Super Bowl 42: Of the MVP and Blocker Ratings

When a quarterback engineers a dramatic Super Bowl-winning drive there's a pretty good chance he'll be the game's MVP. Eli Manning's 55% completion percentage is nothing to get excited about, but his 7.5 yards per attempt is better than average. He accounted for two touchdowns against only one interception, which wasn't even his fault (although he did throw at least a couple of other passes that could have been intercepted and would have been his fault).
 But Manning wouldn't have gotten my MVP vote if I had one. The difference in the game wasn't the Giants offense which scored 17 points, about what many expected they would, but the defense that held the Patriots offense, in perfect conditions, to only 14 points, about twenty fewer than many expected.
 The biggest reason for the Giants defensive success was the pressure they put on Tom Brady. New York's five sacks came from four different players and there were others, from Osi Umeniora to Aaron Ross, involved in the hurries and hits. Justin Tuck led the way with his two sacks and a forced fumble. He also contributed five solo tackles and an assist. While that might not be a huge game exactly, it was the defense's stand out performance, and I would have voted for Tuck as a way to recognize what the Giant defense accomplished.
 The Giants seemed to dominate the Pats offensive line and it got me thinking about a blocker rating system I kicked around in my head for a few months during the season. I never got around to field testing that idea, but now, with a Super Bowl that in many ways came down to line play, I've set down some parameters and charted my first game using my Simple Blocker Rating system (SBR).
 I'm sure there are others, but off the top of my head the only offensive line ratings (player-specific, not as a unit like Football Outsiders' Adjusted Line Yards) I can think of that fans have at least some access to are: Dr. Z's mysterious method which he uses in determining his All-Pro team each year; Yakuza Rich's statistical ranking based on yardage; the percentage-based “grading out” popular with college sites.
 SBR is based on success and not excellence. A cut block on the backside of a run that may or may not have been enough if the run had broken differently is weighted the same as a block by a pulling guard that pancakes his man and opens a hole for the running back. This is one of the things that makes this rating “simple.” But I have chosen to keep it this way in order to limit the value judgments needed on my part. There are two main benefits for this: first, it makes the rating more objective by lessening the need to interpret responsibility or pinpoint the exact effectiveness of a block; second, it cuts down the time required to chart a game, which means this is more likely something I can continue to do.
 Again, SBR doesn't consider technique, only success. In determining success it errs on the side of giving credit to the blocker. As such SBR is almost entirely a descriptive stat; it's probably limited in its ability to predict future results. Just as a quarterback's passing stats are affected by the quality of his receivers, his blockers, and even the threat posed by his running back, a lineman's blocker rating will be affected by things outside of his control such as the kinds of plays called (i.e, a lineman will rate better if his team calls a lot of wide receiver screens and quick slants) and the quality of the defender he's working against,
 Since this is the first and only game I've charted using SBR there's no context for the numbers. I expect that over the course of a season certain positions, such as left tackle, would have lower numbers since they're often going up against the best pass rushers and are less likely than their linemates to be part of a double team.
 Finally, before presenting the table, a few notes and observations. 10 is a perfect score. I charted tight ends and fullbacks but not running backs or wide receivers. All-Pro guard Logan Mankins struggled as much with Tuck, et al., as it seemed he did. Pats backup guard Russ Hochstein wasn't quite as bad as I thought while watching the game, but he was a huge drop off from Stephen Neal who was pitching a shutout. New York's Shaun O'Hara had been perfect in pass blocking before struggling a bit on the last drive. Similarly David Diehl and Rich Seubert struggled in pass protection late in the game, but played solidly prior to that. The Giants' tight ends were much better, with Kyle Brady in particular hurting the Pats in the running game. As might be expected, the Pats kept Ben Watson in to pass protect much more later in the game. NY Fullback Madison Hedgecock was less effective than I would have guessed.

Name	Team	Pos	SBR	Run	Pass	Plays
David Diehl	NYG	LT	8.19	7.82	8.42	61
Matt Light	NE	LT	8.55	6.66	9.07	69
Rich Seubert	NYG	LG	8.85	8.69	8.94	61
Logan Mankins	NE	LG	8.55	8.66	8.51	69
Shaun O'Hara	NYG	C	8.85	8.26	9.21	61
Dan Koppen	NE	C	9.27	8.66	9.44	69
Chris Snee	NYG	RG	9.18	9.13	9.21	61
Stephen Neal	NE	RG	10.00	10.00	10.00	19
Russ Hochstein	NE	RG	8.80	10.00	8.60	50
Kareem McKenzie	NYG	RT	9.50	9.13	9.73	61
Nick Kaczur	NE	RT	8.98	9.33	8.88	69
Kevin Boss	NYG	TE	9.62	9.50	10.00	27
Ben Watson	NE	TE	8.33	6.66	10.00	24
Michael Matthews	NYG	TE	9.16	9.09	10.00	13
Kyle Brady	NE	TE	6.19	5.33	8.33	21
Mike Vrabel	NE	TE	10.00	10.00	----	3
Madison Hedgecock	NYG	FB	7.69	7.22	10.00	13
Heath Evans	NE	FB	5.00	5.00	----	4