Week 10 Munich & Early Window: Advanced Reviews

All the advanced stats, visualizations and commentary for Panthers-Giants, Bears-Patriots, Colts-Bills, Jaguars-Vikings, Chiefs-Broncos, Saints-Falcons, Bucs-49ers and Commanders-Steelers

The adjusted scores quantify team play quality, with emphasis on stable metrics (success rate) and downplaying higher variance events (turnovers, special team, penalties, fumble luck, etc). Adjusted expected points added (EPA), in conjunction with opportunity-based metrics like total plays and drives, projects adjusted points. Adjusted scores have been tested against actual scores and offer slightly better predictive ability, though their primary benefit is explanatory.

All 2024-2022 and historical Adjusted Scores and other site metrics are available in a downloadable format to paid subscribers via Google Sheet.

Find previous advanced reviews here

** Adjusted Scores table:

• “Pass” - Pass rate over expectation (based on context of each play and historical averages

• “Success” - Success rate on offense, a key metric in adjusted score vs actual

• “H & A” - Home or away team

CAR vs NYG (-6.5)

Somehow the Carolina Panthers win this game, even though the adjusted scores have the New York Giants as seven points better. The Giants offensive success rate was significantly better (53% to 40%), but lost too many expected points on turnovers and failures on third down conversions.

The Panthers won the game on the ground, hitting the 83rd percentile in rushing efficiency, led by the newly extended Chuba Hubbard, who generated +3.7 EPA on 29 runs (153 yards and a touchdown).

Hubbard did cost the Panthers the most points of any play with a post-catch fumble, but two Daniel Jones interceptions and a missed field goal were much more negative for the Giants. The costly play in win probability came on the first play of overtime, when Giants running back Tyrone Tracy fumbled and set up the Panthers for the winning field goal.

It was a mediocre game for both quarterbacks, but better than usual by Bryce Young’s career sample. Young didn’t get much going passing (126 yards on 25 attempts, 5.0 YPA), but he avoided turnovers and only took a single sack.

Jones had another mistake-prone game, with the clock running out on his career with the Giants. With $23 million on injury guarantees on his contract in 2025, don’t be surprised if the Giants look to sit Jones soon, with the playoffs basically out of reach at 2-8.

CHI (-6.5) vs NE

In a battle of rookie quarterbacks, the No. 3 pick outplayed No. 1, though neither was outstanding. The difference in the game was that the New England Patriots offense was functional, while the Chicago Bears couldn’t do anything productive. The Patriots offensive success rate was 43% to the Bear at 33%, and their EPA efficiencies were at the 40th (-0.03) and 3rd (-0.37) percentiles, respectively.

The Patriots were much better on the ground than through the air, adding slightly positive EPA on 31 designed runs (+0.7 EPA total). The Patriots were able to control the game on the ground, playing with at least a 10-point lead the entire second half. The Bears were a mess rushing and dropping back to pass, though relatively worse in the former.

The biggest impact play of the game actually went against the Patriots, a 1st & 10 interception that lost 4.8 expected points and 12.4% in win probability. Drake Maye forgot about the underneath defender as he bought time and looked through options.

Many of the biggest impact plays of the game came on high-leverage fourth down plays for the Bears, who were 2-for-4 on those chances. Caleb Williams’ other high-impact plays were of the negative variety, mostly taking sacks.

Williams started out the season with three poor games, following those up with three good games, leading to a sense he might be figuring things out. Now he’s been down the last three games, having his worst efficiency game of the year this week. Williams’ -18.2 in total EPA was the sixth worst weekly total for any quarterback this season. Williams had this awful efficiency game without registering a single turnover. Instead, he took massive negatives (-14.2 EPA) in nine sacks for 51 yards. When he stayed on his feet and the ball did leave his hand, he only generated 120 passing yards on 30 attempts (4.0 per).

Maye was a lot better than Williams, but not great overall. Now, his counting stats were going to look great with only 25 pass attempts (184 yards and one touchdown), though he did average 7.4 yards per attempt. Outside of his interception, Maye only took one big negative in the form of a single sack. Maye’s performance had a lot of negative context that he rose above, completing +5.2% of passes over expectation, while playing with a poorly rated offensive line, and top targets of Kayshon Boutte and DeMario Douglas.

IND vs BUF (-4.5)