Inside the Box Scores - Bonus mid-week edition

18 posts / 0 new
Login or register to post comments
Last post
October 5th, 2011 at 10:01 PM
#1
ST3
ST3's picture
Joined: 09/11/2010
MGoPoints: 2186
Inside the Box Scores - Bonus mid-week edition

    The defense is clearly better to my eye this year, but I wanted to see if the box scores back that up. Two big metrics for the defense are how they do on third down, and how many big plays they give up. So I tried comparing the first five games of 2010 to the first five games of this season. I counted all the 20+ yard plays, running and passing.

    I think the teams we've played this year are better on average, but we've played 5 games at home versus 3 at home last year, so maybe thats a wash. The opponents third down conversion percentage is just about the same, ~42% last year to ~39% this year. So we're better than last year, but only because of Minnesota.

    We gave up more long passes last year, 13 vs. 10, but we gave up fewer long runs, 6 vs. 4. Perhaps that is a reflection of having senior starters at LB last year, and more experienced DBs this year.

Chart? Chart:

 

2011   3rd conv attempts Pct. 20+ run 20+ pass
WMU 6 11 54.5% 1 1
ND 8 14 57.1% 3 5
EMU 4 12 33.3% 0 0
SDSU 8 18 44.4% 1 3
Minn 0 11 0.0% 1 1
Total 26 66 39.4% 6 10
           
2010  3rd conv attempts   20+ run 20+ pass
Conn 4 15 26.7% 1 3
ND 4 14 28.6% 1 4
Umass 6 12 50.0% 0 0
BG 6 14 42.9% 0 3
Ind 11 19 57.9% 2 3
Total 31 74 41.9% 4

13

 

Top
Tags:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
October 5th, 2011 at 10:19 PM | What jumps out at me there is (Score:3 Insightful)
jmblue
Joined: 11/07/2008
MGoPoints: 28961

What jumps out at me there is the trends: our opponents became increasingly successful at converting 3rd downs in '10 as the weeks went on, whereas this year they've become less successful.  (I may be wrong, but I think SDSU's figures are a bit inflated by their last two drives, when they gained a lot of yards through the air after the game was effectively over.)

October 5th, 2011 at 10:17 PM | "So we're better than last (Score:1)
go16blue
go16blue's picture
Joined: 04/28/2010
MGoPoints: 3422

"So we're better than last year, but only because of Minnesota."

I can't stand this line of reasoning. It's not like we only counted the games against OSU and MSU in our stats last year, we played plenty of bad teams. This defense has improved an incredible amount, not only over last year but over where it was in the beginning of this year.

COYS and lets go Detroit FC!

October 5th, 2011 at 10:24 PM | Minnesota (Score:3 Normal)
ST3
ST3's picture
Joined: 09/11/2010
MGoPoints: 2186

I only meant that the 3rd down conversion is better than last year's. Looking at the game 5s, we destroyed Minnesota this year. Last year, we made Indiana look like a competent offense. IIRC, the week after we allowed them 35 points, Ohio State shut them down completely. That's when I really started getting nervous about last year's defense.

A couple things that don't show up in this chart. Last year's big plays were REALLY BIG plays. They went for 71 yards (who remembers Tyrone Pronty), 95 yards to ND's TE, you get the picture. This year, the 20+ plays are mostly in the 20-30 yard range. The other thing that doesn't show up is the turnovers. If you can play more aggressive and yield the same number of big plays, but you get more big plays on your side (sacks, turnovers, etc.) that's a net win. GERG didn't get that, apparently.

October 6th, 2011 at 10:01 AM | Certainly, statistically, one could surmise we are better (Score:2)
victors2000
victors2000's picture
Joined: 03/21/2009
MGoPoints: 2324

than last year, that it is due mostly to the Minnesota game, but empirically, one can see why they are more improved: Execution. The team tackles better, are out of position less, play more focused and consistently. Coaching and experience have improved execution, an improvement that continues as the season progresses. Who in their right mind would have forseen that the Michigan "D" may be the best in the Big Ten?

You have to play this game like somebody just hit your mother with a two-by-four. ~Dan Birdwell

October 5th, 2011 at 10:23 PM | OH NO.. (Score:1)
maizedandconfused
maizedandconfused's picture
Joined: 01/14/2010
MGoPoints: 4199

YOU DIDNT. Ezeh was a senior LB... and Mouton was either a Star Destroyer or a ewok depending on whether he ate his wheaties.

On the fifth night—possibly the sixth—a breeze arose.
It was cool and dewy.

October 5th, 2011 at 10:24 PM | poor comparison...   Not (Score:3 Normal)
switch26
Joined: 02/04/2010
MGoPoints: 2637

poor comparison...

 

Not only are we playing different teams, other than ND... but ND is a hell of a lot better than last year.  

Your stats say we are "barely" better than last year at this point, yet we are allowing 10.2 pts per game compared to 25.1 a game last year...

 

Id would be better if you had 40+ yard plays teams had against us at this time last year

October 5th, 2011 at 10:32 PM | granted, something is missing (Score:1)
ST3
ST3's picture
Joined: 09/11/2010
MGoPoints: 2186

The comparison is what it is. Since we're similar in terms of third down conversions and 20+ yardage plays, there must be something else that explains the 25.1 vs. 10.2 ppg you mention. I think it's the length of the big plays (more 50+ yard plays last year) and more turnovers forced this year. I wonder if some of it is related to better starting field position for the defense.

October 6th, 2011 at 10:16 AM | Something else you can add in is possessions. (Score:2)
victors2000
victors2000's picture
Joined: 03/21/2009
MGoPoints: 2324

Whether we scored or not, the defense was back on the field at a greater frequency last year then this year.

 

Actually, I supply no data to back this up, I'm doing the empiric thing again.

You have to play this game like somebody just hit your mother with a two-by-four. ~Dan Birdwell

October 5th, 2011 at 10:42 PM | Fewer 3rd down conversion attempts in 2011 (Score:1)
Bundrew
Joined: 11/21/2008
MGoPoints: 12

Perhaps as interesting as comparing the 2010 and 2011 3rd down conversion percentages is comparing the number of 3rd down conversion attempts in each of these seasons.  In 2011, the Michigan defense is allowing 1.6 fewer 3rd down conversion attempts per game compared to 2010 (66 vs. 74).

The Michigan defense is not allowing opponents to sustain drives like they did last season (so far anyway).  Possible causes: an increase in turnovers forced + an increase in sustained drives by the Michigan offense.   

 

   

October 6th, 2011 at 7:29 AM | Also (Score:3 Normal)
PhillipFulmersPants
PhillipFulmersPants's picture
Joined: 01/06/2009
MGoPoints: 1170

 

add to this: "Possible causes: an increase in turnovers forced + an increase in sustained drives by the Michigan offense"

This: Fewer total plays. 

Through 5 games, there has been about 225 fewer snaps total in 2011 than 2010 first 5 games.

That breaks down as follows:

2010 D snaps 378 and 2010 O snaps 347 for a total of 725

2011 D snaps 248 and 2011 O snaps 248 for a total of 501.

WMU rain out had something to do with those, but no going no huddle on O means games are much shorter and the D is facing many fewer snaps. 

October 5th, 2011 at 10:56 PM | To test the (Score:4 Normal)
MichFan1997
MichFan1997's picture
Joined: 08/04/2008
MGoPoints: 6230

Minnesota is the only thing that makes us better claim you make, and to expand on it using more than JUST 3rd downs and plays over 20, let's look at a per down yard gained stat:

UConn: 68 plays, 343 yards, 5.0 per play, 1 TO

ND: 76 plays, 535 yards, 7.0 per play, 3 TO's

UMass: 78 plays, 439 yards, 5.6 per play, 2 TO's

BGSU: 58 plays, 283 yards, 4.9 per play, 2 TO's

Indiana: 98 plays, 568 yards, 5.8 per play, 1 TO

TOTAL: 378 plays, 2168 yards, 5.74 per play, 9 TO's

WMU: 56 plays, 279 yards, 5.0 per play, 3 TO's

ND: 72 plays, 513 yards, 7.1 per play, 5 TO's

EMU: 52 plays, 236 yards, 4.5 per play, 2 TO's

SDSU: 77 plays, 376 yards, 4.9 per play, 3 TO's

Minny: 47 plays, 177 yards, 3.8 per play, 2 TO's

TOTAL: 304 plays, 1581 yards, 5.2 per play, 15 TO's

Just on the surface, the defense is saving a half a yard per play. Using last years per play totals, the defense has saved approximatelly 162.57 total yards. Another key component of this seaso so far is that they have done a better job staying off the field. Obviously missing a full quarter against WMU factors in a little bit, but even another 20 plays still is well short of the amount of plays defended last year up to this point. Turnovers are likely a huge factor in that. Any other thoughts here?

 

Follow me on Twitter @gfraley05

October 6th, 2011 at 12:51 AM | For the past couple years and (Score:1)
trueblueintexas
trueblueintexas's picture
Joined: 11/10/2008
MGoPoints: 1250

For the past couple years and now this year, all you hear the announcers talk about is how UofM's offense having longer sustained drives is helping the defense.  (note: I would include turnovers on your own side of the 50 also).  It would be interesting to see how the time of possession numbers and turnovers on your own side of the 50 compare between the two years.

"Anyone who isn't confused, really doesn't understand the situation." - Edward R. Murrow

October 6th, 2011 at 10:27 AM | Last  year the defense (Score:2)
victors2000
victors2000's picture
Joined: 03/21/2009
MGoPoints: 2324

Last  year the defense couldn't get off the field until they ran out of it, while the offense was rarely on the field (so it appeared) for long, time consuming drives, which means the defense was back out on the field again--->more plays for the opponent's offense.

You have to play this game like somebody just hit your mother with a two-by-four. ~Dan Birdwell

October 6th, 2011 at 1:55 AM | posted from iPhone (Score:2 Insightful)
Guttman
Guttman's picture
Joined: 09/10/2009
MGoPoints: 116

Our eyes may be a window to the soul, but our email. . .our email is an unfiltered and objective record of its contents. . .

October 6th, 2011 at 9:42 AM | Im sorry (Score:1 Normal)
Ohioblueblood
Ohioblueblood's picture
Joined: 09/03/2009
MGoPoints: -688

Im sorry but I dont think those numbers have much to do with anything....take a look at what we have done to teams in the redzone on D this year....thats where the huge change is. Also the one other important thing ...POINTS!!...Im pretty certain that looks way better to my eye this year

"The team..The team...The team" 

October 6th, 2011 at 8:22 PM | posted from iPhone (Score:2 Normal)
artds
artds's picture
Joined: 09/04/2009
MGoPoints: 2789

I agree. We've given up only 51 points through 5 games this year, versus 127 points through 5 games a year ago.

Every time an MGoBoard poster complains about a thread topic, God kills a baby panda.

Theme provided by Roopletheme; sidebars adapted from Chris Murphy.