The Cardinals Won't Make the Playoffs Despite Carson's Return & 2nd Best Coach

[Arizona's Finest]

You both make the argument for regression to the mean and then say that you don't believe it because you expect carry-over from one season to the next. So weird.

I DONT expect carryover to the next. My belief is this is a new Cardinals team from last year, but all the reasons we were good n close games in 2013 and 2014 are here and better. So i dont know for a fact how the team will come together, but there is reason to believe there is status quo with the QB, Coach, and Vet Leadership. Same with the Colts. And guess who got them started on that path as the itnterim head coach

 

[Arizona's Finest]

See if this works.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

seems to be a couple comments left out which hurts the flow of the discussion but you get the drift. And K9 please dont harass me on Twitter?

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Here are the missing ones.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

I DONT expect carryover to the next. My belief is this is a new Cardinals team from last year, but all the reasons we were good n close games in 2013 and 2014 are here and better. So i dont know for a fact how the team will come together, but there is reason to believe there is status quo with the QB, Coach, and Vet Leadership. Same with the Colts. And guess who got them started on that path as the itnterim head coach

Exactly. It isn't really about carry over of the play from last year. It is more about still having the things that made us successful over the past couple years. This team still having those things certainly doesn't guarantee the same success, but it gives us reason to be confident that it could. Simply writing off a season because you assume that the team won't have the same "luck" is far worse than being confident that it will happen again because you have a lot of the same pieces.

 

[kerouac9]

Exactly. It isn't really about carry over of the play from last year. It is more about still having the things that made us successful over the past couple years. This team still having those things certainly doesn't guarantee the same success, but it gives us reason to be confident that it could. Simply writing off a season because you assume that the team won't have the same "luck" is far worse than being confident that it will happen again because you have a lot of the same pieces.

Who is doing this?

EDIT: I think people are confusing "the things that made us successful over the past couple years." That's not Carson Palmer. Palmer played well in 6 games last year, but we were primarily successful because of a defense...

- Coordinated by Todd Bowles
- With a veteran defensive line, and
- At least one competent, experienced ILB

I think the heart of the argument that the advanced metrics people are making isn't (or shouldn't be) that Carson Palmer is [whatever]. It should be that the defense is likely to regress, and it's unclear whether the offense can pick up the slack.

We were 11-5 last year with Palmer out, but I don't think he makes a difference in the Atlanta or Seattle games in the win column. So maybe with him we're 12-4 and still a wild card. Does the perception look that much different if we beat a limping Carolina team in round 1 and get smoked by the Cowboys/Packers? I don't know. Probably.

 

[Bodha]

OT: when you click on the link, it takes you to the article. On the borders of the article, on both sides, theres an advertisement for this last Fast and Furious movie. Vin on the right side, the girl and Paul Walker on the left side.

Q - Is that actually Paul Walker, or one his brothers they used to complete the movie after he died?

Because it looks like him, but it also really kinda doesn't.



*The advertisement changes every time you click on it. You can cycle through till it gives you the F&F one.

 

[Matt L]

Who's going to put up the season predictions thread? I think 10 wins is definitely possible and that should earn a trip to the post season.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Aren't all stats "made up" until they're generally accepted? Why look at Passer Rating, YPA, YPC, or any other stat? None of those take the coach's philosophy into account.

Actually no. YPA is actual math, not fantasy math like DVOA. Same with pretty much any other stat. DVOA is fantasy football math.

Let me show you the difference.

Andre Ellington runs for 5 yards on first down. His attempts are 1. His yards are 5. His yards per attempt are 5. These are facts

DVOA has decided that 4 yards on first down is worth 1 point. This means Ellington's run is 1.25 points. This is only factual if you agree with their stated goal and scoring system. Just like fantasy football.

I think the idea is that those moments come out in the wash. Football generally has a sample-size problem where you're only looking at 16 games per season, 600 or so passing plays, 400 or so running games per season. The assumption is that the running out the clock runs are few enough (maybe 6 in 10 games at the maximum?), and that you can't gain 4 yards on first down even in those situations still tells you something.

I completely disagree. Some teams have philosophies to throw on first down, which will lead to a higher DVOA since it is all about yardage.

This is why their entire system is so grossly inaccurate when it comes to predictability. It's predicated on the falsehood that there is a set and same goal every time at certain downs.

I think we agree on this, but if you're just like "Derp derp Carson Palmer wins derp derp Jonathan Cooper game had 125 rushing YPG derp derp" then you have no guideline to use to get your team better or improve for the next season.

Hmmm...which is more of a "Derp Derp"? The one that only counts what the running back does or the one that associates it's relevance to the talent on the offensive line?

I dismiss or discount a lot of PFF's stats because they're not "stats", they're averages of game charter's opinions. Football Outsiders will be the first to tell you that their stats aren't perfect, they're frequently trying to tweak their algorithms, and that they go against their stats all the time. They call Russell Wilson "the asterisk" because his college metrics put him off the charts as a pro prospect, but he's managed to perform pretty well at the team level.

Except the group think sports media isn't actually looking at that. They are just parroting these fake stats without questioning them.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Who is doing this?

EDIT: I think people are confusing "the things that made us successful over the past couple years." That's not Carson Palmer. Palmer played well in 6 games last year, but we were primarily successful because of a defense...

- Coordinated by Todd Bowles
- With a veteran defensive line, and
- At least one competent, experienced ILB

I think the heart of the argument that the advanced metrics people are making isn't (or shouldn't be) that Carson Palmer is [whatever]. It should be that the defense is likely to regress, and it's unclear whether the offense can pick up the slack.

We were 11-5 last year with Palmer out, but I don't think he makes a difference in the Atlanta or Seattle games in the win column. So maybe with him we're 12-4 and still a wild card. Does the perception look that much different if we beat a limping Carolina team in round 1 and get smoked by the Cowboys/Packers? I don't know. Probably.

Seattle was 3 games back and playing us in Seattle with a one read Drew Stanton. The year before we won WITH Palmer in Seattle (yes K9 he had 4 ints but kept us in the game and made the game winning throw)

So no I dont think we are Wildcard. I think with Palmer we win one of those SEA games (the defense played amazing in SEA and was good then fell apart under Ryan Lindleys suckage in the 2nd game) and one other so yes that means we win division and are instead a #1 or #2 seed. Seattle played the worst QB crew ever last 6 games. Palmer makes a difference there having to play him twice.

And if we are the #1 or #2 seed the perception changes COMPLETELY and people are talking about us as favorites instead. Game of inches indeed.

 

[kerouac9]

Actually no. YPA is actual math, not fantasy math like DVOA. Same with pretty much any other stat. DVOA is fantasy football math.

Let me show you the difference.

Andre Ellington runs for 5 yards on first down. His attempts are 1. His yards are 5. His yards per attempt are 5. These are facts

DVOA has decided that 4 yards on first down is worth 1 point. This means Ellington's run is 1.25 points. This is only factual if you agree with their stated goal and scoring system. Just like fantasy football.

DVOA is a percentage? It's a black-box metric, so you can't recreate it, although they'll tell you what the elements are. What's a less meaningful statistic/more relevant to fantasy football: Andre Ellington runs for 5 yards on first-and-10, or Andre Ellington runs for 5 yards on 3rd and 20?

DVOA attempts to parse out that difference, and compare the value of one player in a system to the average performance against all backs/systems/OL. That's what an "average" is.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods#DVOA

I completely disagree. Some teams have philosophies to throw on first down, which will lead to a higher DVOA since it is all about yardage.

This is why their entire system is so grossly inaccurate when it comes to predictability. It's predicated on the falsehood that there is a set and same goal every time at certain downs.

DVOA isn't all about yardage. It's about successful yardage. If you throw a two-yard pass on first down, it's less successful than a four-yard run. The running play will be rewarded with a higher DVOA. An incomplete pass will be rewarded with a lower DVOA than a run for positive yardage.

Hmmm...which is more of a "Derp Derp"? The one that only counts what the running back does or the one that associates it's relevance to the talent on the offensive line?

I'm not sure which side you think is which here.

 

[kerouac9]

Seattle was 3 games back and playing us in Seattle with a one read Drew Stanton. The year before we won WITH Palmer in Seattle (yes K9 he had 4 ints but kept us in the game and made the game winning throw)

So no I dont think we are Wildcard. I think with Palmer we win one of those SEA games (the defense played amazing in SEA and was good then fell apart under Ryan Lindleys suckage in the 2nd game) and one other so yes that means we win division and are instead a #1 or #2 seed. Seattle played the worst QB crew ever last 6 games. Palmer makes a difference there having to play him twice.

And if we are the #1 or #2 seed the perception changes COMPLETELY and people are talking about us as favorites instead. Game of inches indeed.

We lost by 16 points in Seattle. Is Carson Palmer worth 16 points more than Drew Stanton in Seattle?

We lost to Seattle by 29 points at home. Is Carson Palmer worth 29 points more than Ryan Lindley against Seattle?

 

[Arizona's Finest]

We lost by 16 points in Seattle. Is Carson Palmer worth 16 points more than Drew Stanton in Seattle?

We lost to Seattle by 29 points at home. Is Carson Palmer worth 29 points more than Ryan Lindley against Seattle?

For someone who cares about DVOA and advanced statistics I cant possibly think you are asking such a dumb question. That is a basic at its lowest level.

The ENTIRE game would be different if Palmer had played. We may have been beat by 40 pts instead, who knows. What I can assure you is that not one offensive snap would have been the same, which in turn changes the defense playcalling on both sides, field position, the coaching decisions, etc. This stuff isnt in a vacum in a game that has 160 plays that determine the outcome.

So I cant even answer your question as it lives in a linear alternate reality that I cant even fathom how to answer. Ill try this. I think with Carson starting both games we would have won 1 of the 2. And I dont think thats crazy no.

All i know is I watched that game. Seattle pulled away late on 2 AMAZING Russell Wilson plays. In fact I thought that was the best defense through 3 quarters we had played all season in Seattle. I still believe you dont actually watch the games so maybe I had to bring that up as you realy dont remember the context.

 

[Shaggy]

The major change for this year to last year will be the D. I think it has regressed and they may not play at the level they did last year. Now if Carson plays all 16 games, the team won't have to rely heavily on the D to win games like they did last year. I hope I am wrong about the D, but to me, the weak ILB and new DC will be the reason for the regression.

 

[BigRedRage]

We lost by 16 points in Seattle. Is Carson Palmer worth 16 points more than Drew Stanton in Seattle?

We lost to Seattle by 29 points at home. Is Carson Palmer worth 29 points more than Ryan Lindley against Seattle?

the game changes with every quarter, odds are with carson the offense is on the field longer and seattle scores less.

 

[kerouac9]

the game changes with every quarter, odds are with carson the offense is on the field longer and seattle scores less.

One touchdown more for us and one TD less for Seattle still doesn't win us the game. And I don't think we were less aggressive with Stanton in the lineup than we were with Palmer, IIRC.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

We lost by 16 points in Seattle. Is Carson Palmer worth 16 points more than Drew Stanton in Seattle?

We lost to Seattle by 29 points at home. Is Carson Palmer worth 29 points more than Ryan Lindley against Seattle?

Possibly to both questions. Having a competent QB or in the comparison to Drew a much more competent QB in the game can change the entire complexion of the game. It's not as simple as scoring more points, but also less time that your defense is on the field and thus it is likely that the other team scores less. So yes it is a possibility that both of those games are much different with a healthy Palmer in the game.

 

[BigRedRage]

One touchdown more for us and one TD less for Seattle still doesn't win us the game. And I don't think we were less aggressive with Stanton in the lineup than we were with Palmer, IIRC.

yeah, thats all that would change. No butterfly effect, it would have been the exact same game with only a +7 difference.

 

[kerouac9]

yeah, thats all that would change. No butterfly effect, it would have been the exact same game with only a +7 difference.

This isn't a stat-driven argument. With Drew Stanton, the Cards were three scores worse than Seattle. The bottom line answer that I want is does Carson Palmer and all the precipitating results move the needle 16 points? I don't think that's the case. Russell Wilson had to self-destruct against a defense featuring both Karlos Dansby and Daryl Washington for us to beat him in Seattle two years ago.

Ceteris paribus, the question you have to answer for yourself is how big a difference do you think that Carson Palmer now really makes against the top teams in the NFL? I think it makes some difference, but not a big enough difference to win the division and get a first-round bye.

 

[Krangodnzr]

This isn't a stat-driven argument. With Drew Stanton, the Cards were three scores worse than Seattle. The bottom line answer that I want is does Carson Palmer and all the precipitating results move the needle 16 points?

I think what others are saying, is that yes, Carson Palmer could easily be the difference in 16 points. And that doesn't have be offensive points, Palmer would likely have moved the ball more and even if you don't score points, the Seattle offense gets worse field position and has less time of possession.

So yes, he could've been worth 16 points.

I don't think that's the case. Russell Wilson had to self-destruct against a defense featuring both Karlos Dansby and Daryl Washington for us to beat him in Seattle two years ago.

Self destruct, or didn't make plays? I think that's essentially how we beat Seattle, play solid contain on Wilson and force him to only beat you with his arm. That's not self destructing, that's failing to make a play.

Against the Packers, Russell Wilson self destructed.

Ceteris paribus, the question you have to answer for yourself is how big a difference do you think that Carson Palmer now really makes against the top teams in the NFL? I think it makes some difference, but not a big enough difference to win the division and get a first-round bye.

The difference between Palmer and Stanton, is that Palmer makes more of the ordinary plays that Stanton doesn't make. Football isn't just about throwing 72 yard laser touchdowns, it's about being able to complete that pass 7 yards down the field consistently. Stanton struggles with going through his progressions and struggles to have consistent technique. Palmer doesn't struggle with the fundamentals.

 

[daves]

This isn't a stat-driven argument.

The stats (giving each QB full credit for complete games, and 2/3 or 1/3 credit for games where they played roughly that proportion) say the following:

With Palmer, the Cardinals scored 25.5 PPG and allowed 17.0 PPG.
(18, 30, 24, 24, 28, 2/3*31)
With Stanton, they scored 17.2 PPG and allowed 17.2 PPG.
(25, 23, 2/3*20, 1/3*31, 14, 3, 18, 17, 2/3*12)
With Lindley, they scored 12.9 PPG and allowed 25.2 PPG.
(1/3*12, 6, 17, 16)

Of course you could parse these numbers further by snap count, discounting defensive scores, factoring in strength of opponent, etc. And of course these are small samples for all three QBs... but this is a reasonable approximation of how the team did with each QB.

There's no telling what would've happened at Seattle with Palmer vs. Stanton, or vs. Seattle with Palmer vs. Lindley, but a win in one of the games seems plausible. Wins in the games at Atlanta and San Francisco are more plausible. I believe one win vs. Seattle or a total of two wins vs. any opponents would've given the Cardinals home field advantage throughout the playoffs.

On another note, if the Cardinals had scored Palmer's 8.5 PPG more than their opponents all season long, they would've had a point differential of +136, not +11. That certainly would've skewed the Pythagorean win expectation a bit.

...dave

 

[splitsecond]

K9, once again, why do you even watch the game, let alone this team, if all you want to do is tear it down? Or do you just relish your throne as the King Troll of ASFN?

 

[82CardsGrad]

Making win/loss predictions for any team in August is like trying to predict the stock market. Way too many variables. The thing is---a team's success often depends on staying healthy and catching their opponents at the right time...and, of course, that little thing called lady luck. If the Packers' TE lets the on-side kick go right to the WR for an easy catch, the Packers are in the Super Bowl. It was very lucky for the Seahawks that the TE at that moment decided to abandon his assignment on the play which was to block the closest threat.

You may not have directed this at me Mitch, but, for the record, the points I have made here in response to K9 were not about predicting wins & losses. My point was that I believe, based on Palmer's most recent performance as a Cardinal, that he is poised for a big year this season. That another year with BA for him and the entire offense will only add to the chances for success on offense.
I am concerned about our TE position, our RT situation and our Linebacker situation...so, who knows what the W/L record will be. But I remain confident that Carson Palmer will have one of his best seasons of his career in 2015.

 

[Mitch]

You may not have directed this at me Mitch, but, for the record, the points I have made here in response to K9 were not about predicting wins & losses. My point was that I believe, based on Palmer's most recent performance as a Cardinal, that he is poised for a big year this season. That another year with BA for him and the entire offense will only add to the chances for success on offense.
I am concerned about our TE position, our RT situation and our Linebacker situation...so, who knows what the W/L record will be. But I remain confident that Carson Palmer will have one of his best seasons of his career in 2015.

I wasn't directing my comments specifically at you, 82. All I know is, game one versus the Saints is going to be quite a challenge, especially with rookie DC James Bettcher having to match wits with Sean Payton and his speedy, screen oriented offense. Game one is starting to come into focus. Looking beyond that, imo, is what gets teams in trouble.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

I wasn't directing my comments specifically at you, 82. All I know is, game one versus the Saints is going to be quite a challenge, especially with rookie DC James Bettcher having to match wits with Sean Payton and his speedy, screen oriented offense. Game one is starting to come into focus. Looking beyond that, imo, is what gets teams in trouble.

I dont know about everyone else and I agree the preseason is the preseason, but im feeling alot better about Bettcher after seeing the play calls the first two games. Seems similar to Bowles in that respect which was the genius of the guy. So was maximizing players strengths. Looks like that is happening with Bucannon.

well see but so far so good.