Analysis: Cam Cameron's impact on offense | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Analysis: Cam Cameron's impact on offense

finsforce

finsforce

Practice Squad
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
236
Reaction score
0
Location
Melbourne, FL
The devoted readers of FinHeaven have routinely discussed the impact that an offensive-minded head coach will have on the team. What struck my curiosity was exactly how will he affect this team. While the only true answer is to watch the season unfold, we can look at the Chargers offense from 2002-2006 and see how Cameron's offense performed statistically.

NOTE: The statistics shown below were accumulated from NFL.com. While player stats have been excluded from viewing in order to save space, I have provided links that display that information if you choose to view it.

--------------------------------------------------

2002 San Diego Chargers (8-8 record, no playoffs)

OVERALL EFFICIENCY
Total Offense: 5325 Yds, 332.8 Y/G (16th)
Rush Offense: 2137 Yds, 133.6 Y/G (8th)
Passing Offense: 3188 Yds, 199.3 Y/G (22nd)

Points Scored: 333 (20th)
Touchdowns: 19 Rush, 17 Pass
Sacks: 39

1st Downs: 313 (166 Pass, 117 Rush, 30 Penalty)
3rd Downs: 78/210 (37.1%)
4th Downs: 4/12 (33.3%)

Time of Possession: 29:57

(Player Statistics: http://www.nfl.com/teams/stats/SD/2002/regular)

--------------------------------------------------

2003 San Diego Chargers (4-12 record, no playoffs)

OVERALL EFFICIENCY
Total Offense: 5167 Yds, 322.9 Y/G (14th)
Rush Offense: 2146 Yds, 134.1 Y/G (6th)
Passing Offense: 3021 Yds, 188.8 Y/G (19th)

Points Scored: 313 (16th)
Touchdowns: 16 Rush, 21 Pass
Sacks: 30

1st Downs: 290 (146 Pass, 117 Rush, 27 Penalty)
3rd Downs: 62/197 (31.5%)
4th Downs: 10/19 (52.6%)

Time of Possession: 27:52

(Player Statistics: http://www.nfl.com/teams/stats/SD/2003/regular)

--------------------------------------------------

2004 San Diego Chargers (12-4 record, won AFC West Division)

OVERALL EFFICIENCY
Total Offense: 5542 Yds, 346.4 Y/G (10th)
Rush Offense: 2185 Yds, 136.6 Y/G (6th)
Passing Offense: 3357 Yds, 209.8 Y/G (16th)

Points Scored: 446 (3rd)
Touchdowns: 24 Rush, 29 Pass
Sacks: 29

1st Downs: 328 (160 Pass, 131 Rush, 37 Penalty)
3rd Downs: 97/208 (46.6%)
4th Downs: 5/8 (62.5%)

Time of Possession: 31:30

(Player Statistics: http://www.nfl.com/teams/stats/SD/2004/regular)

--------------------------------------------------

2005 San Diego Chargers (9-7 record, no playoffs)

OVERALL EFFICIENCY
Total Offense: 5567 Yds, 347.9 Y/G (10th)
Rush Offense: 2072 Yds, 129.5 Y/G (9th)
Passing Offense: 3495 Yds, 218.4 Y/G (12th)

Points Scored: 418 (5th)
Touchdowns: 22 Rush, 27 Pass
Sacks: 46

1st Downs: 337 (191 Pass, 116 Rush, 30 Penalty)
3rd Downs: 88/208 (42.3%)
4th Downs: 11/17 (64.7%)

Time of Possession: 31:34

(Player Statistics: http://www.nfl.com/teams/stats/SD/2005/regular)

--------------------------------------------------

2006 San Diego Chargers (14-2 record, won AFC West Division)

OVERALL EFFICIENCY
Total Offense: 5840 Yds, 365.0 Y/G (4th)
Rush Offense: 2578 Yds, 161.1 Y/G (2nd)
Passing Offense: 3262 Yds, 203.9 Y/G (16th)

Points Scored: 492 (1st)
Touchdowns: 32 Rush, 24 Pass
Sacks: 61

1st Downs: 321 (169 Pass, 137 Rush, 15 Penalty)
3rd Downs: 92/213 (43.2%)
4th Downs: 6/11 (54.5%)

Time of Possession: 31:39

(Player Statistics: http://www.nfl.com/teams/stats/SD/2006/regular)

--------------------------------------------------

Now, let's look at each category as a group...

Total Offense: 16th, 14th, 10th, 10th, 4th
Rush Offense: 8th, 6th, 6th, 9th, 2nd
Passing Offense: 22nd, 19th, 16th, 12th, 16th

Points Scored: 20th, 16th, 3rd, 5th, 1st
Touchdowns: 36, 37, 53, 49, 56
Sacks: 39, 30, 29, 46, 61

1st Downs: 313, 290, 328, 337, 321
3rd Downs: 37.1%, 31.5%, 46.6%, 42.3%, 43.2%
4th Downs: 33.3%, 52.6%, 62.5%, 64.7%, 54.5%

Time of Possession: 29:57, 27:52, 31:30, 31:34, 31:39

--------------------------------------------------

1. Total Offense improved over the five years without a downturn.

2. Rush Offense was in the Top 10 all five years.

3. Passing Offense improved in each of four consecutive years before taking a slide last season.

4. Points scored increased drastically in a short time frame, which coincided with the number of touchdowns scored.

5. Achieved at least 300 first downs in the seasons with at least a .500 record.

6. Converted at least 37% of their third down situations in those same seasons.

7. Team had a regular season record above .500 when the average time of possession is at least 31 minutes.

--------------------------------------------------

Your thoughts?
 
Improvement in the offense will start with the offensive line. If Cam can fix that, he'll fix the offense.
 
I think even though the numbers look good you do not account for change in personal.If the personal had not changed you can attribute this to coaching.In a anyteam the HC has the final word and in most teams the player package and details are handled by OC and not actual play setup that is a HC call.
Yeah marty let this OC run in playoffs in 04 and now and both lead to a loss.
They have had some awesome additions in TE,RB,OL draft picks.Actually smith has done a phenomial job in picks. Now with a players LT,gates and one of the best OL /Blocking TE personal in the game one has to ask how much was it coaching.

If sandeigo wins the SB this year what does that prove?
 
SD quarterbacks were sacked 61 times last year, and 46 the year before? Even our o-line was better than that with our cruddy QB's.
 
Cam's biggest challege will be to keep defenses off balance with his play calling. Last year saban understood that the QB needed to get rid of the ball quickly to counter all the blitzing he saw. Joey accomplished this but when teams backed off of the blitzing he wouldn't let the deep play develope. Hopefully Trent can do both. It will make everything easier for the offense.
 
Difficult to project due to major differences in personnel. Their O-line is better than ours and they have the best running back in the NFL. You pointed out that they were in the top 10 in rushing all 5 years. On one hand, philosophically, that shows that Cam was committed to the run. However, would they have still finished in the top 10 all those years without their o-line and without Ladanian Tomlinson? Who do you give the credit for that? Scheme and philosophy are important, but without the same players, it is difficult to project IMHO.

Having said that, I think Cam will help allot. Philosophically, sticking with the run is important, as we certainly abandoned it far to early far too many times last year making us one dimensional, and thus making it even more difficult to sort our passing game out. I guess what I'm saying is that I have no doubt that Cam will improve our offensive production, and that he will BUILD a solid offense for our team going forward, but I don't think you can compare the stats of his previous teams and project what he will do with our team because the parts are different, it's apples and oranges really. We shall see...
 
Marino13fanboy1 said:
SD quarterbacks were sacked 61 times last year, and 46 the year before? Even our o-line was better than that with our cruddy QB's.
Click to expand...
NO...SD QBs were sacked 28 times last year. Poster has confused SDs defense, which had 61 sacks, with their offense.
 
I wouldn't be looking for miracles but I would be looking for the offense, just the offense, to score between 283 and 307 points.

In 2003, Miami scored 283 points just on offense with a surrounding cast about as good as we have now. In 2002, Cameron coached an offense that scored about 307 points on offense...his first year in 2002. The caveat was that year was not the first year that San Diego installed that offense. Norv Turner had previously installed the offense in 2001. Altogether if you take the 2001 San Diego offense (first year with Zampese system), 2002 San Diego offense (first year with Cameron as OC, second year with Zampese system), 2002 Miami offense (first year with Zampese system), 2003 Miami offense (second year with Zampese system, comparable talent)...average them up and you get about 312 points.

Estimate an additional 4 touchdowns by special teams and on defense (which is only slightly above average, most teams usually get 3 or 4 touchdowns a year on STs and Defense, yet by all means Miami should be above average in both)...and you have a rough estimated expectation of about 340 total points this year. Estimate that the defense will give up about 290 points this year (last year was 283 points, figuring in one extra touchdown given up by the offense and special teams compared with last year, also an average figure) and you have a point differential of about 50 points.

Regress point differentials and NFL records over the last 20 years and you come up with y = 0.028x + 7.9665, or in this case 9.4 = 0.028(50) + 7.9665, with about 83% R-squared.

In other words, Miami should have between 7.8 and 11.3 wins this year, with an expected value of 9.4 wins.

If you broaden the range of offensive possibilities, then Miami could go as high as 13-3, as low as low as 7-9.

The biggest assumption is that the defense will allow only 269 points. That could significantly worsen, but I don't think many expect it to because Dom Capers is still here and most of the cast is still here with Joey Porter being a significant addition, and with Travis Daniels returning healthy, Yeremiah Bell starting the whole year.

You want my absolute prediction I say 9-7.
 
ckparrothead said:
Regress point differentials and NFL records over the last 20 years and you come up with y = 0.028x + 7.9665, or in this case 9.4 = 0.028(50) + 7.9665, with about 83% R-squared.
Click to expand...

I must admit that I always love your posts. But, as a math teacher, I truly admire this one a lot. Your statistical analysis is well thought out. I'd like to know where you found that linear equation.

Coincidentally, I had a post (http://www.finheaven.com/boardvb2/showthread.php?t=202881) that projected the team's 2007 season record. Of course, it was based on Trent Green's career stats versus our opponents, but it was a solid result:

GREEN'S PROJECTED TOTALS FOR 2007
  • Passing: 293/481 (60.9%), 3599 YD, 224.9 Y/G, 7.5 Y/A, 21 TD, 13 INT, 87.3 QB Rating
  • Rushing: 33 RUSH, 121 YD, 7.6 Y/G, 3.7 Y/R, 1 TD
  • Sacks: 35 Sacks, 214 YD Lost
  • Fumbles: 7 Fumbles, 4 Lost
Based on Trent's career win-loss total (30-22 in 52 career games) against the 2007 Dolphins' opponents, the projected record for the team with him as the starter is 9-7.
Click to expand...
You can read the post to see how I arrived at those projections.
 
finsforce said:
I must admit that I always love your posts. But, as a math teacher, I truly admire this one a lot. Your statistical analysis is well thought out. I'd like to know where you found that linear equation.

Coincidentally, I had a post (http://www.finheaven.com/boardvb2/showthread.php?t=202881) that projected the team's 2007 season record. Of course, it was based on Trent Green's career stats versus our opponents, but it was a solid result:

You can read the post to see how I arrived at those projections.
Click to expand...

From my angle as an equity analyst, it's also more significant when you take different angles and reach the same result. If you have another detailed analysis that points to 9-7, that only strengthens the 9-7 argument.

For what I did in terms of point differential, it's very simple. If you take ALL of the NFL regular season records for the last 20 years, along with the differential between their points for, and points against...you can plot it on a scatter graph. Lucky for us, Excel can plot us a trend line automatically and then show the equation and R-squared.

In this case, with a very significant R-Squared, the number of wins a team has is predictable by the equation I wrote, 0.028(differential) + 7.9665 = Wins.
 
ckparrothead said:
From my angle as an equity analyst, it's also more significant when you take different angles and reach the same result. If you have another detailed analysis that points to 9-7, that only strengthens the 9-7 argument.

For what I did in terms of point differential, it's very simple. If you take ALL of the NFL regular season records for the last 20 years, along with the differential between their points for, and points against...you can plot it on a scatter graph. Lucky for us, Excel can plot us a trend line automatically and then show the equation and R-squared.

In this case, with a very significant R-Squared, the number of wins a team has is predictable by the equation I wrote, 0.028(differential) + 7.9665 = Wins.
Click to expand...

what are equity analysts doing on finheaven all day :cooldude:...:)
 
Great posts gentlemen, like some of us say around here, "I was about to say the same thing"...Anywhere around 7 or 9 wins seems about realistic, although if chemistry works, we could be surprised (06 saints). Say, any of you gents would care to join me for a couple brews at my local Casino? You know, just for company :)
 
ckparrothead said:
From my angle as an equity analyst, it's also more significant when you take different angles and reach the same result. If you have another detailed analysis that points to 9-7, that only strengthens the 9-7 argument.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I wanted to repost my stats on Green because not only does it support your projection of a 9-7 record, but it also helps our readers to set realistic expectations for this team. While there are always unexpected turnarounds and surprising wins in this league seemingly every week, fans should be glad to have a 9-7 record. It would be the start of a positive trend for this franchise and it should offer much optimism for the near future.

For what I did in terms of point differential, it's very simple. If you take ALL of the NFL regular season records for the last 20 years, along with the differential between their points for, and points against...you can plot it on a scatter graph. Lucky for us, Excel can plot us a trend line automatically and then show the equation and R-squared.

In this case, with a very significant R-Squared, the number of wins a team has is predictable by the equation I wrote, 0.028(differential) + 7.9665 = Wins.
Click to expand...

That's great. I thank you for clarifying that for me. I just couldn't imagine having to accumulate all of the data and compute it by hand. You have to appreciate Excel for that :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom