NPLB End of Season Report: Holding the Lines
The NPLB is going to start in a new direction this offseason, and for the most part this will be a tentative foray. The analysis (by necessity) must move beyond the drive charts, and I am also going to try incorporating more information regarding Defense and special teams. To this end, I will be releasing several reports over the next few weeks, dealing with different aspects of the team, analyzing what I feel are some important statistical indicators, and giving an overview of the teams performance last season. For the most part I won't have much need to comment on the analysis, since the season pretty much speaks for itself, but as always the point behind this analysis is to make sure that blame and praise ends up where it rightly belongs. Going into the offseason, this is an important tool for evaluating the coming roster and coaching changes.
On to the first report of the offseason!
Holding the Lines: Our Offensive and Defensive Line Play
When looking at the play of our offensive and defensive lines, I feel we are looking at the true measure of the Broncos' failings this season. From clutch penalties to failures in short yardage situations, we never seemed to be able to assert ourselves when it mattered most. On offense we have already lost one player, who stated that he didn't feel he was playing well enough, but wasn't he? The following analysis looks at what we did well, what we did poorly, and what we did, well...meh.
Offensive Line
The figure above shows the 5 essential directions a rushing attack can take: off LE, off LT, off RE, Off RT, and off C. Listed above these lanes are the names of the current starters as well as the names of any other players who manned the position through the year (in parentheses) and any players who were expected to man the position, but never did {in braces}. Below the lanes are some rankings and stats that we will look at momentarily.
At first glance, one would think that we had a decent amount of stability on the offensive line, with only LG and C seeing any upheaval. Of course, we all know this is anything but true. There is no position more important on the line than C, and that saw us using our third stringer. Holland was in his first year on our line. Pears was playing opposite his natural position, LT. Kuper played opposite his regular position as well, RG. So there was definitely some chaos.
The statistics below the lanes indicate where we ranked league wide in rushing at those points. We were very strong, ranking 5th and 8th in running behind Kuper and Lepsis, though with Zone Blocking, one must take into account the RG Holland pulling to that side. It should come as no surprise that we were not among the more successful teams running behind our third string center, or that we were 6th in the league when sending Selvin Young outside behind Daniel Graham. I am however a bit surprised at our 26th ranking running inside RT. Below these numbers are the percentage of runs we sent in those directions, followed by the league averages for each direction. We spread out more than most teams, and ran behind our veteran Lepsis a lot, with more success than elsewhere. We also ran behind our blocking TE more often than most, mainly because Graham was an every down player, and also because of the speed that Selvin Young brought to the table.
The Good
The Denver Broncos enjoyed one of the more exciting running games that we have seen in years, which can be attributed to Young, our tackles and our outside blocking from TEs and WRs. We ranked 6th in the league on running plays that reached the second level, and went for more than 10 yards.
The Bad
Overall we ranked 13th with our rushing game, not counting non-designed QB runs. This could be worse, and had we not lost our center, this could have jumped into the top ten easily.
In pass protection, the only stat that really addresses the O-line is sacks given up, though that statistic can be adjusted to reflect down and distance situations. In the latter case we rank 14th in the league, and Lepsis was the most frequent contributer, followed closely by penetration off center. However, of the 32 sacks allowed, 14 came on blitzes, which is the responsibility of RBs, TEs and the QB himself. This stat could have been much, much worse.
The Ugly
And boy, are these two ever ugly. First we have the 24th most stuffed rushing attack in the league. What does that mean? It means that only eight other teams were stopped on first and second down rushes as much as we were. This means rushes for zero yards as well as rushes for losses. This is a terrible statistic, and is an indictment of our rushing attack's consistency. but wait, there's more...
32nd. Absolute worst in the league. We got this ranking in the following, narrowly defined field: Rushing offense on 3rd and 4th and less than a yard, as well as all goal to go downs where we rushed the ball. Ugh. In other words, the only way we get into the end zone or get that critical first down is by trickery, or by passing. We absolutely could not assert ourselves in short yardage situations where we were expected to run. Why? Because these are the off center runs, and when you are on your third string center, you just hope for the best. Nalen is one of strongest football players the Broncos have ever fielded. Myers, not so much...
What are we going to do about it?
First thing is we are going to lose probably the best tackle we have. Lepsis retired so check that one off. Next is to hope that we don't get a similar result for our best interior lineman. Nalen and Hamilton must return, or we will be exceptionally thin at o-line, thinner than at any point in Shanahan's tenure (unless you think that PJ Alexander is our next great star. No? Didn't think so.) Let us move forward assuming Hamilton retires, but that Nalen stays. The reasoning being that Hamilton never indicated he had recovered even an iota from his post-concussion symptoms, while Nalen has spoken since his injury about his plans to return, and since his injury isn't the type that ends careers, even the career of an old center like Tom. We draft a center and a guard, and we take a look at the usual suspects in training camp, i.e. guys you haven't ever really heard of but seem to turn the coaches heads. We can't get by next year with less than two young additions, and ideally that number should be three. Expect Pears and Ryan Harris to battle for the LT spot, with the booby prize of RT going to the loser. We are on the cusp of a great young line, but we need to protect it now by keeping depth coming into the roster. This year will be the year we look back and say we got it done in the offseason, and not a second too late, or we will say that we were a day late and a dollar short. Let's get the former done.
Defensive Line
This figure is much like the first. We have our front seven, including players that have come and gone, and players who should have been in the lineup from day one. The statistics are indicative of rushes against.
4 defensive starters cut. Ouch. Even Freddy Kreuger is wincing at the thought. I used to work on a ranch, and even then I never saw that much beef cut in that short amount of time. The loss of Moss held up the development of the line, but after all the smoke clears, that will have very little impact on next years play. One thing to note is that Moss will be wearing down faster than the rest of these guys next year, so keep that in mind as the games progress. What jumps out at me is how much DOOM needs to work on his run game. I expect a leap forward from him in this category, and I expect Denver's offseason moves to help him look better. Adams was hammered early and often this season, but the Thomas/Peterson rotation has been effective. Earlier this year the same statistic was at 27th, so they deserve some credit for shaving it down to 21st, considering that 'ol Sam was like a small planetoid, with his gravitational field seemingly pulling in more than its fair share of runs at 24% of the opponent's efforts. Surprisingly we were above average between the tackles, until of course you realize that DJ's presence limited the overall rushes he saw, as well as their effectiveness. Our strongside rush defense was stout outside, with good young guys and Engleberger, backed up by a Webster that could get to the sideline in a hurry. But anything that bent back off the right offensive side was disaster there, because of spending most of the season in Pancake City (Burton and Gordon), and a Webster that overpursued to the sidelines in a hurry...32nd in the league belongs to our revolving left DT spot and Webster himself.
The Good
Nothing. I'm serious. Oh, well, if I have to put something I'll list our above average 12th ranking against our offensive lines weakest point: goal to go rushing and 3rd and 4th and short. I'll take it, but Lynch is a BIG part of this statistic, and he should be hanging out with Bly all game.
The Bad
We are a very average team defending the rush on first and second down. 18th in the league in fact. This is because Engleberger is average. This is because McKinley is average. This is because Adams was below average, and his replacements were above average. Don't act so surprised...
We are a below average pass rushing team, ranking 19th after adjusting for down and distance. I think this might be because we only have one pass rusher. I think that might be it BUT I DON"T KNOW. Ahh, who am I kidding. Moss needs to get healthy, and we need penetration from our DTs on passing downs. One thing I would like to mention: Mallard, who I hope to call the "Duck of Death" in '08, had 3.5 sacks in 6 games. That's on pace for about 10 for a season. Not great, but serviceable, and he is young, going into his fourth year. If we don't ask for too much, he could deliver...
The Ugly
I am going to play a fun game, and limit myself to choosing just one from this category, since I'm sure you haven't got all day: How about big play rushes allowed? Like the 10+yds variety. I remember worrying a lot about our secondary getting burned through the air after we sent Lynch trudging back up to the line. I don't remember worrying too much about RBs breaking off long ones. Maybe I was numb. Maybe I was dumb. Regardless, except for 5 worse woebegotten teams, we were pitiful against the killer strike from the RB. 27th in the league. Part of that is attrition, I mean, teams loved to run on us. It was the official hobby of the AFC West. But this was one stat that did not go up and down over the course of the year. This is a defining statistic for our rush defense: we had to bring extra players to the line to stop the run, but if you could bend a run back against our out of position LBs, the sky was the limit. I hope we get a safety this offseason, but a safety won't fix this.
What are we going to do?
We are going to sit right where we are at #12 and draft a LB. A patient madman, a guy with guts and grit and a passion for football. DJ will hand him the Mike LB, and take his own lessons from his stint at MLB to the weakside after Gold's departure, where he will, ahem, 'rock tits off.' Two new big boys will filter into the D-line, one of whom will be a FA, the other a rookie. Strongside competition at LB will be fierce, and shockingly, we will end up with solid depth at the position after the dust settles between Webster, Winborn, Rookie #2, and maybe Holdman. And we need to look at a few more defensive ends, but we can afford to be patient and look at projects for the position. More than anything, we need our LB corp to solidify, and we need to give them one more interior guy up front to free them up to attack. I am ready to ask a lot from our new and improved LB corp, too much even. And when they attempt to deliver, whether they succeed or not, they will take ownership of the Broncos' defense.
{Statistics compiled from Football Outsiders and PFW.}
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
0 recs |
27 comments
Comments
THAT is an AMAZING front page post!
Here's a few thoughts.
- I have leaned towards moving Williams to OLB. Then I saw a stat that blew me out of the water. Williams is first in the AFC in tackles, and second in the NFL. Think we should still move him? I'm on the fence.
- Agree on your conclusions and methodology overall. Just two minor questions:
- Do the rush defense stats take into account the rush offenses we face (as opposed to other teams). For example, we faced LT of SD twice.
- The run blocking is hard to gauge, given the lateral movement of the line (in zone block) and the position of the defenders when they finaly get blocked. I think the way you went about it is the only way to evaluate it, and I don't have a better idea. I know that's not a question, but it's worth a mention.
by Steve Nichols on Jan 2, 2008 6:19 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Question! (again)
Can D.J.W's monsterous production have something to do with the DT's? I mean he, as opposed to other MIKEs gets A LOT of tackle-opportunities. He has (ord had, time to kick it in the past tence) to stop every single inside run. I mean, The rookie Patrick Willis is leading that category!
by Claaaaas on Jan 2, 2008 6:28 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I was surprised
by Jeremy Bolander on Jan 2, 2008 11:04 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Perfect time to give props
To address the questions:
- I think Williams did a great job at Mike, and I think we should move him if and only if a vocal leader steps up at the position. I'll put part of an answer to our resident Dane (apologies if your Denmarkiness is transient) and say that Dan Conner sounds like a great addition in this respect, as he could phase D.J. out of the position gradually, getting a reputation for production in the meantime. I certainly don't endorse crowning anyone without them proving themselves, but I also believe that DJ would be happy with a move outside, and would willingly part with the job. The biggest upgrade we need at the position is in terms of a vocal leader, which DJ just isn't. I love that about him, lead by example, quiet and sure. That's my own philosophy for work. But I just don't see it being the most effective way to run the Mike spot. I really want our LBs to put a stamp on the defense, a fiery vocal guy in the middle who is known for blowing people up, a lethal assassin at weakside and the quick, strong, maybe even dirty strongside guy shoving blockers out of his way.
- Some of the rushing statistics are from football outsiders (most of the ones that include a ranking) and they have both an adjusted and non-adjusted version of most statistics, based on opposing off. and def. I agree about it being difficult to statistically evaluate personnel in the zone-blocking scheme. The only way I can think of to do a better job would be to watch tape and track individual players. Some statistics company will no doubt gain the ability in the future to view game tape, though from a gambling (money) point of view, a handicapper would have enough data to evaluate the team from the current stats, and would only want the personnel stats to forecast with.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jan 2, 2008 10:55 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Major props to you
I think the team numbers are the most interesting and useful. Seeing the non-existence of our power rushing attack on paper cemented a feeling I had been having all year.
The Broncos were a tough team to evaluate individually this year. I think the zone blocking, cut back running attack makes it hard to grade the offensive linemen based solely on where the play ends up. And on the defensive side of the ball, the in-season reworking of the line and the situational rotation of players makes it hard to figure out who is truly responsible for what.
A semi related random thought: Does anyone remember the Broncos running a stunt of any sort this year? I'm guessing it's not really part of the run contain system, but I don't even recall seeing them try a stunt on obvious passing downs.
by MattR on Jan 2, 2008 2:44 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't remember
Ugly.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jan 2, 2008 4:54 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry HT, I want Styg to be my agent!
by Arctic Bronco on Jan 2, 2008 9:06 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I wanted him for GM...
by Steve Nichols on Jan 3, 2008 12:05 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
This is
Props!
Hmmm.. As to what we are gonna do with the D-line.. Of course i agree with you, but i'll kinda answer with a question: Can anyone tell me a bit about GB and Giants's D-lines? When you look at them during a game ('cause i've not looked at the stats) it looks like they lineup with 4 ends at the time? Is that true? Or do they only line up with that many in 3rd-and-long situations?
Our depth at End looks good (at least better than DT). Is a more-than-two-end-lienup possible as base lineup? In 3rd-and-long situations?
I mean can you compensate from having undersizeded linemen by sort of blitzing the run from the interior?
Hope someone clearifies this, for a wrong-spelling european:)
/Claus
by Claaaaas on Jan 2, 2008 6:20 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
HT will be by
I will say that we were using Jarvis Moss (pre-injury) and Crowder inside as DTs on passing downs a lot this year. And correct me if I'm wrong but Mallard looks more like a DE than a DT to me, and he is inside on passing downs as well. Bates has flirted with this idea quite a bit in his scheme, and I think he is already working on a way to create more opportunities inside with the players he is expecting to have available. To this end, Mallard saw rushing work, as did Crowder, at the end of the season...
by Jeremy Bolander on Jan 2, 2008 11:00 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks..
BTW: Born a dane and always will be, if that was what you ment by "transient"...:)
by Claaaaas on Jan 2, 2008 11:52 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Good questions as always
Multiple DEs would be used against a team on third and long, but only if the match-ups allow for it between two teams. Smaller and faster DE's can rarely penetrate the interior of an offensive line. A blitz scheme may adjust by using LB's in a supportive role during the blitz.
by Steve Nichols on Jan 2, 2008 2:29 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Could we actually...
Honestly, this is awesome, and what the MHR is all about....
by John Bena on Jan 2, 2008 6:32 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
I would second such a motion! n/t
by Steve Nichols on Jan 2, 2008 2:30 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I third the motion, this was one of the most
by Arctic Bronco on Jan 2, 2008 9:11 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice Read!
I agree that next year's success will be decided by the draft and "reloading-season" acquisitions on the O and D lines.
When you look at teams like the Colts and Pats that have been winning consistently, you can see that there has been little to no change along the front lines, and that is where the Broncos need to aim for.
Oh yeah, and props!
by binford04 on Jan 2, 2008 11:52 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Minor correction
Erik Pears played Left Tackle last year as Lepsis' replacement when he went out with the ACL; but the Broncos always believed he was a more natural right tackle; the left tackle has to be faster on his feet than the right tackle. I've read several sources that say that, so I feel fairly confident this is the general consensus.
Thus, Pears isn't out of place. He's just a slightly below average player there, and I think he's probably a big reason for the weakness in that direction. Certainly he was the reason Daniel Graham needed to stay in and help a lot. The statistics thus don't show as much weakness with Pears as the reality does, because the coaches knew that Pears needed help, and he got it a lot. But that meant that Pears wasn't able to help Holland very much either, and so Holland took a lot of the fall. That's my interpretation, at least.
I think we'll find that Right Tackle is going to be a position with a lot of competition in training camp, and Pears is going to have to improve a lot to win it, or he'll only have another year or two in the league.
by E Halsey Miles on Jan 2, 2008 12:02 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
I would....
As it was, Lepsis was never the same after the knee injury and made a ballsy decision to man-up.
by John Bena on Jan 2, 2008 12:28 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the clarification, E
Here is my (extended) take. Pears came on as a project, who was generally considered to be working towards a RT spot. But he is the biggest, most athletic lineman on the team. Freaky, in fact. The Broncos wanted him to get some of that "seasoning" that you mentioned for Harris. Like you said, and Guru backs up, circumstances put him at LT where he did O.K., but not great. But he still made it to the lineup at RT, where he had been practicing. He has been somewhat of a disappointment, but I think he is getting firetested too early in his zone-blocking career. That he hasn't fallen on his face is testament to the fact that Denver didn't mess up drafting him, but also that he has a lot more work to do. I have no doubt that he gets it done, whether it is to nab the LT spot out from under Harris, or to nail down RT for himself. That all depends on what position the coaches put him in to compete. I heard somewhere else that Harris is expected to compete with Kuper at LT, which I think is a little far out. I suspect that is motivated by Lepsis' history and the idea that Myers has to be a starter next year at LG. We'll see. Should be exciting.
Regarding Holland, I don't think anyone is putting any blame on him. I didn't single him out above except to note that he is contributing to our weakside rushing attack even though he plays the strong side. I think Holland rocked this year, earned his extension and then some, and bought us ever-valuable time to develop our backups.
My final take on Pears: Our best athlete on offensive line should be protecting Cutler's blindside. That's pears. If he could improve in one area, I think he needs to get stronger, but regardless, he has enough talent to nail down a tackle spot for us.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jan 2, 2008 12:48 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
A couple of comments.
2nd, Pears was an undrafted CFA. We didn't draft him.
3rd, I think that Pears just suffered from the "sophmore slump". San Diego's Marcus McNeal who made it to the Pro-Bowl last year as a rookie had a down year. It happens.
4th, Pears is a strong man, however I don't think he is extremely athletic. At least that's the impression I got. Do you have solid info on this?
5th, rock on.
6th, This is my early projection for next years O-line:
LT Harris
LG Meyers
C Hamilton/Nalen
RG Holland/Kuper
RT Pears
I really think that Shanny wants a bigger man at LG, and Hamilton is under 290. Meyers did much better at LG than C. G is his natural positions.
by amirebram on Jan 2, 2008 4:39 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Whoops
Good point also about a sophmore slump. People forget that he came off the practice squad as an NFL europe project and was thrust into the starting role in 06 without the usual foreplay that a broncos lineman gets. My thought is that he may look like he's struggling and then suddenly, one year he will look awesome. I think that could be next year.
Totally agree with your take on Myers being the LG, though it is going to be some great competition next year in training camp. Hamilton is a solid, solid player when he is on the field, and if he is a backup, then the starters must be kicking some serious buns.
I have been searching off and on since E's post above to dig up some of the stuff I read back in 05 about Pears. I'm almost positive I read something about him on Broncos.com, like an interview or an NFL europe update or something. I'll post as soon as I find something.
I'm pretty sure it's not all in my head, but I have to admit to not being able to notice a major difference in what little I am seeing on TV. I never heard his name called, so that must count for something...
by Jeremy Bolander on Jan 2, 2008 5:03 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Pears
That's no knock on him. He came in as a CFA; he made it through NFL-E to get some play time, and most of two seasons on the Broncos. But right now I think he's the weakest link on the O-line. I'm not convinced he's the best athlete on our O-line. Biggest and strongest, yes. But I think he's a little slower on his feet than the zone blocking scheme really prefers. Maybe he can improve on that this summer.
For awhile it was Myers, and to some extent it may still be. When he went to Center, teams clearly attacked him. Jeff Legwold commented in an article, hm, around week 12 or 13, that when Myers came in teams attacked him directly but he held up and hitting him so hard allowed us to burn them around the edges, so they backed off of that behavior.
And the statistics clearly indicate that Myers had trouble getting that push up the middle that a center needs to get. No one can get off the ball quicker than the center, because the center knows when the ball is actually out of his hand. A good center should be able to ram straight forward and make a one yard hole for whomever is carrying the ball from behind, and should be able to do that more often than not.
41%? That's a very poor number. It's particularly poor when you look at the numbers of the other teams around us in the standings. Something's wrong there. The obvious choice is that it's Myers' that is wrong. I'm not 100% sure I'm willing to believe that he was wrong there, though. More like...thrust into the position when he really didn't have enough experience to excel there.
Legwold says that he got better as the season progressed. But our up-the-middle statistics did not.
I think if Myers and Kuper and Hamilton and Holland are competing for guard spots next year, though, we're in better shape than we are now.
by E Halsey Miles on Jan 2, 2008 8:28 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Hhmmmm...
Lepsis is done--retired--gone. If Pears were to be cut, then we would have exactly one (yes 1) OT left on the roster. Ryan Harris, 2nd year pro who has never played a game at OT.
That isn't happening. Pears isn't going to fall off the face of the planet. At worst (if we sign a high profile OT FA in the offseason, draft a OT at #12, and have a really big suprise performance out of a no-name nobody in pre-season) Pears will become a backup OT.
Letting the guy go is insanity, even if his play doesn't improve one bit from 07 to 08. He is the cheapest man on our roster right now. Why let him walk?
by amirebram on Jan 3, 2008 2:50 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I should clarify myself
In both cases, I do completely agree with you that we would not actually cut him, unless he makes a stink about thinking he should be a starter. And he's too young to be making that stink in what will be a contract year for him. Instead, he would be doing himself a disservice to do anything except compete as hard as he can and prove he needs to be a starter -- either with us or someone else.
Also, at least one beat reporter thinks the Broncos are going to try and convince Lepsis not to go, but to give it one more year. I wouldn't be confident in any success there, though.
by E Halsey Miles on Jan 3, 2008 5:25 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I see.
About Pears contract. He is a exclusive FA this year, which means that he can only sign with Denver for 08 (unless Denver cuts him).
If he signs a one year deal, then he will be a RFA next year (I think). So he might just sign a multi-year deal (2 year deal makes the most sense right now I think).
by amirebram on Jan 4, 2008 3:39 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Ben Hamilton and Tom Nalen
On Monday, Hamilton talked about there being "no doubt" that he'll return after missing a season with post-concussion syndrome. Nalen is planning to return for a 15th year after coming off a biceps tear.
by MattR on Jan 2, 2008 5:52 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
The "Duck of Death"
by Arctic Bronco on Jan 2, 2008 9:19 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

by 

































