*Amkalytics: Introducing the "Bad Time" Matrix for Defensive Dominance - Printable Version +- International Simulation Football League (https://forums.sim-football.com) +-- Forum: Community (https://forums.sim-football.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5) +--- Forum: Media (https://forums.sim-football.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=37) +---- Forum: Graded Articles (https://forums.sim-football.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=38) +---- Thread: *Amkalytics: Introducing the "Bad Time" Matrix for Defensive Dominance (/showthread.php?tid=48990)

*Amkalytics: Introducing the "Bad Time" Matrix for Defensive Dominance - Amkamkamk - 01-01-2024 How does one fill the dead time between Christmas (for those who celebrate) and New Year’s Eve (for the Gregorians among us)? If you’re a degenerate, you fire up Excel to make up charts and graphs about The Dots while the laundry piles up and the dishes sit in the sink. Welcome back to Amkalytics, where I recklessly and (most likely incorrectly) try to make sense of DSFL data in service of sweet, sweet forum cash. In this installment, we’re looking at the defensive side of the ball. Introducing The “Bad Time Matrix”. It’s a crude tool for looking at each team's defense by mapping (a lazy version of) Points Allowed per Play and borrowing from the Havoc Rate stat,I’ve done a quick and dirty version that looks at the stats the Sim neatly pulls out per team: TFLs, Sacks, FFs, Interceptions, Safeties, and Passes Defended. Higher on the Havoc = more disruptive players. Lower on the Points per Play = Less points allowed per play. Skip this part if you don’t care about “methodology” (lol): Havoc Rate: I divide that above-counting stats by the number of defensive snaps each team is on the field for (I’m not taking the time to even THINK about special teams). To make it cleaner, I compared every team’s Havoc Rate to the average. On this chart, having a “.15” Havoc rate means their Havoc Rate is 15% higher than the average. I didn’t weigh any of the players. Obviously safeties and interceptions have more impact on the game than TFLs or Passes Defended. However, I am nowhere near smart enough to do anything of that complexity. Points Allowed per Play: See above, but even easier. Take a team’s points allowed, divide by number of defensive snaps, and find the difference from the average Points Allowed per Play. I did NOT sus out special teams TDs or defensive touchdowns (As in, if Offense A throws a pick-six to Defense B, Defense A is on the hook for those points in this graphic). This is a bummer, but I’m convincing myself it doesn’t change the data much. How to Read this Graph: - Negative numbers on the X-axis: GOOD. That means that allow less points than other teams do. Teams on the right hand side allow more points - Negative numbers on the Y-Axis: Less Havoc plays. The higher a team is on the Y axis, the higher rate (relative to the other teams in the DSFL) of Havoc plays. “I thought sports were supposed to be fun..” High Havoc, Low Points per Play  Tijuana Luchadores  : Havoc Index: .17, PAPP Index: -.28 Havoc Rate: 22.35% Points Allowed per Play: .26 Playing Tijuana on defense sucks so bad. Three teams average 62 defensive snaps per game: Tijuana, London, and Norfolk. As we’ll get into later, Norfolk and London give up more points than average in the DSFL -- so part of that is due to chunk plays. Tijuana averages fewer plays because they get their defense off the field. Tijuana is 2nd in TFLs, 2nd in Forced Fumbles, and 1st in Interceptions, which is more impressive when they have 60 fewer defensive snaps than most other teams in the league. Offenses playing Tijuana have yet to score 24 points, and if they can punt without turning the ball over, it’s a victory. Woof.  Dallas Birddogs  : Havoc Index: .15, PAPP Index: -.25 Havoc Rate: 22.4% Points Allowed per Play: .27 All my homies hate the Dallas Birddogs. Did you see how they did my Grey Ducks? I’m filing a formal inquiry with the sim team to investigate this past game. I ran a version of this chart after Week 10, and the Birddogs were a middle-of-the-road Havoc team .. AND THEN: 4 Interceptions 3 Forced Fumbles 17 (!!!!) Passed Defended (About one in every three passes thrown) 1 Safety 6 Sacks (and 1 extra TFL for good measure) 43% of the defensive snaps were Havoc snaps. This isn’t a defense; this is a targeted harassment campaign. My child was weeping, not understanding why someone would do this. We used to be a proper country. I will never forgive. #honkoganda Stressful, but not a Bad Time: High(er) Havoc, Average Defense  Minnesota Grey Ducks .05 Havoc Index, .04 PApP Index Havoc Rate: 20.14% Points Allowed per Play: .37 Do the Grey Ducks have the third-worst defense in the DSFL right now? Yes. Are they the only above-average Havoc team to have below-average defense? Yes. Are they the bravest team in the DSFL? Absolutely. Anyone can play aggressive defense when it saves points, but who else dares to play it and have it NOT work? The Grey Ducks have what we in the business call moral clarity and the courage of our convictions. Do the Grey Ducks want a three-and-out? No. We want to take a pick-six to the house or die trying. I only regret that my player has less than two plays of consequence in each game. #Honkoganda  Portland Pythons  : .01 Havoc Index, -.06 PApP Index Havoc Rate: 19.27% Points Allowed per Play: .37 Our Zen masters, The Portland Pythons, are again almost in the dead center of the graph. It is truly, incredible to witness the commitment to collective balance and unity. The only category that Portland leads in the Havoc stats is Passes Defended, which leads to the gain or loss of no yards. They are almost exactly on the league average for Havoc rate and have an ever so slightly above average offense. While other teams have better-scoring defenses, the Pythons are the last team in the “High Havoc”/”Low Points” part of the graph, which counts for something! A Frustrating, Grinding Time: Low Havoc, Low Points per Play   Kansas City Coyotes  : -.07 Havoc Index, -.10 PApP Index Havoc Rate: 17.85% Points Allowed per Play: .32 One day I’ll find a less time-consuming way to look at Success Rate/Stuff Rate for defenses and Red Zone rates because despite being in the lower half of defenses for yards allowed in the DSFL -- the Coyotes don’t really give up that many points. They are last in TFL, middle of the road for sacks and interceptions, but here they are -- holding their own and sitting atop the best defense in the DSFL North. It’s radiating “starting the paper the night before it’s due” college undergrad energy: It might not be pretty, and at times it might look like the whole project is going to be a mess, but they pull through! The most points they’ve allowed this season? 27 points to the Pre-Ordained Chosen Ones, the Minnesota Grey Ducks. #Honkoganda  Bondi Beach Buccaneers  : -.05 Havoc Index, -.19 PapP Index Havoc Rate: 18.22% Points Allowed per Play: .29 Points Okay, take everything I said about Kansas City, but ramp it up. BBB leads the DSFL in sacks and has the 2nd best run defense in the league. Outside of being lit up by the white-hot Birddogs, the Buccaneers have controlled most teams this season. They’re the 3rd best team in the league…and the third-best team in their conference. Two of their linebackers are in the top 5 in the DSFL for tackles (The Grey Ducks’ own Ali Star is in first. #Honkoganda), and they’ve done a great job keeping a lid on teams despite only having (checks notes) 4 interceptions this season. Dippin’ Dots: Low Havoc, High Points per Play  London Royals  : -.10 Havoc Index, .41 PApP Index Havoc Rate: 17.24% Points Allowed per Play: .48 points per Play  Norfolk Seawolves  : -.15 Havoc Index, .43 PApP Index Havoc Rate: 16.16% Points Allowed per Play: .50 Points per Play I am not a data scientist, a mathematician, or a statistician. This chart is all fun-time goof-around stuff. The Sim does weird things, and one hole in a game plan can stomp a hole in your game. Norfolk and London are both on the receiving end of the top 4 highest scoring offensive outputs this season in the first 3 weeks. Week 1: Kansas City unloaded 62 points on London Week 2: Tijuana put 48 up on Norfolk Week 3: Dallas did 45 on Norfolk, TIJ dropped 41 on London While it hasn’t been the best season for Norfolk or London, both teams showed serious signs of life this past week. In Week 11, London beat Bondi, and Norfolk hung tight (and was pretty stingy!) against Kansas City. Both teams have a chance to vent out some frustration in their upcoming week 12 match-up! RE: Amkalytics: Introducing the "Bad Time" Matrix for Defensive Dominance - Baron1898 - 01-01-2024 Pythons are truly the paragons of perfect mediocrity RE: Amkalytics: Introducing the "Bad Time" Matrix for Defensive Dominance - Bamford13 - 01-01-2024 Lmao Portland is the definition of mid RE: Amkalytics: Introducing the "Bad Time" Matrix for Defensive Dominance - LtHudz - 01-01-2024 All I take away from this is... GREYDUCKS GOIN TO DA ULTIMINI!!!! LETS GOOOOOO!!!! HONK HONK HONK HONK RE: Amkalytics: Introducing the "Bad Time" Matrix for Defensive Dominance - Tmoney6996 - 01-01-2024 Man, all these Amkalytics are saying NOR is bad. I still think it's all just bad luck on there part. Definitely no underlying metrics or anything playing a part here. RE: *Amkalytics: Introducing the "Bad Time" Matrix for Defensive Dominance - lemonoppy - 01-04-2024 The Pythons are the control