Houston Texans Message Board & Forum - TexansTalk.com

Houston Texans Message Board & Forum - TexansTalk.com (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Texans Talk (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=56)
-   -   Progress Markers (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=304)

infantrycak 05-12-2004 10:09 PM

Progress Markers
 
Took a look at some of the mid-league standards from last season and the Texans' performance last year for a little perspective on the spread in the league and improvement the Texans need to make. The 1st numbers below are to be mid-pack in the NFL, i.e. between the 16th and 17th teams last year and the second is the Texans' mark for last year.

# offensive plays: 1008 v. 896
Total offense per game: 317 v. 269
Yards per O play: 5.1 v. 4.8
1st downs per game: 18.2 v. 14.8
3rd down %: 36.5 v. 29.9
4th down %: 3rd best in league at 64.3%
Penalties: 103 v. 121
Time of possession: 30 v. 27:39
Scoring per game: 19.5 v. 15.9
TD's: 35 v. 29
Rushing yards: 1820 v. 1651
Rushing avg: 4.0 v. 3.9
Passing yards: 3200 v. 2655
Passing %: 58.5 v. 56.5
Passing yards per game: 200 v. 165.9
Yards per reception: 11.4 v. 11.5
Sacks allowed: 36 v. 36

Total D given up per game: 316 v. 380
Yards per D play: 5 v. 5.8
1st downs given up: 18.2 v. 21
3rd down %: 38.1 v. 40.1
Penalites: 104 v. 96
Scoring allowed: 20.4 v. 23.8
TD's: 35 v. 42
Rushing allowed: 1870 v. 2370
Rushing per game: 117 v. 148.1
Yards per rush allowed: 4.1 v. 4.4
Passing allowed: 3237 v. 3712
Passing % allowed: 59.2 v. 59.2
Yards passing per game allowed: 202 v. 232
Sacks: 36 v. 19
Yards per reception allowed: 11.3 v. 12.9

So what if anything can we draw from this?

BuffSoldier 05-12-2004 10:14 PM

Our O wasnt far from even with league par even with the injuries of DD and Carr. Our D will be a tun better than last year if we can stay healthy, our run and pass D should improve thanks to off-season aquisitions and haveing almost a totally defensive draft. I think our D will be top 12-10 in the league. :taz:

edo783 05-12-2004 11:39 PM

I think it looks like we need to improve all acrosse the board to even get to the middle of the pack. As close as all the teams are to each other, what seems like a small amount, may in fact prove to be a bit wider than it appears.

rittenhouserobz 05-13-2004 01:26 AM

Those offensive numbers are definitely scewed a little. No excuses, because all teams deal with injuries. We still need more depth at OL and then I think we will be a consistent #12-#18 offense.

Scooter 05-13-2004 07:42 AM

i see no passing game and too many penalties on offense. on defense, no big men = no pass rush & no run D.

El Tejano 05-13-2004 11:52 AM

I see how we drastically improved on the offensive line giving up sacks but being very inconsistent with alot of holding and false start penalties. There was a time when we would move in scoring range but then move right back out of it. I think this will improve as the unit now will have been with each other two years in a row with the exception of Wade.

We werent so bad offensively considering the defenses we played this year (Titans twice, New England, Miami, Carolina). Overall I see our 3rd down conversions need to really improve this year.

Defensively we look like we need work but I think being healthy was a major part of that. The stat that stands out is the sack #. Too low considering the veteran athletes we have on defense. I am sure with the additions we have made to the defense this will turnaround.

I wonder where we are as far as defensive turnovers go.

Blake 05-13-2004 11:55 AM

Well, we arent middle of the pack yet, so those numbers dont shock me. But it does show that we need some work.

Vinny 05-13-2004 12:45 PM

Thanks for all the homework. Excellent stuff.

infantrycak 05-13-2004 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DC_ROCK
Well, we arent middle of the pack yet, so those numbers dont shock me. But it does show that we need some work.

The point was to see some standards for how far the Texans have to go to get to mid-pack.

One thing that really jumps out is third down efficiency leading to lost plays and time of possession. The average rush gained just .1 yards less than NFL average and the average reception gained .1 yards more. We ran 112 less offensive plays than average or 7 plays per game. By the way for "the Texans run all the time" crowd, the split was 51% passing/49% rushing (including 39 QB carries as rushes when most started out as passing plays). Using the same performance for the other 896 plays, those 112 plays lost cost the Texans 57 passing plays for 32 receptions and 370 yards and 55 rushing plays for 214.5 yards. With those plays the totals would have been 3025 passing (slightly below mid-pack) and 1865 rushing (slightly above mid-pack). Third down execution appears to have killed the Texans far more than average production.

wags 05-13-2004 01:38 PM

No False Starts On Third And Short.

TheOgre 05-13-2004 02:26 PM

The Texans seemed to struggle converting 1st down specifically in the zone between the 50 and the opponents 35. In fact, we often seemed to give up a sack or get a penalty in this area of the field. If we can improve upon our execution in that area of the field, I think our offense would be significantly more productive.

Blake 05-13-2004 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by infantrycak
The point was to see some standards for how far the Texans have to go to get to mid-pack.

I know what the point was. Hence the reason I said...

"But it does show that we need some work."

Lucky 05-13-2004 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by infantrycak
By the way for "the Texans run all the time" crowd, the split was 51% passing/49% rushing (including 39 QB carries as rushes when most started out as passing plays)

The league average was slightly more than 53% passing/47% rushing (New England was right at the average), & the Texans were 10th lowest in the pass/run ratio. That makes sense as they were attempting to keep the pass rush off Carr as well as develop their new found running game. Still, the Texans were one of only 4 teams with losing records that had a below average pass/run ratio. Usually teams with that low a ratio are protecting leads late in the 4th quarter.

What are we talking about here, really? One or two plays a game where the Texans might have been better served taking a shot downfield rather than another draw? Maybe with the addition of Wade and the maturation of the QB/WR combo, they'll take those chances.

El Tejano 05-13-2004 05:03 PM

I agree this will be a shake up year but I also believe that is why we got the type of veterans we did rather than the big name guys because these guys have winning attitudes. Even though we had some losses each one of these guys have come in knowing we can beat our opponent and wanting to win.

I really believe this year we will see our investments payoff.

infantrycak 05-13-2004 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucky
What are we talking about here, really? One or two plays a game where the Texans might have been better served taking a shot downfield rather than another draw?

1st Lucky, I agree we run slightly more than NFL average and my post was to point out to folks, that it wasn't the run, run, pass, i.e. 2/3rds running that many people perceive and complain about during the season.

The real purpose of starting this thread was, to see how little spread there is across the league in some areas. For instance league average passing percentage was 58.5% and Carr's was 56.5%--between 2002 and 2003 he improved his percentage by 4.1%. A similar jump would vault him to 6th-7th range and just half would put our passing game around league average. Like you say, 1 to 3 plays per game can make a tremendous difference over the course of a season--1-3 1st downs is 3-9 more plays, several minutes off the clock and hundreds of more yards of offense.

done88 05-16-2004 04:09 AM

What can we draw fom this?
 
We can conclude that the Texans may make signifant leaps forword and still be just better then average. Therefore if the Texans do not have a winning record next year the fans better not exit stage left. Stick to it for the long hall it may be a couple of years before the dynasty starts to settle in. however once it does start to happen it will be worth the wait. :twocents:

Lucky 05-16-2004 01:11 PM

infantrycak,
I'm a little confused about some of these numbers. Shouldn't some of these league average numbers, such as 3rd conversion %, be the same for both offense & defense? Did you subtract the numbers from the Texans games prior to calculating the averages?

(Offense)
3rd down %: 36.5 v. 29.9
Scoring per game: 19.5 v. 15.9
Rushing yards: 1820 v. 1651
Passing yards: 3200 v. 2655

(Defense)
3rd down %: 38.1 v. 40.1
Scoring allowed: 20.4 v. 23.8
Rushing allowed: 1870 v. 2370
Passing allowed: 3237 v. 3712

Looking at these numbers, itís important to remember that the offense and defense results arenít independent of each other. The offense can help the defense by manufacturing long drives, avoiding turnovers, and just plain scoring points. The offense will hinder the defense by a lot of 3 & outs, costly interceptions or fumbles, and not converting opportunities. Conversely, the defense assists the offenseís production by causing turnovers and preventing long drives. If the defense improves, so should some of the offenseís statistics. And vice versa. Neither side exists in a vacuum nor are their numbers created in such.

Some smart guy could possibly derive a formula that relates what one sideís contribution to the others data is. Good luck with that. Again, itís easy to see from the numbers that the Texans need to improve, more difficult to pinpoint where the improvement is most needed.

infantrycak 05-16-2004 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucky
I'm a little confused about some of these numbers. Shouldn't some of these league average numbers, such as 3rd conversion %, be the same for both offense & defense? Did you subtract the numbers from the Texans games prior to calculating the averages?

Actually I should have said median rather than average. The numbers are those between the 16th and 17th teams in each category last year. If they were averages then the numbers should correlate on the two sides of the ball.

Quote:

Looking at these numbers, itís important to remember that the offense and defense results arenít independent of each other. The offense can help the defense by manufacturing long drives, avoiding turnovers, and just plain scoring points. The offense will hinder the defense by a lot of 3 & outs, costly interceptions or fumbles, and not converting opportunities. Conversely, the defense assists the offenseís production by causing turnovers and preventing long drives. If the defense improves, so should some of the offenseís statistics. And vice versa. Neither side exists in a vacuum nor are their numbers created in such.

Some smart guy could possibly derive a formula that relates what one sideís contribution to the others data is. Good luck with that. Again, itís easy to see from the numbers that the Texans need to improve, more difficult to pinpoint where the improvement is most needed.
That is in part what I was posting above about the missing offensive plays. As you say, if the offense gets more plays (about 7 per game to get to league median) then that is less plays the defense is on the field. Don't know that there is any 'formula' to relate the two, but it is simple to calculate the lost output due to lack of offensive plays and extra yardage given up by the D due to having to be on the field more. For the offense using the same performance for the other 896 plays, those 112 plays lost cost the Texans 57 passing plays for 32 receptions and 370 yards and 55 rushing plays for 214.5 yards. With those plays the totals would have been 3025 passing (slightly below mid-pack) and 1865 rushing (slightly above mid-pack). You could do the same calculation for the D but frankly right now I don't have a calculator handy--when I have one available I'll edit this to give the D improvement. FYI the median number of plays by defenses was 998 and the Texans defended 1054.

steve_rutledge 05-16-2004 09:52 PM

I think we will be alot more aggresive due to the arrival of Smith and Wade. As far as execution goes, we will be alot better cuz of the O line will be together instead of consistantly shuffled. With Walker, Payne, and Smith controling that line, the sacks are gonna come right along with the INT's.

Vinny 05-17-2004 09:38 PM

I split all the posts that didn't focus on the numbers provided by Infantrycak in the first post into this thread. Both are topics worthy of their own threads.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:58 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ad Management by RedTyger