Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2

Slide1

By John Bush

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2

I continue my journey looking at 2017 via a narrow view of scoring in the Red Zone (RZ) vs Non-Red Zone NRZ) as compared to Total Team Scoring (TT). I have removed yardage from the equations. In Part 1, I discussed my reasons to do this focused approach. I hypothesize that both scoring, and yardage are variable and to exclude TDs as a fluke is to miss key elements. I suspect most projections are using targets and yardage vs TDs. Until I have proof of Red Zone Scoring is too variable to use I will continue to do this restrictive metric.

Part 1 can be found here Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 1.

Part 2 focuses on the Team’s Positions to view out of balance usages in RZ vs NRZ. It also looks into the best positions for scoring in or out of the RZ. Why are teams better at one vs the other?


Figure 1 and 2. Overall Team views of RZ, NRZ and TT TDs/Targets.

 

These 2 figures highlight the findings from Part 1. These teams had been sorted by RZ TD/Targets. The data were scaled to the league average in each column.

PHI was tops followed by MIN, CIN, JAX, MIA, NYG, SEA and HOU. The best question is to why so good but why did several teams do poorly in the seasonal wins vs loses? The bottom teams were IND, SF, TEN, CLE, CHI, BAL, KC, and CHI. Who changes in 2018?

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide23


This plot highlights the extreme differences at the team level. Red Arrows denote the NRZ Scoring/Targets extreme teams. They had high NRZ (good) but had lower RZ scoring (not so good). The best of these teams was SEA. They have a nice RZ/NRZ levels. The other teams are OAK, WAS, NYJ, DET, LAC, and KC. They were better outside the RZ for a score vs inside the RZ.

The opposite TEAMs were seen with Green Arrows. They were Team great in RZ but weaker in the NRZ areas in the passing game. The teams were PHI, MIN, CIN, JAX, NYG, NE, LA, and BUF. Why were these teams locked out of NRZ scoring? QBs vs WRs in those teams?

 

 

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide24


Positional Level RZ/RZ/TT Scoring Per By Target.

 

Total Team Scoring Data with Targets, Completions, % Completions and Number TDs.

I begin with an overview of all the teams at the positional level. The 4 variables are displayed and color-coded for league highs and lows from 2017 data. We can focus on the overall nature of all teams.

ARI, ATL, BAL, and BUF

  • ARI was all WRs at the TT level (WR vs TE +11 TDs)
  • ATL was WRs based ( +10 TDs vs TE or RBs)
  • BAL WRs were strong but the TE was much closer than the ATL/ARI (+6 TDs WR vs TEs).
  • BUF was also higher in TEs vs WRs (+4 TDs difference of WRs vs TE)

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide26


CAR, CHI, CIN, and CLE

  • CAR High RB vs WR Balance (+4 TDs WR vs RBs)
  • CHI TE Dominate TD Scoring (-3 TDs WRs vs TE)
  • CIN High WR vs TE (+8 WR vs TE)
  • CLE All Positions Close (WR vs TE +0) and (WR/TE vs RB +3)

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide27


DAL, DEN, DET, and GB

  • DAL WR Dominate WR vs TE +6
  • DEN WR Dominate, TE Weak, and RB Average (WR vs TE +9, WR vs RB +8)
  • DET WR Very Strong (+8 WR vs TEs)
  • GB WR Very Strong, TE Weak, and RB Average (+20 vs TE and +18 vs RBs)

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide28


HOU, IND, JAX, and KC

  • HOU Strongest WRs +22 vs TE and +21 vs RBs!
  • IND WRs vs TEs +4 vs RB +5 (Closer to balance)
  • JAX WR +6 vs TE and +9 VS RBs Receiving Scoring
  • KC Strong use of TE! WR vs TE +1 only vs +6/7 RBs

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide29


LA, LAC, MIA, and MIN

  • LA Strong WR +17 vs TEs +14 vs RBs
  • LAC Closer to balance WR vs TE+4, WR vs RB +4, TE vs RB equal.
  • MIA Strong WR +16 vs TEs +19 vs RBs
  • MIN Strong WR +6 vs TE +12 vs RBs

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide30


NE, NO, NYG, and NYJ

  • NE Close to Balance WR vs TE +4 WR vs RB +5 TE vs RB +1
  • NO WR strong vs RB +8 WR vs TE +11 Weak TEs vs RB -3
  • NYG WR vs TE +4 Close, Poor RBs WR vs RB +11
  • NYJ Strong WRs WR vs TE +7, WR vs RB +13 Weak RBs

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide31


OAK, PHI, PIT, and SEA

  • OAK Strong WRs +15 vs TEs and vs RBs. +18 Below Average TEs. +3 vs RBs.
  • PHI Strong WRs vs TE +7 and +17 vs RBs. Strong TEs +10 vs RB. Weak RBs.
  • PIT Strong WRs vs TEs +17. +21 vs RBs. Below Average TEs +4 vs RB. Weak RBs.
  • SEA Close to Balance WR vs TEs +4 only. Strong TEs vs RB +12 Weak RBs

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide32


SF, TB, TEN, and WAS

  • SF Close to Balance WR vs TEs +2 vs +6 RBs. Poor TDs all around
  • TB Equal WR vs TE +0, Weak RBs + 12 WR/TE vs RBs
  • TEN Equal WR vs TE +0 vs RBs +5. Weak RBs Poor TDs all around.
  • WAS WR dominates vs TEs at +9 and RBs +10. TE vs RBs close +1 TEs vs RBs

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide33


Team TD Fantasy Points Scoring vs Targets


ARI, ATL, BAL, and BUF

ARI at 73% WRs and TE 27%. Given that DJ coming back, I expect the WR and TE to drop.

ATL used WRs highly and was equal in TE/RB usages. Expect the 2018 profile to remain. I am picking up Hooper as a 2nd TE!

BAL WRs were underused in 2017 at 55%, Expect with new WRs that number increases! ( Michael Crabtree Willie Snead John Brown). BAL always uses it TEs well at 25 %. BAL TEs are Hayden Hurst, Mark Andrews, Nick Boyle, and Maxx Williams. BAL used 2 TEs so only 2nd TE level players expected.

BUF was also like BAL in the WR and TE usages. BUF used Clay at 33% and at a nice 0.053 T/T level. Expect with new QBs to have a nice slice for Clay the TE! Solid 2nd TE. Concerns about the WRs – Kelvin Benjamin, Zay Jones, Jeremy Kerley, etc.

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide35


CAR, CHI, CIN, and CLE

CAR heavily used it RBs at 35% and 0.52 T/T. Olsen was injury and the TEs was 0.21 T/T. WRs were 0.50 T/T. Expect the RBs to be steady the TEs to move up. WRs could be lower in 2018. Caution for CAR WRs.

CHI was all TE all the time for scoring with a 0.7 T/T. Bringing in Burton suggest that heavy usage at 50% continues. WRs were weak in 2017 while RBs were good. WR at 0.15 T/T was poor. Can Robinson move this up? Is this a team to make a shift from TEs? Caution

CIN used TEs heavily at 0.093 and expect that to remain with either Kroft or Eifert or Both. The WRs were AJ Green against the world. Not seeing that change. The WRs at 0.52 T/T was ok but if Mixon is successful then Bernard could get more work? RBs in 2017 was 0.029 not good. Caution but Bernard is a good late round Best Ball play!

CLE was TE/WR balanced but TEs had a 0.048 T/T vs 0.026 T/T. TEs were used much more efficiently (2X). Duke Johnson was the passing RB but only got 0.21 which was low. Can Hyde actually get DJ more work? CLE has the most moving parts in the league.

 

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide36


DAL, DEN, DET, and GB

DAL was weak at RB % but efficient at 0.042 T/T metric. More needed. Loss of Witten is an issue as TE were at a nice 0.059. If the new TEs cannot get that then assume RB and or WRs increase. Zeke may be in for a nice year seems to be worth his ADP. The DAL WRs were not as efficient with a 0.042 and with new players; Allen Hurns, Deonte Thompson, Tavon Austin and Michael Gallup confusion remains. Gallup nice late-round investment given the niche left by DEZ! The rookie can cook in 2018! High ADP in Best Balls! Pick him.

DEN had ok RB play at 0.035 but nice TEs at 0.059 T/T. The WRs were certainly there but the QB play led to a weak 0.034 T/T. That is a flabby metric for some good WRs. Does Keenum save the WRs day in 2018? He does need to do a lot to up the WRs metrics. The rookie RB also has a slot in here to move the DEN game up in receiving scores/Target. Not sold on JButt as the inheritor TEs? Nice 2017 number but expect a drop in 2018.

DET has a rushing game? with K-JO? The DET RBs last year were flops producing a 0.026 T/T metric. 2018 will be higher! Losing Ebron suggests a 2018 decrease in efficient play. 2017 TEs with Ebron was at a nice 0.067! Luke Willson Michael Roberts or Levine Toilolo are the answers? Caution. Expect a drop down. The WRs were at a nice 0.054 and should be given us in 2018 that pace!

GB. Rodgers coming back shakes up this metric! TE, however, were not used. RBs who can pass catch will lead the RBs up from an ok 0.045 metric. The WRs were great in 2017 with a 79% share and 0.059 metrics. 2018 will be that or even more. Davante Adams
Randall Cobb, and Geronimo Allison. Allison is a STEAL in Best Ball. Drafting him all day long. Cobb is he drops can also be a nice bet. 2018 points to a passing bonanza in GB. You want some of this action!

 

 

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide37


HOU, IND, JAX, and KC

HOU was very skewed to the WRs for scoring. At 83% and a great 0.068 T/T metric. DeAndre Hopkins and Will Fuller show! I expect that to continue. The RBs and TEs were at the lower levels of performance in T/T

IND get Luck back. Can Luck come back fully? What happens when he takes a big hit? The 2017 story was weak efficiency bias in WRs, but they still were at 0.03 T/T. I am not drafting any WRs. Some of the Marlon Mack Nyheim Hines and Jordan Wilkins are draftable. I am getting Wilkins in late Best Ball!

JAX has the team to see improvement. In 2017 the TE was the main show in terms of scoring/targets with a 0.77 (nice metric). ASJ the TE was brought in as well as N Paul. I expect nice 2nd TE low 1st TE shot for ASJ. Bortles is good to his TEs. However, the RB and WRs were much weaker at 0.023 at 0.038 respectively in 2017.

KC gets Mahomes as QB. Caution is suggested. Kelce was the hot dog in 2017 at a 0.077 T/T metric. That remains steady. The RBs and WRs were below peak numbers but still usable at 0.045 and 0.048. If the TE is steady as well as the RBs then does the new WR Watkins take from Hill? Given the fresh QB that seems possible. Kelce is a strong play. Hunt is priced high given the new pieces added. Hunt maybe at his ceiling!

 

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide38


LA, LAC, MIA, and MIN

LA used it WRs a lot in 2017 and Goff was efficient at 0.059 for T/T. The RBs was also nicely efficient at 0058. Both positions are expected to hold steady. Gerald Everett and Tyler Higbee the TEs arrive into a 10% scoring share and a 0.034 T/T metric. not so confident in either but Everett has the pedigree to improve.

LAC is expected to be as they were in 2017. Closer to a balanced team except for no Henry the TE! Thus in 2017, the WRs were at 0.043 and RBs at 0.53. The scoring share can be split between the RB and WRs. I am taking later picks of Mike W and T Benjamin. Eckler is a later best ball pick but it could be Justin Jackson as the surprise handcuff!

MIA gets Tannehill back. His injury last year moved all the score share into a trifecta of WRs. WRs were a whopping 75% share but only 0.052 T/T (lower efficiency vs scoring share). Drake is a possible breakout with Tannehill. Caution suggested. The MIA TEs were at 0.56 and that was a nice metric. Gesicki is the rookie but concerns are always with rookie TEs!

MIN also gets a fresh face in Cousins. He should move the Dynamic WR duo Diggs and Thielen up in score share. They had ok 2017 score share but an underwhelming 0.044 T/T metric. That metric can improve 10 to 20%! Given Cousins use of his TEs, it is assumed Rudolph also has an increased scoring share. Last year he was on fire at 0.091 efficiency! He is a nice TE1 selection. RBs, after Cook was injured, had poor receiving score share 11% and at 0.026 T/T. Can Cook move that number? I think pie gets better for all players.

 

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide39


NE, NO, NYG, and NYJ

NE has a Gronk for a TE and he was nice in 2017 with a 0.064 T/T efficiency metric. The WRs however, were less efficient at 0.046. Chris Hogan Jordan Matthews Julian Edelman Phillip Dorsett Malcolm Mitchell Kenny Britt and Cordarrelle Patterson are now in NE. Edelman has been suspended for 4 games. Hogan is the top dog now! Concerns because of the lower scoring share and efficiency. RBs were used well in 2017 and given new blood in SM the rookie this position can be move used and efficient

NO used their TEs well at 0.059 and they brought Watson back. He was improving in NO in 2016 but was traded away. NO remembers Watson’s potential. My preferred TE2/3 in Best Ball. The RBs were wonderful in 2017 but were not as efficient as one might have thought at a 0.038 T/T number. WRs were also nicely efficient at 0.052! Nothing seems to be in the way for another solid year.

NYG. OBJ is back along with S Barkley. Expectations are high for NUG to bounce back. Note ELI is a later QB grab in Best Ball. Engram had a great year as a TE at 38% scoring share and 0.049 T/T number. I expect a drop because of OBJ coming back to improve the WR group at 0.038. That number hits in 0.050 ish! Draft Engram but not at his price. Barkley walking into a 0.007 (league-worst?) He can only improve that efficiency in 2018!

NYJ. McCown should be back for a wait. He did surprisingly well in 2017, especially with his TEs. They were at 32% passing scoring share and a whopping 0.078 efficiency T/T metric. He lost ASJ to JAX, so these numbers are suspect for 2018. The WRs has 64% scoring share but 0.047 T/T. NYJ left points on the board! The RBs were poor at 4% and a 0.013 T/T. They did get Isaiah Crowell with Powell so there is some hope for improvement. All the pieces seem to be where they were in 2017 and caution is suggested. I am drafting late WRs only in Best Ball!

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide40


OAK, PHI, PIT, and SEA

OAK lost Crabtree but retain Amari Cooper along with Jordy Nelson, Martavis Bryant, and Ryan Switzer. OAK had nice scoring shares at 70 and 0.062 T/T. Carr did well and I expect that continues. I think the WRs hold steady in 2018 as well as the TEs with Cook at 36% and 0.052. The RBs include Lynch and Martin from TB. Hard to see any improvement in the passing sector. I am drafting Cooks as a Best Ball TE 2!

PHI had nice all-around scoring efficiency in RB, TE, and WR. Well balanced. The TE position was highly used in scoring share at 36% and a whopping 0.083. Have Ertz is going to be good for PHI again in 2018. He is a solid TE1 top 3! The RBs were low but a 0.051 T/T score was average. Main concern if the WR limits at 54%. The pie must grow if PHI WRs to improve in 2018. Questions remain.

PIT had average type numbers with a bias to the WR at 72% scoring share and 0.058 T/T number. That number is high and has no room upward. Ceiling level! The TEs were underused but efficient at 0.061! This year PIT has Vance McDonald, Jesse James, and Xavier Grimbler. There is some McDonald Buzz out there and he could be a late-round gamble in Best Ball. Know that if the TEs improve then the WRs will decrease. PIT did not use Bell enough in passing at a 6 scoring share and 0.051 T/T! Bell would be tops if that were to occur. A murky team at the finer focused level.

SEA has super TE play in 2017 and yet move Grahman out? His 40% scoring share was 1st and the 0.113 efficient number was an extreme high outlier! Concerns now for TE in 2018! It is hard to imagine these TEs coming close to those numbers; Ed Dickson Nick Vannett and/or Will Dissly. The RB/WR will have to absorb some of the scoring shares! The RBs has a poor share in 2017 at 8% and equally poor efficiency at 0.028. The WRs had an average type of scoring share at 51% but nice 0.060 efficiencies! Given the new Rookie RB, the belief is that he moves up and inherits some of the TE shares etc. The door is open for him to collect those scoring shares. He is a nice grab because of the inherent opportunity present!

 

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide41


SF, TB, TEN, AND WAS

SF has JG the new QB for 2018. Can he add value to the team? In 2017 the WRs and RBs were poor in scoring shares and very weak in efficiency at 0.016 and 0024! The TEs well the star of the score shares at 36% and 0061 T/T. That is a powerful stat for Kittle to bring into 2018. He is my late TE choice with TE 1 upside based in these numbers. I suggest JG will enlarge the pie and thus add into the RBs and WRs scoring shares without losing the TE numbers. JG needs Kittle! SF brought McKinnon in to ramp up the RB scoring shares and given the low 12% starting point, McKinnon cannot help but be a success. The question is this his ceiling? I am concerned his ADP is near 2018 ceiling. The next area of volatility is the WR crew. They are not the usual solid group and I suggest caution. The SF WR might be the weakest link!

TB had very poor RB play in 2017 with 4% scoring share and 0.01 efficiency! Weakness. Thus, any talk of the old players vs the new Rookie RBs seems “off”. TB needed a new face and they got R Jones! He starts at a low floor and can only improve. A solid draft pick! The 2017 TB use the dynamic duo of TEs and they had a whopping 44% scoring share and but average-ish efficiency at 0.046. That is their ceiling so further improvement is unlikely as a group. Note the balance between Howard and Brate could change but the overall play stays near 2017 levels. The 2017 TB WRs were average at 48% scoring share but poor efficient at 0.034! I am cautious with these players. I have fewer Evans in my Best Ball teams. Winston being gone for 4 games does not help!

TEN in 2017 was a TE/WR balanced team but these numbers were great for TE but weak for WRs. TEN used the TBs to makeup for WRs not doing their business! The WRs were sadly inefficient at 0.026. in 2018, players are hoping for WR improvements in Davis and Matthews. Caution is suggested. There is no evidence to support this hope. Note that Walker the TE has had injuries and J Smith his backup is a sneaky handcuff in a Best Ball if the injury issue is a concern. The only major change is having D Lewis with Henry in the backfield. Lewis has to improve on the RB scoring share at 12%. The backfield looks like committee and TEN hopes to gain at this position.

WAS lost Cousins but gained Smith from KC. The 2017 WAS team was above average in efficient playing at 0.055. Smith can now use Reed and Davis to play the Kelce role. The WRs are also lined up nicely to improve. Smith needs to increase the scoring pie size in 2018. Note though that Smith in 2017 at KC had below average RB and WR scoring! Caution. The bright spot is the new rookie Guice. He has a nice floor to begin his career. I expect Guice to increase the scoring pie vs Smith at QB! Guice is my RB2 as much as possible.

 

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide42


RED ZONE Targets, Completions, %Completions, and Touchdowns

These tables present the Red Zone raw data for your consideration. I will expound on the following Red Zone Scoring share and RZ Scoring/Receiving Targets in the next block. Those metrics encapsulate the raw data in these tables well. I would use this data for a team by team view of activity in the Red Zone. The over Red Zone pattern should be WRs >TE>RBs. Focus into Teams where that pattern is not present.
Slide44

ARI no RB TDs, ATL poor TE TDs, BAL ok, and BUF ok.


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide45

CAR Extreme RBs vs Poor TEs, CHI weak all around especially WRs, CIN TEs=WR, CLE poor all around.


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide46

DAL poor RBs passing TDs, DEN weak TEs, DET ok, and GB very biased to WRs poor TE/RBs.


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide47

HOU WRs strong, IND weak all around, JAX light on RB Passing Scoring, and KC very poor WRs Passing Scoring Kelse Rules RBs nice!


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide48

LA strong WRs, LAC Weak WRs nice RBs scoring, MIA ok, MIN high TEs with very weak RBs.


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide49

NE remarkable team with Nice RB/TE ok WRs. NO High RBs TE/WR ok, NYG Strong TE ok WRs Weak RBs, and NYJ strong TEs with weak WRs and RBs.


Slide50

OAK Strong WRs with weak RBs/TEs, Extraordinary TEs, and Strong WRs and ok RBs, PIT Biased to WRs ok TEs with weak RBs, and SEA Strong TEs (Losing JG concerns) weak WRs and RBs.


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide51

SF weak show all around with best TEs, TB nice TEs weak WRs and RBs, Ten Weak all around, and WAS ok.


RED ZONE Scoring Share and Efficiency by Team and Positions


ARI, ATL, BAL, and BUF

ARI Balanced WR vs TEs, ATL nice RBs, BAL weak, and BUF ok WRs

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide53


CAR, CHI, CIN, and CLE

CAR Strong RBs with Poor TEs and Ok WRs, CHI TEs best others poor, CIN extremely good TEs with ok WRs and Weak RBs, CLE weak TEs/RBs WRs ok.

Slide54


DAL, DEN, DET, and GB

DAL TE/WRs ok but weak RBs, DEN nice TEs OK WR and weak RBs, DET underwhelming WR and RBs with ok TEs (lost Ebron for 2018), GB WRs good with ok TE/RBs.

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide55


HOU, IND, JAX, and KC

HOU Nice RBs and WRs weak TEs, IND very poor WRs ok TE/RBs, JAX nice TEs and good WRs weak RBs, KC weak WRs (Paging WAS with Smith as QB), TEs good and RBs ok.

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide56


LA, LAC, MIA, and MIN

LA Strong RB show with nice WRs and poor TEs, LAC weak WRs (River QBs?) but strong RB and OK TE (But Henry has gone?), MIA Nice all around show with strong RBs and TEs and ok WRs, MIN Strong TE (Late TE Rudolph!) with nice WRS but poor RBs (Cook is back).

Slide57


NE, NO, NYG, and NYJ

NE Nice RBs and TE with Ok WRs, NO nice TE ok RB, and WRs, NYG very strong TEs with weaker RBs/WRs, NYJ Strong TE with very weak RB/WRs.

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide58


OAK, PHI, PIT, and SEA

OAK RB strong TE weak WR ok, PHI Excellent RB and TE ok WR, PIT OK TEs, but poor RBs via passing TDs and WR ok, and SEA Strong TEs, below Avg WRs and RBs ok.

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide59


SF, TB, TEN, AND WAS

SF TEs ok RB/WRs poor, TB, TEs strong but poor RB/WR, TEN RBs ok TE/WR weak and WAS strong RBs, OK TE WRs (Smith uses TEs hard in 2018)

Slide60


Non-RED ZONE Targets, Completions, %Completions, and Touchdowns

Scoring a TD outside the Red Zone is a difficult accomplishment. This data that follows focuses on the 2017 season and on the positions that scored from longer distances out.

Overall RBs scored 27 NRZ TDs, TEs 47 and WRs 166.

WRs are the least dependent on field position to score vs TE/RBs! 3.5 X vs TE and 6X more than RBs. In judging WR then this metric is powerful and lead to a question what teams and players can score in the NRZ vs others.

  • RBs had 82 RZ vs 27 NRZ Passing Scores 3X more production. Suggest a focus on RZ success for RBs.
  • TEs had 162 RZ vs 47 NRZ with a 3.4 X higher production. Thus, TEs do better in the RZ vs RBs
  • WR had 287 RZ TDs vs 166 NRZ with only a 1.67X higher production in the RZ. A WRs RZ is half as important vs TEs and RBs.

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide62

NRZ Comments: ARI WRs 6 NRZ and Low BUF NRZ WR scoring (poor)


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide63

NRZ comments: CHI Poor NRZ WRs but ok TEs, CIN good WRs, CLE Poor but nice TE play!


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide64

NRZ comments: Weak DAL WRs, DET Strong WRs! GB strong WRs.


Slide65

NRZ comments: HOU exceptional WRs, IND had good WRs, KC strong WRs and Ok TEs


Slide66

NRZ Comments: LAC strong WRs as well as MIA, Weak MIA RB and TE! MIN below average.


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide67

NRZ Comments: NYJs excellent WRs. The others ok.


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide68

NRZ comments: OAK, PHI, PIT and SEA all had strong WRs.


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide69

NRZ comments: WAS RB nice and TB/TEN TE were strong.


NON-RED ZONE Scoring Share and Scoring Efficiency per Receiving Target


These metric tables focus on NRZ % of passing based scoring share and % of Scoring/Passing based Target. They, therefore, give insight into usage and positional success.


ARI, ATL, BAL, and BUF

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide71

Highs are ARI, ATL, and BUF TEs. Lows All RBs and BUF WRs.


CAR, CHI, CIN, and CLE

Slide72

Highs CHI and CLE TEs! Poor CHI and CLE WRs and CIN TEs.


DAL, DEN, DET, and GB

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide73

Highs DAL and GB RBs and DET WRs and TEs. Poor DET RB, DAL and DEN WRs.


HOU, IND, JAX, and KC

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide74

Highs KC TE and WR and IND WRs. Poor JAX WRs, IND TEs, HOU RBs and TEs.


LA, LAC, MIA, and MIN

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide75

Highs LA and MIA RBs and LAC WRs. Poor LA TEs and WRs, LAC TEs, MIA TEs, and MIN TEs and WRs


NE, NO, NYG, and NYJ

Slide76

Highs NYJ WRs. Poor NE, NO, NYG, and NYJ RBs. NO, NYG, and NYJ TEs.


OAK, PHI, PIT, and SEA

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide77

Highs OAK, PHI, and SEA WRs and OAK TEs. Poor OAK, PHI, PIT and SEA RBs, PHI and PIT TEs.


SF, TB, TEN, AND WAS

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide78

High TB, TEN and WAS TEs, WAS RBs. Poor SF, TB, and TEN WRs.


Graphical Tables Complete Landscape Total Team Scoring/Target

These next series of tables provide a reference for the metrics for FB, RB, TE, and WRs. The weaker team deserve further focus in 2018 drafting. What has changed? Caution for drafting out of these team’s positions.


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide80


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide81

Note SF, NYG, TB, and NYG were weak in 2017. They all will be improving given the changes coming for these team’s RBs!


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide82

Weakness in TEs is HOU (no change?), CAR (Olsen Back), IND (Luck back?), LA (changes?), GB (changes?), and BAL (changes?)


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide83

CHI (Robinson?) SF (New QB?), TEN (Hum no Changes?), CLE (New QB and WRs changes expected), IND (Luck), and DEN (New QB)


Graphical Tables Complete Landscape Red Zone Scoring/Target


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide85


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide86

ARI (DJ back), PIT (?? weakness here), SF (New RB!), MIN (New QB etc.) and TB (new RB)


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide87

CAR (Olsen back), CLE (No changes?), BAL (No changes?), OAK (Cook weak?), HOU (No major TEs), and TEN (Walker weakness?)


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide88

IND (Luck), KC (New QB?), SF (New QB?), LAC (no changes caution here), CHI (new WRs and Improving young QB?), and TEN (Weak? cautions?)


RZ vs NRZ Scoring Share Compared_ DIFF Metric

Calculate the DIFF metric for deeper Team Positional Focus!

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide90


Teams with High RB RZ Scoring Share.

  • KC
  • NO
  • CHI
  • CAR
  • OAK
  • LAC
  • IND

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide91


Teams with High TE RZ Scoring Share.

  • BAL
  • PHI
  • SF
  • LAC
  • MIN
  • DET
  • KC
  • SEA

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide92


Teams with High WR RZ Scoring Share.

  • GB
  • DEN
  • DAL
  • JAX
  • BUF
  • WAS
  • CLE
  • TEN

RZ vs NRZ RZ Efficiency_ DIFF Metric

I invite you to focus on the DIFF metric to see which Team positions are doing very well in the RZ!

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide94


Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide95

Nice Team RBs Diff (Great RZ Efficiency)

  • WAS
  • ATL
  • MIA
  • NE
  • PHI
  • OAK
  • CAR
  • HOU
  • LAC
  • LA

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide96

Nice Team TEs Diff (Great RZ Efficiency)

  • NYG
  • CIN
  • NYJ
  • PHI
  • MIN
  • DEN
  • SEA
  • TB

 

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide97

Nice Team WRs Diff (Great RZ Efficiency)

  • JAX
  • BUF
  • MIN
  • HOU
  • MIA
  • GB

Some Surprising Teams. JAX was the TOP! Interesting. I am taking LEE late in Best Ball. BUF also was good in the RZ! MIA also (Taking STILLS all day in Best Ball).


Final Metric Discussion

I offer up my projections of the value of RDZ vs NRZ Targets. I have never seen this metric! I usually keep these metrics to myself.

The Table below established in RBs the passing Targets are multiplied by 14.9, TEs by 15.154 and WRs only at 11.7. Thus, I will use these in Part three to “score” players!

Also with RBs, I calculated the value of RZ rushing attempts. at 2.74 vs NRZ attempts!

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide99


The Figures below gives a visual of these RZ vs NRZ values for targets from the Tables.

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide100

Novel Red Zone Metrics Part 2 Slide101

Please look for Part 3. This series is very data intensive and I hope it comes out in a week.

 

Other articles below!

More Information Increasing Accuracy? http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=35319

Redraft ADP Pattern Analysis 5/9/18 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36403

Non-PPR Player Rankings Part 1 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36513

Non-PPR Rankings Part 2 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36541

PPR Rankings Part 1 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36549

PPR Rankings Part 2 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36554

Fantasy Football Planning http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36562

Why Late QB Drafting? http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36601

Best at Best Ball Part 1 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36666

Best at Best Ball Part 2 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36677

Best at Best Ball Part 3 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36708

Best at Best Ball Part 4 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36726

Best at Best Ball Part 5 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36734

FF Players Biased Decisions Part 1 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36738

FF Players Biased Decisions Part 2 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36743

ADP vs Player Performance Part 1 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36752

ADP vs Player Performance Part 2 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36771

ADP vs Player Performance Part 3 http://www.fakepigskin.com/?p=36788

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>