With no buildup, I present four reason that the Eagles will win the Super Bowl:
1. Jalen Hurts.
We’ve already said so much about our All-Pro starter, but in case anyone needs any reminders, here are Jalen Hurts’ ranks among qualifying NFL QBs:
Rushing yards: 3rd
Rushing YPG: 3rd
Rushing TDs: 1st
Passer rating: 4th
Total QBR: 4th
ANY/A: 5th
DVOA: 5th
TD/Int ratio: 3rd
Turnover/touch ratio: 7th
Win/Loss %: 1st
I’m sharing all of this not so much because I think that having a top shelf QB is all you need to win this game (it isn’t, more on this shortly). I’m not even sharing this to make the case that Hurts is necessarily better than Mahomes. I’m sharing this because the media will be inundating us all with Mahomes propaganda from this point until the game ends. I’m not going to pile on Mahomes at all; I think he’s as good as it gets with few doubts, but a reminder that the other starter isn’t too shabby is well in order. (By the way, here are Mahomes’ ranks in the above statistics, respectively: 8th, 9th, 8th, 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 2nd. Obviously still good, and obviously comparable to Hurts).
2. The Eagles are the better team.
Lost in the media coverage of the Super Bowl (which can largely be boiled down to “In terms of Super Bowl 57 blah blah blah Patrick Mahomes...”), is the question, “who is the better team?”. I’m no expert, but that seems like an important question to answer. I crunched some numbers, and what do you know? Philly gets the distinction. (note: I used the PFF player grades for this analysis; we all know there are issues with that system but if you know a better unified way of grading all 106 players I’ll be happy to look at it).
The easiest way to cut the numbers is to take the average score of all the players, weighted for snaps played. The average Chief scores at 70.8. The average Eagle scores at 72.7. It’s worth noting that the Chiefs actually hold the edge if you only consider starters (73.8-71.9), but considering how often both teams go to their bench (really, any teams that make it this far do), the depth really needs to take precedence.
Where are the relative strengths and weaknesses in these teams? The Eagles rank higher in all units other than QB (Chiefs lead 90.9-81.3) and DB (70.6-67.8); no grades for special teams but KC likely has an edge there too. Philly holds advantages everywhere else; on their DL (72.1-65.5), LB unit (74.0-70.5), the skill guys (70.5-68.1) and their OL (77.5-75.0). I think it's pretty clear that the only obvious advantage the Chiefs enjoy is the QB “mismatch” (which, as I said in Part One, isn't as big of a mismatch as it appears).
One final callback to my playoff preview: if you recall that piece you remember that I listed seven statistical tests that showed promise for predicting a SB champion; the Eagles met six of the seven, the Chiefs met only three. If you read that piece you may remember that the analysis was based on 22 different statistical measures; the Eagles average NFL rank out of those 22 was 7.73 (second among the playoff teams); KC only averaged 11.27 (fifth).
The thinking right from the start was that if you're going to build a case for a Chiefs victory, your case begins and ends with NFL MVP Patrick Mahomes. That's a great place to start, but historically not a great place to finish. If you’re a student of 21st century sports media, that sounds like a crazy proposition. Is it? Well…
3. A mismatch in starting quarterbacks, real or perceived, is a poor predictor of the winning team.
Before we actually examine the evidence for my statement, I wanted to comment on why this matters. We’re so conditioned to think of big football games in terms of “starting QB vs. starting QB” that the notion that it might not matter the same way we think sounds strange to us. In the game review I’ve been struck by how similar the situation (and accompanying narrative) is to the game five years ago. In 2017 the Eagles possessed not only the better defense but the better team overall, and yet all you heard was “Tom Brady Patriot Mystique Tom Brady Bill Belichick Tom Brady”. Check out the following quotes from a selection of writers on The Athletic who picked the Chiefs to win, and see if any of them sound familiar in the context of the last Eagles Super Bowl:
“The Chiefs have a better, more experienced head coach. The Chiefs have the better, more experienced quarterback. That alone would outweigh any advantage the Eagles might have in a side-by-side rundown of the other positions…”
“The Eagles have built the better roster, but the Chiefs have the better quarterback, and that’s the deciding factor when I make the game a coin flip.”
“Mahomes is the best player in the NFL by far. He will be the best player in the Super Bowl by far. And he’ll be healthy. Philadelphia will score but not as much as Pat.”
“The Eagles have the best roster in the league, but I’m rolling with the best player: Patrick Mahomes.”
“The case for the Eagles centers on roster depth and talent. They have impressive options on both sides of the ball, and they lost only one game this season with Jalen Hurts (Washington in Week 10). And yet, it’s a tick hard to gauge how good they are considering their light schedule over the second half of the season and the NFC playoffs. They also won’t have the best player in the Super Bowl (Patrick Mahomes)...”
You’ll notice the common thread: most admit that the Eagles are the better team but somehow think that Mahomes will pull it out, more or less on his own. Swap Tom Brady for Mahomes in that story and you’ve nailed the narrative for Super Bowl 52.
So what of it? Using DVOA as a guide, an analysis of every Super Bowl QB matchup since 1981 (as far back as we have DVOA data) reveals that a mismatch in QB efficiency has surprisingly poor predictive value, contrary to what's taught in the sports media. In this time frame, the team with the higher ranked QB is only 21-20 (51.2%) in the big game. Patrick Mahomes ranks #1 overall in QB DVOA; the top rated passer has appeared in the SB 11 times over this span and won just three (27.3%). NFL MVPs who are quarterbacks are an awful 4-14 (22.2%) over this period. You may have heard, but Jalen Hurts lost the MVP voting to Mahomes this season. The 22 game sample size* is small enough that this terrible record could theoretically be a random occurrence, but ask yourself this: how would you like the chances of a four win team in the Super Bowl? That’s roughly the same odds that we’re looking at here.
*Let’s address that sample size; the chances of only winning four games out of 22 purely by chance (and not because of a tangible and predictable reason) are very small. You can simulate odds like this with a spreadsheet, the random number function and a lot of copying and pasting; it turns out that the chances of only winning four games out of 22 randomly is about one in 630. In other words, it’s unlikely.
Naturally, I don't think anyone will read this and decide that having a brilliant QB is holding teams back, and they shouldn't. Say rather that such teams tend to rely on their QB too much to be consistently and predictably successful.
4. A mismatch in the team's defenses is a solid predictor of the winning team.
The first question to answer; is there in fact a defensive mismatch? Philly ranked #6 in defensive DVOA while KC only ranks #17. Teams with the higher ranked defense by DVOA are 25-16 (61.0%) in the big game, and when you adjust for the spread in quality, the situation becomes more predictive. Teams with a top ten defense matched up against teams ranked OUTSIDE the top ten have gone 15-8 (65.2%) in such games. More tellingly, when one defense ranks at least ten slots above its opponents, the better defense has gone a notable 16-6 (72.7%). In PFR’s excellent Defensive SRS statistic, Philly ranked #13 league wide; KC ranked #19. The higher ranked team in that metric wins the SB 68.3% of the time (28-13). All of these situations are in play, and the truth is that you can cite similar statistics all day long but the conclusion remains the same: defense still wins championships, and now you've seen some real evidence.
CONCLUSION AND PREDICTION
I believe I’ve built a strong case that Philly has a great chance to win, but the truth is that this is a closely matched game. The overall quality of these teams is very similar, however, the point of the statistical analysis I’ve done isn’t so much to prove that Philly is better, but more to prove that the Birds fit the mold of a successful team better than KC does. I suggested earlier that this game (both in narrative and in the actual on-field matchup) mirrors Super Bowl 52 in a lot of ways, and I suspect that this game will play out in much the same way. This should be a high scoring affair (well over the Vegas total of 50.5) in which neither team is able to dominate the other. I don't think that either defense will shut down either offense but I do think that the Eagles will make a few more big plays on defense that will spell the difference. The Eagles have a mismatch against KC’s below-average rush defense; exploiting it will be key to victory.
Chiefs win IF: they shut down the Eagles’ running game and are able to consistently protect Mahomes. A further key will be Philly’s weak zone defense; if Gannon thinks that the strategy that failed against Dak Prescott and Andy Dalton will work against Mahomes, it may get ugly quickly. If Hurts’ perceived issues getting the ball downfield prove to be more significant than we currently think, that will hurt Philly too.
Eagles win IF: they do not turn the ball over and get fair treatment from the officials.
Eagles win big IF: their run game and pass rush are both hot early on. If this happens it’ll force the Chiefs to abandon even the pretense of balanced offense, and big defensive plays for Philly could pile up. Hurts’ good health is paramount to this outcome as well.
I think this will be a high scoring, back and forth affair that will include at least one double digit comeback. Like five years ago, Philly notches a late game turnover/touchdown combo to seal it. Eagles win, 38-31.
Comments