No purple shades here...

[1/28/01]

One typically tends to correlate positively with the other. If you give up a lot of yards, generally speaking, you give up a lot of points, and vice versa.

We quite often are not that well ranked in yards per game, but are top 3 in points per game. Not as hand in hand as you'd think.

[HomeoftheBRAVENS]

 

Not a bum but pretty much Cam Cam level. He IS holding the defense back.

 

 

That's a perfect comparison.

[Tenacious Faulker]

The only reason the Ravens were not a top 5 defense is because they could not stop the deep ball and no matter how great your front 7 is they cant stop the deep ball from going out.  Every move in the offseason on defense was designed to fix the fact that the Ravens gave up the most deep passes in the NFL and if they fix that they are a top 3 NFL defense for sure.

 

Not to mention all the injuries they had to overcome in their secondary the past two seasons.  It's a miracle they made it to the playoffs and won in the post season with how they've had to scab together corners and against such strong passing teams like San Diego, Pittsburgh, Cincy, Indy, New Orleans, and Atlanta.  That's 9 out of 17 games right there.  Cam and Spagnulo got the most out of the bottom of the barrel.  Provifing depth is Ozzie's issue.   

Ray and Ed made it work.

Not a bum but pretty much Cam Cam level. He IS holding the defense back.

Anyone who thinks Cam is holding the defense back just uninformed.  Can;t stress this enough - FORGET THE PAST.  We are no longer a smashmouth team.  GET USED TO IT because that's what the league has made.  If you're looking for a Seattle-like defense then just know its an aberration in the league today to have so many young, talented defensive players.  When their contract all come up they'll come back to Earth.

 

Cam is playing chess on defense Rex and his predessors played checkers because they had that Seattle level talent when the league still rewarded defenses, not offenses.  Most fans don;t like what they don't know and don't know how to run a defense, sooooo.......

[rmcjacket23]

We quite often are not that well ranked in yards per game, but are top 3 in points per game. Not as hand in hand as you'd think.

Well, lets see what the numbers say:

 

Last ten seasons, first number is yardage ranking, second number is points ranking:

 

2014: 8th, 6th

2013: 12th, 12th

2012: 17th, 12th

2011: 3rd, 3rd

2010: 10th, 3rd

2009: 3rd, 3rd

2008: 2nd, 3rd

2007: 6th, 22nd

2006: 1st, 1st

2005: 5th, 10th

 

There's been five times in the last decade where we were top 3 in points allowed, and only one of those seasons were we not top 3 in yardage allowed (2010).

 

The average ranking deviation between yardage and points allowed in the last decade is 3.6, meaning we will typically be within 3-4 spots when comparing yardage to points allowed. 

 

There's been three times when our yardage ranking > points ranking, and three times when our points rankings > yardage ranking, though it's probably perceived that we do better in points because three times in the last five years we've done better in points allowed than yardage, though really 2010 was the only real "significant" difference.

 

I'd potentially argue that 2007 appears to be a huge outlier of some sort, since our yardage ranking was pretty good yet our points allowed rankings was pretty horrible.

 

Without sampling the entire league, I'd bet you'll find most teams in the league are within a similar range. I'd suspect most teams yardage/points allowed deviation is going to be 4-5 ranking spots at most, which to me, is sufficient to say that yardage and points generally coincide with each other pretty closely.

[beasy2487]

Somehow...this just turned into a Cam Cameron thread. Climbing to new lows lol.

[Moderator 3]

I posted a statistical breakdown over the last ten years for the Ravens, but apparently the mods won't push it through for whatever reason.

Might be related to it being an off-season Sunday afternoon and we're all busy living our lives.

[K-Dog]

Somehow...this just turned into a Cam Cameron thread. Climbing to new lows lol.

I think its my fault.

[ravensdfan]

You all have Pees colored shades.

 

Yards given up directly affects the offense. It affects starting position. Not getting off the field directly affects the offense. It affects TOP and chances to score.

 

I remember all of you making all these injury excuses berating the offense and trying to blame them for late game defensive failures in 2013 when THEY were pummeled with injuries and the only receiving options we had were old, slow, on their last legs guys and Torrey. That was it.

 

But we gave all the draft love to the defense for 3 years and stayed the same.

 

Ranking changed only because other teams did worse - outside of against the run - statistically we remained stasis.

[Adreme]

For all the love the Ravens gave to defense over the past 3 years they were still starting a corner from another teams practice squad .   When your secondary unit for the second half of the season can honestly be called one of the worst in the NFL and if not for Will Hill I would probably say it might have very well been the worst and they still managed to do the best they could with what they had.  Pees understood that a lot of the opposing offenses drives would either be 3 and out or they would reach the red zone where you could rely on that amazing front 7 to carry the day.

[beasy2487]

Might be related to it being an off-season Sunday afternoon and we're all busy living our lives.

where's that codizzle Fire emoji when you need it lol!!!!

[Tru11]

the premise of what you're saying is that it's better to lose a guy before the game because then the backup has time to prepare to play, but if you're in the NFL and not preparing to play every week, there's something wrong. Let's also not forget that Tharold Simon saw time in 10 games during the regular season and bad five starts. He got significant time against Carolina in the playoffs.

In no way is the Ravens situation comparable to the Seahawks

 

I never compared the situations.

that's the point you are missing.

 

I merely said the hawks had injuries.

Some had the idea the hawks where healthy and complete.

 

Also you still don't get what im talking about.

[BmoreBird22]

I never compared the situations.

that's the point you are missing.

 

I merely said the hawks had injuries.

Some had the idea the hawks where healthy and complete.

 

Also you still don't get what im talking about.

Then instead of saying, "You don't get what I'm saying," and allowing people to misconstrue your words, just say it

[Tru11]

Then instead of saying, "You don't get what I'm saying," and allowing people to misconstrue your words, just say it

 

 

so did the seahawks  had injuries or not?

 

im simply pointing out they where far from a healthy defense and brady did the same thing he did to us:

picking on the weakest link.

 

some fans think the hawks where healthy apparently.

 

if you wanna compare both units toe to toe then feel free to do just that but I have no intention to argue with you about it since I never suggested the intention to do so.

 

my first reply to you in this thread.

 

2nd sentence cleary explains the thoughts by my reply.

3rd sentence says the reason why I wrote my reply in the first place.

4th sentence im telling you I don't want to compare both units and I never suggested or intended to do so.

 

How you are able to misunderstand this and still decide to compare both units and their situation is beyond me.

 

Also I tried to explain the time of when an injury occurs  does indeed have a big effect on the performance of a player.

lets take flacco and schaub for an example.

 

if flacco goes down now then the team and schaub would have trainings camp and pre season to build a game plan around schaub strengths and schaub would have enough reps with the starters to have some chemistry heading into week 1,

 

if flacco goes down in week 1, schaub will have to come in having only practiced with the back ups so no chemistry with the starters and thus we will be forced to adjust the game plan on the fly cause some plays that worked for flacco most likely wont work for schaub.

 

I cant explain it any easier then this so....

[rmcjacket23]

You all have Pees colored shades.

 

Yards given up directly affects the offense. It affects starting position. Not getting off the field directly affects the offense. It affects TOP and chances to score.

 

I remember all of you making all these injury excuses berating the offense and trying to blame them for late game defensive failures in 2013 when THEY were pummeled with injuries and the only receiving options we had were old, slow, on their last legs guys and Torrey. That was it.

 

But we gave all the draft love to the defense for 3 years and stayed the same.

 

Ranking changed only because other teams did worse - outside of against the run - statistically we remained stasis.

Care to provide statistical backing for this claim?

 

Edit: I did some of the work for you:

 

The league itself as a whole as remained consistent through the three years Pees has been DC when it comes to YPG allowed and PPG allowed

 

2012: 347 YPG allowed league average, 22.8 PPG allowed

2013: 348 YPG allowed league average, 23.4 PPG allowed

2014: 348 YPG allowed league average, 22.6 PPG allowed

 

So Pees YPG allowed annual ranking has improved from 17th to 12th to 8th, yet the league itself has remained flat. And his PPG alloed annual ranking as gone from 12th to 12th to 6th, yet the league itself has remained falt.

 

In fact, our team fluctuated somewhat:

 

2012: 351 YPG allowed, 21.5 PPG allowed

2013: 335 YPG allowed, 22 PPG allowed

2014: 337 YPG allowed, 19 PPG allowed

 

Down roughly 15 YPG (not a huge number obviously), but are down about a FG a game (pretty significant).

 

You could probably argue that we have remained "flat" as well, but that has basically nothing to do with the notion that we are improving in ranking because the league is getting worse. They are not getting worse.

Edited June 15, 2015 by rmcjacket23

[BmoreBird22]

my first reply to you in this thread.

 

2nd sentence cleary explains the thoughts by my reply.

3rd sentence says the reason why I wrote my reply in the first place.

4th sentence im telling you I don't want to compare both units and I never suggested or intended to do so.

 

How you are able to misunderstand this and still decide to compare both units and their situation is beyond me.

 

Also I tried to explain the time of when an injury occurs  does indeed have a big effect on the performance of a player.

lets take flacco and schaub for an example.

 

if flacco goes down now then the team and schaub would have trainings camp and pre season to build a game plan around schaub strengths and schaub would have enough reps with the starters to have some chemistry heading into week 1,

 

if flacco goes down in week 1, schaub will have to come in having only practiced with the back ups so no chemistry with the starters and thus we will be forced to adjust the game plan on the fly cause some plays that worked for flacco most likely wont work for schaub.

 

I cant explain it any easier then this so....

And I agreed that they were not healthy, but that does not make it a comparable situation to the Ravens and that the Seahawks were still in a better position than the Ravens. How did you miss that?

[Tru11]

And I agreed that they were not healthy, but that does not make it a comparable situation to the Ravens and that the Seahawks were still in a better position than the Ravens. How did you miss that?

 

I did not compare them.

 

so there was nothing for me to miss.

 

if you want to compare them then do it with someone else.

[BmoreBird22]

I did not compare them.

 

so there was nothing for me to miss.

 

if you want to compare them then do it with someone else.

By bringing the Seahawks up as having injuries and using that as a reason for their play for against Brady, you're comparing the situations, even if it isn't directly. 

[Tru11]

By bringing the Seahawks up as having injuries and using that as a reason for their play for against Brady, you're comparing the situations, even if it isn't directly. 

 

 

I did not bring them up the person I replied to did.

I did not compare them , the person I replied to did.

All I did was give the person i replied to extra info.

 

I told you all of this after you replied to me.

 

nice try though .

[1/28/01]

Well, lets see what the numbers say:

Last ten seasons, first number is yardage ranking, second number is points ranking:

2014: 8th, 6th

2013: 12th, 12th

2012: 17th, 12th

2011: 3rd, 3rd

2010: 10th, 3rd

2009: 3rd, 3rd

2008: 2nd, 3rd

2007: 6th, 22nd

2006: 1st, 1st

2005: 5th, 10th

There's been five times in the last decade where we were top 3 in points allowed, and only one of those seasons were we not top 3 in yardage allowed (2010).

The average ranking deviation between yardage and points allowed in the last decade is 3.6, meaning we will typically be within 3-4 spots when comparing yardage to points allowed.

There's been three times when our yardage ranking > points ranking, and three times when our points rankings > yardage ranking, though it's probably perceived that we do better in points because three times in the last five years we've done better in points allowed than yardage, though really 2010 was the only real "significant" difference.

I'd potentially argue that 2007 appears to be a huge outlier of some sort, since our yardage ranking was pretty good yet our points allowed rankings was pretty horrible.

Without sampling the entire league, I'd bet you'll find most teams in the league are within a similar range. I'd suspect most teams yardage/points allowed deviation is going to be 4-5 ranking spots at most, which to me, is sufficient to say that yardage and points generally coincide with each other pretty closely.

I really only popped in to disagree with you on something.

[rmcjacket23]

I really only popped in to disagree with you on something.

Gets difficult when the facts speak for themselves... carry on.

[1/28/01]

Gets difficult when the facts speak for themselves... carry on.

Chill out, man. Smile every once in a while. You'll enjoy life more.

[rmcjacket23]

Chill out, man. Smile every once in a while. You'll enjoy life more.

Not a problem for me.

[BmoreBird22]

Gets difficult when the facts speak for themselves... carry on.

There are certainly exceptions

[BmoreBird22]

Gets difficult when the facts speak for themselves... carry on.

 

 

There are certainly exceptions

I won't get too crazy when looking at this, but here are some of the exceptions in terms of (yardage ranking, points per game ranking) this past season under your assumption that the teams should rank within 4-5 ranking spots for both of those factors. Here you go:

 

2014: Broncos (3rd, 16th), Jets (5th, 24th), Panthers (10th, 21st), Colts (11th, 19th), Dolphins (12th, 20th), Texans (16th, 7th), Raiders (21st, 32nd), Redskins (20th, 29th), Bengals (22nd, 11th), Browns (23rd, 9th), Cardinals (24th, 5th).

 

That's 11 teams in 2014 with with seven showing a ranking differential greater than 10, or in simpler terms, a huge gap. There are some major differences within individual rankings (passing, rushing), but you can find those on your own and I'll just discuss the Ravens rankings. For example, there pass defense last year ranked 26th in yardage, but 6th in total passing touchdowns given up. 

 

In 2013: Texans (7th, 24th), Giants (8th, 18th), Browns (9th, 23rd), Raiders (22nd, 29th), Redskins (18th, 30th), Bills (10th, 20th), Jets (11th, 19th), Eagles (29th, 17th), Colts (20th, 9th), Dolphins (21st, 8th), Patriots (26th, 10th), Chargers (23rd, 11th).

 

That's 12 teams in 2013 with 10 showing a ranking differential that was a 10 or more spot differential, or again, a huge gap. In this case, the Ravens were ranked 21st in passing defense, but 14th in passing touchdowns given up. The Ravens ranked 11th in rushing yards per game given up, but fifth in rushing touchdowns given up.

 

In 2012: Patriots (25th, 9th), Jets (8th, 20th), Ravens (17th, 11th), Panthers (10th, 18th), Buccaneers (23rd, 29th), Falcons (24th, 5th), Lions (13th, 27th), Dolphins (21st, 8th), Eagles (15th, 29th), Redskins (28th, 22nd), Raiders (18th, 28th).

 

That's 11 teams in 2012 with seven showing a 10 or more spot differential, or again, a huge gap. In this case for the Ravens, they ranked 17th in passing yardage given up, but just 2nd in total passing touchdowns given up. 

And no list would be complete without mentioning the famous (infamous?) 2011 Patriots and Packers where they were 31st and 32nd in yardage given up, a then NFL record for the worst defense in terms of yardage EVER, but ranked a respectable 15th and 19th respectively. 

 

What we're seeing is that on average (just over those three years because it is very annoying to look up those statistics and bounce back and forth when three years are throwing a consistent trend) is that there are 11 teams that have a ranking differential greater than five spots and eight of those teams have a ranking differential equal to or greater than 10 spots. No, that isn't half the league or anything, but it is greater than 33% for the differential greater than five and 25% for the 10 or more ranking differential, so actually, 1/28/01 actually has a point when he says it's not as hand in hand as you may think.

[BmoreBird22]

Chill out, man. Smile every once in a while. You'll enjoy life more.

Go ahead and see my above post. I think you may like it.

[rmcjacket23]

I won't get too crazy when looking at this, but here are some of the exceptions in terms of (yardage ranking, points per game ranking) this past season under your assumption that the teams should rank within 4-5 ranking spots for both of those factors. Here you go:

 

2014: Broncos (3rd, 16th), Jets (5th, 24th), Panthers (10th, 21st), Colts (11th, 19th), Dolphins (12th, 20th), Texans (16th, 7th), Raiders (21st, 32nd), Redskins (20th, 29th), Bengals (22nd, 11th), Browns (23rd, 9th), Cardinals (24th, 5th).

 

That's 11 teams in 2014 with with seven showing a ranking differential greater than 10, or in simpler terms, a huge gap. There are some major differences within individual rankings (passing, rushing), but you can find those on your own and I'll just discuss the Ravens rankings. For example, there pass defense last year ranked 26th in yardage, but 6th in total passing touchdowns given up. 

 

In 2013: Texans (7th, 24th), Giants (8th, 18th), Browns (9th, 23rd), Raiders (22nd, 29th), Redskins (18th, 30th), Bills (10th, 20th), Jets (11th, 19th), Eagles (29th, 17th), Colts (20th, 9th), Dolphins (21st, 8th), Patriots (26th, 10th), Chargers (23rd, 11th).

 

That's 12 teams in 2013 with 10 showing a ranking differential that was a 10 or more spot differential, or again, a huge gap. In this case, the Ravens were ranked 21st in passing defense, but 14th in passing touchdowns given up. The Ravens ranked 11th in rushing yards per game given up, but fifth in rushing touchdowns given up.

 

In 2012: Patriots (25th, 9th), Jets (8th, 20th), Ravens (17th, 11th), Panthers (10th, 18th), Buccaneers (23rd, 29th), Falcons (24th, 5th), Lions (13th, 27th), Dolphins (21st, 8th), Eagles (15th, 29th), Redskins (28th, 22nd), Raiders (18th, 28th).

 

That's 11 teams in 2012 with seven showing a 10 or more spot differential, or again, a huge gap. In this case for the Ravens, they ranked 17th in passing yardage given up, but just 2nd in total passing touchdowns given up. 

And no list would be complete without mentioning the famous (infamous?) 2011 Patriots and Packers where they were 31st and 32nd in yardage given up, a then NFL record for the worst defense in terms of yardage EVER, but ranked a respectable 15th and 19th respectively. 

 

What we're seeing is that on average (just over those three years because it is very annoying to look up those statistics and bounce back and forth when three years are throwing a consistent trend) is that there are 11 teams that have a ranking differential greater than five spots and eight of those teams have a ranking differential equal to or greater than 10 spots. No, that isn't half the league or anything, but it is greater than 33% for the differential greater than five and 25% for the 10 or more ranking differential, so actually, 1/28/01 actually has a point when he says it's not as hand in hand as you may think.

He'd have a point... IF he wasn't referencing the Ravens, which he was. The passing statistics aren't as relevant for the point I was making, because they would be included in the total YPG and total PPG allowed. Since Pees oversees the entire defense, not just the passing game side of it, I'd say YPG and PPG are a much better indicator.

[January J]

I won't get too crazy when looking at this, but here are some of the exceptions in terms of (yardage ranking, points per game ranking) this past season under your assumption that the teams should rank within 4-5 ranking spots for both of those factors. Here you go:

 

2014: Broncos (3rd, 16th), Jets (5th, 24th), Panthers (10th, 21st), Colts (11th, 19th), Dolphins (12th, 20th), Texans (16th, 7th), Raiders (21st, 32nd), Redskins (20th, 29th), Bengals (22nd, 11th), Browns (23rd, 9th), Cardinals (24th, 5th).

 

That's 11 teams in 2014 with with seven showing a ranking differential greater than 10, or in simpler terms, a huge gap. There are some major differences within individual rankings (passing, rushing), but you can find those on your own and I'll just discuss the Ravens rankings. For example, there pass defense last year ranked 26th in yardage, but 6th in total passing touchdowns given up. 

 

In 2013: Texans (7th, 24th), Giants (8th, 18th), Browns (9th, 23rd), Raiders (22nd, 29th), Redskins (18th, 30th), Bills (10th, 20th), Jets (11th, 19th), Eagles (29th, 17th), Colts (20th, 9th), Dolphins (21st, 8th), Patriots (26th, 10th), Chargers (23rd, 11th).

 

That's 12 teams in 2013 with 10 showing a ranking differential that was a 10 or more spot differential, or again, a huge gap. In this case, the Ravens were ranked 21st in passing defense, but 14th in passing touchdowns given up. The Ravens ranked 11th in rushing yards per game given up, but fifth in rushing touchdowns given up.

 

In 2012: Patriots (25th, 9th), Jets (8th, 20th), Ravens (17th, 11th), Panthers (10th, 18th), Buccaneers (23rd, 29th), Falcons (24th, 5th), Lions (13th, 27th), Dolphins (21st, 8th), Eagles (15th, 29th), Redskins (28th, 22nd), Raiders (18th, 28th).

 

That's 11 teams in 2012 with seven showing a 10 or more spot differential, or again, a huge gap. In this case for the Ravens, they ranked 17th in passing yardage given up, but just 2nd in total passing touchdowns given up. 

And no list would be complete without mentioning the famous (infamous?) 2011 Patriots and Packers where they were 31st and 32nd in yardage given up, a then NFL record for the worst defense in terms of yardage EVER, but ranked a respectable 15th and 19th respectively. 

 

What we're seeing is that on average (just over those three years because it is very annoying to look up those statistics and bounce back and forth when three years are throwing a consistent trend) is that there are 11 teams that have a ranking differential greater than five spots and eight of those teams have a ranking differential equal to or greater than 10 spots. No, that isn't half the league or anything, but it is greater than 33% for the differential greater than five and 25% for the 10 or more ranking differential, so actually, 1/28/01 actually has a point when he says it's not as hand in hand as you may think.

interesting. it gets difficult when ppl have differing opinions on what some call "facts".

[BmoreBird22]

interesting. it gets difficult when ppl have differing opinions on what some call "facts".

Or just make presumptions because they don't expects someone to actually do the research.

[berad]

He'd have a point... IF he wasn't referencing the Ravens, which he was. The passing statistics aren't as relevant for the point I was making, because they would be included in the total YPG and total PPG allowed. Since Pees oversees the entire defense, not just the passing game side of it, I'd say YPG and PPG are a much better indicator.

 

That's an extremely weak response to a good post and rebuttal of your point.

[BmoreBird22]

He'd have a point... IF he wasn't referencing the Ravens, which he was. The passing statistics aren't as relevant for the point I was making, because they would be included in the total YPG and total PPG allowed. Since Pees oversees the entire defense, not just the passing game side of it, I'd say YPG and PPG are a much better indicator.

But you referenced the entire league when you said that you'd probably see a trend of 4-5 spot differential across the league, which clearly isn't true and the fact of the matter is that when you're talking about it going hand in hand, there are multiple levels across the defense and it's interesting to see that they don't always work hand in hand. You got bested, but good try at covering your tracks.