Just looking at some numbers

[Esks1949]

Esks scoring by quarter.xlsx

I've wanted to do this for a while. I compiled all the Eskimos scoring by quarter compared to their opponents scoring by quarter in the same game.

It shows what I think we pretty much know anyway but, when you see it in black and white it really stands out.

By quarter:
1. Esks outscored 78-101
2. Esks outscored 87-142
3. Esks outscored 58-123
4. Esks outscore opponents 160-127

What's even more interesting, (or depressing depending how you feel), is that the Esks have gone 9 games where they have gone scoreless in the 3rd quarter. They have gone scoreless 5 games in 1st quarter, 4 games in 2nd quarter, and 3 games in the 4th quarter. So the 3rd quarter has killed this team.

The way I look at it they have pretty much lost 5 games in the third quarter.
Game 3: 0pts--BC 14 pts
Game 4: 0pts--BC 14 pts
Game 7: 0pts --Tor 16 pts
Game 9: 0pts --Cgy 13 pts
Game 17: 0pts --BC 14 pts

It's brutal. BC sure owns us after halftime. I'm not going to pretend what this means other than the obvious which points to coaching. There is a very clear trend here.

[glenvb]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

Cool!

The 3rd quarter stats are a question of coaching adjustments at the half... although the first two quarters weren't exactly great shakes either. The good 4th quarter record is inflated due to "garbage time" points.

In terms of points for and against, we will finish only ahead of the Bombers in both categories. And we were 0-9 against the West. Clearly the Esks and Bombers were in a class of their own this year, and not competitive against the stronger (or even average) teams. We only had one win against non-Bomber teams, and that was a weird game played in a monsoon.

[gizmo fan 2]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

I like looking at the by-quarter stats as well.

One major thing I take from it is not only the gooseeggs, but the q's where we score (or allow) a FG or less...or a TD or less.

We've only had 4 1st q's of 17 where we've had 7 pts or more, and TWELVE with a FG or less. The offence hasn't been ready to start the game, almost ever.
On the reverse side, 9 of 17 when we allowed a FG or less, and 8 with a TD or more (5 with 10+). Not a terrible job by the D to start.

7 2nd q's scoring 3 or less.
10 3rd q's scoring 3 or less.
7 4th q's scoring 3 or less.

36 quarters with a FG or less. That's 9 games - or half a season. We AVERAGE two quarters EVERY GAME where we score 3 or less. That's terrible.

We also have 7 double-digit quarters - excluding the 4th. We have 9 4th q's with 10+ pts. Shows just how important garbage time was to the numbers - not to say they didn't keep fighting, as they did, but that they continually put themselves in holes that were too deep to dig out of.

It's not just the 3rd q that's terrible - it's also the 2nd. The 2nd and 3rd combined have a pt differential of -120, in 17 games.

Combined differential went as follows: 6-22, 7-6 (win), 0-15, 7-24, 10-13, 12-17, 10-26, 21-19, 7-13, 9-6, 7-4 (win), 14-13 (win), 14-10, 0-18, 6-14, 10-17, 5-28

Not going to win very many games when you win the 2nd/3rd q's 6 times only, and never by more than 4 pts (10 differentials -4 or worse).

[Looner]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

thanks Esks1949 love looking at in depth stats

[BUCK]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

There really is only one stat that counts and that is 3 wins and 14 losses. Woulda -- coulda -- shoulda!!!

[Goldie-Lox]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

There really is only one stat that counts and that is 3 wins and 14 losses. Woulda -- coulda -- shoulda!!!

Not when you are trying to evaluate individual talent or where you need to improve on.

[Sticker]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

Not when you are trying to evaluate individual talent or where you need to improve on.

^^^ That

[Esks1949]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

thanks Esks1949 love looking at in depth stats

no problem.

[Esks1949]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

I like looking at the by-quarter stats as well.

One major thing I take from it is not only the gooseeggs, but the q's where we score (or allow) a FG or less...or a TD or less.

We've only had 4 1st q's of 17 where we've had 7 pts or more, and TWELVE with a FG or less. The offence hasn't been ready to start the game, almost ever.
On the reverse side, 9 of 17 when we allowed a FG or less, and 8 with a TD or more (5 with 10+). Not a terrible job by the D to start.

7 2nd q's scoring 3 or less.
10 3rd q's scoring 3 or less.
7 4th q's scoring 3 or less.

36 quarters with a FG or less. That's 9 games - or half a season. We AVERAGE two quarters EVERY GAME where we score 3 or less. That's terrible.

We also have 7 double-digit quarters - excluding the 4th. We have 9 4th q's with 10+ pts. Shows just how important garbage time was to the numbers - not to say they didn't keep fighting, as they did, but that they continually put themselves in holes that were too deep to dig out of.

It's not just the 3rd q that's terrible - it's also the 2nd. The 2nd and 3rd combined have a pt differential of -120, in 17 games.

Combined differential went as follows: 6-22, 7-6 (win), 0-15, 7-24, 10-13, 12-17, 10-26, 21-19, 7-13, 9-6, 7-4 (win), 14-13 (win), 14-10, 0-18, 6-14, 10-17, 5-28

Not going to win very many games when you win the 2nd/3rd q's 6 times only, and never by more than 4 pts (10 differentials -4 or worse).

Good points.

The stat I've been wanting to see for a while now is what percentage of the time are the Esks trailing in a game. I remember 4-5 games ago watching an Esks game on TSN and Suitor said that the Esks trailed 90% of the time. I think that's a very telling stat too. The only way I can see to get that stat is if I just go game by game and figure it out that way.

Obviously, watching the games we can see the Esks are constantly coming from behind but i'd like to see the real number.

[glenvb]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

...or constantly falling behind, until the last 3 minutes.

[Esks1949]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

...or constantly falling behind, until the last 3 minutes.

If they could have had a solid short yardage unit you can probably chalk up an extra 3 wins min.

[56Parkies]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

Here's the only stat I really pay attention to:

Since Labour Day, our record is 5 wins, 22 losses.

A .185 winning percentage. Nowhere near good enough. Will be a very, very busy off season I would hope.

[gizmo fan 2]

Re: Just looking at some numbers

Good points.

The stat I've been wanting to see for a while now is what percentage of the time are the Esks trailing in a game. I remember 4-5 games ago watching an Esks game on TSN and Suitor said that the Esks trailed 90% of the time. I think that's a very telling stat too. The only way I can see to get that stat is if I just go game by game and figure it out that way.

Obviously, watching the games we can see the Esks are constantly coming from behind but i'd like to see the real number.

Interesting. One should be able to figure that out reasonably easily from box scores. I'll take a look at that sometime later this week.

I have a hunch it will be a very high % of the time.