The Watchtower: Lions at Vikings

 

Last week’s game against the Eagles had a hint of desperation: both teams were coming off the heels of a painful loss, and both teams lost their starting quarterbacks in the process.  But if that game had a hint of desperation about it, this game is absolutely dripping with desperation.  The Lions are 0-2, and fans would give almost anything to get on the board and know 0-16 won’t happen again.  The Vikings dragged Brett Favre back from Mississippi, kicking and screaming, to win a Super Bowl—and yet, they also find themselves at 0-2. 

Brad Childress vs. Gunther Cunningham

Chilly	Gun	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Fum	Sack
PHI	TEN	4	25.9	6.18	4.54	11th	20.2	6.30	3.83	24	5.89	2	3.66	1-1	6-31
PHI	KCC	18	19.4	5.93	3.92	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	37	7.69	1	5.33	3-1	1-1
MIN	DET	2nd	29.4	7.18	4.15	32nd	30.9	7.78	4.42	27	6.04	0	4.5	2-1	2-1
MIN	DET	2nd	29.4	7.18	4.15	32nd	30.9	7.78	4.42	27	11.10	0	4.90	2-2	1-4

All the in-division foes grant me the luxury of two meetings a year.  The 2009 Vikings were especially Watchtowerable opponents; serving as a perfect case study for why I do this.  In the first Vikings Watchtower analysis, I concluded:

We see the same pattern in all three games; therefore I feel safe concluding the following: given equal or lesser talent and execution, Gunther Cunningham’s hyperaggressive 4-3 disproportionately disrupts Brad Childress’s conservative Walsh-style offense, especially in the running game. However, a very effective deep passing game can stretch the defense, reduce QB pressure, and produce points.

In the second Vikings Watchtower, I fairly well crowed about the how the offensive output of the Vikings was indeed much lower than expected, and boldly predicted the pattern would repeat itself in the second game as well:

Rather than attempt to decide which dimension of the Vikings' offense holds the iocaine, let's go right back to the data. Despite the second-best offense in the NFL meeting the second-worst defense, that offense underperformed its season averages. I originally concluded that the Gunther Cunningham 4-3 disproportionately disrupts Childress’ conservative flavor, and that conclusion was indisputably correct.

Now, I didn’t make an actual prediction for the game beyond “a medium-to-low scoring slugfest”; I was just starting this feature, and hadn’t refined it to the level I have now. Therefore, I’ll simply refine my original prediction: Given a huge talent and execution advantage, but a definite systemic disadvantage, I expect the Vikings will meet or slightly underperform their season averages: scoring 27-30 points, passing for 6.75-7.0 yards per attempt, and rushing for 3.75-4.0 yards per carry. I have very high confidence in this prediction.

I stuck my neck pretty far out there with that “very high confidence” bit, especially as it’s quite rare for two teams to play each other twice in one season and have duplicate results.  Nevertheless, that’s exactly what happened; the Vikings were again held to 27 points.  Twice the second-ranked, scoring-29.4-points-per-game Vikings offense faced the dead-last-ranked, allowing-30.9-points-per-game defense, and twice they scored only 27 points.  Clearly, whether it’s through scheme or playcalling, the Lions’ defense “has the Vikings’ number.”

Astoundingly, the Vikings have the second-lowest-scoring offense in the NFL, averaging just 9.5 points through the first two games.  Granted, those two defenses are the Saints and the Dolphins, currently 10th and 1st in the NFL in scoring defense, but still—the Vikings aren’t playing like they did in 2009.  With a mere 6.3 YpA, the passing offense that was so successful last season looks completely pedestrian in 2010.

I’m not certain I buy it.  It’s true that Favre is missing his favorite target from last season, Sydney Rice—and it’s true that Favre’s offensive line is in the process of crossing the line between “experienced” to “old”.  Still, I don’t think the Silver Fox is completely out of magic.  An awakening is due, and a home game against the Lions seems like the perfect wake-up call.

Still, Rice isn’t coming back this week, and new WR addition Hank Baskett is unlikely to make an impact in his first game in purple.  If we blame the Vikings’ precipitous drop in effectiveness on Rice, and a rusty Ironman, the Lions should still be facing these Vikings as they are.  The Vikes are averaging ten points a game, having faced two top ten defenses.  We can posit that against the Lions’ twenty-seventh ranked scoring defense (27.0 ppg), they should score something more like 20-23 points.

Given a slight advantage in execution, and a proven systemic advantage, I expect the Vikings to perform slightly below expectations.  With little data about the Vikings’ 2010 offensive norms, I project them to score 17-20 points.  I project them to throw for 6.5-7.0 YpA, and rush for 4.5-4.75 YpA.  I have medium confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences

Well, Brett Favre is Brett Favre, and when Brett Favre Brett Favres ya, you just never know what’s coming and then BOOM!  The Lions, as a franchise, have never beaten Brett Favre on his own turf, and there’s a reason for that: Favre is the greatest quarterback of all time, and the Lions have been perennially terrible on the road, and against the pass.  They may be better at both this season, but enough to finally take down #4?  That’s still a big ask, as humbled as the great one may currently be.

Scott Linehan vs. Leslie Frazier

Lin	Fraz	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Fum	Sack
MIN	TBB	8th	24.4	6.60	5.3	1st	12.2	4.88	3.79	24	7.78	2	7.52	3-11	2-1
MIN	IND	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	19th	21.9	7.15	4.43	28	8.89	0	5.75	2-1	2-15
MIA	TBB	16th	19.9	5.94	3.69	8th	17.1	6.15	3.46	13	6.21	0	3.56	3-2	4-24
DET	MIN	27th	16.4	5.27	3.92	10th	19.5	6.89	4.14	13	5.07	2	3.79	2-1	2-16
DET	MIN	27th	16.4	5.27	3.92	10th	19.5	6.89	4.14	10	4.39	0	4.23	2-1	3-20

In the first Vikings Watchtower, I concluded:

given greater or equal talent, Scott Linehan’s balanced offense significantly outperforms its averages when facing a Dungy-style Tampa 2, especially against the run. Given lesser talent, Linehan’s offense meets or mildly outperforms expectations against a T2. However, a disproportionate amount of sacks and turnovers seem to be created by a Tampa 2 when facing a Linehan offense.

Though I wasn't projecting specific point totals at that point in my Watchtowering, I felt as though the 13-point, 2-sack, 2-INT performance by the Lions' offense bore out my conclusion.  From the second Watchtower:

I originally concluded that given lesser talent, Scott Linehan’s balanced offense meets or slightly exceeds expectations against a Dungy-style defense, even while allowing more sacks and/or turnovers. This conclusion was confirmed by the results of Week 2.

Again, I’ll refine my original prediction: with lesser talent, and therefore a small-to-zero systemic advantage, the Lions will slightly underperform, or approach, their season averages: 14-17 points scored, 5.0-5.25 YpA, and 3.75-4.0 YpC. I have very high confidence in this prediction.

The Lions actually fell slightly short of this projection, mustering only ten points.  Stafford didn’t throw an interception—but this was accomplished by almost never taking a risk.  The miniscule 4.39 YpA (51 attempts for only 224 yards!) shows the extensive degree to which the Lions were ankle-biting.  If they have any hope of beating Brett Favre and the Vikings this time around, they will not be able to do it by throwing it no farther than they could run it.

So far this year, the Lions are scoring at a well-above-average clip, 23.0 PpG.  This is good for 10th-best in the NFL (though, of course, with only two games played, it’s hard to assign that fact much weight).  The Vikings’ offense has slipped, but the defense is as stout as ever—through two games, they’ve allowed only 21 offensive points to the Saints and Dolphins combined.  It’s worth noting that this same Saints offense averaged 31.9 points last season!

It’s safe to assume the Vikings’ defense will remain a top ten unit.  Given their performances with Shaun Hill in, it’s tempting to say that the Lions’ offense will remain a top ten unit as well.  Given the propensity for the Lions to outperform averages, especially on the ground, against Minnesota, I think we need to look at their current scoring average, 23.0 points, and make it the target.  Given an equal (or slightly lesser) level of talent and execution, and a mild systemic advantage, the Lions should roughly meet their season averages, scoring 20-24 points.  They should pass for 6.0-6.5 YpA, and rush for 3.5-3.75 YpC.  I have medium confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences

There are a slew of these.  The Vikings’ defensive averages, as well as the Lions’ offensive averages, are far from solid—they’re both based on just two games.  The Lions have played against two (presumably) stout defenses in the Bears and Eagles; yet their average is certainly inflated by the two TDs scored against the Eagles’ prevent defense.  Then again, they had a TD on the Bears erroneously taken off the board, so that may be a wash.

Meanwhile, the Vikings have held the vaunted Saints offense to just 14 points, and the much-less-vaunted-but-nothing-to-sneeze-at Dolphins offense to only 7.  Even with a systemic advantage tilting the field towards the Lions, this is an extremely stout defense.  It makes me very, very nervous.

Conclusion

All the stars are aligning for the Lions: the Vikings offense is in disarray, the numbers seem to point their way, and they've played well enough to win (without winning) for two games.  It seems like the dam has to burst, like the time has finally come.  Paula Pasche of the Oakland Press has already gone out on a limb and predicted victory; the numbers compel me to do the same.  The Brett Favre loss streak, the road loss streak, the axemen ready to chop that limb to the ground?  Well, I’ll just have to brave them with her.  The most likely outcome of the game is a close Lions win, with above-average rushing performances from both sides, and a 21-17 final score.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,minnesota vikings,brett favre,adrian peterson,jahvid best

Read more...

the watchtower: lions at vikings

Before we delve into a very, very special Watchtower—the first to feature an opponent that has already been Watchtower’d—let’s take a look at last week’s installment:

• Regardless of talent, Gunther Cunningham defenses disproportionately depress the scoring of Greg Knapp offenses, despite allowing typical rushing and passing per-play effectiveness.
• Given a definite talent advantage and a mild systemic points-denial disadvantage, I expect the Seahawks to mildly overperform their season averages: 20-23 points, with 6.00-6.25 YpA, and 3.75-4.00 YpC. I have medium-high confidence in this prediction.
• It seems as though Jim L. Mora’s conservative 4-3 disproportionately depresses the per-play effectiveness of Linehan’s balanced offense—unless scoring can come from big plays that get behind the defense.
• If "Dr. Jekyll" shows up--the Lions offense that features Matt Stafford, Calvin Johnson, and Kevin Smith all healthy and effective--the Lions should be able to push it deep and meet or slightly outperform their expectations: 17-20 points, 6.25-6.5 YpA, and 3.75-4.YpC. I have medium-low confidence in this prediction.

. . . and the results, in gorgeous table format:

Off.	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
DETp	19.3	5.84	3.51	31st	29.3	7.53	4.82	17-20	6.25-.5	-	3.75-4	-
DETa	19.3	5.84	3.51	31st	29.3	7.53	4.82	20	4.83	5	5.43	2-17
SEAp	16.1	5.42	3.76	14th	21.0	6.49	4.25	20-23	6-6.25	-	3.75-4	-
SEAa	16.1	5.42	3.76	14th	21.0	6.49	4.25	25	6.62	1	3.06	1-2

First, of course, the points: I projected 17-20 for the Lions; they scored 20. I projected 20-23 for the Seahawks; their offense scored 25.  I got into a protracted argument with Seahawks fans about whether or not it is ethically legitimate to subtract a defensive TD from “actual points scored” while evaluating a projection of offensive points; I won.

Oddly, as close as the projection was on points scored, it was wildly off-base on run/pass effectiveness--in both directions, for both teams.  I projected 6.25-to-6.50 yards per pass attempt for the Lions; they produced a miserable-even-for-them 4.83.  Of course, that’s partially explicable by the five attempts that went for zero yards . . . on the ground, I projected a mildly better-than-average day, 3.75-to-4.00 YpC.  Instead, the Lions’ ground game was breathtakingly effective, gashing Seattle for 5.43 YpC.

For Seattle’s part, I projected 6.00-6.25 YpA, and instead they averaged almost a half-yard more than that: 6.62 YpA.  On the ground, I projected they’d just about match their average, 3.75-to-4.00 YpC—and instead, with run-stuffer Grady Jackson a healthy scratch, the Lions held the ‘Hawks to just 3.06 yards per carry.

Interestingly, this run/pass effectiveness reversal seems to happen a lot.  Might it be because defenses load up to stop where teams are strong, and then the offense outperforms expectations the other way?  Figuring out if this is a statistically quantifiable phenomenon might make for an interesting offseason project.  Either way, this run/pass Whack-a-Mole effect produced the projected final results: a regrettably foreseeable, no-less-heartbreaking loss.

Brad Childress vs. Gunther Cunningham

Chilly	Gun	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
PHI	TEN	4	25.9	6.18	4.54	11th	20.2	6.30	3.83	24	5.89	2	3.64	1-1
PHI	KCC	18	19.4	5.93	3.92	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	37	7.68	1	1.64	3-1
MIN	DET	2nd	30.5	7.18	4.15	31st	29.6	7.36	4.65	27	6.04	0	4.48	2-1

In the Watchtower for the first Vikings game, I identified a systemic advantage for the Lions' blitzing 4-3 defense against Brad Childress' conservative flavor of the Bill Walsh offense.  Sure enough, the Lions stymied the Vikings in the first half, shutting them out completely.

I expected the Vikings to overcome this disadvantage by airing it out over the Lions' suspect secondary--but instead, they nibbled underneath. Brett Favre was sparklingly efficient while dinking and dunking, completing 23 of 27 pass attempts.  Adrian Peterson, while very effective on a per-carry basis (6.13 YpC), was effectively contained, gaining only 92 yards on 14 carries; his sole TD accounted for 27 of those.

Since that game, the Vikings have proven that they’re a force to be reckoned with: they’re the second-best scoring offense in football, averaging 30.5 points per game.  They’re excelling in both dimensions of offense, netting 7.18 YpA and 4.15 YpC.  Meanwhile, the Lions’ defense has been anything but forceful: they’re the second-worst scoring defense in football, allowing 29.6 points per game.  They’re failing in both dimensions of defense, allowing 7.36 YpA and 4.65 YpC. 

Of course, it's tempting to turn around and predict a 40-point explosion for the Vikings--but, that didn’t happen the first time.  In fact, the Lions held the Vikings to 3.5 points beneath their season average, partially thanks to that aggressive passing D.  The Vikings fell more than a yard short of their season per-attempt average, and only outgained their season per-carry average by a third of a yard.

So, what to do? The strongest possible data point of all, a prior in-season meeting between two teams, seems to trump everything--and yet, when two teams meet twice in a season, it never results in the same game being played twice.  Part of this is adjustment; both teams learned a lot about each other from the first meeting.  That might lead to some of the Whack-a-Mole effect I discussed above: if the Lions come out defending the short pass with press man coverage, and linebackers in zones behind them, the Vikings might immediately attack the sidelines deep, and rush AD often, without fearing the run blitz.

However, we could spend all day playing the “I know that YOU know that I know that YOU know . . .” game: 

Rather than attempt to decide which dimension of the Vikings' offense holds the iocaine, let's go right back to the data.  Despite the second-best offense in the NFL meeting the second-worst defense, that offense underperformed its season averages.  I originally concluded that the Gunther Cunningham 4-3 disproportionately disrupts Childress’ conservative flavor, and that conclusion was indisputably correct.

Now, I didn’t make an actual prediction for the game beyond “a medium-to-low scoring slugfest”; I was just starting this feature, and hadn’t refined it to the level I have now.  Therefore, I’ll simply refine my original prediction: Given a huge talent and execution advantage, but a definite systemic disadvantage, I expect the Vikings will meet or slightly underperform their season averages: scoring 27-30 points, passing for 6.75-7.0 yards per attempt, and rushing for 3.75-4.0 yards per carry.  I have very high confidence in this prediction.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences:

I’ve noticed that when there are two in-season games between two teams, two primary factors cause the results to vary between games: weather tipping the run-pass balance towards “run”, and variances in quarterback play.  Obviously, these are two dome teams, so weather isn’t a factor.  Brett Favre has been playing generally better as the season wears on, and has developed a much stronger rapport with Vikings wideouts like Sidney Rice. 

However, he was essentially flawless in the first meeting between two teams; how much better could he play?  The Lions’ defense, meanwhile, has been playing generally better as the season wears on as well (their current averages are still skewed by the Saints and Bears blowouts).  Their pass rush, especially, has been markedly better.

The final result of this should be that Favre has a lower completion percentage, gets sacked more often, and possibly commits a turnover or two—but he should also complete more deep passes, possibly for devastating quick-strike TDs.  I’m going to cite the Whack-a-Mole principle and call this all a wash; in the end, the Vikings should meet the objective statistical predictions.

Scott Linehan vs. Leslie Frazier

Lin	Fraz	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
MIN	TBB	8th	24.4	6.60	5.3	1st	12.2	4.88	3.79	24	7.78	2	7.52	3-11
MIN	IND	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	19th	21.9	7.15	4.43	28	8.89	0	5.75	2-1
MIA	TBB	16th	19.9	5.94	3.69	8th	17.1	6.15	3.46	13	6.21	0	3.56	3-2
DET	MIN	26th	16.6	5.27	3.92	17th	21.8	6.89	4.14	13	5.07	2	3.79	2-1

In the previous installment, I also identified a mild systemic advantage for Scott Linehan offenses against Dungy-style Tampa 2 defenses.  When Linehan had a talent advantage over the Dungy D, the running game was even more effective.  When Linehan had lesser talent, this systemic advantage seemed very mild or nonexistent.

In Week 2, this analysis was confirmed: the Lions scored 13 points, just a little beneath their season average.  The Lions managed 5.07 YpA against the Vikings; just a little beneath their season average.  The Lions ran for 3.79 YpC; just a little beneath their season average.  Considering that the Lions’ offense is the 26th-best in the NFL, and the Vikings are the 17th, underperforming averages across the board is exactly what you’d expect.  It could be argued that the Lions underperformed their averages less than expected--indicating that a systemic advantage affected the outcome--but that would be assigning big significance to some very, very small variances.

I originally concluded that given lesser talent, Scott Linehan’s balanced offense meets or slightly exceeds expectations against a Dungy-style defense, even while allowing more sacks and/or turnovers.  This conclusion was confirmed by the results of Week 2.

Again, I’ll refine my original prediction: with lesser talent, and therefore a small-to-zero systemic advantage, the Lions will slightly underperform, or approach, their season averages: 14-17 points scored, 5.0-5.25 YpA, and 3.75-4.0 YpC.  I have very high confidence in this prediction.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences:

Again, what will be the biggest factor in differentiating Week 10’s results from Week 2’s?  Effective quarterback play.  Now, Matt Stafford’s Week 2 game against the Vikings was no great shakes: 18-of-30 for 152 yards, 1 TD, and 2 INTs.  However, that was a notable improvement from Week 1.  Tellingly, it was not yet as good as his best game as a pro: his 21-of-36, 241-yard, 1 TD/0 INT Week 3 win over the Redskins.

Once he’d established this very, very steep upwards trend line, he got hurt, and the offense completely fell apart.  It was clear against St. Louis that Stafford was rusty; his balls were inaccurate, and very frequently dropped.  It was similarly clear that Kevin Smith was not 100%; he looked hesitant and slow.  It was sparklingly, scintillatingly, absolutely crystal clear that without the threat of Megatron, defenses could simply smother the Lions with in-the-box defenders and press coverage.

However, against the Seahawks, it was clear that the offense that had started the season--the one that had averaged over 20 points in the first four games--had returned, leaving behind the miserable 10 PpG offense we'd seen against the Steelers, Packers, and Rams. With Stafford and Megatron both in the lineup, this offense would the 19th-best in the league, virtually tied with Seattle on a per-game basis. Without them both, it would be very nearly the worst; ahead of only the Rams, Browns, and Raiders.  This is the “Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde” phenomenon I referred to last week.

Matthew Stafford's five interceptions cost the Lions the Seattle game; there's no doubt about that. Two of those picks came when Stafford failed to see a extra-deep linebacker playing centerfield--the cornerstone principle of the Tampa 2 defense.  The Seahawks just installed the Tampa 2 this season--and the Vikings are an established T2 team.  One would hope that this is a point of coaching emphasis this week!  If Stafford can cut the picks down from five to the two he threw in Week 2, and move the ball with the effectiveness he did against Seattle, the Lions’ O could drastically exceed expectations.

Would it surprise you to learn that the Seahawks are allowing only 20.88 points per game on defense; 13th-best in the league?  Would it further surprise you to learn that Minnesota’s is the 17th-best in the league, allowing 21.75?  I hope not; we’ve covered those figures very recently!  But even so, it’s shocking to see it in black and white: this season, Seattle is executing the Tampa 2 slightly better than Minnesota is.

So: if we continue down this primrose path, we can conclude that this matchup is "really" between Dr. Jekyll, the 19th-best scoring offense, and the 17-best scoring defense--and therefore, the systemic advantage that Linehan offenses possess against T2s should express itself, and the Lions should strongly outperform their "real" season averages, especially on the ground. The averages for the "Dr. Jekyll" Lions offense (Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 9) are 20.6 PpG, 5.55 YpA, and 3.80 YpC.  Therefore, in Fantasyland, the Lions will score 27-30 points, pass for 6.00-6.25 YpA, and rush for 4.5-4.75 YpC.

Conclusion:

Unfortunately, even if you buy tickets to the "Fantasyland" I've constructed, the Lions and Vikings are both projected to score 27-30 points.  Further, with the way the Vikings are cutting through the league right now, and the way the Lions have been playing, I simply cannot see the Lions playing 60 minutes of “Dr. Jekyll” football in the Metrodome.  Moreover, one of the “Dr. Jekyll” games was against Minnesota, and as competitive as that game was (I was there), 27-13 is not the same as winning.  I’m going to stick with my original projections—the data is rock-solid—and say that the Lions will lose this week, scoring 14-17 points against Minnesota’s 25-30.

Read more...

the watchtower: Lions vs. Vikings

In last week’s Watchtower, we matched up the historical OC vs. DC tendencies to see if there were any schematic mismatches—that is, if either team had a systemic advantage over the other.  Looking over the history, and the presumed talent levels of each team, we came to a conclusion: the most probable outcome of the game was a shootout that the Lions lose.

Sure enough, that’s exactly what happened--though some of the Lions’ scoring contributions relied heavily on special teams providing great field position, and one of the TDs was defensive.  It seems as though the breakdown, though statistically flawed--very small samples of head-to-head matchups, relying entirely on the mean averages of 16 data points, etc.—had enough predictive value to be worthwhile.

This week, the Lions take on the Vikings.  Again, the Linehan offenses are the 2006-2008 Rams, the 2005 Dolphins, and the 2002-2004 Vikings.  Gunther defenses include the 1995-2000 Chiefs, and the 2004-2006 Chiefs.  I tentatively include data from his 2001-2003 stint as linebackers coach with the Titans, since Jim Schwartz was the DC at that time--but the Lions’ scheme is thought to more closely resemble Gun’s system in KC than the balanced D Schwartz ran in Tennessee, so I include those years on a case-by-case basis.  I also discount Cunningham’s ‘06, ‘07, and ‘08 seasons in KC, as he merely executed Edwards’ conservative flavor of the Tampa 2 defense.

For Minnesota, I’m calling the 2002-2005 Eagles and 2006-2008 Vikings “Childress” offenses.  Unfortunately, Lions OC Scott Linehan never faced off against Minny DC Leslie Frazier as a head coach or offensive coordinator.  However, we know that Frazier, after studying under Jim Johnson in Philly, and a contentious two-year run as the DC in Cincinnati, became Tony Dungy’s star pupil in Indianapolis, and now runs the Tampa 2.  Therefore, I included Linehan’s games against Dungy’s Colts and Monte Kiffin’s Bucs defenses.

/tr>

Chi	GC	Ornk	PPG	Ypa	Ypc	Drnk	PPG	P	YpA	Int	YpC	Fum	Sak
PHI	TEN	4th	25.9	6.18	4.54	11th	20.2	24	5.89	2	3.64	1-1	6-31
PHI	KCC	18th	19.4	5.93	3.92	16th	20.3	37	7.68	1	1.64	3-1	1-1
MIN	KCC	15th	22.8	6.35	5.33	14th	20.9	10	5.82	0	4.24	2-1	5-36

In the first matchup, we see that Philly comes in as a potent scoring offense, ranking 4th in the NFL with 25.9 ppg.  Note they ran the ball especially well, with 4.54 yards per carry.  Tennessee’s defense was solid; ranked 11th, at 20.2 points per game.  I’d expect scoring to be right at or just below Philly’s average on the season—and indeed it was: 24 points scored.

The passing yards-per-attempt was right about on target (6.18 avg., 5.89 actual), but look at the rushing!  Philly rushed for 0.9 ypc below average for that game; it was also on 22 attempts, so they didn’t just abandon the run—and the only rushers were starting RB Duce Staley and QB Donovan McNabb, so it’s not as if injuries were a concern.  Also, look at the disruption numbers: 2 picks, 1 fumble lost, and six sacks for a loss of 31 yards!  Still, this was with Schwartz making defensive calls, not Gunther, so let’s hold off on drawing conclusions.

In 2005, the Eagles were a below-the-median scoring offense, ranked 18th with 19.4 ppg.  Passing for 5.93 yards per attempt, and rushing for 3.92, the Childress-led offense was considerably less fearsome.  Though not boasting anywhere near the personnel the ‘02 Titans had, the Cunningham-coordinated Chiefs were the 16th-best scoring defense, allowing a mean 20.3 points per game.  The expectation would be a very-close-to-average output by Philly—but instead, they blew up with 37 points, and passed far more effectively than usual(5.93 avg., 7.68 actual).  Terrell Owens had a huge day (11-171, 2 TD). 

However, the Philly running game was again stymied.  Brian Westbrook and Lamar Gordon combined for just 28 yards on 17 carries.  KC also forced three fumbles, recovering one, picked off a pass, and sacked McNabb once.  Since the first data point is still “iffy”, I’m going to look at the last one.

In 2007, the two coordinators again have closely-matched, close-to-the-median scoring units: the Vikings were ranked 15th with 22.8 average points scored, and the Chiefs were the 14th-ranked scoring defense, allowing an average 20.9 points per game.  The ‘07 Vikes looked much like the ‘02 Eagles: passing for 6.35 ypa, but absolutely toting it for 5.33 ypc.  The Chiefs allowed an average of 20.9 points per game, ranking them 16th in the NFL and matching Minnesota’s average output.  Therefore, we have a very strong expectation that Minnesota will score 21 points.  However, they only mustered 10.

They passed much less effectively, gaing 0.53 fewer yards per attempt than their average.  The juggernaut running game was staunched even more, gaining 1.09 yards fewer than expected with every attempt.  Also, we see another raft of sacks (5-36), and 2 fumbles (1 lost).

We see the same pattern in all three games; therefore I feel safe concluding the following: given equal or lesser talent and execution, Gunther Cunningham’s hyperaggressive 4-3 disproportionately disrupts Brad Childress’s conservative Walsh-style offense, especially in the running game.  However, a very effective deep passing game can stretch the defense, reduce QB pressure, and produce points.

Lin.	T2	Ornk	PPG	Ypa	Ypc	Drnk	PPG	P	YpA	Int	YpC	Fum	Sak
MIN	TBB	8th	24.4	6.60	5.3	1st	12.2	24	7.75	2	7.52	3-11	2-1
MIN	IND	6th	25.3	8.18	4.71	19th	21.9	28	8.89	0	5.75	2-1	2-15
MIA	TBB	16th	19.9	5.94	3.69	8th	17.1	13	6.21	0	3.56	3-2	4-24

Linehan had a very strong roster when he first faced a Dungy-style defense—24.4 ppg (8th best in the NFL), and carrying for 5.3 ypc.  However, those Bucs were ridiculous; the #1 scoring defense, allowing a miniscule 12.2 points per game!  Yet, the Vikings weren’t slowed down at all.  They scored their average 24 points, passed for a well above average 7.75 yards per attempt, and rumbled all over the Bucs for an absolutely ridiculous 7.52 yards per carry.  The disruption numbers were very high: 2 picks, 3 fumbles (2 lost), and 2 sacks, but with a young Daunte Culpepper at the helm, that was not unexpected for those Vikings.

Against Dungy’s Colts in 2004, Linehan’s Vikings were again very strong: 6th-best in the league with 25.3 ppg, passing for 8.18 ypa, and rushing for 4.71 ypc.  The Colts, however, weren’t executing that Tampa 2 nearly as well as the ‘02 Bucs: the Colts were a below-median scoring defense, allowing 21.9 points per game.  One would think the Vikings would outperform their average, and that’s exactly what happens: 28 points, a robust 8.89 ypa, and a walloping 5.75 ypc—0.71 and 1.04 yards per play above their season averages, respectively!  Again some disruption: 2 fumbles, 1 lost, and 2 sacks—but overall, a strong Linehan O met a mediocre Dungy D and mildly outperformed expectations. 

Finally, we see the 2005 Dolphins, the median offense that season (19.9), going against the 8th-ranked Buccaneers, who were allowing only 17.1 yards per game.  The expectation would be that the Dolphins’ offense scores well below season averages, and that’s what happens—they muster only 13 points.  However, the passing game and running game each hover near their in-season per-play expecations (5.94 avg,, 6.21 act.; 3.69 avg., 3.56 act.).  There is, again, a lot of disruption (2 fumbles, 1 lost, 5 sacks for –36 yards), but this time it can’t be blamed on Culpepper.

Strong patterns are emerging, so I feel pretty comfortable in making this statement: given greater or equal talent, Scott Linehan’s balanced offense significantly outperforms its averages when facing a Dungy-style Tampa 2, especially against the run.  Given lesser talent, Linehan’s offense meets or mildly outperforms expectations against a T2.  However, a disproportionate amount of sacks and turnovers seem to be created by a Tampa 2 when facing a Linehan offense.

It’s that pesky turnover thing that will make the difference; if Minnesota sacks Stafford five or six times and generates two or three turnovers, the Lions  will have an extremely hard time keeping pace, even if the ground game is working well (and scheme or no, nobody runs on the Williams Wall!).  However, Minnesota’s lack of a downfield passing game should allow Gunther Cunningham to turn up the defensive heat to an extreme level, which should have a disproportionately disruptive effect on the Vikings’ offense.

Given how amazing Adrian Peterson looked in the Vikings’ first game, and how inept the Lions looked against the Saints, it’s tempting to say this will be a blowout—however, the Vikings didn’t blow out the Browns, and I don’t think this one will be a blowout either.  It appears as though the Lions have a decided systemic advantage on both sides of the ball, assuming Gunther feels safe enough to crank up the heat.  It remains to be seen if those advantages will be enough to overcome the gap in talent on both sides of the ball.

Therefore, the most likely result of this game is a closely contested, medium-to-low scoring slugfest, with a lot of turnovers and penalties.  It is slightly more likely that Minnesota’s talent overcomes Detroit’s systemic advantages, but this will be a volatile game in Detroit’s home opener.

There IS some room for hope here. But to cash in, the running game will have to improve, Stafford will need to limit turnovers, and Gunther will have be as Gunther as he can be. Also, be prepared for another round of ref-trashing, replay controversy, obnoxious flags, and trash-talking. Me? I'll be up in the Roar Zone, doing plenty of roaring.

Read more...