I look forward to the day you don't have to report a -3 turnover margin on a frequent basis. Not sure when this day will come.
2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru UConn
All Part Of The Plan?: Now I see – this is just all part of the plan. After all, what do you learn by rolling over an "easy" opponent in what is basically a glorified scrimmage? Pretty much nothing. But, tough come-from-behind victories and overcoming adversity ……… now that is worth something! Oof.
Synopsis: Michigan's TOM for the game was – 3 and for the year it is now – 5 (– 1.25 per game) which is ranked #111. Turnovers were not a primary factor in determining which team won the game. But, the game would not have been nearly as close without the TOs. Michigan suffered a net disadvantage of –7.75 expected points due to the – 3 turnover margin (see details below in section on Expected Points). Michigan's one takeaway saved the day in this game just as their two takeaways saved the day against Akron. Without those interception takeaways, M is sitting at 2-2 and the pitchforks are being wielded.
Morgan made a fabulous interception and Michigan's 6 interception takeaways for the year is ranked #16 in the nation. The Michigan defense is ranked #35 for interception takeaway percentage at 3.7%. Gardner threw two interceptions and now has 8 for the year. M is ranked dead last (#125) for interceptions thrown percentage at 8.3%. Devin also lost his second fumble of the year.
National Rankings: All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. The four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).
Expected Points: The impact of each turnover depends upon the down, the spot the turnover is lost, and the spot the turnover is gained. This week, the first turnover was the most difficult to determine EP. It was 3-6 on the UConn 33. Without the interception, it would have been 4-6 and Michigan could have tried a 50 yard field goal, could have gone for it, or could have punted (boo). Based on the assumptions in the EP table below, there is no lost EP for Michigan in this circumstance.
This chart shows Expected Points for various yard lines.
This chart shows the basis of EP calculations for each turnover.
"let's go blue".
It is painful to read this particular diary each week, but I still very much enjoy it. On the bright side of things, at least there is no graphical representation of Michigan turnovers vs. Michigan offensive touchdowns.
during Hoke's 2+ seasons have been committed by QBs. I'd guess it's really high, between Denard, Bellomy, and Gardner.
I posted that in last week's diary. But, to refresh your memory:
Quarterbacks!: In 2011, quarterbacks were responsible for 19 of 21 turnovers. In 2012, quarterbacks were responsible for 23 of 25 turnovers. So far in 2013, quarterbacks are responsible for 8 of 8 turnovers.
After Saturday, make that 11 of 12 turnovers this year.
As Brian and others have argued many times around here, it often does not pay to spend much time dwelling on turnovers. There is very little correlation from year to year in turnover rates and not much coaches can do to ensure a positive margin.
Howeva! IIRC the Mathlete has shown charts revealing that more experienced QBs certainly do throw fewer interceptions. So...my hope is that Devin gets his stuff together through the season and winds up doing better by November. Certainly we have to hope he's doing better next year.
The way things are going I'm pretty sure your next post is going to say "Turnovers had a primary role in who won the game."
I am fully aware that MGoBrian and others have stated their e-pinion that turnovers are random. Not buying it.
I challenge anyone to ask/tell Brady Hoke that he is wasting his time talking about turnovers (both to the media and his team). Or ask him why he is wasting so much time in practices with drills that are meant to minimize turnovers.
I challenge anyone who watches Devin Gardner run with the ball to rationally believe that if he fumbles it is just "a random event or just bad luck".
Anyone who is counting on regression to the mean to solve Michigan's turnover problem is going to be very, very disappointed. There are solutions -- but just ignoring the problem and hoping it will all even out, is not one of the solutions.
Since this is the bye week, it is as good as time as any to revisit this question in more detail with some data.
Watch this space next Monday.
agreed Enjoy Life.... I appreciate the value of stat analysis, was not good at it, but appreciate it... and turnovers are not about stat analysis. At best you can find numbers that will make you feel better but it doesn't address whatever underlying problems there are that cause the turnovers.