Stats

Sunday, September 2, 2012

2012 Season Preview - Part 3 - The "Paul Johnson Effect"


There is something about Paul Johnson that I’ve been noticing for a few years now, but just now got around to running the numbers.  I believe Coach Johnson to be one of the best X and O schemers out there.  Watching our games, I always get the sense that we have the edge in terms of in game adjustments.  In general, we do better in the second half than the first.  And in particular, we have tremendous success specifically on our first drive of the second half.  I attribute this phenomenon to the fact that the first drive of the second half comes immediately after halftime.  Halftime is the best time to make in game adjustments, for obvious reasons.  There is more time to get the players to understand what adjustments are needed.  This effect shows most clearly in the first drive, in my opinion, because as the second half progresses, both teams dilute the significance of the halftime by making further adjustments.  Thus, my hypothesis was that, if your coach is a great in game X and O coach, you should do better generally in the second half than the first, and even better still on the first possession of the second half.  Unfortunately, I don’t have the time to test that hypothesis across a bunch of teams.  And there are other conceivable explanations for doing better as the game goes on.  For example, you could wear down the defense.  If we had Alabama’s O-line, or if we ran a hurry up style like Oregon or Clemson, I would give this possibility more consideration.  Also, if we did better in the second half because we wear down the defense, one would think we would do better late in the second half than on the first drive.  Anyway, I’m just guessing at what is going on here.  But here are the numbers.  I call this “the Paul Johnson Effect”.


All Games
Points Per Possession (Entire Game)
Points Per Possession (2nd Half Only)
Points Per Possession (1st Drive 2nd Half)
2008
2.10
2.13
2.62
2009
3.07
3.45
4
2010
2.30
2.47
2.62
2011
3.08
2.73
4
Average
2.64
2.70
3.31



Now Conference games only.



Conference Games 
Points Per Possession (Entire Game)
Points Per Possession (2nd Half Only)
Points Per Possession (1st Drive 2nd Half)
2008
1.91
1.89
1.63
2009
3.11
3.69
4.67
2010
2.08
2.47
3.38
2011
2.53
1.98
3.88
Average
2.41
2.51
3.39


A couple of things jump out at me.  First and foremost, the absurd numbers in the last column.  4.6, 3.3, 3.8?  To put that in perspective, the ACC’s best offense this year averaged 2.6 points per possession (for the whole game).  Wow.

We are marginally better in the 2nd half than the first half, but incredibly good on the first possession of the 2nd half.  In particular, the 2009 group, in conference games, was ridiculous.  Averaging 4.67 points per possession?  That is not all that far from scoring a touchdown every time (In fact we did score a TD on 6 out of 9 drives...)  You can also see that the 2008 group was in fact our worst offense under Paul Johnson.  In my experience people tend to forget this, but the 2008 team was successful mostly because it had a good defense.  The offense only started to get good towards the end of the year.  I expect 2008 will forever be our worst offensive numbers under Paul Johnson (which should excite all GT fans - imagine what we can do if we ever get a defense that good again, since our offense will likely be much better than 2008 was).

Additionally, our four year conference average of 2.4 points per possession is quite good.  From the previous blog post, you can get an idea of what the conference average is (roughly 2.1 or 2.2, which also shows exactly how amazing our first drive of the second half numbers are).  2.4 is well above average for that span.  Finally, you can also see that the 2011 offense was quite a bit better than the 2010 group.  A fair amount of fans seem to think our offense can’t be any good (and was not that good last year) because we lack playmakers.  Well, from 2010 to 2011, we lost our best playmaker, Anthony Allen, to the NFL and got much better.  (I don’t blame this on Allen, for what its worth).  The most important 2 things for our offense, in my opinion, are O-line performance and QB reads, in that order.  Having “difference makers” at the skill positions would certainly help, but we will do just fine with “average” players there if we can execute in those two areas.  (I think our skill players are better than merely “Average” anyway, but that seems to be the popular perception.)

I’m not sure what exactly to make of the fact that, in 2011, our second half offense was considerably worse than our first half offense.  We were still very good on the first drive of the second half.  This will be something to watch going forward.  

Anyway, for a couple of years now, I’ve expected a TD on our first drive of the second half, and I’m usually not dissapointed.  

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

2012 Season Preview Part 2 - Look Back to 2011 Con't


I decided to look a little further into the per possession numbers in the previous post.  They provide a good picture, but I think it would be even more accurate to control for quality of opponent.  Everybody did not play an equal schedule.  For example, FSU’s defense did not face the conference’s 1st, 3rd, 5th or 6th best offenses.  FSU’s defense compiled its stats against all 6 offenses in the bottom half of the conference, plus only 2 of the top 6.  Meanwhile Maryland played the exact same schedule, except they did not face Duke (9th) or Maryland (11th), but did play FSU (1st) and GT (3rd).  So maybe a comparison of absolute stats is not as accurate as it could be.  Here is a look at how each offense and defense performed, compared to the averages gained or allowed by their opponents.  We will start with the offenses.  

Points Per Possession - Offense


Offense
Points Per Possession Scored
Average Points Per Poss. Allowed by Defenses Faced
Difference
FSU
2.6517
2.19
0.461
Clemson
2.5175
2.06
0.457
Miami
2.6173
2.17
0.447
GT
2.5301
2.14
0.390
VT
2.2970
2.15
0.147
UNC
2.2245
2.10
0.125
Wake
2.2188
2.10
0.119
NC St
1.8317
2.11
-0.278
Duke
1.7143
2.02
-0.306
Maryland
1.5758
1.98
-0.404
UVA
1.6344
2.17
-0.536
BC
1.4666
2.12
-0.653



So you can see there is some movement.  Clemson jumps up from 4th to 2nd.  GT is now 4th, however we are closer to first than we were before.  In fact we are closer to 1st  than we are to 5th, by a long shot.  Basically, the conference’s top 4 offenses were all similar, and quite a bit better than the rest.  

Here is the same data charted by average yards per possession, rather than points.  This chart will remove some of the special teams bias (some teams start with better field position, some teams make a higher percentage of FG’s - so the special teams has some influence over average points per possession.  Only the offense gains yards though...)


Offense
 Yards Per Possession Gained
Average Yards Per Poss. Allowed by Defenses Faced
Difference
Miami
38.37
33.37
5
GT
37.76
33.20
4.56
Clemson
35.15
32.08
3.07
VT
36.48
33.82
2.66
FSU
35.38
34.14
1.24
Wake
31.33
31.91
-0.58
Maryland
31.72
32.31
-0.59
UVA
32.65
33.40
-0.75
UNC
32.38
33.44
-1.06
Duke
30.91
33.11
-2.2
NC St
26.89
32.63
-5.74
BC
26.04
33.18
-7.14



Not a big change, but this does suggest that Miami and GT might have had better pure offenses than FSU and Clemson, while FSU and Clemson had better combinations of defense and special teams (as just one example).  At any rate, GT was 2nd and 4th in these two, very near the top in both categories, and well above the conference average.  


Now, on to the defense.  


Defense
Points Allowed Per Possession 
Average Points Per Poss. Scored by Offenses Faced
Difference
FSU
1.51
1.95
0.44
UVA
1.79
2.18
0.39
NC St
1.74
2.10
0.36
VT
1.82
2.16
0.34
Clemson
1.87
2.12
0.25
BC
2.12
2.18
0.06
UNC
2.11
2.17
0.06
Miami
2.14
2.01
-0.13
Wake
2.25
2.03
-0.22
GT
2.39
2.05
-0.34
Duke
2.80
2.21
-0.59
Maryland
2.82
2.18
-0.64


Again you see some slight changes.  GT is about the same as before on this one.  Still really bad.  FSU is still the best but the margin is substantially smaller.  UVA and NC State were underrated defenses last year.  Clemson falls off a little bit as well.  In the previous post, I insinuated that Clemson’s offense and defense were about equal last year.  Maybe not.  When you control for quality of opponents faced, it appears Clemson’s offense is better than its defense by a decent margin.  



Defense
 Yards Per Possession Allowed
Average Yards Per Poss. Gained by Offenses Faced
Difference
NC St
26.01
32.80
6.79
FSU
26.87
31.63
4.76
Clemson
29.32
32.72
3.4
UVA
31.49
33.74
2.25
UNC
30.47
32.69
2.22
VT
31.25
33.30
2.05
BC
34.30
33.28
-1.02
GT
35.53
33.07
-2.46
Wake
34.94
31.87
-3.07
Duke
38.94
33.80
-5.14
Maryland
38.09
32.95
-5.14
Miami
40.01
32.91
-7.1


Again NC State’s defense shows very well.  They jump up and now have a significant margin over FSU, indicating to me that NC State’s special teams were not as good as FSU’s (probably).  Miami is absolutely atrocious on this stat, somewhat surprisingly.  And how about GT?  We move up to 8th place, still bad, but not nearly as bad as before.  Suggesting again that our special teams really hurt us.  When you isolate the defense’s performance as much as possible, we get a little bit better relative to everybody else (and this is also true for the offense).  

So, our offense is very good, our defense is bad, and apparently our special teams do not help us much.  Not that this is exactly news, but just so everybody can see exactly the extent of what is going on.  Here’s hoping we see some improvement to the defense and special teams Monday night...