Bo Knows Low-Variance Football. So Does Jim.

Jim Schwartz, on why the Lions have scored more points in the fourth quarter than the first three in all of their games so far:

"We've had to in the fourth. We've been behind and that's put the pressure on us to have to do it. We're trying just as hard in the first quarter. Certainly no design or scheme or anything like that. We have to be efficient all four quarters and it can make a difference for us if we can get a lead and we can hold a lead. But we've got to battle for 60 minutes. You're judged just like a 16 game season, you're judged on all 16 games, you're judged on all 60 minutes. So no matter where you're scoring them they all count."

“We’ve had to in the fourth.”

Schwartz says it’s “no design or scheme or anything like that,” but the Lions’ close games are the result of obvious changes in approach on offense.

The biggest change from last season to this season is the way defenses are playing the Lions—and all of last season’s 5,000-yard passing offenses. The Saints, Patriots and Lions went 36-10 last season; through Week 6 of this season they’re 6-10. NFL defensive coordinators are paid way too much to let teams beat them with the same thing over and over—so they’re taking away the bombs-away offense and forcing these teams to adjust.

The Lions have adjusted by re-emphasizing the run game, drastically cutting back on hopeful shots downfield, and trying to emphasize intermediate routes. Linehan has also been doing a lot of “setting up” defenses with repetitive/predictable playcalls early in games, to subvert them later—or in the case of this play broken down by TuffLynx at Pride of Detroit, use repetitive/predictable playcalls in early games, to subvert them in later games.

By taking fewer risks and being less aggressive on offense, the Lions are pursuing a low-variance strategy.

This concept has been discussed all over the Internet, but it was synthesized best for me by Brian Cook at MGoBlog, in a piece called “Keep it Close and Lose in the Fourth Quarter," and its follow-up, "Mathy Mailbag." Read them both, plus all the links in both if you really want to grok this.

To summarize: low-variance strategies result in fewer possible outcomes. Two equally-matched teams both running more often than they pass and always punting on fourth down regardless of field position and never blitzing on defense won’t produce a 48-0 blowout in either direction.

This is, as discussed by Cook, Chris Brown, and Malcom Gladwell a “Goliath strategy.” When you’ve got a massive talent and skill advantage—as Goliath did over David—you want to eliminate the chance of anything crazy happening. Since the expected outcome is “you win,” you want to maximize the probability of getting the expected outcome.

As Cook notes, this is the strategy used by Bo Schembechler at Michigan: grind it out, play suffocating defense, take few risks, minimize mistakes, and use your massive size and talent advantage to consistently beat opponents with execution. Cook cited a passage from a book called Bo’s Lasting Lessons, wherein Bo, at a coaching clinic, veered dangerously close to schematic enlightenment before reaffirming his fevered belief in fundamentals and “playing Michigan football.” Cook:

This may have been brilliant in 1985, and brilliant against the poor, huddled masses that comprised Michigan's opponents at the time, but it's fundamentally a variance-hating strategy that presumes better talent. In it are the seeds of Michigan's time-honored failure against Rose Bowl foes, and its recent struggles to put away inferior competition.

It’s that old chestnut, attributed to darn near every midwestern football coach of historical note: “Only three things can happen when you pass the ball and two of them are bad.” Passing is a high-risk, high-variance strategy.

No NFL team passed more, or more often, than the Lions did in 2011.

This is why the Lions aren’t  doing it again in 2012: the Lions can assume a talent advantage over most NFL teams. They just beat the Eagles, one of the most talented teams in football, and Jeff McLane of the Philadelphia Inquirer wrote you could “see” the Lions were “physically dominant.” This is why the Lions passing twice as often as they run would be dumb, and playing things close to the vest is smart.

But.

One of the side effects of playing for low variance by running the ball a lot, making ultra-conservative fourth-down calls and, I don’t know, refusing to try an onside kick when you’re kicking from the opponent’s forty-yard line is that you shorten the game. With more time running off the clock, there are fewer plays and possessions—fewer chances to press your advantage.

If you flip a coin that’s weighted to land on “heads” 60% of the time 10,000 times, it will land on heads 60% of those 10,000 flips. If you flip that same coin ten times, it’s much more likely to land on heads for some other percentage.

If you reduce the number of ‘trials’, you increase the chance for an unexpected outcome. That is to say, if the Lions have an advantage over their opponent, attempting to control the clock gives them fewer chances to leverage that advantage. Re-stated again: by playing to reduce risk, the Lions can’t blow people out like they used to. They’re also not going to get blown out, but that’s cold comfort when you’re starting 2-3 instead of 5-0.

As a consequence, the Lions are running into the same problem Lloyd Carr did: if you’re going to keep it close for four quarters, you actually have to execute significantly better than the other team. Bo's reliance superior talent and execution left him unarmed against opponents with equal talent. Carr's similar approach with less-superior talent against less-hapless Big Ten opponents guaranteed him at least one embarrassing upset a season.

The Lions let the Rams hang around when Stafford throwing three first-half interceptions, and it almost cost them. The Lions were on track to beat the Titans 27-20 and the Vikings 13-6 except, you know, two punt return touchdowns, two kickoff return touchdowns, and a fumble return touchdown. By playing it close to the vest, the Lions couldn't build up the kind of lead that can withstand these freak occurrences/horrible mistakes. They have to get touchdowns from their early scoring opportunities and not settle for field goals.

Still, throughout these games, the Lions’ advantage has become apparent in the final stanza: Mikel Leshoure and Joique Bell punishing bruised defenses, Matthew Stafford and Shaun Hill carving up beleaguered secondaries downfield, shellshocked quarterbacks running for their lives and throwing picks.

Over the course of the season, the weird bounces and fluky breaks will even out. Stafford quickly eliminated the terrible picks of the Rams game, and the coverage teams managed to go a whole game without allowing a single return touchdown. The Lions are taking the correct approach—but they’re going to have to improve their offensive execution, or continue dropping games to inferior opponents.

Read more...

Three Cups Deep: Week 3, at Tennessee Titans

Coffee, by Martin Gommel

McDonald's has espresso now.

They've had it for a few years now, in fact. They’ve quickly been renovating all the zillions of McDonald’s restaurants across the globe. Gone is the dramatic, quasi-art-deco Yesterday’s-Diner-of-the-Future-Today chic of the original restaurant, gone is the sometimes-drab, sometimes-garish look of the utilitarian huts of the Eighties and Nineties; now we have “McCafe.”

The one closest to my house sports breathtakingly detailed blue-and-black tilework, hardwood floors, and an enclosed bubbling “waterfall” backlit by color-changing neon. The “chairs” to some tables are rolling upholstered cubes that seemed to have rolled off an Ikea showfloor. The food is as it always was. I have no idea what to do with this edifice.

Now, when I go through the drive-through for a morning breakfast fix, my nostrils get an arresting double shot of ground, roasted espresso beans: a knee-buckling aroma that renders me oblivious to everything but wanting coffee.

If McDonald’s put their robot-barista where you order instead of where you receive McGriddles, they’d be rich.

So Three Cups Deep returns after a hiatus. I’m not lying when I tell you I’ve started each of the last few 3CDs only to be unable to finish them due to real life commitments, or caught waiting for the new Coaches’ Film to be released, or simply beaten to the punch by all the wonderful Lions bloggers out there making the same point I wanted to make.

But the coffee’s in the air, and we need to talk about some things.

Abandoning the running game is bad.

It just is. As hard as it is for an NFL offense to consistently get the better of NFL defenses for four quarters, let alone sixteen games, it’s so much harder when you tell the defense what you’re going to do. The Lions lined up in the shotgun 68% of the time in 2011, and passed on 62.9% of all plays.

The Lions have an offensive “identity,” they are built around Matthew Stafford and his arsenal of targets. The offensive line is a pass-blocking offensive line. The Lions have invested heavily in talented running backs who can flourish without dominating run-blocking. They might well be described as a pass-to-run team.

However, defenses know the Lions struggled to run the ball last season, struggle to sustain drives, and can be beaten by taking away the deep pass. This season are dropping their secondaries very, very, very deep and daring the Lions to beat them with runs and short passes.

In order to remain effective, the Lions have to beat them with runs and short passes.

For years, the Texans tried to force-feed Andre Johnson with 20 targets a game. They didn’t win much. When they finally got a consistent running back, a reliable tight end, and some decent No. 2 and No.3 receiving options, the offense exploded. Also, I should not need to remind any TLiW readers about the “Randy Ratio.”

Being predictable does not work in the NFL, not unless the execution is absolutely perfect. Matthew Stafford, for whatever reason, has not only been not-perfect, his first two games looked very suspiciously only “pretty good.” On Sunday, Stafford was outstanding: 33-of-42 (78.6%) for 278 yards (6.62 YpA) and a touchdown. He completed passes, he overcame drops, he protected the ball. Brandon Pettigrew didn’t, and that’s unfortunate, but none of that is why the Lions lost.

The Lions lost because they allowed two special teams return touchdowns, two of an NFL record five touchdowns of 60-plus yards.

Let's be very clear about this: without those two return scores, the Lions win this game. They also allowed the bizarre Pettigrew strip-return for six, and beaten by the weird over-the-top-of-Jacob-Lacey-who-turned-the-wrong-way score. Just like against St. Louis, the Lions dominated the down-to-down ball movement: With all the freaky long scores, the Lions still outgained the Titans 583-437. just like against St. Louis they couldn't make the scoreboard reflect it until the closing seconds.

Just like against San Francisco, the Lions' coaches brought the right game plan, and the Lions' players executed it almost well enough to win. But not quite. Not quite.

Read more...

The Watchtower: Lions vs. Rams

Finally.

The Lions host the St. Louis Rams on Sunday, and all the months of half-informed, befuddled claptrap about the Lions “regressing” or “taking a step back” or having “discipline problems” or whatever will but up against the hard reality of the Detroit Lions taking the field and playing honest-to-God competitive football.

The baseless “regression” hogwash that floated throughout the diaspora has been logically debunked, most spectacularly by Nate Washuta of Holy Schwartz! and Jeremy Reisman at Detroit OnLion. Now, the Lions have a chance to physically debunk it, by playing four quarters of great football against a team that’s served as a benchmark for Jim Schwartz’s Lions twice before.

It was against the Rams that the Lions suffered the most obnoxious defeat of the 2009 campaign: the Rams’ 17-10 win at Ford Field was their only win of the season, the only “W” standing in between them and repeating the Lions’ 2008 feat.

It was against the Rams that the Lions enjoyed their most emphatic win of the 2010 season: a 44-6 romp that not only answered the question of which team’s turnaround was further along, but served as a desperately-needed release for apoplectic Lions fans; it was a laugher in every sense of the word.

Now, somehow, the stakes are exactly the same: a loss to the lowly Rams would be again be a gut-punch, a convincing win all the proof we need that everything is going to be alright.

Scott Linehan vs. Jeff Fisher

Lin	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	JF	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
MIN	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	TEN	30th	27.4	7.27	4.55	20	-21%	6.10	-15%	5.63	20%
MIA	16th	19.9	5.94	3.69	TEN	29th	26.3	6.84	4.22	24	21%	5.03	-15%	5.05	37%

Scott Linehan has faced off against Jeff Fisher twice before: in 2005, as the offensive coordinator of the Dolphins under Nick Saban, and the season before, as architect of the Vikings offense. The ‘04 Vikings were a powerful unit, ranked 6th in the NFL in scoring. They averaged 7.16 yards per pass attempt, and 4.71 yards per carry on the ground—both figures second-best in the NFL.

The Titans were not, as they say, in their glory in these days. In 2004, the Titans were ranked 30th (3rd-worst) in the NFL in scoring defense. They allowed an average of 27.4  points per game, 7.27 yards per pass attempt and 4.55 yards per carry.

Surprisingly, Linehan’s Vikings only scored 20 points against the Titans that day, 21% below their season average. They also held the Vikings to 6.1 YpA, 15% below their season average. The Vikings, however, ran at will: 5.63 YpC, a 20% boost above their already-stout 4.71 season average. Further, it didn’t really matter: the Titans’ offense could only muster a lousy three points; the Vikings didn’t have to put up pinball numbers to win comfortably.

In 2005, the Titans at least managed an offensive touchdown: Billy Volek hit Drew Bennett for a 55-yard score in the fourth quarter. But 10 points couldn’t match the Dolphins’ 24. Linehan’s Dolphins scored 21% more points than their season average against Fisher’s Titans, and again ran wild: 5.05 YpC, a 37% boost over their 2005 norm.

Interestingly, the YpA depression was exactly the same as in 2004: 15%. So we have two contests between these two coaches, with two different teams running the same offensive system against the same defensive system. In both cases, there was a major talent gap: the 2004 and 2005 Titans defenses were terrible overall, the 2005 Dolphins were average, and the 2004 Vikings were excellent.

We have only two games to work with, and the scoring differentials weren’t consistent. But the passing depression was exactly 15% both times, and the running boost was significant both times. I'm willing to declare: when facing Jeff Fisher/Jim Schwartz defenses of poor quality, Scott Linehan offenses tend to pass less effectively, and run much more effectively, than their season averages.

Brian Schottenheimer vs. Gunther Cunningham

Shot

Ornk

PgG

YpA

YpC

Gun

Drnk

PpG

DYpA

DYpC

PTS

PTSΔ

YpA

YpAΔ

YpC

YpCΔ

NYJ

12th

23

6

4.8

DET

19th

23.1

6.75

4.51

24

6%

8.62

45%

3.67

-24%

The last time the Lions faced Brian Schottenheimer, I went on one of my most ridiculous flights of if-then fancy. Not only did I play telephone with Schottenheimer’s mentors and influences, going all the way back to Sid Gillman, I went to ridiculous lengths to construct a narrative from the data I cobbled together. The result? Durr Sharks.

From that original Watchtower, I pointed out:

If there were no systemic advantage or disavantage, the expectation for the Jets’ offense against the Lions’ defense would be 24-27 points.

The Jets needed an overtime field goal to get there, but 24 points is exactly what they scored. That field goal pushed the points delta from –7% to +6%,  to go with a whopping 45% increase in YpA. The Lions, surprisingly, held up very well against the Jets’ bruising running attack, holding them to just 3.67 YpA (-27%) . . . fat lot of good it did them.

That the Jets had the 12th-best offense, and the Lions the 19th-best defense, and they did such a fantastic job of holding down such a powerful running attack (very much unlike the rest of the season). The Jets met scoring expectations, but only because they dragged it out into overtime. Their YpA was extraordinarily high; I’d be surprised if Mark Sanchez equalled that mark in any other game. Of course, he was helped tremendously by two 74- and 52-yard bombs;  subtract those two throws and Schottenheimer’s Jets only netted 5.68 yards per attempt.

The bottom line here is that it seems as though there may be a mild systemic advantage for Jim Schwartz defenses against Brian Schottenheimer offenses, especially against the run. However, I got burned really badly when speculating on Schottenheimer before, and now we’re dealing with a completely different team.

Conclusion

I’m not doing mitigating/augmenting influences this time; we have no strong statistical trends and no data from this season to work with, either. This might also be the most incestuous game I’ve ever Watchtowered, too: Schwartz, of course, coached under Fisher in Tennessee for years, and Gunther Cunningham worked with Brian Schottenheimer (and his father) in Kansas City.

All of these coaches know each other (and each other’s schemes) very well; there’s going to be a lot of chess-matchery going down. But in this battle of student and master—or, should I say, mentor and Grandmaster—the student is playing with quite a few more pieces.

The Rams have two strong running backs and a great pass-rushing defensive line. They also have a young quarterback who’s still more potential than reality, and a bevy of talented new faces in the secondary. They don’t have any real receivers, or an offensive line worth mentioning.

The injuries to the Lions’ secondary make me wonder if this will be a shootout, but I can’t believe the Rams’ offense will be consistent enough to string several scoring drives together. Based on last year’s Lions offensive output and pass rush, plus the Rams’ profound awfulness and in-progress recovery therefrom, I see the most likely outcome as a 32-17 Lions win. As a corrolary, watch to see if the Lions’ systemic advantage in running the ball, and disadvantage passing the ball comes into play.

I can't pretend this is a mathematically derived anything, and so have very low confidence in this projection. AFTER this game, we’ll have a pretty clear idea on whether or not Gunther really does have the drop on his homeboy’s kid, and whether the student truly has become the Grandmaster. Going into it, I’m going with my gut.

Read more...

Lions at Ravens Preview: a Finally, a Real Fake Game

My apologies to the Cleveland Browns, but even by Great Lakes Classic standards last week was a snoozer: little anticipation, little of the stars doing their thing, little to get excited about. What little of Stafford & Co. we got to see was uninspiring. The promising rushing improvements came mostly with backups, mostly against backups, and the two units most in question (offensive line, back seven) failed to answer any questions.

This second game presents the first real test: the vaunted Baltimore Ravens defense, a hostile crowd, an offense actually capable of scoring points, more reps for the starters and less Kellen Moore/Seneca Wallace.

Also, as John Kreger of CBSSports.com Tweeted, the Lions are gameplanning more for the Ravens; Baltimore is Schwartz's home and he'll want to put up a "good show."

A “good show” will consist of:

• Matthew Stafford looking sharp, and being on the same page with his receivers.
• More consistent pass protection from Jeff Backus; continued solid run blocking from the interior line.
• Titus Young making an impact.
• Kevin Smith, Keiland Williams and Joique Bell running with a high success rate; don't need home runs as much as solid gains on 1st-and-long and 3rd-and-short.
• At least one touchdown by the starting offense against the starting Ravens defense.
• The interior pass rush making an impact.
• Continued success by the exterior pass rush.
• A MUCH improved showing by the linebackers in coverage.
• Bill Bentley and Jacob Lacey keeping Anquan Boldin out of the end zone and Torrey Smith from hauling in a 30-plus-yard reception.
• A MUCH improved showing by the safties, in coverage and in tackling.

Okay, maybe asking for all that is too much. So I'll just ask for this:

Please, Lions, take this one seriously. Play like you want to play. Play like you want to play well. Play like you want to win.

Jim Schwartz told Dave Birkett of the Freep the same thing:

"Hopefully we play a lot better," he said Wednesday. "We need to play a lot better. We need to play with a little more sense of urgency."

It's not that I want the Lions to pull out the schematic stops, or run the starters all the way to halftime. To the contrary: I want to keep the best stuff under wraps and the starters injury-free. But I want the guys that are fighting for starting—or roster—spots to fight. I want the guys who think they’ve got a role locked up to show us why. I want the Lions to make the most of every rep they get.

That's what the Patriots' “Next Man Up” philosophy has always been about: no matter what letters are arranged on the back of any Patriot’s jersey, that player is supposed to do his job just like the man before him did. Let us not forget who our own Baltimorian, the Grandmaster himself, studied under: Patriot head coach Bill Belichick.

Last week, the Lions mostly looked to be sleepwalking, waiting for their proven awesomeness to win out over an opponent who wanted desperately to prove that they can play. The reality is, these 2012 Lions haven’t proven anything. If they want to wear getting whooped in last year’s Wild Card game like a badge of honor, they’re in deep trouble.

Tonight, I want to see two playoff teams smack each other in the mouth for four quarters, regardless of whether it's the first-stringers or the fourth-stringers on the field.

Read more...

Detroit Lions Must Trade Their 2012 1st-Round Pick

After three full drafts by Martin Mayhew, with Tom Lewand, Shack Harris and the scouts, and Jim Schwartz and the coaches providing input, we’d like to think we understand the Lions’ approach. BATFAN, a term first coined by Josh at Roar of the Lions, seems to encapsulate it: “Best Available that Fits a Need.”

This strategy can be seen at work in the selections of players like Brandon Pettigrew: Tight End was a need at the time, if not nearly the most pressing one, and Pettigrew a special talent. Pettigrew was derided as a “luxury pick,” but it became apparent that locking down the tight end position with a dynamic two-way player was a luxury the Lions couldn’t have afforded to pass up.

We see BATFAN at work in the selection of Titus Young; he perfectly fit a need we were barely aware the Lions had. Was he the “best available player”? It didn’t seem so at the time, but quick flip through the players drafted after him reveals many walked into camp as starters and ended the season on the bench. Few made the impact Young did, or have as clear of a long-term future.

But with the Lions’ draft slot lower, and roster better-stocked, than it’s been since I was but a fanling, BATFAN is being twisted around to mean “whoever I like the best.”

Who are the best prospects that could fall to the Lions’ spot at 1.23? What are the Lions’ “needs”? These are murky concepts. Martin Mayhew said last week there are “about 4-7” prospects the Lions would feel ‘very comfortable’ taking there. When I heard that, I knew the one thing the Lions absolutely should not do: draft a player at 1.23.

Let’s look over our (as yet incomplete) Old Mother Hubbard needs list, sorted in my own opinion of most-pressing to least-pressing:

• Dominic Raiola's heir at starting OC, possibly backing up or pushing starters at OG.
• A CB who can immediately contribute in nickel and dime packages, and push to start in 2013.
• Jeff Backus' heir at starting LT, possibly pushing Gosder Cherilus at RT.
• A pass-rushing DE to compete with Cliff Avril, Lawrence Jackson, and Willie Young for a long-term starter's role.
• An OLB who can stop the run and cover the pass, ready to start in 2013.
• A S who can rotate/compete with Amari Spievey.
• A developmental TE.

Note that I haven't completed the RB, WR, or QB OMHs yet. Something like "Home-run threat RB to compete with Jahvid Best, Mikel Leshoure, and Kevin Smith" will likely be added, as will "Boom-or-bust developmental quarterback."

This puts our list of positions that have a need at: QB, RB, TE, OT, OG/C, DE, OLB, CB and S . . . basically, the whole team. Outside of QB and probably TE, the Lions could justify spending a late first-round pick on almost any position on the roster—yet, don't NEED to spend a first-round pick anywhere on the roster.

If the Lions get on the clock at 1.23, and have seven players they’d be equally happy with, they must trade down. They’d ideally slide down six slots, add a pick or move up in another round, while still nabbing one of the players they’d have been “very comfortable” taking at their original position.

That sounds great, but the window of opportunity a late-first-round rookie has to contribute to this team is small. Nickel corner, situational runner or situational pass rusher . . . that's about it. If the Lions stand pat at 1.23, it's likely they'll be drafting a developmental player who'll help the team in very specific, limited ways—much like Young’s role last season.

BATFAN, by definition, is a passive strategy. It’s one thing to take the “best available player” when you’re drafting 2nd, or 13th. You can let the draft board come to you. But at the 23rd pick, how other teams draft has a huge say in who the Lions will end up with. If the Lions are going to get a player that has a major impact on how many games the Lions win this year, they must trade up.

Don’t be scared. As I wrote for Bleacher Report, Trading Up is the New Trading Down. Don’t forget, the Lions traded up from the second round into the first for Jahvid Best in 2010—then in 2011, traded up from the third into the second to get Mikel Leshoure. In both cases, the Lions saw a player of great value, the last of a tier, sitting high atop the remaining prospects on their draft board. In both cases, they saw the value of getting an impact player at a position of need, and went and got them.

For years, the going thought has been that the Lions should add value by adding draft picks; by trading down and fleshing out the middle of the roster they’ll get better. But now the strategy must change. It’s no longer about accepting the best of what falls to them, because their needs are so vast almost anything will do. It’s about getting the best possible player to fill their very specific needs.

The Lions cannot risk being left with no immediate-impact prospects, not unless they’ve been compensated for a slide down the draft board. They must aggressively target the player they believe will help them win the most games in 2012, and go get him.

Read more...

Relax, Lions Fans. The NFL Draft is Fun Again

In my formative years, I had an annual NFL Draft routine. I’d have my Sports Illustrated draft preview issue, Friday’s Detroit Free Press, and a spiral-bound notebook. My targets would be dog-eared and circled, and I’d snuggle in to my blue beanbag chair with a two-liter of Cherry Coke and my insulated Lions mug.

I'd wake up early, tune in to ESPN, and jack in to the Draft and all its glory. I always wrote down every pick through the first round, scratching the draftees off my target list, living and dying with every draft card preceding the Lions’ pick. I can still feel the hot, bitter tears on my cheeks from when the Vikings—the damned VIKINGS—took Dewayne Washington just in front of Detroit.

Back then, the draft was a surprise, a mystery, a carnival of anticipation. Following the draft that maniacally was rare to begin with, and who could anticipate the capricious whims of Wayne Fontes? The needs on the field were legion, even when the Fontes teams were at their best, and his picks rarely correlated with them anyway.

During the Millen years, the drafts actually made sense. He laid the foundation with his first three picks: Jeff Backus, Dominic Raiola, Shaun Rogers. In subsequent drafts, he added a “franchise quarterback” and surrounded him with elite weapons: Charles Rogers, Roy Williams, Kevin Jones.

Indeed, Millen’s philosophy was consistent: he loved athletes. He loved speed and talent and elite natural ability; he drafted for that on both sides of the ball. Boss Bailey, Kalimba Edwards, Tedy Lehman, Ernie Sims, Calvin Johnson. With a few exceptions, the picks made sense to fans and media alike. Just because the picks overwhelmingly failed, and Millen’s teams were historically bad, doesn’t mean Millen didn’t get great draft grades throughout his tenure.

One of my deeper regrets is not starting this blog earlier; I wrote hundreds of "blog posts" that have disappeared into the archives of forums I haunted in the Aughties. On the other hand, folks today would be able to dredge up deeply embarrassing posts from that era, brimming with conviction about what prospects the Lions should draft, and what would become of the ones they’d drafted.

During the Millen era, draft season was less fun and more important. Since the fortunes of the “new Lions” so were entwined with the “real football man” at the helm, each pick was a glimpse into the glorious future yet to come. Even as the glorious future rounded the bend and became a disastrous present, the draft was our only hope for escape. Outside of a few major free agents who went bust, Millen never made an concerted effort to improve the roster. Going into the last few Millen drafts fans screamed at each other, “WE MUST GET FIVE IMMEDIATE STARTERS OUT OF THIS DRAFT!” which should have tipped us off because that’s ridiculous.

Now, the Lions will return 21 of 22 starters from a young playoff team. In key positions, depth is plentiful. The few real needs are obvious, but we understand that the Lions understand what they are—and further, we understand that the Lions are smarter than to draft to fill needs. They draft great young players, or players with the potential to be great. That’s it.

During the Lions’ town hall meeting, Schwartz told a hilarious story:

“Last year we drafted Nick Fairley, Mikel Leshoure, and Titus Young—three great young players who are going to be a big part of what we do for a long time—and every press conference after, we’d get up on stage and the media would be like [WTF SHRUGGING] ‘Really? Really?! Don’t you guys know you need a corner?’  We were like ‘. . . well, would you feel better if we drafted a crappy corner?’”

The amount of faith and confidence I have in this leadership is almost boundless. I stare at today’s Lions draftniks with a mix of deep respect and profound confusion: why on Earth are you building out a seven-round “draft board” for a team that is schooling the rest of the planet on talent evaluation?

Last year's pick of Titus Young was a gift, a tremendous surprise. I’d researched late-round receivers, but Young was completely off my radar. A wideout I’d never heard of, with sub-six-foot size, from a mid-major? It threw me for a loop—but then I did Young’s Meet the Cubs, and saw a world of potential. Then he got on the field and blew me away.

This year’s draft has that old magical feel for me. The Lions draft too low to have a definite grasp on who’ll be available, and there are plenty of good prospects who’ll fit a need, whether or not they’ll fit whatever your personal opinion of what the need is. When the Lions turn their card in, we’ll all get to find out who the newest great young piece of this team will be. I can't wait.

Now where the hell is my beanbag?

Read more...

The 4th annual Detroit Lions Town Hall Meeting

“In 20 years in the NFL, that Monday Night Football game was the best football atmosphere I’ve ever been a part of.” That’s what Jim Schwartz told me and over 700 fellow Lions fans Monday night—at least I’m pretty sure that’s what he said, because the last few words were nearly drowned out with applause.

I was lucky enough to be present at the fourth annual Season Ticket Holder Town Hall Meeting. The event was exactly as you see it pictured above: a panel of Tom Lewand, Martin Mayhew and Jim Schwartz, moderated by Lions radio voice Dan Miller. The entire event consisted of the three men running the Lions talking about running the Lions. It was outstanding.

My phone couldn't capture it, but Ford Field at twilight had a surprisingly intimate feel. The simple nature of the event, the mostly-empty stadium, and the mood lighting contrasted sharply with every other experience I’d ever had at the venue. Men in blazers and slacks rubbed elbows with jersey-clad fans carrying beers from the single open concession stand. The few staff present were extremely friendly and welcoming.

As I began to Tweet my early impressions, a Lions executive politely asked me to stop. The event was a special privilege for season-ticket holders; the team wanted those present to have a valuable experience, one you couldn’t get from skimming Twitter or YouTube. I appreciated and respected this request.

The three men took a turn making opening remarks, and the overwhelming message was one of gratitude to the fans. Tom Lewand thanked the fans for coming out to the event, but more strongly thanked fans for coming out in the fall and “creating what we think is the best home-field advantage in the NFL.” That sounds like a rock band professing every single city on their tour is the best crowd in the world, but Lewand insisted he was sincere.

“It’s not a cliché,” he said, “when we say you’re the best fans in the NFL.” Jim Schwartz backed Lewand up. “You actually affect the the game on the field,” he said. The energy Lions fans release into Ford Field helps drive the players to better performances—and, as we know, can disrupt the opponent.

I’ve waxed philosophical about this before. It’s the fan’s ultimate thrill: to literally be able to help your team win. To actually tilt the playing field in your team’s favor. To change the final score, even the game’s final outcome, with nothing but the strength of your passion.

"Don't underestimate the effect you have on the networks, either," Lewand said. "I had more than a few people at the NFL and NBC say, 'We heard about that Monday Night game in Detroit. We want some of that.'" It’s a heady thing to hear the President of your team tell you to your face you’re raising the Lions’ national profile with your cheering.

The real headline out of all of this wasn’t the latest news on the draft or free agency; Mayhew is ludicrously close-lipped about such things. When asked about the re-signing of Jeff Backus, Mayhew said “Well, I don’t like to announce things until they’re officially official, but I’ll say you’re probably right” that Backus had been re-inked—despite Lewand and Schwartz openly discussing Backus’s return on either side of him.

Yet, Mayhew spoke openly about “getting Tully’s contract done,” a phrase which smacked of inevitability—and indeed, as I wrote this, PFT reported the Lions inked Tulloch to a five-year deal. When asked to talk about his philosophy of what positions should be taken in what round of the draft, Mayhew glibly demurred. “Our philosophy is not to talk about what positions we’ll be taking in the draft,” cueing a round of laughter.

The real takeaway from the Town Hall meeting was the class of the organization, and the quality of its leaders. Time and again, they stressed doing things the right way, working hard, trusting in each other and their collaborative process, and never resting on their laurels. “We approach it day by day,” Lewand said. “Get better every day. Tackle the mission of that day. Maybe you look back at the end of the month and say ‘that was a good month,’ or at the end of the year say ‘that was a good year,’ but we can’t get caught up in some grandiose goal, or listen to the kudos, or especially read the press clippings."

Schwartz built on Lewand's comments: "Just because we don't talk about playoffs and Super Bowls doesn't mean those aren't our goals. In our experience, the teams that do the most talking about things like that aren't there at the end." He stressed that that emphasis carries through to the players: "We're fortunate that our best players are also our hardest-working players," he said.

Lewand echoed that with a story: “When Calvin was in to sign his contract, he met with the press, and the first words out of his mouth were, 'I'm just looking forward to getting back to work.' That wasn't rehearsed or prepared. He'd just signed a contract that will set him, his children, his children's children, his—” “—neighbors,” Schwartz interjected, “—many future generations of Johnsons up for life, but his focus was getting back to work.” Lewand said. “It was said from a place of authenticity. It was genuine.”

Lewand went on to emphasize how players like Calvin have changed the culture in Detroit. After praising the leadership of veterans like Backus and Kyle Vanden Bosch, Lewand said “You have a lot of young guys we drafted beginning to come into leadership roles and have expectations of winning,” noting the players that join the Lions now are entering a locker room full of players acquired by the current regime, all pulling in the same direction.

Jim Schwartz talked about the community pride the Lions’ success has inspired. “You see people wearing Lions hats at the gas stations now. One of the first things my wife did when we moved here was to go to a sporting goods store. The manager told her, ‘Ma’am, we don’t carry that stuff.’” Now, you see Honolulu Blue everywhere.

The subject of ticket prices was brought up. Lewand thought intensely as he answered the question. "I want to say this: we respect the investment you make in us." Lewand explained the Lions' ticket and concession prices are in the bottom half of the NFL—and that is a hard cap the staff works under at the explicit mandate of the Fords themselves.

I left Ford Field brimming with pride. I’m absolutely convinced that the Lions are being run by the right people; that if anyone can bring a championship to Detroit, it’s these three men. They have, against the odds, retained every key coach and player that made last year a success—and they’ll continue to add talent through the offseason. This team is primed to be one of the NFL’s best, now and for years to come.

Read more...

Three Cups Deep: Lions at Saints, Playoff Edition

The Lions are not there yet.

In one of his final radio segments, Tom Kowalski projected the Lions would go 8-8. He said that they’d taken big steps, but in terms of matching up with the NFL’s elite, like the Packers, they’re “not there yet.” We saw that dramatically illustrated Saturday night. We also saw how close they are.

I talk a lot about the “story of the game,” a high-level narrative that explains the forces that forged the final score—or, in some cases, why the final score is a lie. This morning, the only story anyone wants to tell is that the Lions’ cornerbacks are terrible. The problem is, that story isn’t true.

Yes, the Lions safeties surrendered two touchdowns by leaving receivers completely uncovered; there’s nothing the cornerbacks can do about that. Lions defensive backs got their hands on potential interceptions that they didn’t bring in—but the Lions picked off 21 passes this season, fifth-most in the NFL.  The Lions struggled to bring pressure with their front four, exacerbating the problem—but the Saints have All-Pro interior linemen and the tackles were holding the DEs like crazy. Ultimately, none of those details matter.

The Lions were a very good young team playing very well. The Saints were a great team playing great. The Lions did everything they could to hold back New Orleans, but in an uncomfortably apropos metaphor, the levee was going to break.

Drew Brees is playing the quarterback position as well as he ever has, which is to say as well as anyone ever has. Nate from Holy Schwartz! compared Brees and the Saints to Ivan Drago from Rocky IV. The physical disparity between Brees and Dolph Lundgren is hilarious (while we’re at it, so is the similarity between Ludmilla Drago and Brittany Brees). But in terms of performance, Nate is right: the Saints are a machine right now, and at this point I’m not sure even the Packers can defeat them.

I wrote in the Watchtower for this game that “’A performance + B player = A+B performance’ never works cleanly in the NFL,” and that’s true over the offseason. There’s no draft-eligible kid working out in Florida right now that would have made the difference in that game. There’s no free agent-to-be waiting for his phone to ring who would have made the difference in that game. There’s no A + B = C formula that makes the Lions better than the Saints.

As I’ve written before, every season’s team is its own alchemy, its own witches’ brew. You can take the exact same roster from one year to another and get wildly different results. Players grow and decline, roles change, synergy appears and disappears, schedules fluctuate, and variance—that devilish factor that bounces the ball all over the field—aids and injures as it will.

For the first time in a long time, it’s truly possible for the Lions to regress. Building blocks of the offense and defense may need to be replaced. Jeff Backus, Cliff Avril, and Stephen Tulloch are all major contributors who may or may not be back, and they only start the list. For the first time since Schwartz was hired, this offseason will not be unidirectional.

Still, what’s important here is that the core, the fundamental truth, the identity of this team will not change. Jim Schwartz is the head coach, Matthew Stafford is the quarterback, Calvin Johnson leads a legion of viable targets, and the defensive line is stacked. That, along with all the other factors, is good enough to get the Lions to the playoffs—and that will be true in 2012 as well.

Can Schwartz, Mayhew, Lewand and company brew a more potent batch of Lions in 2012? Can they add just the right ingredients, and hold back what might spoil the brew? Can they put it over just the right amount of heat so, as the Saints are doing now, it peaks in strength at the perfect time? We’ll see.

It’s an incredible time to be a Lions fan. This year’s Lions were an amazing, exciting, thrilling team. They fulfilled every expectation, and had a lot of fun doing it. With minimal changes, they should at least be good enough to make the playoffs in an exciting fashion next year, too. But win a championship? Well . . . they’re not there yet. Yet.

Read more...

The Watchtower: NFC Playoff Wild Card Round

The Detroit Lions made the playoffs exactly twenty years, after their last playoff win, and their first foe is familiar: the New Orleans Saints. The Saints were the first opponent of the Schwartz era, and they’re also the first opponent this blog Watchtowered. The methods have been refined, the predictions made more specific, and the tables prettier, but the idea is the same: use data to tell the story of the game before the game happens.

When the Lions last went down to New Orleans for an 8:00 pm showcase game, the data told me this story:

The Saints are like the mini-Packers, and the Lions are like the mini-Saints. These two teams hold up a mirror to one another, and the Saints are a little bit better in every phase of the game—except the Lions play much, much better pass defense. I could see this going either way, and the Saints have a huge advantage in the Superdome (they’re 5-0 at home).

However . . . last week I was rooting for a huge Monday Night Football win for the Saints over the Giants. Why? Because we’ve seen all too well what can happen to a team that pulls out all the stops for a huge home MNF win, and face a tough follow-up test the following Sunday. The Saints are due to come out flat, and the Lions are coming off a long week of rest and preparation.

I could sit here and flip thought-experiment coins all day, but that wouldn’t help much. I’ll just follow the numbers: The most likely outcome of the game is a 30-28 Lions win.

The final score was 31-17, but the winner of that game was not the Lions. There were two big reasons for that. First, the Lions without Ndamukong Suh, Chris Houston, and Louis Delmas—so the key phrase “the Lions play much better pass defense” in the above quote didn’t bear out (see my Lions vs. Brees pass defense film breakdown for details). Second, the Lions killed themselves with a few stupid mistakes.

Finally, there was the little matter of the referees:

My personal belief is that the league and/or officials are trying to send a message to the Lions. Now that they’re a “dirty team,” the Lions not only have to play as clean as everyone else, they have to play cleaner. They’re going to get flagged for things no other team gets flagged for. Rough stuff from the other side is going to go unpunished. The league is sending a message to the Lions, and it’s up to them to listen.

Now, the Lions are completely healthy. On Thursday, the Lions had full roster participation in practice: per John Kreger of CBS Rapid Reports, 21 of the 22 Week 1 starters will be expected to start on Saturday night, with Jahvid Best the only casualty. We can presume, then, that the Lions will do a much better job of playing to their season averages on Saturday night. Ah, yes—season  averages.

One of the many, many benefits of making the playoffs is that the 2011 season-average data is actually an entire season; all the highs and lows of this year are as ironed out by sample size as they’ll ever be. With a full roster, and a full season, we can look at these numbers with as much confidence as possible.

Sean Payton vs. Gunther Cunningham

SP	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Gun	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
NYG	21st	20.0	7.20	3.80	TEN	29th	27.2	8.05	4.62	29	45%	7.86	9%	2.48	-35%
DAL	15th	20.3	6.68	3.57	KCC	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	27	33%	9.59	44%	5.83	63%
NOS	1st	31.9	8.01	4.50	DET	32nd	30.9	7.79	4.51	45	41%	10.53	31%	4.49	0%
NOS	2nd	34.2	8.08	4.94	DET	23rd	24.2	6.34	5.00	31	-9%	9.50	18%	4.35	-12%

In the last Watchtower, I had a difficult time identifying any consistent trend with the three games Sean Payton had called against Gunther Cunningham. In the first contest, Payton’s Giant’s were the 21st-ranked offense in the NFL, and faced off against Cunningham’s 29th-ranked Titans. The Giants scored way above expectations, 45% better than their season average, despite Tennessee holding them to within 10% of their usual YpA and completely shutting down their run game.

In the next meeting, Payton’s 15th-ranked Cowboys met Gunther’s 16th-ranked Chiefs; a very even matchup of talent. Again, the Cowboys outperformed expectations, scoring a touchdown more than their season average—only this time, the rushing and passing effectiveness were both well above average, too, up 44% and 63% respectively.

Then came 2009's slaughter: the No. 1 Saints scoring offense faced a Lions unit ranked butt-naked last. What happened was predictable: a 41% boost in scoring output, accompanied by a 31% gain in passing effectiveness. Rushing effectiveness, interestingly, stayed flat.

Finally, we have December’s matchup. The Saints’ 34.2 PpG offense was the second-best this season—and it’s been extremely balanced, averaging 8.08 yards per attempt and 4.94 yards per carry. The Lions’ defense is ranked 23rd, allowing 24.2 points per game, 6.34 YpA, and exactly 5.00 YpC.

As discussed above, the Lions pass defense couldn’t meet their typical 2011 performance standards—not with their top interior pass rusher, top cover corner, and playmaking/coverage-quarterbacking safety all out of commission. They allowed 9.50 YpA to Brees and the Saints, 18% better than the Saints’ average gained and 33% more  than the Lions’ average allowed. I’d expect that figure to be between 7.00 and 7.50 on Saturday.

Though the Lions had been allowing a healthy 5.00 YpC all season, and the Saints had been gaining rushing yards at an almost identical rate (4.94), New Orleans only ground out 4.35 YpC last month. That’s a very surprising result; I’ll project the Saints to more closely match their average: between 4.75 and 5.00.

Despite the lack of Suh, Houston, and Delmas—and despite the first-half loss of Nick Fairley, who was having an incredible game—and despite allowing 10.35 yards per attempt and despite allowing 21 points in the second quarter, the Lions still held Brees and New Orleans to 31 total points. That’s right: the 2nd-best offense met the 23rd-ranked defense and scored 9% fewer points than their season average.

Were the systemic wrinkles I caught on film enough to explain the Saints’ underperformance? If so, it’s tempting to project that same advantage on the Lions again. But the Saints have access to way more Lions tape than I do; Gunther and company will have to come up with an all new set of surprises if they want to get the drop on Payton again.

By skill against skill, I'd expect the Saints to score about 40 points. By average against average, it should be 30. By “take what happened last time and add in Suh, Fairley, Houston and Delmas,” it should be 20. But what’s the one thing The Watchtower has taught us, above and beyond anything else? The story of two teams playing against each other twice in one season is never the same.

Throughout this season, I’ve realized that “points per game” is far from an ideal metric. When the offense throws a pick six, that counts against the defense. When the defense gets a pick six, that counts for the offense. Watching the second Minnesota game, the offense played poorly and the defense very well—yet the 34-28 final score suggests a shootout. It’s for these reasons I discount “the Saints hang 40+” storyline that “2nd-best offense versus 23rd-best defense” suggests. Similarly, “A performance + B player = A+B performance” never works cleanly in the NFL.

With full season averages and a fully healthy roster, I give the two teams’ average performance levels the most weight. Therefore, taking into account the projected pass and run figures, I project the Saints to score 27-30 points, passing for 7.00-to-7.50 YpA and rushing for 4.75-to-5.00 YpC. Despite the lack of a strong, consistent historical systemic advantage, I have medium-to-high-confidence in this projection.

Aggravating/Mitigating Factors

As I said above, I don’t see the Saints racking up 40-plus unless the Lions do, too in a Week 17-style track meet. There is the potential for a surprisingly low-scoring game, if Suh, Fairley, Houston, and Delmas all make as big an impact as possible. However, the Lions defense still played very, very well in that game; I’m not sure how many plays those players would have made that their replacements didn’t.

The huge factor in the last game was penalties—stupid ones the Lions made, and terrible ones the referees called. If that factor is removed from the previous meeting, the outcome of that game is likely different.

As potentially huge as each of those two factors could be, they could also potentially be non-factors. I remain confident in the projection.

Scott Linehan vs. Gregg Williams

Lin	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	GW	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
MIN	8th	24.4	6.60	5.30	HOU	27th	24.8	6.20	4.49	39	60%	6.24	-5%	5.46	3%
MIN	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	HOU	21st	19.3	6.89	3.92	34	34%	7.92	11%	4.69	0%
STL	10th	22.9	6.69	4.26	WAS	20th	19.2	7.18	4.47	37	62%	10.21	53%	5.05	19%
DET	27th	16.4	5.12	4.42	NOS	20th	21.3	6.57	4.49	20	22%	4.95	-3%	3.17	-28%
DET	4th	28.7	6.72	4.48	NOS	19th	22.9	6.52	5.03	17	-41%	9.27	38%	3.95	-12%

Throughout the history of the Watchtower, one of the most consistent effects I’ve identified is Scott Linehan offenses against 3-4 defenses, and 4-3 defenses that feature a lot of aggressive blitzing. Gregg Williams and his aggressive 4-3 defense are no different; he has struggled mightily against Scott Linehan offenses.

Look at the first four rows of this table. Linehan’s units were ranked anywhere from 6th-best in the NFL to 6th-worst, and the “PTSΔ” (change in points scored from season average) is massively positive every time. The running and passing effectiveness has been all over the map, with a lot of games near average—so against Gregg Williams defenses, Linehan offenses tend to get better point production from typical between-the-20s performance.

This season the Lions’ 4th-ranked offense, racking up 28.7 points per game, faced the Saints’ just-below-median 22.9 PpG defense—and only scored 17 points. This, despite completing 31 of 44 passes for 408 yards! Stafford’s 9.27 YpA performance was one of his best of the year, and it came with a below-typical-but-not-terrible 3.95 YpC effort from the running game. How could a high-flying offense spend a whole game gaining nearly one first down per pass attempt’s worth of yardage, but only muster 17 points?

Does the phrase "offensive pass interference" mean anything to you?

The Lions had 25 first downs to the Saints’ 21, and outgained them 466 to 438. But that one interception and those critical penalties swung the game around in a big, big way. The other problem was a missed field goal and a blocked field goal, wiping a usually-guaranteed six points off the board.

What are those expectations? I’m glad you asked. Last time, I projected this:

I project the Lions to score 30-33 points, pass for 6.75-7.25 YpA, and rush for 5.00-5.25 YpC. I have medium-high confidence in this prediction.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors:

Actually, there aren’t too many. Unless Stafford completely melts down—or ditching the gloves unleashes a truly magnificent performance—I don’t see much wiggle room here. I expect the Lions to be able to take advantage of the Saints pass defense . . . whether that’s early on in an upset win, or in garbage time of a blowout loss, like last time.

Well, the Lions certainly were able to “take advantage of the Saints pass defense,” two-and-a-half yards per attempt better than I thought they would! Yet Lions’ inability to drive it all the way to the red zone and score killed them. This is the opposite of the effect we usually see when Linehan offenses meet Williams defenses.

The numbers have barely changed since I last looked at them. Even without the advantage, I’d expect the Lions to keep pace with the Saints here—and referees aside, that advantage was in evidence throughout the previous game. I’m going to bump the projected passing effectiveness to account for Stafford’s hot streak, and aim high on the rushing effectiveness because of a healthy Kevin Smith. Hanson won’t miss two field goals again.

Ultimately, I’m going to stay with the data, and project the exact same point total as I did a month ago: 30-33 points, coming from 8.00-8.50 YpA and 4.50-4.75 YpC.

Aggravating/Mitigating Factors

Did I mention the penalties?

Conclusion

It’s the same two teams, nearly the same set of numbers, in the same place at nearly the same time for even higher stakes. Last time Lions performed even better than I expected, but mistakes, injuries, and the officials held them back. I expect the Saints to take their game to the next level, too, though, so I can’t project a complete turning of the tables.

The data, and my instincts, compel me to project an even closer, 31-30, Lions win.

Read more...

The Fallen Watchtower: Detroit Lions at Oakland Raiders

In the excitement of interviewing Brandon Pettigrew (and Justin Durant, keep your eyes peeled), plus adding stat analysis to my weekly film study, PLUS all the various pre-Christmas festivities, it’s been a wild, wild weekend here at TLiW Headquarters.

Normally, I’d power through and do a full Watchtower, but look: Hue Jackson has the most ridiculous resume I’ve ever seen. Since starting out as a grad assistant at Pacific, Jackson has been promoted, or taken a new gig, nearly every single year. He’s worked at almost every level of college, the NFL, and even the World League of American Football. He’s coached under all kinds of coaches in all kinds of systems, from Marty Schottenheimer to Steve Spurrier and everyone in between.

His offensive coordinator is Al Saunders, a prominent disciple of Don Coryell (along with Norv and Ron Turner, Mike Martz, etc.). But I’d need do to some pretty extensive digging to confidently say how much Air Coryell exists in the Raiders’ current attack. So, I punted.

Raiders offense vs. Lions defense

There’ll be no systemic data here, but we can still compare season averages as usual. The Raiders are the 16th-ranked offense in the NFL, averaging 22.3 points per game. They’re averaging 7.14 YpA through the air, and 4.57 YpC on the ground. If this sounds like a very effective dual-threat offense that keeps shooting itself in the foot, you’re right.

Carson Palmer has thrown an interception on 5.9% of his pass attempts, by far the worst in the NFL. Perspective: Rex Grossman is #2 at 4.6%. The Raiders are also the only team that’s kept pace with the Lions’ league-leading 27 personal fouls. The Raiders’ running attack was extremely potent when Darren McFadden was catalyzing it with his 5.4 YpC, but he’s sidelined for the year with a lingering foot injury. Michael Bush and his 3.9 YpC will be carrying the load today.

The Lions defense is allowing 23.5 points per game, 23rd in the NFL. They’re still only allowing 5.82 YpA through the air, and still a whopping 5.10 YpC on the ground. On the whole, they’re a much better defense than their points-per-game shows; they get a lot of three-and-outs and takeaways—but they also get hosed by the offense giving it back, and both sides of the ball commit a lot of penalties.

I'd expect the Lions to force a lot of turnovers today, especially if Suh and the defensive line can generate pressure without the blitz. I project the Raiders to score 17-21 points, passing for 6.00-6.50 YpA and rushing for 4.50-4.75 YpC.

Lions offense vs. Raiders defense

The Lions have been Jekyll and Hyde all season long. Their passing game has been everywhere from dominant to disjointed, and their rushing game has been everything from unstoppable to invisible. On the whole, the Lions are averaging 28.2 points per game, still 4th-best in the NFL. They're still averaging 6.91 YpA, and 3.68 YpC.

Kevin Smith returns (again) this week, so perhaps the running game will be a little closer to the former than the latter. Matthew Stafford has been “on,” or close to it, for three out of the last four weeks. On the average, the Lions’ offense is a less potent-but-more-effective version of the Raiders’. In the specific, when Matthew Jekyll (and his offensive line) shows up the Lions are one of the best offenses going . . . Mr. Jekyll shows up most often against bad passing defenses.

The Raiders are allowing 27.2 points per game, 28th-best (4th-worst) in the NFL. However, like the Lions, their pass defense is quite stout: they’re allowing must 6.24 YpA. But like the Lions, they “can’t stop the run;” they’re allowing a ridiculous 5.24 YpC on the ground.

Though the Lions should do much better than average against the 28th-ranked defense, the Raiders’ tight pass defense and raucous home crowd should depress scoring a bit. I project the Lions to score 28-32 points, averaging 6.75-7.25 YpA and 4.50-4.75 YpC.

Conclusion

Jeremy Reisman of Detroit OnLion will actually be at the game—and not just there, but in Section 104, in the heart of the Black Hole. On last week’s Fireside Chat he promised to wear his Honolulu Blue; please admire his spirit and pray for his safety. If you’re curious how to cheer in non-Lions games, follow Pride of Detroit’s Rooting Guide.

As for the Lions? I project a 30-17 Lions victory, though both numbers could easily be swayed either way by turnovers or penalties.

Read more...

The Watchtower: Detroit Lions vs. Minnesota Vikings

The last time the Vikings played at Ford Field, they were the home team. Now, they couldn’t be less welcome guests. After the Week 3 contest that teetered on the brink of disaster, Jared Allen & Co. are coming to Detroit, dead set on finishing what they started. The Lions and Vikings are headed in opposite directions: the Lions started 5-0 but are 2-5 since; the Vikings are 2-10 but have found their quarterback in rookie Christian Ponder, and might be getting Lion tamer Adrian Peterson back.

As before, this game is a must-win for the Lions. The Lions are favored by as much as 11.5 points as of this writing; surely the heaviest they’ll be favored by for the remainder of the year. Moreover, as a division opponent (and common opponent with the Falcons and Saints), the Lions’ record against the Vikings strongly affects the Lions playoff tiebreakers.

Bill Musgrave vs. Gunther Cunningham

Mus

Gun

Ornk

PgG

YpA

YpC

Drnk

PpG

DYpA

DYpC

PTS

PTSΔ

YpA

YpAΔ

YpC

YpCΔ

MIN

DET

22nd

20.5

6.28

4.92

21st

23.1

6.06

4.81

23

12.1%

5.86

-6.7%

5.74

16.7%

In the previous Watchtower, I found that Bill Musgrave had never faced off against Gunther Cunningham as a signal caller—and though he boasts strong Bill Walsh offense credentials, he has a diverse resumé and does not run a Childress-style WCO in Minnesota.

In the first meeting, the Vikings managed to score 23 points. That’s almost a field goal above their season average—fitting, because the Lions’ defense is currently ranked 21st, just below the middle. The Vikings are averaging a decent 6.28 YpA through the air, and a monster 4.92 YpC on the ground.

Of course, the Lions aren't facing the Vikings they faced last time. Donovan McNabb started at quarterback in that game, and he's since been supplanted by first-round rookie Christian Ponder. To the surprise of many observers, though, Ponder hasn’t been able to shake a supposedly-minor hip injury; he did not practice on Thursday. If he can’t play on Sunday, last year’s sixth-round pick Joe Webb will get the start.

The Vikings got some very good news when Adrian Peterson had limited participation in Thursday’s practice and was able to cut without pain. If Joe Webb is under center and All Day isn’t lining up behind him, the Vikings are going to get their doors blown off.

There's no evidence of a systemic advantage or disadvantage here, but if Ponder, Peterson, or both are not 100% the Vikings will be in trouble. If Ponder and Peterson can go, I’d still expect the Vikings to fall just short of expectations, scoring 17-20 points, passing for 6.00-6.50 YpA and rushing for 5.00-5.25 YpA. If either Ponder or Peterson cannot start, those figures fall to 13-17 points, 5.50-6.00 YpA, and 4.50-4.75 YpC. With little historical info, I have low-to-medium confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors

Well, I pretty much laid them out for you up there: if Ponder and AD go at 100%, the Vikings should be good for roughly their season average. If either cannot start, or if one or both are significantly limited, the Vikes are going to be very hard-pressed to move the ball. Banged-up secondary or no, the Lions defense should be going for the juglar from the opening snap. An early turnover or barrage of sacks could get the Lions up quickly—and put it in cruise control. I don’t see a scenario where the Vikings score more than three touchdowns.

Scott Linehan vs. Leslie Frazier

Lin	Fra	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
MIN	TBB	8th	24.4	6.60	5.3	1st	12.2	4.88	3.79	24	1.6%	7.78	17.9%	7.52	41.9%
MIN	IND	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	19th	21.9	7.15	4.43	28	9.7%	8.89	24.2%	5.75	22.1%
MIA	TBB	16th	19.9	5.94	3.69	8th	17.1	6.15	3.46	13	-44.7%	6.21	5.5%	3.56	-3.6%
DET	MIN	27th	16.4	5.27	3.92	10th	19.5	6.89	4.14	13	-26.1%	5.07	-3.8%	3.79	-3.3%
DET	MIN	27th	16.4	5.27	3.92	10th	19.5	6.89	4.14	10	-64%	4.39	-16.7%	4.23	0.2%
DET	MIN	14th	22.8	5.99	3.99	16th	21.9	6.36	3.92	10	-66.2%	5.51	-8.1%	3.32	-16.8%
DET	MIN	14th	22.8	5.99	3.99	16th	21.9	6.36	3.92	20	-14%	6.62	10.5%	3.96	-0.8%
DET	MIN	4th	27.8	6.89	4.44	31st	27.5	7.53	3.76	26	-3.6%	8.22	19.3%	0.95	-78.7%
DET	MIN	4th	27.8	6.89	4.44	31st	27.5	7.53	3.76

From the last Watchtower:

In Watchtowers past, I’ve found there is a mild systemic advantage for Scott Linehan offenses against Leslie Frazier defenses. However, in each of the last two games, critical red zone turnovers have short-circuited that advantage, and the Lions’ offense has underperformed expectations. Today, Matthew Stafford will leading the offense, instead of Shaun Hill—and I’ll presume the Lions’ systemic advantages remain intact.

What happened was not quite what I expected. The Watchtower review explains:

The story of the game was the one I worried about: the Vikings playing their brains out, the crowd noise and the pass rush handing the Vikings the momentum, and the Lions finding themselves having to scrap their way out of a hole, as opposed to putting it in the cooler.

This is why I was so grumpy about the probably-enhanced crowd noise: it made an enormous difference in the way the game played out. The lesson to take away from this game, and this Watchtower, is that the Lions are clearly much better than the Vikings. The Lions took Minnesota’s best shot—and staggered—but leaned on the ropes long enough for their talent and skill to win the day.

So what we have here is the 4th-highest-scoring offense that squared off against what has been the 31st-best (2nd-worst) scoring defense and didn’t, quite, meet its season scoring average. This continues a trend we’ve seen with Frazier and Linehan that’s kicked in just since Linehan took over the Lions offense: turnovers (and dirty cheating fake Viking crowd noise) are severely depressing the Lions’ scoring, even as passing effectiveness is boosted.

Obviously, the crowd noise won’t be slowing the Lions down on Sunday, but this is too strong of a trend to ignore. I’m going to say Leslie Frazier defenses disproportionately disrupt Scott Linehan offenses with sacks and turnovers, even while allowing greater per-attempt passing effectiveness. Since the Lions have been especially turnovery lately, I project the Lions to significantly underperform expectations. However, expectations would be that the Lions, facing the second-worst defense in the league, would exceed their scoring averages by 10-14 points. So, the Lions should score 33-35 points, pass for 8.00-8.50 YpA, and rush for 4.00-4.25 YpC.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors

Or, the Lions crowd could give it to the Vikings almost as good as the Metrodome sound reinforcement system gave it to the Lions, and for the fourth time this year the Lions get back on track after a shaky game by hanging forty points on somebody.

Conclusion

I’m hoping this game mirrors the Broncos game: where the Lions work out a few weeks of frustrations by completely dominating an inferior opponent. The crowd will be on their side. The injuries to the Vikings’ stud running back, only serviceable quarterback, and half their defense should help swing momentum their way too.

But things haven’t gone too rosy for my Watchtower projections as of late, because the Lions keep drawing ridiculous penalties, shooting themselves in the foot, getting field goals blocked and other such nonsense. They’re moving the ball just like they have been all season, but it hasn’t translated into points. That this seems to be the Vikings’ particular mojo vs. the Lions scares me, too. So, I project that the most likely outcome of the game is a 35-20 Lions win. This presumes that Ponder and All Day make their starts and are significant fractions of healthy. If not, well . . . it’s time for that #BEATEMDOWN.

Read more...

Jim Schwartz, Good Parenting, and Discipline

People are social animals. We’re hardwired to help acclimate and acculture each other into serving the greater good. We compliment those who embody our collective virtues, and we damn those who embody our cultural vices. As children, we tease and gossip and bully each other until we (mostly) conform, rounding off each other’s sharper corners so as to better get along. As adults, we do all the same things, usually via “helpful advice” or passive-aggressive notes.
     Charlie Capen of How to Be a Dad, having suffered through a doozy of a parenting critique, vented on the Good Men Project:

This past week someone close to us told us that my son evidently has a “discipline problem.” This information was delivered first to my wife (who almost lost it), after which I called Captain Commentary to see if I could clear up the misunderstanding. The critic launched into a solid hour of armchair quarterbacking. I paraphrase:

“Your son, maliciously and premeditatedly, hurled a sippy cup at your wife’s head. On purpose. Following that, he went over to a younger cousin and hit him. Twice. On purpose. He is undisciplined and the sole cause of stress in your life.”

This, after only 40 minutes of observation. He was barely 18 months old at the time. My son, not the critic.

Parenting is the most sensitive topic I know of. Politics, religion, and even the BCS don’t raise more hackles than parenting choices. As a parent, you get all kinds of unsolicited advice on how to raise your child—and once you get past a certain point you start to feel very strongly that others could benefit from your own wisdom. Of course, every child is different and every parent is different; there’s never a “one size fits all” solution.

The Detroit Lions have a discipline problem, and everybody is all eager to tell Jim Schwartz what he needs to do. He needs to fine his players. He needs to pull them out of games. He needs to not pull them out of games. He needs to bench them. He needs to publicly denounce their acts. He needs to keep it all in house. He needs to stop playing favorites, and punish all offenders the same . . .

It just doesn’t work that way. Everyone is motivated differently. Everyone has different goals. Everyone has different fears. Reinforcement can be positive or negative, and the “carrot” and the “stick” are different for everyone. My middle child absolutely cannot stand being told to go to his room. Being alone with nothing to do is abhorrent to him; it’s a powerful punishment. Sending my eldest to her room results in her shrugging her shoulders and planting her nose in a book; it’s hardly a punishment at all.

Of course, the Detroit Lions aren’t children; they’re grown men. But some are long-married parents of multiple kids, and some are just a year or two removed from frat parties. Some are already set for life, and some are going to be selling insurance in a few years. Some are brilliant, multi-faceted people who could have felt fulfilled in any number of careers. Some were born to play football. You can’t apply the same standards of discipline to them all and expect the same results.

Moreover, just like the all the unsolicited parenting advisors, we know practically nothing about these men and their situations. We know nothing about their relationship with the coaches. We know nothing about about what’s said or done in private. We know nothing about what’s been demanded, what’s been promised, what the internal rules are or when they’ve been broken or how many times or by whom.

Publicly, we’ve seen a loss of self-control on the field, and it’s killing the team’s ability to win games. That has to stop and that is on Jim Schwartz. But we shouldn’t be armchair-coaching each and every individual incident. That’s not going to do anybody any good. Schwartz and the players have acknowledged there’s a problem, and they’re going to address it. Let’s give them a chance to teach and learn and correct the problems before we start lecturing a guy who might be the best Lions coach of the last fifty years on how to do his job.

Read more...