UK Football's Prediction According to Science

[UKani]

I know a teacher who teaches is math students by using sports numbers. Its all basically sports analytics and looking at things scientifically by the numbers and by efficiency. I'll first say that I apologize for not being able to talk the lingo and show all the bars and graphs that I was shown before writing this post. I will basically tell you guys the summery of what it showed.

According to the numbers UK actually performed the way that the numbers said that they would performed with an exception to a couple of games, but the 5-7 record was about right for that team last year. This season the numbers support that UK's offense should be in the upper half of the SEC in offense and should average around 43 points per game (correction they should average almost 40 points a game, the upper half of the SEC averaged 43 a game), which about what the top half of the SEC was averaging last season. The bad side of it is that UK's defense will still continue to be below average in the SEC, however are getting closer to be the middle of the pack than they were last year, but not by much more. All in all, by the numbers it shows that UK should be looking at a 7-5 regular season record with just 3 SEC wins and the opportunity to win its 8th game in a bowl game.

 

[BDamCat]

That would be great!

 

[BlueRaider22]

Sounds great.

You're a computer guy, UKani. See if you can post the data and let some of the number guys on here help interpret it.

 

[UKErik]

UK's offense will be better. UK's defense won't be anywhere near middle of the pack though, IMHO. Well, maybe if we get markedly better play at corner.

Even with a poor defense though, UK could win 7-8 games. Kentucky's defense was horrid last season, yet they were just two dropped INT's away from 7-5.

GBB!!!

 

[WildCard]

I know a teacher who teaches is math students by using sports numbers...

First of all, don't bring science into this! Secondly, good for him. I have always believed that with math, for most kids, you have to bring math class into the real world.

Such projections are fun but can be pretty dicey. The "master" of this game is Phil Steele. In his magazine he always does a "projected stats" for the coming year. Last year he was +/- 3 points on 11 of the 14 SEC teams and missed by about +/- 8 points on the other 3. That's pretty good.

Regarding your friend's numbers, as a simple "sanity check" of that "projection", it can be compared against recent history. If the Cats average 43 PPG next year that would be an increase of 16.5 PPG over 2014. And a 16.5 PPG increase is pretty big number.

Last season only 3 of 128 teams (AP State, TCU and LA Tech) increased their scoring by 16.5 points or more over the previous year. Of the 13 teams that increased by 10 or more PPG only 2 averaged more than UK did in 2014 (EDIT: 26.5) although Arky State just missed at 26.4). The average 2013 scoring of those 13 "big movers" was 18.8 point, 9 points less than the overall 2013 scoring average. This underscores the fairly obvious point that the biggest increases are likely to come from teams that did not score well the previous year. Naturally, one should look at more than 1 year (and I have done so from time to time) but the bottom line is pretty much the same; an increase of 16.5 PPG is a lot.

When thinking about scoring, we must remember the Cats scored 6 "non-offense" TDs last year. I cannot find that metric as a stat but that has to be among the nation's best. that is 3.5 PPG by the defense. So while it is reasonable to expect the "true" offense to score better next year, it is unlikely the Cats will score that much on defense/STs. I expect the offense to be better. It will be interesting to see how Steele projects the offense next year but I suspect it will be well less than 43 PPG.

Peace

 

[Rhavicc]

UK's offense will be better. UK's defense won't be anywhere near middle of the pack though, IMHO. Well, maybe if we get markedly better play at corner.

Even with a poor defense though, UK could win 7-8 games. Kentucky's defense was horrid last season, yet they were just two dropped INT's away from 7-5.

GBB!!!

As long as they keep the ball in front of them (which they're very, very good at. 2nd in the SEC in that regard), then I'm not worried about the CB's as much. Stoops has been openly enthusiastic about the improvement of every other defensive position.

 

[jimmy cowboy]

I know a teacher who teaches is math students by using sports numbers. Its all basically sports analytics and looking at things scientifically by the numbers and by efficiency. I'll first say that I apologize for not being able to talk the lingo and show all the bars and graphs that I was shown before writing this post. I will basically tell you guys the summery of what it showed.

According to the numbers UK actually performed the way that the numbers said that they would performed with an exception to a couple of games, but the 5-7 record was about right for that team last year. This season the numbers support that UK's offense should be in the upper half of the SEC in offense and should average around 43 points per game, which about what the top half of the SEC was averaging last season. The bad side of it is that UK's defense will still continue to be below average in the SEC, however are getting closer to be the middle of the pack. All in all, by the numbers it shows that UK should be looking at a 7-5 regular season record with just 3 SEC wins and the opportunity to win its 8th game in a bowl game.

Hope you are right, that would be awesome!

 

[SanAntonioCat]

After many varied and different perspectives on the 2015 season, it would appear 6-6 to 7-5 is the consensus for the upcoming season. I cannot disagree. Bottom line, a successful 2015 season helps in every way from recruiting to state pride to higher expectations for future years.

 

[UKani]

I goofed up. The math teacher that I know who ran the numbers is doing this off of points per possession. Which is all efficiency stuff.

He said that the top half of the SEC averages about 43 points a game, but that UK should average almost 40 points a game. He said that the improvement should be around +0.46points per possession.

As for the defense he said that UK's improvement from year 1 under Stoops to year 2 under Stoops has barely out paced the median improvement of the SEC. This season UK should get even better I'm the efficiency department on defense but should still be below the SEC Median.

However he's sticking to a 7-5 record with 3 SEC wins.

 

[UKani]

First of all, don't bring science into this! Secondly, good for him. I have always believed that with math, for most kids, you have to bring math class into the real world.

Such projections are fun but can be pretty dicey. The "master" of this game is Phil Steele. In his magazine he always does a "projected stats" for the coming year. Last year he was +/- 3 points on 11 of the 14 SEC teams and missed by about +/- 8 points on the other 3. That's pretty good.

Regarding your friend's numbers, as a simple "sanity check" of that "projection", it can be compared against recent history. If the Cats average 43 PPG next year that would be an increase of 16.5 PPG over 2014. And a 16.5 PPG increase is pretty big number.

Last season only 3 of 128 teams (AP State, TCU and LA Tech) increased their scoring by 16.5 points or more over the previous year. Of the 13 teams that increased by 10 or more PPG only 2 averaged more than UK did in 2014 (28.5) although Arky State just missed at 26.4). The average 2013 scoring of those 13 "big movers" was 18.8 point, 9 points less than the overall 2013 scoring average. This underscores the fairly obvious point that the biggest increases are likely to come from teams that did not score well the previous year. Naturally, one should look at more than 1 year (and I have done so from time to time) but the bottom line is pretty much the same; an increase of 16.5 PPG is a lot.

When thinking about scoring, we must remember the Cats scored 6 "non-offense" TDs last year. I cannot find that metric as a stat but that has to be among the nation's best. that is 3.5 PPG by the defense. So while it is reasonable to expect the "true" offense to score better next year, it is unlikely the Cats will score that much on defense/STs. I expect the offense to be better. It will be interesting to see how Steele projects the offense next year but I suspect it will be well less than 43 PPG.

Peace

Wildcard, I did state some incorrect stuff in the original post, but I'll tell you I'll take his numbers as he's been very accurate on UK over the past 4 or 5 years. He didn't do all of the SEC, but he did do UK and he has been really accurate by tracking efficiency numbers.

 

[UKani]

Sounds great.

You're a computer guy, UKani. See if you can post the data and let some of the number guys on here help interpret it.

He posted over on TCP, you might have seen him over there. He's a UK professor.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I know a teacher who teaches is math students by using sports numbers. Its all basically sports analytics and looking at things scientifically by the numbers and by efficiency. I'll first say that I apologize for not being able to talk the lingo and show all the bars and graphs that I was shown before writing this post. I will basically tell you guys the summery of what it showed.

According to the numbers UK actually performed the way that the numbers said that they would performed with an exception to a couple of games, but the 5-7 record was about right for that team last year. This season the numbers support that UK's offense should be in the upper half of the SEC in offense and should average around 43 points per game (correction they should average almost 40 points a game, the upper half of the SEC averaged 43 a game), which about what the top half of the SEC was averaging last season. The bad side of it is that UK's defense will still continue to be below average in the SEC, however are getting closer to be the middle of the pack than they were last year, but not by much more. All in all, by the numbers it shows that UK should be looking at a 7-5 regular season record with just 3 SEC wins and the opportunity to win its 8th game in a bowl game.

Where are you getting your information from? I just looked at scores of Bama, OM, MSST and none of them averaged 43 a game, or even 40 last year and thats scoring a bunch against us SBS teams.

 

[UKWinsAgainYep]

UK's offense will be better. UK's defense won't be anywhere near middle of the pack though, IMHO. Well, maybe if we get markedly better play at corner.

Even with a poor defense though, UK could win 7-8 games. Kentucky's defense was horrid last season, yet they were just two dropped INT's away from 7-5.

GBB!!!

I still can't get over the choke drop in the UL game. One of the worst chokes in UK football history. That's considering 25+ years.

 

[BlueRaider22]

He posted over on TCP, you might have seen him over there. He's a UK professor.

Great. I read that a while back. Great thread. He certainly is knowledgeable.

 

[CATFANFOLIFE87]

First of all, don't bring science into this! Secondly, good for him. I have always believed that with math, for most kids, you have to bring math class into the real world.

Such projections are fun but can be pretty dicey. The "master" of this game is Phil Steele. In his magazine he always does a "projected stats" for the coming year. Last year he was +/- 3 points on 11 of the 14 SEC teams and missed by about +/- 8 points on the other 3. That's pretty good.

Regarding your friend's numbers, as a simple "sanity check" of that "projection", it can be compared against recent history. If the Cats average 43 PPG next year that would be an increase of 16.5 PPG over 2014. And a 16.5 PPG increase is pretty big number.

Last season only 3 of 128 teams (AP State, TCU and LA Tech) increased their scoring by 16.5 points or more over the previous year. Of the 13 teams that increased by 10 or more PPG only 2 averaged more than UK did in 2014 (28.5) although Arky State just missed at 26.4). The average 2013 scoring of those 13 "big movers" was 18.8 point, 9 points less than the overall 2013 scoring average. This underscores the fairly obvious point that the biggest increases are likely to come from teams that did not score well the previous year. Naturally, one should look at more than 1 year (and I have done so from time to time) but the bottom line is pretty much the same; an increase of 16.5 PPG is a lot.

When thinking about scoring, we must remember the Cats scored 6 "non-offense" TDs last year. I cannot find that metric as a stat but that has to be among the nation's best. that is 3.5 PPG by the defense. So while it is reasonable to expect the "true" offense to score better next year, it is unlikely the Cats will score that much on defense/STs. I expect the offense to be better. It will be interesting to see how Steele projects the offense next year but I suspect it will be well less than 43 PPG.

Peace

UK increased its PPG by 9 points a game last year which was still in the top 15 in the country. People like to throw the blame on Neal Brown because he made some questionable calls at times but he had to use unconventional methods considering the youth, inexperience, and lack of depth he had last year. I expect a similar jump from last season this year. Dawson has a lot going for him with an experienced QB, a more experinced supporting cast, and added depth across the board

 

[ukalumni00]

I still can't get over the choke drop in the UL game. One of the worst chokes in UK football history. That's considering 25+ years.

Was disappointing but the team simply did not know how to win. Teams who know how to win beats Florida and UofL. As these players get more experience and start to see more wins, collectively, they will start to make the plays that winning teams make.

 

[WildCard]

I goofed up. The math teacher that I know who ran the numbers is doing this off of points per possession. Which is all efficiency stuff.

He said that the top half of the SEC averages about 43 points a game, but that UK should average almost 40 points a game. He said that the improvement should be around +0.46points per possession....

OK, that makes a more sense but there is still a hiccup in those numbers. Lots of guys use points per play in their analysis. Points per possession is really a basketball metric. In football "points per possession" is really "points per drive". A team typically has 12 to 14 drives (or possessions if you prefer) per game. An increase of .5 points per possession/drive would raise UK's game scoring by 7 points per game which is a more reasonable reasonable expectation but still pretty good jump. In 2014 there were only 25 teams that made a 7 point or greater jump from 2013.

Like Grumpy I am totally puzzled at that 43 points per game number. Last year GA led the SEC in scoring averaging 41.3 points per game. Next highest were AL and MSU with 36.9 points per game. ???

UK increased its PPG by 9 points a game last year which was still in the top 15 in the country. People like to throw the blame on Neal Brown because he made some questionable calls at times but he had to use unconventional methods considering the youth, inexperience, and lack of depth he had last year. I expect a similar jump from last season this year...

Against FBS competition (I frequently use a stat site that excludes games against non FBS opponents) the Cats jumped from 18.0 in 2013 to 26.5 points/game in 2014. That (8.5 points) is a good jump. Aside from the "football argument" that a second year offense (with mostly the same players) should be more "efficient" than the first year offense, the Cats were making that jump from a spot well below the national scoring average (about 28 points per game). Of the 66 teams that averaged 28 or more points per game in 2013, only 3 teams improved by more than 7 points in 2014. IOW, it will be "harder" (certainly not impossible) to make a corresponding jump this year.

Also as I previously noted, consider the impact of "non-offensive points". The Cats were tied at #5 nationally last year with 4 Pick 6 balls off "just" 15 picks (#23 nationally). Only 4 teams picked 5 balls for scores. The SEC standards for defense (LSU and AL) had just 1 Pick 6 play between them. UofL tied for the lead nationally with 26 INTs but had only 1 Pick 6 play. And while they had no ST scores the Cats ran back 2 fumbles for scores. That is 42 defensive/ST points (average of 3.5 points per game) of a total of 350 points scored. IOW, 12% of the offense came directly from defensive scores. I think VPI in their prime would have been more than happy with that defensive point production.

Peace

 

[UKani]

OK, that makes a more sense but there is still a hiccup in those numbers. Lots of guys use points per play in their analysis. Points per possession is really a basketball metric. In football "points per possession" is really "points per drive". A team typically has 12 to 14 drives (or possessions if you prefer) per game. An increase of .5 points per possession/drive would raise UK's game scoring by 7 points per game which is a more reasonable reasonable expectation but still pretty good jump. In 2014 there were only 25 teams that made a 7 point or greater jump from 2013.

Like Grumpy I am totally puzzled at that 43 points per game number. Last year GA led the SEC in scoring averaging 41.3 points per game. Next highest were AL and MSU with 36.9 points per game. ???



Against FBS competition (I frequently use a stat site that excludes games against non FBS opponents) the Cats jumped from 18.0 in 2013 to 26.5 points/game in 2014. That (8.5 points) is a good jump. Aside from the "football argument" that a second year offense (with mostly the same players) should be more "efficient" than the first year offense, the Cats were making that jump from a spot well below the national scoring average (about 28 points per game). Of the 66 teams that averaged 28 or more points per game in 2013, only 3 teams improved by more than 7 points in 2014. IOW, it will be "harder" (certainly not impossible) to make a corresponding jump this year.

Also as I previously noted, consider the impact of "non-offensive points". The Cats were tied at #5 nationally last year with 4 Pick 6 balls off "just" 15 picks (#23 nationally). Only 4 teams picked 5 balls for scores. The SEC standards for defense (LSU and AL) had just 1 Pick 6 play between them. UofL tied for the lead nationally with 26 INTs but had only 1 Pick 6 play. And while they had no ST scores the Cats ran back 2 fumbles for scores. That is 42 defensive/ST points (average of 3.5 points per game) of a total of 350 points scored. IOW, 12% of the offense came directly from defensive scores. I think VPI in their prime would have been more than happy with that defensive point production.

Peace

Well I'll tell you this, the FEI uses points per possession to calculate team scoring efficiency. This is the method most widely used in sports analytics. Nevertheless it's the same thing as points per drive. Now if you are looking at yards efficiency then they user yards per play, which is how they calculate QBs passing efficiency.
As for the 43 points per game for the top half of the SEC I'll have to text my man to see what he means by that or if it's a typo, because as I checked points average Georgia did average 41.3 and that was tops in the SEC. So I'll see what he's talking about on that.

 

[WildCard]

Well I'll tell you this, the FEI uses points per possession to calculate team scoring efficiency. This is the method most widely used in sports analytics. Nevertheless it's the same thing as points per drive. Now if you are looking at yards efficiency then they user yards per play, which is how they calculate QBs passing efficiency.
As for the 43 points per game for the top half of the SEC I'll have to text my man to see what he means by that or if it's a typo, because as I checked points average Georgia did average 41.3 and that was tops in the SEC. So I'll see what he's talking about on that.

I suppose you could use points per play or points per possession (drive) to compute an "efficiency metric" of some kind. But there would be a huge difference in the "raw number" of either metric. And, of course, if you are "projecting" from those numbers you need some kind of statistical reference as to what is meaningful (e.g., 65% of the teams that did this improved by this the following year). I'm sure your math teacher friend is aware of that.

As for the "PPP" metric, there was an earlier thread where someone cited some "PPP analysis" from a post to Larry Vaught's website. The article did not define "PPP" (i.e., points per play or points per possession) but it really made no difference as the "analysis" incorrectly interpreted the meaning of an increasing or decreasing number. I guess you could say I had already been in this discussion!

Peace

 

[jnewc2]

I know a teacher who teaches is math students by using sports numbers. Its all basically sports analytics and looking at things scientifically by the numbers and by efficiency. I'll first say that I apologize for not being able to talk the lingo and show all the bars and graphs that I was shown before writing this post. I will basically tell you guys the summery of what it showed.

According to the numbers UK actually performed the way that the numbers said that they would performed with an exception to a couple of games, but the 5-7 record was about right for that team last year. This season the numbers support that UK's offense should be in the upper half of the SEC in offense and should average around 43 points per game (correction they should average almost 40 points a game, the upper half of the SEC averaged 43 a game), which about what the top half of the SEC was averaging last season. The bad side of it is that UK's defense will still continue to be below average in the SEC, however are getting closer to be the middle of the pack than they were last year, but not by much more. All in all, by the numbers it shows that UK should be looking at a 7-5 regular season record with just 3 SEC wins and the opportunity to win its 8th game in a bowl game.

I think numbers are always a good indicator, and that projection sounds about right.

UK has almost always been an average SEC team offensively, and a bottom of the barrel team defensively. It's a good projection next year that the offense will take another step forward and be in the top half of the SEC. Whether this season goes from 6 or 7, to 7 or 8+ will depend on the defense. We can't expect the offense to try to outscore everyone like we expected last year. We have to start holding Stoops/Eliot's defense accountable.