11-30-2021, 11:06 AM
(11-30-2021, 07:10 AM)SladeX Wrote: I had a 2 point post in regards to the statistical relationship between run and pass, etc.
First.
I recall several years ago the Patriots had an almost nonexistent running game. However, several analysts stated that their short passing game to the RBs, screens and such, were basically long handoffs, and that those plays were in fact, running plays.
With that in mind, reorienting analysis to categorize pass plays behind or near the LOS as running plays (most especially if said play involves blocking for the receiver by members of the OL), does that change any of the correlations you've been mentioning?
2nd:
Mixon has had 2 very effective games. In both games, the passing numbers were a bit pedestrian, but efficient. You can bet that upcoming opponents will be attempting to create a game plan that will stop the run, which will probably benefit the passing game. So in upcoming games, the running game may look pedestrian, but the passing game will improve. In this way, each type of offense will benefit one another over time. There may be a game to game " game planning effect " that leads to ultimate success.
Extra point:
How many air Coryell type, pass almost exclusively offenses have won a superbowl? Especially keeping point number one in mind?
Sorry Tony, this may need it's own thread...
To your first point, I could probably look into that. The play-by-play library I use has air_yards as a column, so I could filter a dataset on air_yards <= 1 yard and throw those in with the run data.
To your second point, this would be something that we could see. In my dataset from 2010-current, I am working with roughly 400k plays. We would be able to see a stronger relationship one way or another. I could break it down into groups based on run game effectiveness and study passing numbers for the game immediately after a big rushing game. Regardless, I don't think we will find anything there, either. A defensive coordinator is much more afraid of Burrow and co. than Mixon. Run games, by nature, tend to be inconsistent. Now, some of them are more consistent than others (Taylor, Chubb). A strong passing game also has a higher correlation to winning games than rushing does.
I'm sure the DC for the Chargers will have situations to handle the run, that will be normal, but I would also wager a bet that the gameplan is going to be centered around slowing the passing attack down. Passing is just significantly more dangerous than running. If a team can hold Burrow to a game like these past two games, they will take their chances with the running game. They will have installed run fits to help contain the rushing attack, but bringing eight men into the box isn't as common as many think.
EDIT - What specifically are you meaning by Air Coryell? Are you genuinely talking about Air Coryell passing concepts, or just heavy passing teams?
EDIT #2 - I ran the numbers for your first point. The correlations actually become weaker. I took all passes that traveled one yard or less in the air and gathered metrics on those, adding them to the rushing data. Then, I ran the same tests and here were the results...
New YPC to Passer Rating - Very weak relationship, less than 1% of the variation in passer rating can be explained here.
New YPC to YPA - Genuinely ZERO relationship. Correlation coefficient of 0.01. Zero percent of the variation in YPA numbers can be explained by this new YPC number.
