Thanksgiving Watchtower: Detroit Lions vs. Packers

This is it.

This game is the game. The game that everything is riding on, the game that everything has come down to. The Lions have done their part through the first ten weeks of the season, going 7-3. They’re neck-and-neck with the Bears, and keeping within striking distance of the 10-0 Packers. They’re two games into the difficult half of their schedule, and though it’s been a painful test, they’re as close to the mountaintop by as anyone could have expected.

With a win, the Lions make the NFC North title race a race again, clawing to within two games of the Packers and picking up the head-to-head tiebreaker. With a win, the Lions will have handled one of the two “hard” games the Bears won’t have to handle. With a win, the Lions solidify their hold on the division-record tiebreaker—the mark that gives the Lions the upper hand on the Bears, even after being blown out by them in Week 9.

The Lions, as always, get a national showcase for this game. After years of hearing the pundits gripe about how our team is harshing America’s collective turkey buzz, there isn’t a game the football-watching world would rather see.

Mike McCarthy vs. Gunther Cunningham

McC	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Gun	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
NOS	14th	21.2	6.43	4.46	TEN	29th	27.2	8.05	4.62	12	-43%	8.04	25%	1.53	-66%
NOS	14th	21.8	6.62	3.96	KCC	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	27	24%	9.59	45%	5.83	47%
GBP	3rd	28.8	7.56	4.30	DET	32nd	30.9	5.42	4.42	26	-10%	9.68	28%	3.57	-17%
GBP	3rd	28.8	7.56	4.30	DET	32nd	30.9	5.42	4.42	34	18%	8.92	18%	2.96	-31%
GBP	10th	24.2	7.63	3.81	DET	19th	23.1	6.75	4.51	21	-13%	10.65	40%	4.28	12%
GBP	10th	24.2	7.63	3.81	DET	19th	23.1	6.75	4.51	3	-88%	6.03	-21%	3.30	-13%
GBP	1st	35.5	9.18	3.88	DET	19th	21.9	5.45	4.97

Over the years, Gunther Cunningham’s defenses have consistently put the clamp on Mike McCarthy’s offenses. Time and time again, the Packers fall well short of what you’d expect when a high-flying Packers air attacks meets a mediocre-to-terrible Lions defense. Look at the chart above. Note the respective offensive and defensive ranks, and points-scored deltas: there’s an undeniable trend.

For 2010's first Packers game, I projected the Lions defense to be relatively stingy; they did even better than I projected. When the 10th-ranked scoring offense (7th at the time) faces the 19th-ranked scoring defense (25th at the time), and they score 13% fewer points than average, something is up.

When Watchtowering last year’s second Packers game, I couldn’t fully trust this effect. The numbers, combined with a strong systemic advantage, were projecting a seriously low-scoring effort from Green Bay. I couldn’t believe the Lions’ D could do it again—so when I projected the Packers’ point totals, I pulled back the reins:

It seems unlikely that the Lions’ defense does that well against an offense that good twice in a row, though, so I’m going to project the Packers to slightly underperform scoring expectations: gaining 23-26 points. I expect the Lions to be more successful defending the pass with zone coverage, allowing 8.0-8.5 YpA, at the expense of fewer interceptions. The Lions will likely cede the run to the Packers again, allowing 4.25-4.5 YpC. I have high confidence in this projection.

Of course, nobody could predict the Lions holding the Packers to just a measly field goal. They knocked Aaron Rodgers out of the game with a concussion in the second quarter—and despite what Rodgers and Packer fans will tell you, that wasn’t the only reason the Lions were successful against him. Before leaving the game Rodgers attempted 11 passes, completing seven of them for 46 yards, no touchdowns, and a pick.

This season, the Packers offense is #1 in the NFL, racking up a ridiculous 35.5 points per game. It’s no surprise that Rogers and his array of targets are fueling this scoring machine; they’re moving the ball through the air an average of 9.18 yards a pop. The ground game has struggled at times, but at 3.88 YpC it hasn’t been awful.

After the slew of defensive and return touchdowns in the past two weeks (which I cannot find season scoring totals that correctly exclude), the Lions defense is now technically the 19th-best in the NFL, allowing 21.9 points per game. You can see in the effectiveness stats that those averages don’t reflect the true performance of the secondary: they’re allowing a miniscule 5.45 YpA this season. On the ground, the Lions defense has allowed 4.97 YpC—this is actually an improvement; the Lions are no longer allowing more yards per rushing attempt than passing attempt.

The defense gets sacks, gets turnovers, stiffens up on third down, and gets stops. This is doubly true when the offense isn’t going three and out, or turning it over right back, and the coverage units aren’t allowing scores. On Thanksgiving, the Lions’ defense will need the Lions offense to help them get it done.

Without any systemic advantage, I would expect the Packers to slightly outperfom their season average against the 19th-ranked defense. Taking the strong systemic advantage into account, I project the Packers offense to score 27-30 points, passing for 7.00-7.50 YpA and rushing for 4.25-4.50 YpC. I have medium-high confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors

Sometimes, my projection seems very close to the “ceiling” or the “floor” of possible scenarios. For example, I thought Monday Night Football game against the Bears could be lower-scoring than I projected, but not higher. This game has wild possible movement in both directions.

All season long, the Packers have gotten themselves caught up in shootouts. They get a big lead early, but their secondary can’t shut down the other team. The Packers then have to keep the pedal to the metal to stay ahead of the other team. It is possible, if not probable, that this happens on Thanksgiving; I have been telling everyone to prepare for a possible 100-point combined effort.

Then again, the Lions scoring defense had been a Top 10 defense all season long, up until the last two weeks’ explosion of turnover- and special-teams-fueled scoring. By Pro Football Focus grades, they’re still the NFL’s second-best pass coverage unit. They simply don’t get beaten through the air.

If the Lions jump out to an early lead instead, I can see the Lions defense shutting the Packers passing game down—and dramatically depressing their scoring output.

Scott Linehan vs. Dom Capers

Lin	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Dom	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
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	30th	14.5	5.67	3.95	MIA	21st	21.6	6.61	2.35	12	-17%	4.26	-25%	4.30	9%
DET	24th	18.1	5.60	3.91	GBP	12th	20.3	6.17	4.46	0	-100%	4.20	-25%	4.33	11%
DET	27th	16.4	7.80	4.42	GBP	7th	18.6	5.96	3.59	12	-27%	4.95	-37%	3.17	-28%
DET	15th	22.6	6.02	3.99	GBP	2nd	15.0	5.90	4.65	26	15%	6.13	2%	5.86	47%
DET	15th	22.6	6.02	3.99	GBP	2nd	15.0	5.90	4.65	7	-69%	5.32	-0.12	4.63	16%
DET	3rd	30.1	6.79	4.30	GBP	15th	21.2	7.40	4.72

When Scott Linehan offenses meet Dom Capers defenses, something very interesting happens. It’s one of the strongest statistical trends that has ever cropped up in The Watchtower. First, the Linehan offenses tend to rush much better than expected. Second, they tend to outperform scoring expectations as a result. Third, and most interestingly, quarterback runs are wildly more successful than usual.

This was a quirk Commenter Matt noticed back in 2009, and it’s held up. Before last season’s game against the Packers at home, it drove me to boldly predict the following:

The Lions will be starting Drew Stanton, whose running ability is well-known, and whom the Lions have never hesitated to call designed running plays for. I expect to see at least one rushing touchdown, or 20-plus-yard scramble, from Drew Stanton on Sunday.

Stanton rushed 4 times for 44 yards, with a YpC of 10.0 and long of 17. As a whole, Jahvid Best, Maurice Morris, Stefan Logan and Stanton combined for 4.63 YpC, over half a yard per carry better than season averages. Might the Lions draw up some surprise quarterback draws for Stafford? Or, might he scramble for some yardage? It’s something to keep an eye on. Of course, it didn’t translate into any more than a measley seven points, thanks in part to two Stanton picks and a missed field goal.

If the offense turns it over twice in the first three possessions for the third straight week, it’s going to be hard for the Lions to meet expectations.

However, those expectations will be extremely high. The Lions are scoring 30.1 points per game, third-best in the NFL. Meanwhile, the Packers defense is ranked 17th, allowing 21.2 points per game. Keen observers will note the Lions’ and Packers’ units are ranked very, very similarly to each other. Without any kind of systemic advantage factored in I’d project the Lions to slightly outperform season averages, just as said I’d do for the Packers above.

However, we have a strong systemic advantage in place—and look at the per-play effectiveness stats! The Packers’ pass defense is allowing 1.95 more yards per passing attempt than the Lions’. Their rushing-allowed and scoring-allowed figures are nearly identical, though. Again, we know why this discrepancy exists: the Lions defense has been victimized by special teams and defensive scores in the past two weeks.

It’s hard to project Kevin Smith to repeat his NFL Offensive Player of the Week performance, or anywhere close, on Thursday. But his dramatic welcome-back party plays right into the Lions’ hands. With a back that can take advantage of the Lions’ systemic advantage, the Lions should exceed nominal expectations.

Therefore, I project the Lions to score 33-35 points, passing for 7.0-7.50 YpA and rushing for 4.75-5.0 YpC. I have very high confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors:

Well, jeez, there’s a lot of stuff going on here. The bottom line is that we have two very high-powered offenses, and two middling defenses. However, there are very strong systemic advantages in play when the ball’s moving in either direction, and both of them favor the Lions. There’s a very high potential for a “whoever scores last wins” kind of shootout, in which case whoever scores last will win, and the Packers have won half their games by being the kind of team that always finds a way to score last.

If that’s not what happens, though, the Lions have the upper hand.

The Lions should run and pass more effectively than the Packers, and God willing that will translate into more points—without too much interference from turnovers or return touchdowns. If, however, the Lions play with fire for the third straight week, they will get burned.

Conclusion

Of course, there’s one more factor I haven’t mentioned: us. The Lions fans. The ones who, in the words of Peter King, were the “ninth, 10th, 11th and 12th man in the Oct. 10 Monday night win over the Bears,” and awarded a game ball for our contributions.

If we do our part on Thanksgiving like we did on Monday Night Football, if we force the Packers into beating themselves with false starts and allowed sacks, the Lions will have every opportunity to make my projection of a 33-30 Lions win look brilliant.

Technorati Tags: detroit lions,green bay packers,thanksgiving,the watchtower,jim schwartz,mike mccarthy,gunther cunningham,dom capers

Read more...

Three Cups Deep: Winning Like the Packers

Congratulations to the Green Bay Packers. Congratulations to Aaron Rodgers, MVP. Congratulations to Mike McCarthy and Ted Thompson, a great coach and a fantastic franchise architect. Congratulations to all the awesome Packer bloggers, through whom I’ve been living vicariously throughout the playoffs. Most of all, congratulations to the Packers’ owners: their fans.

Last season, I wrote a post called “Winning Like the Saints.” In it, I talked about how the NFL is a copycat league—but they often copy wrong. When the Dolphins deployed the Wildcat, they were wildly successful; most teams in the NFL spent the next summer experimenting with some sort of Wildcat or Pistol formation. The Dolphins’ use of the Wildcat, though, was an intelligent response to a desperate situation: they weren’t winning games, and needed a way to maximize their only talent advantage: two strong tailbacks. The reason they went to the Wildcat is because most teams don’t have two strong tailbacks.

The way to copycat the Dolphins was not to “run the Wildcat” with whoever was on the roster, but to have smart coaches who’ll schematically maximize the talent they have. The Saints were a perfect example:

Think about it. What did Drew Brees do so well at Purdue? Pick defenses apart with short-range passes out of multi-WR sets. As a conventional quarterback in San Diego, he was at best inconsistent and at worst a failure. In New Orleans, Sean Payton asks him to do only what he’s excellent at; people think Brees is now “better” than Peyton Manning, which flatly isn’t true.

Sean Payton figured out that Reggie Bush is Kevin Faulk, not Marshall Faulk, and employs him in only in that role—to great success. Payton figured out that Robert Meacham is a short-yardage monster, and employs him in that role—to great success. Payton knew that with his fast-scoring, high-powered offense, he needed an aggressive, blitzing defense that could protect a lead. He hired hyperaggressive DC Gregg Williams to install such a defense, even though he had to give up $250,000 of his own money to do so!

Ironically the Dolphins, having found a way to maximize their talent, latched onto it as their offensive identity. They began reaching for marginal players that fit the scheme, rather than continuing to adapt and respond. This season, their powerful offense fizzled out, as the no-longer-novel Wildcat failed to surprise—and the relative lack of talent prevented the Dolphins from running a conventional offense well. Head coach Tony Sparano was nearly replaced by Jim Harbaugh as a result. Sparano’s eventual extension came hand-in-hand with the departure of Dan Henning—the offensive coordinator who implemented the Wildcat to begin with.

Don’t this next bit wrong: I don’t mean to demean the Packers’ coaching staff. Mike McCarthy is respected schemer, instrumental in getting the most out of both Favre and Rodgers—and, we’re now finding out, he’s a gifted motivator as well. Further, DC Dom Capers’s long track record of innovation and success is well-known, and his defense was magnificent this year. However, this Super Bowl belongs to Ted Thompson.

Thompson, the Packers’ GM, has long been a target of criticism—not least of which from Packers fans—because he approaches team-building in an unconventional way. His first major moves as GM were to let perennial All-Pros Marco Rivera, Mike Wahle, and Darren Sharper walk. His first draft pick was Aaron Rodgers, after the top quarterback prospect fell all the way to the 24th pick. Thompson continued to draft for value, build slowly, refuse to re-sign aging veterans for a penny more than he valued them at, and—with a notable exception in Charles Woodson—eschew free agency almost entirely. It was a long, slow process, that was successful in maddening fits and starts: 4-12, 8-8, 13-3, 6-10, 11-5.

It must be (and has) been said: Thompson had the temerity to sent Brett Favre packing when it was time. Thompson had the confidence in McCarthy and Rodgers to make the correct move for the franchise. When the first season of the Rodgers Era ended with a 6-10 record, and he was asked about coaching staff changes, Thompson replied, “That’s not my bailiwick.” When the Packers’ offensive line again struggled badly to protect Rodgers at the start of 2009, the tide of public sentiment fully turned. Aaron Nagler of Cheesehead TV, up until then one of his most faithful supporters, vehemently outlined Thompson and McCarthy’s failures.

Of course, the very next game, Daunte Culpepper "led" the Lions into Lambeau, and the slaughter that ensued kicked off a 9-3 run to the playoffs. However, a notable undercurrent of anti-Thompson sentiment still ran through the Packers’ fanbase. I repeatedly encountered Pack fans on blogs and Twitter and elsewhere who were convinced McCarthy was the right guy—but successful in spite of Thompson’s lackadaisical talent management. “firetedthompsonnow.com” was registered in March of 2010 . . .

. . . now, all that’s hosted there is a picture of Thompson, overlaid by the words “I’m not afraid to admit it. I was wrong. Congrats Ted.” Thompson’s vindication comes not only in the winning of a championship with Aaron Rodgers, while Favre sits at home, disgraced, but in the Packers doing it with the bottom half of their roster. The Pack’s stunning injury losses, and subsequent triumph, proved the top-to-bottom quality of the house Thompson’s built.

So, how do you win “like the Packers”? It’s not by having a #1-overall-pick-caliber quarterback fall into your lap at the bottom of the first, making him wait three years to play, or pushing his veteran superior out the door. It’s not by having a raft of intelligent, talented, hardworking receiving targets. It’s not by deploying a multiple-look 3-4 defense,  or having two great complementary cornerbacks. You win “like the Packers” by building the roster through the draft. You win “like the Packers” by refusing to compromise your long-term vision with stopgap solutions. You win “like the Packers” by refusing to pay a player more than he’s worth, for any reason. You win “like the Packers” by meticulously building a championship-caliber roster, that rolls 53 men deep.

Martin Mayhew is not Ted Thompson. He lacks Thompson’s public idiosyncrasies. He’s been slightly more cognizant of immediate need—see Foote, Larry—and is okay with stopgaps for the right price. Thompson has been judicious in signing players, while Mayhew has churned the roster with incredible vigor: literally hundreds of players have been a Lion for at least a day since Mayhew took over. Then again, Thompson didn’t start with a truly talentless, 0-16 team—who knows what Ted’s approach would have been in Martin’s place?

On the whole, though, Mayhew’s strategy has been much like Thompson’s: the Lions have built their current roster almost entirely through the draft. When they’ve reached into free agency, they’ve been swift and decisive; as in the brilliant all-in move for Kyle Vanden Bosch. The Lions have also refused to pay more than they feel a player is worth. Foote’s arrival was delayed because the Lions refused to part with any more than a seventh-rounder for him. When the Steelers insisted on more, the Lions called their bluff—and got Foote for nothing when the Steelers released him.

Over this offseason, look for both men to stay the course: drafting the best player that fits a need, making judicious moves when the value is there, and being willing to part with unneeded parts. Between the Packers’ injured players coming back, and the Lions’ third full offseason of reconstruction, both teams will be in position to win several more games than they did this year—and both teams will be built to last.

Strap yourselves in, folks--this is going to be a hell of a ride.

Technorati Tags: nfl,super bowl xlv,green bay packers,ted thompson,mike mccarthy,aaron rodgers,detroit lions,martin mayhew,miami dolphins,tony sparano

Read more...

The Watchtower: Lions vs. Packers

The Packers are sitting at 8-4, one game behind the Bears in the race to the top of the NFC North.  The Lions are sitting at 2-10, three games ahead of the Vikings in the race to the bottom of the NFC North.  By the Simple Ranking System, both teams are much, much better than their record implies: the Packers’s value is 10.0; #2 in the NFL.  Meanwhile, the Lions are valued at 0.0, and ranked 16th.  Statistically speaking, the Lions are the median team: right smack dab in the middle of the NFL, in terms of relative strength.  But is that enough to compete with the mighty Pack, even before a sold-out Ford Field?

Mike McCarthy vs. Gunther Cunningham

McC	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Gun	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
NOS	14	21.2	6.43	4.46	TEN	29th	27.2	8.05	4.62	12	-43%	8.04	25%	1.53	-66%
NOS	14	21.8	6.62	3.96	KCC	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	27	24%	9.59	45%	5.83	47%
GBP	3rd	28.8	7.56	4.30	DET	32nd	30.9	5.42	4.42	26	-10%	9.68	28%	3.57	-17%
GBP	3rd	28.8	7.56	4.30	DET	32nd	30.9	5.42	4.42	34	18%	8.92	18%	2.96	-31%
GBP	7th	25.2	7.68	3.99	DET	25th	25.5	7.18	4.58	21	-17%	10.65	39%	4.28	7%
GBP	7th	25.2	7.68	3.99	DET	25th	25.5	7.18	4.58

In the last Watchtowering of the Packers, I discussed the very strong statistical trend we’ve seen when Mike McCarthy faces Gunther Cunningham:

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.

In the last two meetings, however, the Packers’ offense has underperformed even this.  In both cases, the Packers scored the amount of points I projected—but with the help of a defensive touchdown, meaning the offense was a full TD below what expectations project.  Last time, I projected the Packers to do the following:

With the Lions possessing a systemic advantage against the Packers’ already injury-weakened running game, and in depressing the Packers’ scoring, I project the Pack will fall just short of their season average, scoring 24-27 points. I have very high confidence in this projection.

Given the depth and specificity of the data we’ve got, and the special circumstances surrounding the matchup, I’ll take the opportunity to get a little more specific: I cite my Whack-A-Mole principle, and project that the Lions will concede the run to the Packers, allowing 3.75-4.0 YpC, in order to focus primarily on the pass, which should yield 7.5-8.25 YpA. Further, I predict the Lions will sack the Packers four to six times.

The Pack did bomb it down the field, picking up 10.65 YpA—but with only 17 attempts, and two of those picked off, that only amounted to 181 yards.  The Lions did cede the run to the Pack in the process: 4.28 YpC.  The Lions sacked the Packers twice (on only 19 dropbacks), though, and recovered two fumbles in addition to those two INTs.  The disruption in scoring is obvious: the Packers are the 7th-best scoring offense in football this year, averaging 25.2 PpG, and the Lions—the 25th-ranked defense—held them to just 21 offensive points.  Keep in mind, the Lions have been allowing 25.5 points per game on the average; to hold the 7th-best offense to less than what you’ve been allowing on average all year is an impressive feat.

So.  The Lions are allowing 25.5 points per game, the Packers are scoring 25.2 points per game.  The Lions have since put their #1 DE, Kyle Vanden Bosch, and #2 corner, Alphonso Smith, on Injured Reserve.  However, the Packers have since lost #1 RB Ryan Grant, and #1 TE Jermichael Finley to injuries, as well.  The last game was at Lambeau, but this game will be a a Packer-fan-filled Ford Field.  As I said last week, rarely do two meetings between two teams in the same season end up with the same result, but all the factors seem to cancel each other out.

It seems unlikely that the Lions’ defense does that well against an offense that good twice in a row, though, so I’m going to project the Packers to slightly underperform scoring expectations: gaining 23-26 points.  I expect the Lions to be more successful defending the pass with zone coverage, allowing 8.0-8.5 YpA, at the expense of fewer interceptions.  The Lions will likely cede the run to the Packers again, allowing 4.25-4.5 YpC.  I have high confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors:

Again, with such a consistent trend, and a prior game this season, everything above is a mitigating or aggravating factor—we’re just looking to see what will modify what happened before.  As I said, in Week 4, the Lions managed to hold the Packers’ offense to as few points as can be expected, given how effective they were on a per-play basis.  If the same offense shows up this week, I don’t see the Lions being so fortunate.  On the other hand . . .

This week, ESPN NFC North blogger Kevin Seifert pointed out that Greg Jennings has put the team on his back, much like the (uproariously NSFW-audio-laden) Madden clip we all know and love:

Ahem.

Look for the Lions to drop eight men into coverage on a regular basis, essentially the same game plan we saw against the Patriots on Thanksgiving.  The idea is to get enough rush from the front four to slow down the Pack’s offense just long enough for the Lions’ offense to outscore them.  Greg Jennings will be the key to this game for the Packers’ offense.  If the Lions can stop him with double- and triple-teams, I don’t think Donald Driver and Donald Lee will be enough to score more than the 23-26 I project, if enough to score that much at all.

Scott Linehan vs. Dom Capers

Lin	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Dom	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
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	30th	14.5	5.67	3.95	MIA	21st	21.6	6.61	2.35	12	-17%	4.26	-25%	4.30	9%
DET	24th	18.1	5.60	3.91	GBP	12th	20.3	6.17	4.46	0	-100%	4.20	-25%	4.33	11%
DET	27th	16.4	7.80	4.42	GBP	7th	18.6	5.96	3.59	12	-27%	4.95	-37%	3.17	-28%
DET	13th	23.2	5.92	3.72	GBP	1st	15.7	6.02	4.49	26	12%	6.13	4%	5.86	58%
DET	13th	23.2	5.92	3.72	GBP	1st	15.7	6.02	4.49

Last year, I thought I’d identified a systemic advantage for Scott Linehan against Dom Capers (and most 3-4 defenses), where the running game was disproportionately effective, and scoring was therefore disproportionately higher.  Then, Daunte Culpepper went out and Daunte Culpeppered the Lions to a big stinky shutout in their first matchup against the Pack, seemingly blowing my theory out of the water.   However, this season has shown that my initial conclusion has legs.

This year, the Packers have the #1 scoring defense in the NFL.  Yes, that’s right, let me say that again: this year, the Packers have the #1 scoring defense in the NFL.  You wouldn’t know it from how little attention this fact has received, but it’s true.  Nevertheless, Shaun Hill led the Lions to a 26-point day against these Packers on the road, and his 40-yard scramble led the Lions’ rushing attack to an impressive 5.86 YpC.

In the comments on the last Watchtower, commenter Matt pointed out that a lot of the Packers’ rushing yards allowed to that point were gained by Michael Vick—and sure enough, the Packers allowed the Lions some significant scramble yardage, as well.  I replied in the Watchtower Review:

My notion that Green Bay is generally struggling against the run this year was false. However, we may have stumbled upon something interesting: are Green Bay’s nickel packages especially susceptible to quarterback runs? With a three-man front attempting to rush the passer, and one or more linebackers blitzing, it would make sense that there’s a giant gaping hole in the middle of the field. I’ll be keeping an eye on this throughout the season . . . and for the next Watchtower.

Well, I can’t find an quick answer for how many yards the Packers have been surrendering to rushing quarterbacks, or if that total’s unusually high.  However, the Packers are allowing 4.49 YpC on the ground, 7th-worst in the NFL—so clearly, my notion that the Packers are generally struggling against the run was true.  Further, the Lions will be starting Drew Stanton, whose running ability is well-known, and whom the Lions have never hesitated to call designed running plays for.  I expect to see at least one rushing touchdown, or 20-plus-yard scramble, from Drew Stanton on Sunday.

Typically, the Lions are outgained by their opponents, but keep games close with red-zone defense, sacks, and turnovers.  However,  against the Packers, the Lions actually far outgained the Pack, outrushing them 123 to 91, and outpassing them 331 to 181.  It was only a slew of costly penalties that kept the Lions from scoring thirty or more the last time around.  I don’t expect the Lions to put up 454 yards against the Packers this time around, but I do project them to be more productive with their yards: scoring 17-23 points, gaining 4.50-5.00 YpC, and throwing for 5.75-6.00 YpA.

Mitigating/Augmenting Factors:

First, this presumes that Drew Stanton plays like he did last week: an efficient, effective, conservative backup quarterback.  If Stanton has a regression to his “2009 49ers game” form, this will be an ugly blowout.  However, there’s an X factor here named Jahvid Best. We saw a return to form last week, and if he still has that burst, that bounce, he could do an awful lot of damage against a Green Bay defense that’s lost three of its top five linebackers for the year.  Finally, in the first matchup, Brandon Pettigrew made a lot more headlines for the two or three crucial passes he dropped, than the eight he caught for 91 yards.  Likely being matched up against A.J. Hawk, as 49ers TE Vernon Davis was last week (4 catches, 126 yards, 1 TD) could result in a field day for Jumbotron.

Conclusion

The Lions gave the Packers their best shot in Week 4, and lost the game mostly by shooting themselves in the foot.  Between a truly massive amount of penalties (13 for 102 yards), and the now-obligatory Charles Woodson pick-six, the Lions let the Packers off the hook.  As I said above, it’s hard to believe that the Lions could play that well against a team as talented as Green Bay twice in once season—and yet, it’s there.  It’s there for them, again.  They lost by two on the road before, they can win this one at home.  They can . . . but they won’t.  Here’s what I said at the end of the last Watchtower:

I'd love to say that this Packer team, struggling so mightily to run and stop the run, is primed for an upset. But the talent gap between these teams is still too large, especially when considering the almost-two-decade-long streak of Lambeau futility the Lions are riding. I project another tantalizingly close game, with an outstanding day by the defensive line—marred by the back seven yielding to one of the best passing attacks in the game. This will be an extremely painful 17-24 defeat.

CTRL-C, CTRL-V, folks.  This will be an extremely painful 17-24 defeat.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,green bay packers,mike mccarthy,jim schwartz,scott linehan,gunther cunningham,dom capers,drew stanton,aaron rodgers,greg jennings

Read more...

Watchtower Review: Lions at Packers

I do not feel like doing this.

In the Watchtower for the Packers game, I said this about the Packers’ offense:

But with the Lions possessing a systemic advantage against the Packers’ already injury-weakened running game, and in depressing the Packers’ scoring, I project the Pack will fall just short of their season average, scoring 24-27 points. I have very high confidence in this projection.

Given the depth and specificity of the data we’ve got, and the special circumstances surrounding the matchup, I’ll take the opportunity to get a little more specific: I cite my Whack-A-Mole principle, and project that the Lions will concede the run to the Packers, allowing 3.75-4.0 YpC, in order to focus primarily on the pass, which should yield 7.5-8.25 YpA. Further, I predict the Lions will sack the Packers four to six times.

It looks as though the Packers overshot this window--but Charles Woodson’s pick-six accounted for seven of the Packers’ 28 points.  With only 21 points scored, the defense did even better than expected.  My running projection wasn’t too far off either; the Packers netted 4.38 yards per carry.  The Packers’ passing YpA (which is a devil to predict) was 10.65; that’s much more than I expected.  Finally, my projection called for four-to-six sacks, but the Lions managed only two.

How did the Packers run and pass better than they usually do, get help from the Lions with massive penalties, only get sacked twice, and still underperform scoring expectations?  For starters, turnovers—even though the Lions turned it over three times, the Packers turned it over four times, killing drives.  Second, the way the Lions repeatedly handed the Packers the ball, and yards via penalties, reduced the number of snaps the offense had to take. 

The Lions only sacked the Packers twice, yes—but Rodgers only dropped back to pass nineteen times.  In the first three games, Rodgers had been sacked a total of three times—on 108 dropbacks.  With the Lions’ sack rate on Sunday, once per 9.5 dropbacks, if Rodgers had been forced to throw as many times as he usually has this season (36), the Lions would have garnered 3.79 sacks.  Of course, if we’re playing that game, the Packers’ 32.21 attempts, at 10.65 YpA, would have netted them 343.04 passing yards . . . so let’s not look a gift horse in the mouth.  The Lions got two sacks on 19 dropbacks, and that's good.

Ultimately, the Lions depressed the Packers' scoring with a couple of sacks (one killing a crucial late-third-quarter drive), four turnovers, and good old-fashioned ball control. The Packers only had time to run 38 offensive plays . . . you just can’t generate a lot of points with so few bites at the apple.

Now, let me take a moment to address longtime commenter Matt, who routinely drops knowledge in the comments (more than I can adequately respond to!).  Here’re some excerpts of Matt’s challenge to my Watchtower conclusions:

There's a problem with your analysis. You say the Packers are getting gashed by the run, but if you check the box scores, it's not really true.

. . . By these numbers, the Packers have given up 333 yards on 67 carries (4.97 ypc), but 152 of those yards and 17 of those carries came from QBs (two-thirds of THAT being Vick). That leaves the running backs gaining only 3.6 yards per carry. Even though they haven't faced any of the elite RBs yet, the Packers aren't as bad against the run as some numbers suggest. They just let the QB slip out every now and then and once that QB was Vick.

This is a great point; I was remiss not to break it down further.  The Packers aren’t any softer than usual against tailbacks this season; Jahvid Best   These things have a way of working themselves out, though . . .

With all this in mind, I don't think Sunday looks very bright for Jahvid Best, regardless of how the toe feels. That being said, if he plays around 80-90%, there's a good chance he scores whatever touchdowns the Lions manage. I also don't think the Lions are getting 9 yards a carry out of Shaun Hill.

Thanks to that wild 40-yard scamper, they actually got 13.25!  Of course, I would never have predicted it, and it shows that my notion that Green Bay is generally struggling against the run this year was false.  However, we may have stumbled upon something interesting: are Green Bay’s nickel packages especially susceptible to quarterback runs?  With a three-man front  attempting to rush the passer, and one or more linebackers blitzing, it would make sense that there’s a giant gaping hole in the middle of the field.  I’ll be keeping an eye on this throughout the season . . . and for the next Watchtower.

Given the season averages so far, and taking into account (but not overemphasizing) the systemic advantage Scott Linehan has against Dom Capers, I project the Lions to mildly outperform expectations, meeting or falling just short of their season averages: 15-20 points, 5.50-to-6.00 YpA, and 4.00 YpC.  I have medium to high confidence in this projection.

The rushing, as we discussed, was thrown off by Shaun Hill's scramble. The Lions' team per-carry average was a stout 5.86!  Jahvid Best and Kevin Smith combined for 15 carries and 62 yards, or 4.13 YpC.  That’s a half-yard better than the tailback-rushing-allowed figure Matt so helpfully calculated, and over a full yard better than the Lions’ season averages so far.  Clearly, the advantage Linehan has over Capers in the running game came into play.

As far as the passing goes, at first blush the Lions were much better than expected—but the Lions only averaged 6.13 YpA.  It wasn’t so much that the Lions were much more effective through the air than usual, it was when they were effective, completing 62.9% of their passes and converting 10/17 third downs, the Lions possessed the ball, moved the chains, and got many more bites at the apple.  Also, just as their defensive penalties were making the field shorter for the Green Bay offense, the Lions’ offensive penalties were making the field longer for themselves.  They padded out that 331 yard passing-yard total by getting back a lot of they yards they gave tot he Packers—they key point here, though, is that they did get those yards back.

Clearly, the Lions outperformed my projections for points, strengthening the trend of Linehan offenses outperforming Capers/LeBeau 3-4 defenses.  What’s maddening, though, is that they left so much on the table: four second-half scoring drives ended in field goals instead of touchdowns, most notably this sequence right here:

1-6-GB 6 (12:12)

    14-Sh.Hill pass incomplete short right to 81-C.Johnson.

2-6-GB 6 (12:06)

    (Shotgun) 14-Sh.Hill pass incomplete short left to 80-B.Johnson (38-T.Williams).

3-6-GB 6 (12:00)

    (Shotgun) 14-Sh.Hill pass incomplete short left to 85-T.Scheffler.

4-6-GB 6 (11:54)

    4-J.Hanson 24 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-48-D.Muhlbach, Holder-2-N.Harris.

When you have 1st and goal from your opponent's 6-yard-line, and your last three drives all ended in field goals . . . you have to score a touchdown there.  You just have to.  If the Lions can’t figure out their red-zone strategy. . . or, more accurately, if Shaun Hill can’t figure out how to execute the Lions’ red-zone strategy, the Lions will continue to be unable to close games until Matthew Stafford comes back.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,green bay packers,mike mccarthy,jim schwartz,dom capers,gunther cunningham,scott linehan,shaun hill

Read more...

The Watchtower: Lions at Packers

The Lions find themselves in a desperate position.  Having lost three difficult, but winnable games to open the season, they travel to Green Bay to face their most toughest test yet.  Oh, and stop me if you’ve heard this one before, but the Lions haven’t won at Lambeau since 1991.  Vince Workman scored all of Green Bay’s touchdowns in that game.  Mel Gray took a punt to the house.  The Lions finished the season 12-4, and the Packers limped to a 3-12 record.  Shortly thereafter, the first President Bush authorized the first attack of the first Gulf War.

The Packers have dominated the Lions to an almost mythic degree; I’d love to know if there’s a similar streak at any level of any team sport.  Eighteen seasons without a road win, against a divisional rival?  Unthinkable—and yet, here we are, and there they are.  Let’s do this.

Mike McCarthy vs. Gunther Cunningham

McC	Gun	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Fum	Sack
NOS	TEN	14	21.2	6.43	4.46	29th	27.2	8.05	4.62	12	8.04	0	1.53	3-2	3-20
NOS	KCC	14	21.8	6.62	3.96	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	27	9.59	1	5.83	2-0	4-19
GBP	DET	3rd	28.8	7.56	4.30	32nd	30.9	5.42	4.42	26	9.68	1	3.57	3-1	5-30
GBP	DET	3rd	28.8	7.56	4.30	32nd	30.9	5.42	4.42	34	8.92	0	2.96	2-2	1-6

The first Watchtowering of the Packers led me to the following conclusion:

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.

What happened in that first game?  As I crowed in the Watchtower for the November Lions-Packers matchup:

• 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.

This is exactly what the trend predicted: with lesser talent, Gunther Cunningham’s defense held the Packers to their norms for the season with sacks and turnovers—despite being victimized for great chunks of yardage between the 20s.  However, over the course of the season, the Packers’ offense had picked up steam—and the Lions had suffered their usual rash of secondary losses.  My conclusion:

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.

At first blush, this was once again spot-on: the Packers scored 34 points.  However, one of those touchdowns came on a Charles Woodson interception return; the Packers’ offense was only responsible for 27 of those 34 points.  YpA was 8.92, just under the lower bound of my projection, but running?  That was held to a meager 2.96 YpC.  Given that the Lions also held the Packers to 3.57 YpC in the first meeting (their season average was 4.30), this is an interesting trend.

It’s tempting to suggest that the Packers were not running well because the pass offense was working—but the Packers rushed 30 and 27 times in the two games.   It’s further tempting to suggest that the Packers were merely “putting it in the cooler,” but the score of the second game was 13-7 at halftime; it didn’t become a blowout until the middle of the third.  Don’t forget, the Lions were allowing 4.42 YpC on the ground last year; this was not a stout run defense.  Clearly, there’s something systematic depressing Packer rushing yardage, even when the defense should be coming in terrified of the aerial assault.

The Packers are coming off a brutal Monday Night Football loss, where reserve tailbacks John Kuhn and Brandon Jackson combined for 43 yards on 13 carries; the 3.31 YpC a clear indicator that they miss starter Ryan Grant.  Moreover, the willingness to completely abandon the run shows the Packers are well aware of what they do well, and what they do not.

One thing they do very, very well is get the ball to Jermichael Finley, who’s got 17 receptions for an incredible 265 yards.  I expect the Packers to try to exploit this advantage, especially given the Lions’ weakness at outside linebacker (even with the return of Zack Follett) and safety (C.C. Brown, anyone?).

In terms of the data, things are ever-so-slightly less bleak for the Lions this year.  The Packers boast the 4th-ranked scoring offense, racking up points at at 26.0 PpG clip; the Lions are allowing points at the exact same rate, 26.0 PpG.  The expectation would be that the Packers will score well above their average.  But with the Lions possessing a systemic advantage against the Packers’ already injury-weakened running game, and in depressing the Packers’ scoring, I project the Pack will fall just short of their season average, scoring 24-27 points.  I have very high confidence in this projection.

Given the depth and specificity of the data we’ve got, and the special circumstances surrounding the matchup, I’ll take the opportunity to get a little more specific: I cite my Whack-A-Mole principle, and project that the Lions will concede the run to the Packers, allowing 3.75-4.0 YpC, in order to focus primarily on the pass, which should yield 7.5-8.25 YpA.  Further, I predict the Lions will sack the Packers four to six times.

Mitigating/Augmenting Factors:

I’ve mostly covered the whys and wherefores above.  If the Lions’ pass rush can’t hit home, they will have a devil of a time depressing scoring; the Packers will likely throw it fifty times against an extremely susceptible back seven.  Rodgers, however, is not known for getting rid of it quickly, and an extra step for KVB, Avril, Suh, and Williams to get there may make all the different in the world.  The possibility exists that the Lions’s pass rush actually drives a better-than-expected performance here; with no effective running game and nothing to lose, I expect Cunningham to be extremely aggressive.

On the other had, we are talking about Rodgers, Jennings, Finley, Driver, et al., in Lambeau.  The scoring could also get completely out of hand.  I’m pretty confident in these numbers, though.

Scott Linehan vs. Dom Capers

Lin	Capers	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Fum	Sack
MIN	HOU	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	21st	19.3	6.89	3.92	34	7.92	0	4.69	0-0	3-8
STL	MIA	30th	14.5	5.67	3.95	21st	21.6	6.61	2.35	12	4.26	3	4.30	0-0	0-0
DET	GBP	24th	18.1	5.60	3.91	12th	20.3	6.17	4.46	0	4.20	3	4.33	2-0	5-34
DET	GBP	32nd	30.9	7.80	4.42	7th	18.6	5.96	3.59	12	4.95	4	3.17	1-1	2-14

In the first Packers Watchtower, I made some pretty big statements, based on the performance of the Lions against 3-4 defenses of Capers-like lineage:

Let's look briefly at the scorched-earth napalming that Linehan's 6th-ranked Vikings offense put on Dom Capers' 21st-ranked Texans defense. 34 points, 7.92 YpA, 4.69 YpC. Culpepper was 36-of-50 for 396 yards, 5 TDs, and 0 INTs. Vikings backs ran 26 times for 122 yards. It probably would have been worse if the Vikes hadn't been flagged 10 times for 75 yards. Given the only data point on LeBeau, and fitting it into the broader picture painted by the Capers and Williams info, I think I'm safe to say that Scott Linehan's balanced offense significantly outperforms expectations against aggressive, blitzing 3-4 defenses like LeBeau's.

. . . As we've seen with Gregg Williams and Dick LeBeau, 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.

Zip.  Zero.  Zilch.  Nada.  Bupkus.  Donut.  Shutout.  Matthew Stafford did not play, Daunte Culpepper was Culpepperific in the extreme, and the Lions didn’t score a single point.  They passed (4.20 YpA) no more effectively as they ran (4.20 YpC), and they answered the Packers’ opening drive TD with an interception that was converted into a second touchdown.  They were down by 14 within minutes of the opening gun, and never got anything going after that.

The second time around, I learned my lesson:

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.

Underperform they did, netting 10 offensive points (2 more came from a safety), gaining 4.95 YpA, and rushing for 3.17 YpC.  Clearly, I was still either overestimating the effect size of the Linehan/Capers thing, or overestimating expectations of the 27th-best scoring offense when facing the 7th-best scoring defense.  I think I’ll assume the former for now, and adjust my predictions downward—especially since Stafford will still be out, Burleson will be out, and Best will be far from full-speed.

The Lions’ offense is a sight better from last season, even with Shaun Hill at the helm.  Ranked 18th, and averaging 18.7 PpG (not counting Megatron’s wiped-out TD), the Lions go up against a similarly-stingy Packer defense this time around.  Green Bay’s still ranked 7th, allowing a mere 15.7 PpG, and holding opposing quarterbacks to only 5.47 YpA.  However, the Packers are getting gashed for 5.00 YpC . . . it’s not helping opposing teams much, but Green Bay is not stopping anyone on the ground right now.

Given the season averages so far, and taking into account (but not overemphasizing) the systemic advantage Scott Linehan has against Dom Capers, I project the Lions to mildly outperform expectations, meeting or falling just short of their season averages: 15-20 points, 5.50-to-6.00 YpA, and 4.00 YpC.  I have medium to high confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Augmenting Factors:

If Jahvid Best were healthy, I could see him really catching fire against the Packers’ substandard run defense.  If that happened, the secondary could be drawn closer to the line, opening up opportunities downfield.  But even if so, could the Lions capitalize without Stafford and/or Burleson?  Further, Best isn’t healthy; even if he plays it will be with a high degree of pain.  Unfortunately, that's the only chink in this doomy armor I can find.

Conclusion

I'd love to say that this Packer team, struggling so mightily to run and stop the run, is primed for an upset.  But the talent gap between these teams is still too large, especially when considering the almost-two-decade-long streak of Lambeau futility the Lions are riding.  I project another tantalizingly close game, with an outstanding day by the defensive line—marred by the back seven yielding to one of the best passing attacks in the game.  This will be an extremely painful 17-24 defeat.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,green bay packers,the watchtower,jim schwartz,gunther cunningham,scott linehan,mike mccarthy,dom capers,matthew stafford,jahvid best,shaun hill,aaron rodgers

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...

the watchtower: Lions at Packers

Last week’s Watchtower, full of vim and vigor from the previous week’s accuracy, made the following projections about the Steelers game:

• Roethlisberger should have an incredibly effective day, smoking the Lions' subpar secondary; completing at least 70% of his passes. Whether that's for 350 yards and 4 TDs or 250 yards and 2 TDs will depend on the Lions' ability to stop Rashard Mendenhall--and then blitz to get pressure on Ben.
• If Matt Stafford, Kevin Smith, and Calvin Johnson are healthy enough to play, and play well, this could be an intense shootout.
• Duante Culpepper proved last week that he's a dumpoff artist and no more. If Stafford can't go, the corners will press, the safeties will creep up, and the ground game will be ground to a halt.
• Either way, though, I think we're just talking about margin of loss. As I said about the similar pass-first, blitz-heavy Saints, the most likely outcome of this game is a shootout that the Lions lose.

While I wouldn’t call 28-20 a “shootout”, that score doesn’t necessarily reflect the offensive output/efficiency of either team.  Big Ben’s stat line was astonishing, as predicted: 23-of-30 for 277 yards (9.23 YpA), 3 touchdowns, 123.9 passer rating . . . oh yes, and one interception.

Minus that beautiful defensive play, the final score is 28-13--and would have been 28-6 heading into the fourth quarter.  Culpepper did open it up a little bit, generating a much-improved 7.62 YpA—but again, he was sacked SEVEN times for a loss of 57 yards.  If you use the “Average yards gained per passing play” stat, that  robust-looking 7.62 YpA drops all the way down to a meager 5.1.  Not to mention, of course, his mistakes killed the drives before and after the only offensive TD.  Kevin Smith was almost completely ineffective, averaging a miserable 2.65 YpC.

However, there’s no question that the defense surpassed my expectations, especially on the ground.  While Mendenhall rushed for 5.13 YpC, it was just 15 carries for 77 yards, including one 27-yarder (the other 14 carries averaged 3.57 yards each).  The defense actually got to Big Ben three times, twice on third down--thereby killing drives where the Steelers might have scored.

The three Steelers drives that were killed by sacks and the pick-six definitely suppressed the Steelers’ scoring . . . and that’s wonderful news.  This sequence--the Steelers' second-to-last drive, immediately prior to the Northcutt TD--shows exactly how the Lions’ defense is supposed to work:

• 1-10-PIT 49 (9:57): 7-B.Roethlisberger sacked at PIT 40 for -9 yards (sack split by 96-A.Fluellen and 92-C.Avril).
• 2-19-PIT 40 (9:20) (Shotgun) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short right to 86-H.Ward to PIT 45 for 5 yards (24-K.Pearson).
• 3-14-PIT 45 (8:35) (Shotgun) 7-B.Roethlisberger sacked at PIT 45 for 0 yards (59-J.Peterson).

On the first play, you see the base nickel defense.  To an extent, this is a coverage sack; Ben has time to throw, but instead just pumps as he waffles about it.  Then, Fluellen, who was lined up on the right side, beats his man to the left, then cuts behind that guard inside.  As Flu launches to sack Ben, Avril--who'd doubled back from the edge--follows Fluellen, attacking the same gap.  They get to Ben at nearly the same time, preventing any Roethlismagic.  Note that Foote is also sent on a delayed blitz--so even if Roethlisberger had gotten away from Flu and/or Avril, or the protection had been different, the pressure would still have been there.

On 2nd-and-19, the offense doesn't have much it can do but take a bite out of the elephant--and so it does, hitting Ward for 5 and setting up a slightly-but-not-much easier 3rd-and-14.

On the third play, we get the payoff.  Whereas the first set looked like a soft nickel and became a five-man rush, this play begins with all three linebackers up on the line of scrimmage: one between each defensive lineman.  Ben is already in the shotgun to try and nullify the heat--but at the snap, all three linebackers drop back into coverage.  Ben, who was ready to get rid of the ball to a target just beyond the blitzing linebackers, now has to wait for deep routes to develop.  Julian Peterson, lined up as the rush end, simply outruns the LT to the outside, though overrunning Ben to do so. Ben feels the heat and tries to roll out, but he has no options. Peterson doubles back and runs Ben down.

You see how this is supposed to work: pressure (and the threat of pressure) dictating what the offense does, throwing them out of rhythm, killing drives, and denying points.  If the execution was just a little bit better, this defense as a whole could be a LOT better.

In Green Bay, the same talent may indeed be a little more effective; the Packers have allowed a league-high 20 sacks so far, and appear to be incapable of protecting their franchise QB, Aaron Rodgers. . . well, let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

McC	Gun	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
NOS	TEN	14	21.2	6.43	4.46	13th	20.2	6.60	3.79	12	8.04	0	1.53	3-20
NOS	KCC	14	21.8	6.62	3.96	29th	27.2	8.05	4.62	27	9.59	1	5.83	4-19

What we have here are GB Head Coach Mike McCarthy’s ‘03 and ‘04 New Orleans Saints (he was OC under Jim Haslett), squared off against Jim Schwartz’s ‘03 Titans and Gunther Cunningham’s ‘04 Chiefs.  In the first contest, the Saints are a middle-of-the-road offense, scoring 21.2 PpG, gaining 6.43 YpA, and a very healthy 4.46 YpC (Deuce McAllister had a 1,600-yard season that year).  Meanwhile, the Titans were ranked 13th in scoring defense, allowing an average of 20.2 points a game.  They were a little firmer against the run than the pass, holding opponents to under well under 4 YpC, but allowing 6.6 YpA.

The defensive lockdown that occurred is impressive indeed.  The Titans held the Saints to just 10 offensive points (their D came up with a safety), completely neutralized McAllister—8 yards on 11 carries!—and sacked Aaron Brooks 3 times for –20 yards.  Brooks was efficient when he did get the ball off, completing 15-of-23 for 185 yards, a score, and no picks—but it didn’t translate into points until the fourth quarter, when the score was sitting at 20-5 and the game was functionally over.

In the second matchup, the Saints were again ranked 14th in the NFL in scoring, with very similar output (21.8 ppg).  However, McAllister tweaked his ankle that season, and wasn’t nearly as effective; Aaron Stecker picked up some of the load, but the Saints ran for a half-yard less per carry in 2004 than in ‘03.  Meanwhile, Gun had jumped from the maturing Titans defense to the clean-slate Chiefs unit, and it showed.  The 29th-ranked scoring defense allowed 27.2 ppg, a whopping 8.05 YpC, and less-whopping-but-still-not-good 4.62 YpC.

Though the Saints, in line with expectations, scored a touchdown above their season average—right at the Chiefs’ season average—they actually gained yardage at clips well above their norms.  At 9.59 YpA and 5.83 YpC, the Saints were moving the ball extremely well—it’s the 4 sacks, 2 forced fumbles, and a pick that depressed New Orleans’s score.  Wait a minute, that sounds familiar . . .

Clearly, McCarthy was working with a substandard QB in Aaron Brooks, and clearly, this Lions’ defense is much closer to the 2004 Chiefs than the 2003 Titans.  However, those Chiefs damn near won that game: the final score was 27-20, after a 42-yard Joe Horn bomb broke a 20-20 fourth-quarter tie.  So despite being hopelessly overmatched on talent, Gun’s D stood up to McCarthy’s O, all the way until the last drive.

Combining the results of that game with the defensive Alcatraz Jim and Gun contained the ‘03 Saints in, I'm willing to conclude 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.

Lin	Capers	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Sack
MIN	HOU	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	21st	19.3	6.89	3.92	34	7.92	0	4.69	3-8
STL	MIA	30th	14.5	5.67	3.95	21st	21.6	6.61	2.35	12	4.26	3	4.30	0-0

Last week, I gave us a sneak preview of this week.  While trying to get a handle on Steelers DC Dick LeBeau, I included some data from his disciple, Dom Capers.  That data was his Texans against Scott Linehan’s Minnesota Vikings.  I’ll just quote what I said last week:

Let's look briefly at the scorched-earth napalming that Linehan's 6th-ranked Vikings offense put on Dom Capers' 21st-ranked Texans defense. 34 points, 7.92 YpA, 4.69 YpC. Culpepper was 36-of-50 for 396 yards, 5 TDs, and 0 INTs. Vikings backs ran 26 times for 122 yards. It probably would have been worse if the Vikes hadn't been flagged 10 times for 75 yards. Given the only data point on LeBeau, and fitting it into the broader picture painted by the Capers and Williams info, I think I'm safe to say that Scott Linehan's balanced offense significantly outperforms expectations against aggressive, blitzing 3-4 defenses like LeBeau's.

Obviously, the Lions didn't significantly outperform expectations against the Steelers--they only scored 13 offensive points--but with Kevin Smith playing hurt (and ineffective), Daunte being Daunte, and Megatron missing a significant fraction of the game, Linehan's offense wasn't exactly "balanced", either. If we look briefly at the season so far for the Steelers and Packers . . . we see that the Steelers are the 14th ranked scoring defesne, at 19.6 PpG, and the Packers are 21st-ranked, at 23.6 PpG. Obviously, that's just the average of five and four games, respectively, for these teams, so those numbers aren't anywhere near airtight--but there is a clear gap in talent and execution between the Steelers and Packers. With Ryan Pickett instead of Casey Hampton, and an out-of-position Aaron Kampman instead of Lamar Woodley, the Packers' defense should be a significantly flimsier obstacle between the Matt Stafford and the end zone than the Steelers.

Yes, that presumes that Stafford will play--but unlike last week, he's already practicing. It's true that Megatron may not be able to go--but if Stafford is under center, I still like the Lions’ chances to be effective.  Northcutt and Williams should have a good day in between the Packers' excellent corners, and Aaron Kampman on Brandon Pettigrew is an incredible mismatch that Scott Linehan is more than smart enough to relentlessly attack.

So, where does that leave us? As we've seen with Gregg Williams and Dick LeBeau, 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. If history is any indicator, and the finally-awakening Lions pass rush can really get going against the hapless Packers offensive line, Gunther Cunningham's aggressive 4-3 should be able to limit the Packers below their (admittedly tiny-sample-sized) season average of 26.0 PpG.

Based on the Packers' reliance on the passing game, inability to protect the quarterback, and a decided systemic advantage for the Lions on both sides of the ball, the most probable outcome is a medium-scoring, close-margin game that the Lions win.

Read more...