Calvin Johnson NOT for Madden 13 Cover

It is time for this site to officially weigh in on the greatest controversy of our time: whether, or not, to support Calvin Johnson in EA’s quest for the next victim of the Madden Curse. We hereby advise Detroit Lions faithful to vote NO on Calvin Johnson. The Lions in Winter officially endorses Cam Newton for Madden 13 Cover.

Look, do I believe the player on cover of Madden is doomed to fail? About as much as I believe my opening a Guinness causes the Red Wings to score: for fun, yes totally really it’s completely ironcladly true; for serious no I am not a drooling idiot.

The reality of the Madden cover is the same as the reality of the rest of the NFL Fan/Media hivemind, which is to say it's the same as the Pro Bowl or Fantasy Football or any other award: people think what just happened will keep happening, and what hasn’t happened yet won’t happen. A year ago, Peyton Manning was a "lock" to “shatter” all of Brett Favre’s records, and Titus Young’s drafting was two weeks away from being met with boos.

Calvin Johnson’s proven he’s one of the best players in the NFL, even to the Doubting Crises of the world. There’s no accolade, honor, or award whose bestowment or lack thereof can change that. A Lion making the cover of Madden 13 would mean a dramatic undoing of the Millen Era: a time when no Lion was “hot,” or “cool,” or otherwise hyped by the NFL Fan/Media hivemind . . .

. . . except that this is a fan vote.

The marketing whizzes at EA deciding Megatron, out of all other players in the NFL, would move the most copies of Madden 13, would be one thing. But this is a fan vote. Browns fans got Peyton Hillis on the cover last season, which was super-awesome for them and everything because it’s the only thing Browns fans have left to live for.

The sad truth is, it’s all Madden’s got to live for, too. Why? Because the game that taught my generation how football works has dropped the ball. All the flash and glitz and glamour and play modes and TV presentation and stupid virtual trading card games, what even is that get all the development love, while the gameplay gets faster and faster and stupider and stupider. “Who’s on the cover” is Madden’s primary contribution to the universe.

This year, Cam Newton should be on the cover. He’s the avatar of hope for a team that’s gone through some wretched, hopeless seasons lately. The Panthers are a team on the rise, with a new logo to match their new unis and everything. Let them rejoice in the symbol of their resurrection.

Not long ago, we were as as Panthers fans are. Not long ago, Calvin Johnson on the cover of Madden would have been something I cherished. Savored. Clung to and took succor from. “Golly gosh,” I’d think, “a Detroit Lion won a popularity contest! That had players from other teams in it! The future is now!”

The Lions are a playoff team. I’ll cling to that.

Read more...

Old Mother Hubbard: The Wide Receivers

Finishing up the Old Mother Hubbard series, post-draft, seems anti-climatic. However, there’s plenty of offseason left (maybe too much), and this cupboard isn’t done being restocked. To that end, we dig into the Pro Football Focus grades for wide receivers:

In this case, “Pass” refers to their grades in the passing game, i.e. their receiving performance. “Run” refers to their performance when running the football (on reverses, etc.). Unlike tight ends, run blocking and pass blocking are consolidated into “Blocking,” as receivers rarely pass block. The bright orange line represents Brandon Lloyd, the wideout who turned in the best overall grade. His +24 is predicated almost entirely on his +23.4 receiving grade (the other dimensions have little variation, and therefore little impact on the overall grade). Should we be surprised that Darrius Heyward-Bey is bringing up the rear? His –14 overall grade is the worst of any NFL wideout.

There’s a little thing in research called “confirmation bias,” where you seek out objective facts that confirm your preconceptions. That the Lions drafted a speedy receiver with their second pick suggests the Lions saw a need that had to be filled. I simply have to acknowledge this: I’m curious to see why the Lions thought they should pick a wideout so high, especially one whose game superficially matches Nate Burleson’s. I’m going to do this straight, but keep an eye out for signals that there’s a need to stretch the field.

The Lions’ WR corps is the most divergent unit on the team. Most of the other positions’ players are clustered around the thick black AVERAGE line, with only a few strong deviations in either direction. However, Calvin Johnson was PFF’s third-best graded receiver in 2010, with a very strong +14 overall grade. That was powered by a +14.5 receiving grade, and only having a single penalty called against him all year. He also had a (very) slightly above-average rushing grade.

Surprisingly, Megatron’s blocking grade was awful. He turned in a –3.1 blocking mark, well below the NFL average of –1.27, and ranked 94th out of 110 receivers. We don’t play Megatron to block, but you’d think a dude who has half a foot and sixty pounds on most corners could do better than that without breaking a sweat.

Statistically, Calvin caught 77 of 131 passes thrown at him; his percentage of passes caught is actually a little below-average at 58.8% (NFL average: 59.6%). Part of this is definitely due to system and quarterbacking. The top receiving percentage guys are typically slot receivers in pass-first, multi-WR offenses featuring quality quarterbacks; Megatron is a #1 wideout in a conventional offense driven by very inconsistent quarterback play last year. Still, I’d expected Calvin to be better than the mean at getting to, and hauling in, footballs.

Perhaps it's in the way they use him? Megatron was thrown at once every 7.8 snaps, exactly the NFL average. His yards per reception, 14.5, is definitely a notch above average, 13.2. But his touchdowns . . . well, his 13 12 vastly outstrip the league average of 4. It was my eyeball observation that the Lions tended to move between the 30s with passes to slot WRs, TEs, and RBs, then take shots at the endzone with Calvin once they got close. I divided receptions by touchdowns and . . . yup! Megatron was 10th in the NFL with 6.4 receptions per touchdown (4th with 5.9 if you count the Chicago Robbery). If the Lions were throwing to Calvin, they were often taking a shot at the end zone.

Bottom Line: Calvin Johnson was one of the NFL’s best receivers in 2010, despite being targeted the average number of times, primarily in the red zone, by a rotating cast of quarterbacks. If he and Matthew Stafford play all 16 games in 2011, expect Megatron to be #1 by a long shot.

The neon-green line a little ways inside of AVERAGE is Nate Burleson, the Lions’ second-splashiest free agent acquisition of 2010. Burleson turned in a –2.7 receiving grade, which couldn’t be offset by his run grade (+1.6, tied with Devin Hester for third-best in the NFL), or his relatively clean penalty grade. His very-slightly-below-average blocking performance (-1.4) didn’t help either.

Burleson’s negative grade didn’t come entirely from dropped passes, as Brandon Pettigrew’s clearly did. Burleson was ranked 56th in snaps-per-drop, with 17.0 (avg.: 17.6)—not great, but barely off the NFL median and mean. His YAC was excellent; 18th-best in the NFL with 5.6. He also made a defender miss on a post-catch tackle 8 times on just 55 receptions—the 21st-highest rate in the NFL (6.9 Rec./MT; NFL avg. 10.8).

That is the end of the good news for Burleson—who, outside of two great games against the Jets and Dolphins (+2.9, +3.4), turned in neutral or weakly negative grades the rest of the year (none worse than his –1.8 week one; most not nearly that low). He also, despite his well-above-average YAC rate, could only muster 11.4 yards per reception. Think about that: he ran for an average of 5.6 yards after every catch, but only gained 11.4 yards on an average catch. He caught the ball an average of 5.8 yards downfield! The picture this all paints is of a slightly-below-average receiver who struggles to get open deep—but becomes a genuine threat once the ball is in his hands.

Bottom Line: Nate Burleson proved to be a valuable asset, often getting open short and manufacturing yards in space when there were none to be had. However, he failed to provide a credible threat across from Calvin Johnson, instead carving out a niche in underneath the coverage. “Recepticon” has a future in this offense, but it will be much brighter if he can work in the space created by a legitimate deep threat.

Bryant Johnson is a receiver from Penn State who seems like a really cool guy on Twitter. Unfortunately, PFF’s grades are not kind to him. Johnson’s –13.1 overall grade is second-worst in the NFL, ahead of only Darrius Heyward-Bey. His –13.5 receiving grade is at the very bottom; it’s only his total lack of penalties called that pull him up above Heyward-Bey. His 37.5% of targets caught is also second-worst in the league; dropping 7 passes on just 48 targets didn’t help.

Here’s one positive tidbit for Johnson, though: his 4.2 catches per missed tackle means he was the third-hardest WR to bring down in the NFL. Should he happen to catch the ball, Bryant Johnson is tough to stop.

Bottom Line: Bryant Johnson struggled mightily to catch the ball in 2010, as he did in 2009. Though his body type and tool set would be the perfect complement to draw coverage away from Megatron and open up space for Burleson, his inability to catch the ball strips him of any credible threat—and of any real chance of returning for 2010.

Derrick Williams is a receiver from Penn State who seems like a really cool guy on Twitter. Williams's commitment to giving back to the Detroit community is as impressive as it is unheralded. Unfortunately, PFF’s graders took a dim view of his 2010 performance, as well. Williams, whose 154 snaps didn’t qualify him for the 25% cutoff, only saw time in weeks 3, 4, 5, 11, 12, and 13.

His –6 overall rating and –4.8 receiving rating didn’t come from doing a bad job catching the ball. The problem was, he was never open: in 154 snaps played, Lions quarterbacks only targeted him three times. Astonishingly, that’s the exact same number of penalty flags he drew (though one was called back).

Bottom Line: Despite being, by all appearances, a great guy and a good teammate, Williams’ single reception for 7 yards was probably the former #1 recruit in America’s last as a Lion.

SHOPPING LIST: Though no one identified WR as a need prior to the draft, had I managed to crank this one out I’d have been screaming from the mountaintops about this one, too. Calvin Johnson is a flat-out stud, Nate Burleson is a quality slot ninja, and after that the Lions have two guys who’ve proven they can’t help, and practice squadders like Brian Clark and Tim Toone. The need for a wideout with legitimate downfield speed and NFL hands to go with it was, in fact, desperate—and the Lions may have filled it with Titus Young.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,nfl draft,2011 nfl draft,calvin johnson,nate burleson,titus young,boise state,team needs

Read more...

Three Cups Deep: Lions at Buccaneers

Again.  Again, the Lions’ defense—which had held the opponent in check all game long—had turned to wet tissue in the fourth quarter.  Again, the Lions had one drive to win or lose the game.  Again, I knew, the Lions would get a couple of first downs and then either commit the big turnover, or the stupid penalty.  If the universe was feeling especially cruel, I knew, the Lions would get within decently-easy field goal range--then miss the field goal.  Having lived my entire life a Lions fan, I knew the question wasn’t how the Lions could win, but how they would lose.

It wasn't helping my sense of foreboding that the scoreboard showed exactly what I'd predicted in my ill-formed not-Watchtower: 17-20 Lions.  Drew Stanton took over at the 32, and immediately threw an incomplete pass.  2nd-and-10, and memories of the Eagles game flooded my head: the would-be tying “drive” merely four straight incompletions.  But then, Drew went to work.  Alternately hitting Bryant Johnson and Calvin Johnson—and, my Lord, what a catch Calvin Johnson made—Drew got the Lions into field goal range. 

The first time my heart stopped was when Drew took at shot at the end zone,  going again to Bryant Johnson, whose defender had slipped downfield.  With the pass sailing clean into the end zone, Bryant couldn’t quite get his wheels underneath him, either, and a sure touchdown bounced harmlessly off the turf.  Why?  WHY?

Drew kept his head on, though, and completed a pass to Scheffler that brought the Lions to the Buccaneers’ ten-yard-line with just eight seconds left.  Now, it was real.  Now, the Lions faced a true choice: should they take a shot at the end zone—and lose by interception, or clock?  Or, should they try a 28-yard field goal that, despite its close range, was guaranteed to be shanked, blocked, bad-snap’d, or some other awful thing that’s never even happened before?  I thought to myself, I’d rather the Lions lose on a Drew Stanton interception while going for the win, than by Mysterious Dave Rayner Miss while going for the tie.  Fortunately, Schwartz keeps big brass ones downstairs, and they went for the jugular. 

The fade pass that Drew Stanton threw was perfect.  Perfect.  He put it exactly where it needed to be, and Calvin went up and over the cornerback for it, as he’d done many times before.  Myron Lewis, the Bucs’ cornerback, simply made a great play.  If he didn’t play that absolutely perfectly, the game would have ended right there.  Another game-winning Lions touchdown bounced harmlessly off the turf.  I crumpled.

So Dave Rayner and the Lions set up to kick on the sloppy, nasty grass, and I bit my nails and paced nervously and chain smoked and everything old cartoon characters do when everything is on the line.  I flop-sweated, I whimpered quietly, my knees knocked (even though I was sitting on the edge of my seat).  Then the snap, the kick . . . good.  The Lions would delay their heartbreaking loss—and my heartbreak—for a little while longer.

But then, something funny happened: the Lions won the toss.  That’s not how this script goes.  That’s not what’s supposed to happen.  Come on Universe, I thought, don’t play me like this.  Don’t get me believing it could happen.  Don’t make this hurt more than it already will!  But  the script had flipped: it was the Jets game in reverse.  The Lions could not be denied:  Maurice Morris and Jahvid Best gashed the Bucs for yards and yards.  Drew hit Calvin Johnson again, and Mo Morris shaved another ten yards off.  Rayner lined up, and my last nerves unravelled. 

The snap, the kick, the hold . . . GOOD!  GOOD!  GOOD!  JIM SCHWARTZ FIST PUMP!  MEGATRON SMILE A BILLBOARD WIDE!  THE STREAK IS OVER!  THE STREAK IS OVER!  THE STREAK IS OVER!  Our family jumped for joy, hugging and hooting and hollering and high-fiving all over the living room.  For once, for once, this game ended the right way.

Later that night, as I was getting ready for our kids' Christmas pageant, I noticed something in the mirror: there, at the edge of my goatee, was my very first gray hair.

I love this stupid team so much.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,tampa bay buccaneers,calvin johnson,drew stanton

Read more...

Three Cups Deep: Lions vs. Bears

A couple of years ago, I had what might be called a quarterlife crisis.  I’d just bought a minivan—relegating my newish five-door Pontiac Vibe to pointlessly capacious commuter duty.  In a move designed to both lower my car payment and raise my self-esteem, I decided to trade it in for an older two-seat convertible.  After months of looking for just the right car, negotiating with the dealer, dealing with the bank, navigating my way through the credit crunch, and getting the stamp of approval from Mrs. Inwinter, I finally got everything arranged.  All the pieces were in place, all the numbers were crunched—and though the deal went right down to the absolute bottom dollar, I knew I had finally gotten what I wanted.

I called the dealer to arrange pickup.  When I asked what I needed to bring with me, he said “Your proof of insurance, title, and payoff statement.”  With fresh memories of the test drive whizzing through my head, I asked my bank to fax over a copy of the payoff statement.  They did so.  It was a thousand dollars higher than I thought it’d be.

To this day I don’t know how I screwed this up, but I thought I’d owed exactly one thousand dollars less than I really did.  There was nothing to be done; I’d already spent a week going back and forth to make it happen.  I’d negotiated so hard that at one point, I was in a room with the salesman, the sales manager, the service manager, and the general manager, bending them all to my will.  To suddenly be a thousand dollars apart meant it was over.

I halfheartedly kept searching for another car, another deal, but it wasn’t meant to be.  I was, I thought, thirty minutes away from swapping keys and driving a real, live sports car home . . . instead, I was back in the wagon.  I was crushed, and for a long time felt fated—doomed, even—to drive this car into the ground.  Sadly, I consigned myself to waiting for my midlife crisis.

In the meantime, though, it’s become easy to remember why I bought this Vibe to begin with: it’s big inside without being big outside, it gets great mileage, and—with a stick—is surprisingly fun to drive, even with five doors and a sewing machine engine.  It’s far from what I wanted, and even farther from what I imagine I’ll be in the market for come Model Year 2031.  But even though it doesn’t put the “permagrin” on my face, I’ve spent a few years wringing enjoyment from this ride; I know how to be happy with it.  I know exactly how hard I can push it around every corner on my commute.  I know that with a well-timed downshift, I can coax just enough “zing” from it to gleefully thumb my nose at an oblivious cell-phone-jabbering Saturn Vue owner as I pass them with authority.

In some ways, it’s pathetic; I’m psyching myself into getting my he-man car-guy rocks off within the context of posted speed limits.  But in other ways, it’s simply acknowledging reality: I’m a happily committed family man, working hard to give my kids every opportunity that I can.  I’m not going to eat my cake unless my family can have it, too—and that day just isn’t here yet.  So, I’m making do with what I’ve got—and frankly, I’m more blessed than many around these parts these days.

Being happy while following this Lions team is much the same.  It isn’t what I want—and God knows That Glorious Day has seemed right around the corner so many times.  But . . . this is what I’ve got.  I’m a Lions fan.  If I tried to drape myself in the colors of a winner, it would be a hollow lie.  Until the day comes when the Lions win games consistently, I’m going to revel in the glory of Calvin Johnson stiff-arming half the Bears’ defense en route to the end zone.  I’m going to go crazy about Cliff Avril picking up the slack for an injured KVB with a three-sack masterpiece of a breakdout performance.  And, yes, I’m going to queue up YouTube and watch Drew Stanton run for paydirt and do something vaguely resembling “the Dougie.”

I’m not going to let this team’s limitations, inexperience, and bad luck ruin my Sundays; I’m just going to watch and cheer and hope, and cherish the good stuff that happens while the snows roll in.  It’s going to be a long, long winter when this season’s said and done . . . maybe the longest winter yet.  With an NFL lockout looming on the horizon, it’s possible that there might not even be Lions football in 2011.  So, please, don’t tune out.  Don’t unplug.  Don’t let Packers fans take over our stadium next week.  Don’t miss out on the really cool moments this team is generating, even without some of their best players.    Make do with what you’ve got, and be thankful you’ve got something to make do with at all.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,chicago bears,drew stanton,jim schwartz,cliff avril

Read more...

Donte Stallworth to the Lions?

Those of you who have paid attention to my Twitter feed over the past year are well acquainted with my views on Michael Vick: he spent years as the architect, orchestrator, and Don of an empire of animal cruelty, animal murder, and illicit gambling.  After a six-year career filled with inconsistency, poor attitude, and bad decisions, in my mind he’d lost his privilege to play professional football.

Imagine my surprise when, upon Vick’s release, I heard the phrase “Vick deserves a second chance” about four hundred and seventy-two million times in the span of a few weeks.  On what planet?

Besides being a serial perpetrator of disgusting, torturous, brutal, soulless federal felonies, and patron of the attendant gambling rings, Vick flatly denied responsibility for his crimes, telling bald-faced lies to police and federal agents.  In fact, he only admitted guilt when multiple co-conspirators flipped on him.  As if his contempt for our justice system was in doubt, he made it plain by testing positive for marijuana while out on bond between his plea and sentencing.

Until he actually did time in Leavenworth, he never “got it”.  Even then, his first attempt to satisfy his creditors through bankruptcy court was essentially “I get to keep everything, and once I get back in the NFL I’ll pay you all back”. 

Meanwhile, Donte Stallworth, a wide receiver drafted in the first round by the Saints, recently of the Browns and currently a free agent, killed a man while driving drunk.  While Vick served 19 months in federal prison, Stallworth served only 24 days in jail.  The outcry over this disparity became the most tired ‘take’ since . . . well, since “Mike Vick deserves a second chance”. 

It's true, Stallworth was driving after having had one or two too many.  It’s also true that he hit someone with his Bentley, and that person died.  However, surveillance video that captured the accident apparently showed the victim jaywalking directly into Stallworth’s path, and Stallworth’s car simply unable to avoid him.

Florida law states that in order to convict a person of DUI manslaughter, the prosecution has to prove that the alcohol was a factor—i.e., that the accident wouldn’t have happened if the accused was stone cold sober.  However, the existence of the video tape prevented such a conviction; apparently the video makes it plain that there was little Stallworth could have done.

Moreover, everyone on-scene agrees that Stallworth stopped immediately after the accident, called 911, cooperated fully, accepted full responsibility, apologized to the family, and has since shown nothing but regret, remorse, and sorrow for what he did.  He made a mistake; he is not a monster.  THAT is a man who “deserves” a second chance.

Though I usually have a N.I.M.B.Y attitude towards players with attitude problems, and Stallworth’s career has so far not justified his first-round draft status, I feel a perverse sense of pride that it’ll be the Lions to give Stallworth his first crack at a second chance.

In pure football terms, the signing makes excellent sense.  The Lions desperately need a field-stretcher to pair with Megatron; a second fiddle with deep speed.  Of course, Stallworth has never possessed reliable hands, nor exceptional route-running ability—but they don’t need him to possess either of those traits.

All the Lions really need is a WR who presents a physical mismatch for a #2 corner, and Stallworth can fit that bill.  He should come cheaply—and even if he can’t beat out Bryant Johnson for the #2 role, he’s an unquestionable talent upgrade over Dennis Northcutt, Derrick Williams, or any of 2009’s slot receivers.

As I write this, it's all still up in the air.  The Lions could work Stallworth out tomorrow, he could cut a Chuck-Rogersesque 4.8, and this would all be moot.  Or, he could blow them away, get signed on the spot, go on to humiliate the all the #2 corners playing man-to-man ten yards off of him, and become the Alvin Harper to Calvin Johnson’s Michael Irvin.

Either of those scenarios, or anything in between, are entirely feasible.  All that’s left is to see today what Stallworth can make of his second chance.  For a variety of reasons, I hope he makes the most of it.

Read more...

Mlive.com Highlight Reel: Lions Trade Scenarios

My latest piece for Mlive.com’s Highlight Reel blog has just been posted.  In it, I review what Martin Mayhew did so well with his trades last year, and how he can recapture that magic without either dealing Calvin Johnson, or threatening Jerry Jones with those pictures again.

Read more...

The Watchtower: Lions at Bengals

For a Lions fan, it seems like there’s no longer wait than the one between the Thanksgiving Day game and second Sunday after that.  For me, it’s been a little over a week since I posted the Watchtower for that game, but it seems like a month-long blur of stuffing, friends, sausage stuffing, family, chestnut stuffing, and stuffing myself.

In said Watchtower, I projected:

If we apply the systemic advantage it appears Gunther Cunningham’s aggressive defenses have against Mike McCarthy’s offenses, scoring should be somewhere above the Lions’ allowed average—the Packers are a well-above-average offense—but below, like, a zillion points. Meanwhile, the Pack should be able to move between the 20s more or less at will. Therefore, the Packers should score 34-38 points, pass for 9.00-10.00 YpA, and run for 4.50-4.75 YpC. I have very high confidence in this prediction.

Let the record show: 27 offensive points, 8.92 YpA, and 2.96 YpC.  Clearly, the defense did even better than expected, despite a decimated secondary attempting to cover one of the more prolific passing offenses in the NFL.  The effect I’d isolated in prior McCarthy/Cunningham matchups, of the Packers moving the ball well but not scoring, was clearly seen in Week 6, and it was clearly seen on Thanksgiving as well.  Despite being thoroughly outclassed, the defense’s ability to generate timely disruption kept the Lions in the game.

Even accounting for the systemic advantage I still believe a fully realized Linehan offense has against a Capers-style 3-4, the Lions should meet, or slightly underperform, their season averages: 14-17 points, 5.25-5.50 YpA, and 3.85-4.15 YpC.

Again, for the record: 10 offensive points, 4.95 YpA, and 3.17 YpC.  My projections here were a little bit optimistic; I place the blame entirely Schwartz’s decision to kick a field goal from the 4-yard-line while down by 18 in the fourth quarter.

I'm kidding.

Stafford, unbelievably, started and played the whole game--though the cortisone/adrenalin was clearly wearing off in the second half.  Megatron suited up, too, but he didn’t appear to be anything like his usual self.  Besides failing to be unstoppable, he had to be helped up on several occasions, and took himself out of the game at least twice.  Kevin Smith ran hard, but didn’t have much room.  There were a couple of runs where he was literally one step away from taking it to the house—but as we’ve repeatedly seen, that’s the one step he just doesn’t have.

At this point, the Lions are what we know they are: a team with good coaches, a few young, foundational players, and nearly nothing else.  Because they can’t run the ball, they are asking a rookie quarterback to beat teams by throwing it 40-50 times a game.  Because they can’t rush the passer, they are asking an injury-decimated secondary to hold the line while they blitz.  There’s no getting around it: the Lions do not have enough talent on the roster to beat good teams.

Who's next on the schedule?  Oh, yes, the 8-3 Bengals.  Sigh.

Bob Bratkowski vs. Gunther Cunningham

Brat	Gun	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
SEA	KCC	10th	22.7	6.05	4.57	1st	15.1	5.41	4.38	10	6.28	1	4.33	3-22
SEA	KCC	10th	22.7	6.05	4.57	1st	15.1	5.41	4.38	3	2.79	0	1.53	4-29
SEA	KCC	16th	19.8	6.13	4.52	11th	18.8	6.60	3.78	17	5.13	1	3.03	7-18
SEA	KCC	16th	19.8	6.13	4.52	11th	18.8	6.60	3.78	16	7.00	1	5.50	3-25
SEA	KCC	9th	22.8	6.50	4.46	1st	14.5	6.43	3.92	17	9.69	1	6.00	3-32
SEA	KCC	9th	22.8	6.50	4.46	1st	14.5	6.43	3.92	19	6.70	1	2.96	5-25
SEA	KCC	10th	23.2	6.25	3.82	22nd	22.7	6.23	3.81	6	2.85	2	2.81	0-0
SEA	KCC	10th	23.2	6.25	3.82	22nd	22.7	6.23	3.81	17*	5.40	2	3.38	2-14
CIN	TEN	31st	14	5.13	3.88	25th	24.2	7.31	3.53	7	5.71	2	1.90	1-10
CIN	TEN	31st	14	5.13	3.88	25th	24.2	7.31	3.53	23	7.48	2	3.70	1-4
CIN	KCC	4th	26.3	7.10	4.16	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	3	4.06	2	1.68	1-6
CIN	DET	16th	21.0	6.47	4.11	32nd	30.5	7.94	4.33

When I saw Bob Bratkowski’s name, my blood ran cold.  I knew he’d been an OC in the NFL for a very long time, and when I saw that he’d spent four years coaching in-division against Guntherball . . . well, I was smothered in an avalanche of data.  For those of you who spent Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday where this piece was, well, here it is.

Bratkowski is a disciple of Dennis Erickson, having been Erickson’s OC both at Washington State and with the Seahawks.  Yet, unlike the aerial offenses that Erickson employed at Wazzou and elsewhere, with the Seahawks Bratkowski employed a balanced offense with a strong running game.

This may be partially due to personnel—the Seahawks quarterbacks of the mid-90s were a Rogue’s Gallery of has-beens and never-weres.  However, the consistency of the yards per attempt and carry from year to year (despite constantly fluctuating personnel) indicate an intentional approach to run/pass balance—and this is borne out in his approach at Cincinnati as well.

The ‘95-‘98 Seahawks teams were consistently strong offensively.  In ‘95, the were the 10th-best scoring offense, averaging 22.7 points per game.  The passing offense was unimpressive, averaging just 6.05 yards per attempt—but Chris Warren led the rushing attack to 4.57 YpC.  The Chiefs, however, were the #1 defense in the NFL—led by Hall of Famer Derrick Thomas, whose #58 jersey will be retired this weekend.  The result was predictable: 15 points for the ‘Hawks in the first game, and only 3 in the second.  Tellingly, the ‘Hawks moved the ball a bit in the first game, 6.28 YpA and 4.33 YpC, but did no such thing in the second—a pathetic 4.06 YpA and 1.68 YpC. 

What was the difference between an on-par-with expectations first performance and the #10 scoring offense eeking out just a field goal?  Weather and quarterback play.  The first game was Week 1, and Rick Mirer threw it around a little bit, if not efficiently.  The second game was in Arrowhead on Christmas Eve, back when Arrowhead was Arrowhead, and most of the snaps went to John Friesz--who was horrific.  There may be a little something here in terms of schematic advantage, but I’m chalking that performance up to talent, execution, and one of the most notorious home field advantages in modern NFL history.  On an incredible side note, monster returner Tamarick Vanover took a kickoff to the house in both games!

In 1996, Seattle’s offense fell off slightly, to 19.8 PpG, making them the median offense in the NFL (16th-best).  The Chiefs were slightly less stingy as well, allowing an average of 18.8 PpG (11th-best).  The results were right in line with what you’d expect: 17 and 16 points scored by the Seahawks, just a little bit less than their ‘97 season averages.  Interestingly, rushing and passing per-carry averages were depressed in the first game, at home: 5.13 YpA, and 3.03 YpC—and yet, they were elevated well above averages on the road: 7.00 YpA, and 5.50 YpC.  Either way, though, the Chiefs defense held scoring to just below the Seahawks’ season averages.

In ‘97, both teams rebounded: Seattle was the 9th-best scoring offense with 22.8 PpG, and the Chiefs reclaimed the top spot by allowing a miserly 14.5.  Once again, they met in the middle, 17 and 19 points scored in the two times they met.  Before we move on to ‘98, check out the sack numbers!  In six games, 25 sacks for –151 yards.  This was not extraordinary for those Chiefs--who were to the 90s what the Ravens have been in the aughts--but it’s remarkable to note.

Finally, we get to 1998. During this season, the Chiefs' defense got markedly worse with similar personnel: they were they 22nd-best scoring defense, allowing 22.7 points per game. However, for a clue as to why Gunther Cunningham was promoted to the head coach position after the season anyway, when it was his unit that faltered, look at the season-average YpA and YpC numbers; they held steady even though the scoring defense melted.  For another clue, look at the sack numbers: the Chiefs had 54 sacks as a team in 1997, but only 38 in 1998.

Surprisingly, the Seahawks, despite having the best offensive output of the Erickson/Bratkowski era at 23.2 PpG, didn’t fare any better against Gunther’s Chiefs, scoring 6 and 17 offensive points in their annual pair of games.  Neither turnovers nor sacks played any more role than they usually did in these meetings—in fact, the defense had far fewer sacks against the ‘Hawks than in ‘95-‘97.

When Erickson was broomed after the '98 season, Bratkowski didn't coach again until Dick LeBeau tabbed him to coordinate the Bengals’ offense in 2001.  The Bengals, using Jon Kitna, Scott Mitchell, and Akili Smith at quarterback, somehow finished 31st of 31 teams in scoring offense that season (14.1 PpG).  I’ll give you all a moment to recover from the shock . . .

Gunther, for his part, had been axed as Kansas City’s coordinator, and was working with Jim Schwartz in Tennessee.  The Titans weren’t much better on defense--ranked 25th and allowing 24.2 PpG, Tennessee would be expected to allow the Bengals some of their better games.  Not so much the first time around; Cincy’s only score was a Kitna-to-Ron-Dugans touchdown.  YpA and YpC were . . . awful.  In the final contest of the season, though, the Bengals got two scores from Corey Dillon, and three field goals from the inimitable Neil Rackers.  Kitna, throwing 47 times for 340 yards, may have been taking advantage of Titans D that was 7-8, tied for 3rd of 5th place in the AFC Central, and had nothing left to play for.

Finally, in 2005, Bratkowski brought his career’s best offense to bear against Cunningham: the 4th-best scoring offense that year, the Palmer-Johnson-Johnson-Houshmandzadeh quartet averaged 26.3 PpG, 7.10 YpA, and 4.16 YpC.  Meanwhile, the Chiefs were the median defense, allowing 20.3 PpG, 6.58 YpA, and 4.10 YpC.  My projection would be that the Bengals would replicate their season averages against the median defense, but no—they mustered only a field goal.  I checked for injuries; both Palmer and Kitna played, but they both played well.  It was the complete denial of a run game, only 1.68 YpA, that engendered this offensive collapse.

This allows me to conclude: regardless of talent or execution, if a Gunther Cunningham defense can stop the running game of a Bob Bratkowski balanced offense, Cunningham's aggressive playcalling completely disrupts the passing offense, as well.  Otherwise, there is mild systemic advantage for a Cunningham defense against a Bratkowski offense, suppressing point production without affecting per-play effectiveness.

The 2009 Bengals' offense is a shadow of what it was in ‘05: right at the median, averaging 21.0 points per game, 6.47 YpA, and 4.11 YpC.  In terms of run/pass effectivness, this looks exactly like Bratkowski's Seahawks teams of the late 90s: stout, solid, and flashless--but effective.  Has Palmer's effectiveness ironically regressed to Jon Kitna levels?  Was T.J. Houshmandzadeh that important?  For this analysis, though, what's relevant is not that we figure out why this system hasn’t been as effective against other defenses, just that we figure out how effective this system will be against the Lions’ defense.

The Lions’ defense is, as we know, the worst in football.  Allowing 30.5 points per game, a whopping 7.94 YpA, and 4.33 YpC, they’ve been a shot in the arm for every offense they’ve faced.  While the Bengals’ offense hasn’t been spectacular, and Bengals fans have been calling for Bratkowski’s head for some time, they’re running the ball effectively, only throwing when they have to—and they’re winning games.  Lots of games.

I don't believe that the Lions have the personnel up front to stop the Bengals' increasingly effective running game, ergo no triggering of the magical "Stop Bratkowski's offense cold regardless of personnel" effect we see above. Therefore, the Bengals will meet or slightly exceed their average point production, while greatly exceeding per-play averages through the air. I project 20-24 points, 8.0-8.5 YpA, and 4.25-4.5 YpC.  I have extremely high confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences:

Chad Ochocinco has publicly called for the Bengals to throw it 50 times on Sunday—but lately, Bratkowski hasn’t thrown it at all unless he’s had to.  While the Lions have been much stouter against the run than the pass, they’ve been only not-very-good against the run, as opposed to disastrous against the pass.  I fear that even if the Bengals throw it only 10 times, it’ll be for 150 yards and two scores.  The Lions might try double-covering The Ocho with Will James and Louis Delmas, and isolating Philip Buchanon on Laverneous Coles—but if the defensive line doesn’t get pressure, it’s only a matter of time.

The Lions will be helped by the lack of a dangerous pass-catching runningback or tight end; death by Andre Caldwell in the slot is a slow death indeed.  Still, I see the defensive line being overwhelmed by the Bengals' enormous offensive line, and their deep rotation of power running backs. It's imperative that the Lions' offense finally be able to stick with the run, keep the defense fresh late, and keep the score close. If the Bengals unleash the deep ball, it will be over quickly.

Scott Linehan vs. Marvin Lewis

Lin

Marv

Ornk

PgG

YpA

YpC

Drnk

PpG

DYpA

DYpC

PTS

YpA

INT

YpC

Sack

STL

CIN

28th

16.4

5.63

3.78

24th

24.1

6.83

4.25

3*

5.46

1

3.67

0-0

It's almost laughable.  After the Bratkowski/Guntherball matchup generated a mountain of data, more than twice as many games as I’d ever broken down before, Linehan’s only faced off against Lewis once.  Unfortunately, one data point really can’t allow me to draw any kind of conclusion.  However, this was at least a recent-vintage Bengals defense.  Marvin has overseen many different defensive systems as both a coordinator and head coach—isolating just one would be practically impossible, even if there’d been a baker’s dozen meetings between the two coaches.

In 2007, Scott Linehan’s Rams were a mess; they had Steven Jackson and little else, and they didn’t have Steven Jackson much, either.  Ranked as the 28th-best scoring offense in the NFL, the Rams average 16.4 points per game, 5.63 YpA, and 3.78 YpC.  The Bengals’ defense of 2007 wasn’t a powerhouse either; the 24th-ranked unit allowed an average of 24.1 PpG, 6.83 YpA, and 4.25 YpC.  The meeting between the two teams resulted in an almost-perfect replication of the Rams’ season averages: 5.46 YpA, and 3.67 YpC.  However, the Rams scored only 3 offensive points, far short of their per-game average of 16.4.

It’s worth noting that those Rams lost almost their entire starting offensive line to in-season injuries; by December 7th (the date of this game) they were even losing the street free agents they'd signed to replace all the injured starters and backups. It's plausible to blame their below-expectations perfomance on that, but without even a second data point we can't determine if it's a fluke or a trend.

Looking at the 2009 data, it's absolutely painful. The Lions are nearly a statistical reproduction of that 2007 Rams offense.  Take the phrase above: "Scott Linehan’s Rams were a mess; they had Steven Jackson and little else, and they didn’t have Steven Jackson much, either".  Then, replace "Rams" with "Lions", and "Steven Jackson" with "Calvin Johnson" , and there you have it.

Meanwhile, the Bengals aren't the 24th-best scoring defense, they're the best in the NFL.  Let me say that again: the Cincinnati Bengals have the best scoring defense in the NFL.  Allowing only 15.8 points a game, 5.98 yards per attempt, and 3.80 yards per carry, the Bengals aren’t giving up anything to anybody . . . certainly not the Lions. 

Therefore, the expectation would be that the Lions significantly underperform their season averages--and we have no evidence of a systematic advantage that would modify those expectations.  Therefore, the Lions should significantly underperform their season averages: 7-9 points, 4.5-4.75 YpA, and 3.75-4.00 YpC.  I have low confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences:

There are two ways I see the Lions exceeding the (extremely low) expectations set for them; one is in the interplay between defense and offense. If the Bengals play conservative, ball-control offense and don't score very much early, the Lions may finally be able to get Kevin Smith in a rhythm. If the Bengals never open up a three-score lead on the Lions, it'll only be one Matthew Stafford-to-Calvin Johnson play away from being anybody's game. Of course, the Bengals will be capable of opening it up the other way, too . . .

The only other source of optimism is the relative health of Stafford and Johnson. Both were visibly hurt on Thanksgiving, especially Megatron. IF the long break has allowed them both to return to 100%, then there is at least the potential that the Lions' downfield passing game will force the Bengals to abadon their ball-control game. However, see above; forcing Carson Palmer and Chad Ochocinco will beat us might well result in them beating us.

There are any number of scenarios that may play out. If the Bengals choose to slow it down, and the Lions can't make the downfield pass happen, the two teams might not score 20 points combined. On the other hand, if the Lions or Bengals are aggressive early, it could turn into a track meet--much like the Browns game did. On the third hand, if Leon Hall baits Stafford into three or four picks, which could happen, it could just be a good old-fashioned blowout.

Oh, one other factor: it's in Cincy. The Lions haven't won a road game since before Halloween 2007, and I don't think they break the streak against the best defense in football.

Given all of these contradictory and/or depressing factors, I'm going to stick with the data: 20-24 points for the Bengals, and 7-9 points for the Lions.

Read more...

The Watchtower: Packers at Lions

Traditionally, I start each Watchtower with a postmortem analysis of the previous game’s Watchtower.  Suffice it to say, the Lions and Browns completely blew all of my predictions out of the water.  Regular commenter Matt actually did much better than I:

"You have to put the Browns' defense in perspective: MY perspective. My fantasy football team went into that game needing the Browns to hold Joe Flacco AND Ray Rice to less than 14 points. They combined for 13! This threw me into a 4-way division tie (all 5-5) instead of being two games back. The Browns D also aided this by keeping the Ravens' kicker in check. So, even though the team lost, the Browns D was simply stepping up to help out a fantasy football geek. :-) We can now extrapolate this to next week's Lions/Browns game. The only player from this game on either fantasy roster is Matt Stafford (my opponent as no Lions or Browns). He will be on my bench behind Brett Favre. This surely means that Stafford will have his break-out game, throwing for 400 yards and 5 TDs, as the Lions completely trounce the Browns while my Las Vegas Kings lose a heartbreaker. :-)"

When I initially penned the last Watchtower, it was on the heels of a game where the Browns had played the Ravens; they threw the ball further than five yards downfield only a handful of times.  Not only did the announcers in the booth call this out as it happened, the postgame analysts carped on it as well--and then the Cleveland media, national NFL media, and entire football blogosphere spent the next entire week flogging the Browns for their total lack of downfield balls.

Pun intended.

It only stands to reason, then, that with the 31st-ranked scoring defense--minus some starters in the secondary, and minus some of the replacements for those starters—next on the schedule, the Browns would give downfield passing a whirl.  The results were, well, typical.  Meanwhile the Lions, rather than getting ahead early and turning to Kevin Smith as I’d predicted, again abandoned the run and asked Stafford to win the ballgame.  This time, it worked.

Okay, the Packers:

Mike McCarthy vs. Gunther Cunningham

	McC	Gun	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
2003	NOS	TEN	14	21.2	6.43	4.46	29th	27.2	8.05	4.62	12	8.04	0	1.53	3-20
2004	NOS	KCC	14	21.8	6.62	3.96	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	27	9.59	1	5.83	4-19
2009	GBP	DET	8th	26.2	7.41	4.46	32nd	30.1	7.84	4.47	26	9.68	1	3.57	5-30

The Packers are the second team to feel the searing gaze of the eye atop the Watchtower twice in one season.  The first time around, I concluded that:

Given equal or greater talent, Gunther Cunningham’s aggressive 4-3 disproportionately disrupts Mike McCarthy’s downfield flavor of the Bill Walsh offense. Given lesser talent, Gunther’s 4-3 will cap offensive production with sacks and turnovers, even while allowing better-than-average offensive effectiveness between the 20s.

Then, in the midseason review of the Watchtower feature, I smugly pointed out that:

• The Packers scored 26 points, which exactly matched their average on the season to that point.
• Aaron Rodgers completed 29 of 37, for a whopping 358 yards (and 9.68 yards per attempt!).
• Rodgers, however, was sacked five times, and intercepted once. The Lions also forced three fumbles, recovering one.
• Rodgers passed for only two touchdowns, and those were on the first two drives (one of which started on the Lions' 17).
• The Packers as a whole did not score a touchdown after cashing in on the opening-drive Culpepper turnover.

Of course, things are a little different now.  The Lions’ secondary has been decimated, degrading said unit from “suspect” to “dumpster fire”.  The Packers’ offense has clicked a little more, too, with the OL protecting better than, you know, not at all, and the WRs beginning to get open deep again.  Though my conclusions about McCarthy’s offense and Cunningham’s defense proved to be spookily correct the first time around, merely projecting a repeat of the prior game would be hubris.

Let's instead look at the Packers’ current stats, the Lions’ current stats, and then apply the same advantage to those figures.  The Packers are now the 8th-best scoring offense, averaging 26.2 PpG.  They’re passing for an impressive 7.41 YpA, and rushing for a surprising 4.46 YpG.  Meanwhile, the Lions are allowing 30.1 PpG, surrendering 7.84 YpA, and being run on to the tune of 4.47 YpG. 

One would expect the Packers to significantly outperform their season averages—that is, score well over 26 points, and gain passing and rushing yards at a pace well over their typical per-play average.  However, if we apply the systemic advantage it appears Gunther Cunningham’s aggressive defenses have against Mike McCarthy’s offense, scoring should be somewhere above the Lions’ allowed average—the Packers are a well-above-average offense—but below, like, a zillion points.  Meanwhile, the Pack should be able to move between the 20s more or less at will.

Therefore, the Packers should score 34-38 points, pass for 9.00-10.00 YpA, and run for 4.50-4.75 YpC. I have very high confidence in this prediction.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences:

If it weren't for the frequent turnovers by, and rampant futility of, the Lions offense, the Packers might not have scored even the 26 points that they did. Moreover, the Lions were without Matt Stafford and Calvin Johnson--which, as we've discussed before, absolutely destroys the Lions' offense.

Of course, the Lions may not have Stafford or Megatron available this time, either, but if they do play, the defense won’t be hung out to dry as badly as before. Also, the Lions’ defense was even more banged up last time—3/4ths of the starting defensive line was out---so the crappy secondary being even more crappy might not be as big of a factor.

Another interesting factor to note: instead of the Lions trying to break a 19-year-old losing streak at LLLLAAAAAMMMMMBOOOWWW FEEEEEEEEEELLLD, they'll be playing at home, in front of a sellout crowd, on national TV, in the Lions’ annual showcase game.  I don’t think this will matter anywhere near as much as Stafford/Culpepper, or Megatron/no Megatron, but the Lions have been much “better” at home than on the road. 

Scott Linehan vs. Dom Capers

	Lin	Capers	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
2004	MIN	HOU	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	21st	19.3	6.89	3.92	34	7.92	0	4.69	3-8
2008	STL	MIA	30th	14.5	5.67	3.95	21st	21.6	6.61	2.35	12	4.26	3	4.30	0-0
2009	DET	GBP	24th	18.1	5.60	3.91	12th	20.3	6.17	4.46	0	4.20	3	4.33	5-34

Okay, the last time we did this, I concluded:

Scott Linehan's balanced, conventional offense is disproportionately successful against an aggressive, blitzing 3-4. This will be the third such defense that the Lions face, and they've outperformed averages against the two prior units. If Kevin Smith is his usual, steady self, and Matt Stafford is able to play, I expect the Lions to score between 24-28 points.

This is why I started breaking the analysis out from the "influencing factors"!  There was a monstrous whopper of an “if” in there, and I utterly failed to account for it.  Still, I don’t think anyone would have predicted how poorly Daunte Culpepper would play.  4.20 yards per attempt?  That’s criminally bad.  For what it’s worth, the Lions did rush for a very respectable 4.20 YpC.

It’s almost impossible to tell what’s going to happen here.  Given the Culpepper/Stanton in-and-out, no Megatron, and the immediate TD/turnover/TD sequence putting the Lions on their heels two minutes in, I’m not going to attribute the shutout earlier this year to scheme-on-scheme interaction.  That leaves us with the earlier conclusion, that Linehan’s offenses are unusually good against blitzing 3-4s, especially when the running game is working well.

Unfortunately, given the loss of Stephen Peterman, I don’t see Kevin Smith rushing any better than he did the first time around.  If the Lions, as probable, are playing from behind early again, a rushing attack averaging 4.2 yards a carry is not going to force the Packers to adjust to stop it.

I have to project this based on the assumptions that Daunte Culpepper and Bryant Johnson will be starting in the stead of the newly-christened avatar of the Lions franchise and, arguably, the most dangerous downfield threat in football.  Given the way the Packers defense has been playing (12-ranked scoring defense!), this is an insurmountable challenge.

Even accounting for the systemic advantage I still believe a fully realized Linehan offense has against a Capers-style 3-4, the Lions should meet, or slightly underperform, their season averages: 14-17 points, 5.25-5.50 YpA, and 3.85-4.15 YpC.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences:

Yeesh, this Linehan/Capers section has been almost all “influences” already, but here we go.  Obviously, Matthew Stafford is now THE QUARTERBACK, and losing him is a great loss indeed.  Megatron is the only weapon that defenses respect, and losing him is an even bigger loss.  However, last Sunday, the Packers have lost both their top corner, Al Harris, and their top pass rusher, Aaron Kampman, for the rest of the season.

While I’m not exactly salivating over the Charles Woodson-versus-Bryant Johnson matchup, the Lions’ remaining wideouts should have much better looks than they did the first time around.   Moreover, as miscast as Kampman has been this season, he’s still a naturally gifted pass rusher, and losing him partially de-fangs a defense whose bite has been much worse than its bark this season.

Unfortunately, for the second week in a row, we find the Watchtower’s view obfuscated.  This offense without a healthy Stafford and Megatron simply isn’t the same offense—and while it’s only on the low end of mediocre with them, it’s absolutely wretched without them.  Let’s be real, here, folks: if both Stafford and Megatron can’t go, this is going to be another bloodbath, regardless of who is out on the other side, or what logo is at midfield.  It kills me to say it, but unless the young binary stars of this franchise take the field on Turkey Day, the national audience is going to get treated to yet another Thanksgiving fiasco.

Read more...

not midseason grades

Icon SMI

Writers with their heads on a swivel, such as Big Al at the Wayne Fontes Experience, and Neil at Armchair Linebacker, have realized that this is the midpoint of the NFL season, and handed out midseason grades—or grade, as the case may be.  I am sullen and ashamed that I didn’t do anything like this myself—but then, it’s already been done, and done well.

For a really enlightening read, check out the John Niyo’s statistical comparison between the 2008 and 2009 position groups, using a handful of different benchmarks for each.  The best part of John’s piece is the metrics he chose to assess each group—like for the linebackers: opponent 3rd down conversion percentage and opponent’s yards per carry.  This is great research and really shows how the character of the team has changed.

What’s really, really depressing is how obvious the progress is!  Look at the defensive secondary’s numbers:

Year	OComp%	OYpA	INT by DB
2008	67.4%	8.88	1
2009	71.7%	7.69	4

It’s true that opponents are completing a higher percentage of their passes; I attribute that to a much higher percentage of blitzes that open up underneath routes.  However, look at the yards per attempt: the Lions allowed nearly 1.2 more yards on every pass attempt in 2008!  That is a HUGE change in defensive effectiveness.  Moreover, look at the INTs by DBs!  That lonely “1” in the 2008 row was, I believe, the only INT by any Lions DB in all of 2008.  I can’t really put into words how completely God-awful that is.

And now, the bad news: allowing 7.69 yards per attempt is also God-awful; the Lions are allowing the 5th-most yards per attempt in the NFL this year.  Compare that to the league-leading Jets’4.8 YpA allowed, and you see just how rotten that is.  I don’t have the numbers for DB-only INTs, but the Lions are in a 5-way tie for 23rd in the NFL with 6 total INTs.  Meanwhile, the Saints lead the NFL with 16.

Unfortunately, this is the picture we’re left with at midseason: real, tangible, quantifiable, undeniable absolute progress—the Lions are a much better team this season—but nearly zero relative progress.  Instead of being the worst team in the NFL by a wide, wide margin, the Lions are now among the few worst teams in the NFL.  Better, but not better.

We’ve seen glimpses of the team these coaches are trying to build.  We’ve seen glimpses of the team these Lions will become.  In the first half of the Vikings and Seahawks games, and in most of the Redskins game, we saw a team with a lot of heart, a lot of swagger, and a lot of raw talent.  Most of the rest of the season, though, we’ve seen a team that is simply outclassed in every phase of the game.

The Lions have neither the quality veteran starters, nor the quality veteran depth to play near their peak for 60 minutes.  They certainly don’t have the depth to withstand any significant injuries, as we found out in weeks 5-8.  As much as people would love to blame Stafford, or the coaching staff, for this team’s problems, the problem is the rest of the team.  This roster is simply not talented, deep, or experienced enough to play at a high, sustained level.

I’m not sure what the coaches and players are going to do about this.  If this were Madden, I’d let the computer simulate the rest of this season and just get on with it.  But for the real Lions, that’s not an option.  They still have eight more weeks of football to play.  The state of the team at the end of that run is going to say a lot about A) the caliber of coaches roaming the sidelines right now, and 2) the character of the players.

I was officially alarmed by this Stafford/Megatron “sideline tiff” stuff; the relationship these two have will be the foundation this team is built on—and if Megatron is fed up with Stafford and losing and Detroit and goes Roy Williams on us . . . it’s going to be horrible.  While I buy all the denials and assurances and glossing-overs Schwartz & Co. are handing out

As they say, winning cures a lot of ills—and there’s a corollary: losing makes everybody sick.  All the momentum, positive vibes, etc. that came from breaking the streak is already gone.  No matter how much better this team is than last year’s edition, if that’s only good for 1-15, the bloom will already be off the rose, and this staff will be fighting to keep these players on board with their systems and their message.

Unfortunately, I don't see any way it happens this weekend--but the next win needs to come soon.

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...

three cups deep: resignation

Don't be fooled by the title!  I'm not tendering my “resignation”, merely writing about my mood this morning.  My second cup of coffee is slowly waking me up to reality: the Lions really lost to the Rams.  Moreover, they looked completely impotent.  It wasn’t just that they couldn’t score any points the Rams didn’t hand them for the first three quarters.  It was hauntingly familiar scene: linemen who couldn’t block, receivers who couldn’t catch, and defenders who couldn’t tackle.

In the theatre of the mind, the DVD one feels has been popped in is the 2002 Lions.  There’s rookie Joey Harrington trying to keep his head above water, throwing to a cobbled-together crew of stone-handed also-rans: Bill Schroeder, Az-Zahir Hakim, Scotty Anderson.  There’s RB James Stewart, a decent NFL starting back, whose inside running style is being stymied by an offensive line unable to open inside holes.  That line, of course, features Jeff Backus, Dominic Raiola, a young mammoth RT with tons of upside but questionable athleticism and instincts (Stockar McDougle), and a rotating cast of has-beens and never-wases at guard (Tony Semple, Ray Brown, Eric Beverly) . . .

The resemblance is uncanny.  However, there are a few critical differences between the ‘02 Lions and the ‘09 Lions.  Joey Harrington, then, was clearly “swimming”; in NFL-speak, that’s thinking instead of acting or reacting.  You could watch his wheels turning, watch him trying to take it all in, watch him trying desperately to slow it all down.  In 2009, Matthew Stafford looks more like he wishes he could slow it down for his teammates.  He looks like he’s trying to will his team to victory—or like he’s trying to win despite them.  It’s telling that on the Lions’ sole offensive score, Stafford called his own number.

There's another critical difference: one of the NFL’s best WRs was on the sideline.   In 2002, there was no Calvin Johnson who wasn’t able to go that day; Schroeder and Hakim were it.  With Megatron in there, Bryant Johnson and Dennis Northcutt become valuable second and third options instead of woefully inadequate starters.  With Megatron in there, Stafford has an oasis he can go to again and again, instead of rocks in a desert.  With Megatron in there, the defense has to bend and flex soften and roll his way, opening the field up for everyone else.  

There’s one more critical difference: the defense.  Believe it or not, folks, this Lions defense is starting to meet expectations.  Many thought the Rams would finally get their passing game on track against the Lions’ woeful secondary, but 17-of-35 for 176 and 0 is not what I would call “on track”.  If you switch the fake field goal TD for, you know, a field goal, that leaves the Rams with 13 points; exactly what I projected.

Sure, they allowed 149 yards rushing to Steven Jackson—and yes, he made a lot of would-be Lions tacklers look like fools.  But Jackson’s the hardest man in the NFL to bring down, and until the closing minute he never even hit paydirt.  The fact is, a defense that holds its opponent to 13 points has done its job.  A defense that holds its opponent to 13 points, in the NFL, should expect to win.

Ultimately, that's what hurt the most: we expected the Lions to win this one.  They were favored, they’d played better throughout the year, they were at home, and this was the softest opponent on the schedule.  Winning this game would have been a solid step forward: “Hey, we were supposed to win and we did!  Good on ya, boys!”  Meanwhile, the Rams wanted to win.  Needed to win.  The Rams might not have another winnable game left on their schedule ; to them, this was the last chance they had at preventing their own run to 0-16.

The Lions probably got the Rams’ best effort all season—and if the Lions’ WRs could catch a pass, the offensive line could have blocked a little better, or the defense could have tackled a little better, the ending might have been different.  Instead, we need to collectively sigh.  We need to hang up our dreams of 7-9, our expectations of 5-11.  We need to stop thinking that the quick-fix bounceback is happening; it isn’t.  We need to resign ourselves to reality: the Lions are not good, and they’re not going to be good this season.

Let's take another swig of coffee, and open eyes: from this point forward, we're looking for sparks. We're looking for signs of growth, for evidence of progress. We need to see Matt Stafford developing, and starting to elevate those around him. We need to see Calvin Johnson get healthy and build a rapport with Stafford. Mostly, we need to see this team fight for every down, every game, all the way out--even if they don't win any.

Read more...