Running game is why the defense looks better

[percyhoward]

I said it was a factor.

So did I.

"The Cowboys' offense has definitely been a factor in limiting the number of opponents' drives, but the offense is not a factor in how the defense has performed on those drives."

 

[jobberone]

Page 7. What can I say that hasn't been said already in a thread this deep? In this case, I will make an exception and reply.

Why on earth would anyone try to make the argument that our success on defense has to do entirely with the running game and our defense is over achieving? Screw the stats. Just look at my signature and you'll see what I think of stats.

All you have to do is use your eyes to observe performance, execution, and talent. This defense has the makings of something great. We are one solid defensive draft away from nailing it.

People seem to forget that observation is the basis for science. But I'm as guilty as others for getting into stats. You need both but your eyes are keen instruments.

 

[percyhoward]

If being fresh on defense doesn't matter, besides moving from base to nickel, why do we rotate personnel ? Can you answer that? Why not give guys on the d-line 60 snaps?

You think the connection between the offense's TOP and the way we rotate personnel on defense is different from that of other teams.

 

[Sportsbabe]

Damn. G money, Outlaw , and Adam shut this down. With well interpreted stats and facts. Wow. That was an old fashion butt whipping.

Must be embarrassing for some.

Be careful, the language

 

[percyhoward]

There was some debate in another thread as to what the actual impact is of time of possession and controlling the clock thus limiting the number of plays the other offense has.

There was also some debate as to whether this defense is improved, and if so, that the improvement is more of a reason as to why we are top 10 in time of possession vs the offense controlling the clock.

So I looked at some stats, per play stats for the defense. Total yardage, points, first downs etc are really meaning less. You need to compare play to play.

But to really demonstrate this point I will list our rankings for Totals:
Total 1st Downs: 1
Total 3rd Downs: 6
Total Points: 10
Total Yards: 14

Looks awesome right? Pretty dominant, top 10 kind of defense. But not so fast.

We are also leading the league in Defensive Plays per game. (56.7) Let's see how we look at a play per play basis:
1st Downs per play:10
3rd Downs per play:19
Points per play:18
Yards per play:27

Not so hot anymore. Let's also throw in 18th for 3rd Down Conversion %. Do these numbers really support the idea that the defense is getting a lot of 3 and outs? Stopping the offense? And speaking of opposing offenses, aside from New Orleans and Seattle ( 7 and 8 respectively) the other 5 opponents are as follows:
NY: 15
San Fran: 21
St Louis: 23
Houston: 24
Tennessee: 29

Now let's compare our offense and defense to that of Philly, because Philly is a fast past offense and we will be playing them soon. Philly is ranked 31st in TOP, we are ranked 2nd. Philly is ranked 3rd in number of plays, we are ranked 7th. Philly averages 22.82 seconds per play (32nd), we average 30.80 (1st).

Philly's defense is also ranked 31st in Defensive Plays per game. 15.1 more plays per game than Dallas.

What would our defense look like from a Totals perspective if they had to be on the field 15.1 more plays a game?
Total 1st Downs: 25
Total 3rd Downs: 19
Total Points: 27
Total Yards: 32

Looks very much like last year.

What's saving us is that we are running the ball. We are #1 in the league in rushing attempts per game (33.6) That's up from only 21 attempts per game last year. We are up on number of offensive plays per game 65.9 compared to 59.8. We average 30.8 seconds per play, up from 29.11. We are controlling the ball 4 minutes and 40 seconds longer this year than last year.

So yes, the running game is helping the defense, very much in fact. And no, the defense is not really much better than last year and should still be a big concern, especially come playoff time.

Remember, the thread title is "Running game is why the defense looks better."

It's already been shown that about 25% of the drop in points allowed is due to the offense's increase in TOP. That's what guys like Jimmy and Mooch are talking about when they say the offense is helping the defense. They're right, it is. But it's only a small part of "why the defense looks better." Most of it is simply the fact that the defense is playing better. The drive stats show this. They also show that there is no correlation between having a top 10 offense in TOP and a top 10 defense in points allowed.

Some further proof that the defense is largely making its own way so far. If we're benefiting disproportionately from being "fresher" (because of the offense's increased TOP), then it stands to reason that our true colors would show in the first half of the game, when all defenses are still fresh. Without the advantage of being any fresher than the others, we should be exposed as a bad defense right there in the first half. The freshness factor should then kick in some time late in the 3rd quarter, and by the 4th quarter our "league's freshest" defense should be playing much better compared to the others. But that's not happening.

1st half defense
35 drives, 52 points 1.49 pts/drive
drives ending in scores: 23% (2nd)
yards per drive: 24.8 (4th)
drives ending in punts: 51% (7th)
average drive start: 27-yard line (19th)

offense: 128 passes 116 runs

2nd half defense
38 drives, 74 points 1.95 pts/drive
drives ending in scores: 37% (17th)
yards per drive: 37.1 (25th)
drives ending in punts: 26% (27th)
average drive start: 26-yard line (12th)

offense: 98 passes 119 runs

Even with better starting field position from the defense's point of view, and even with the offense running the ball more, the defense's rankings drop considerably in the 2nd half of the game.

If we aren't making up lost ground on tired defenses in the 2nd half to make the D look better than it is, than when is it supposedly happening?

 

[jobberone]

Remember, the thread title is "Running game is why the defense looks better."

It's already been shown that about 25% of the drop in points allowed is due to the offense's increase in TOP. That's what guys like Jimmy and Mooch are talking about when they say the offense is helping the defense. They're right, it is. But it's only a small part of "why the defense looks better." Most of it is simply the fact that the defense is playing better. The drive stats show this. They also show that there is no correlation between having a top 10 offense in TOP and a top 10 defense in points allowed.

Some further proof that the defense is largely making its own way so far. If we're benefiting disproportionately from being "fresher" (because of the offense's increased TOP), then it stands to reason that our true colors would show in the first half of the game, when all defenses are still fresh. Without the advantage of being any fresher than the others, we should be exposed as a bad defense right there in the first half. The freshness factor should then kick in some time late in the 3rd quarter, and by the 4th quarter our "league's freshest" defense should be playing much better compared to the others. But that's not happening.

1st half defense
35 drives, 52 points 1.49 pts/drive
drives ending in scores: 23% (2nd)
yards per drive: 24.8 (4th)
drives ending in punts: 51% (7th)
average drive start: 27-yard line (19th)

offense: 128 passes 116 runs

2nd half defense
38 drives, 74 points 1.95 pts/drive
drives ending in scores: 37% (17th)
yards per drive: 37.1 (25th)
drives ending in punts: 26% (27th)
average drive start: 26-yard line (12th)

offense: 98 passes 119 runs

Even with better starting field position from the defense's point of view, and even with the offense running the ball more, the defense's rankings drop considerably in the 2nd half of the game.

If we aren't making up lost ground on tired defenses in the 2nd half to make the D look better than it is, than when is it supposedly happening?

Love the stats but those stats mean nothing without correlation with the game circumstances and defenses played. We've come from behind in some of those games but we've also played with a lead. And we've traded yardage for time and played to protect from the big play. That's just one aspect of where the stats don't tell the entire story but it makes the point.

A favorite instructor once said, "Get your head out of the cockpit and away from those gauges so much ; look around you and fly the airplane!".

 

[percyhoward]

Love the stats but those stats mean nothing without correlation with the game circumstances and defenses played. We've come from behind in some of those games but we've also played with a lead. And we've traded yardage for time and played to protect from the big play. That's just one aspect of where the stats don't tell the entire story but it makes the point.

A favorite instructor once said, "Get your head out of the cockpit and away from those gauges so much ; look around you and fly the airplane!".

Well, at least we agree that observation is everything, but that's kinda the point.

If we're getting a boost in PPD because we're fresher, then we should be able to "look around" and see bad defense in the first half of games. The point is not that the defense is worse in the second half. You gave some valid reasons as to why it might be. The point is that it's so good in the first half.

 

[DanteEXT]

Love the stats but those stats mean nothing without correlation with the game circumstances and defenses played. We've come from behind in some of those games but we've also played with a lead. And we've traded yardage for time and played to protect from the big play. That's just one aspect of where the stats don't tell the entire story but it makes the point.

A favorite instructor once said, "Get your head out of the cockpit and away from those gauges so much ; look around you and fly the airplane!".

Saints scored 14 of those 2nd half points percy pointed out. Huge lead in that one. Saints averaged 8.76 ypp the 2nd half also.

I'm not really sure about the other games off the top of my head.

 

[percyhoward]

Saints scored 14 of those 2nd half points percy pointed out. Huge lead in that one. Saints averaged 8.76 ypp the 2nd half also.

I'm not really sure about the other games off the top of my head.

The myth I'm busting is that having a fresh defense has given us a boost in points allowed per drive. In that game, we allowed 0 points in the first half.

Fatigue wouldn't be a factor in the first half, so the question would be, what gave us that advantage?

 

[JD_KaPow]

The question isn't whether you'd rather have a fresh defense or a tired one, it's how much of the defensive performance is attributable to the offense's increase in TOP.

You said, "The Cowboys' offense has definitely been a factor in limiting the number of opponents' drives, but the offense is not a factor in how the defense has performed on those drives."

The proposed relationship is:
Offense's increase in TOP -> fewer drives against defense -> less time the defense is on the field -> fresher defense -> better performance by the defense when they are on the field.

I'm not certain how to prove or disprove this hypothesis, but the data you showed (lots of teams with ball-controlling offenses but crummy defensive performance) does not disprove it.

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

I'm not certain how to prove or disprove this hypothesis, but the data you showed (lots of teams with ball-controlling offenses but crummy defensive performance) does not disprove it.

No, but it does begin to show a lack of correlation between freshness and performance. I suppose if one wanted to one could run a regression to confirm the apparently weak correlation.

 

[percyhoward]

You said, "The Cowboys' offense has definitely been a factor in limiting the number of opponents' drives, but the offense is not a factor in how the defense has performed on those drives."

The proposed relationship is:
Offense's increase in TOP -> fewer drives against defense -> less time the defense is on the field -> fresher defense -> better performance by the defense when they are on the field.

"The offense's TOP" refers to drive stats. Using simple TOP per game, you wouldn't know what part of the TOP belonged to the offense. On a per-game basis, the offense's increased TOP has made a difference in points allowed. That doesn't mean there has been any effect at all on each drive, however.

If our defense is benefiting from being rested in periods during a game when most other defenses are tired, where is the evidence of this?

 

[JD_KaPow]

"The offense's TOP" refers to drive stats. Using simple TOP per game, you wouldn't know what part of the TOP belonged to the offense. On a per-game basis, the offense's increased TOP has made a difference in points allowed. That doesn't mean there has been any effect at all on each drive, however.

If our defense is benefiting from being rested in periods during a game when most other defenses are tired, where is the evidence of this?

As I said, I don't think I've seen any good evidence one way or the other on this one, nor do I know how to gather any. But I'm very curious about how much of an effect there may be.

 

[AdamJT13]

The proposed relationship is:
Offense's increase in TOP -> fewer drives against defense -> less time the defense is on the field -> fresher defense -> better performance by the defense when they are on the field.

The question is when does that "freshness" take effect? Are they fresher in the first five minutes of the game? Are they fresher at the end of the first quarter? Are they fresher in the second quarter? The third? The fourth? How much fresher are they at each point in the game? And how much effect does "freshness" have on the defense?

The idea that the offense (or even just "the running game," which is another subject altogether) is "why the defense looks better" implies that the defense is not better on its own, but there is plenty of evidence that the opposite is true -- the defense is playing better than last year regardless of any "freshness" or fatigue.

Not to mention the question of how much the offense contributes to the defense being fresher and how much of it is more rotating among the defensive players, better conditioning, better athletes, etc.

 

[JD_KaPow]

The question is when does that "freshness" take effect? Are they fresher in the first five minutes of the game? Are they fresher at the end of the first quarter? Are they fresher in the second quarter? The third? The fourth? How much fresher are they at each point in the game? And how much effect does "freshness" have on the defense?

The idea that the offense (or even just "the running game," which is another subject altogether) is "why the defense looks better" implies that the defense is not better on its own, but there is plenty of evidence that the opposite is true -- the defense is playing better than last year regardless of any "freshness" or fatigue.

Not to mention the question of how much the offense contributes to the defense being fresher and how much of it is more rotating among the defensive players, better conditioning, better athletes, etc.

Absolutely. The question I'm interested in is: given the same defensive players and scheme, how much does a defense's ability change as a function of time on the field? Like I said, I'm curious about this, and assume there must be some effect, but I know of no way to effectively measure it. The effect would, one might think, be most pronounced in 4th-quarter drives, but the offense and defense are often approaching 4th-quarter drives very differently from drives in the rest of the game.

The larger questions are, "why is the Dallas defense achieving better outcomes?" and "can we expect those improved outcomes to continue in future games?" To answer those, one needs to tease out the various contributions to the improved outcomes and try to figure out which of those are sustainable or not. The "freshness" contribution is one that would be sustainable, but is very hard to quantify. I accept that it's probably quite small.

 

[jobberone]

Well, at least we agree that observation is everything, but that's kinda the point.

If we're getting a boost in PPD because we're fresher, then we should be able to "look around" and see bad defense in the first half of games. The point is not that the defense is worse in the second half. You gave some valid reasons as to why it might be. The point is that it's so good in the first half.

I'm only arguing that one post not everything that's been said one way or another in this very excellent thread. It's quite obvious they are playing better this year and there are many reasons as to why. But they have a ways to go. There are reasons why it takes awhile for a defense to get going at the beginning of a game that has nothing to do with being fresh. And of course you have 'fresh' players going up against 'fresh' players so it's not unusual for it to take awhile to see results.

 

[Brooksey]

The myth I'm busting is that having a fresh defense has given us a boost in points allowed per drive. In that game, we allowed 0 points in the first half.

Fatigue wouldn't be a factor in the first half, so the question would be, what gave us that advantage?

You're not busting any myth. To sit here and say a fresher defense has not helped our defense is a big stretch. Nobody said it was the exclusive reason.

 

[5Stars]

I'm only arguing that one post not everything that's been said one way or another in this very excellent thread. It's quite obvious they are playing better this year and there are many reasons as to why. But they have a ways to go. There are reasons why it takes awhile for a defense to get going at the beginning of a game that has nothing to do with being fresh. And of course you have 'fresh' players going up against 'fresh' players so it's not unusual for it to take awhile to see results.

How can anyone quantify about how this team has progressed?

It's all 1's and 0's.

(stupid 011010010)

 

[jobberone]

How can anyone quantify about how this team has progressed?

It's all 1's and 0's.

(stupid 011010010)

 

[percyhoward]

I'm only arguing that one post not everything that's been said one way or another in this very excellent thread. It's quite obvious they are playing better this year and there are many reasons as to why. But they have a ways to go. There are reasons why it takes awhile for a defense to get going at the beginning of a game that has nothing to do with being fresh. And of course you have 'fresh' players going up against 'fresh' players so it's not unusual for it to take awhile to see results.

To clarify, the upshot is that this defense has been one of the best first-half defenses in the league.