Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Statistical Trending - How Bad is the USS Jimmy Lake and Minnow JonDon Offensively
Tequilla
Member Posts: 19,825
So I've done variations of this in the past to highlight how the team is trending from a statistical standpoint comparatively in the conference. I tend to look at a few statistics that I consider to be indicators of relative performance/talent and whether you're maximizing your efficiency. Feels like a good time to get this data out there for where we are trending in 2021 and we'll compare back to numbers dating back to the CFP year of 2016 and the metrics shown are for conference play only in order to normalize the schedules. I'll include the 2020 numbers for reference but not from a ranking standpoint.
Offensive Statistics
Yards per Carry
2016: 5.40 (4th in P12, USC 1st at 5.66)
2017: 5.31 (5th in P12, Arizona 1st at 6.94)
2018: 4.38 (5th in P12, Arizona 1st at 5.10)
2019: 3.92 (7th in P12, Oregon 1st at 4.82)
2020: 4.52
2021: 3.66 (8th in P12, Oregon St 1st at 5.98)
Pretty easy to see a declining trend here. I think you can explain the 2018 decline on receiving talent dropping fairly substantially but mitigated by still having #MMFG in place and the 2018 to 2019 drop the difference between Gaskin and Ahmed 2020 a bit of a smaller sample size and a tale of 2 subsets (the Oregon St/Arizona subset at 5.2 ypc; the Utah/Stanford subset at 3.4 ypc). What is very clear here is that Washington doesn't get any easy yards on the ground coming from the QB position and the lack of a threat of the QB in the running game minimizes what the defense has to defend (see the impact of Arizona in 2017/2018 for how the QB in the running game can influence).
Yards per Pass Attempt
2016: 8.59 (1st in P12)
2017: 7.54 (5th in P12, USC 1st at 8.47)
2018: 8.11 (2nd in P12, Stanford 1st at 8.62)
2019: 7.07 (10th in P12, Utah 1st at 10.71)
2020: 8.16
2021: 6.36 (10th in P12, ASU 1st at 9.70)
Really easy here to see that we're falling off a cliff here and what's surprising in the number is that Morris has actually gotten more accurate as the season has transpired and UW's completion % at 63.6% in conference play is actually 4th in the conference. I tend to think that we actually have play makers at the WR position ... at least as good as any dating back to really the 2016/2017 time periods. So what we're seeing here is a combination of poor scheme and execution (we're not getting our players in spots to have explosive plays, when we do we're not connecting). I'll take the 2016-2018 passing game performance all day despite some of the issues that we saw (always can be better). 2019 a combo of terrible receiving play and Eason not as accurate as you'd want (11th in the conference in completion %). To be a good offense you really want to be at 8+ per play here.
Yards per Completion
2016: 14.42 (1st in P12)
2017: 11.34 (9th in P12, USC 1st at 13.47)
2018: 12.90 (3rd in P12, Arizona 1st at 13.63)
2019: 11.96 (5th in P12, Utah 1st at 14.56)
2020: 13.32
2021: 10.00 (11th in P12, Colorado 1st at 16.45)
Effectively, this is a measure of explosiveness ... when you complete a pass what do you get out of it. The general standard in the conference is that top performance ranges from the mid 13's to mid 14's yards per completion. 2016/2018 were generally in good areas ... not shocking that those are years we won the P12. 2017 highlights what happens when you're struggling to get explosive plays. 2019 shows that when we completed balls we weren't that bad but the inaccuracy (yards per attempt) really stalled drives too often. The 2020 to 2021 gap though is beyond disturbing though as you could argue that the pass catching options are really one of the stronger areas of the roster. So what you're really looking at here in 2021 again comes back to there's some significant scheme issues combined with Morris not taking advantage of the shots that are there. BTW, Colorado in 1st is a bit of an outlier because they really can't throw the ball ... so when they complete it it tends to be for large chunks.
Yards per Play
2016: 6.77 (2nd in P12, USC 1st at 6.92)
2017: 6.19 (4th in P12, Arizona 1st at 7.28)
2018: 5.75 (6th in P12, Stanford 1st at 6.51)
2019: 5.42 (10th in P12, USC 1st at 6.90)
2020: 6.03
2021: 4.95 (10th in P12, ASU 1st at 7.04)
This is one measure of efficiency with the caveat that your run/pass play mix can really influence the outcome. 2018 is a great example in that while UW was efficient in the passing game, an over 60/40 weighting to the running game suppressed the overall yards per play. You can see in the trending that generally speaking top in the conference is at around 7 yards per play. To be successful, you probably need to be at over 6 yards per play unless you have either a very strong defense or if you're a highly efficient running team. You can see the downward trend as the explosion has gone down. Execution bogged down the 2019 numbers. 2020 was good enough to be competitive. 2021 is an absolute joke ... as a point of reference for where that metric would have ranked from 2016-2019 in the conference (2016 = 11th, 2017 = 12th, 2018 = 10th, 2019 = 11th) ... the only reason the 2021 number isn't lower than 10th is because Colorado and Arizona are relatively inept (that said Colorado at 4.90 yards per play is within reach of us getting under them; probably safe from Arizona at 4.53). Simply put, over the last 5+ years, this is about as bad of an offense as the conference has seen.
Points per 100 Yards
2016: 8.52 (1st in P12)
2017: 8.28 (1st in P12)
2018: 6.46 (9th in P12, Wazzu 1st at 8.15)
2019: 7.20 (5th in P12, Utah 1st at 8.02)
2020: 7.51
2021: 7.90 (1st in P12)
The logic behind this metric is that it measures how effectively you move the ball ... can you convert yardage into points. Generally speaking, I consider 7 points per 100 yards of offense over the course of a season to be a decent benchmark. The metric implicitly includes turnover margin and red zone efficiency embedded within it. Generally speaking, the good news is that UW traditionally does a good job at converting and finishing drives. It passes the sniff test this year in that by and large when the team has been in the red zone they've converted those drives into points. The problems in terms of overall points is that the pace of the game (# of drives) is really low and when we don't score they tend to be relatively quick drives in the 3 and out range. Going back into history, the big outlier obviously is 2018 and it's probably why when you look back on the season our inability to finish drives was the difference between being 10-4 and 12-2 or better (almost assuredly influenced the losses in both the Auburn and Oregon games).
Offensive Plays per Turnover
2016: 63 (2nd in P12, Cal 1st at 70)
2017: 84 (1st in P12)
2018: 56 (4th in P12, ASU 1st at 78)
2019: 50 (9th in P12, Oregon St 1st at 122)
2020: 89
2021: 37 (8th in P12, UCLA 1st at 99)
There's a pretty obvious outlier here in 2021 with Morris consistently turning the ball over and it creating significant issues. The metrics can change year to year depending on the quality of the defense in the conference combined with how aggressive you are offensively. That said, there's really no reason to not be targeting a turnover every 55-70 plays which will generally equate to 1 per game. 1 turnover per game won't kill you ... 2 per game will.
Offensive Statistics
Yards per Carry
2016: 5.40 (4th in P12, USC 1st at 5.66)
2017: 5.31 (5th in P12, Arizona 1st at 6.94)
2018: 4.38 (5th in P12, Arizona 1st at 5.10)
2019: 3.92 (7th in P12, Oregon 1st at 4.82)
2020: 4.52
2021: 3.66 (8th in P12, Oregon St 1st at 5.98)
Pretty easy to see a declining trend here. I think you can explain the 2018 decline on receiving talent dropping fairly substantially but mitigated by still having #MMFG in place and the 2018 to 2019 drop the difference between Gaskin and Ahmed 2020 a bit of a smaller sample size and a tale of 2 subsets (the Oregon St/Arizona subset at 5.2 ypc; the Utah/Stanford subset at 3.4 ypc). What is very clear here is that Washington doesn't get any easy yards on the ground coming from the QB position and the lack of a threat of the QB in the running game minimizes what the defense has to defend (see the impact of Arizona in 2017/2018 for how the QB in the running game can influence).
Yards per Pass Attempt
2016: 8.59 (1st in P12)
2017: 7.54 (5th in P12, USC 1st at 8.47)
2018: 8.11 (2nd in P12, Stanford 1st at 8.62)
2019: 7.07 (10th in P12, Utah 1st at 10.71)
2020: 8.16
2021: 6.36 (10th in P12, ASU 1st at 9.70)
Really easy here to see that we're falling off a cliff here and what's surprising in the number is that Morris has actually gotten more accurate as the season has transpired and UW's completion % at 63.6% in conference play is actually 4th in the conference. I tend to think that we actually have play makers at the WR position ... at least as good as any dating back to really the 2016/2017 time periods. So what we're seeing here is a combination of poor scheme and execution (we're not getting our players in spots to have explosive plays, when we do we're not connecting). I'll take the 2016-2018 passing game performance all day despite some of the issues that we saw (always can be better). 2019 a combo of terrible receiving play and Eason not as accurate as you'd want (11th in the conference in completion %). To be a good offense you really want to be at 8+ per play here.
Yards per Completion
2016: 14.42 (1st in P12)
2017: 11.34 (9th in P12, USC 1st at 13.47)
2018: 12.90 (3rd in P12, Arizona 1st at 13.63)
2019: 11.96 (5th in P12, Utah 1st at 14.56)
2020: 13.32
2021: 10.00 (11th in P12, Colorado 1st at 16.45)
Effectively, this is a measure of explosiveness ... when you complete a pass what do you get out of it. The general standard in the conference is that top performance ranges from the mid 13's to mid 14's yards per completion. 2016/2018 were generally in good areas ... not shocking that those are years we won the P12. 2017 highlights what happens when you're struggling to get explosive plays. 2019 shows that when we completed balls we weren't that bad but the inaccuracy (yards per attempt) really stalled drives too often. The 2020 to 2021 gap though is beyond disturbing though as you could argue that the pass catching options are really one of the stronger areas of the roster. So what you're really looking at here in 2021 again comes back to there's some significant scheme issues combined with Morris not taking advantage of the shots that are there. BTW, Colorado in 1st is a bit of an outlier because they really can't throw the ball ... so when they complete it it tends to be for large chunks.
Yards per Play
2016: 6.77 (2nd in P12, USC 1st at 6.92)
2017: 6.19 (4th in P12, Arizona 1st at 7.28)
2018: 5.75 (6th in P12, Stanford 1st at 6.51)
2019: 5.42 (10th in P12, USC 1st at 6.90)
2020: 6.03
2021: 4.95 (10th in P12, ASU 1st at 7.04)
This is one measure of efficiency with the caveat that your run/pass play mix can really influence the outcome. 2018 is a great example in that while UW was efficient in the passing game, an over 60/40 weighting to the running game suppressed the overall yards per play. You can see in the trending that generally speaking top in the conference is at around 7 yards per play. To be successful, you probably need to be at over 6 yards per play unless you have either a very strong defense or if you're a highly efficient running team. You can see the downward trend as the explosion has gone down. Execution bogged down the 2019 numbers. 2020 was good enough to be competitive. 2021 is an absolute joke ... as a point of reference for where that metric would have ranked from 2016-2019 in the conference (2016 = 11th, 2017 = 12th, 2018 = 10th, 2019 = 11th) ... the only reason the 2021 number isn't lower than 10th is because Colorado and Arizona are relatively inept (that said Colorado at 4.90 yards per play is within reach of us getting under them; probably safe from Arizona at 4.53). Simply put, over the last 5+ years, this is about as bad of an offense as the conference has seen.
Points per 100 Yards
2016: 8.52 (1st in P12)
2017: 8.28 (1st in P12)
2018: 6.46 (9th in P12, Wazzu 1st at 8.15)
2019: 7.20 (5th in P12, Utah 1st at 8.02)
2020: 7.51
2021: 7.90 (1st in P12)
The logic behind this metric is that it measures how effectively you move the ball ... can you convert yardage into points. Generally speaking, I consider 7 points per 100 yards of offense over the course of a season to be a decent benchmark. The metric implicitly includes turnover margin and red zone efficiency embedded within it. Generally speaking, the good news is that UW traditionally does a good job at converting and finishing drives. It passes the sniff test this year in that by and large when the team has been in the red zone they've converted those drives into points. The problems in terms of overall points is that the pace of the game (# of drives) is really low and when we don't score they tend to be relatively quick drives in the 3 and out range. Going back into history, the big outlier obviously is 2018 and it's probably why when you look back on the season our inability to finish drives was the difference between being 10-4 and 12-2 or better (almost assuredly influenced the losses in both the Auburn and Oregon games).
Offensive Plays per Turnover
2016: 63 (2nd in P12, Cal 1st at 70)
2017: 84 (1st in P12)
2018: 56 (4th in P12, ASU 1st at 78)
2019: 50 (9th in P12, Oregon St 1st at 122)
2020: 89
2021: 37 (8th in P12, UCLA 1st at 99)
There's a pretty obvious outlier here in 2021 with Morris consistently turning the ball over and it creating significant issues. The metrics can change year to year depending on the quality of the defense in the conference combined with how aggressive you are offensively. That said, there's really no reason to not be targeting a turnover every 55-70 plays which will generally equate to 1 per game. 1 turnover per game won't kill you ... 2 per game will.
Tagged:
Comments
Stats are for losers.
Scheme has been bad
Which one worse? Does it matter?
Classic case of abundance
Not sure the juice is worth the squeeze on that
That said 2020 vs 2021 Morris and sacks also interesting to compare
The OL is so incredibly weak inside this is the worst run blocking OL since 0-12 Willingham. The pass blocking is better but it is still way below average. Assignments against the blitz are regularly incorrect or missed, especially in the Wattenburg/A gap.
The TEs are always underused no matter what but atleast they aren't forcing them to get jam fucked by a DL anymore... I guess...
The WR group is probably the best group since Pettis/Ross, collectively they are decent but there isn't an individual that looks all like an all-Pac12 let alone an AA. McMillen seems to always find a way to get open without trying, he is the most likely to actually be really good if he is actually developed.
The RB group, whats more disappointing their development/play or their management? I can appreciate what McGrew and Pleasant try to do but they are the worst RBs to get major mins in a long long time at UW. They are still better than the bullshit the coaches tried to roll out in the first two games. Still dont understand how that happened... Hard to fault them too much though, prime Reggie Bush would look pedestrian with this OL.
Overall it wouldn't surprise me if Lake had been doing some new age NFL team management shit and they are spending minimal time actually working out or practicing hard. It would explain why the team looks so incredibly physically weak, the regression of nearly every player (even past good ones like Ulofoshioioio or Otton), the terrible scheme for the personnel in the first few games, and the benching of better players like Mcgrew/Pleasant at the start of the season.