The Watchtower: Lions vs. Vikings

okay seriously this guy gets me every time

Well, this is it: the final Watchtower of 2010.  If the Lions win this game, they’ll have emphatically announced their ascension from the basement of the NFL, by ascending out of the basement of their division.  If they can turn away the Vikings at the gate, the Lions will finish third—as in, not last—in the NFC North.

The players don’t particularly care—at least according to Ndamukong Suh, who per ESPN NFC North blogger Kevin Seifert said:

"I don't think it means that much.  The only thing that would really mean something is obviously winning the division and being able to move on to the playoffs. Winning and being third in the division, it seems you're the second loser in the whole thing. That's the way I pretty much see it right now."

I’m glad Suh has that attitude—but for me, this game means everything.  The Lions have been so terribly, horribly, God-awful bad for so long.  In the past decade, there have been only two seasons where the Lions won six or more games: in 2007, when they won seven, and in 2004, when they won six.  These two seasons—these two not-quite-as-losing seasons—were the only times in the past ten years the Lions haven’t been amidst the bitter dregs at the bottom of the NFL cup.  During those seasons, we looked forward to games.  During those seasons, we thought the Lions had a chance to win going into every single contest. During those seasons, we thought the Lions were coming into their own, were finally emerging from the muck and the mire.

With a win on Sunday, this season will stand alongside those two.  The Lions have won at home, and won on the road.  They’ve beaten winning teams; beaten likely playoff teams, even.  They’ve won in the face of adversity, they’ve come from behind—and they’ve played with a lead and held onto it.  With a win on Sunday, they’ll have won two games in division, four games in a row, finished above the Vikings in the standings, and—as Neil from Armchair Linebacker wrote in an absolutely glorious post, finally buried Brett Favre, once and for all.

So, will the Lions win on Sunday?  We go to the data.

Darrell Bevell vs. Gunther Cunningham

Chilly	Gun	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Fum	Sack
PHI	TEN	4th	25.9	6.18	4.54	11th	20.2	6.30	3.83	24	5.89	2	3.66	1-1	6-31
PHI	KCC	18th	19.4	5.93	3.92	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	37	7.69	1	5.33	3-1	1-1
MIN	DET	2nd	29.4	7.18	4.15	32nd	30.9	7.78	4.42	27	6.04	0	4.5	2-1	2-1
MIN	DET	2nd	29.4	7.18	4.15	32nd	30.9	7.78	4.42	27	11.10	0	4.90	2-2	1-4
MIN	DET	28th	17.9	6.26	4.48	19th	23.7	6.92	4.59	24	5.91	2	6.1	1-1	2-16
MIN	DET	28th	17.9	6.26	4.48	19th	23.7	6.92	4.59

To begin with, this isn’t really Darrell Bevell’s data; it’s Brad Childress’s.  Bevell has been Childress’ top lieutenant for four seasons, and before then spent five years under Mike Sherman in Green Bay.  Bevell is a dyed-in-the-wool Walsh offense guy, and it’s that exact pedigree—and experience with Brett Favre in Green Bay—that made Minnesota such an attractive destination prior to Favre.  There have been no real schematic changes to Minnesota’s offense since Childress left, so I’ll continue to use Minnesota’s data.

Last season, the Lions held the Vikings to 27 offensive points in both games—below their scoring average of 29.4 ppg.  Now, the Vikings were the second-best scoring offense in the NFL last year, and the Lions were the worst scoring defense in the NFL.  That points to a powerful systemic advantage for Gunther’s D, to say the least.  It also jibes with a result from 2002, when Schwartz and Cunningham put together a gameplan that allowed their 11th-ranked Titans D to hold the 4th-ranked Eagles just below their season average.  The other meeting between Childress and Gunther didn’t go very well at all—but if the advantage only works when Schwartz and Cunningham are working together, well, that’s just fine for our purposes.

I took that advantage into account in 2010’s first Vikings Watchtower, lo these many weeks back:

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

The Vikings, of course, scored 24 points, which didn’t sound like a horrible miss when I reviewed the Watchtower a couple of days later:

there are two major components to the Watchtower breakdown: first, an analysis of past performance when one coach meets another coach. Attempting to control for the varying skill of the players, I try to find out if one coach has a schematic and/or playcalling advantage over the other—if one “has their number.” I try to identify the mechanism too—say, a certain offense is typically depressed when facing a certain defense, because that defense tends to sack the quarterback more often than that offense usually allows.

The systematic advantage of Gunther Cunningham's defense over Brad Childress' offense is one of the most consistent that I've found. Linehan's performances against Frazier (and Dungy) have been consistent, too. As a result, my two Vikings predictions were quite nearly spot-on. I was extremely confident in the respective effects I'd identified . . . but what was I saying about two major components? Oh, yes.

The second part is identifying what the “expectations” are. This is easy at the end of the season, when the teams have played ten or eleven games and their averages are fairly well-established—but at this point in the season, it’s mostly guesswork . . .

. . . Unfortunately, the Stefan Logan fumble that handed the Vikings the ball within striking distance skewed these results. While turnovers are a part of offense/defense interaction, this analysis doesn't factor in special teams at all--and in this case, the Vikings got a free drive AND incredible field position out of a very rare special teams mistake. In light of that, a projection of 17-20 points is not far off the mark.

Indeed-and now, at the end of the season, we know the 28th-ranked Vikings offense is mustering just 18 points a game on the average, and the slightly-below-average Lions defense should have allowed about that much.  24 points minus special teams gift-wrapped touchdown does equal 17 . . . but the Lions are supposed to have a systemic advantage, so what gives?  Well, Adrian Peterson gives.  Peterson ripped off an 80-yard TD run, part of a 23-carry, 160-yard day.  This was enough to push the Vikings past where I projected, even with a two-interception day from Favre.

I'm not willing to completely discount the idea of a systemic advantage; the Lions were playing on the road, after all.  However, I’m going to temper my expectations.  Given a mild systemic advantage for Gunther Cunningham against Minnesota’s conservative flavor of the Bill Walsh offense, I project the Vikings to meet their season average, scoring 17-20 points, passing for 5.5-6.0 YpA, and rushing for 4.5-4.75 YpC.  I have medium confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors:

Brad Childress has been fired, and Leslie Frazier, a candidate for the Lions coaching job, has taken over the head coaching gig.  Brett Favre is out, and Joe “He Worked Out At Wide Receiver At The Combine” Webb will start.  The Lions defense is playing much, much better over the past few weeks than it did during the first few weeks—and are starting an almost entirely different defensive secondary.  Basically, this is all completely up for grabs.  But I’ll stand pat with the data anyway; it has a funny way of being right.

Scott Linehan vs. Leslie Frazier

Lin	Fraz	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Fum	Sack
MIN	TBB	8th	24.4	6.60	5.3	1st	12.2	4.88	3.79	24	7.78	2	7.52	3-11	2-1
MIN	IND	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	19th	21.9	7.15	4.43	28	8.89	0	5.75	2-1	2-15
MIA	TBB	16th	19.9	5.94	3.69	8th	17.1	6.15	3.46	13	6.21	0	3.56	3-2	4-24
DET	MIN	27th	16.4	5.27	3.92	10th	19.5	6.89	4.14	13	5.07	2	3.79	2-1	2-16
DET	MIN	27th	16.4	5.27	3.92	10th	19.5	6.89	4.14	10	4.39	0	4.23	2-1	3-20
DET	MIN	14th	22.8	5.99	3.99	16th	21.9	6.36	3.92	10	5.51	2	3.32	1-1	1-15
DET	MIN	14th	22.8	5.99	3.99	16th	21.9	6.36	3.92

Here’s what I projected for the Lions’ offense the first time around:

Given an equal (or slightly lesser) level of talent and execution, and a mild systemic advantage, the Lions should roughly meet their season averages, scoring 20-24 points. They should pass for 6.0-6.5 YpA, and rush for 3.5-3.75 YpC. I have medium confidence in this projection.

. . . and yeah.  Ten points not so much.  However, as I said in the review:

Of course, the Lions scored only ten points, so it looks like this is a huge failure. But Shaun Hill threw two end-zone interceptions from within the Vikings' ten-yard-line; if you simply switch those to touchdowns, that's 24 points on the nose. Then again, Shaun Hill turning it over against a strong Vikings D is something to be expected. It's probably why my offensive "Mitigating/Augmenting Factors" section was wholly mitigating, and ended like this:

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

For the only time this season, the Lions will face a divisional opponent at home, while starting the same quarterback they started against them earlier in the season.  However, Shaun Hill’s settled into the groove and cut way down on turnovers, having started the season with 7 INTs to 5 TDs in the first four weeks of the season, but 10 TDs to 4 INTs thereafter.  With the Lions’ 14th-ranked offense averaging 22.8 points a game, and the Vikings’ median defense allowing 21.9 points a game, the Lions should hit this one right on the nose.

I'd thought I'd identified a mild systemic advantage for Linehan offenses, and I suppose if Hill had thrown red zone TDs instead of red zone INTs in Week 3, I'd have been correct.  However he didn’t, so I wasn’t.  For the purposes of this week, I’ll take the advantages off the table.

The Lions’ offense should meet their season averages against the Vikings’ median-ranked defense, scoring 21-23 points, passing for 6.0-6.5 YpA, and rushing for 3.75-4.00 YpC.  I have medium confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors:

As on the defensive side, there are quite a few of these.  It’ll be played in front of a sold-out (and likely raucous) Ford Field crowd, instead of at the Metrodome.  Shaun Hill could play as he was in midseason, or he could play as he did against the Vikings the first time.  Jahvid Best could put up his best game of the season—or not.  Still, as with the offense, I’ll stick with the data.

Conclusion

I'll be honest: my gut is calling this one a Lions romp, something like 35-10.  However, the data’s telling me to be far more cautious, so I will be—to a point.  According to my projections, the most likely outcome of the game is a 23-17 Lions victory.  And, if I’m right, the worst decade in Lions history—arguably, in NFL history—will truly be a thing of the past.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,minnesota vikings,jim schwartz,gunther cunningham,scott linehan,leslie frazier,darrell bevell

Read more...

Drew Stanton: Detroit Lions Starting Quarterback

By now, you’ve certainly heard the news: Drew Stanton will be starting for the Lions as they face the Bears this Sunday.  This kicked off a cavalcade of reactions:

• Sean Yuille at Pride of Detroit:

  “Apparently Schwartz said that the offense won't change with Stanton at the helm. All I can say is I'll believe it when I see it.”

• Neil at Armchair Linebacker:

  "Hell had to find a way to ferret out the tiny pockets of hope that were still left in the fanbase and then crush their fragile spirits, and what better way to do that than to parade down the streets with a clueless Drew Stanton waving and smiling and throwing Grit at horrified onlookers while the devil rides an evil sleigh made from the bones of Matthew Stafford and Shaun Hill?"

• Big Al at The Wayne Fontes Experience just screamed, senselessly.

I come from a different school of thought entirely.  Way back in March of aught-nine, in this blog’s third month, I penned a little piece I called “On Quarterbacks,” which was much more about Drew Stanton in particular than quarterbacks in general:

Stanton is a player I have an extra soft spot for, because my then-toddler daughter was introduced to football through him. One of the games we'd play with her would be to point out Drew Stanton every time teh camera closed in on him. In fact, one of the first times she recognized a number was during a Spartan football game, and she started shouting, "Green Number Five!" It took us a little while to realize that she was seeing Stanton and calling out his jersey number: a green five. When got a little older, my mother taught her to say "Drew Stanton, what a babe!" (gee, thanks, Mom). Ultimately, DS was kind enough to do an autograph session at the Mall, and my little girl actually got to meet the man in person.

Anyway, when Stanton was drafted by the Lions, it was a dream come true, of course. A second-round pick, at just the right time to draft and groom a QB, and a very Millen kind of QB, a tough-nosed, smart, gritty, vocal leader. The kind of player who legitimately hates opponents and wants to beat them--not for glory, not for stats, not for money, but for the sake of victory. The kind of player who can't stand losing, and will give every last ounce he's got to come out on top. That is exactly the kind of quarterback that most Lions fans have been screaming for for years, yet have not ever seen.

I was both thrilled and scared to tell my daughter about Drew Stanton What A Babe becoming a Lion, because deep down I feared that what happened to Chuck would happen to Drew. That the dark presence that hangs over this organization would roll down upon Ford Field and smite him, and DS would never lead the Lions to anything. Sure enough, it's been two whole seasons now; thanks to injuries, blackouts, and the ineffable Will of Rod, my now-twice-as-old-as-she-was-then daughter has still never seen Drew Stanton play for the Lions.  She roots for the Buccaneers now.

If the Millen/Martz/Marinelli three-headed monster, and multiple untimely injuries, hadn’t snuffed out Drew Stanton’s hopes of ever becoming The Lions’ Quarterback (instead of a Lions quarterback), the selection of Matthew Stafford did.  As soon as the ink was dry on Stafford’s massive contract, the forecast for Drew Stanton’s Lions career read “Cloudy with a slight chance of Charlie Batch in Pittsburgh.”  From that point, Hometown Boy Career Backup was the best Detroit Lion he could hope to be.

Unfortunately, Drew hasn’t made enough of his few chances to get even there.  His first—and until Sunday, his only—NFL start didn’t go so hot: 11 of 21 for 130 yards, no scores, and 3 INTs.  Combined with his various relief and mop-up appearances, he’s completed 55 of 104 attempts for 611 yards, two TDs, and seven interceptions.  That’s a career passer rating of 49.0.

His limitations as a passer are undeniable.  At his best, Drew’s passes are in the right place at the right time, but lack zip, especially on deep routes.  At his worst, his throws are wildly inaccurate and easily intercepted.  As Neil is so fond of pointing out, though, Drew’s stock in trade is Grit: with heart and effort and general athletic ability, he goes out and makes plays and does his best to win, no matter the odds.  In college, it worked—sometimes spectacularly.  Drew did engineer the biggest comeback in NCAA D-I history, after all.

Unfortunately, the same hasn’t been true so far in the pros.  In preseason, we’ve seen Stanton scramble for scores and throw 50-yard bombs—but when the bullets have been live, he’s been a dud.  Some of it’s because his team’s been terrible.  Some of it’s because he gets almost zero practice reps outside of training camp, so never practices with the starters and barely practices at all.  Some of it’s because his best chance to make it in the pros was with slow, steady, careful grooming to build good habits and iron out bad ones.  Some of it’s because . . . well, his limitations as a passer are undeniable.

Even so, this season we saw some real progress out of Drew. When he came in cold against the Giants, he turned in a performance that was a little shaky—but, yes, gritty.  He made plays when he had to, and nearly shocked the Giants at Your Company Name Here Stadium.  He impressed everyone, even Giants head coach Tom Coughlin:

"The third quarterback came in and, geez, he played very, very well,'' Giants coach Tom Coughlin said.

And Dominic Raiola--part of a Lions offensive line that worked incredibly hard to give Drew time against one of the better pass rushes in the NFL--voiced his support of Drew, too:

"Drew is mentally tough. You're not going to tell him he can't play and then he'll go in the tank. The guys are behind him -- he got better and he did a good job for us,'' Lions center Dominic Raiola said. "Drew's come a long way. He's so improved. People who think he's not an NFL quarterback ... he looked like one out there to me. He did a great job of preparing and he gave us a chance."

. . . and Stephen Peterman, too:

"I thought he did great,'' guard Stephen Peterman said. "He came in and stepped in and played a helluva game. He made checks and looks that you wouldn't expect from a guy who hasn't been in there. He did a great job."

In the wake of the Bills loss, I angrily blamed Jim Schwartz for starting a severely hampered Shaun Hill (who was too hurt to practice the whole playbook that week), instead of giving Drew a solid week of preparation with the starters.  Surely, I said during the Fireside Chat, if you knew that that was all Shaun Hill could give you, you have to start Drew.  If you can’t count on your third quarterback to play when your second-stringer is too hurt to take snaps under center, then what is he doing on the roster?  Schwartz answered that very question this week:

"There's a reason we've kept him around, and you only keep a guy around if you have confidence to put him in a game," Schwartz said. "His role has been third quarterback, and now it's time for him to be able to answer that and be able to go."

Obviously, actions speak louder than words: if Shaun Hill, playing at about 52% of his usual ability, gets the nod over a healthy Drew Stanton, then in fact you don’t have confidence to put him in a game.  Then again, actions speak louder than words—Schwartz and Mayhew have had plenty of opportunities to cut Drew loose and bring in someone else.  The Lions have not been shy about churning the roster; there’ve been no sacred cows.  Even beloved, respected, hometown boy, brought-in-by-this-regime Jon Jansen was sent packing when the Lions thought his roster spot would be better served on someone younger.  In fact, they have brought in several other quarterbacks: Brooks Bollinger, Kevin O’Connell, Zac Robinson—and they just worked out Josh McCown and J.T. O’Sullivan earlier this week.  If any of those guys offered a floor, or ceiling, higher than Stanton, Drew’d be gone.

I realize, at this point, that I sound like a fool.  I realize, at this point, that everyone else long ago boarded the Drew Stanton Sucks So Bad it’s Funny train, even though the reality of his situation hasn’t changed: he’s still a 2007 second-round draft pick, and he’s still only getting his second real shot at playing quarterback for this team.  He’s getting a full week of practice reps with the ones, a full week of preparing as the starter, a sellout home crowd, and a team eager to play for him—and get the victory over the Bears that was taken from them.

Go get ‘em, Drew.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,drew stanton,shaun hill,jim schwartz,chicago bears

Read more...

Watchtower Review: Lions at Bills

From last week’s Watchtower:

The 26th-ranked Buffalo offense has been averaging just 18.8 points per game, by far the worst Chan Gailey offense we’ve looked at. The Lions, ranked 23rd, are allowing 22.4 points a game. In theory, we should split the difference here—but applying a moderate systemic advantage, I’ll project the Bills to score 13-16 points. I’m not even going to attempt YpA and/or YpC, given how all over the map those numbers are this time, but I have high confidence in this scoring projection.

Good.  Yes.  Well done, data. 

So what’s going to happen when the 7th-ranked Lions offense comes to town? Since most of those points were scored with Shaun Hill at the helm, there shouldn’t be any dropoff from the usual rate of production. Even if there is . . . well, we’re talking a team that averages 25 points a game going up against the worst defense in the NFL. Even if we presume there is no systemic advantage, the Lions should score 30-35 points. Due to the total lack of systemic historical data, I have low confidence in this projection.

Somehow, the tenor of the national conversation surrounding the Bills-Lions game has become “Oh, sweet, the Bills will get a chance to get off the schneid! They pretty good for 0-8; they just almost beat the Bears, you know.” But the numbers just don’t support it. This is one of the best offenses in the NFL going against, by far, the worst—and on the other side, a mediocre offense against a mediocre defense. The Lions have a clear upper hand in this game, and mostly likely will win, 30-14. Hey, twenty-five fell demons of meadow grazing and road defeats! We are apex predators; you lose.

. . . sigh.

Frankly, I've already beaten this to death, so I won’t be long.  The Lions came out with a one-armed quarterback who couldn’t take too many snaps from under center.  Their game plan?  Run it down their throats, minimize risk, and play a low-variance game where their superior talent and execution will bring home the W.

Problems: the out-of-the-shotgun running game wasn’t working, at all (see Tom Kowalski’s play-by-play film breakdown of the Lions’ running game).  Shaun Hill couldn’t throw it downfield, and wasn’t throwing short passes with any accuracy either.  Shaun Hill was physically incapable of opening it up, and Drew Stanton hadn’t practiced all week.  The Bills came to play as if their lives depended on it, and the Lions came to play as if victory was inevitable.  Finally, when all that registered, and the Lions realized they had to flip the switch or lose, Hill’s rustiness, the rain, and some flat-out concentration lapses neutralized the Lions’ downfield attack.  Even then, converted on fourth down multiple times to score the needed touchdown . . . except, of course, Hill’s hand-slip & subsequent airmailing of the game-typing two-point conversion.  Right.

Outside of marking the Lions’ offensive projection way down (way, way, WAY down) for Hill’s rust, there’s really no way I could account for this—I had no reason to believe Jahvid Best would be completely ineffective against a run defense allowing 4.87 YpC, and no reason to believe that the Lions wouldn’t be able to go to the air if the running game wasn’t working.  Poor showing, lads.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,buffalo bills

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...

Watchtower Review: Lions at Vikings

In the Watchtower analysis of the Lions and Vikings, I stuck my neck out for the first time—and predictably, the axe fell:

The most likely outcome of the game is a close Lions win, with above-average rushing performances from both sides, and a 21-17 final score.

What went wrong?  Well, there are two major components to the Watchtower breakdown: first,  an analysis of past performance when one coach meets another coach.  Attempting to control for the varying skill of the players, I try to find out if one coach has a schematic and/or playcalling advantage over the other—if one “has their number.”  I try to identify the mechanism too—say, a certain offense is typically depressed when facing a certain defense, because that defense tends to sack the quarterback more often than that offense usually allows.

The systematic advantage of Gunther Cunningham's defense over Brad Childress' offense is one of the most consistent that I've found.  Linehan's performances against Frazier (and Dungy) have been consistent, too.  As a result, my two Vikings predictions were quite nearly spot-on.  I was extremely confident in the respective effects I'd identified . . . but what was I saying about two major components?  Oh, yes.

The second part is identifying what the “expectations” are.  This is easy at the end of the season, when the teams have played ten or eleven games and their averages are fairly well-established—but at this point in the season, it’s mostly guesswork.  Technically, the Lions were averaging 23 points per game after the first two games--but, that doesn't count the Calvin Johnson touchdown that we all know actually happened.  Their "real" scoring average (obviously, mean of just two data points is  inadequate for a projection like this anyway) is 26.5.

I assumed that that will be their scoring average at the end of the season; a reasonable assumption given the defenses they've faced, the eventual return of Matthew Stafford, etc.  So, when I applied 26.5 ppg to the Vikings' 14 ppg allowed, that got me an expectation of 20 points.  Apply a mild systemic advantage, and you get this:

Given an equal (or slightly lesser) level of talent and execution, and a mild systemic advantage, the Lions should roughly meet their season averages, scoring 20-24 points.

Of course, the Lions scored only ten points, so it looks like this is a huge failure.  But Shaun Hill threw two end-zone interceptions from within the Vikings' ten-yard-line; if you simply switch those to touchdowns, that's 24 points on the nose.  Then again, Shaun Hill turning it over against a strong Vikings D is something to be expected.  It's probably why my offensive "Mitigating/Augmenting Factors" section was wholly mitigating, and ended like this:

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

On the defensive side of the ball, it was the same story: little data to establish "expectations" with, but a strong historical trend.  Unfortunately, the Stefan Logan fumble that handed the Vikings the ball within striking distance skewed these results.  While turnovers are a part of offense/defense interaction, this analysis doesn't factor in special teams at all--and in this case, the Vikings got a free drive AND incredible field position out of a very rare special teams mistake.  In light of that, a projection of 17-20 points is not far off the mark.

You can see how that data led me down a primrose path, especially as regards the offense.  I maintain that if Best (a major factor in the Lions' scoring "norms" for 2010) had not gotten hurt during the game, or if that was Matthew Stafford leading those fourth-quarter drives instead of Shaun Hill, I wouldn't look like quite the fool I do.

And yet, the egg is on my face.  Anyone have any bacon?

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,matthew stafford,shaun hill,jahvid best,minnesota vikings,brett favre,adrian peterson

Read more...

Three Cups Deep: Lions at Vikings

Brutal.

Nasty, dirty, violent, sloppy, ugly, whatever.  Yesterday’s game was one of the most brutal football games—in every sense of the word—in my memory.  Brutal, as in physically violent and punishing.  Brutal, as in unfeelingly cold and vicious.  Brutal, as in “unpleasantly accurate and incisive” (H/T: Mirriam-Webster).

We knew that going on the road, into the Metrodome, and beating a Brett-Favre-led Vikings squad would require the snapping of several historically-long streaks, and require the kind of sixty-minute performance the Lions have been unable to put together for years.  We knew that the Lions would be without Matthew Stafford, without Nate Burleson, without Zack Follett, without Zack Follett’s backup, Landon Johnson, and only barely with a whole host of guys just barely coming back from injury (Peterman, Avril, Levy, Delmas, etc.).

We didn’t even know Jahvid Best would go out indefinitely with a toe thingy of some sort.  We didn’t know Stefan Logan would squander the chance to answer a Vikings three-and-out with points, by handing them the ball within striking distance.  We didn’t know that the Lions would have sacks and interceptions called back by penalties, that Jason Hanson would stand on the right hash and push a 44-yard field goal wide left, or that the Lions and Vikings would combine for an appalling 20 penalties for 187 yards.

And yet, here were the Lions, with almost three minutes to go in the game, first-and-goal from the Vikings’ four.  Down by two scores, but surely just seconds away from one, Shaun Hill threw a brutal interception.  Instead of narrowing the lead to seven, the Lions widened the chasm between then and the Vikings.  After the defense dutifully forced a three-and-out, the Lions again marched right back down to the Vikings’ ten—and again, Shaun Hill threw a brutal interception.

So, here we are.  Again—despite all of the factors, physical and karmic, working against the Lions—they absolutely had a chance to win this game.  And again, despite all of the factors, physical and logical, working for the Lions, they lost.  So, the Lions are technically 0-3, next going on the road to Lambeau where they haven’t won since the FIRST President Bush started the FIRST Gulf War, and are looking hard at 0-4.  Judging by the Internet, and call-in radio, lots of fans are abandoning hope.

Why?  The Lions are exactly what we thought they were.  I, and many others, said many times that the Lions could win six or seven games this season, but would be lucky if more than one came before the bye—and that was with Stafford, Burleson, Best, Levy, Avril, Delmas, and all the rest.  We cannot be losing hope that the Lions are on track.  Vikings bloggers, and the Vikings themselves, have been vocal in pronouncing that these are not the “old Lions”.

The hope that we’ve lost is for the magical season.  The dream season.  The totally-unexpected, everything-came-together, lightning-in-a-bottle 9-7 season that announces, with authority, that the New Lions are here and never going away.  THAT is what we have lost; let's take this day to mourn it.

. . . tomorrow, there’s wood to chop.

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

Read more...

The Watchtower: Lions at Vikings

 

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

Brad Childress vs. Gunther Cunningham

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences

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

Scott Linehan vs. Leslie Frazier

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

In the first Vikings Watchtower, I concluded:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

Read more...

Watchtower Review: Lions vs. Eagles

In the Watchtower for the Eagles game, I wasn’t starting with an entirely clean sheet.  Last season, the Lions faced a longtime  Andy Reid disciple, Rams OC Pat Shurmur.  I analyzed Reid’s performances against Gunther Cunningham, and concluded:

Given how loosely connected these two data points are to Pat Shurmur, and how wildly they vary between each other, I cannot draw a firm conclusion, other than Reid/Shurmur Walsh-style offenses run the football well below expectations when facing a Schwartz/Cunningham aggressive 4-3.

. . . Therefore, given no talent advantage for either side, and only a very questionable systemic advantage for Cunningham defenses against the running game of Reid/Shurmur offenses, I expect the Rams' output will meet expectations.

I took this non-conclusion conclusion and applied it to Sunday’s game: the Eagles will meet expectations.  Of course, this is the first season in over a decade where the Eagles’ offense wasn’t a known quantity—and then the Vick thing happened.  What I said was:

Given all the unknowns about the Eagles' offense, and tentatively mixing the Lions’ defensive performance on Sunday with preseason expectations and eyeball guesstimation, I project the Eagles’s offense to meet expectations on Sunday. They should score slightly more than my projection of their average for 2010: 24-27 points. I have medium-to-low confidence in this projection. According to my prior research, it is possible that the running game will be depressed—but with Vick likely to run well and often, the Eagles’ final team rushing numbers probably won’t look bad at all.

Vick only rushed 8 times for 37 yards.  His running kept plays alive long enough to repeatedly burn the secondary, but his actual on-the-ground yardage was insignificant.  What was significant was LeSean McCoy’s 120 yards on only 16 attempts.  Though that total is bolstered by a 45-yard long gainer, he was still running at a 6.3 YpC clip without it.  It seems as though the commitment to bottle up Vick was so complete, the Lions essentially surrendered the non-Vick run.

Of course, the Eagles outstripped my scoring prediction by 7-10 points.  It’s undeniable that the Lions blitzed early and often, even more than they normally do.  This approach worked beautifully to keep the heat on Vick; Vick required all of his oh-so-amazing skills to be sacked only six times.  However, the secondary couldn’t keep a clamp on receivers, and Vick, repeatedly, was able to find an open man in desperation.  The 284 passing yards came at a ridiculous 13.52 YpA clip.  Combined with the 7.5 YpC average of McCoy, and no turnovers, the six sacks were the only thing keeping the scoring under 50!

Given a strong systemic [dis]advantage, and a presumable talent [dis]advantage, I project the Lions’ offense to perform below expectations.  Even giving the Lions credit for the erroneously discounted touchdown in their projected season scoring average, the Lions should score 13-17 points.  I have medium confidence in this projection.

I was very, very, very happy to be wrong on this one.  Jahvid Best’s monster performance was the antidote to the aggressive Eagles blitzing, and the Lions’ offensive line physically pushed around the smaller, faster Eagles’ defense.

You have no idea how blissfully I typed that last bit.

I'm going to type it again: The Lions' offensive line physically pushed around the Eagles' defense.  Ah, that felt wonderful.  Er, yes.   Ahem.  Anyway, the final prediction:

The most likely outcome of this game is a “closer than the scoreboard shows” loss by the Lions, with a tense back-and-forth ultimately giving way to a 14-24 final score.

What was odd was, at the end of the third quarter, my prediction was exactly right.  It had been a close back-and-forth game that had seen a Lions lead be eclipsed, 21-17, right before halftime.  After another quarter, the score was 28-17 (just what I’d predicted!), and it looked like the Eagles would calmly salt it away.  They tried to do just that, taking half a quarter to score the would-be dagger.  But the Lions suddenly poured it on, scoring 14 points in the next 3:15.  Recovering the onside kick, the Lions had field position, time on the clock, and a host of offensive weapons.  All that stood between them and victory was . . . oh yeah.  Being the Lions.

Derp, derp, derp, derp.  Game over.

The Eagles must have let off the gas a little bit after they went up 35-17—which, of course, is understandable.  Just like the Chicago game though, once the Lions had a little bit of breathing room they became very, very dangerous.  It’s going to be difficult to project the Lions’ scoring for the next few games, because I won’t be sure which Lions team will show up—nor do I really know how much the play of Shaun Hill is depressing the offense’s output.  But, for now, I clearly have to revise expectations upward, especially for Jahvid Best.  That, at least, is welcome news.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,philadelphia eagles,michael vick,jahvid best

Read more...

The Watchtower: Lions vs. Eagles

Both the Lions and the Eagles are coming off of excruciating fourth-quarter losses where their starting quarterback was lost, indefinitely, to injury.  Both teams desperately need a win to keep their season from going far off-track.  The Lions fell short of winning one of the very few winnable games in their early schedule; if  they don’t get a win this week they’ll be looking hard at 0-4.  If the Eagles open the season with consecutive losses, climbing out of the brutal NFC East and into the playoffs will be a tall task indeed.  Lions fans will show up 65,000 strong, hoping against hope that their team can beat a perennial winner.  At least that many Eagles fans will be waiting at the airport chanting for Andy Reid’s head, if their team drops one to a perennial loser.

Andy Reid vs. Gunther Cunningham

Reid	Gun	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Fum	Sack
PHI	TEN	4th	25.9	6.18	4.54	11th	20.2	6.30	3.83	24	5.89	2	3.64	1-1	6-31
PHI	KCC	18th	19.4	5.93	3.92	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	31	7.69	1	1.65	3-1	1-1

I broke down these numbers last season when the Lions faced the Rams, and their new offensive coordinator Pat Shurmur.  Shurmur is a Reid disciple, and attempted to run Reid’s offense last season with St. Louis’ talent.  It didn’t work well; the Rams were the worst offense in the NFL.  They averaged only 10.9 points per game.  Still, the Xs-and-Os were the same, and so into the numbers I delved.  The conclusion:

Given how loosely connected these two data points are to Pat Shurmur, and how wildly they vary between each other, I cannot draw a firm conclusion, other than Reid/Shurmur Walsh-style offenses run the football well below expectations when facing a Schwartz/Cunningham aggressive 4-3.

. . . Therefore, given no talent advantage for either side, and only a very questionable systemic advantage for Cunningham defenses against the running game of Reid/Shurmur offenses, I expect the Rams' output will meet expectations. This means they should outpace their season averages: I project 10-13 points, 5.60-5.80 YpA, and 4.5-4.75 YpA. I have medium-low confidence in this projection.

Well, Andy Reid never had Steven Jackson against the Lions' run defense; the Rams trucked it for a whopping 5.77 YpC that day.  However, they scored 17 points, and netted an average of 5.89 yards per pass attempt; rather close to my projection.  I often use the master as a guideline for the student, but Pat Shurmur calling plays for The Worst Offense Ever Plus Steven Jackson doesn’t help us model the 2010 Eagles at all, so I can’t include those numbers for this projection.  I’ll continue to presume that the Reid offense essentially meets expectations against Cunningham/Schwartz defenses.

But, what are expectations for the Reid offense this year?  The switch from Donovan McNabb to Kevin Kolb threw a monkey wrench into one of the most stable units in football; a perennial top-ten offense was going to get a new signal caller for the first time in over a decade.  Even if Kolb performs at Donovan McNabb replacement level this year, Kolb won’t take Ford Field on Sunday, Michael Vick will.  The threat Michael Vick’s game represents to the Lions defense was brilliantly broken down by Michael Schottey at Bleacher Report:

Vick loves to run up the middle of the field as the pocket is collapsing, picking his way through and leaving jock-less linebackers in his wake.

The Lions defense invites that kind of up-the-middle scrambles with their defensive front alignment. The Lions defense eschews the normal 1-3-5-7 gap scheme and widens out their defensive ends creating (usually) a 1-3-7-9 look.

Even if Vick is perfectly suited to defeat this Fisher/Schwartz/Cunningham defense, though, the Eagles won’t necessarily be more difficult for the Lions to beat with Vick at the helm.  Vick is an inconsistent decision-maker, and has never been an accurate downfield passer.  We’ve seen so little of what Kolb and Vick can do that we don’t have any baseline for the 2010 Eagles’ offensive power.  Either way, it’s safe to assume that the Eagles will be less proficient than last season’s fifth-best 26.8 PpG, though not dramatically less.  Given their 20-point performance against a presumed-good Packers D, let’s peg the Eagles’ potential norm for 2010 23.0 PpG. 

Just how good is the Lions’ defense?  Well, they allowed a whole lot of yards against the Bears’ offense last week—but only 19 points.  With a tiny one-week sample size, the Lions currently sit at 9th place in team defense, according to Football Outsiders’ DVOA stat.  I don’t think this is an above-average defense, and the timely turnovers that kept dropping into the Lions’ lap won’t keep dropping all season long.  I project the Lions to be a mediocre scoring defense, hovering around 20-22nd best, allowing about 21 PpG. 

Given all the unknowns about the Eagles' offense, and tentatively mixing the Lions’ defensive performance on Sunday with preseason expectations and eyeball guesstimation, I project the Eagles’s offense to meet expectations on Sunday.  They should score slightly more than my projection of their average for 2010: 24-27 points.  I have medium-to-low confidence in this projection.  According to my prior research, it is possible that the running game will be depressed—but with Vick likely to run well and often, the Eagles’ final team rushing numbers probably won’t look bad at all.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences:

Obviously, Michael Vick is a walking, talking wild card, and his effect on the Lions defense may well be Kryptonitesque.  Vick could run wild, drawing the safeties up—and DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin will be free to traumatize the Lions’ secondary.  However, Vick also has a history of following a good game with a terrible one—and his “terrible” games are often turnover-laden, drive-killing-mistake-filled affairs.  If Vick stops the Eagles’ offense for the Lions, the Eagles could have a long day ahead of them.  Also, Vick was brought off the bench in surprise Week 1, and provided a spark—but this will be his first start since Leavenworth.  Will a full week to prepare for Vick, Gunther and The Grandmaster may well come up with something to slow #7 down.  Indeed, Gunther says such efforts are well underway:

"He's not just a quarterback, he's a runner. So the game changes and your preparation is different. You stay up late at night and you get up early in the morning. If you look at our coaching staff, they all look like zombies today."

Scott Linehan vs. Eagles Defense

Lin	JJ	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	YpA	INT	YpC	Fum	Sack
MIN	PHI	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	2nd	16.2	5.84	4.31	16	7.30	1	4.11	3-1	4-11
MIN	PHI	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	2nd	16.2	5.84	4.31	14	6.72	2	4.62	1-0	3-28
STL	PHI	30th	14.5	5.67	3.95	6th	18.1	5.55	3.51	3	6.08	0	2.40	1-0	4-28

The Eagles’ defensive coordinator’s name is Sean McDermott, but he has inherited one of the richest legacies in the NFL: the late, great, Jim Johnson’s defense.  Johnson ran a one-gap, blitz-heavy 4-3, and the Eagles’ creative assaults on the quarterback became their calling card for a decade.  For more reading material, check out Sports Illustrated’s Tim Layden’s brilliant breakdown of Johnson’s double A gap blitz.  The system McDermott runs now is nearly identical to the one Johnson ran; comparison is definitely valid. 

In 2004, Scott Linehan’s Vikings faced Johnson’s Eagles twice—as always, an ideal set of circumstances for comparison, since you get two results from the same talent matchup.  Of course, the Vikings were ranked 6th in the NFL in scoring offense, averaging 25.3 points per game.  They were extremely balanced, netting 7.16 YpA and 4.71 YpC.  Meanwhile, the Eagles were the second-best scoring defense in the NFL; they allowed only 16.2 points per game, 5.84 YpA, and 4.31 YpC.  As you can see, their pass defense was much more stout than their run defense—but as Ron Jaworksi will repeatedly tell you, points come out of the passing game.

In the first contest, the Vikings scored only 16 points—far below their season average, and exactly matching the Eagles’ season average.  This means that the 6th-best offense in the NFL played just like an average victim of the Eagles’ fearsome 2004 defense.  Interestingly, the Vikes’ per-play passing effectiveness wasn’t affected.  My theory on the scoring depression is that the interception, lost fumble, and four sacks had something to do with the depressed scoring output—that, and the running game’s effectiveness being dropped by half a yard.

In the second contest, the results were nearly identical: only 14 points scored by the Vikings.  This time, the passing game was depressed by half a yard per play while the running game met expectations; I chalk this up to what I call the “Whack-a-Mole Effect”.  Either way, the vaunted Vikings offense was bottled up again.  No lost fumbles this time, but two picks, and three sacks for –28 yards, contributed to the profound lack of points.

As the final data point, we have the 2008 Rams.  Their wretched, 30th-ranked unit got Linehan fired—and they went up against the Eagles’ typically sixth-ranked defense.  Between the Rams’ average of 14.5 points scored, and the Eagles’ average of 18.1 points allowed, the final result was a pathetic three points, and even that was on a last-quarter field goal in a game that was long since over.

The inescapable conclusion is that given equal or better talent, Jim Johnson’s hyperaggressive one-gap 4-3 defense disproportionately disrupts Scott Linehan’s balanced, conventional offense.  Scoring is typically depressed, partially via increased sacks and interceptions.  Typically, one dimension of the offense is dramatically less effective than season norms.

Given a strong systemic advantage, and a presumable talent advantage, I project the Lions’ offense to perform below expectations.  Even giving the Lions credit for the erroneously discounted touchdown in their projected season scoring average, the Lions should score 13-17 points.  I have medium confidence in this projection.  If we’re calling 14 the baseline for this season, this is a single-digit number, but I don’t believe that’s the correct performance level for this offense.

Mitigating/Augmenting Influences:

Any time you subtract Matthew Stafford from this offense, you’re subtracting an awful lot of scoring potential.  If Shaun Hill can step up, and Jahvid Best can find his groove in the lanes not being blitzed through, maybe the Lions can muddle along and meet expectations.  Or, you know, the lack of Stafford will allow the Eagles to go crazy with the blitzes, and it’s even worse than it looks like it’ll be.  One ray of hope: the Eagles may be without starting middle linebacker Stewart Bradley.

Conclusion:

As much as I desperately want to find a reason to hope, as much as I’d like to have found proof that the Eagles are vulnerable, I’ve found nearly the opposite.  The offense, which we know will be handcuffed without Stafford, is at both a systemic and talent disadvantage.  Even if the defense can bottle up Vick—or if Vick hands the game to the Lions on a turnover platter—the offense will be lucky to score more than twice.  The most likely outcome of this game is a “closer than the scoreboard shows” loss by the Lions, with a tense back-and-forth ultimately giving way to a 14-24 final score.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,philadelphia eagles,matthew stafford,michael vick,stewart bradley,kevin kolb

Read more...