We've seen how teams have played for a half of a season -- both offenses and defenses. Combining that data, which defenses project to come on in the second half of the season? Ian Allan explores.
John Ruppe posted a blurb earlier in the day. Asking about the best defenses going forward. Rather than just tossing out a few names, I thought I'd offer some data/analysis.
Kansas City, of course, has been phenomenal. It's getting after quarterbacks and running balls into the end zone. But look a the schedule. In the final eight weeks, Kansas City's schedule is the least-friendly in the NFL. It's remaining opponents are allowing (on average) under 2 sacks per game, which is the lowest in the NFL. Two games against Peyton Manning, and two against Philip Rivers, and those guys are tough to sack.
Let's instead look not at teams but who they're playing. In the case of defenses, that's half of the equation, isn't it?
The following teams have the most fantasy-friendly schedules the rest of the way (at least for defenses) -- Jets, Bills, Browns.
And here, I'm looking at just sacks and interceptions. Those numbers tend to be more constant. Fumbles and touchdowns seem to be driven more by chance/luck, so I'm leaving those out.
| STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE -- DEFENSES | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Team | Int | Sac | Points |
| NY Jets | 1.05 | 3.66 | 5.77 |
| Buffalo | 1.16 | 3.23 | 5.55 |
| Cleveland | 1.13 | 3.07 | 5.32 |
| Miami | 1.05 | 3.05 | 5.14 |
| * New England | 1.02 | 3.07 | 5.11 |
| Houston | 1.09 | 2.91 | 5.09 |
| Tennessee | 1.11 | 2.86 | 5.08 |
| Jacksonville | 1.06 | 2.94 | 5.06 |
| Indianapolis | 1.06 | 2.78 | 4.91 |
| Pittsburgh | .94 | 3.00 | 4.88 |
| Cincinnati | .98 | 2.88 | 4.84 |
| Detroit | 1.06 | 2.70 | 4.83 |
| * Dallas | 1.13 | 2.54 | 4.79 |
| * Seattle | 1.20 | 2.34 | 4.73 |
| * Carolina | .98 | 2.75 | 4.72 |
| San Diego | .97 | 2.69 | 4.63 |
| * Washington | 1.13 | 2.34 | 4.59 |
| Oakland | 1.08 | 2.44 | 4.59 |
| * San Francisco | 1.02 | 2.50 | 4.53 |
| Arizona | .86 | 2.77 | 4.48 |
| Baltimore | 1.00 | 2.47 | 4.47 |
| Green Bay | 1.08 | 2.28 | 4.44 |
| * Denver | .88 | 2.69 | 4.44 |
| Tampa Bay | .88 | 2.56 | 4.31 |
| * Chicago | .88 | 2.56 | 4.31 |
| Atlanta | .80 | 2.63 | 4.22 |
| NY Giants | .92 | 2.30 | 4.14 |
| Philadelphia | 1.02 | 2.09 | 4.13 |
| Minnesota | .88 | 2.33 | 4.08 |
| * St. Louis | .82 | 2.43 | 4.07 |
| New Orleans | .78 | 2.44 | 4.00 |
| * Kansas City | .89 | 1.98 | 3.77 |
The teams with asterisks, those are the ones that currently rank in the top 10 in fantasy scoring (using the system of 6 points for TDs, 2 for takeaways and 1 for each sack).
Now again, I'm not saying that Kansas City will have the worst defense in the final eight weeks. I'm saying that their schedule is the hardest.
If you take these scheduling numbers, then average them against what you think the defense would do against a typical schedule, then you're starting to get an idea of how the defenses should perform in the second half of the season.
So, hey, let's do that.
I took the scheduling numbers, and then averaged them against our Redrafter forecast numbers from Tuesday. So if we were projecting that Bills would average 2 sacks per game, but their opponents were allowing 3 sacks per game, then the Buffalo number would become 2.5. I did this for both sacks and interceptions (leaving out the more chance-driven TD and fumble numbers).
The revised board for the second half of the season starts to look like this:
| DEFENSE -- "BLENDED" NUMBERS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Team | Int | Sac | Points |
| Buffalo | 1.17 | 3.05 | 5.40 |
| Seattle | 1.22 | 2.54 | 4.99 |
| NY Jets | .95 | 3.02 | 4.92 |
| New England | 1.07 | 2.75 | 4.90 |
| Cleveland | 1.08 | 2.69 | 4.85 |
| Dallas | 1.12 | 2.52 | 4.75 |
| Kansas City | 1.06 | 2.62 | 4.73 |
| Miami | 1.02 | 2.65 | 4.70 |
| Carolina | .99 | 2.69 | 4.67 |
| Tennessee | 1.05 | 2.55 | 4.66 |
| Cincinnati | 1.01 | 2.59 | 4.61 |
| Arizona | .99 | 2.60 | 4.59 |
| Indianapolis | 1.05 | 2.48 | 4.58 |
| Baltimore | .97 | 2.61 | 4.55 |
| Houston | 1.00 | 2.52 | 4.52 |
| Detroit | 1.05 | 2.41 | 4.51 |
| Denver | .94 | 2.63 | 4.50 |
| San Francisco | 1.03 | 2.41 | 4.47 |
| Green Bay | 1.02 | 2.36 | 4.41 |
| Washington | 1.00 | 2.36 | 4.36 |
| New Orleans | .91 | 2.50 | 4.31 |
| San DIego | .89 | 2.53 | 4.31 |
| Oakland | .96 | 2.31 | 4.23 |
| Tampa Bay | .91 | 2.34 | 4.16 |
| Chicago | .99 | 2.16 | 4.14 |
| St. Louis | .83 | 2.46 | 4.13 |
| Philadelphia | .99 | 2.04 | 4.03 |
| Jacksonville | .92 | 2.16 | 4.00 |
| Minnesota | .89 | 2.10 | 3.88 |
| Pittsburgh | .84 | 2.19 | 3.88 |
| Atlanta | .79 | 2.19 | 3.77 |
| NY Giants | .88 | 1.99 | 3.76 |
Bills the No. 1 defense? Maybe. Note that these figures don't even include the team's kick return units, which are outstanding (I think they're top 5 in both punt and kickoff returns). Buffalo has games left against Roethlisberger, Tannehill and Geno Smith, and those guys are taking lots of sacks.
Others to consider: Seahawks, Jets, Patriots, Browns. Cleveland still has a pair left against Roethlisberger.
Kansas City still projects to have a good defense, just not the dominating butt-kicker group it's been so far.
What do you think? Anything to this? Or would you rather just stick with a defense that has played well so far?
--Ian Allan
