fiestavike wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2023 11:23 am
I think you are going a little bit by the outcome rather than the process and the product, which I understand, but which I ultimately reject as an invalid way of assessing until you get to a much larger sample size. This team looks better than last year's team. By better I mean, closer to really being able to compete for a championship, that is, to compete against the best teams in the league. There was no point last year when this team looked like a remotely serious contender. Also, there is no point this season at which this team has looked like a remotely serious contender...granted. but I do see them making philophical changes on D which alone constitute a real improvement.
Outcome does matter, but that's not what I'm talking about. You say they "look" better and I think you're the one being fooled by the difference between "exciting" and "effective". I think the defense is more fun to watch because they're so aggressive but that's not leading to better results overall. I'm not just talking wins and losses.
I'm talking about giving up a 76% completion percentage (66% last year). We're giving up 6.7 yrds/attempt rather than 7.3 which is a decent improvement but not great. 1 INT and 2 Fumble recoveries. Last year's team laid back more but they also averaged nearly1 INT a game. This team so far is getting 1 every 5 games. Despite being so much more agreesive they're only average .5 extra sacks per game. Last year's defense averaged 2.2 sacks per game this years is 2.6. On the run game they're both equally terrible in different ways.
People were annoyed watching the defense last year play so far back but it yielded better results with the level of talent on defense. The 2023 defense has traded turnovers for aggressiveness and they haven't gotten any significant gains from doing so.
To go to the basketball analogy which I prefer to illustrate the point, a team might be down 9-0 because they have missed 3 layups and the opposition has hit 3 half court shots. Over the course of the game, I'm going with the team that manufactures good looks over the team that hits low percentage shots over a short period. Stretch that out over a week, a month, a season, and I think it only becomes more compelling. My thesis is that this team is taking better shots, even if they aren't making them than last year's team, which hit a number of low percentage shots.
Or put one more way, If the vikings can run off a few wins in a row and get in position to make the playoffs, I think they have a better chance to actually become the sort of team that has a legit chance than last year's team ever did.
I think you've got your analogy reversed. With their aggressiveness the 2023 Vikings defense is going for the big play often. They're running up and taking that 3-pointer every other play. The 2022 picked their spots and as a result ended up more big plays. More INTs by far, .58 fumble recoveries per game in 2022 and .4 this season.
In what way is the 2023 team actually better?