How Good Were The Redskins Last Year And What Should That Tell Us About How Good We Should Be This Year? (Looking At Profootball Reference's Srs)

[PeterMP]

We all know that it isn't uncommon for a team to come out of no where in one season and do really well and then sink back down into mediocrity in the NFL.  In baseball, there's a lot of emphasis on expected winning percentage because all sorts variables can affect win totals.

 

The samething can happen in football too.

 

Pro football reference has something called the simple rating system for teams (SRS).  Based on that, last year we were tied with the Viking in the NFC for 7th (3.4) and behind the Giants (6.2) in our own division, and well below teams like SF and the Seahawks who had values over 10.

 

Does this have any use?

 

For the years of 2012 and 2011, it is highly correlated with the number of wins within the year.

 

This isn't really surprising or very useful.

 

Between 2011 and 2012, the number of wins for reach team isn't correlated.  In other words, knowing you won a lot of games in 2011 wasn't a good predictor of how many wins you had in 2012.

 

For the SRS between 2011 and 2012, the value is significantly correlated.  It is lower than within a season for the number of wins, but if you had a high SRS in 2011, you were likely to have a high SRS in 2012.

 

Then the question becomes SRS in 2011 vs. wins in 2012.

 

Again, the correlation to wins between years is lower than SRS between years, but even based on only two years data, it is a significant correlation.  Having a high SRS in 2011 means you were more likely to win more games in 2012 than a team with a lower SRS in 2011.

 

Then you have to wonder, is partly what we are seeing a regression to the mean.  Last year, we won more games than we should have and this year it isn't going to happen.

 

That is as a team our quality is more close to the Vikings than Seatle, SF, and GB.

 

(Add in that most every other team had an easier time getting better because they could be more active in FA and had a #1 pick and it seems possible our SRS from 2012 might over predict 2013 win totals.)

 

(Note, I'm not claiming that SRS is perfect or even good (I can think of a some relatively simple changes to their system that I suspect would be better.) nor am I claiming absolutely that a team with a high SRS will win a lot of games the next year (or vice versa).  The correlation is pretty low, but still significant.  And ideally, I'd be looking at more than just two years of data, but that's all I have time for now.  If somebody wants to put together a table that looks like year, team, SRS, wins, I'd be willing to put together something based on more data probably Wed.)

[Jumbo]

You should post more in the stadium, Peter (believe me, I know....time). Your football posts usually feature seeking/exploring for more expert knowledge on a matter just as with many of your tailgate posts.

 

Certainly a lot of premises have been put forth (some by me) that our fan base broadly exaggerated and glamorized matters beyond the very real excellent things we saw lat season, and that continued as most of us bought into what we were being told by EVERYBODY (and what we thought saw with our eyes in numerous film clips of workout and practices), and by Robert himself, as to how ready he was.

 

There are many things that smart football-objective folks seem to find rather plainly evident (to "them", whether we agree or not) in last year's story that justify great enthusiasm for a better Redskins future, but do not present anything like dominance of our opponents even through the streak. We should know from fairly recent experience that such streaks, arising form a level of performance that get you into, but then right out of, the play-offs do not make you a winning franchise.

 

We had a great (for us) season in a division that allowed a 10-6 team to win it (barely) and then were gone---obviously the injury is there as a huge setback (for now), but it's not the whole story.

 

The PFW SRS (and I haven't studied it closely) might be another frame to use to reflect back and consider suspected exaggeration of last year and unrealistic expectations for this year, despite many saying they had us (like me) in what one could have considered a pretty reasonable w/l record of between 8-11 wins, with 9-10 seeming the most chosen.

 

So there is that factor--even when we pick and discuss more rationally, there's still that irrational side that "makes" most of us expect and "demand" a win even though we "know" we aren't likely (lol) to go undefeated each and every year.

 

So the final fun part is which reality do we regard as the most real? What I mean is for many football fans of most teams trying to establish a consistent-winner top-tier identity, "reality" often changes in chunks even within each season, as well as the longer periods of time.

 

At one point, it's roses and parades and the future looks solid and all the "evidence" is gleaming. Then a few weeks later it's grave concern. It seems especially true with such teams' fans that you get the broadly-varying "we're awesome" and the "we are so ****ed" back and forth in the same year (or game) in response. We all know this. 

 

Right now the "reality" is such that many level-headed football-smart people (as well as other types ) are challenging (effectively) how we had ourselves ranked both pre-injury and post-injury.

 

We are legitimately questioning much of it ourselves. Because we lost two games in poor fashion. But of course if we go on some streak again or such, winning however meagerly, and look to threaten for the division again, our "reality" can make all the second-guessing appear just that---until we slide again.

 

I think teams that have yet to establish a consistent winning history from season to season need to do so before they get credit for doing do. Right now we all (figuratively speaking) think we look like Hot Cup-O-Suk ® even though we already are doing diligent damage control in revising our view of this team for now. For now. We win 5 in a row and this current "reality" all becomes wispy again.

 

 

Sorry, all.  I should never start Monday mornings out reading some of the stuff I do at work and then going right to ES.  

[Probos]

There may be something to the SRS but I think it's pretty clear why the team (at this point anyway) seems to be regressing.

1. Robert's injury. It's stunted his development as QB which in turn as stunted the developement of the offense. He spent the entire offseason rehabing so he wasn't able to further developing his skills as an NFL QB. He's not 100%, can't effectively run the read option, so your left without the deceptive element that made the offense so good last year. He needs time and experience to become a really good QB from the pocket. So we're left with having to watch him struggle and gain experience on the fly this season all while hoping he doesn't get hurt.

2. The cap hit the last two years has really hurt this team, and it especially shows on the defensive side of the ball. Skins are starting two rookies in the secondary and it's obvious at this point they're no where near ready for that responsibility, but the coaches have no other choice. Wilson and DHall are average at best and probably wouldn't be on the team if they had the cap space this past off season. Shoot, London might even be gone.

I'm know those aren't the only variables, but those two pop out to me as being pretty obvious.

[PeterMP]

There may be something to the SRS but I think it's pretty clear why the team (at this point anyway) seems to be regressing.

1. Robert's injury. It's stunted his development as QB which in turn as stunted the developement of the offense. He spent the entire offseason rehabing so he wasn't able to further developing his skills as an NFL QB. He's not 100%, can't effectively run the read option, so your left without the deceptive element that made the offense so good last year. He needs time and experience to become a really good QB from the pocket. So we're left with having to watch him struggle and gain experience on the fly this season all while hoping he doesn't get hurt.

2. The cap hit the last two years has really hurt this team, and it especially shows on the defensive side of the ball. Skins are starting two rookies in the secondary and it's obvious at this point they're no where near ready for that responsibility, but the coaches have no other choice. Wilson and DHall are average at best and probably wouldn't be on the team if they had the cap space this past off season. Shoot, London might even be gone.

I'm know those aren't the only variables, but those two pop out to me as being pretty obvious.

 

1.  Considering he played more obviously hurt and obviously less developed in games as a QB where they appeared to play better and won last year, I'm not sure how important that is. 

 

2.  I'm not saying anything about how or why the roster was constructed, just that given the roster, I'm not sure they are really very good.  The fact that Wilson and Hall are here and were here and that relates to the quality of the team by measuers other than wins is my only point.

 

3.  Though, I will say that I think the idea that some people have in terms of our cap sitution isn't really correct.  Dealing with the penalty meant restructuring some contracts.  That mean pushing money back in some cases.  I know that Coefield gets ~$3 million raise next year.  (Though I'm sure if I'm wrong about the pre- and post-penalty costs of some contracts and what that means about our cap space for next year somebody will correct me.)

[Springfield]

This is a lot to ingest. It makes a whole lot of sense though. Perhaps we all should have adjusted our expectations before the season started. What's the fun in that though?

[Momma There Goes That Man]

The main concern I had coming into the season was our turnovers. It is almost impossible to duplicate turnover success year after year and we were historically great at it last year.

Or low turnover numbers and timely takeaways last year definitely contributed a lot to our winning streak in so many close games. I was worried that once that stat retuned to the mean, we would find it more difficult to win.

I basically ignored this though since I thought the defensive improvements and offensive growth would be enough to overcome the increase in turnovers lost.