Interesting Numbers on Turnovers

[ShotgunDawg]

There has been much discussion today about how good Ole Miss is & how they are winning. I think most reasonable people realize that Ole Miss is winning by creating turnovers, but I wanted take some time today to do some numbers crunching in an effort to gain a clearer picture of just much turnovers have impacted Ole Miss compared to other SEC West teams.

So, I took the stats from 2014 & thus far in 2015

Here is the data





Here is the meat of the numbers:

- Since the start of 2014, Ole Miss has created 42 turnovers.
- The next highest in the SEC West over that time period is Auburn at 30 & the lowest is Texas A&M at 17.
- The average in the SEC West since 2014, excluding Ole Miss, is 24.7
- MSU over the same time period has created 25 turnovers, which is about average.
- Ole Miss also has the greatest turnover margin in the SEC West over that time period at +13. The next highest is actually Arkansas of all teams at +9

So, that's the meat of the numbers.

Now the question is: Are turnovers luck or a skill?

I think the obvious answer is, they are some of both. Ole Miss absolutely plays aggressive on defense, puts pressure on the QB, runs to the ball, & hits hard. All of those attributes typically lead to more turnovers.

However, Alabama & LSU also do that & they have only gotten 25 & 22 turnovers, respectively, over that same time period.

My personal belief is that Ole Miss has a turnover creating defense, but unless the Ole Miss coaches & players are the greatest turnover producing coaches & players in the history of football, they will most certainly regress to the mean at some point.

My best analogy to this phenomenon is BABIP (Batting Average on Balls In Play) in baseball. The MLB average for BABIP is .300. Really good hitters like Miguel Cabrera, Mike Trout, Bryce Harper, etc.... will often have high BABIPS because hitting the ball hard is a skill. However, no matter how good of a hitter you are, when your BABIP gets around .380-.400, it is out of whack & bound to regress soon. I see Ole Miss' turnover margin the same & just don't think it's sustainable unless they've created some new technology or tacking technique that no one in the history of football has ever used.

[Dawg496]

Looks like you're trying to post an image from an email.. so we can't see it.

[ShotgunDawg]

Looks like you're trying to post an image from an email.. so we can't see it.

How do you post an image that isn't on the internet? Can you upload?

[Dawg496]

How do you post an image that isn't on the internet? Can you upload?

Yeah, when you reply here you can click Go advanced and click manage attachments on the next page. Or you can upload at http://imgur.com

[ShotgunDawg]

Can you see it now?

[Dawg496]

Can you see it now?

Yep! Thanks

[Dawg496]

Are your INT/Fumble numbers backwards? I don't remember any INTs for us this year but at least two fumbles, not counting the two Ross PR ones.

[Really Clark?]

Are your INT/Fumble numbers backwards? I don't remember any INTs for us this year but at least two fumbles, not counting the two Ross PR ones.

The numbers are for the defense not our offense.

[ShotgunDawg]

The numbers are for the defense not our offense.

Correct. The turnover margin includes the difference between how many turnovers we got vs how many we gave up. However, I didn't include the offensive numbers in this.

Thus far this season, Redmond & Richie have an INT, Dak has not thrown one, but we have 3 or 4 fumbles.

The main numbers to pay attention to here is Ole Miss' 42 turnovers, the next closest team's 30 turnovers, Texas A&M's division low of 17 turnovers, & how the difference between Ole Miss' 42 & Auburn's 30 is virtually the same difference between Auburn's 30 & A&M's 17.

Point is that Ole Miss is getting drastically/abnormally more turnovers than any other team in the division.

Then ask yourself if this is likely to continue at this rate.

If so, we may see a Tom Emanski type video by the Ole Miss coaches on how to create turnovers.

[Really Clark?]

Correct. The turnover margin includes the difference between how many turnovers we got vs how many we gave up. However, I didn't include the offensive numbers in this.

Thus far this season, Redmond & Richie have an INT, Dak has not thrown one, but we have 3 or 4 fumbles.

The main numbers to pay attention to here is Ole Miss' 42 turnovers, the next closest team's 30 turnovers, Texas A&M's division low of 17 turnovers, & how the difference between Ole Miss' 42 & Auburn's 30 is virtually the same difference between Auburn's 30 & A&M's 17.

Point is that Ole Miss is getting drastically/abnormally more turnovers than any other team in the division.

Then ask yourself if this is likely to continue at this rate.

If so, we may see a Tom Emanski type video by the Ole Miss coaches on how to create turnovers.

I can see what you are saying. Golson may have been your anamoly. He had 10 Int last year which was a huge spike for him and the defense from the year prior. I would be interested to see how many Elston ends up with.

[ShotgunDawg]

I can see what you are saying. Golson may have been your anamoly. He had 10 Int last year which was a huge spike for him and the defense from the year prior. I would be interested to see how many Elston ends up with.

It will interesting. It's easy to see that Ole Miss is thriving off turnovers, but the question is: is that sustainable?

LSU is thriving off of Fournette running ball, & think that's fairly sustainable. In fact, running the ball & not giving up yards are probably the two most sustainable things you can do in football that contribute to winning.

For example: I can take a rifle, blindly shoot it in the woods, & kill a deer. If I do that, does that make me a good deer hunter or is that just luck? Is that a sustainable way to continue to kill deer?

I think Ole Miss' defense contributes heavily to these turnovers, but the numbers are out of whack & I expect them to regress. Not sure if that means they'll lose a game or not

[bulldawg28]

They may not have a 10 int man this year but they put people in position to make plays. They will continue to cause turnovers with the right personnel on the field, proper positioning, attacking, and players that fit their scheme.

[Dawg496]

The numbers are for the defense not our offense.

I'm stupid. I apologize.

[ShotgunDawg]

They may not have a 10 int man this year but they put people in position to make plays. They will continue to cause turnovers with the right personnel on the field, proper positioning, attacking, and players that fit their scheme.

I don't disagree, because they are built to create turnovers. But Bama & LSU are as well & they haven't had this kind of success.

I'll just be curious to see how things go for them if teams begin to take care of the football when playing them

[Really Clark?]

They may not have a 10 int man this year but they put people in position to make plays. They will continue to cause turnovers with the right personnel on the field, proper positioning, attacking, and players that fit their scheme.

Maybe but they were not doing it prior to last year with the same system and coaching. They were middle of the pack in the SEC. Will be interesting to see if it holds. Usually it a different set of teams finishing in the top 3 every year. Heck I think we lead the league in 2012

[bulldawg28]

I don't disagree, because they are built to create turnovers. But Bama & LSU are as well & they haven't had this kind of success.

I'll just be curious to see how things go for them if teams begin to take care of the football when playing them

Ole Miss purposefully plans to take away the largest part of the field which is the middle. They crowd it both on the run and pass which is the easiest play for an offense. The outside passing is where you ideally where to attack them. However, lately they've done a good job of getting corners that can hold their own and makes it appear they have no weakness. They are a true puzzle defense . LSU relies on individual matchups to create turnovers . Bama with the 3-4 slow backers only match up well with teams like LSU and has cut back their turnovers. Plus teams have figured them out.

[ShotgunDawg]

Ole Miss purposefully plans to take away the largest part of the field which is the middle. They crowd it both on the run and pass which is the easiest play for an offense. The outside passing is where you ideally where to attack them. However, lately they've done a good job of getting corners that can hold their own and makes it appear they have no weakness. They are a true puzzle defense . LSU relies on individual matchups to create turnovers . Bama with the 3-4 slow backers only match up well with teams like LSU and has cut back their turnovers. Plus teams have figured them out.

I seriously doubt Ole Miss is schematically superior to both Bama & LSU on defense, & we know that Bama & LSU overall have better players on that side of the ball.

What's happening IMO, is that Ole Miss is taking some risks on defense that Bama & LSU don't feel like they need to take due to their talent level.

Therefore, when will teams begin to make Ole Miss pay for these risks? There is no perfect defense

[bulldawg28]

I seriously doubt Ole Miss is schematically superior to both Bama & LSU on defense, & we know that Bama & LSU overall have better players on that side of the ball.

What's happening IMO, is that Ole Miss is taking some risks on defense that Bama & LSU don't feel like they need to take due to their talent level.

Therefore, when will teams begin to make Ole Miss pay for these risks? There is no perfect defense

Lol..numbers don't lie. Teams with better skill players can take advantage of it. A&M and State match up well on the outside which is where the schematic weakness is.

[Really Clark?]

Lol..numbers don't lie. Teams with better skill players can take advantage of it. A&M and State match up well on the outside which is where the schematic weakness is.

Numbers don't lie but you can't go back and look at the top 3 teams in creating turnovers and draw conclusions that it's talent or scheme or luck. Over the last 5 years you have like 10 different teams in the top 3. Including Vandy and our 2012 team. How many of those turnovers last night had more to do with Bama. 3. Maybe 4. They may lead the league again but that would be a first in a while. I think there is a good bit luck of the bounce with some of this. Now there is something to be said about teams who do a good job in stripping the ball and creating fumbles. Nothing special there, middle of the conference. They have a great start though so if the are not in the top half at the end then they will have some games that are really tight.

[bulldawg28]

Numbers don't lie but you can't go back and look at the top 3 teams in creating turnovers and draw conclusions that it's talent or scheme or luck. Over the last 5 years you have like 10 different teams in the top 3. Including Vandy and our 2012 team. How many of those turnovers last night had more to do with Bama. 3. Maybe 4. They may lead the league again but that would be a first in a while. I think there is a good bit luck of the bounce with some of this. Now there is something to be said about teams who do a good job in stripping the ball and creating fumbles. Nothing special there, middle of the conference. They have a great start though so if the are not in the top half at the end then they will have some games that are really tight.

Playing in the SEC brings tight games. I'm saying it isn't luck or chance they were the #1 ranked defense and leading the conference in turnovers. If that's the case Joe Lee doing it with us with Ashley Cooper and the crew was lucky charms at it's finest.