forums

Vision Vestige

Advertisement
Thank you for sharing that information. That being said, it makes me sick how ****** Golden was here at Miami.
 
HurricaneVision said:
As we move towards the start of the season and many of us get a needed dose of energy from the new staff, I wanted to take a look at how Miami fared in key metrics last year- as well as look at what the proposed solutions are from this staff...
Click to expand...

Brother Hurricane V...

A W E S O M E...

You took the time to quantify in great detail what several of us have been saying, mostly qualitatively with some quant, for a long time now.

The migraine you caused in the brains of corch, croot, porster crowd was worth the read...and re-read.

Agree with your findings 100%, with a comment...I don't think RB metrics tell the whole story, particulary ypc because it assumes (I assume) a baselined "average" OL. The OL play last year was abysmal, so
hard to truly get at what was/was not on the RBs. With that said, the RB metrics do indicate overall success/medocrity/failure of the RB and OL groups together.

Keep on keep'n on.

Moneyball is here.

Go Canes.
 
Advertisement
OP A couple of stats that distinguish the elite teams I think are IMO avr/yDS/play on O and D. Miami was #46 on O at 5.91 yds/Play which is slightly above avr and 5.78 on D for a ranking of #86 . These numbers tell you who makes big plays and who doesnt give them up which I believe is huge contributor to the winner of a game. Would like your insight on this if you have a study.

Another stat that concerns me from last year is turnover margin. We did so well in this metric that I hope we can just come close to duplicating it. I can only imagine how bad we would have been if not for the +11 margin we enjoyed. How many points is a TO worth on your table?
 
Yds per play is definitely a good stat to use, but I wasn't trying to evaluate how last year's team fared so much as I was trying to determine where they struggled and what can happen to change those areas.

Turnover correlation year-to-year is around .30, which means you can only explain away 30% of the "noise" so that is just not statistically significant. We will undoubtedly regress towards the mean in turnovers caused, but that doesn't mean we will regress in turnovers we experience. It simply means the amount of potential turnovers gained will regress.

Really the metric that has some correlation with turnovers is sacks per dropback. I suspect we will see a big increase in that number this year.
 
Great post, very informative, don't change a thing. Numbers are needed to support opinion. Dudes have just become too comfortable with empty posturing and *** pics around here.
 
HurricaneVision said:
Yds per play is definitely a good stat to use, but I wasn't trying to evaluate how last year's team fared so much as I was trying to determine where they struggled and what can happen to change those areas.

Turnover correlation year-to-year is around .30, which means you can only explain away 30% of the "noise" so that is just not statistically significant. We will undoubtedly regress towards the mean in turnovers caused, but that doesn't mean we will regress in turnovers we experience. It simply means the amount of potential turnovers gained will regress.

Really the metric that has some correlation with turnovers is sacks per dropback. I suspect we will see a big increase in that number this year.
Click to expand...

Based on the UM stats from last year, if you hid the team and had me guess the W-L record I'd say 6-6 at best. Not sure how we won 8 games with these numbers.

Scoring O #71
Scoring D #77

Total O #67
Total D #69

1st Downs #93
1st Downs allowed #103

Penalties #128 (last)
Penalties by Opponent #41

Sacks #64
Sacks allowed #34

TFL #96
TFL allowed #8 (not bad)

3rd Down Conversions #107
3rd Down conv allowed #67

Red Zone TD % #111
RedZone TD % for opponents #58
 
Fantastic write up.

It would be interesting to see how our statistics shape up as the season progresses...
 
Advertisement
Agreed. Don't dumb it down. Interesting post to read and presented data objectively. One suggestion would be to maybe have one post for the offense and then another for the defense. Could help us have time to chew on the information for each side of the ball instead of getting it all at once.
 
GTPete00 said:
Agreed. Don't dumb it down. Interesting post to read and presented data objectively. One suggestion would be to maybe have one post for the offense and then another for the defense. Could help us have time to chew on the information for each side of the ball instead of getting it all at once.
Click to expand...

Good suggestion. Thank you.
 
[MENTION=5374]HurricaneVision[/MENTION]

I like the look at last years #'s. But I'm having a struggle figuring out how they are relevant now with a different rooster and a different coaching staff running completely different schemes this year.

Genuinely curious
 
HurricaneVision said:
I'm always wondering if I should split my writing into more than one post. Feedback welcomed.
Click to expand...

This was perfect. Post of the year.

It goes to show you just how bad we were last year, and even though we were that bad we still won 8 games. You have to be a very talented team to pull that off, and put up those abysmal numbers. Insert Mark Richt, and a completely overhauled D, and I think we see significant jumps in every stat field. 3rd down had been terrible the whole time Coley was calling plays, and it wasn't always because we didn't get yards on 1st and 2nd down. He was on the other side of horrible when it came to knowing what plays to call, and when. I honestly expect to see a completely, completely different Miami Hurricane team this year.

For this reason I scoff at the people calling for 8-9 wins. It's a whole new ballgame now.
 
Back
Top