Personnel Formations

[Dantés]

I posted a little bit about this elsewhere, but I think it deserves fuller explanation and discussion.

The absence of a WR in the draft caught us all completely off guard. One thing I had not considered before the draft is how the Packers intend to play, formationally, on offense.

Disclaimer before I share the data and the projection, this is not a defense of the Packers not picking a WR. It's merely an analysis of what happened in terms of offensive formation in LaFleur's first season, and what may happen moving forward.

Here was the shift in LaFleur's first season:

11 Personnel (3 WR)

• 2018: 72%
• 2019: 53%

12/21 Personnel (2 WR)

• 2018: 21%
• 2019: 40%

22/13 Personnel (1 WR)

• 2018: 5%
• 2019: 7%

So in year one as the HC/OC, the offense went from 3+ wide receivers 72% of the time to 2 or fewer wide receivers 47% of the time.

Given that LaFleur is off of the Shanahan tree and runs the same system, it's relevant to look at what the Niners did in this regard last year:

11 Personnel (3 WR)

• 30%

12/21 Personnel (2 WR)

• 54%

22/13 Personnel (1 WR)

• 15%

So SF ran 3+ wide receiver sets less frequently than all but on team in the NFL (Minnesota).

So what might this mean moving forward? I would expect that we would see the shift away from 11 personnel continue in Green Bay. LaFleur's philosophy, trajectory, and the way they handled the off-season suggest that will be the case.

After cutting it down by ~20% last year, let's be conservative and suppose that there's only half that much movement from 2019 to 2020. Here's what that would look like, spreading the resultant snaps even across other formations:

11 Personnel (3 WR)

• 43% (in 2019, this would have been 29th in 11P frequency, behind MIN, SF, and TEN)

12/21 Personnel (2 WR)

• 45%

22/13 Personnel (1 WR)

• 12%

If I'm right, and this is the way that they're heading, then only 3 wide receivers are going to see significant playing time, and the WR3 would be very much a part time player. It would be a lot of playing time for Sternberger, Lewis, Deguara, and perhaps Tonyan.

It will be interesting to see how it unfolds.

 

[longtimefan]

Ground and pound

 

[Dantés]

Here are some WR target numbers.

Total Targets to WR Position:

• 2018 Packers: 384
• 2019 Packers: 314
• 49ers: 233

Target Breakdown to WR Position:

• 2018 Packers:
  • Adams: 169
  • Valdes-Scantling: 73
  • Cobb: 61
  • St. Brown: 36
  • Allison: 30
  • Kumerow: 11
  • Moore: 3
  • Lazard: 1
• 2019 Packers:
  • Adams: 127
  • Valdes-Scantling: 56
  • Allison: 55
  • Lazard: 52
  • Kumerow: 21
  • Shepherd: 2
  • Davis: 1
• 49ers:
  • Samuel: 81
  • Sanders: 53
  • Bourne: 44
  • Pettis: 24
  • Goodwin: 21
  • James: 10

So with the 20% drop in 11 Personnel came an 18% drop in targets to wide receivers. If, as I projected above, the 11 Personnel frequency drops this year by another 10%, then an accompanying 10% drop in wide receiver targets would give Green Bay a total of 283.

 

[Dantés]

Run Pass Percentages...

• 2018 Packers: 640 Passes, 333 Rushes (66% pass, 37% rush)
• 2019 Packers: 573 Passes, 411 Rushes (58% pass, 42% rush)
• 49ers: 478 Passes, 498 Rushes (49% pass, 51% rush)

If we project, as has been my pattern here, a movement in the same direction by half as much as year one, you'd see a ration of 54/46 in favor of the pass in 2020 for the Packers.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

This running game emphasis thing is scary. Passing game is far more efficient and productive way to score in the NFL and a focus on the running game means you have to have an elite defense to not get blown out; and even when you have an elite defense AND an elite running game, great passing teams like KC will still beat you.

There needs to be some balance but the passing game is still far more important.

 

[Dantés]

This running game emphasis thing is scary. Passing game is far more efficient and productive way to score in the NFL and a focus on the running game means you have to have an elite defense to not get blown out; and even when you have an elite defense AND an elite running game, great passing teams like KC will still beat you.

There needs to be some balance but the passing game is still far more important.

I see it less as a movement towards a "run first" attack and more of a movement towards a style of offense that takes advantage of defensive personnel weaknesses.

The 49ers offense doesn't work simply because they run a lot. It works because run and pass are tied together so efficiently and seamlessly (in terms of personnel, formation, and play design) that defenses can't be "right" in terms of defensive personnel. They can throw efficiently out of personnel formations that traditionally signal run (i.e. 21, 12, 22, 13), but if you go light (nickel, dime) to handle that, they can obviously also run really effectively out of them too.

It clearly works extraordinarily well if you pull it off. That's what LaFleur was hired to do, that seems to be one of the main points of this year's draft, and we will see if he can get the job done.

But the worst idea, in my opinion, would be for LaFleur to try and be someone he's not and coach an offense that isn't his. If he can't make this work, then he just needs to be replaced. He's never going to be and Andy Reid disciple.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I see it less as a movement towards a "run first" attack and more of a movement towards a style of offense that takes advantage of defensive personnel weaknesses.

The 49ers offense doesn't work simply because they run a lot. It works because run and pass are tied together so efficiently and seamlessly (in terms of personnel, formation, and play design) that defenses can't be "right" in terms of defensive personnel. They can throw efficiently out of personnel formations that traditionally signal run (i.e. 21, 12, 22, 13), but if you go light (nickel, dime) to handle that, they can obviously also run really effectively out of them too.

It clearly works extraordinarily well if you pull it off. That's what LaFleur was hired to do, that seems to be one of the main points of this year's draft, and we will see if he can get the job done.

But the worst idea, in my opinion, would be for LaFleur to try and be someone he's not and coach an offense that isn't his. If he can't make this work, then he just needs to be replaced. He's never going to be and Andy Reid disciple.

Yes, but SF also has the best offensive coach in the NFL. MLF isn't Shanahan (that's not a knock on MLF) and trying to replicate SF's offense, as compared to the Rams or Chiefs, is much more difficult. The NFL game today emphasizes the passing game and the Packers, this year, have done nothing to show that they are embracing that fact. SF is adding elite receiving weapons to that dangerous run game; the Packers added Funchess.

 

[tynimiller]

Love it and agree 100% this is the direction MLF and Gute have been working towards all along. This is one reason why despite some hating I saw Chase Claypool as likely target by us....his ability to shift down and block as a TE or split out is an amazing toy in this system. I think it is also why we will continue to see bigger WR targeted and signed (Lazard...Funchess...) rather than the short shifty type.

I wouldn't be shocked if we end up keeping more TEs than WRs on our roster someday. The crazy thing is this system will only continue to grow Adams and his legacy here as a WR due to the limited amount of target spread happening amongst WRs.

 

[tynimiller]

Yes, but SF also has the best offensive coach in the NFL. MLF isn't Shanahan (that's not a knock on MLF) and trying to replicate SF's offense, as compared to the Rams or Chiefs, is much more difficult. The NFL game today emphasizes the passing game and the Packers, this year, have done nothing to show that they are embracing that fact. SF is adding elite receiving weapons to that dangerous run game; the Packers added Funchess.

To be fair Aiyuk is one of my favorites from the class...but even I'd struggle to say he is an Emmanuel Sanders at this point. Deebo progresses he is arguably the only WR that would be handed our #2 spot...Aiyuk would have a valid battle at it.

Their WR corps as a whole I'd say I would take over ours...but it isn't anything stellar at all. Funchess is a #2b type guy at worst....and honestly its been a few years since Aaron has had a legit, or what should be, a legit #2 behind Adams. Last time we did, Cobb was still here.

 

[Dantés]

Yes, but SF also has the best offensive coach in the NFL. MLF isn't Shanahan (that's not a knock on MLF) and trying to replicate SF's offense, as compared to the Rams or Chiefs, is much more difficult. The NFL game today emphasizes the passing game and the Packers, this year, have done nothing to show that they are embracing that fact. SF is adding elite receiving weapons to that dangerous run game; the Packers added Funchess.

LaFleur is not Shanahan, but he is off the same coaching tree and runs the same offensive system.

Either he installs the offense that he was hired to bring to Green Bay and it works, or he gets fired. Expecting him to run an offense that isn't his doesn't make any sense.

 

[Dantés]

Note: The resource I was using was defaulting to show only rushing snaps. I noticed this and corrected the information in the original post.

The trajectory and basic point of the data remains the same, but the trend isn't quite as dramatic as it originally appears. My fault for not realizing that sooner.

 

[tynimiller]

Note: The resource I was using was defaulting to show only rushing snaps. I noticed this and corrected the information in the original post.

The trajectory and basic point of the data remains the same, but the trend isn't quite as dramatic as it originally appears. My fault for not realizing that sooner.

That's it...my faith and trust in your reliable statistically based posts are forever ruined for a few minutes.

 

[Dantés]

That's it...my faith and trust in your reliable statistically based posts are forever ruined for a few minutes.

Seems reasonable.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I can't remember if I read it or heard it during the draft, but it made sense to me. Quite awhile ago teams started loading up with faster, smaller guys on defense in attempt to keep up with the quick aerial attacks that some teams were finding to be very successful. So that created the opportunity to exploit these teams via the run game. Offensive lineman could take out these fast, but smaller guys a lot easier than they used to be able to move the slower moving but bigger players. Not sure how that might change the way Pettine runs his defense or the personnel that Gute will bring in to man it, but in the NFL, it seems you always need to stay one step ahead of your opponents in not just the style of offense or defense you are going to run, but the players you are using to execute it.

A team like the 49'ers with a well balanced offense can really take advantage of either defense. Put your run stoppers in there and we will throw it, put your pass defense in and we will run it right down your throat. MLF may want to get more run oriented, but he is still going to have to rely on #12's arm, as well as give him enough weapons to make it painful for teams to start playing run defense against the Packers.

 

[GleefulGary]

I can't remember if I read it or heard it during the draft, but it made sense to me. Quite awhile ago teams started loading up with faster, smaller guys on defense in attempt to keep up with the quick aerial attacks that some teams were finding to be very successful. So that created the opportunity to exploit these teams via the run game. Offensive lineman could take out these fast, but smaller guys a lot easier than they used to be able to move the slower moving but bigger players. Not sure how that might change the way Pettine runs his defense or the personnel that Gute will bring in to man it, but in the NFL, it seems you always need to stay one step ahead of your opponents in not just the style of offense or defense you are going to run, but the players you are using to execute it.

A team like the 49'ers with a well balanced offense can really take advantage of either defense. Put your run stoppers in there and we will throw it, put your pass defense in and we will run it right down your throat. MLF may want to get more run oriented, but he is still going to have to rely on #12's arm, as well as give him enough weapons to make it painful for teams to start playing run defense against the Packers.

Football, like most things, is cyclical.

It won't be long until teams shift to power football to take advantage of defenses that primarily play in nickel, dime, etc. If you're going to play a Raven Greene in the box, they'll make you pay for it. Just an example of the situation, I thought Greene actually played very well in his short time as a starter.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

LaFleur is not Shanahan, but he is off the same coaching tree and runs the same offensive system.

Either he installs the offense that he was hired to bring to Green Bay and it works, or he gets fired. Expecting him to run an offense that isn't his doesn't make any sense.

Sean McVay also worked under Shanahan and he runs a pretty good passing offense using multiple receivers and TEs; people seem to forget that when he had good QBs and WRs, Shanahan had some REALLY good passing offenses. Shanahan is not some running-game-centric HC, he's a head coach that is the best in the NFL at creating an offense to fit his personnel.

 

[HardRightEdge]

There's a much simpler way to look at it along with some overlooked facts.

2019 WR Snaps: 254% inluding playoffs, i.e., averaging 3 WRs on 54% of plays
2018 WR Snaps: 272%, i.e., averaging 3 WRs on 72% of plays

While that is a meaningful difference, there are other considerations:

• Adding up the OP's 1, 2 and 3 WR sets for 2018, it comes up to only 90%. In 2019 it comes up to 98%. Zero WR sets are pretty rare. I'm going ahead without looking it up to say that 8% diference is in McCarthy's favoring 4 WR sets which we already knew to be the case. Half the difference is in total snap count percentage is in those 4th. WRs..

• WRs do not take 100% of snaps even if they sustain no injuries. At the least, a guy runs a couple of deep routes in a row and he takes a blow, he sits a play or two after a big hit even without concussion protocol, he gets pulled on a running play or two to stay fresh. The highest Packer WR single season snap count since 2012 when they started counting this stuff was Nelson at 97% in 2013. The next highest was Nelson's 93% in 2016.

• Even using last year's 254% total WR snap count and assuming no injuries to any of the top 3, the top 3 snap count split looks more like 95%, 95%, 64%.

• What are the odds that the top 3 go 48 for 48 in starts, nore with playoffs? Slim to none. Let's say one of the top 2 misses 2 games, a pretty fortunate circumstance as it is. Then the split looks more like 95%, 83%, 76%. If it's 4 games as with Adams last season, the do the math. If the #3 misses two games then you need somebody of some adequacy to take those 54% snaps on average for two games.

• In comparing the two seasons, there is no reason to the think the #3 receiver is not an important position. It's the #4 that is diminished in value under LaFleur with those 4 wide sets being reduced to near zero. But you'll wish you had an adequte #4 if injuries strike.

Run Pass Percentages...

• 2018 Packers: 640 Passes, 333 Rushes (66% pass, 37% rush)
• 2019 Packers: 573 Passes, 411 Rushes (58% pass, 42% rush)
• 49ers: 478 Passes, 498 Rushes (49% pass, 51% rush)

If we project, as has been my pattern here, a movement in the same direction by half as much as year one, you'd see a ration of 54/46 in favor of the pass in 2020 for the Packers.

Sacks are passing plays.

Rodgers is not Lamar Jackson. I can recall one called QB sneak last season. Rodgers QB options? LOL I think he ad libbed one when he didn't like the run audible and just took the ball himself rather the TO. There are some kneel downs in there. The rest of his runs are pass plays.

I'm not going to figure out how many kneel downs there are in these stats which amount to non-plays, but the tally for the two years are as follows which skew the passing percent upward for the two years even if the spread is wider.

Packers 2018: Sacks + QB runs = 82 snaps
Packers 2019: Sacks + QB runs = 101 snaps

And it stands to reason if you're losing more games as in 2018 vs. 2019, you're forced to throw more which may have more to do with the yearly differences than any schematic preference other than the 4-wide issue.

SF drafted a WR in the 1st. round to go with their collection of 2nd. and 3rd. rounders while also signing their version of Funchess in adding a grissled vet with recent injury issues in Travis Benjamin. Perhaps the 49ers believed they ran too much, which is not a radical proposition.

 

[Dantés]

Sean McVay also worked under Shanahan and he runs a pretty good passing offense using multiple receivers and TEs; people seem to forget that when he had good QBs and WRs, Shanahan had some REALLY good passing offenses. Shanahan is not some running-game-centric HC, he's a head coach that is the best in the NFL at creating an offense to fit his personnel.

Shanahan still does have a really good passing offense. I'm talking about formational tendencies, not a cessation of throwing the ball. I projected them for a 54/46 split in favor of the pass.

 

[Dantés]

There's a much simpler way to look at it along with some overlooked facts.

2019 WR Snaps: 254% inluding playoffs, i.e., averaging 3 WRs on 54% of plays
2018 WR Snaps: 272%, i.e., averaging 3 WRs on 72% of plays

While that is a meaningful difference, there are other considerations:

• Adding up the OP's 1, 2 and 3 WR sets for 2018, it comes up to only 90%. In 2019 it comes up to 98%. Zero WR sets are pretty rare. I'm going ahead without looking it up to say that 8% diference is in McCarthy's favoring 4 WR sets which we already knew to be the case. Half the difference is in total snap count percentage is in those 4th. WRs..

• WRs do not take 100% of snaps even if they sustain no injuries. At the least, a guy runs a couple of deep routes in a row and he takes a blow, he sits a play or two after a big hit even without concussion protocol, he gets pulled on a running play or two to stay fresh. The highest Packer WR single season snap count since 2012 when they started counting this stuff was Nelson at 97% in 2013. The next highest was Nelson's 93% in 2016.

• Even using last year's 254% total WR snap count and assuming no injuries to any of the top 3, the top 3 snap count split looks more like 95%, 95%, 64%.

• What are the odds that the top 3 go 48 for 48 in starts, nore with playoffs? Slim to none. Let's say one of the top 2 misses 2 games, a pretty fortunate circumstance as it is. Then the split looks more like 95%, 83%, 76%. If it's 4 games as with Adams last season, the do the math. If the #3 misses two games then you need somebody of some adequacy to take those 54% snaps on average for two games.

• In comparing the two seasons, there is no reason to the think the #3 receiver is not an important position. It's the #4 that is diminished in value under LaFleur with those 4 wide sets being reduced to near zero. But you'll wish you had an adequte #4 if injuries strike.

Sacks are passing plays.

Rodgers is not Lamar Jackson. I can recall one called QB sneak last season. Rodgers QB options? LOL I think he ad libbed one when he didn't like the run audible and just took the ball himself rather the TO. There are some kneel downs in there. The rest of his runs are pass plays.

I'm not going to figure out how many kneel downs there are in these stats which amount to non-plays, but the tally for the two years are as follows which skew the passing percent upward for the two years even if the spread is wider.

Packers 2018: Sacks + QB runs = 82 snaps
Packers 2019: Sacks + QB runs = 101 snaps

And it stands to reason if you're losing more games as in 2018 vs. 2019, you're forced to throw more which may have more to do with the yearly differences than any schematic preference other than the 4-wide issue.

SF drafted a WR in the 1st. round to go with their collection of 2nd. and 3rd. rounders while also signing their version of Funchess in adding a grissled vet with recent injury issues in Travis Benjamin. Perhaps the 49ers believed they ran too much, which is not a radical proposition.

2018 adds up to 98%, not 90%. 2019 adds up to 100%. I did not include the the other 2% of snaps from 2018 because they're negligible amounts spread across seven rarely used formations:

• 5 snaps in 20 personnel
• 2 snaps in 01 personnel
• 1 snap in 23 personnel
• 1 snap in 00 personnel
• 1 snap in 31 personnel
• 1 snap in 02 personnel
• 7 snaps in 14 personnel

If you feel it's important to know, LaFleur's offense had 12 snaps unaccounted for above that were spread out across 10, 20, 23, 32, and 31 personnel.

As I said in the original post:

Disclaimer before I share the data and the projection, this is not a defense of the Packers not picking a WR. It's merely an analysis of what happened in terms of offensive formation in LaFleur's first season, and what may happen moving forward.

So I'm not sure why there was this lengthy rebuttal of something I'm not suggesting. I agree that the Packers should have acquired a WR-- especially one that can create yards after the catch. I would not expect them to just ignore the position into the future. This formational shift, if it continues, will affect how many capable receivers you need, but it won't change the importance of the ones who play.

The existence of sacks and QB scrambles that turn into rushing attempts don't change the clear shift in year one of LaFleur's offense away from 3 WR sets and towards 2, and even 1 WR sets. Nor does it change the clear shift away from McCarthy's absurdly imbalanced offense towards one that is closer to even between run and pass. The approach in the draft and the current model for what this offense can look like, suggest that the shift will continue.

 

[Dantés]

I can't remember if I read it or heard it during the draft, but it made sense to me. Quite awhile ago teams started loading up with faster, smaller guys on defense in attempt to keep up with the quick aerial attacks that some teams were finding to be very successful. So that created the opportunity to exploit these teams via the run game. Offensive lineman could take out these fast, but smaller guys a lot easier than they used to be able to move the slower moving but bigger players. Not sure how that might change the way Pettine runs his defense or the personnel that Gute will bring in to man it, but in the NFL, it seems you always need to stay one step ahead of your opponents in not just the style of offense or defense you are going to run, but the players you are using to execute it.

A team like the 49'ers with a well balanced offense can really take advantage of either defense. Put your run stoppers in there and we will throw it, put your pass defense in and we will run it right down your throat. MLF may want to get more run oriented, but he is still going to have to rely on #12's arm, as well as give him enough weapons to make it painful for teams to start playing run defense against the Packers.

That's exactly it right there. And to accomplish that, Shanahan has collected players who fit in run oriented formations but who can be threats in the passing game. That's the idea behind Deguara and, hopefully, Sternberger in year two.

They will certainly need to continue adding weapons to the outside moving forward-- at a minimum, someone who can create after the catch like Samuel or Aiyuk.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This formational shift, if it continues, will affect how many capable receivers you need, but it won't change the importance of the ones who play.

Think that pretty well nails it.

I am not convinced Gute and MLF were blind to the fact that the team needed to upgrade the WR group, but I think it was less priority to them than it was for many of us. I have to guess that they had a very short list of guys they were interested in at WR and parameters around when they would be drafted and none of those fell in line. From all of this, I have also come to the conclusion that just like in 2019, the Packers are a lot more confident in their receiving personnel than I am.

 

[PackAttack12]

From all of this, I have also come to the conclusion that just like in 2019, the Packers are a lot more confident in their receiving personnel than I am.

Problem is, it reared its ugly head in 2019 and I fear the same in 2020 especially if we have another training camp season ending injury like what happened with EQ.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Shanahan still does have a really good passing offense. I'm talking about formational tendencies, not a cessation of throwing the ball. I projected them for a 54/46 split in favor of the pass.

Yes, I agree. However, a team generally needs more than one good receiver to have a successful passing offense.

 

[Dantés]

Yes, I agree. However, a team generally needs more than one good receiver to have a successful passing offense.

Totally. WR is an important position and ideally, the Packers would have traded up and secured one in the 2nd round, even after deciding to take Love.

The 49ers traded up to take a receiver themselves, although I would argue that they were in even worst straits at the position than we are, with the top three receivers on the roster other than Aiyuk being Samuel, Bourne, and Pettis. That was the situation they were in last year too, and they ended up trading for Sanders. Perhaps Gutekunst will also make a move for a WR. We'll see.

 

[superdan]

great thread. Thank you for the breakdowns. Thought provoking stuff.