ESPN Team Efficiencies Update, 2017 Week 2
The updated ESPN team efficiency ratings have been posted, and as you might expect after managing to not lose to Cincinnati, Michigan drops 12 spots to #31 overall. So, this makes even more room for improvement than M had after beating Florida. The U-M splits are offense, #68 (down from #59); defense, #12 (down from #3); and special teams, #65 (down from #37). Mediocre in all be defense, which itself is looking markedly less elite than it had initially.
Of U-M's other 2017 opponents, MARYLAND now looks the strongest at #6 overall, followed right behind by Penn State at #7. Next week's matchup, Air Force, is holding up at #15, which constitute M's strongest opponent to date by a wide margin, since the Gators pull up at a perfectly mediocre #69. After its loss, OSU dropped as well, just not as much as M, and so the edge M once had on the Buckeyes is no more. Oh yea, Sparty climbs 18 spots to #34, just 3 behind M to reclaim its long lost status of Best Little Brother Team in the State of Michigan. Don't look now, but Sparty has both a more efficient offense and defense than Michigan. Meanwhile, closer still is Indiana at #33.
Overall, 2 of Michigan's opponents are in the top ten, 4 are in the upper quartile of the ratings; all but 3 are in the upper half; and only one (Rutgers) is in the lowest quartile.
Here's a brief synopsis of the ratings, or click the link above to see the whole list &/or sort by category:
RK
|
TEAM
|
OFF
|
DEF
|
S/T
|
O'ALL
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1
|
Oklahoma, Big 12
|
97.0
|
88.1
|
18.9
|
96.2
|
2
|
Miss St, SEC
|
72.2
|
98.5
|
72.4
|
95.8
|
3
|
Alabama, SEC
|
82.2
|
90.3
|
91.6
|
95.2
|
4
|
Oklahoma State, Big 12
|
94.7
|
89.6
|
28.0
|
95.1
|
5
|
LSU, SEC
|
91.5
|
88.1
|
39.5
|
93.9
|
6
|
Maryland, Big Ten
|
96.0
|
77.8
|
66.8
|
93.4
|
7
|
Penn State, Big Ten
|
74.1
|
88.4
|
88.6
|
92.4
|
8
|
Duke, ACC
|
83.5
|
94.7
|
19.9
|
91.0
|
9
|
Vanderbilt, SEC
|
85.5
|
84.1
|
58.4
|
90.8
|
10
|
TCU, Big 12
|
74.5
|
85.0
|
88.7
|
89.7
|
15
|
Air Force, MW
|
88.4
|
72.4
|
34.5
|
85.8
|
23
|
OSU, Big Ten
|
70.4
|
71.3
|
73.8
|
79.1
|
31
|
Michigan, Big Ten
|
48.5
|
90.0
|
53.2
|
75.8
|
33
|
Indiana, Big Ten
|
63.3
|
64.1
|
76.7
|
72.2
|
34
|
Michigan State, Big Ten
|
50.9
|
90.9
|
23.2
|
72.1
|
38 | Notre Dame, Indep. | 60.1 | 72.7 | 52.6 | 70.0 |
40
|
Purdue, Big Ten
|
73.7
|
69.6
|
17.4
|
69.4
|
41
|
Wisconsin, Big Ten
|
55.6
|
80.0
|
39.0
|
68.2
|
45
|
Minnesota, Big Ten
|
51.0
|
71.0
|
65.8
|
66.2
|
66
|
W Michigan, MAC
|
56.8
|
40.9
|
76.2
|
54.6
|
69
|
Florida, SEC
|
12.2
|
84.3
|
35.1
|
53.4
|
74
|
E Michigan, MAC
|
34.2
|
74.8
|
30.7
|
51.1
|
92
|
Cent Michigan, MAC
|
38.5
|
41.8
|
44.5
|
36.8
|
96
|
Cincinnati, American
|
27.2
|
45.3
|
57.1
|
35.0
|
102
|
Rutgers, Big Ten
|
23.2
|
56.0
|
31.0
|
30.9
|
September 11th, 2017 at 3:23 PM ^
What's the difference between FPI and FPI team efficiency (also in the link you have, and also below)? BTW, in "pure FPI", the #1 team as ....... the 1-1 OSU Buckeyes. That makes sense!
I don't discount the possibility ESPN has no formula and makes this up as they go.
September 11th, 2017 at 3:31 PM ^
I think the pure FPI this early in the season is still heavily reliant on things like returning production and recruiting rankings.
September 11th, 2017 at 3:44 PM ^
per the ESPN references:
Team efficiencies are based on the point contributions of each unit to the team's scoring margin, on a per-play basis. The values are adjusted for strength of schedule and down-weighted for "garbage time" (based on win probability). The scale goes from 0 to 100; higher numbers are better and the average is roughly 50 for all categories.
The Football Power Index (FPI) is a measure of team strength that is meant to be the best predictor of a team's performance going forward for the rest of the season. FPI represents how many points above or below average a team is. Projected results are based on 10,000 simulations of the rest of the season using FPI, results to date, and the remaining schedule.
My take regarding the Efficiency Metrics is that in general, the longer it takes a team to reach garbage time, the lower the efficiency score. That said, in the case of M's game with Cincy, it's damn near impossible for M to raise its efficiency aggregates since it's already starting out at a win likelihood in the high 90's. However, it's really easy to bring efficiency aggregates down, by screwing around in the 2nd and 3rd quarters and generally doing things that end up looking like this:
September 11th, 2017 at 4:28 PM ^
however - looking at your chart Michigan has an (approximately) 96% chance of winning from the game's opening snap. Which, sure, Michigan is simply a better football team than Cincinnati.
But that means the "a priori" difference between teams is baked into the win probability metric. If I'm reading things right, their algorithm could be construing the entire first half of the game of the UC game as "garbage time" for Michigan, given their very high win probabilities?
A ratings algorithm should discount "garbage time" drives, of course. But the first half (and 3rd quarter) of the UC game was far from "garbage time."
If that's what FPI is doing, that's a very fundamental flaw.
September 12th, 2017 at 1:15 PM ^
Yea, I hear ya. It's unclear exactly how the ESPN Effciency scheme applies the concept of garbage time. What is known is how the concept is applied in equivalent points schemes such as S&P+, which defines the garbage time constraint as:
...a score differential within 28 points in the first quarter, 24 in the second, 21 in the third, or 16 in the fourth -- either when a team is winning or losing.
By this definition, the MvCincy game did not enter garbage time until the last pick-6 with 4:21 remaining, which is less than 10% of the game time left.
Getting back to the win probability basis, since the initial probability has UM as a heavy favorite, the win probability definition of garbage time would seem to start at some likelihood even higher than that, and increase still further over the 60 minute game time (so we're talking about probabilities ranging from 99% to 99.99% to reach garbage time given the intial conditions). With that fuzzy notion in mind, and overlaying it onto the chart above, UM didn't reach garbage time until ...sometime late in the game? In the end it means that all that putzing around on offense by Michigan actually counted in terms of fancy stats, and counted in a deleterious way. This is what I was trying to get at by suggesting it's easier to do harm to a team's efficiency score in games like this than it is to improve it.
September 11th, 2017 at 3:25 PM ^
Here are the things I learned in week 2 in college football:
1) Rutgers is still Rutgers;
2) It is hard to plant flags on artificial surfaces;
3) Brian Kelly is still an asshole. However, I did not learn if asshole is Misogynistic.
September 11th, 2017 at 3:39 PM ^
September 11th, 2017 at 3:44 PM ^
Didn't we learn it was misandrist?
September 11th, 2017 at 3:25 PM ^
Two weeks is an entirely insufficient amount of data. I guarantee this team finishes top 5 in defensive efficiency and top 20 in overall efficiency.
Also, all models are flawed, and S&P+ metrics are more telling than ESPN's.
September 11th, 2017 at 3:44 PM ^
unforced fumbles and unforced overthrows do not make one efficient.
I'm hopeful offensive efficiency will improve as the season continues; much of that potential improvement depends on the play of a single man.
September 11th, 2017 at 5:52 PM ^
an 87 yard TFL apparently makes one very efficient on defense.
https://www.sbnation.com/2017/9/9/16282358/louisiana-tech-fumble-missis…
September 11th, 2017 at 3:29 PM ^
September 11th, 2017 at 3:30 PM ^
Based on my data analysis, I predict Michigan will score 34.5 points per game this season. My model suggests that there is only a tiny error margin to this prediction, so I predict that this prediction will be virtually perfect.
#BadStatsSmallSamplesFuckYeah!
September 11th, 2017 at 3:32 PM ^
So don't read too much into their ranking.
September 11th, 2017 at 3:34 PM ^
Duke solidified their #8 ranking by beating North Carolina Central University. Thow out the record books when those cross-town rivals square off!
September 11th, 2017 at 3:49 PM ^
They actually gained more yards against Northwestern this week than they did vs NC Central.
September 11th, 2017 at 3:51 PM ^
I thought their week 2 demolishment of Northwestern was impressive. They are a top 30 team to me.
September 11th, 2017 at 5:28 PM ^
Fair. But they're not the 8th best team in the country.
September 11th, 2017 at 3:47 PM ^
Rooting for Maryland this season except for in one game.
September 11th, 2017 at 3:51 PM ^
Why, did Maryland kill Nolan Ulizio's cat or something?
September 11th, 2017 at 4:09 PM ^
As long as we're discussing too-early ratings systems, Michigan dropped from #3 to #4 (jumped by Oklahoma) in the Massey Ratings system. We are a favorite in all remaining games, with the closest being PSU (51% likelihood of winning). 80%+ in the four games between now and then.
September 11th, 2017 at 4:21 PM ^
September 11th, 2017 at 4:24 PM ^
I'll wait until they play some better competition, but they do seem to be much improved compared to the team that barely squeaked by a 3-8 FCS team in Furman last year. Lewerke seems like he has some high potential. I think depth is still a huge issue for them though. Injuries are unavoidable.
I'm still crossing my fingers for the collapse though. Long live the 3-9 jokes!
September 11th, 2017 at 5:01 PM ^
I watched both games. Bowling Green would have been a dogfight if their QB wouldn't have overthrown at least three blow coverages, and they just lost to South Dakota. MSU is going to be slightly improved because Lewerke makes them two dimensional and is a legitimate run threat. He reminds me of Drew Stanton with less agility or a Great Value Jake Locker. They certainly aren't good and have no chance to compete for the division. I'm thinking 6-6 is likely but 7-5 is the ceiling. They will probably get to a 13th game and play a MAC team in a shit-tier bowl.
September 11th, 2017 at 5:56 PM ^
I tried watching them this weekend, but something was wrong with my BTN HD feed. It was only right before half that I remembered I have a BTN SD channel. Being forced to watch MSU in SD seems about right. I think last year was an aberration and they will at least be bowl eligible this year. I'm not wandering any further out on that limb.
September 12th, 2017 at 11:21 AM ^
I watched most of both. They look incredibly basic, slow, and predictable. That will work against inferior talent but they're gonna get railed by most P5 teams.
September 11th, 2017 at 4:58 PM ^
Totally insufficient data considering teams like Miss St have played only cream puffs.
Also...Michigan has only a 90.0 rating on defense. Schwaaaaat??
September 11th, 2017 at 6:16 PM ^
MSU looks like a 6 win team. Their rush defense is better but their offense and pass defense is still iffy.
September 11th, 2017 at 8:11 PM ^
September 12th, 2017 at 11:09 AM ^
Look at that efficiently high defense because of it