S&P+ Five Factors Matchup: UM vs. MSU
Update Note: After pondering the comparative numbers, I've tweaked the formulas so that ratios are scaled in proportion to the National Average, such that if team A is matched against an exactly average team B, the resulting metric for the team A offense vs team B defense is the same as that of team A offense by itself. If team B is worse than average, team A metrics will look better. Conversely, if team B is better than average, team A metrics will look worse.
The impact of the change results in M now having a slight Rushing IsoPPP advantage over MSU instead of being a tie.
Here's the next installation of Bill Connelly's Five Factors metrics matchup between UM & MSU. It's a bit busy, but what you see are columns of raw metrics for both offenses and defenses. The Category of the given metric is given in the column at the left. To the right of the team offense and defense metrics are the National Averages for that category. The last two columns are where the rubber meets the road...
The "M Offense vs. MSU Defense" column either averages (if inversely proportional) or takes the ratio (if not inversely related) between those two metrics to gauge the performance of the UM offense against the MSU defense. Likewise, the "MSU Offense vs. M Defense" averages or differences the other two metrics to gauge the performance of the Michigan State Offense. From there, the column with the greater aggregate number has the competitive advantage...EXCEPT, in the three categories with asterisks: "Stuff Rate", "SD Sack Rate" and "PD Sack Rate", which are contra-metrics that gauge the offense's ability to avoid the given categorical description.
Anyway, the numbers showing the advantage are in bold, and as such it appears the matchups tilt in M's favor in four of the Five Factors, including Turnovers. Breaking it down further, UM has the advantage in all but three two sub-categories, as follows:
-
Rushing IsoPPP (rushing explosiveness, measured as pts. scored per successful rushing plays). Neither team has an advantage here, as the result is draw. Also, since this metric considers successful plays only, it can be a bit deceiving. The net Rushing Success Rate for the MSU offense is about 30% lower than UM (this is about the same as what LOLRutgerz was by comparison). - Passing IsoPPP (passing down explosiveness, measured as pts. scored per successful passing play). Same idea here as with 1. and 2. Look at the Passing Success Rate: M is 50% better than MSU.
- SD IsoPPP (standard down explosiveness, measured as pts. per successful standard down). The same as against Colorado, PSU & Wisconsin, RU... Again, keep in mind that IsoPPP consider successful plays only, of which there are not a great number against the stout UM defense. Again, the success rate for UM is about 50% greater than MSU.
FIVE FACTORS (less T/O Luck) |
M Off | M Def | MSU Off | MSU Def |
Nat'l Avg. |
M Off v MSU Def |
MSU Off v M Def |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1) EXPLOSIVENESS: IsoPPP |
1.33 | 1.31 | 1.28 | 1.18 | 1.27 | 1.24 | 1.32 |
2) EFFICIENCY: Success Rate |
45.9% | 18.5% | 40.8% | 43.0% | 40.9% | 48.3% | 18.5% |
3) FIELD POSITION: Avg. FP |
37.2 | 26.7 | 28.7 | 30.2 | 29.70 | 37.83 | 25.80 |
4) FINISHING DRIVES Pts./Trip in 40 |
5.78 | 2.69 | 4.38 | 4.95 | 4.67 | 6.13 | 2.52 |
5) T/O MARGIN: T/O Luck (PPG) |
2.49 | -2.07 | 4.56 | -4.56 | |||
RUSHING | |||||||
Rushing S&P+ | 118.8 | 231.7 | 102.4 | 96.9 | 100.0 | 122.6 | 44.2 |
Rushing Success Rate | 46.7% | 17.6% | 40.4% | 41.7% | 42.4% | 45.9% | 16.8% |
Rushing IsoPPP | 1.15 | 1.18 | 1.01 | 1.04 | 1.08 | 1.11 | 1.10 |
Adj. Line Yards | 107.5 | 188.7 | 97.4 | 106.5 | 100.0 | 100.9 | 51.6 |
Opportunity Rate | 41.3% | 28.3% | 40.0% | 34.7% | 39.7% | 36.1% | 28.5% |
Power Success Rate | 80.6% | 60.0% | 61.1% | 70.4% | 68.0% | 83.4% | 53.9% |
Stuff Rate* | 16.8% | 27.8% | 17.7% | 21.4% | 18.7% | 19.2% | 26.3% |
PASSING | |||||||
Passing S&P+ | 128.8 | 226.3 | 111.2 | 87.4 | 100.0 | 147.4 | 49.1 |
Passing Success Rate | 45.0% | 19.3% | 41.2% | 44.7% | 40.9% | 49.2% | 19.4% |
Passing IsoPPP | 1.56 | 1.41 | 1.61 | 1.33 | 1.48 | 1.40 | 1.53 |
Adj. Sack Rate | 153.9 | 189.0 | 97.4 | 47.2 | 100.0 | 326.1 | 51.5 |
STANDARD DOWNS | |||||||
SD S&P+ | 121.1 | 191.9 | 113.0 | 94.6 | 100.0 | 128.0 | 58.9 |
SD Success Rate | 50.9% | 22.9% | 47.6% | 46.8% | 47.0% | 50.7% | 23.2% |
SD IsoPPP | 1.18 | 1.29 | 1.12 | 1.05 | 1.12 | 1.11 | 1.29 |
SD Line Yds/Carry | 3.37 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 2.62 | 2.98 | 2.96 | 1.48 |
SD Sack Rate* | 3.4% | 11.1% | 1.2% | 2.7% | 5.1% | 1.8% | 2.6% |
PASSING DOWNS | |||||||
PD S&P+ | 121.4 | 276.8 | 93.3 | 89.2 | 100.0 | 136.1 | 33.7 |
PD Success Rate | 32.9% | 13.2% | 28.2% | 35.3% | 30.3% | 38.3% | 12.3% |
PD IsoPPP | 1.97 | 1.34 | 1.81 | 1.54 | 1.74 | 1.74 | 1.39 |
PD Line Yds/Carry | 2.79 | 1.62 | 2.5 | 2.67 | 3.40 | 2.19 | 1.19 |
PD Sack Rate* | 7.8% | 15.6% | 10.1% | 4.1% | 8.0% | 4.0% | 19.7% |
The IsoPPP advantages of Sparty in standard downs and passing plays will mean UM must be on the lookout defensively in order to contain explosive plays, particularly on Standard Downs. This is not necessarily a weakness so much as a condition of the UM Defense under Don Brown's aggressive schemes. It doesn't happen often - it just seems that UM's secondary will need to continue to be on its toes in blitz situations. Judging from the PFF numbers I've seen regarding QB ratings vs. Stribling and Lewis, however, QB's would do better by just throwing the ball out of bounds than anywhere near the U-M CB's.
In general, however, I would say this matchup looks as one might expect rolling into Piscataway East Lansing. Personally, I would love to see a complete annihilation of the Scarlet Knights Spartans, for reasons I will leave to you, dear reader, in the comments below...
October 26th, 2016 at 6:44 AM ^
October 26th, 2016 at 12:04 AM ^
October 25th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^
October 25th, 2016 at 1:28 PM ^
Stockholm syndrome?
October 25th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^
Remember when the Fab Five beat MSU in East Lansing (in 1992, I think?), and Jalen Rose humped the Sparty logo at center court? Wouldn't it be sweet if UM beat Sparty by 79 this weekend (Rutgers +1), then the entire team (plus all the coaches, staff, the water boys, etc.) all collectively went to mid field and collectively humped the MSU "S"? I think it would...
October 25th, 2016 at 1:18 PM ^
meh... a simple railroad spike into the field will probably do. what, too soon???
October 25th, 2016 at 1:28 PM ^
I don't think you're fully considering the awesomeness of 100+ people in maize and blue - led by Harbaugh - humping that big S in perfect unison. Because you know it would be done in perfect unison if Harbaugh organized it...
October 25th, 2016 at 1:41 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 25th, 2016 at 2:37 PM ^
October 25th, 2016 at 1:33 PM ^
if we run up the score?
October 25th, 2016 at 1:34 PM ^
any time someone tries to compare our recent basketball teams with the Fab 5.
Christ those guys were awesome.
October 25th, 2016 at 2:05 PM ^
Keep it classy...
October 25th, 2016 at 1:37 PM ^
October 25th, 2016 at 1:43 PM ^
To beat the worst shutout margin by 1 point....because Harbaugh
October 25th, 2016 at 1:50 PM ^
It's not our job to stop ourselves - it's your job and your team's to do that.
56-3
#BurySparty
October 25th, 2016 at 2:26 PM ^
October 25th, 2016 at 2:00 PM ^
Would dry humping in unison be considered disrespekt or would that be a display of "f**king intellegence"?
October 25th, 2016 at 2:11 PM ^
Its like everyone on this board has forgotten what its like to play MSU. The team we see Saturday will look little like the team everyone else has seen all season. I fully expect us to win, but basing expectations of annihilation on the MSU team that has shown up in prior games this season is silly.
It's as if this is your first year as a UM fan.
October 25th, 2016 at 2:13 PM ^
Riiiight.
October 25th, 2016 at 3:31 PM ^
October 26th, 2016 at 12:00 AM ^
October 25th, 2016 at 2:12 PM ^
Herein lies the difference between the typical fan and his well-disciplined favorite team. Harbaugh's been saying for 14 months now that his team prepares for every opponent with the same mentality. Typical fans see it differently and are freighted with years-worth of emotional baggage. I got so sick and tired of listening to Hoke patronize these people with Rivalry talk.
And I'm betting Meyer treats the rivalry with Michigan the same way even in the face of fans that are exponentially more rabid than those of us here.
October 25th, 2016 at 2:17 PM ^
but that we are beating them so badly we rest all starters after the first quarter.
October 25th, 2016 at 11:55 PM ^
October 25th, 2016 at 2:18 PM ^
5 | 2002 | Ann Arbor | #15 Michigan | 49–3 |
96 | 2003 | East Lansing | #13 Michigan | 27–20 |
97 | 2004 | Ann Arbor | #14 Michigan | 45–373OT |
98 | 2005 | East Lansing | Michigan | 34–31OT |
99 | 2006 | Ann Arbor | #6 Michigan | 31–13 |
100 | 2007 | East Lansing | #14 Michigan | 28–24 |
101 | 2008 | Ann Arbor | Michigan State | 35–21 |
102 | 2009 | East Lansing | Michigan State | 26–20OT |
103 | 2010 | Ann Arbor | #17 Michigan State | 34–17 |
104 | 2011 | East Lansing | #23 Michigan State | 28–14 |
105 | 2012 | Ann Arbor | #23 Michigan | 12–10 |
106 | 2013 | East Lansing | #22 Michigan State | 29–6 |
107 | 2014 | East Lansing | #8 Michigan State | 35–11 |
108 | 2015 | Ann Arbor | #7 Michigan State | 27–23 |
October 25th, 2016 at 3:00 PM ^
68-35-5 since 1898, when UM defeated the Aggies 39-0.
October 25th, 2016 at 9:24 PM ^
MSU dropped its math requirement, so they can't go to fourteen without taking off their shoes.
October 25th, 2016 at 2:22 PM ^
have to play in Ann Arbor two years in a row. Fugking Brandon...
October 25th, 2016 at 2:26 PM ^
October 25th, 2016 at 2:56 PM ^
Won't put it past the shoulder chip crew to resort to nasty stuff including knee hunting. Honestly my biggest concern this weekend is a cheap shot injury.
October 25th, 2016 at 10:48 PM ^
Make up the point differential in the Dontonia era.