Week 4: Buffalo at Green Bay - Time to bounce back

[HardRightEdge]

So whats the overall outlook for Jamaal Williams versus Aaron Jones? Which guy is your actual lead back?

There isn't a lead back. Williams is the presumed starter and the default assumption for more snaps at this point, but it's a presumed committee affair at this point. That said, I'd expect it to be situational. If McCarthy features the run more than in the season to date, and Jones gets a hot hand, he could see more run attempts than Williams. On the other hand, Williams is about as good a pass blocker as you're likely to see and a pretty good receiver on the release, so if the Bills force blitz pickup to be a priority Williams is the presumed player for that job.

The one thing I've noticed about the Packer run game is that it has looked best running stretch plays to the right with the whole O-line on the move with the runners picking their spot inside our outside the OT. We're hearing that the RG McCray will be out and replaced by Bell and RT Bulaga is questionable after leaving the game last week with his replacement Spriggs having been disappointing, so if or how well they execute those stretch runs is questionable.

 

[Dantés]

Now, did you read my post? I agreed with that point in saying, "Don't get me wrong, House has played badly." It's Bukowski that the Captain and I disagree with.

You are correct in observing that House's interference was a bad look. It was 3rd. and 2 at the Packer 9 yard line. If he makes a play on the ball and not the receiver then Washington likely kicks the field goal. Tagging House for 4 points is fair. Correlating his presence on the field with 28 point was an exercise, to repeat, in shallow data mining, a correlation without causation.

I thought the 28 point false correlation in the Redskins game was sufficient to put Bukowski's thesis to bed. The 22 points Bukowski correlates to the quarters House played in the Vikes game must be confined to the 4th. quarter where they in fact scored 22 points. Since it's not a golf day, and there are only 3 scoring drives on 20 plays to look at including the 2 point coversion, I'll go ahead and do that from the game replay out of curiosity.

First possession, 9 plays, 71 yards, 7 points

2nd. play: House was targetted with Thielen for a 4 yards short of the first down.

Second possession, 2 plays, 75 yards, 7 points

Diggs beat House on the 75 yard TD

Third possession, 8 plays, 75 yards, 8 points

House was not on the field.

This was, of course, the drive featuring the infamous Matthews roughing call / Alexander pick that would have sealed the game. The touchdown to Thielen on this drive was the other infamous play where both Brice and Alexander had a hot at making a play on that ball, but they both took their eyes off it and stopped short as they saw each other about to collide.

House didn't play in the Bears game.

In conclusion, we could reasonably tag House for 11 points on 30 snaps plus the PI call. That's not good. But it does not account for the other 39 points scored in quarters where House was on the field or the points scored when he wasn't. The notion that House will no longer be playing is some kind of cure to what ails is a very incomplete picture.

I'm a little reluctant to make the following point given recent contentiousness, but since you insisted on pressing the point, I'll plow right ahead.

You said, "I can't really vet [Bukowski], mind you, so I can't confirm this is absolutely true." It was partially vetted initially by myself and the Captain. Now it is, I think, fully vetted. Are we OK now?

I understand you better now. In fairness, Bukowski also noted that you can't pin everything on House. He just found it interesting. I think the main point that we all agree on is that the integrity of the defense was questionable with House in the lineup. I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that playing through an injury was affecting his performance, but the bottom line is that he was an exploitable link. But he was also not at all the only player (or aspect of the scheme) that was exploited.

 

[Dantés]

Yes McDermott took over play calling in week 2 after the half, but Leslie Frazier was back calling plays for the Vikings Game. The big change that was noticeable was in the 2nd half of the Chargers game we were throwing out a TON of blitzes and pressures, which we had not been doing in preseason, in week 1, or in the first half of week 2. Going into the Vikings game there were a lot more blitz packages and odd pressures as well.

I think the major adjustment that can be gleaned from McDermott stepping in, si that he wants to force more pressure, even if it means sending extra guys at the QB. Frazier had gotten away from that, and in 2017 he was not big on sending additional pressures either. He prefers his front 4 to get the pressure on their own, but it hasn't been working so they made an adjustment.

That's also probably part of why it was successful against the Vikings, there wasn't a lot of film from us approaching the defense like that. GB will have film on it now to make adjustments.

I appreciate you popping over to talk ball with us.

 

[HardRightEdge]

II am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that playing through an injury was affecting his performance, but the bottom line is that he was an exploitable link.

I said nothing about House playing with an injury. Others might have mentioned it as a factor or an excuse. I did not. I think I've already explained, at greater length that it deserves, my opinion that House was a weak link. Bukowski's implication, however, was false. The integrity of the defense, with or without him, has been questionable.

 

[Dantés]

I said nothing about House playing with an injury. Others might have mentioned it as a factor or an excuse. I did not. I think I've already explained, at greater length that it deserves, my opinion that House was a weak link. Bukowski's implication, however, was false.

You didn't... I did.

Bukowski made an observation. Like I did, he noted that the total of the points allowed during phases of the game when House played, can't be honestly all allotted to House. But the correlation is interesting.

 

[HardRightEdge]

You didn't... I did.

Bukowski made an observation. Like I did, he noted that the total of the points allowed during phases of the game when House played, can't be honestly all allotted to House. But the correlation is interesting.

Oh. Well, my view is if you take the field you are accountable. Where I have a problem is where folks go off on what comes next, like "cut Adams" for example, when the guy clearly was limping around the field much of the season. You don't change the grade of the performance but you recognize that is might not be indicative of comes after that. House did not have a good body of work over his career, somewhere in the serviceable/adequate range, plus or minus depending on the day, over his career. In this case, what would come next if House was 100%? Serviceable/adequate, plus or minus.

Bukowski's correlation was interesting on its face to start out or I would not have looked into it. It's not interesting anymore as a false correlation after close inspection. There are two plays on limited snaps where House gets docked. There's a whole lot of other stuff that went on in the quarters House played or didn't play that raises quesions of defensive integrity, and that would be my point.

As far as what comes next regarding defensive integrity, we'll see. We're moving past the junky early part of the season to the point where identities begin to emerge. I don't have a prediction on that.

From my standpoint, we've reached EOS. That's "end of story". Is EOS already a thing on the internets? That I do not know.

 

[Dantés]

Oh. Well, my view is if you take the field you are accountable. Where I have a problem is where folks go off on what comes next, like "cut Adams" for example, when the guy clearly was limping around the field much of the season. You don't change the grade of the performance but you recognize that is might not be indicative of comes after that. House did not have a good body of work over his career, somewhere in the serviceable/adequate range, plus or minus depending on the day, over his career. In this case, what would come next if House was 100%? Serviceable/adequate, plus or minus.

Bukowski's correlation was interesting on its face to start out or I would not have looked into it. It's not interesting anymore as a false correlation after close inspection. There are two plays on limited snaps where House gets docked. There's a whole lot of other stuff that went on in the quarters House played or didn't play that raises quesions of defensive integrity, and that would be my point.

As far as what comes next regarding defensive integrity, we'll see. We're moving past the junky early part of the season to the point where identities begin to emerge. I don't have a prediction on that.

From my standpoint, we've reached EOS. That's "end of story". Is EOS already a thing on the internets? That I do not know.

That is along the lines of what I was thinking.

 

[MR8]

There isn't a lead back. Williams is the presumed starter and the default assumption for more snaps at this point, but it's a presumed committee affair at this point. That said, I'd expect it to be situational. If McCarthy features the run more than in the season to date, and Jones gets a hot hand, he could see more run attempts than Williams. On the other hand, Williams is about as good a pass blocker as you're likely to see and a pretty good receiver on the release, so if the Bills force blitz pickup to be a priority Williams is the presumed player for that job.

The one thing I've noticed about the Packer run game is that it has looked best running stretch plays to the right with the whole O-line on the move with the runners picking their spot inside our outside the OT. We're hearing that the RG McCray will be out and replaced by Bell and RT Bulaga is questionable after leaving the game last week with his replacement Spriggs having been disappointing, so if or how well they execute those stretch runs is questionable.

Makes sense, if the changes they made to the defense against Minnesota hold true, the Bills D will be much more aggressive this week than they were in weeks 1 and the start of week 2. Look for more blitzing and shifting on the D-line to create mismatches against Hughes, Kyle Williams, and Murphy. So we'll probably see more of Williams for protection, and his between the tackles style running.

Or D is designed for penetration with Hughes, Williams, Murphy, and Shaq Lawson (when healthy, which he is not and missed last week) Star is just a big ugly who they want to be absorbing guys and clogging the middle. He started off poorly at that in weeks 1 and 2, but really did a nice job last week against the Vikings. If he can anchor the middle and draw some double teams, it will free up Hughes, Williams, and Murphy, all of whom can be a real disruption in the backfield. Hughes may be getting older, but when he turns it on he's one of the best in the league. Unfortunately for us, that can be hit and miss.

Honestly you guys may also have an advantage from the fact that Mike Pettine is your DC. He was our DC under Doug Marrone a few years ago before he took the gig in Cleveland. We loved him in Buffalo, his amoeba defense puts some great looks out there. Jerry Hughes had one of his best seasons under Petting, Pettine knows Hughes and Kyle Williams very well... Tendencies and weaknesses. I'm sure he's voiced those to McCarthy and Philbin with regards to protections for Rodgers.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Makes sense, if the changes they made to the defense against Minnesota hold true, the Bills D will be much more aggressive this week than they were in weeks 1 and the start of week 2. Look for more blitzing and shifting on the D-line to create mismatches against Hughes, Kyle Williams, and Murphy. So we'll probably see more of Williams for protection, and his between the tackles style running.

Or D is designed for penetration with Hughes, Williams, Murphy, and Shaq Lawson (when healthy, which he is not and missed last week) Star is just a big ugly who they want to be absorbing guys and clogging the middle. He started off poorly at that in weeks 1 and 2, but really did a nice job last week against the Vikings. If he can anchor the middle and draw some double teams, it will free up Hughes, Williams, and Murphy, all of whom can be a real disruption in the backfield. Hughes may be getting older, but when he turns it on he's one of the best in the league. Unfortunately for us, that can be hit and miss.

Honestly you guys may also have an advantage from the fact that Mike Pettine is your DC. He was our DC under Doug Marrone a few years ago before he took the gig in Cleveland. We loved him in Buffalo, his amoeba defense puts some great looks out there. Jerry Hughes had one of his best seasons under Petting, Pettine knows Hughes and Kyle Williams very well... Tendencies and weaknesses. I'm sure he's voiced those to McCarthy and Philbin with regards to protections for Rodgers.

That was interesting but I'd like to point something out about the above bolded phrase.

Yes, the Packers have used him a lot in that way, slamming him up inside. He gets the extra yard or two moving the pile or getting the fall forward. I understand that's one staple in any run game. But the regularity with which they use him that way is a bit tiresome. It's a "here, we'll show you the run before we get down to business" kind of call. It also seems to be a favored audible call out of pass to run. It's not exactly amusing watching Rodgers motion Graham from the slot to in-line, a guy who can't block, then slam Williams up inside for 2 yards, but I suppose it has to be done at times when the situation does not call for burning a time out.

While Williams is not a guy who's going to run wide and win at the corner as Jones is capable of doing, he is a slasher as much as a pounder. He's got a mean stiff arm and is tough to get down at the second level if they can get him clean to the hole. Often there's no hole at all on those inside runs to even redirect.

On the other hand, the stretch runs have worked, whether with Williams or Jones in limited action this season. Maybe we'll get more of that, spread the field with 4 wide on 1st down, show pass, get 'em in nickel or dime, and give Williams more slashing opportunities.

In case anybody is not visualizing what I mean by a stretch run, the second and third plays in the following highlight reel are examples.

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

Note those are not runs against prevent D. It's 7 in the box on the first, 8 in the box on the second. Note the O-line is student body right on both of those plays from last year, a crease develops, and Williams slashes through it. We've seen several examples of that this season.

Of course there are plenty of examples of Williams running over and through guys or punching them in the mouth, literally, in that reel. I just want to observe that's only half the story, and a there's that other half not used enough in my option. Now the question is, "can they do it with the backups?"

 

[HardRightEdge]

Both. Call them "Thunder and Lightening" if you will

They will both get carries and each offer a different running style.

You mean like Larry Csonka and Mercury Morris? OK, that's way over the top.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You mean like Larry Csonka and Mercury Morris? OK, that's way over the top.

I agree....those guys are ancient and I doubt that they could play anymore!

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

 

[HardRightEdge]

I agree....those guys are ancient and I doubt that they could play anymore!

It seems like only yesterday. Then how about Blachard and Davis, "Mr. Inside and Mr. Outside"?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It seems like only yesterday. Then how about Blachard and Davis, "Mr. Inside and Mr. Outside"?

Slow down Gramps...I could barely figure out who Larry Csonka and Mercury Morris were!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Am I crazy, or didn’t he have a really ugly DPI on a target in the end zone against WAS?

You're absolutely right about it. I completely forgot about that play.

The one thing I've noticed about the Packer run game is that it has looked best running stretch plays to the right with the whole O-line on the move with the runners picking their spot inside our outside the OT. We're hearing that the RG McCray will be out and replaced by Bell and RT Bulaga is questionable after leaving the game last week with his replacement Spriggs having been disappointing, so if or how well they execute those stretch runs is questionable.

It's an interesting observation that the Packers have been more successful running to the right side. The blocking hasn't been that much better on those plays (1.62 yards before contact) than on rushes to the left side (1.37).

 

[HardRightEdge]

It's an interesting observation that the Packers have been more successful running to the right side. The blocking hasn't been that much better on those plays (1.62 yards before contact) than on rushes to the left side (1.37).

I was talking specifically about stretch runs, with the point being they don't run it enough. Because they don't use it much it would not have put much of dent in averages one way or the other, whether I'm right or wrong.

OK, so I went back and looked at the replays for every run play in the Washington and Minnesota games, as identified in the ESPN play-by-play, to log the stretch run results, presented below. I would have done the Bear game too, but I saw enough to satisfy myself on this thesis, with plenty of time spent already on those two games. I'm pretty sure I saw the stretch run work successfully against the Bears, but I'm not absolutely certain.

I define a stretch run as one where the entire O-Line moves laterally in one direction off the snap. If there's back side O-Line seal blocking or pulling around inside seals that's not what I'm talking about. If only a backside TE happens to seal block but the O-Line is on the move laterally, I counted it. There are other runs left or right where the line attacks forward angling left or right, That's not what I'm talking about either. Again, see those Wiliams clips as a point of reference. It's a zone blocking read with the entire O-Line making an initial lateral move in unison off the snap, not specifically designed for the runner to go to the edge, though he might end up there if the opportunity is presented. The runner reads and reacts, one cut and go, to where he sees a crease.

Here are the stretch runs I've identified for those two games:

Minnesota

1st. quarter, 1:28, 1st. and 10, pistol, TEs right and left, hand off right to Mongomery agaisnt 7 in the box: 16 yards inside the RG

4th. quarter, 6:32, 1st. and 10: it was right to Williams for 6 yards but called back for holding on Bakhtiari.

4th. quarter, 3:13, 1st. and 10, pistol, TE right, hand off right to Williams against 6 in the box: 3 yards


Washington

1st. quarter, 2:14, 1st. and 10, pistol, two TEs left, pitch left to Williams against 7 in the box: 5 yds inside the LT

1st. quarter, 0:52, 1st. and 10, pistol, one TE right, hand off right to Jones against 6 in the box: 10 yards outside the RT

1st. quarter, 0:09, 1st. and 10, pistol, 4 wide left with Jones who motions to the backfield, no TE, hand off right to Jones against 6 in the box,: 8 yards inside the RT

[For those who have replay access, check this one out. It is a thing of beauty out of a spread offense.]

3rd. quarter, 15:00, 1st. and 10, pistol, TE left, double slot left, hand off left to Williams against 7 in the box: -2 yards

Conclusions

The first thing that jumps out at me, which I did not expect, is that it was only run on 1st. and 10. Watch for it on that down and distance going foward. Hopefully the defenses won't.

I see it run 4 times right, 2 time left, in those 2 games.

They run it out of a variety of formations.

The 6 that counted netted 39 yards for 6.5 yds. per carry. Considering they were all 1st. and 10, a running down if there is such a thing anymore, that's pretty impressive.

As for those stats, not especially relevant to my point, I would note a 0.25 differece before contact is something more than chump change. It's half the difference between a 4.0 "average" number and a 4.5 "good" number. Further, how does yards before contact translate to total yards? Is it one-for-one factor? More? Less? Or maybe it's all just a function of having better run blockers on the right side or an in-line TE on the right side more often than on the left.

Again, the plays I've cited are not sufficient to bend the curve on that stat one way or another. Maybe they would if they ran them more.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Further, how does yards before contact translate to total yards? Is it one-for-one factor? More? Less?

The Packers have averaged 3.37 yards on runs to the left side compared to 5.92 when rushing to the right one.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I was talking specifically about stretch runs, with the point being they don't run it enough. Because they don't use it much it would not have put much of dent in averages one way or the other, whether I'm write or wrong.

OK, so I went back and looked at the replays for every run play in the Washington and Minnesota games, as identified in the ESPN play-by-play, to log the stretch run results, presented below. I would have done the Bear game too, but I saw enough to satisfy myself on this thesis, with plenty of time spent already on those two games. I'm pretty sure I saw the stretch run work successfully against the Bears, but I'm not absolutely certain.

I define a stretch run as one where the entire O-Line moves laterally in one direction off the snap. If there's back side O-Line seal blocking or pulling around inside seals that's not what I'm talking about. If only a backside TE happens to seal block but the O-Line is on the move laterally, I counted it. There are other runs left or right where the line attacks forward angling left or right, That's not what I'm talking about either. Again, see those Wiliams clips as a point of reference. It's a zone blocking read with the entire O-Line making an initial lateral move in unison off the snap, not specifically designed for the runner to go to the edge, though he might end up there if the opportunity is presented. The runner reads and reacts, one cut and go, to where he sees a crease.

Here are the stretch runs I've identified for those two games:

Minnesota

1st. quarter, 1:28, 1st. and 10, pistol, TEs right and left, hand off right to Mongomery agaisnt 7 in the box: 16 yards inside the RG

4th. quarter, 6:32, 1st. and 10: it was right to Williams for 6 yards but called back for holding on Bakhtiari.

4th. quarter, 3:13, 1st. and 10, pistol, TE right, hand off right to Williams against 6 in the box: 3 yards


Washington

1st. quarter, 2:14, 1st. and 10, pistol, two TEs left, pitch left to Williams against 7 in the box: 5 yds inside the LT

1st. quarter, 0:52, 1st. and 10, pistol, one TE right, hand off right to Jones against 6 in the box: 10 yards outside the RT

1st. quarter, 0:09, 1st. and 10, pistol, 4 wide left with Jones who motions to the backfield, no TE, hand off right to Jones against 6 in the box,: 8 yards inside the RT

[For those who have replay access, check this one out. It is a thing of beauty out of a spread offense.]

3rd. quarter, 15:00, 1st. and 10, pistol, TE left, double slot left, hand off left to Williams against 7 in the box: -2 yards

Conclusions

The first thing that jumps out at me, which I did not expect, is that it was only run on 1st. and 10. Watch for it on that down and distance going foward. Hopefully the defenses won't.

I see it run 6 times right, 1 time left, in those 2 games.

They run it out of a variety of formations.

The 6 that counted netted 43 yards for 7.2 yds. per carry. Considering they were all 1st. and 10, a running down if there is such a thing anymore, that's pretty impressive.

As for those stats, not especially relevant to my point, I would note a 0.25 differece before contact is something more than chump change. It's half the difference between a 4.0 "average" number and a 4.5 "good" number. Further, how does yards before contact translate to total yards? Is it one-for-one factor? More? Less? Or maybe it's all just a function of having better run blockers on the right side or an in-line TE on the right side more often than on the left.

Again, the plays I've cited are not a sufficient to bend the curve one way or another. Maybe they would if they ran it more.

Great work, now let's hope that Leslie Frazier and the other DC's we will face in the near future aren't reading this thread.

The Packers have averaged 3.37 yards on runs to the left side compared to 5.92 when rushing to the right one.

You two keep yapping and we will never be able to run right again!

 

[HardRightEdge]

The Packers have averaged 3.37 yards on runs to the left side compared to 5.92 when rushing to the right one.

That's pretty wierd. So, an extra 0.25 yards before contact nets an extra 2.55 yards net?

My guess would have been an extra 0.25 before contact would net something more than 0.25 net, but nothing like that. I have to think there is either something wrong in the data or the sample size is small enough that a few outlier plays are distorting the avergage.

Can you run those queries for last year for a bigger sample size? The players and the plays have not changed much.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Can you run those queries for last year for a bigger sample size? The players and the plays have not changed much.

Last season the Packers averaged 1.61 yards before contact when running to the left side as well as 2.39 on rushes to the right. They averaged 4.27 yards on attempts to the left compared to 4.80 to the right.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Great work, now let's hope that Leslie Frazier and the other DC's we will face in the near future aren't reading this thread.

You two keep yapping and we will never be able to run right again!

What hath we wrought?

I would be more than surprised if any professional, "foreign" or "domestic", reads this board.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

What hath we wrought?

I would be more than surprised if any professional, "foreign" or "domestic", reads this board.

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

 

[HardRightEdge]

Last season the Packers averaged 1.61 yards before contact when running to the left side as well as 2.39 on rushes to the right. They averaged 4.27 yards on attempts to the left compared to 4.80 to the right.

That makes more sense. According to that data, +0.78 yds. before contact got +0.63 yds net on the right side. Not exactly what I would expect but in the realm of plausibility as a meaningful ratio.

Who's data are you using?

 

[HardRightEdge]

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

Great "again"? It's always been pretty great.

If we got quoted on "Fox and Friends" or Hannity while applying the term "professional" loosely, we could make the big time!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That makes more sense. According to that data, +0.78 yds. before contact got +0.63 yds net on the right side. Not exactly what I would expect but in the realm of plausibility as a meaningful ratio.

Who's data are you using?

I'm getting the numbers from Pro Football Focus' premium stats.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Packers injury report for Sunday's game against the Bills:

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/robdemovsky/status/1045746997221871622?s=21[/TWEET]