AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
2018 Buffs Advanced Statistics Thread
- Thread starter J.R. Ewing
- Start date
they look at per play success. The nubs were very successful on average against us. Plus, lots of advanced statistics don't think much of fumbles, and consider them random.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...zo333PqSetw52kEGgbXKb6viGZSbYuJugvRR/pubhtml#
#44 in S&P.
Tidbits:
#44 in S&P.
Tidbits:
- The model can't believe we won against Nebraska. Thinks we should have lost by more than 2 TDs.
- It thinks we have two "big wins" left: UCLA & Oregon State. Oregon state is just a bit worse than UCLA.
- It thinks we have three "should wins" left: Cal, Arizona & ASU. Cal is the toughest test, with Arizona the easiest.
- There are two "coin flip" games (which I think of as a win or loss % < 55%): Utah and WSU. It thinks Utah is the win.
- We have a decent chance at USC.
- UW will blow us out.
- Yea, the model predicts 9 wins if you look at the results. Wow. But... it also thinks we are an 8 win team. Math.
- It thinks our OL is the problem in the running game, ranking 80th, despite an average to above average running game.
- We really struggle when we get behind the sticks, ranking near the bottom in the country.
- Our running game is more explosive than efficient, and our passing game is more efficient than explosive;
- The only RB the model likes is McMillian. Not even Beau gets love (which makes sense, the model doesn't count garbage time stats).
- Our red zone offense is average to bad.
- Our rushing D is average.\
- Our DL is doing a lot more than past years, but is still average;
- Our LBs are bad ass.
- DBs are the worst in years.
Standard down run rate = 51% (103rd in the country). We're run heavy but not that close to Leach-ean numbers.
This is a pretty good synopsis of how I currently feel about this team. To the BOLD, it has been obvious that our offense goes, for the most part, based on how well we do on 1st down. In a different thread, @Buffnik pointed out the areas that he is excited to see how we grow through the rest of the season. I would add Chiaverini's growth as a play caller to that list. He has done very well this year, but three games into his first season as the play caller, I would point out that conventional wisdom should be that his ceiling is much higher than what we've seen thus far.
Guys. Don't get too down on the OL. A lot of new guys and guys coming off injuries. You will see a marked improvement as they play more. Also, OL fundies had not changed for about 50 years until this year. There is a lot of progressive change to some of the set and leverage fundamentals right now and we are on the cutting edge of implementing these changes. It's actually what the Broncos OL started doing last year late and you are now seeing marked improvement from guys like Bolles, Paradis etc... I would expect a much better look against UCLA. When it gels it will gel. UCLA are slugs up front. They are good on the edges though.
A lot of these issues point to our OL, and secondarily, Montez. When Chev can't keep the D off balance because they know it's a passing down, they come after us. Both the OL and Montez aren't handling it all that well.
Cumulatively, it's also a Chev playcalling issue in that he's not finding ways to get guys open quickly on 3d and long even though teams are bringing the heat. He needs to adapt, as much as that is possible.
Scoop! Expound! (seriously, at least on the fundamental change stuff)
This is what's going to make things tough on offense. The word is going to get out on this team. You can't sit back in a bend don't break or Montez will eat you alive. You have to get aggressive and rush the passer.
Montez's completion rate is 8th in the nation.
When blitzed, we give up sacks at a rate 127th in the nation.
OL must do a much, much better job of picking up the blitz. I wonder how much the loss of Lindsay, both as a blocker and as a safety valve receiver is affecting the high sack rate?
Montez's completion rate is 8th in the nation.
When blitzed, we give up sacks at a rate 127th in the nation.
OL must do a much, much better job of picking up the blitz. I wonder how much the loss of Lindsay, both as a blocker and as a safety valve receiver is affecting the high sack rate?
Pursell also is an issue that could be causing this. When the fronts get complicated, is he making bad calls?
I agree with all of that. But, I have noticed Chiv calling some plays on 1st down that seem like he is just testing things out....and they just flat out fail, and then the issues you point out rear their ugly head. I hope to see Chiv get zeroed in on what this offense does well as the season progresses, and this offense being much more efficient in managing their down and distance.
Bliff Cranch
Well-Known Member
I more or less agree with this. The exception being I’d swap win and loss on the model Utah/WSU prediction. WSU is likely a win and Utah more likely loss. Cal will not be an easy out at all. That will be a very tough game and may come down to who’s more healthy at the end of the season.
Unfortunately, Snow, that's about all I can say. I do like the new stuff though. Let me tell you, I've taught both my boys a certain way but I think this is progress. That said, OL play is really a martial art and relies heavily on muscle memory. When they get it, the pocket will look a lot better on pass pro and should be a great look for Montez to be able to see the field, move in the pocket and set his feet. I also think guys like Will Sherman are made for this athletically and as they grow in this offense and get better muscle memory concerning the new techniques, every week they will be better up front.
Thanks for sharing what you could. Interesting stuff.
Glad the metrics say our Dbacks aren’t that great. I thought I was eating crazy pills. But more than not eating crazy pills, I’d like our dbacks to be awesome.
Young and inexperienced. Good news is we don't lose anybody at CB. We lose both our starting Safeties, but the CB position is well positioned to be a strength again next year.
Safety play has been as big an issue as CB play imo. We have not been great in coverage.
Which is what worries me most about ASU. They don’t do **** all game long, then st the end they just chuck and their dudes can catch it, and our dudes can’t really stop it.
Jimmy_Wood
Active Member
Where did you find this google spreadsheet at? Fantastic stuff?
I just follow the guy who creates it on twitter.
Bufffan68
Club Member
I’d give Chiv a B right now. The 3td down conv rate is pathetic and I haven’t seen TEs involved in any meaningful way. I share concerns about calling plays to help aleiviate the crap OL pass protection. But we have the #1 receiver in the nation and the #2 QB in the PAC so he’s doing lots right.
somebody
Well-Known Member
Okay. It's just very funny that a method whose goal is to predict future success botches it so badly on current knowledge. BTW, Troy was 86th to the nubs 29th. I guess it needs A LOT more data, because Troy dropped to 94 to the nubs current 46. It just can't seem to get a read on Nebraska. Maybe it should take coaching into account?
It's a model, not God. Probabilities are not certainties. From the sound of it, you don't understand it or how it reaches its conclusions. I urge you to read up on it. It uses certain stats to state the likelihood of a team winning a game. We lost those stats against NU, but still won. It was a wacky game.
Notably, it also predicted our score against the nubs exactly right before the game. 33 to 28. **** happens. If you don't like it, ignore it. Larger picture, it tends to tell you exactly what your team is w/o bull**** hot takes or hype to confuse the issue, which I like.
somebody
Well-Known Member
Wow, time to unbunch. I only said it was funny and it can't figure out Nebraska. Week 3 it predicted Neb 45 Troy 22.
Sure.
https://theathletic.com/532285/2018/09/19/stop-rate-oklahoma-state-shows-something-new-on-defense/
We are 22d in Stop rate, not allowing points on 81.8% of drives. However, we are allowing 1.09 points per drive, which isn't great. Too many explosive plays for TDs. The real good defenses are clustered around .75 points per drive or lower.
We are 22d in Stop rate, not allowing points on 81.8% of drives. However, we are allowing 1.09 points per drive, which isn't great. Too many explosive plays for TDs. The real good defenses are clustered around .75 points per drive or lower.
I really wish that "Points Per Possession" would become the standard for how offenses and defenses are ranked. I don't care about yards. Points are too reliant on pace of play. Only PPP gives a true picture of effectiveness.