The NFL Draft Guys present their 2008 NFL Combine All-Snubbed Team. The two players there who really stand out: Georgia center/guard Fernando Velasco and Connecticut LB Danny Lansanah. Although, as much as I liked watching Lansanah at UConn (fan bias alert), I'm even more surprised that Oklahoma State LB Rodrick Johnson didn't get an invite. The Draft Guys also have an interview with one of my “pet cats” Eastern Michigan's Jason Jones.
Yakuza Rich takes A Statistical Look at the Last 30 Super Bowls and finds some interesting results related to the NFL's Passer Rating, such as “the G-Men won the Super Bowl despite having the worst QB rating differential of any team that has gone to the last 30 Super Bowls” and “[the Giants] also had the largest QB rating differential margin to overcome as the Pats had a 37.9 QB rating differential compared to the G-Men’s -9.5 QB rating differential.”
NFL Stats has a fascinating three-part post on The Passing Paradox. Covering similar ground, PFR asks Why do teams run the ball?.
Detroit Lions Weblog on the Patriot's loss and In Defense of Greatness.
Over at Hashmarks Mike Sando breaks down the Patriots' personnel used in Super Bowl 42. One interesting nugget: “Tom Brady averaged 6.2 yards per pass attempt with four or fewer pass rushers coming his way, but 2.6 yards per attempt with more than four.”
Finally, a quick note on the heels of Adam Schefter's report that Chris Long's draft stock is rising and that “the widespread consensus is that Miami football operations chief Bill Parcells believes there is less risk with Long than any other potential No. 1 overall pick.” With so many mock drafts across the Web these days, I'm sure some of them had this earlier, but when I moved Chris Long into the number one spot in my mock draft last month, none of the “major” mock drafts online had gone there yet. As an added kick: I had Chris Long as a first-rounder before the 2007 season started when few others did. Having paid particularly close attention to the personnel decisions (both on the field and in the front office) made by the Dallas Cowboys during Bill Parcells' tenure there, I even had Long going to a Jeff Ireland team!
Showing posts with label Super Bowl 42. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Super Bowl 42. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Sunday, February 10, 2008
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.
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 |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
