Brees 70%+ loss rate when he has more than 40 attempted throws (1 Viewer)

[TheBerg-75]

I think we're missing an obvious correlation... when he throws more than 40 attempts its usually because we NEED to, which means we were probably losing anyway and trying to play catchup... its putting the cart before the horse saying that we lost BECAUSE we threw 40 attempts

 

[TheBerg-75]

Correlation without causation, look it up.

It may be (and likely is) BECAUSE he is losing those games that he has to throw 10-15 times at the end of the game to try and catch up.

lus-un2:

I didn't read all the way down before I posted the same thing... i gotta start doing that

 

[mt15]

This seems to come up every year at some point. I'm disappointed in the "talking heads" who put it out there without putting it into context.

Oh and I enjoyed the umbrella, car accident correlation. That's a good one.

 

[1badsailor]

Comes down to if we let the Bucs get ahead. Obviously we slow that down by running the ball. but not just running it but running it efficiently. You can run all you want but if all you are getting is 2-3 yards its pointless.

2 - 3 yards may be enough we just have to make teams believe we are willing to do it. By the way you get 0 yards for incomplete passes

 

[Sophandros]

I love it when people who don't know how to use statistics try to. It's really entertaining, in a sad way.

You're trying to imply causality from this correlation, but you really have it backwards. Passing more does not lead to losing; rather, losing leads to passing more. Stats are useless without proper context.

Teams throw more when they are behind, so obviously, you'll see a strong correlation between passing attempts and losing.

A better way yo look at it would be a difference in yards per play (team vs opponent) or passing rating difference, or something similar. Basically, use a rate based metric compared to a baselinr (league average or the opponent) rather than some arbitrary counting metric.

And learn that correlation does not necessarily implay causality, and that all stats are useless without context.

 

[Sophandros]

Bingo! When I teach this concept to my students we look at data showing the high correlation between daily umbrella use and car accidents and then discuss whether the increase in people using umbrella's causes more car accidents.

The best football related example is the high correlation between kneel down plays and winning percentage. Since teams who kneel the ball down on offense tend to win more games, clearly, teams should just kneel more...

 

[1badsailor]

I love it when people who don't know how to use statistics try to. It's really entertaining, in a sad way.

You're trying to imply causality from this correlation, but you really have it backwards. Passing more does not lead to losing; rather, losing leads to passing more. Stats are useless without proper context.

Teams throw more when they are behind, so obviously, you'll see a strong correlation between passing attempts and losing.

A better way yo look at it would be a difference in yards per play (team vs opponent) or passing rating difference, or something similar. Basically, use a rate based metric compared to a baselinr (league average or the opponent) rather than some arbitrary counting metric.

And learn that correlation does not necessarily implay causality, and that all stats are useless without context.

the game starts off 0-0 start running from the opening whistle not in the second half when u are already down.. and u have no choice but to pass

 

[Kris]

Comes down to if we let the Bucs get ahead. Obviously we slow that down by running the ball. but not just running it but running it efficiently. You can run all you want but if all you are getting is 2-3 yards its pointless.

WRONG!! You keep running and then play action starts working. Once play action starts working running get's up to 4 - 7 yards. It's the giving up too soon on the rush that is killing the team.

Kris

 

[Kris]

The best football related example is the high correlation between kneel down plays and winning percentage. Since teams who kneel the ball down on offense tend to win more games, clearly, teams should just kneel more...

I got to say, if the Saints kneeled on the first two of the game and then passed from a kneeling formation it MIGHT work for a TD!!!! Talk about confusion on D.

Kris

 

[Frank The Rat]

I would be shocked if this stat couldn't be said for most quarterbacks. High pass attempts usually means you are behind and needing to play catch up.

 

[Kris]

11 of our 1st 17 plays were runs, just wasn't getting anything. Blockers couldn't get to the second level.

DUDE, Under Payton the Saints have NEVER rushed 11 of the first 17! check the play by play before you post such drivel. counting the sack as a pass it was 11 pass attemps to six rushes and I am not counting the punts.

Kris

 

[los226]

Is it too much to ask to keep this man's throws around 35? I understand we were "playing from behind", but being down by 14 in the second quarter doesn't mean abandon the run IMO. They better improve on play calling.

I think we need to focus on running the ball more in practice. Practice it like it's our main tool of offense. I'm getting sick of all this throwing which leads to a couple of picks and we're fighting for our life till the last second.

Green Bay has a similar offense, but actually run the ball which is why they are so successful. If I remember correctly Green Bay was struggling when it had no running game either. It worked for us in '09. Why can't we just figure it out after so many years? I was expecting this year to be as dedicated to the run as we were in '09. We have all this talent in the back field, but our o-line looks like all they know how to do is pass block. We need to practice like Drew is out for the season.

 

[crosswatt]

We just need to run the ball more.

 

[TheDeuce53]

I think we're missing an obvious correlation... when he throws more than 40 attempts its usually because we NEED to, which means we were probably losing anyway and trying to play catchup... its putting the cart before the horse saying that we lost BECAUSE we threw 40 attempts

Right.. it isn't like we can just magically throw the ball less than 40 times to get the W, it's likely a product of the game situation.

Also, Brees TECHNICALLY threw 40 passes in the Superbowl.. if we count the 2pt conversion throw.

 

[St. Widge]

WRONG!! You keep running and then play action starts working. Once play action starts working running get's up to 4 - 7 yards. It's the giving up too soon on the rush that is killing the team.

Kris

WRONG!!!!!1!1!1!!1 ZOMG


Nobody is going to pay attention to the play action pass if you are running the ball for 3 yards a carry. They will be happy to let you keep doing that. What is killing the offense (If that really applies to this offense when this is just an overreaction to one bad game on offense. And, it happens every time the offense has a bad game) is the inability to efficiently run the ball. If they could average 4 or so yards per carry in the running game they would not be behind and they could run the ball in the second half with the result being that Brees would only end up throwing 35 or so times per game.