Inside The Numbers: Us Edition
"If you multiply Tha1 by any integer, you get that integer." via www.fearthebeard.org
Well, we've taken a look at many teams' stats over the past few weeks. With the bye week, it seemed prudent to take a moment and actually LOOK at Cal's numbers. There's been a lot of perception of stats, so let's see what the stats actually are.
All stats taken from here.
Let's first look at overall team numbers:
2008 California Football
CAL Overall Team Statistics (as of Oct 04, 2008)
All games
TEAM STATISTICS CAL OPP
--------------------------------------------------------
SCORING....................... 197 90
Points Per Game............. 39.4 18.0
FIRST DOWNS................... 106 86
Rushing..................... 37 29
Passing..................... 59 46
Penalty..................... 10 11
RUSHING YARDAGE............... 900 475
Yards gained rushing........ 1000 660
Yards lost rushing.......... 100 185
Rushing Attempts............ 162 191
Average Per Rush............ 5.6 2.5
Average Per Game............ 180.0 95.0
TDs Rushing................. 9 7
PASSING YARDAGE............... 1158 978
Att-Comp-Int................ 168-99-4 169-86-10
Average Per Pass............ 6.9 5.8
Average Per Catch........... 11.7 11.4
Average Per Game............ 231.6 195.6
TDs Passing................. 12 4
TOTAL OFFENSE................. 2058 1453
Total Plays................. 330 360
Average Per Play............ 6.2 4.0
Average Per Game............ 411.6 290.6
KICK RETURNS: #-Yards......... 16-379 30-583
PUNT RETURNS: #-Yards......... 21-261 7-102
INT RETURNS: #-Yards.......... 10-178 4-126
KICK RETURN AVERAGE........... 23.7 19.4
PUNT RETURN AVERAGE........... 12.4 14.6
INT RETURN AVERAGE............ 17.8 31.5
FUMBLES-LOST.................. 6-3 11-3
PENALTIES-Yards............... 32-266 28-237
Average Per Game............ 53.2 47.4
PUNTS-Yards................... 25-1083 32-1296
Average Per Punt............ 43.3 40.5
Net punt average............ 37.6 31.1
TIME OF POSSESSION/Game....... 28:53 31:07
3RD-DOWN Conversions.......... 18/54 24/76
3rd-Down Pct................ 33% 32%
4TH-DOWN Conversions.......... 1/3 2/7
4th-Down Pct................ 33% 29%
SACKS BY-Yards................ 13-102 7-34
MISC YARDS.................... 75 4
TOUCHDOWNS SCORED............. 26 12
FIELD GOALS-ATTEMPTS.......... 5-7 2-6
ON-SIDE KICKS................. 0-3 0-0
RED-ZONE SCORES............... 20-23 87% 9-16 56%
RED-ZONE TOUCHDOWNS........... 15-23 65% 7-16 44%
PAT-ATTEMPTS.................. 26-26 100% 12-12 100%
ATTENDANCE.................... 185228 77433
Games/Avg Per Game.......... 3/61743 2/38716
Neutral Site Games.......... 0/0
SCORE BY QUARTERS 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total
-------------------- --- --- --- --- ---
CAL................. 55 48 31 63 - 197
Opponents........... 17 21 21 31 - 90
I think many people are sort of down on the team this year. Especially on the offensive side of the ball. There are many who make reasonable arguments about this. Note how amazing our differential is on Scoring. Wow, we've scored over 100 points than our opponents. But look at first downs. Only 20 more first downs than our opponents. Compare that to see how a lot of our domination hasn't necessarily come from the offensive side of the ball. Either we're having a ton of huge play scoring drives (which happens occasionally) or our offense is not as responsible for as much scoring as we might like.
Note that many have said our rushing game is better than our passing game. Hard to disagree with that. But notice that we have 162 rushing attempts and 168 passing attempts. Near PERFECT balance. If that doesn't catch your eye, nothing will.
Note: We are averaging 6.2 yards per play! 4.0 given up per play. I will take that any time.
We have about the same percentage 3rd down success rate as our opponents (33% to 32%). But note that we have had 54 3rd down conversion attempts while our opponents have had 76 attempts. 54 in and of itself doesn't really mean anything. But the fact that our opponents have had so many more, I think, stems from our bend, but don't break defense.
Note also our Red Zone efficiency. 86% total for us with a 65% TD rate. Our opponents have had 56% total with a 44% TD rate. I am no statistician. Somebody else will have to look at various other teams to find solid comparisons here. 86% total with a 65% TD rate doesn't mean much in and of itself, but compare it to what Cal has given up and it looks impressive.
We are also averaging over 60K a game. I'm not sure what out max attendance is off the top of my head, but that sounds good to me!
Rushing Stats:
RUSHING GP Att Gain Loss Net Avg TD Long Avg/G
-----------------------------------------------------------
Best, Jahvid 4 59 443 22 421 7.1 4 86 105.2
Vereen, Shane 5 62 387 15 372 6.0 2 81 74.4
Slocum, Tracy 5 11 59 4 55 5.0 1 21 11.0
Geurts, Peter 2 6 45 1 44 7.3 0 27 22.0
Riley, Kevin 4 11 48 33 15 1.4 1 27 3.8
Ross, Jeremy 5 4 16 8 8 2.0 0 13 1.6
Ta'ufo'ou, Will 5 1 1 0 1 1.0 0 1 0.2
Mansion, Brock 1 1 1 0 1 1.0 1 1 1.0
Longshore, Nate 5 1 0 4 -4 -4.0 0 0 -0.8
TEAM 4 6 0 13 -13 -2.2 0 0 -3.2
Total.......... 5 162 1000 100 900 5.6 9 86 180.0
Opponents...... 5 191 660 185 475 2.5 7 38 95.0
This chart came out poorly. Those who complain Will T is being criminally underused might note that he apparently only has 1 rush attempt. Total. Jeremy Ross has more! Peter Geurts has more! We'll also see Will T in the receiving later, but with no attempt at editorializing here, he is not getting a lot of rushing attempts. California Pete notes that this might be common to Tedford offenses, the lack of rush attempts for FBs. If he has any further insight into the matter, we'd love to hear it!
I forget what Marshawn's average was in 2004. Was it 8+ a carry? I forget. Best averaging 7.1, well, that's sick. To be fair, much of those average probably stems from his amazing WSU game, but that's also counter balanced by the disappointing Maryland game. Vereen is averaging 6.0, which is HARDLY anything to sneeze at. And I often sneeze at things, so that's important that I wouldn't sneeze in this specific situation.
As long as Best stays healthy, there are no real worries here. Our two main backs averaging 6+ a carry? I will take that! To the bank! Were there to be any still working.
Passing is obviously a key area of concern:
PASSING GP Effic Cmp-Att-Int Pct Yds TD Lng Avg/G
---------------------------------------------------------------
Riley, Kevin 4 132.88 62-109-1 56.9 735 7 42 183.8
Longshore, Nate 5 150.36 36-54-3 66.7 413 5 50 82.6
Mansion, Brock 1 92.00 1-2-0 50.0 10 0 10 10.0
TEAM 4 0.00 0-2-0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Vereen, Shane 5 0.00 0-1-0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Total.......... 5 135.64 99-168-4 58.9 1158 12 50 231.6
Opponents...... 5 95.47 86-169-10 50.9 978 4 63 195.6
I never fully understand math (basic or otherwise) and so the college QB efficiency rating confuses me. All I know is 150>132. Nate has a MUCH higher completion rate, albeit about half the attempts. That might even out with more attempts, not sure. Nate has nearly thrown as many TDs in half the attempts as Riley, but, of course, 3x as many picks (in half the attempts).
It doesnt say it here, but I did the math on yards per completion and yards per pass.
Longshore: 11.4 per completion, 7.6 per pass
Riley: 11.8 per completion, 6.7
So, unless I suck at math (which is likely) while Riley is averaging more per completion, he is averaging less per pass. Not sure what to make of that, to be honest. Just the facts, ma'am!
The receivers, young, inexperience, and all:
RECEIVING GP No. Yds Avg TD Long Avg/G
-------------------------------------------------
Morrah, Cameron 5 15 194 12.9 4 50 38.8
Vereen, Shane 5 15 95 6.3 0 15 19.0
CUNNINGHAM, L. 5 14 223 15.9 1 29 44.6
Best, Jahvid 4 14 157 11.2 0 42 39.2
Boateng, Nyan 5 12 170 14.2 2 34 34.0
Young, Sean 5 8 112 14.0 1 42 22.4
Calvin, Michael 4 8 103 12.9 0 23 25.8
Smith, Zach 8 4 33 8.2 1 10 4.1
Ta'ufo'ou, Will 5 3 10 3.3 1 5 2.0
Slocum, Tracy 5 2 0 0.0 0 2 0.0
Verran Tucker 2 1 29 29.0 0 29 14.5
Ross, Jeremy 5 1 14 14.0 1 14 2.8
Tucker 1 1 10 10.0 1 10 10.0
Jones, Marvin 3 1 8 8.0 0 8 2.7
Total.......... 5 99 1158 11.7 12 50 231.6
Opponents...... 5 86 978 11.4 4 63 195.6
No surprise here. Morrah leads the pack in receptions. Interesting, however, how Vereen is right below him. I don't think any of us expected that! But if you note his average per game, its 19.0 as compared to 38.8 for Morrah, 44.6 for Cunningham or 39.2 for Best. So, that is probably a lot of little dink and dunk passes to the flat that weren't as successful for whatever reasons.
This is really what you'd expect from the type of team we have here, a lot of guys with about the same stats. Not 1 guy who is above and beyond better than any of the others. Cunningham's average per game is quite a bit higher, showing that he perhaps been the most consistent. I am honestly shocked at Boateng's numbers. Not that they are bad per se, but I thought he was higher up in the action. Averaging 10 yards per game less than Cunningham and 5th on the team in receptions.
Clearly, nobody has proven themselves as a receiver on the level of DeSean or even The Hawks. That's not really surprising to anybody, is it?
PUNT RETURNS No. Yds Avg TD Long
---------------------------------------
THOMPSON, S. 12 164 13.7 1 73
Young, Sean 7 31 4.4 0 15
Johnson, Brett 1 5 5.0 0 0
KENDRICKS. M. 1 26 26.0 0 0
NNABUIFE, B. 0 35 0.0 2 30
Total.......... 21 261 12.4 3 73
Opponents...... 7 102 14.6 0 32
Not much here, except SydQuan is a GOD. But we knew that already.
KICK RETURNS No. Yds Avg TD Long
---------------------------------------
Best, Jahvid 9 284 31.6 0 54
Hagan, Darian 3 68 22.7 0 28
Slocum, Tracy 2 8 4.0 0 8
Glover, Drew 1 4 4.0 0 4
Bishop, Devin 1 15 15.0 0 15
Total.......... 16 379 23.7 0 54
Opponents...... 30 583 19.4 0 68
Jahvid kicking butt. I wonder if they'll use him on kick returns anymore with the elbow and all. I predict no. He's too valuable. Use Hagan or Slocum.
|--------Tackles--------| |-Sacks-| |---Pass Def---| |-Fumbles-| Blkd
DEFENSIVE LEADERS GP Solo Ast Total TFL/Yds No-Yds Int-Yds BrUp QBH Rcv-Yds FF Kick Saf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 Felder, Anthony 5 15 22 37 3.5-12 0.5-3 . . 1 . 1 . .
18 MOHAMED, M. 5 10 18 28 1.5-4 . . . 1 . . . .
26 Hagan, Darian 5 20 7 27 2.0-3 . 1-0 5 . 1-0 1 . .
1 WILLIAMS, W. 5 9 18 27 2.5-7 . . 2 . . . . .
56 Follett, Zack 5 15 11 26 7.5-50 3.0-34 . 1 2 1-0 2 . .
5 THOMPSON, S. 5 18 7 25 2.0-17 2.0-17 3-108 8 . . . . .
9 Young, Eddie 5 7 15 22 0.5-3 0.5-3 . . . . . . .
44 Alualu, Tyson 5 8 13 21 3.0-17 1.5-10 . . 3 . . . .
29 Ezeff, Marcus 5 10 10 20 1.0-1 . . 2 . . . . .
25 Johnson, Brett 5 7 10 17 . . 2-62 . . . 1 1 .
97 Jordan, Cameron 4 7 8 15 4.0-10 2.0-7 1-3 . 1 . 1 . .
2 Hicks, Bernard 3 8 6 14 . . 1-0 . . . . . .
17 Conte, Chris 5 7 5 12 . . 1-0 2 . . . . .
76 Hill, Derrick 5 1 10 11 . . . 1 . . . . .
94 Davis, Rulon 4 4 6 10 2.5-13 1.5-9 . 1 2 . 1 1 .
10 Bishop, Devin 5 4 5 9 0.5-1 . . . . . . . .
30 KENDRICKS. M. 5 6 3 9 1.0-10 1.0-10 . . . . . 1 .
0C Holt, D.J. 3 5 2 7 1.0-1 . . . . . . . .
57 Browner, Keith 5 2 5 7 1.5-10 1.0-9 . 2 . 1-0 . . .
43 JOHNSON, Ch. 5 3 3 6 . . . . . . . . .
37 Mullins, Robert 3 2 3 5 . . . . . . . . .
95 Owusu, Ernest 2 1 3 4 . . . . . . . . .
20 Brooks, Jesse 4 3 1 4 . . . . . . . . .
31 Tyndall, John 4 1 2 3 . . . . . . . . .
11 Cattouse, Sean 4 2 1 3 . . 1-5 2 . . . . .
98 Kane, Mika 5 1 1 2 . . . . . . . . .
15 NNABUIFE, B. 5 1 1 2 . . . 1 . . . . .
42 McIntyre, Shea 4 2 . 2 . . . . . . . . .
27 Amadi, Charles 4 1 1 2 . . . . . . . . .
4 Best, Jahvid 4 2 . 2 . . . . . . . . .
4D Smith, Zach 8 1 . 1 . . . . . . . . .
6 Longshore, Nate 5 1 . 1 . . . . . . . . .
77 COSTANZO, M. 4 . 1 1 . . . . . . . . .
0H Campbell, D.J. 3 1 . 1 . . . . . . . . .
Total.......... 5 185 198 383 34-159 13-102 10-178 27 10 3-0 7 3 .
Opponents...... 5 184 161 345 30-87 7-34 4-126 16 6 3-0 5 1 .
Every now and then I see a stat and I remember when it, in specific, occurred. For example, Jahvid Best's 2 solo tackles. I remember when 1 of those was! And I remember when Nate Longshore's 1 solo tackle was, too. Triple Los Sigh.
But besides those two examples, what else do we have. Felder is leading the team in tackles. A LB. That's good! Last year, DeCoud, a defensive back, led the team in tackles. No good! Then, we have Mohamed, who I thought was a DB, but is listed here as a LB. So, I'm confused. Syd'Quan doesn't have a lot of tackles compared to some, coming in 6th overall, but is 2nd in solo tackles with 18. Only 2 behind Hagan. And 3 more than the next set of people. I've always been impressed with Syd'Quan's tackling ability, so that makes sense.
It's all DBs and LBs on top for tackles, which makes sense in a 3-4, I would think. As far as sacks are concerned, the LBs and DBs seem to be doing well there, too. Although, to be fair, each of the big name DLine guys (Jordan, Alualu, and Davis) aren't doing bad, either.
Note Follett is bringing the PAIN TRAIN a lot, because he leads the team with 7.5 tackles for loss. And Syd'Quan has 3 ints for 108 total return yards. I think 2 of those ints came in the Wazzu game, but I could be wrong. Note that Syd'Quan leads the team with 8 pass break ups. That doesn't sound like a large number, but given how few teams throw at him and then how few balls actually make it to their intended target, that seems like a goodly number. Hagan has 5, which is no less impressive. Well, OK, it's 3 less impressive!
So, I tried to just point out interesting numbers here. Sift through the data and minimize the editorializing. Is there something that jumps out at you? Is there a stat here that surprised or shocked you? Let's discuss!
0 recs |
36 comments
Comments
It doesnt say it here, but I did the math on yards per completion and yards per pass.
Longshore: 11.4 per completion, 7.6 per pass
Riley: 11.8 per completion, 6.7
So, unless I suck at math (which is likely) while Riley is averaging more per completion, he is averaging less per pass. Not sure what to make of that, to be honest. Just the facts, ma’am!
It means when Riley hits passes, he hits them for (slightly) bigger yardage…but also less often. Which isn’t to say that Longshore is a dink-and-dunk type quarterback, but they do say averaging less than 7.0 ypa in the NFL is below average. Averaging less than 7.0 in college is not so good.
JUST SAYIN’! I do think Riley has the potential to be a great quarterback for this team, but he certainly didn’t play like it this year.
Still happy over the fact that the Nets signed Ryan Anderson. Now if only they can sign Leon Powe after this year...
by yellow fever on Oct 16, 2008 7:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting. If anybody wants to double check the numbers, feel free. If I was good at math, I wouldn’t have gone to law school. I would have become a mathmagician!
I'm no The Maharg! But I try. Oh, how I try!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Oct 16, 2008 7:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
Agree on all points.
Twist, the “yards per pass attempt” statistic is widely considered by coaches and football gurus as the more meaningful statistic between “yards per pass attempt” and “yards per completion” because the former integrates completion percentage statistics into it, whereas the latter does not.
As Fever notes, a yards per attempt should be above about 6.5 to 7 yards per attempt, and as for yards per completion, that should be around at least 9 yards per completion.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Oct 16, 2008 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wish college would take yards after catch into effect and factor in yards per completion at the point of contact. It tells us a lot more about arm strength in general.
by BearsNecessity on Oct 16, 2008 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about if both QBs flexed real hard and let us massage their biceps? That’d help us out, too!
I'm no The Maharg! But I try. Oh, how I try!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Oct 16, 2008 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure if yards per completion at the point of contact would be all that instructive
Other than highlight the kind of gameplan that the coach is using and whether the quarterback is being called upon to throw it deep. I’m fairly certain, for instance, that JaMarcus Russell’s yards per completion at the point of contact are low, but his arm strength is at the top of the NFL. Meanwhile, Chad Pennington has always had good completion numbers throwing the ball deep, but is widely viewed to have something of a noodle arm.
Still happy over the fact that the Nets signed Ryan Anderson. Now if only they can sign Leon Powe after this year...
by yellow fever on Oct 16, 2008 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I was referring to gameplan and not quarterback scouting. Like a lot of Cal’s offense later in the season relied on screen dumps, swing passes, and slant in patterns, which probably artificially inflated much of Cal’s running stats. I remember several plays like this later in the season breaking for huge yards and Longshore getting most of the credit for those yards, although all he did was execute a 2 yard swing.
by BearsNecessity on Oct 16, 2008 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So, it sounds like both Rile and Longshore are playing well under your metric. They are WELL above 9 yards per completion, each. Longshore is higher on yards per pass attempt, but Riley is still right in there, too.
I'm no The Maharg! But I try. Oh, how I try!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Oct 16, 2008 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course, it bears noting
That Longshore does have far more interceptions along with his much higher completion percentage. I think I’d take that trade-off, as long as it’s not to the extreme that it was with Vince Young last year – 62.3% completion percentage, but 9 touchdowns and 17 picks.
Still happy over the fact that the Nets signed Ryan Anderson. Now if only they can sign Leon Powe after this year...
by yellow fever on Oct 16, 2008 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And throw in those 3 ints as completions (I mean they were directly to a player in several instances!), his completion rate is even higher!!!
I'm no The Maharg! But I try. Oh, how I try!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Oct 16, 2008 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good data all around
The thing that stands out to me, though, is that just as you never want your top tackler to be a DB, neither do you want your top four receivers to include a TE and two RBs. Until one of the WRs can step up and separate himself (LOL PASSING GAME PUN SEE WHAT I DID), or unless Tedford and Cignetti get more comfortable going vertical with their QBs (which reluctance stems from different causes but has a common result), I don’t expect that to change.
I would normally object to stat-inflation brought about by WSU, but at season’s end everyone in the Pac-10 will have gotten healthy on the Palouse so ultimately I don’t think it makes that much difference. Given how much rushing and how little passing took place, the Cougar doesn’t really inform the QB derby that much.
I do NOT like the multiple bye weeks with road games around them. I do not like them Sam I Am. Reminds me too much of the long vacation in 2004, and not in a good way. Stupid hurricane.
by VandyImport on Oct 16, 2008 7:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree
It’s probably not a good thing to have so many of your passes directed at non-wideouts, but it’s worked in the past for both the Chiefs when they had Priest Holmes, Tony Gonzalez, and a non-descript WR corps, as well as the Chargers with Tomlinson, Gates, and a bunch of no names at receiver. I don’t think it necessarily matters which position is it that teams get their receptions from, as long as the guys getting those receptions are the best runners in the open field. The same goes for Brian Westbrook, Steven Jackson, Reggie Bush, and all kinds of other running backs as well.
Of course, all things being equal I’d rather see the WRs get more receptions, but you can’t just force the ball to a receiver if he’s not open.
Still happy over the fact that the Nets signed Ryan Anderson. Now if only they can sign Leon Powe after this year...
by yellow fever on Oct 16, 2008 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yeah
I damn near won my fantasy league in 2004 with Alge Crumpler, Tony Gonzalez and Chris Cooley as my three receivers =)
(I’m starting to wonder about the prospects of Vereen in the backfield and Best out on the slot – get all the speed and YAC on the field at once and make safeties walk up so that the one wideout might get single coverage…)
by VandyImport on Oct 16, 2008 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’ve been hoping best or vereen would get slot time since day one……. maybe it’ll happen soon, now that calvin is out…
My heart skips a beat every time I hear the band strike up 'Our Sturdy Golden Bear'.
by oskisunbear on Oct 16, 2008 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember the last time Best got slot time. That did not end well.
by BearsNecessity on Oct 16, 2008 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mohamed is the starting 4th LB in the 3-4
...nuh nuh nuh gone
by Thoroughbred on Oct 16, 2008 8:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I thought that was Eddie Young?
I'm no The Maharg! But I try. Oh, how I try!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Oct 16, 2008 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mohamed’s been on the field more than Young, and he was the 4th LB last year…
...nuh nuh nuh gone
by Thoroughbred on Oct 16, 2008 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough. I must have been mistaken to think he was a safety. He’s a bit leaner than Young and the other LBs. Probably why I thought that.
I'm no The Maharg! But I try. Oh, how I try!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Oct 16, 2008 9:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eddie Young is the starter
but Mohammed has played a lot.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on Oct 16, 2008 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
D’oh. I know they rotate the whole LB unit in though
...nuh nuh nuh gone
by Thoroughbred on Oct 16, 2008 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would imagine Hill’s doing a good job with 2 Hurries and a pass break-up, considering that his job is to eat up multiple inside blocks.
...nuh nuh nuh gone
by Thoroughbred on Oct 16, 2008 8:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I love the punt stats....
NNABUIFE, B. zero returns for 30 yrds and two td’s…
Go Bears Go
by Rocksanddirt on Oct 16, 2008 8:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
opponents only have 7 punt return in 5 games?
wow. either our offense is amazing and never has to punt (which isn’t true), or our punter is amazing and kicks over the returner’s head (which is true).
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on Oct 16, 2008 9:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Love the defense & Best numbers
Those two parts of our game are really doing well, even from the impressive raw numbers.
But I agree that the offense stats are not so hot. I am concerned by the numbers of the third down attempts of the opponents when coupled with the average points. It wouldn’t be such a concern if we were building several TD leads early on, but it doesn’t feel that way (except WSU). Rather we cling to two score leads and we keep the other team in the game until the end.
The other concern I see is that we are losing 50% of fumbles while only recovering only 25% of opp’s. Luckily we are still winning the turnover battle with ints and good special teams.
by CountDuku on Oct 16, 2008 10:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Football Outsiders has preached for years that recovering a fumble isn’t skill so much as it is luck that will even out in the end. Of course, that luck could persist over the course of an entire season and then reverse itself next year, which means that it wouldn’t do much good this year…but you can’t really teach the ability to recover fumbles. I think more promising is the fact that the team forces lots of fumbles to begin with.
Still happy over the fact that the Nets signed Ryan Anderson. Now if only they can sign Leon Powe after this year...
by yellow fever on Oct 16, 2008 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I always loved Madonna’s old song “Football Outsider Don’t Preach.”
I'm no The Maharg! But I try. Oh, how I try!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Oct 16, 2008 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I had no idea your poppa was a Football Outsider!
Still happy over the fact that the Nets signed Ryan Anderson. Now if only they can sign Leon Powe after this year...
by yellow fever on Oct 16, 2008 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would agree that it is a good thing that they are forcing fumbles and shaking confidence of opps and that we seem to be doing well protecting the ball. That said the percentage of recovery seems low, if this was purely luck-driven our null hypothesis would put the recovery percentage at 50% and while a sample size 11 is hardly a large sample, it does seem that we should be doing a better job getting to the ball once it is out.
As a follow up, do punt blocks count in this stat? I think that would distort this stat further.
by CountDuku on Oct 16, 2008 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Given a sample size of 11 and assuming a recovery rate of 50, the average would be 5.5 recoveries with a standard deviation of 2.75. That would mean we’re just under one standard deviation below the expected value, and there’s about a 16 chance the number would be that low, or lower.
Still, that’s not statistically significant, and I’d expect the numbers to start evening out more over the rest of the season.
As far as punt returns, I’m pretty sure that’s accounted for under what Rockanddirt mentioned, the two returns that went for 30 yards and two touchdowns while being credited to absolute gibberish. I don’t think they’re considered fumbles, although I suppose it would be nice if someone go could through game-by-game statistics to make sure.
Still happy over the fact that the Nets signed Ryan Anderson. Now if only they can sign Leon Powe after this year...
by yellow fever on Oct 16, 2008 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
god wtf
The formatting nuked my percentage signs.
Still happy over the fact that the Nets signed Ryan Anderson. Now if only they can sign Leon Powe after this year...
by yellow fever on Oct 16, 2008 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Offensive stats somewhat worrisome.
SMQ and Phil Steele agree that the number of first downs gained is very important and correlative to offensive success. It shows that your offense can gain yards when it has to, not just when the opportunity presents itself. If you remove the Wazzu game and the 2nd half of Maryland, our offense looks pretty darn average.
Average offense is good enough to win when the D dominates (ASU), or the team is just so awash in suck (WSU) that losing can’t happen without divine intervention. I am scared at what might happen if our D had an off-day, or a couple unlucky plays or penalties mean our offense HAS to kick it into gear (….Maryland). ASU did a great job of preventing the big play, and we managed only 24 points despite being +2 in TO margin.
We cannot count on interceptions, blocked punts, and 70/80 yard runs from Best against OSU, UA, and SC… We have to find a way to consistently move the chains or this season will not end well.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Oct 16, 2008 12:42 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I generally agree, Spaz. Some of the Bears’ lack of first downs can be attributed to big scoring plays, but much of it is due to problems on Third Down.
A 3rd-down conversion percentage of only 33% is disappointing. It’s a good sign for the Cal defense to be putting up that number; indeed, it’s good enough to place the Bears in the Top 21 nationwide. But offensively, Cal’s 33% is good enough for only 92nd place!! For comparison, both BYU and Tulsa top the 60% mark, and a dozen teams have coverted at least half of their 3rd downs. Average would be about 40 percent, and above average (what I think the target should be) is about 45 percent.
As for the fullback, I don’t have any new insight to add. But looking back at Manderino’s career numbers, and treating that as the standard (rightly or wrongly), then a Tedford fullback “should” be getting about one carry and one reception per game. By those standards, Will T last year was underutilized as a receiver; this year, he’s (so far) been underutilized as a runner. But again, we’re only talking about two touches per game, so the far more concerning—but not necessarily surprising—number is the lack of catches (so far) by the wide receivers. Establish some reliable targets out wide, and that should also open up the run game to help create and convert more third-and-short opportunities. Do that, and this Cal team just might find an offense to match the play of its defense and special teams (so far) and thus become a legitimate contender for the conference championship. But all of that, of course, remains to be seen.
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Oct 16, 2008 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problems with statistics ...
Stats are kind of like politicians, they often talk an awful lot without saying a thing.
Two examples: Our scoring differential vs opponents, & Riley vs Longshore comparison.
1. Scoring. The fact that we have so much defensive scoring totally skews this stat and makes it very unreliable. Didn’t more than half out scoring against CSU come from either defense or special teams? Of course, scoring from those areas are key to winning games, but on a sterile stat sheet they tend to be misleading.
2. Longshore/Riley. Again, statistically they look pretty even. But here is somewhere that context is more important than numbers. The offense looked more potent and in synch with Longshore during the ASU game than it ever did with Riley (except for the MSU game). I’m a firm believer in the best guy being in there, and right now, it seems like Longshore is the more effective piece for the offense. He certainly is better on the long throws, and is more a danger to lead a quick strike. Of course, he also gives the ball up more, so he is a high risk – high reward option. The question is whether we feel lucky enough to take that risk and whether the offense (and Longshore) are good enough to overcome his inevitable brain-farts.
Go Bears!
by SoCal Oski on Oct 16, 2008 1:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Whoops. I met to put that in a different thread.
by The Hombre on Oct 16, 2008 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 






















