Allow me a slightly lengthy preface here.

Here at NYGMen, I’ve long relied upon the unique stats created by the smart guys at FootballOutsiders.com, especially their DVOA stat, which breaks down each play and determines its success based on situation and opponent.

DVOA is a better gauge of how good a team is than raw yardage stats, which are often skewed by situation – think about when a team piles on chunks of yards while getting blown out – and opponent – maybe a 90-yard rushing performance against the ’85 Bears is more impressive than a 100-yard game against the 2008 Seahawks.

It is also a better gauge of how good a team is than wins and losses, which are subject to simple luck: what if the tipped pass is caught by a wide receiver, or even falls incomplete, and doesn’t get intercepted and returned for a touchdown?  Looking at teams on a play-by-play basis puts in their proper place these random elements of luck that have a disproportionate impact on the outcome of games.

The value of a stat can be judged by how predictive it is going forward.  As it turns out, DVOA is more predictive of win-loss record going forward than both win-loss record itself and yardage stats.  In other words, a team with a good DVOA but a mediocre win-loss record can generally be expected to have a good win-loss record going forward.  Conversely, a team with a mediocre DVOA but a good win-loss record can expected to be mediocre in the future.

So there you have it: DVOA, the best gauge I know of how good a team will be from a given point forward.  The stat is expressed in terms of a percentage relative to the league average: to give a general benchmark, a team with a 30% DVOA is Super Bowl worthy, a team with a DVOA of 0 is average, and a team with a DVOA of -30% is first-pick-of-the-draft worthy.

Ok, anyway…

This is all prologue to a discussion of how ridiculously good the Giants have been this year.  Their DVOA of 56.7% is by far the best in the league, significantly better than the second-best Ravens (I know, it seems weird, but bear with me on DVOA, please), who stand at 42.5%.

Their offense has been truly phenomenal, sporting a DVOA of 41.1%, more than 10 points better than the second-best Broncos.  Their running game has been the best in the league by far, with a 38.6% DVOA that ranks much better than the second-place Falcons at 26.2%.  Their passing game ranks a very narrow second to Washington’s – of all teams! – by a margin of 43.7% to 43.6%.

The defense has been merely excellent: their DVOA of -12.4%, (which was brought down by getting sliced up by Carson Palmer) ranks 7th in the league.  They have been excellent against both run (-10.2%, which ranks 9th) as well as the pass (-14.0%, which ranks 7th).

And thanks to John Carney and some good returns by Hixon and even R.W. on Sunday, the G-Men are even very good on special teams, boasting a DVOA of 3.2%, which ranks 10th.

The upshot here is that the G-Men have been absurdly good on a play-by-play basis, probably better than you would have thought.  Detractors might point to our soft schedule thus far, but the beauty of DVOA is that it accounts for opponent.  (Although at this point in the season, the strength of opponents is hard to pin down.  Also, the G-Men get a lot of credit in this system for beating the Redskins, but it seemed pretty clear that the Redskins of Week 1 weren’t the same team as they are now.  But I digress…)

How good has this Giants start been?  It is the 7th best start since 1996, the point at which FootballOutsiders has enough data to calculate DVOA.  The top team on this list?  None other than the 2007 New England Patriots, with an absurd 72.4%.

Their offense has been nearly as good from a recent historical perspective: It ranks 8th best through four games.  Strangely, the 1999 Redskins top this list.

I’ll let Aaron Schatz, the genius behind FootballOutsiders, take this one home:

“Yes, that’s right – so far, the Giants have been that good.  They have a better pass defense than they had a year ago, and a much, much better passing game on offense.  Many NFL observers felt Eli Manning would continue to play at the high level he showed in last year’s postseason, with improved confidence moving him into the upper echelon of NFL quarterbacks.  Pro Football Prospectus 2008 said Manning would put up better fantasy numbers this year because of the “third down rebound effect.”  [A FootballOutsiders tenet that says that guys who are significantly worse on third down than they were on first and second – which Eli was last year – will bounce back as their third down performance gets more in line with their early down performance.]  It looks like both of these things have happened.  He’s the clear leader of the team and as we learned this week, he can even play well without Plaxico Burress on the field.  Meanwhile, the Giants offense leads the league on first down and second down and is fifith in third down.  Last year, the Giants offense ranked 12, 17, and 23 on those downs, respectively.”

Bob Glauber in Newsday reports the Giants are not only looking at DeAngelo Hall, but also Seattle CB Marcus Trufant.

There is speculation they’re interested in dealing for Falcons cornerback DeAngelo Hall, who said Friday he will not return to the team after new general manager Thomas Dimitroff told him the club would consider offers for him. Add in another potential target of the Giants: Seahawks cornerback Marcus Trufant.

According to a league source familiar with the Giants’ situation, Trufant is on their radar as a potential acquisition once the trading period begins next Friday. Seattle has designated Trufant as their “franchise” player, meaning Seattle has virtually exclusive negotiating rights with him for the 2008 season. But that does not preclude them from making a trade. He is coming off his best season, with a career-high seven interceptions.

Hall has one year left on his contract with Atlanta, and had initially expressed optimism about staying. But Friday, after hearing that Dimitroff would listen to offers for him, Hall told reporters in Indianapolis that he isn’t coming back.

“You know what, I’ll go anywhere - anywhere they want me,” he said. “It’s hard to play or be a part of an organization that doesn’t want you, so I just want to go somewhere that wants me. It ain’t about the money. I even told the Falcons, ‘I’ll play out the last year of my contract if you don’t franchise tag me the following year.’ And they couldn’t agree to that.”

It looks like the Giants will revamp the  secondary.

Note: Took a needed vacation this past week, hitting the tables in AC, so sorry for neglecting the blog.

According to Star Ledger, the Giants may be looking to trade for DeAngelo Hall.

According to two people with knowledge of discussions between the teams, the Giants are willing to give Atlanta their first-round pick (31st overall) in April’s draft in exchange for Hall. The people requested anonymity because of the private nature of the trade talks.

Giants general manager Jerry Reese declined to comment yesterday morning when asked whether the Giants have inquired about Hall, the eighth overall pick in the 2004 draft.

The Giants had hoped to make a run at the Seahawks’ Marcus Trufant and the Raiders’ Nnamdi Asomugha, according to one of the people familiar with the team’s off-season plans, but each was made the franchise players by their respective teams. The Giants would owe two first-round picks if they signed either player. Patriots cornerback Asante Samuel, who will become a free agent next Friday, is viewed by the Giants more as a player whose success is the product of New England’s defensive system than his own ability.

Hall, 24, is a fast, tough and talented player who had 17 interceptions in his four NFL seasons. However, he had a tumultuous 2007 season with the Falcons. In a loss to the Panthers in September, he drew three penalties on Carolina’s game-tying drive and then got into a shouting match with coach Bobby Petrino on the sideline. Hall was fined $100,000 and benched for the first quarter of the next week’s game for the incident.

Hall would be interesting get. Yes he could be a cancer, but with the veteran leadership on the team, I don’t see it as a problem.