by Aaron Schatz
It's no surprise that the Giants have moved into the top spot in DVOA after shellacking the Seahawks in Week 5. That game had the best single-game DVOA rating so far this year (105.9%). The teams ranked second and third, however, are a little bit more of a surprise: Baltimore and Philadelphia.
Yes, that's right -- we have a 2-2 team ranked second and a 2-3 team ranked third. As you know, DVOA takes every single play and breaks it down, and it only cares about how well a team plays, not whether it wins or loses. It's not saying that wins and losses are not important -- of course, we don't decide who goes to the playoffs based on statistical ratings -- but DVOA does a better job of telling you how good a team is now and will be in the future. It just so happens that the Ravens and Eagles are really good despite their less-than-glittering records this season.
Baltimore has a single-game DVOA rating above 25% for all four of its games this season. According to DVOA, the Ravens outplayed both the Steelers and the Titans but just couldn't get the breaks. (Seriously, what was up with that roughing the passer call on Terrell Suggs?) The Ravens lead the league in defensive DVOA, not the Titans, and the run defense has been particularly strong, allowing 2.8 yards per carry and no touchdowns on the ground.
Philadelphia only has one "tough loss," i.e. a loss where the team had a higher DVOA than its opponents. Based on our ratings, the Eagles were outplayed by the Cowboys and (narrowly) the Bears. Still, none of their losses have come by more than a touchdown. Slaughtering the Rams doesn't seem like a big deal, but manhandling the Steelers sure is. The 2008 Eagles seem a lot like the 2006 Eagles, a team that couldn't catch a break in the first half of the season, then caught every single break during the second half. The difference is that they won't back their way into a division title this year, because the NFC East is so absurdly strong. The lowest NFC East team according to DVOA is Dallas, the team that everyone else thinks is the best in the division -- and they still rank seventh in the NFL overall.
As for the Giants, I write more about them below. First, let's run the numbers.
* * * * *
These are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings through five weeks of 2008, measured by our proprietary Defense-adjusted Value Over Average (DVOA) system that breaks down every single play and compares a team's performance to the league average based on situation in order to determine value over average. (Explained further here [1].)
OFFENSE and DEFENSE DVOA are adjusted to consider all fumbles, kept or lost, as equal value. They also include opponent adjustments, currently at 50 percent strength. SPECIAL TEAMS DVOA is adjusted for type of stadium (warm, cold, dome, Denver) and week of season.
As always, positive numbers represent more points so DEFENSE is better when it is NEGATIVE.
DAVE is a formula which combines our preseason projection with current DVOA to get a more accurate forecast of how a team will play the rest of the season. Right now, the preseason projection makes up 27 percent of DAVE, and this year's DVOA makes up 73 percent. For teams with only four games played, that split is 40/60.
To save people some time, please use the following format for all complaints: <team> is clearly ranked <too high/too low> because <reason unrelated to DVOA>. <subjective ranking system> is way better than this. <unrelated team-supporting or -denigrating comment, preferably with poor spelling and/or chat-acceptable spelling>
| TEAM | TOTAL DVOA |
LAST WEEK |
DAVE | RANK | W-L | OFFENSE DVOA |
OFF. RANK |
DEFENSE DVOA |
DEF. RANK |
S.T. DVOA |
S.T. RANK |
|
| 1 | NYG | 56.7% | 2 | 36.5% | 1 | 4-0 | 41.1% | 1 | -12.4% | 7 | 3.2% | 10 |
| 2 | BAL | 42.5% | 1 | 26.8% | 3 | 2-2 | 3.0% | 14 | -43.4% | 1 | -3.9% | 29 |
| 3 | PHI | 32.7% | 3 | 32.8% | 2 | 2-3 | 13.3% | 9 | -16.1% | 5 | 3.2% | 11 |
| 4 | TEN | 28.6% | 4 | 20.2% | 4 | 5-0 | -2.9% | 21 | -32.3% | 2 | -0.8% | 21 |
| 5 | WAS | 24.5% | 7 | 15.4% | 8 | 4-1 | 28.7% | 3 | -0.1% | 13 | -4.2% | 30 |
| 6 | CAR | 20.3% | 12 | 16.0% | 6 | 4-1 | 9.3% | 11 | -8.6% | 9 | 2.3% | 14 |
| 7 | DAL | 18.1% | 8 | 16.3% | 5 | 4-1 | 28.3% | 4 | 9.0% | 21 | -1.2% | 22 |
| 8 | ARI | 16.6% | 16 | 11.8% | 12 | 3-2 | 19.7% | 5 | 0.5% | 14 | -2.6% | 25 |
| 9 | PIT | 15.0% | 10 | 12.7% | 10 | 4-1 | -6.4% | 24 | -18.3% | 3 | 3.1% | 12 |
| 10 | MIA | 14.7% | 19 | 0.3% | 19 | 2-2 | 19.4% | 6 | -5.9% | 10 | -10.6% | 31 |
| 11 | CHI | 14.4% | 11 | 9.9% | 13 | 3-2 | -2.3% | 19 | -11.9% | 8 | 4.8% | 6 |
| 12 | TB | 13.7% | 5 | 15.4% | 7 | 3-2 | -3.7% | 22 | -17.9% | 4 | -0.5% | 19 |
| 13 | NO | 9.9% | 14 | 7.5% | 14 | 2-3 | 11.2% | 10 | 9.6% | 22 | 8.4% | 2 |
| 14 | SD | 7.9% | 9 | 12.9% | 9 | 2-3 | 13.8% | 8 | 8.2% | 19 | 2.3% | 15 |
| 15 | DEN | 7.0% | 15 | 5.9% | 16 | 4-1 | 29.8% | 2 | 21.2% | 29 | -1.6% | 24 |
| 16 | ATL | 5.9% | 13 | -6.7% | 23 | 3-2 | 17.4% | 7 | 15.8% | 26 | 4.2% | 8 |
| TEAM | TOTAL DVOA |
LAST WEEK |
DAVE | RANK | W-L | OFFENSE DVOA |
OFF. RANK |
DEFENSE DVOA |
DEF. RANK |
S.T. DVOA |
S.T. RANK |
|
| 17 | BUF | 3.1% | 6 | -1.7% | 20 | 4-1 | 1.5% | 16 | 3.4% | 16 | 5.0% | 5 |
| 18 | GB | 2.7% | 17 | 11.9% | 11 | 2-3 | -1.6% | 18 | -1.3% | 12 | 3.1% | 13 |
| 19 | MIN | -0.5% | 20 | 6.0% | 15 | 2-3 | -0.9% | 17 | -14.1% | 6 | -13.7% | 32 |
| 20 | NYJ | -1.5% | 23 | -2.9% | 21 | 2-2 | 2.5% | 15 | 3.6% | 17 | -0.5% | 18 |
| 21 | SF | -4.3% | 18 | -10.6% | 25 | 2-3 | -9.7% | 26 | -1.6% | 11 | 3.9% | 9 |
| 22 | OAK | -6.3% | 22 | -13.3% | 26 | 1-3 | -12.3% | 27 | 1.6% | 15 | 7.6% | 3 |
| 23 | NE | -8.8% | 26 | 4.4% | 17 | 3-1 | -2.5% | 20 | 15.7% | 25 | 9.4% | 1 |
| 24 | IND | -9.1% | 25 | 2.3% | 18 | 2-2 | 6.0% | 12 | 11.7% | 23 | -3.4% | 27 |
| 25 | JAC | -10.7% | 24 | -5.0% | 22 | 2-3 | 4.8% | 13 | 19.9% | 28 | 4.5% | 7 |
| 26 | CLE | -24.9% | 27 | -20.2% | 27 | 1-3 | -24.7% | 31 | 6.3% | 18 | 6.2% | 4 |
| 27 | SEA | -27.9% | 21 | -10.5% | 24 | 1-3 | -7.3% | 25 | 16.8% | 27 | -3.7% | 28 |
| 28 | CIN | -31.9% | 28 | -23.9% | 28 | 0-5 | -23.7% | 30 | 8.7% | 20 | 0.4% | 17 |
| 29 | HOU | -38.7% | 29 | -24.4% | 29 | 0-4 | -5.6% | 23 | 32.5% | 30 | -0.6% | 20 |
| 30 | KC | -54.0% | 30 | -43.9% | 30 | 1-4 | -35.4% | 32 | 15.4% | 24 | -3.2% | 26 |
| 31 | DET | -65.2% | 32 | -47.8% | 31 | 0-4 | -20.0% | 28 | 47.2% | 32 | 2.0% | 16 |
| 32 | STL | -65.3% | 31 | -50.1% | 32 | 0-4 | -23.4% | 29 | 40.5% | 31 | -1.4% | 23 |
| TEAM | TOTAL DVOA |
W-L | NON-ADJ TOT VOA |
ESTIM. WINS |
RANK | PAST SCHED |
RANK | FUTURE SCHED |
RANK | VAR. | RANK | |
| 1 | NYG | 56.7% | 4-0 | 69.0% | 4.4 | 1 | -20.1% | 32 | 17.3% | 1 | 17.6% | 22 |
| 2 | BAL | 42.5% | 2-2 | 44.0% | 4.1 | 2 | -2.6% | 21 | 3.6% | 12 | 2.8% | 4 |
| 3 | PHI | 32.7% | 2-3 | 38.2% | 3.5 | 5 | 1.3% | 15 | 12.0% | 3 | 13.6% | 18 |
| 4 | TEN | 28.6% | 5-0 | 30.4% | 3.7 | 3 | -7.9% | 27 | -16.5% | 32 | 4.9% | 8 |
| 5 | WAS | 24.5% | 4-1 | 14.1% | 3.6 | 4 | 26.8% | 1 | -5.0% | 20 | 4.7% | 7 |
| 6 | CAR | 20.3% | 4-1 | 23.8% | 3.3 | 7 | -5.3% | 22 | 5.9% | 6 | 15.2% | 19 |
| 7 | DAL | 18.1% | 4-1 | 21.6% | 3.3 | 6 | 0.6% | 16 | 14.6% | 2 | 8.5% | 14 |
| 8 | ARI | 16.6% | 3-2 | 14.7% | 2.7 | 15 | 7.3% | 8 | -6.6% | 26 | 23.8% | 26 |
| 9 | PIT | 15.0% | 4-1 | 19.4% | 3.2 | 9 | 0.2% | 17 | 6.5% | 5 | 5.3% | 9 |
| 10 | MIA | 14.7% | 2-2 | 19.8% | 2.8 | 13 | 2.8% | 14 | -13.7% | 31 | 44.3% | 32 |
| 11 | CHI | 14.4% | 3-2 | 17.1% | 3.2 | 8 | -1.5% | 19 | -11.9% | 29 | 3.6% | 6 |
| 12 | TB | 13.7% | 3-2 | 14.3% | 2.7 | 14 | 8.0% | 7 | -6.5% | 25 | 19.2% | 23 |
| 13 | NO | 9.9% | 2-3 | 7.3% | 3.0 | 10 | 8.1% | 6 | -3.1% | 16 | 5.9% | 10 |
| 14 | SD | 7.9% | 2-3 | 9.4% | 3.0 | 11 | 6.8% | 9 | -7.1% | 28 | 9.1% | 15 |
| 15 | DEN | 7.0% | 4-1 | 12.4% | 2.5 | 18 | -5.8% | 24 | -4.9% | 19 | 23.7% | 25 |
| 16 | ATL | 5.9% | 3-2 | 13.7% | 2.5 | 19 | -16.5% | 30 | 4.0% | 11 | 32.9% | 30 |
| TEAM | TOTAL DVOA |
W-L | NON-ADJ TOT VOA |
ESTIM. WINS |
RANK | PAST SCHED |
RANK | FUTURE SCHED |
RANK | VAR. | RANK | |
| 17 | BUF | 3.1% | 4-1 | 5.7% | 2.6 | 16 | -18.7% | 31 | -5.4% | 23 | 15.7% | 21 |
| 18 | GB | 2.7% | 2-3 | 5.6% | 2.6 | 17 | -5.6% | 23 | -5.9% | 24 | 12.4% | 16 |
| 19 | MIN | -0.5% | 2-3 | -5.1% | 2.3 | 22 | 10.5% | 4 | -5.0% | 22 | 7.8% | 12 |
| 20 | NYJ | -1.5% | 2-2 | -6.1% | 2.4 | 21 | 6.1% | 10 | -12.9% | 30 | 15.4% | 20 |
| 21 | SF | -4.3% | 2-3 | 1.4% | 2.2 | 23 | -15.1% | 29 | 0.6% | 14 | 12.8% | 17 |
| 22 | OAK | -6.3% | 1-3 | -8.2% | 2.2 | 25 | -7.2% | 26 | 1.7% | 13 | 24.8% | 27 |
| 23 | NE | -8.8% | 3-1 | -8.1% | 2.9 | 12 | -9.0% | 28 | -3.9% | 17 | 27.3% | 28 |
| 24 | IND | -9.1% | 2-2 | -5.4% | 2.4 | 20 | -7.1% | 25 | -5.0% | 21 | 0.3% | 1 |
| 25 | JAC | -10.7% | 2-3 | -11.0% | 2.2 | 24 | -0.2% | 18 | -6.8% | 27 | 2.4% | 2 |
| 26 | CLE | -24.9% | 1-3 | -26.2% | 1.8 | 26 | 8.7% | 5 | 10.9% | 4 | 21.5% | 24 |
| 27 | SEA | -27.9% | 1-3 | -25.9% | 1.4 | 27 | -2.0% | 20 | 5.4% | 8 | 41.8% | 31 |
| 28 | CIN | -31.9% | 0-5 | -39.3% | 1.1 | 28 | 24.2% | 2 | -0.8% | 15 | 7.3% | 11 |
| 29 | HOU | -38.7% | 0-4 | -36.8% | 0.6 | 29 | 4.8% | 11 | -4.2% | 18 | 3.4% | 5 |
| 30 | KC | -54.0% | 1-4 | -43.0% | 0.5 | 30 | 3.6% | 13 | 4.8% | 10 | 28.7% | 29 |
| 31 | DET | -65.2% | 0-4 | -64.0% | 0.1 | 31 | 3.7% | 12 | 5.0% | 9 | 2.6% | 3 |
| 32 | STL | -65.3% | 0-4 | -70.3% | 0.0 | 32 | 12.9% | 3 | 5.8% | 7 | 8.4% | 13 |
Since the Rams and Lions have both had their bye weeks, we're going to switch our look at the worst teams ever from "worst after X weeks" to "worst after X games." That's why Kansas City does not show up on the "worst DVOA" table -- their DVOA after four games was higher than it is now after five games. The Chiefs have their bye this week, so all our bad teams will be caught up with each other by next week.
| WORST TOTAL DVOA AFTER FOUR GAMES |
WORST DEFENSIVE DVOA AFTER FOUR GAMES |
|||||
| 1999 | CLE | -68.0% | 2008 | DET | 47.2% | |
| 2001 | WAS | -67.4% | 2008 | STL | 40.5% | |
| 2000 | CIN | -66.6% | 2006 | HOU | 39.0% | |
| 2008 | STL | -65.3% | 2007 | NYJ | 34.0% | |
| 2008 | DET | -65.2% | 1998 | PHI | 33.9% | |
| 2006 | TEN | -62.3% | 2000 | SF | 33.8% | |
| 2005 | HOU | -60.6% | 2008 | HOU | 32.5% | |
| 2002 | CIN | -58.6% | 2000 | ARI | 31.5% | |
| 1998 | PHI | -55.8% | 2001 | ARI | 31.2% | |
| 2006 | OAK | -51.9% | 2001 | BUF | 29.6% | |
| BEST TOTAL DVOA AFTER FOUR GAMES |
BEST OFFENSIVE DVOA AFTER FOUR GAMES |
|||||
| 2007 | NE | 72.4% | 1999 | WAS | 47.7% | |
| 1999 | STL | 72.3% | 2000 | IND | 47.3% | |
| 1996 | GB | 63.5% | 2007 | NE | 46.7% | |
| 2001 | STL | 58.8% | 2007 | IND | 46.1% | |
| 2005 | CIN | 58.4% | 2007 | DAL | 44.7% | |
| 2008 | NYG | 56.7% | 1998 | DEN | 43.8% | |
| 2007 | DAL | 52.1% | 2008 | NYG | 41.1% | |
| 2006 | CHI | 51.4% | 2001 | STL | 40.9% | |
| 1999 | JAC | 49.7% | 1999 | STL | 39.7% | |
| 1998 | DEN | 49.6% | 2005 | SD | 39.1% | |
Yes, that's right -- so far, the Giants have been that good. They have a better pass defense than they had a year ago, and a much, much better passing game on offense. Many NFL observers felt Eli Manning would continue to play at the high level he showed in last year's postseason, with improved confidence moving him into the upper eschelon of NFL quarterbacks. Pro Football Prospectus 2008 said Manning would put up better fantasy numbers this year because of the "third-down rebound effect." It looks like both of these things have happened. He's the clear leader of the team and as we learned this week, he can even play well without Plaxico Burress on the field. Meanwhile, the Giants offense leads the league on first down and second down and is fifth on third down. Last year, the Giants offense ranked 12th, 17th, and 23rd on those downs, respectively.
Of course, the Giants' league-leading DVOA rating comes with a bit of an asterisk, which you can figure out by looking at the second table on this page. The Giants have played the easiest schedule of opponents so far and have the league's hardest schedule of opponents over the final 12 weeks. (In fact, three NFC East teams rank 1-2-3, with Washington only 17th because they've already played three of their division games.) Right now, opponent adjustments are only 50 percent strength, so perhaps we are underestimating how much the Giants' record is about the other teams playing poorly rather than the Giants playing well.
To try to figure out the impact of the Giants' schedule on their DVOA rating, I re-ran the season so far with opponent adjustments set at 100 percent strength rather than 50 percent strength. Surprise: The Giants' DVOA rating barely changes. With full opponent adjustments, the Giants would have a 41.0% rating on offense, basically the same, and a -11.0% rating on defense, slightly worse. They would still lead the league in total DVOA by more than a dozen percentage points. The opponent adjustments are weaker than you would expect in part because Washington has played so well since their awful opening night performance against the Giants. With every good game the Redskins play, the Giants' DVOA for that game gets better and better. Did the Giants dominate a team that was actually very good? Or did they dominate a team that had no idea what it was doing with a new offense, and wasn't anywhere near as good as the team that beat Dallas and Philadelphia the last two weeks? Your answer to that question is going to be entirely subjective.
What we do know is that every team that has started as strong as the 2008 Giants has gone on to have a pretty darn good season. Big Blue is for real and has to be considered one of this year's Super Bowl favorites -- unless an opposing defensive lineman tears Eli Manning's ACL at the start of the first postseason game.
One more fun note: Reggie Bush's two punt return touchdowns raise New Orleans from 22nd to second in special teams DVOA. But what's interesting is that the Saints already ranked third in punt return value before Week 5. They are mediocre in every other area of special teams, but now have more than twice as much punt return value (18.3 points) as the team that ranks second, Buffalo (8.8 points).
Links:
[1] http://www.footballoutsiders.com/methods#dvoa
[2] http://www.footballoutsiders.com/glossary#estimated_wins
[3] http://www.footballoutsiders.com/glossary#variance