Turnover stats

All this talk of Burris' ints and fumbles made me look up the following. Keeping mind the following teams have one more game and could add to these totals - Winnipeg, Montreal, BC and Saskatchewan.

Interceptions thrown

1 Montreal 10
2 Edmonton 12
3 BC Lions 15
4 Calgary 17
5 Saskatchewan 18
6 Hamilton 21
7 Winnipeg 22
8 Toronto 27

Fumbles lost

1 Edmonton 9
2 Hamilton 10
3 Saskatchewan 11
4 BC Lions 11
5 Montreal 13
6 Winnipeg 14
7 Toronto 19
8 Calgary 20

Combined fumble + Intercpetions given away

1 Edmonton 21
2 Montreal 23
3 BC Lions 26
4 Saskatchewan 29
5 Hamilton 31
6 Winnipeg 36
7 Calgary 37
8 Toronto 46

Total turnovers given away includes failed 3rd down conversions, so in total turnovers lost, Hamilton ranked 4th. Not bad.

In total turnovers taken away from other team, Hamilton ranked tied for 7th. Bad.

So the offense was avg in terms of turning over the ball, and the defense was 2nd worst in creating turnovers.

“The No. 1 thing was the plus-minus ratio. I'm going to guess that we're going to end up last in the league in plus-minus and that makes it hard to win the game,? Cortez said. “Giveaways and take-aways both are involved in it.?

The Ticats finish the season at minus-11, though the East's other non-playoff team will likely top that (the Bombers are at minus-15.)

[url=http://www.thespec.com/sports/ticats/article/829892--underachieving-ticats-turn-tail-on-2012-season]http://www.thespec.com/sports/ticats/ar ... 012-season[/url]

Stats up to the beginning of this week had Hamilton with 34 takeaways & 41 turnovers for a -7 ratio which is second last in the league to the other non playoff team ... Winnipeg. Add 4 more from this week & they may in fact be last.

Turnovers & takeaways = Fumbles, interceptions, on downs

Burris has thrown 18 Ints but 43 TD's , compare that to Glen with 16 ints and 23 TDs
Even Durant with 12 Ints and only 20 TDs

When you have the worst defense in the league, you cannot afford to turn the ball over. Another interesting stat would be the number of points scored by opposing offenses as a result of Ti-Cat turnovers. Then subtract the number of points Ti-Cats scored as a result of takeaways and you have the net "damage" caused by the turnover ratio.
Of course there are also intangibles involved, such as a shift in game momentum resulting from a turnover. Time of possession is also affected because the offense is forced from the field "prematurely" when a turnover occurs.

+1. Well said.

Ian Busby from the Calgary Sun quoted a guy named Steve Daniel who said Hamilton has given up 113 points off turnovers this season.

If that's correct, it indicates the Ti-Cats gave up an average of just over 6 points per game off turnovers. From the schedule, I think Hamilton lost 5 of their 12 games by 6 points or less.
Of course we don't know the actual distribution of the 113 points amongst the 18 games and we also don't know how many points the team scored on takeaways which would offset the above numbers so this is a broad generalization at best. It does however, help to quantify the extent to which turnovers can determine wins and losses.

You have the number offense in the league, and offense that is average in giveaways, ( 4th best) and you want them to do more? That's not good enough? Am I interpreting that correctly, or not?

You're accepting that the defense is absolutely horrid, dead last in the league? That's ok, so it's now incumbent on the offense to be even better than they have been?

That's incredulous to me. Did I misinterpret?

How about asking the defense to be... I dunno, maybe 6th or 7th? Or is that too much to ask?

Burris had the 2nd best TD to interception ratio.

But what does that mean?

How is that stat calculated, and more importantly, how does it compare t the other teams?

Honestly, without knowing that, 133 means little.

You must have missed the post before yours. Winnipeg is -15 with one game to go, Hamilton finishes -11 due mainly to the defense being 2nd worst in takeaways.

Do you want to win football games or do you want to judge the success of this football team based on stats? If you want to win football games, you do whatever is necessary to score at least one more point than the opposition. You score more points than the opposition through a combination of offense, defense and special teams play. It's that simple!
When your defense is giving up more points than any other team in the league, the onus necessarily falls upon the offense and special teams to do more than their "fair share" in order to win. Is it fair? Maybe not - but ultimately it doesn't matter. The Ti-Cat defense is what it is. It never really improved much over the season and continually placed pressure on the offense and special teams to make up for the defense's poor play. Some would argue that the offense was given comparatively more firepower and tools to work with by management and so they should have been prepared to contribute more - it's probably a moot point now. Ultimately, winning is all that matters.
Concerning the turnovers, when your defense is giving up too many points for the offense and special teams to overcome and you're losing football games, obviously turning the ball over to the opposition simply exacerbates your problems.

The discussion involved the effect of the 113 (not 133) points given up by the Ti-Cats off of turnovers and how that may have directly influenced their won/lost record (having lost 5 games by less than 6 points). How that stat compares to other teams doesn’t have any bearing on the discussion IMO.

"[The defence] continually placed pressure on the offense and special teams to make up for the defense's poor play." As a result, the offence tended to force plays more than maybe they should have. Fantuz not giving up in this last game when two or three tacklers had him wrapped up, Burris throwing into tight coverage, even Dile jumping the snap count to get a split second advantage over his opponent, may have been a direct response to needing to rack up more points than could reasonably be expected.

At this point, the team needs to look at improving what's wrong with the team. To me, that's the defence. The d-line was starting to get better by the end of the season, but is lacking depth. The secondary has some good players, but not all five, and hardly any depth at all. Our linebackers are good, and we have some depth there. So for next year, one, maybe two d-linemen who could start if needed, and a handful of DBs.

Really, other teams' points off of turnovers have no bearing to you? I couldn't disagree more. i think stats, in general, are quite meaningless unless compared to the other teams.

( 133 was a typo, I stand corrected. Thanks for the catch)

I can see it from both your perspectives. Yes, comparables are useful & sometimes absolutely necessary. But I can see the original poster's point as well. In absolute terms, giving up just over 6 points a game on turnovers is quite shocking especially considering the close games the TiCats lost this year. I think that was his point. So in essence, Hamilton scored on average 37 points a game this year. It's just that some of them were for the opposition. :wink:

I've emailed the originator of that stat to get more detailed information. But considering it was quoted to emphasize a point about Hamilton's turnover problems this year ... I'm gonna guess it means Hamilton leads the league in points given up off turnovers.

The big killer stat? That's easy we had 576 points scored against and that my friend is rock bottom in the CFL. :cowboy:

And 113 of those points came courtesy of the offense all gift wrapped nicely! Or roughly 20% of the team's points against came via points off turnovers. 1 in 5!