getting 6 "extra" turnovers, suggesting that they're benefiting from some luck.

Also of note #2: they're defensive ranking seems to rest on having a great pass defense.

Looking into that has me more optimistic about that matchup than I was before. Of course I remember our last trip up there, it'll be a tough one. I miss Wulff.

[stupac2]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=17637.msg205339#msg205339 date=1507566239]
I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something? Leach doesn't turtle on offense, so it's not a bunch of 1-yard runs dragging the average down, I wouldn't think.

Two stats provide some insight.

WSU is #6 in the country in 3rd down defense.  Opponents only converting 24.7% of the time on 3rd down.
WSU defense is #5 in the country in takeaways with 15 takeaways in 6 games.

U.SC was 2 for 11 on 3rd down. Oregon was 2 for 17 on 3rd down.  A defense can give up some big plays, but they can be very successful if they stop the opponent on 3rd down (and also get turnovers).

As a point of contrast, Stanford is #111 in the country in 3rd down defense at 45.9%
[/quote]

That's interesting to me because it points toward them getting lucky. I don't believe there's anything special about 3rd down defense that allows you to be particularly good at it compared to other downs. And turnovers are really random, you can create more chances for them but actually getting them involves some luck.

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=17637.msg205339#msg205339 date=1507566239]
I'm also surprised at how low WSU is here. Has anyone been watching their games and have any idea what the deal is? They've been pretty dominant on the scoreboard, is it just slipping into prevent-ish defense early and giving up lots of big plays in garbage time or something?

Well, I had a theory, but not sure how well it stands up to scrutiny.

For a pass-all-the-time team, WSU has surprisingly few big plays and surprisingly high amount of ball control. That happens with a mostly dink and dunk approach.

So, WSU has the second highest number of first downs per game in the Pac 12.
WSU has the second highest time of possession in the Pac 12.
WSU does have a lot of 10+ plays, but they drop to ninth in number of 30+ yards plays.
[Stanford is 8th in 10+ yard plays, but #1 in 20+, 30+, 40+, 50+, and 60+ yard plays - the Love effect.]

However, one might think this should mean WSU would look much better in FEI (which is drive based) than S&P+ (which is play based). However, WSU is #32 in FEI, #17 in S&P+.
Fremeau hasn't yet released his more detailed per drive stats, so it is hard to break that down much.

Also of note on WSU, they appear to be stronger on defense than offense.
Note that they are #2 on your list in defensive yds/play, but only #8 on offense.

Stanford in contrast, is #1 on the list in offense yds/play, but #11 on defense.
[at least on the offense side, more of the Love big-play efffect}

[/quote]

The difference in FEI and S&P+ could be due to pre-season expectations, I believe FEI is still using them and S&P+ might not be. Could also be something like opponent adjustments or that sort of thing. But I think there's a more direct analysis of this, looking up Connelly's team profile for WSU. Interestingly WSU (offensively at least) is middling, in the 40's or 50's at everything, including efficiency and explosiveness. It's the defense where he agrees with you, #14 in efficiency but #50 in explosiveness.

Also of note: he has them as getting 6 "extra" turnovers, suggesting that they're benefiting from some luck.

Also of note #2: they're defensive ranking seems to rest on having a great pass defense.

Looking into that has me more optimistic about that matchup than I was before. Of course I remember our last trip up there, it'll be a tough one. I miss Wulff.

[teejers1]

I'm not an analytics guy, but I suspect that third down efficiency has a high correlation to what third down distance you're facing.  Stanford seems to have a lot of third and longs (stuffed run, incomplete pass, being paradigm).

Does anyone else get more excited this season over third down conversions?  And the one play against Utah where Stanford converted a 2H third and long (Chryst pass to someone, with max protect) was downright "H."  Seemingly gone are the days of routine 3rd and 2-4 yards.  Again, I'm not a numbers cruncher so this gut feel may not be supported by the numbers.

But it sure seems that way . . .   

[teejers1]

I'm not an analytics guy, but I suspect that third down efficiency has a high correlation to what third down distance you're facing.  Stanford seems to have a lot of third and longs (stuffed run, incomplete pass, being paradigm).

Does anyone else get more excited this season over third down conversions?  And the one play against Utah where Stanford converted a 2H third and long (Chryst pass to someone, with max protect) was downright "H."  Seemingly gone are the days of routine 3rd and 2-4 yards.  Again, I'm not a numbers cruncher so this gut feel may not be supported by the numbers.

But it sure seems that way . . .