Personnel Formations

[HardRightEdge]

2018 adds up to 98%, not 90%. 2019 adds up to 100%.

They do now.

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.

It wasn't a rebuttal per se and I didn't say anything about drafting a WR in that post. It was a different way to look at the stats. Your slant understated the practical frequency of #3 WR snaps in a 2019-like offense--rest snaps, injuries, games where you're not running down the clock in the 4th. quarter.

I heard you for the umpteenth time saying the Packers should have "acquired" a WR. They did, of course, in Funchess. I'm not expecting another of any consequence, maybe one of those Draft 2.0 guys who gets cut. Perhaps Jones will run more routes out of slot/wide. He's probably the best slot receiver on this team.

Next on the agenda should be signing Tramon Williams for one more rodeo, or a reasonable facimile thereof, nickel who can swing to safety in a pinch.

Then there's the matter of the Clark extension, if it happens at all. And the bar keeps rising for LTs with Tunsil's 3 year, $66 mil extension. Younger than our guy, to be sure, but the numbers keep going up. Having some cap carryover, if nothing else, would be helpful.

 

[PackinMSP]

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.

Dantes I think you're right,

Not only that, but I could see/envision Davante, Funchess, Lazard being at least "above average" run blockers if we need to run this way. (i.e. they are a lot bigger guys than Randall Cobb for instance)

Having Sternberger, Mercedes, and basically 2 HBack/TE hybrid guys now also confirms this

BUT....

The only remaining question too I think would be (*hopefully if*) can our OL perform well enough to do this?

This is definitely more of a "ground and pound" offense and "wear the defense down" type of O, which i'm totally cool with

But hopefully our OL has the skillset for that

Elgin Jenkins 110% definitely fits the mold of the "type" of OL that would suit this type of O as well, in addition to being just a really damn good OL anyway lol

But how about everyone else?

Bulaga was too "finesse" i suppose

But our method for drafting OL has typically been draft a BUNCH in Rds 4-7 and look for the "diamond in the rough" types like Bahktiari, Linsley, Tretter, Wells, Taushcer, etc etc etc The list goes on and on

I'm 100% fine with this as for every Bulaga you get, you also get Sherrod and Spriggs it seems

But we must also assume that one of those late OL would pan out too

 

[Sunshinepacker]

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.

I'm still hoping they swing a trade for Curtis Samuel. Trade a pick next year for him since they apparently were unable to draft a receiver in the deepest receiver class (maybe ever) this year.

 

[Dantés]

They do now.

Before I corrected them, they totaled 97%, and that was an hour and a half before you replied. But whatever.

 

[Dantés]

I'm still hoping they swing a trade for Curtis Samuel. Trade a pick next year for him since they apparently were unable to draft a receiver in the deepest receiver class (maybe ever) this year.

Yeah, I would be interested to know what they think of Samuel. He came out as kind of a gadget guy who people figured would get the ball in a variety of ways. If I understand, they've turned him into more of a deep target there, who produces very little after the catch. He's only 23.

 

[lambeaulambo]

No more shotgun chuck n duck crap...It is stale, and running the unpredictable is a bit of fresh air.

 

[Dantés]

Some figures on anther team that runs this offense, the Minnesota Vikings (Gary Kubiak).

11 Personnel: 18%

12/21 Personnel: 61%

22/13 Personnel: 21%

82% of the time using 1 or 2 WR's.

207 targets to the WR position.

466/476 pass-run ratio (49/51 in favor of the run).

 

[HardRightEdge]

Before I corrected them, they totaled 97%, and that was an hour and a half before you replied. But whatever.

I don't think so, and you might consider how it was I saw the original data if I replied later. I'm not at all proud to say it, but some call it multi-tasking. I don't have a problem editing posts. I do it all the time I'm sorry to say as an afterthought comes to mind, but I get that it can cause problems.

 

[Dantés]

I don't think so, and you might consider how it was I saw the original data if I replied later. I'm not at all proud to say it, but some call it multi-tasking. I don't have a problem editing posts. I do it all the time I'm sorry to say as an afterthought comes to mind, but I get that it can cause problems.

Ultimately it does not matter. If it was my mistake, then sorry about that.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Ultimately it does not matter. If it was my mistake, then sorry about that.

OK, cool. Regardless of the exact numbers I disagree with the premise. Even SF, which is hardly the norm in leaning on the run game, you see Garoppolo taking 512 drops + however many of his 46 runs were scrambles, while at the same time this team went out of their way for a 3rd. receiving weapon to go with Kittle and Samuel, first Sanders and now Aiyuk, and that was after a couple of high picks who did not work out.

It is and shall remain a passing league.

 

[Dantés]

OK, cool. Regardless of the exact numbers I disagree with the premise. Even SF, which is hardly the norm in leaning on the run game, you see Garoppolo taking 512 drops + however many of his 46 runs were scrambles, while at the same time this team went out of their way for a 3rd. receiving weapon to go with Kittle and Samuel, first Sanders and now Aiyuk, and that was after a couple of high picks who did not work out.

It is and shall remain a passing league.

I am not sure that we are on the same page regarding what my premise is.

Here it is, spelled out plainly: In his first year as head coach, LaFleur's offense shifted significantly away from 11 personnel in favor of 1/2 receiver formations. Given what the team is telling us in the draft, and the way that this offense is employed elsewhere, we are likely to see that shift continue in 2020.

If you disagree with that, OK. But that's the point I'm making.

 

[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.

Updating this information for 2020.

11/20 Personnel (3 WR): 54%

12/21 Personnel (2 WR): 38%

22/13 Personnel (1 WR): 6%

Lazard is listed as a WR, and often used that way, but he is also routinely used like a move TE and does a lot of work like a TE would tight to the formation and in the blocking game.

Dominique Dafney has been playing more lately in that H-Back role that was meant for Deguara. I think we would have seen a little bit more of a trend away from 3 WR sets had Deguara stayed healthy. He would have taken 250-300 snaps away from the WR position.

 

[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.

So far in 2020: 946 plays on offense, 502 passes, 424 rushes, 54/46 pass-run ratio.

 

[PackAttack12]

Green Bay run frequency is 7th most in the NFL this season (in relation to run vs pass, or 26th in pass vs run, however one cares to look at it). Who would've ever thought.

 

[tynimiller]

Green Bay run frequency is 7th most in the NFL this season (in relation to run vs pass, or 26th in pass vs run, however one cares to look at it). Who would've ever thought.

The moment we hired MLF everyone knew this was the trend we'd be heading towards. System is reliant on the run to set up a very high efficient passing game.

 

[PackAttack12]

The moment we hired MLF everyone knew this was the trend we'd be heading towards. System is reliant on the run to set up a very high efficient passing game.

I meant before LaFleur ever came on board. In the McCarthy days.

 

[Dantés]

Green Bay run frequency is 7th most in the NFL this season (in relation to run vs pass, or 26th in pass vs run, however one cares to look at it). Who would've ever thought.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[PackAttack12]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

I meant before LaFleur ever came on board. In the McCarthy days.

^ Apparently I should have spelled it out a little bit more clearly.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So far in 2020: 946 plays on offense, 502 passes, 424 rushes, 54/46 pass-run ratio.

If you include sacks and exclude quarterback kneel downs the Packers actually drop back to pass the ball on 56.4% of the plays.

 

[PikeBadger]

It’s the direction we’ve been heading in. I wouldn’t expect it to go over 50-50 though unless Rodgers arm skill disintegrates quickly.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If you include sacks and exclude quarterback kneel downs the Packers actually drop back to pass the ball on 56.4% of the plays.

Just had to point out, great new signature line!!!

 

[Dantés]

If you include sacks and exclude quarterback kneel downs the Packers actually drop back to pass the ball on 56.4% of the plays.

Right, but to figure out what that means relative to the rest of the league, you'd have to do that for the other 31 teams.

The point is the trajectory.

 

[Dantés]

It’s the direction we’ve been heading in. I wouldn’t expect it to go over 50-50 though unless Rodgers arm skill disintegrates quickly.

I would think as long as Rodgers is playing like this, it would remain somewhere in the neighborhood of this season's ratio. A 12% shift from McCarthy's last year in Green Bay!

 

[Dantés]

^ Apparently I should have spelled it out a little bit more clearly.

I saw your correction too late. And frankly, I was too happy with the gif.

 

[PackAttack12]

I saw your correction too late. And frankly, I was too happy with the gif.

It's a good one, no doubt.