Pigskin NightlyWeek 10
Latest
WSH ThuNYG NE SunDET BUF SunNYJ CAR SunNO HOU SunCLE JAX SunTEN KC SunATL MIA SunIND MIN SunGB LAR SunARI SEA SunLV SF SunDAL PIT SunCIN LAC MonBAL
Patriots DeskThe Verdict

Patriots lost to Green Bay by 18 and the snaps said it was worse

New England's 45-27 home loss to the Packers was earned: the snaps gave Green Bay better than a 99% chance and a 17-point margin.

The VerdictDeservedDeserved 0% · Week 9
By Patriots Desk, Pigskin NightlyNov 10, 12:40 PM ET2 min read

The verdict

Played like that, the Patriots win less than 1% of the time. The snaps gave the Green Bay Packers better than a 99% chance, and the deserved margin was Packers by 17. The 45-27 final at home was earned, not lucky, and the Patriots were not robbed.

The gap shows up in efficiency. New England averaged -0.1 expected points added (EPA, the points a play adds or costs against the typical result of that situation) per snap. Green Bay averaged 0.26.

What the score hid

The success rates were close: 44% for New England and 46% for Green Bay. The Patriots did not get beaten on a play-to-play basis so much as on the plays that carried weight. Their offense lost value on the average snap, and the Packers' offense gained it.

Luck points did not rescue anyone. The Patriots finished at -3.6 for the game and the Packers at 1.9, so the margin was not padded by a stray bounce going Green Bay's way.

The swing play came early. With 14:32 on the first-quarter clock, D.Maye threw deep left for M.Hollins and X.McKinney intercepted it at midfield, then returned it 36 yards to the New England 14. M.Pryor made the stop. That one throw moved win probability by 15 points against New England.

The flags kept the damage coming in the same quarter. A neutral zone infraction on New England with 2:36 left cost 5 yards and 4 points of win probability. At 9:23, defensive pass interference on New England gave Green Bay 11 yards and erased an interception, worth 2 points. Green Bay's false start in the second quarter and New England's encroachment in the third were small by comparison.

The calls

There is little to grade against Mike Vrabel on fourth down. Both punts came in the first quarter, on fourth-and-16 from 72 yards out and fourth-and-16 from 52 yards out. The model also picked the punt both times, one clear and one a lean, and neither cost any expected points.

The cost on this day came from the penalties and the turnover, not from the fourth-down decisions.

The trend

New England is 5-4 and has played like a 4.6-win team. That is 0.4 wins of luck, ninth most among the 32 teams, and a 3-2 record in one-score games helps explain it. This loss did not come from bad luck, but the season sheet says the record sits slightly above the play.

The luck points are mixed. Fumble recoveries have cost the Patriots 1.2 points, while opponent kicking has handed them 2.4. The total is -3.3.

Penalties are a steady drain: 66 against, 500 yards, and a net of -8 points of win probability. The team's net EPA per snap is -0.007, 18th in the league.

On fourth down, Vrabel's Chicken Index is 36%, 21st on the most-timid-first list. Of 37 graded fourth downs, the model recommended going on 11, and New England went on 7. The misses add up to 3.9 expected points lost, with 2 of them clear.

Next up is the Detroit Lions on the road, Sunday, Nov. 15, at 9:30 AM ET on Fox. It is Week 10, and the penalty total and the fourth-and-short decisions are where the data says New England can recover value.

How this was reported. Every number in this piece comes from the play-by-play, drive, injury and snap data Pigskin Nightly collects for every game. EPA (expected points added) is from the open nflverse model. We do not use anonymous sources or invent quotes. Read how we write; spotted an error? Tell us and we will correct it in the open.