WP: Redskins' Off-Season Needs

This week's post at the Washington Post's Redskins Insider site takes a look at the Redskins needs based on a position-by-position analysis of player EPA.


  • Spread The Love
  • Digg This Post
  • Tweet This Post
  • Stumble This Post
  • Submit This Post To Delicious
  • Submit This Post To Reddit
  • Submit This Post To Mixx

10 Responses to “WP: Redskins' Off-Season Needs”

  1. Jeff says:

    Excellent post. You should actively campaign over the off-season for an online column in the Baltimore Sun. Why should the Redskins' (and sometimes the Giants' and Jets') fans benefit from your team-specific analysis, while we Ravens' fans have to settle for Mike Preston insisting that the solution to all our problems would be to run the ball more.

    This week Preston talked about the Ravens using a two tight-end set as their base as if it were a bad thing and an indictment of Lee Evans. While Evans has been disappointing, has Preston not been paying attention to the fact that in 2011 virtually every TE (even second TEs) have been outperforming the third WR on their roster before you even account for their blocking?[And, by the way, if we should be running the ball more, wouldn't a two-TE-set be a step in the right direction?] Help us, Obi-Brian-Burke, you're our only hope!

  2. Anonymous says:

    can you walk through one example?

    Take LBs. Did you aggregate the EPA/P for Kerrigan, Orakpo, Fletcher, and Riley/McIntosh and then compare that to EPA/P totals for other 3-4 LBer groups?

  3. Brian Burke says:

    I aggregated the +EPA for all team LB's and compared all the 3-4 teams.

  4. Frank Day says:

    It is simply beyond credulity to me that a team that scores a TD on the opening drive wins 71% of the time, yet that is what the numbers say for this game right now. Is this really the case? Or, is the algorithm in need of "tweaking"?

  5. Brian Burke says:

    That's true. It's actually closer to about 68%, but depending on the subsequent field position and other factors, 71% very reasonable.

    And that's right in line with outcomes based on point spreads. Teams that are 7-point favorites win 2 out of 3 times.

  6. Anonymous says:

    No they don't. 7 point caves win about 3 out of 4 games

  7. Anonymous says:

    Faves, not aves! DYAC!

  8. Anonymous says:

    ...er.. You know what I mean

  9. Anonymous says:

    How can the receivers on a team score higher than the QB? In a passing play, isn't EPA split between the QB and the pass catcher?

  10. Anonymous says:

    Ohh.. right, sacks and interceptions. Any other factors that cause the difference?

Leave a Reply