The Giants offense according to starting field position

[DallasEast]

A few snapshots of what has happened at the end of New York offensive drives after they began their drives at their:

§ 20-yard line or deeper
§ Between their 21 or 30 yard line
§ Between their 31 to 50-yard line
§ Inside their opponent’s territory

http://i356.***BLOCKED***/albums/oo4/DallasEast1701/touchdowns.jpg ...... http://i356.***BLOCKED***/albums/oo4/DallasEast1701/fieldgoals-1.jpg​

When the Giants’ have started their offensive drives closer to the opponents’ endzone, a higher percentage of their drives have ended with field goals than touchdowns. This may be true of most teams, but I haven’t applied the same principle to other teams’ offenses to make certain. I just thought it was kinda unusual that one of the best teams in the league’s offenses found the endzone more often with a longer field than with a shorter field.

 

[parchy]

I think if you made a graph like that for any team in the league, it'd look a lot like that one. All it means is that we have almost no shot of stopping them inside the 20 with our crappy secondary. If they get past the 50 our D's chances of stopping them from scoring go way, way down.

I just have nightmares of Plaxico destroying our smaller defenders like he does every year. He always burns us.

 

[windward]

So to keep it close we shoul focus on short punts and turnovers on our side of the field, right?

 

[Temo]

The first graph is suprising; the second seems about right.

What are the sample sizes here?

EDIT: Here's a graph of expected points per drive, based on starting field position (From advancednflstats.com)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3122/2723338601_713161096f.jpg?v=0

 

[DallasEast]

I think if you made a graph like that for any team in the league, it'd look a lot like that one. All it means is that we have almost no shot of stopping them inside the 20 with our crappy secondary. If they get past the 50 our D's chances of stopping them from scoring go way, way down.

I just have nightmares of Plaxico destroying our smaller defenders like he does every year. He always burns us.

Out of their 12 probable scoring possessions which have started in opponents territory (against the Rams and 49ers) which ended with touchdowns, the Giants came away with only two touchdowns. That's against the 26th and 18th ranked pass defenses. Hopefully, our 14th ranked pass defense can do as well or better today.

 

[DallasEast]

The first graph is suprising; the second seems about right.

What are the sample sizes here?

EDIT: Here's a graph of expected points per drive, based on starting field position (From advancednflstats.com)

EDIT: The sample size is 71 offensive drives, which do not include drives which ended in kneel downs to finish halves or games.

 

[DallasEast]

So to keep it close we shoul focus on short punts and turnovers on our side of the field, right?

Let's hope not. There's only so much prayer to go around.

 

[theogt]

That is pretty odd. Yay for sucky special teams?

 

[Temo]

Just thought I'd dig this up and show that the Giants completely reversed this trend against the Cowboys

Good research still, OP.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

very interesting.......but, that is always the goal to have the Giants start out on their 1

 

[AdamJT13]

Just thought I'd dig this up and show that the Giants completely reversed this trend against the Cowboys

Good research still, OP.

And we still haven't scored a single touchdown (and only two field goals) on a possession that STARTED in the opponent's territory. We recovered a fumble at the Giants' 16, and Owens fumbled it right back two plays later. That makes us 0-for-12 this season.

 

[jobberone]

And we still haven't scored a single touchdown (and only two field goals) on a possession that STARTED in the opponent's territory. We recovered a fumble at the Giants' 16, and Owens fumbled it right back two plays later. That makes us 0-for-12 this season.

Wow. That and turnovers says an awful lot about this team.

That stuff is supposed to even out.

So when do we start with that???

 

[Temo]

And we still haven't scored a single touchdown (and only two field goals) on a possession that STARTED in the opponent's territory. We recovered a fumble at the Giants' 16, and Owens fumbled it right back two plays later. That makes us 0-for-12 this season.

There's no good reason that a team should perform like that though. I'd think it was just a product of small sample size, and the cowboys could be in for a reversing of that trend, much like what the Giants did in the last game.

It's just a fluke, essentially.

 

[cowboyed]

And we still haven't scored a single touchdown (and only two field goals) on a possession that STARTED in the opponent's territory. We recovered a fumble at the Giants' 16, and Owens fumbled it right back two plays later. That makes us 0-for-12 this season.

That is unbelievably shocking. Not so long ago it seemed if we had outstanding field position scoring a TD would be a no-brainer.

 

[AdamJT13]

It's just a fluke, essentially.

Probably -- especially considering that going into the Giants game, we led the NFL in offensive touchdowns. That's amazing, considering that EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM started on our side of the 50.

 

[Temo]

Probably -- especially considering that going into the Giants game, we led the NFL in offensive touchdowns. That's amazing, considering that EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM started on our side of the 50.

I wanted to find out exactly how unlikely this is to happen. So here's my assumptions.

The cowboys have scored TDs on 25% of their drives this season (excluding end-of-half, kneel down, etc.) Lets say that for drives that occur on the opposing side of the field, your chance to score goes up by 50% (probably over estimating, but what the hell).

That means that the Cowboys should score on 37.5% of these 12 drives. Or about 4 and a half of them (on average). By the binomial probability, the chance of not scoring a touchdown on any one of those twelve chances is (n=12,p=0.375,k=0):

0.355%

Now that's pretty crazy!

 

[AdamJT13]

I wanted to find out exactly how unlikely this is to happen. So here's my assumptions.

The cowboys have scored TDs on 25% of their drives this season (excluding end-of-half, kneel down, etc.) Lets say that for drives that occur on the opposing side of the field, your chance to score goes up by 50% (probably over estimating, but what the hell).

That means that the Cowboys should score on 37.5% of these 12 drives. Or about 4 and a half of them (on average). By the binomial probability, the chance of not scoring a touchdown on any one of those twelve chances is (n=12,p=0.375,k=0):

0.355%

Now that's pretty crazy!

In 2006, NFL teams scored touchdowns on 15.7 percent of the possessions started on the offense's own half of the field. When they started in the opponent's territory, it went up to 34.9 percent -- more than double. (I don't think those exclude end-of-half/kneel-down possessions, though.)

If we've scored touchdowns on 25 percent of ALL our possesions, that means we should have scored touchdowns on about 59 percent of those we started across the 50 -- or about seven out of the 12.

 

[LeonDixson]

In 2006, NFL teams scored touchdowns on 15.7 percent of the possessions started on the offense's own half of the field. When they started in the opponent's territory, it went up to 34.9 percent -- more than double. (I don't think those exclude end-of-half/kneel-down possessions, though.)

If we've scored touchdowns on 25 percent of ALL our possesions, that means we should have scored touchdowns on about 59 percent of those we started across the 50 -- or about seven out of the 12.

That's quite amazing. It's sort of like the fact that teams never missed a FG against the Cowboys in an ungodly number of tries. I think the trend went for at least a season and a half. Maybe 2 seasons. Do you have the #'s on that, Adam?

 

[AdamJT13]

That's quite amazing. It's sort of like the fact that teams never missed a FG against the Cowboys in an ungodly number of tries. I think the trend went for at least a season and a half. Maybe 2 seasons. Do you have the #'s on that, Adam?

You're probably thinking of our opponents' streak from December 2002 to the middle of the 2005 season, when they went 70-for-74 on field goals — without a single miss from less than 48 yards.

By the way, right now, our opponents have made 25 of their past 27 field goals, with the only misses coming from 54 yards and 51 yards. The last time our opponent missed a kick of less than 50 yards was Week 15 of last year.

 

[LeonDixson]

You're probably thinking of our opponents' streak from December 2002 to the middle of the 2005 season, when they went 70-for-74 on field goals — without a single miss from less than 48 yards.

Yes, that's what I was thinking about

By the way, right now, our opponents have made 25 of their past 27 field goals, with the only misses coming from 54 yards and 51 yards. The last time our opponent missed a kick of less than 50 yards was Week 15 of last year.

Incredible! Why us, Lord???