Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Kenny Florian Announces Retirement After Nine-Year Career

Major Kyle (Coming Home) - The 2009 Broncos Passing Game & Why Eddie Royal Isn't Lost In Space

4...3...2..1...Kyle behind us...

passing, hurling....floating weightless

calling, calling...(Denver) home...

When I put these weekly columns together, I have so much 80s music to chose from it's almost criminal.  This week it was a close competition between Motley Crue's Shout at the Royal or Falco's Rock Me Kyle Orton.  But ultimately I decided there simply wasn't a better way to introduce the 2009-passing game of the Denver Broncos than with reference to this song by Peter Schilling in 1984, which was also covered in 2009 by Shiny Toy Guns.   I personally could listen to either version 50 times in succession--the equivalent to the number of seasons the Raiders will wait for the playoffs--and never grow bored.

The song is about an astronaut (hey, man, David Bowie originated the story, so don't look at me) who ends up drifting into space forever.  This isn't exactly how the Broncos passing game looked in 2009, but it often seemed this way.  On the surface, it appeared as if bubble screens drifted into the play-book at the expense other more production routes. The standard thinking--that Eddie Royal would become the 2009 version of Wes Welker--never materialized.  Royal became more well-known for his returning prowess than for anything resembling a successful sophomore campaign at wide receiver.

Kyle Orton, for his part, represented a microcosm of the entire season for the Broncos.  Depending on who you believed, Orton was either starting to grow into McDaniels' complex offense over time or he was a less mobile version of Chad Pennington.  He couldn't stretch the field particularly well.  He couldn't make a big play in the clutch.  And he didn't move in the pocket, despite putting up a decent stats.   As many pundits have said, we should consider Kyle Orton an "average quarterback."

Star-divide

That debate will continue to rage until Orton is no longer the quarterback of the Denver Broncos, or he leads the Broncos deep into the playoffs.   So we won't settle the issue now.   But we can be sure of a few things. First, Al Davis eats children on Halloween.  Second, Kyle Orton is coming back for another year (at least) as the QB for the Broncos.

So let's do our part and break down the Broncos passing offense from 2009 like you've never seen it before--through the use of expected points.  By the time you are done with this article, you'll know more about the trends of the Broncos passing offense than many of its own players.  We'll break down Orton, and finally, we'll solve the enigma that was Eddie Royal, my favorite current Bronco.  

 

For those that are new to MHR (in the last week), or want a quick refresher, let me again say that I have looked at every play of the 2009 Broncos season.  I've assigned a points value to each play using the concept of expected points value, which is explained here.  This allows us to value any single play in the context of how many points it generates. Most useful, however, is its ability to help us understand value in the context of downs, distance, and direction.  With that aside, let's get right to it.

Kyle Orton - Out of Orbit?

I suppose I should start by comparing Kyle Orton to Chris Simms in detail.  But that would be a waste of your precious time. This simple two-line table tells the whole story.

 

 Play  Passer  Count   Average Points Per Pass Attempt 
Pass Kyle Orton 532 0.314
Pass Chris Simms 16 -0.349

 

The numbers reflect the entire body of the work of each quarterback.  Touchdowns, completions, interceptions, and incompletions (outside of spikes) are included in these numbers.  So the two pick-six interceptions that Orton threw against Kansas City are in there as well.  In fact, Orton's last interception on the year was worth -8.796 points.  As you can imagine, throwing a pick-six is like a weekly trip to the Black Hole.  It lowers everything across the board.

But without digressing too far, let's get back to (dispose of) Simms quickly.  Simms didn't have a large sample size, but the trend already emerged.  Your quarterback can't average negative points with his passes and do much in this league.  So the first lesson that emerges from this brief analysis is one that your eyes already saw without numbers: Chris Simms will have a tough time staying with the Broncos going into 2010. 

Orton, on the other hand, had a respectable average-points-per-passing attempt.  But I wouldn't proclaim these numbers to be All-Pro.  To me they appear average.  Unfortunately, until I finish this kind of analysis for every quarterback in 2009, I can't claim this with certainty.  If you'd like a quick comparison, however, I'll give it to you.  During the 2006 season, in which Peyton Manning passed for almost 3,400 yards, had a quarterback rating of 101.0, threw 31 touchdowns to 9 interceptions, his average-expected-points value per pass was .423.   Sure, Manning had a great season, but that's an almost 38% improvement over Orton's number from 2009.  Much of this has to do with Manning's ability on 3rd down, but I think we can all agree that Kyle needs to experience a growth curve this year in order to put more points on the board.

Let's take a look at Orton's values by distance and direction (note: deep passes are those passes that travel 15 yards or more through the air):

 Pass Direction  Frequency Average Pass Per Play 
Short Left 190 0.251
Short Middle 111 0.428
Short Right 165 0.134
Deep Left 30 0.848
Deep Middle 25 0.495
Deep Right 26 0.351

 

What is the first thing that jumps out at you?  For me, with just a cursory glance, it's the strong tendency of the Broncos to throw the ball to the left side of the field.  Now, anyone that has played quarterback or has pitched in baseball can tell you that for a right-handed thrower, it's easier to throw accurately to the side of the field/plate where you naturally step.  So I'll cede the point that throwing to the left right is naturally more comfortable for Orton. However, the number of times they threw to the left side was simply overwhelming.  Denver threw the ball to the left side of the field 16% more than they threw the ball to the right side, and a full 62% more than they threw the ball to the middle of the field.  In fact, the Broncos threw the ball to the short-left side of the field the 2nd most in the entire league.  

This tendency is frightening because if a guy with a penchant for slacker movies and glam-metal can catch this tendency, I'm guessing that even the Oakland Raiders coaches caught it.  But even more frightening is the fact that the average-expected-points value for Orton's passes to the short-left side of the field were 1.7 times less than those passes to the short middle of the field.

This value decrease is even more pronounced when looking at passes to the short right.  The average value of these passes were .134 points per pass, or 3 times less than those passes Orton threw over the middle.  So even though the Broncos threw over the middle much less, they had much more value throwing over the middle when they did.  

Quick, now that you know this, answer my two important multiple choice questions:

 

What kinds of passes do the Broncos need to throw more of in 2010?

A. Short Middle

B. Short Middle

C. Short Middle

 

What kinds of passes does Kyle Orton need more practice?

A. Right Side

B. Right Side

C. Right Side

 

If you picked A, B, or C in either question, you are correct.  You are now qualified to replace Tom Cable.

Before we move away from this table, a word about the deep passes.  It appears that throwing to the deep left part of the field was much more successful for the Broncos in 2009.  This is generally true, but remember, 3 of these plays were broken 60-to-70 yard bombs from Orton to Stokley and to Marshall.  So I wouldn't necessarily believe (given the smaller sample size) that throwing to the deep left will yield twice the results in the future.  We can much easier make generalizations about the short passes due to the much larger sample size (4 times as large). 

This doesn't mean we can't gleam some useful data, however.  First, the value of throwing the ball to the right side of the field was significantly less than the deep middle and the deep left.  This is a similar to what we saw in the short passing game. Second, notice that the value of the short middle passes was near that of the value of throwing to the deep middle.  This probably means that when a receiver or back were getting the ball in the short middle of the field, they were gaining a lot of yards after the catch, which was driving up the value of these plays to the same level as if Orton took more risk by throwing long.    

I could be wrong (I'm doubting it), but this gives us an important bit of information that can be of use for the Broncos in the future. Throwing the ball over the middle using crossing routes and letting the Broncos receivers do the dirty work for Orton is something that they should consider.  To this we will return in a moment when discussing Eddie Royal.

We can also break down the 2009 Denver Broncos passing game by down:

 

Play Type Down   Count  Average
Pass 1st  183 0.297
Pass 2nd  204 0.291
Pass 3rd  156 0.205
Pass 4th  5 3.160

 

Last week, we looked at length at the Broncos struggles on 3rd downs when running.  They don't exhibit a similar tendency in the passing game, although they can always improve significantly.   

Are All Systems a Go? 

One question I get asked from time-to-time via email is whether this McDaniels-led offense in Denver is the same McDaniels-led offense he was running with the Patriots. Or is it watered down?   After all, McDaniels said himself that we would see something that we hadn't seen before in 2009.  Well, the answer is that it depends on which Patriots offense we compare it to. I decided to look at the Matt Cassel led Patriots from 2008 and the Tom Brady led Patriots from 2007, possibly the most stunning aerial attack ever witnessed in the NFL.  I simply looked at the percentage of pass plays called in each aerial direction.  Below were the results:

 

Team Short Left  Short Middle  Short Right  Deep Left  Deep Middle  Deep Right 
2009 Broncos 35% 20% 30% 5% 5% 5%
2008 Patriots  33% 21% 31% 5% 3% 7%
 
2007 Patriots  30% 20% 33% 7% 4% 6%

 

It's clear that McDaniels, given his druthers, would prefer to pass the ball deep more often than he did in 2009.  In the successful year of 2007, his offense passed the ball deep 17% of the time.  This translates into about 20 to 22 more deep passes per year.  It's also striking again how unbalanced the 2009-Denver offense was, even for McDaniels, when throwing the ball to the short left.  In 2007 McDaniels only threw to the short left 30% of the time.  In 2008, this number was 33%.  It's obvious he would like more balance, although I still believe he ought to head to the middle of the field more often given the value of these passes.

Josh McDaniels was recently quoted as saying (courtesy of Brian Shrout) this about Kyle Orton.:

I think the fact that he's got a great foundation, a great base of understanding of the terms and the things we ask him to do from a mental stand point, I think he'll be able to start running. Last year, it was kind of a walk, walk, maybe crawl first and then walk, and then start running . . .

I think this quote, when looked at within the context of the above data, says it all.  McDaniels, if we are to believe Kyle Orton is now ready to progress to the next level of this offense, is going to challenge defenses more often in the deep part of the field. Both with Cassel and with Orton, it appears as if McDaniels played to the ease and accuracy of throwing short passes to the left side (again, the easiest of throws for right-handers).  Expect 2010 to be different.  Those who want to find out if Orton can really throw deep are going to get their answer--for better or for worse.


The Count Goes On - A Brief Mention of the Shotgun

When I broke down the Denver passing game another interesting statistic emerged.  Denver's passing attack was more valuable when using the Shotgun.  This is typical with respect to most passing attacks in the NFL, but I wanted to show you the data anyway.  Here is what emerged:

PlayFormationCount  Average  
Pass Shotgun 357 0.369
Pass Under Center 191 0.155
Run  Overall  423  0.093
Run Shotgun 63 0.034

 

While passing out of the shotgun, Denver's passing attack was over 2 times more valuable than under center.  However, I also threw in the data for running out of the shotgun formation as well.  That's because it gives you a sense for just how often Denver chose to run out of the shotgun and how poorly they really did.  

McDaniels likes to run almost 50% of his plays out of the shotgun.  The fact that Denver struggled to run out of this formation speaks again for the need to draft and stockpile power-running linemen.  Running out of the shotgun isn't for lightweights.  It's for very large men with tribal tattoos, large biceps, and who live in Moscow, Idaho (oops, I just gave you my mock draft in one sentence).  


Eddie Royal - Space Oddity

Two weeks ago, I wrote a long piece on Brandon Marshall, Tony Scheffler, and the other wide receivers.  You can access that piece here, so there's no need to go over the data again.   However, your those that want to see the big picture, here are the expected points values of the Denver receiving corp:

Play ReceiverCount  Average PlayReceiverCount  Average 
Pass Brandon Marshall 148 0.509 Pass Brandon Stokley 31 0.805
Pass Eddie Royal 77 0.044 Pass Knowshon Moreno 37 0.243
Pass Jabar Gaffney 85 0.536 Pass Correll Buckhalter 38 0.270
Pass Tony Scheffler 48 0.585 Pass  Peyton Hillis 6 -0.112
Pass Daniel Graham 41 0.438 Pass Brandon Llyod 17 0.327


Royal's expected points value is barely above zero.  Much has been speculated about Royal and why this is.  Perhaps the best treatise on the subject was written recently by our own Emmett Smith here.  It's worth a re-read, or if you haven't read it, it's probably as comprehensive a look at Royal as you are going to find anywhere.  As the good doctor points out, Royal has suffered from some confidence issues and last year, his percentage of balls-caught slipped to 53% from a masterful 71% in 2008.   This is imminently fixable.   

Some of us have surmised that the return game has been exhausting Royal and taking away from his focus at wide receiver. There is probably some truth to that.  Others have pointed out that, with the arrival and number of targets that Jabar Gaffney received in 2009, there simply wasn't that many opportunities.  There's truth in this as well.  According to Pro Football Focus, Royal was targeted 127 times in 2008.  Imagine you're Eddie Royal and in 2009, the number of times the team looks your way drops to 77.  And Brandon Marshall wanted to complain?  Even if Royal catches the same percentage as he did in 2008, he still only ends up with 54 catches.  Others have lamented that Royal has been having difficulties with press coverage, and, therefore, has been less effective.  This is where I disagree.  

Eddie Royal didn't suddenly lose his 4.3 speed.  He didn't suddenly forget how to run crisp routes.  And he sure as David Bowie didn't forget how to get open off the line of scrimmage.  I went back to the NFL Rewind tapes and I didn't find that Royal had any more or less trouble getting off the line than he did in 2008, when he caught 91 balls.  If someone has proof of Royal being dominated consistently by cornerbacks in bump-and-run, I'd love to see it.  Perhaps I'll switch to listening to country music for being wrong.  But I'm afraid such video evidence doesn't exist.  

I certainly don't need to remind Broncos fans that this is the same guy who Mike Shanahan said was the best receiver in his draft class at beating press coverage.  And I don't need to mention how he turned an a certain Raiders cornerback into a soft pretzel in his rookie debut.

Josh McDaniels recently weighed in on Royal (Courtesy of Emmett Smith): 

"Absolutely, I know that I'm frustrated and disappointed that we couldn't do more in terms of using (WR) Eddie Royal. I've been asked that question a bunch. I know Eddie is frustrated with it, too. I'm not happy with that, and I don't want that to be the case. That's not stereotypical of Eddie this year. We're going to work hard to try to fix that and get that to change dramatically going into next season."

So if Royal is the same guy, what's the difference between 2008 and 2009?   And just how should McDaniels utilize Royal more productively.  The simply answer, I believe, is in the numbers.  And if McDaniels looks at them closely, we'll see a different Eddie Royal in 2010.

So what do the numbers say? Here are Royal's expected point values both by direction and by down in 2009:

Eddie Royal        
Average Points - Direction  Direction  Count Average    Average Points - Down  Down Count  Average 
Pass Short Left 28 0.291   Pass 1 19 0.302
Pass Short Middle 7 -0.536   Pass 2 31 0.143
Pass Short Right 34 -0.016   Pass 3 27 -0.251
Pass Deep Left 5 0.260   Pass 4 0 .000
Pass Deep Middle 1 -0.599   Total Points      
Pass Deep Right 2 -0.569   ER 1 -0.99 Running
Pass Shotgun 50 0.005   ER 77 3.421 Receiving

 

Let's begin with the obvious.  Even with some of the smaller samples sizes, throwing the ball to Royal on third down or to the middle or the right side of the field was the equivalent to losing points for the Broncos last season.  Royal had his highest value on 1st down and when the ball was thrown to him on the short left of the field.  In many ways, he was simply a victim of a larger trend in the Broncos passing game (and that of Kyle Orton), which is a lower expected points value of passing to the right side.  

But what strikes me even more about this data is the lack of touches in the middle for Royal in general.  He was targeted only 7 times all year!  It's obvious that when Royal was the primary receiver in a given formation, the routes rarely called for him to run over the middle.  To drive this point home even further, consider that Brandon Marshall, Jabar Gaffney, Daniel Graham, Tony Scheffler, and Brandon Stokley were all targeted more often than Royal over the short middle of the field.  Even Buckhalter and Moreno were targeted 6 times apiece.  

I find this statistic disconcerning, as I'm sure does Josh McDaniels.  Royal was supposedly going to be utilized much like Wes Welker out of the slot in New England.  Eddie Royal is a guy that the Broncos trusted with their return game, a guy who can create space in a phone booth, a guy who, in 2008, made a ton of plays over the middle of the field out of the slot, and he is only targeted 7 times all year?  Given that the some of highest expected points value from the Broncos passing game came from passes over the short middle, it would seem the Broncos probably under-or-mis-utilized Royal in this area.  

I fully expect to see Josh McDaniels remedy this in 2010 if he has seen this data.  We're likely to see Royal in many more crossing or delayed routes over the middle in 2010.  This will help Eddie and this will help Denver.  

As always, I invite your perspective on this data.  I'm always intrigued by two things.  First, that there continues to be a large and receptive audience here at MHR for statistical-based analysis (and 80s music).  Second, that people see the data in different ways than I do.  But I welcome this.

Next week, I hope to begin taking a look at the defense through the lens of expected points values.  We'll see you there.  But one thing.  Could you lose the space suit?

Comment 112 comments  |  25 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Great piece TJ....always love your stuff my friend!

Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.

by boydy2669 on Feb 17, 2010 7:46 AM MST reply actions  

Boydy, thanks for sludging through this thicker-than-Orange-soda piece

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 9:38 AM MST up reply actions  

Awesome job TJ

So do you think Royal is better suited to the slot or on the outside? Based on your analysis, there is nothing wrong with him as a number two receiver if only the Broncos would throw the guy the ball. Does this mean ridding of Brandon Marshall is an okay thing? Obviously Royal can be productive as we have all seen, so if Marshall is gone can Royal really flourish or is he best suited as a 2/3 receiver?

If I were to come to a conclusion based on this article, I would say that it is in the Broncos’ best interests to sell Marshall high and simply throw Eddie Royal the ball. Is that off base?

by Sayre Bedinger on Feb 17, 2010 7:55 AM MST reply actions   1 recs

Sayre, the slot for sure. For a few reasons I didn't get into much, but which Sharpe as a Tack mentions below.

But let’s assume for the sake of this discussion, that Royal has struggled a bit off the line. Here are a few reasons why the slot would be ideal for him:

1) Being in the slot allows him space off the line already from the beginning of the play. You see the Pats successfully do this with Welker a lot. The space is already created from the nature of the slog itself

2) On the quick throw and catch, he’d be getting the ball with a little space already, which would then allow him to utilize his punt returner skills to get better YACs.

Regarding you last point, that’s the crux, eh? I would say I’m an advocate of this approach, which related to my previous article on Marshall and Scheffler:

1) Keep Marshall but don’t overpay for this value. Make sure his payroll number is near that of his overall contribution to the annual expected points value of the team.

2) Utilize Royal in the manner in which I describe and more often in the slot. Also, and I mentioned this before, utilize Royal and Marshall in the running game.

3) Consider Bryant anyway. I know this is counter-intuitive, but if we don’t move down or can’t move down, why not get this guy at 11? Then you would have Marshall, Bryant and Eddie in the slot. And Gaffney in the 4-WR sets? Freakin’ animalistic, dude. Can you think of a more powerful combination? Bryant would force the slot to become even more of a powerful option with Royal. By the way, I’m still advocating stocking up on huge men and often if we can move down. I still think we should use the blueprint that the Cowboys of the 90s used. I should do a piece on this actually. Of course, as you know, I’m not the smartest draft guy in the world.

4) Utilize the dump off passes to the backs more often. I should have spent more time on this point. They have high value and I think that McD was forced more often than he wanted to use them as an extra blocker in shotgun.

Overall, Jabar Gaffney had a few years on Royal in this offense and I think Orton knew this too. I think Kyle (not on purpose) tended to target Gaffney more often and Gaffney certainly got more snaps:

Marshall: 864
Gaffney: 757
Royal: 583

If we all agree Royal’s first season wasn’t a fluke, he’s got to be on the field more often.

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 10:07 AM MST up reply actions  

Great post

I’m big on Bryant myself but the Marshall factor weighs on me as well. The Marshall factor being if Dez Bryant is making more money then Marsh how does he handle that?

You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?

You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen

by johnnystarr on Feb 17, 2010 3:02 PM MST up reply actions  

I don't see that as a possibility

Marshall will probably be either re-signed or traded before the draft.

by Sayre Bedinger on Feb 17, 2010 3:09 PM MST up reply actions  

Gotta love the definitive stand, Sayre

just kidding

I’m in the same spot. He’ll either be here or he won’t. :)

We live in an age when instant gratification isn't fast enough

by Brian Shrout on Feb 17, 2010 3:31 PM MST up reply actions   1 recs

this coinsides with info about the lack of use of Eddie Royal. And maybe small mistakes made by coach McD by focusing on ‘his’ proven vets. Just a couple of his remarks about players that could have been used. But hey, he was a rookie coach trying to impress.

by DLMyers on Feb 17, 2010 10:08 AM MST up reply actions  

Great post. Classic music.

Perhaps a little Tom’s Diner by Suzanne Vega next?

Or should that be Jedi’s Diner?

All Ready!

by precisiontint on Feb 17, 2010 8:05 AM MST reply actions  

Vega, nice.

World Before Columbus is my favorite of hers…

Precision in thought, concision in style, decision in life.

"That's MR.Styg..."

by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 17, 2010 12:33 PM MST up reply actions  

as long as we are providing links....

a rare instance of live backup on this song.

Precision in thought, concision in style, decision in life.

"That's MR.Styg..."

by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 17, 2010 10:07 PM MST up reply actions  

very nice ty!

Haven’t heard enough of this broad…

by Whidbey Bronco on Feb 18, 2010 12:25 AM MST up reply actions  

Fascinating!

I think we can all take something away from this. In any case, it is information that we must at least have to answer for if we disagree with. Great job!

Question: I was uncomfortable with this method when we started it back in February last year, and now it’s come to a bit of a head for me. That method is comparing McDaniels’s previous years as OC and coming up with some conclusion regarding his methods on the Broncos as HC. First, there are the restrictions from OC to HC — we don’t know how much of the Pats’ playcalling BB dictated. Second, there is the change in personnel — all the more significant in an “amoeba” offense that utilizes situational mismatches. Finally, it doesn’t account for learning. For example, when you say

It’s clear that McDaniels, given his druthers, would prefer to pass the ball deep more often than he did in 2009

I might raise the question of whether or not his offensive philosophy is moving away from the deep ball, and not just because of personnel concerns.

Just a few thoughts.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

by Sharpe as a Tack on Feb 17, 2010 8:07 AM MST reply actions  

Absolutely

We speak of sample size quite a bit, and in the case of McD we have no basis of comparison to his past performance as a HC and thus a small sample size. We can make assumptions based on his years as OC but again those should be taken with a grain of salt. Truth is we’ll never know to what extent the offense in New England was McD’s. Year 2 in the McD project will be telling and this time next year we should all have a more accurate picture of his tendencies as a coach.

by T.Dot_Bronco on Feb 17, 2010 8:24 AM MST up reply actions  

I've a minor nit with this statement too...
t’s clear that McDaniels, given his druthers, would prefer to pass the ball deep more often than he did in 2009.

I’d trot out the p-values here, TJ. In my opinion, there is no statistically significant difference between the 15% of 2008 & 2009 and the 17% of 2007. That is just minor variation. In fact, if one of my researchers brought me in the context of measured response to a drug, I’d say there was no difference between any of the measurements (and would in fact go so far as to proclaim the sample responses identical).

by DCJ on Feb 17, 2010 8:33 AM MST up reply actions  

DCJ, thanks for catching this. I can cede this, surely.

No problem. I can accept this minor statistical anomaly. Especially when putting this together so quickly. The statement is likely true from a non-statistical standpoint, given the points value of deep passes, so I’m good with the statement.

What I’m uncomfortable with is that I didn’t catch this!!! Thanks for getting it. I’ll be sure to quickly check my p-values when I make such statements next time.

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 8:53 AM MST up reply actions  

Sharpe, good criticism of the data.

From my research (with a few beers), it seemed from all of the information, Bill let McDaniels pretty free to do what he wanted. Of course, we’ll really never know as T.Dot mentions rightly.

When I put in the quote from McDaniels (courtesy of my friend Brian Shrout), it appeared as if McDaniels was saying, “next year, we’re letting loose the hounds.”

And good point regarding the amoeba philosophy. I think an interesting question would be then, assuming that McDaniels would rather stretch the ball a little more than he has, do we have the personnel to pull this off? What is your take on this?

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 9:04 AM MST up reply actions  

All indications point to

McDaniels having had a significant degree of freedom, yes.

I read the same thing as you and Brian did into McDaniels’ quote. It certainly leads one to think that McDaniels likes to air it out, beers or no beers!

I do not think we have the personnel right now, no. I would like to see a WR who is not just blazing fast, but who also is good at jump balls, catching in traffic, and creating separation at the line of scrimmage — a Larry Fitzgerald-type. I would also like to see a QB who is very accurate throwing deep balls — as much of a defender as I am of Orton’s arm, I freely admit that his deep accuracy leaves a good bit to be desired. We have the personnel to adequately stretch the field, but we do not have the personnel to make that a hallmark or a signature of ours.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

by Sharpe as a Tack on Feb 17, 2010 9:53 AM MST up reply actions  

The answer is C

Wonderful TJ

Ashes to ashes, fun to funky
We know the “Dude”
is a Broncos Junky.

Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks

by KaptainKirk on Feb 17, 2010 8:07 AM MST reply actions  

Kaptain, you passed!!!!! I hear Al Davis could use a few good men:-)!

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 10:13 AM MST up reply actions  

Awesome man....thank you for raising my statistical awareness!

Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.

The guy formerly known as ZAPPA

by Tim Lynch on Feb 17, 2010 8:22 AM MST reply actions  

Mr. Lynch, my wish is your command:-)

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 10:14 AM MST up reply actions  

Great piece TJ

I love the analysis you do on players and trends.

I rec’d it, though I may have to you a bit for calling country music a punishment. ;-p

We live in an age when instant gratification isn't fast enough

by Brian Shrout on Feb 17, 2010 8:26 AM MST reply actions  

Ha! Brian, I'll tell you that I do enjoy me some country, but I couldn't think of anything funny at 1am

when I was putting that line together.

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 10:14 AM MST up reply actions  

LOL

We live in an age when instant gratification isn't fast enough

by Brian Shrout on Feb 17, 2010 10:43 AM MST up reply actions  

*oops forgot the word "ding"

as in “ding you” who knows where “have to you” came from

We live in an age when instant gratification isn't fast enough

by Brian Shrout on Feb 17, 2010 10:43 AM MST up reply actions  

TJ

awesome stuff again. You set the bar high my friend with your statistical prowess and rapiers wit.

by T.Dot_Bronco on Feb 17, 2010 8:26 AM MST reply actions  

Thanks, my friend.

Stats-geeks of the world unite!

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 9:05 AM MST up reply actions  

Dang

Sorry I missed the last meeting. I was busy crunching numbers.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

by Sharpe as a Tack on Feb 17, 2010 9:53 AM MST up reply actions  

As one of the 'Eddie can't beat press' voices...

…I have to admit that I don’t have rewind— don’t have the attention span for rewind, probably. I just trust my eyes. What I’ve consistently observed with Royal is that he eats up off coverages (an example is his very nice early game against Pittsburgh) and generally disappears when coverages are more aggressive. His debut against Oakland had a lot to do with a very cocky DeAngelo Hall thinking he had the quick to play Eddie off-man. The Raiders basically shut Royal down with the aggressive and physical Chris Johnson later in the season— they, in fact, bragged about how they observed this weakness in Royal’s game…hit him in the mouth, get in his face, and he loses his vinegar a little. After his debut against Oakland, he had the occasional explosive play that skewed his stat line in some games, but settled into a guy that often struggled to average better than 9 YpC. Probably more than any other Bronco, he benefited from a strong armed, dart throwing QB that could force him the ball and get it to him even when he failed to generate much room off the LoS.

I like Eddie Royal, and don’t view the observation that he’d be better suited in the slot as an insult. Even if the statement that he can’t beat press is an exaggeration, it doesn’t change the fact that he seems to excel when a little wiggle room is either given to him by the defense or generated schematically. The way I see it, I guess, is that even if he might be serviceable outside, he could be potentially deadly if he is consistently put in situations that play to his strengths. He is better with room than he is when he has to go to war with his defender.

Not trying to be confrontational here, just explaining that argument from the other perspective.

Beyond that, thanks for another revealing piece.

"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-- Oscar Wilde

by PredominantlyOrange on Feb 17, 2010 8:27 AM MST reply actions  

PO, No offense taken. I know I am not the only voice out there in Bronco Land.

I’d agree that Royal’s game isn’t the same as Marshall’s. He’s a more reserved guy and has struggled with some confidence issues as Emmett alluded to. I think given that Royal is also a very smart player, sometimes these guys can “overthink” and this can lead to issues that you describe.

Regarding the 9.8 yards per catch. This is a good stat. Welker is also a guy that only averages about 10 yards per catch as well. All the more reason that….

….Your 2nd paragraph is golden. If I would have done a better job, I would have explained how the slot position is a good fit for someone that works in this 5-10 yard-wiggle zone. I think Eddie is IDEAL for the slot and can take some of the Stokley catches we saw last year and turn them into TDS.

Good stuff, PO. I think going to war is when you go to Marshall, however, I think Eddie can be a Welker Clone. I really do.

I admit I’m slightly biased towards Eddie, though.

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 9:11 AM MST up reply actions  

We agree completely on the Welker Clone thing.

He could be a rich man’s Welker, IMO. And yes, 9.8 is a nice slot average. It isn’t, however, reflective of an explosive outside guy. His down field production never matched the hype leading up to the 2009 season. I think he’s been outside for two reasons: the presence of Stokely— widely described as one of the best slot guys ever— and because pre-Gaffney, there wasn’t a better option on the roster. He did a respectable job, but he can be a star inside, IMO.

"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-- Oscar Wilde

by PredominantlyOrange on Feb 17, 2010 10:13 AM MST up reply actions  

Excellent! Thanks for satisfying my stat. and Broncos fix yet again.

With all the mock drafts floating around, I can’t imagine a bigger need for us than Guard and Center.

by RalphW on Feb 17, 2010 8:47 AM MST reply actions  

Anytime, my friend. Anytime.

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 9:11 AM MST up reply actions  

+1

That was damn fast for the full version….loved it!

"Brandon Marshall will be a happy BRONCO WR in 2010"
Broncotodd - 2009

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."
John Adams

by Broncotodd on Feb 17, 2010 9:17 AM MST up reply actions  

HT, couldn't have said it any better!!

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 10:12 AM MST up reply actions  

Nicely done!

I’m posting a link to original song video below btw.

There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants country, and damned proud of it.

by underdog on Feb 17, 2010 11:39 AM MST up reply actions  

wow

“give my guy a chance”…then nothing more….

(goosebumps)

Precision in thought, concision in style, decision in life.

"That's MR.Styg..."

by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 17, 2010 12:37 PM MST up reply actions  

perfect Steve, perfect

"A great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do" Walter Gagenot
"Hope sees the invisible, feels the intangible and achieves the impossible."

by bchiper on Feb 18, 2010 1:37 PM MST up reply actions  

TJ

Consider subbing this URL for the Shiny Toy Guns version. Much better link IMO.

Live, but with studio quality. Plus has that science fiction “sexy robot” appeal. lol

Formerly known as Hoosierteacher or just HT.

"I presume that all of you here think me worthy of pity. But Great God, when I think I was on the point of doing nothing, I consider myself worthy of envy." Jean Valjean, Hugo's Les Miserables

by Steve Nichols on Feb 17, 2010 8:58 AM MST reply actions  

Oops... forgot link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGultrg7l0I

Formerly known as Hoosierteacher or just HT.

"I presume that all of you here think me worthy of pity. But Great God, when I think I was on the point of doing nothing, I consider myself worthy of envy." Jean Valjean, Hugo's Les Miserables

by Steve Nichols on Feb 17, 2010 8:58 AM MST up reply actions  

Steve, got it. Linked it!

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 9:12 AM MST up reply actions  

Brothers from another mother LOL

I don’t know what it is, but the humor and bottom line analysis from the stats are identical…… and I also have an affinity for 80’s music…..love to play it really loud and look foolish driving down the road :P

I still think we need to throw to our backs alot more. :)

"Brandon Marshall will be a happy BRONCO WR in 2010"
Broncotodd - 2009

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."
John Adams

by Broncotodd on Feb 17, 2010 9:21 AM MST reply actions  

Those of us old guys that still listen to 80s music...

..are more prone to “throw out our backs” than to throw TO our backs.

lol

Formerly known as Hoosierteacher or just HT.

"I presume that all of you here think me worthy of pity. But Great God, when I think I was on the point of doing nothing, I consider myself worthy of envy." Jean Valjean, Hugo's Les Miserables

by Steve Nichols on Feb 17, 2010 10:21 AM MST up reply actions  

Too funny...

and oh so accurate :)

"Brandon Marshall will be a happy BRONCO WR in 2010"
Broncotodd - 2009

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."
John Adams

by Broncotodd on Feb 18, 2010 9:01 AM MST up reply actions  

Todd, I'm not an exclusive 80s guy, but...

That decade had new wave and glam metal. What more do you want, man?

I haven’t even touched on the depths of Dokken, Pretty-Boy Floyd, Warrant, Vixen, etc.

Nor have I even begun to tap the depths of new wave music.

Thanks for reading my friend!

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 11:22 AM MST up reply actions  

From classical to current, I like all music...

well, accept rap….just can’t get into it.

Love the theme and I find myself singing the songs in my head after each post :P

"Brandon Marshall will be a happy BRONCO WR in 2010"
Broncotodd - 2009

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."
John Adams

by Broncotodd on Feb 18, 2010 9:02 AM MST up reply actions  

Interesting, but maybe a bit unfair

Amazing statistical workup, but I’m just wondering about the data. Comparing Orton’s first year in the Broncos system to one of Mannings best years probably is unfair. Since you said you will do all QBs in 2009, can you apply your impressive skills to comparing something on a more apples to apples basis, like Orton’s first year with the Broncos to other similar situations, maybe Matt Schaub’s first year with the Texans, Cassel’s first year with the Chiefs, Drew Brees first year with the Saints, and other short term veterans who went to new teams? Also, I think Orton’s throwing to the left had more to do with Brandon Marshall being there than any ability to throw left vs. middle or right. Its about matchups, as McDaniels said more than once, and BM had better matchups than anyone else. But you are right, matchups aside, the Broncos need to find a way to spread the ball around better. Just don’t lay it all on Orton for doing what he was told and going with the best matchup. I think McDaniels is a good coach, but the lack of performance from Royal and Hillis is all on McDaniels, not the players. He has to find a way to get them more involved.

by opinion8r on Feb 17, 2010 9:35 AM MST reply actions  

op8, fair point

I really did feel a little bit bad about bringing up Manning’s year. But I did want show some differences, to be sure.

I think you are right. I could do a lot better by showing these comparisons between years—specifically, Cassel. Extremely good idea. I like all of your suggestions, actually.

Regarding the last point, I agree. Targeting Royal only 7 times all year is criminal.

Hillis, man. I don’t know what to say about that. I am convincing, although I don’t have much evidence because there isn’t enough of a sample, that Hillis wasn’t getting the job done with respect to pass blocking. As you know, blocking for a running back is critical when you run the shotgun as much as McDaniels does. I personally hope he stays and I hope they utilize him in place of Lamont Jordan.

"But I hate the way our identity has changed..Kyle Orton might not be the flashiest quarterback, but the guy is a winner, and that formula worked for us. I hate to say it, but that’s the truth." --Brian Urlacher

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 10:12 AM MST up reply actions  

Yes TJ, you are indeed convincing

(and I DO think there is enough evidence). Even so, it does seem a bit bold and fresh of you to proclaim so yourself.
:)

by warmick on Feb 17, 2010 11:58 AM MST up reply actions  

"Unfair" has nothing to do with it.

To put Orton’s performance in perspective, it makes sense to examine how it compares to that of a really good quarterback. There’s a middle school quarterback playing somewhere right now, who is going to be as good or better an NFL player than any who has ever played the game. If you were going to play him in the NFL right now, however, he would be the worst NFL quarterback ever seen. There is nothing "unfair" about making that observation. It is merely a matter of exploring a player’s current standing relative to what it takes to be a top quarterback in the NFL.

As for your observation about the success in throwing to the right, I totally agree: It should surprise nobody that The Broncos threw most often and with the best results to their best receiver.

by warmick on Feb 17, 2010 11:31 AM MST up reply actions  

Concerning the throws to the left & Marshall

Your contention that the majority of throws were to the left because that’s where Marshall lines up makes sense if it is indeed true that BMarsh lines up on the left for the majority of plays. I honestly don’t know if he does or doesn’t but I do know that Marshall isn’t confined to the left side of the offense. From recollection alone I think that he lined up plenty of times on the right as well. As to the majority of the time (left vs right) I couldn’t tell you.

There is also the fact that on crossing patterns a receiver could be initially lined up on the left and make a catch on the right side of the field (or vise versa). This needs to be taken into consideration as well when considering this question.

Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds. - Albert Einstein

Once we accept our limits, we go beyond them. - Albert Einstein

by c_style on Feb 17, 2010 4:58 PM MST up reply actions  

Very good point

There’s a hole in the data there.

Don't say rebuild - say reload...

by Doc Bear on Feb 17, 2010 6:14 PM MST up reply actions  

My one beef with Orton (and why it hurt Royal)

Great article. You had one comment that got me thinking: "Royal has suffered from some confidence issues and last year, his percentage of balls-caught slipped to 53% from a masterful 71% in 2008. " I don’t think this is a confidence issue. Rather, I think that the one place where Orton is below average is putting the ball right “on the money”. So many passes seemed to be a little high, a little low, a little ahead, a little behind. On the short timing routes for Royal, those little miscues mean he is reaching, stutter stepping, or the defender is just getting a finger in the way of the pass. Or the worst for Royal, is he is having to slow up and then gets clobbered by the defender. I think this is what caused the slip in catches-per-target percentage. It is not as pronounced with B Marsh due to his huge wing span, big body and huge hands. Anyone have the patience to watch all of the passes and count what percentage were sort of on target, but not really?

(By the way, watch Manning, and notice how is receivers never break stride for a catch. That is one of the differences of “great” vs. “average” in my opinion.)

by Bradoncadonc on Feb 17, 2010 10:28 AM MST reply actions   2 recs

There is no doubt...

…that Orton and Royal struggled to get in sync.

"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-- Oscar Wilde

by PredominantlyOrange on Feb 17, 2010 10:46 AM MST up reply actions  

That's certainly one way to interpret this data.

A well-put-together response, Brad. Another reason to get him into the slot more often. He’ll have this space immediately.

I admit I did not watch the passes to that great of detail to do an account of how close each of the passes actually were. However, this would be quite a stat. Subjective, but quite a stat to be sure.

I am in agreement that Orton needs to take it up a notch this year. Absolutely. In many ways, his fate will be that of McDaniels. They are tied together whether they want to be or not.

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 11:19 AM MST up reply actions  

Lots of good points

Eddie’s history with problems defeating press is a matter of history, and I’ll hold to what I still see on tape. But there’s a second, equally important issue, and I’ve realized that people tend to think that I’m talking about one or the other, rather than both. The issue is separation. This is not just getting off the line – it’s getting the defender out of your hip pocket at any point on the route. This leads to Brad’s point.

Brad’s point is accurate: Orton did have difficulty with getting his accuracy as regards Royal as good as both of them would prefer. It’s also true that Royal struggled more to make the catches than he has in the past, and it’s hard to support the belief that he doesn’t have a higher level of misses when his coverage is more aggressive. He’s not getting quite enough separation to handle the less perfect pass when the CB (or whoever) has a greater opportunity to interfere with the flight of the ball or the locus where it is snared. This created some problems in 2009 that were apparent almost from the beginning.

‘Kaptain’ Kirk Davis was kind enough to turn me onto a book by Timothy Gay, professor of physics, who has worked with NFL films, among others, explaining in physics terms what we see on the football field. Since the ‘window’ of opportunity on a pass – assuming a catchable radius of about 2.5 feet in radius, a 5 foot diameter (which is probably bigger than Eddie’s, since his arms aren’t quite as long as those of the example used in the text, Jerry Rice), you have a ‘window’ of .17 seconds, maximum.
Royal’s would be a little smaller – without the right measurements, I can’t work out the math perfectly but let’s assume that it’s close – say, .14-.15 seconds (which should be fairly close). With that small a window, the ability to have minute additions to the ‘field’ of separation is essential. It should also go toward realizing how small a change in Royal’s path to the ball is required (from the defender’s actions) to create an incompletion.

With regard to the Orton/Royal issue, that one is easier. Bill Walsh used to get in trouble with the league regarding ‘rumors’ that he and his QB/WRs were meeting secretly to practice, bypassing the regulations that were in place at that time as to how much practice you could ‘require’ of your players. They weren’t rumors, just facts. Montana and Rice, in particular, liked to violate those rules as much as possible. Given the shorter passes that are the beginnings of the system, the perfection required of the timing is incredible. Royal and Orton don’t have that down yet. Eddie needs to improve his game, Orton should do the same, neither has had a great chance to get used to the other and that will change this year.

This is a very interesting analysis. I’d be interested in further breakdowns of the matchups involved and in getting a better understanding of how much of this is taking what the Broncos were given, using Orton’s strengths (in 2008, the Bears had him throwing high numbers to the short right, despite his percentages being far better on the left) and the growing connection between Orton and Marshall, a connection that both have commented on. Brandon is better at going up and getting the ball – his physical strength and size play in here, as does his athleticism. That only means that Denver will have to work a little harder to get Royal into the game better.

At the beginning of 2008, Eddie used a couple of double moves in his route running that fooled everyone, but they didn’t come out that much in the later year and I didn’t see as much in 2009, perhaps partly because they take longer to unfold. It will be interesting to see how the Broncos solve this puzzle. Great article, TJ – Rec’d!

Don't say rebuild - say reload...

by Doc Bear on Feb 17, 2010 2:01 PM MST up reply actions   1 recs

If the players themselves volunteer to practice with each other, is it still against the rules?

I was thinking that these players if they were really serious about winning then they would bond together like brothers, not just show up when it is required. That’s the way I would be anyway…

by bfree2bronc on Feb 17, 2010 5:02 PM MST up reply actions  

It the time, it was against the rules

It was something about not forcing players to practice excessively. I guess no one ever told Brady, who needed his own key to the facility ;-). But the players ignored the rule often and Walsh sometimes came out to ‘observe’ and coached them.

I don’t know what that ruling is today. Kirk and Jeremy seem to keep good track of the rules – we should ask them.

Don't say rebuild - say reload...

by Doc Bear on Feb 17, 2010 6:27 PM MST up reply actions  

Em, as always, when you say something with this kind of prose, I'm not usually in a position

of having a lot more to say about the subject!

Great point on the double moves. Shanahan did use routes that took longer to develop and Eddie could use these types of double cuts. Great point. The system of McDaniels is not built on this type of timing. Ah, good point. All the more reason to put him in the slot and create the space initially.

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 6:09 PM MST up reply actions  

That's a great observation, Bradoncadonc

I hope, of course, it is wrong as it would kind of deflate hopes for some real improvements but it does seem like a very reasonable possibility.

by warmick on Feb 17, 2010 11:40 AM MST up reply actions  

Average vs great

If we are going to have that discussion then you might want to note that while great qbs are to put it right in the numbers, great receivers can make the catch, while some blame can be put on Orton, if Royal is as good as you think he is, then he would make the catch. Look at the great receivers, Marshall, Johnson, Fritzgerald, Moss, TO, all make the catches.

by Topher Doll on Feb 17, 2010 12:55 PM MST up reply actions  

You're right, md

If you have the interest in looking at the article that TJ linked to, it contained this:

Tough player, but will have some concentration lapses, along with a penchant for trapping the ball, leading to a share of dropped balls.
    Must do a better job extending for the ball, as he likes to let it into his body too often (has just adequate hands)…Good competitor, but will get frustrated when he can’t escape the jam to get into his route (lets that affect him for several plays, getting take out of his game).

The issue of catching too close to the body makes it easier to interfere with him at the moment of the catch. He has very strong hands – he may need to reach more and grab the ball. There were plays from 2009 that reflected that, although I didn’t keep track of each. since he also had some confidence problems, the second quote is also of some importance.

As I noted to TJ, neither of these really explains why he wasn’t targeted more – TJ has made a very good start to that. But as far as once he’s targeted, you’re right – he has to pull those in.

Don't say rebuild - say reload...

by Doc Bear on Feb 17, 2010 2:24 PM MST up reply actions  

Royal missed two games and was sharing snaps with gaffney . Josh also reduced his snaps due to special teams

Besides that he was just ineffective this year .

Gaffney takes Eddies snaps and he immediately is open 20 yards down field it seems every game .

Stoke gets in the game and is all over the underneath passes

Lloyd comes in at the end of the season and is open all over the place.

Apparently the only person who couldnt catch Ortons passes was Eddie .

Eddie got his bell run on those crossing routes at the start of the season and he really was never the same .

I also believe that he was upset at how Marshall was treated after he returned to the team..

Eddie shows up and works extra hard doing all the right things . Marshall is a total goofball.After the attention and compliments the coach paid him Eddie is thinking hes gonna be the man but by game 3 is an afterthought . I really believe he was more affected by this then he let on because hes a team player but underneath you know he had to be thinking he was gonna get the Welker role in this offseason.

by Hoopforia on Feb 17, 2010 10:18 PM MST up reply actions  

finally somebody makes the point nobody here wants to...

Orton’s accuracy on the short throws as well as the deep throws …it hurt us. There’s really no arguing this.

Yes KO should improve this year. With improved play from our line/run game, as well as his further understanding of McD’s offense? He could improve dramatically. But his accuracy will always be an issue.

Every QB has his flaws.

by Whidbey Bronco on Feb 17, 2010 2:20 PM MST up reply actions  

Great work, as always, Dude.

When Orton throws deep to the left
He takes chunks of yards like a theft
The defenses cry
With the ball in the sky
It’s quite sad when they feel so bereft

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bereft

Quick clarification question: To qualify as a “short” or “deep” pass, what is the cutoff? Most times it is greater than or less than 20 yards, but I was just wondering if the scale is different.

Awesome job. I can’t wait until next season. Then we can have just as much fun comparing 2010 to 2009 to see if McD changed playcalling and assignments to complement the strengths of his players more efficiently.

If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6

by Troy Hufford on Feb 17, 2010 10:43 AM MST reply actions  

KB, nice limerick my friend.

The cut off is 15 yards.

So 14 yards or less: Short
15 yards or more: Deep

I am thinking I should actually break this down by the middle as well, but I’m still debating that. What do you think?

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 11:20 AM MST up reply actions  

It would give us a more detailed idea of what passing zones are more efficient for a player.

It’s up to you, though. This piece is already awesome. I’m not sure that the data would show anything differently, though, even if you did add a middle zone. I guess it would depend on where you placed your boundaries. If your parameters were < 10 (or 15) yards, 10(15) – 20(25) yards, 20(25) + yards, it would still give basically the same overall conclusion that you gave with only a short and deep zone. Adding a middle zone would be a bit more detailed and alter the expected point totals a little bit for each category you’ve already shown, but I don’t think that your overall conclusions would be about the same.

I’d think of this like rounding. If you have 3.2143 and rounded to 2 decimal places instead of 1, you’d have 3.21 instead of 3.2. Both answers are pretty close to the original number, especially you really only needed a whole number in the first place, but to draw a safe conclusion about that number, is it really necessary to carry it out to 2 decimal places instead of 1? As an engineering student, I’d say yes (if it isn’t exact, it isn’t right)(or for math classes, get it to 8 significan digits), but for the overall understanding of the passing zones you’ve already indicated in your post, I don’t think it is necessary in this case.

Great post, TJ. It’s perfect the way it is.

If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6

by Troy Hufford on Feb 17, 2010 11:47 AM MST up reply actions  

I realize it would be a hellacious amount of work

but a middle zone might be helpful since I’ve heard McDaniels’ offense described as using the mid-range pass to set up both the run and the deep passing game.

Just what you needed, someone advocating additional work, huh? ;-p

We live in an age when instant gratification isn't fast enough

by Brian Shrout on Feb 17, 2010 12:53 PM MST up reply actions  

So, now you have one yes and one no.

Well, a split decision goes to you. lol. What say you?

If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6

by Troy Hufford on Feb 17, 2010 1:02 PM MST up reply actions  

Major Tom video

Peter Schilling’s Major Tom

As one who came of age in the 80s I have a soft spot for this song and many other new wave classics.

So thanks for bringing that up.

But more importantly, thanks for another piece of required reading for any Broncos fan.

There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants country, and damned proud of it.

by underdog on Feb 17, 2010 11:41 AM MST reply actions  

Thanks for the post Dude!

I love the expected points value system!

It would be nice to see Royal step fully back into the receiving role, and still run back a touchdown on a kick/punt return at least once a season (so rotate him in as returner at least a couple times a game)…. But I have a feeling that it will be possible that we don’t see him doing any returns come next season… Only time will tell, but my gut tells me on this, he’ll either be more of one than the other – either full-time return man, with some receiving snaps on the side, or full-time receiver and someone else will step into the full time return man role (perhaps a new draftee, or McKinley, as I think the Phonz will be close to starting on D)… Again, I can’t wait to find out!

First team to three consecutive SB wins!!!! and then some, right? I think four and someone else oughtta have a 'fair' shot ( =

by PearlJamBroncoGFunk on Feb 17, 2010 12:20 PM MST reply actions  

Great piece indeed! TJ

We can all agree on one thing…And it doesn’t end up on a stat sheet. Eddie Royal just like the guy carrying the Gatoraid bottle was on a learning curve process. Just like the rest of the players and coaches. This season will be a more accurate measure of the players performance. In McDaniels pursuance of evaluating every players weaknesses and strong points, he somehow dropped the ball with Royal. Eddie was used in the slot formation at the Redskins game on a couple of plays. Mostly on the left and one for a 1st down called back because of Kuper’s dumb penalty. (ineligible receiver).

There is no doubting Royals ability to gain space between himself and the defender, he certainly can do this and do it good, but as we all know, even in football it takes two to tangle. Why Kyle and Eddie didn’t have a close relationship is baffling to me and a mystery even to this day. I don’t very seriously that Eddies duties as the return guy had any affect on his receiving game. The answer to the mystery lies somewhere between Eddie, Kyle and McDaniels. Those three will have to figure it out and get on board with each other.

by bfree2bronc on Feb 17, 2010 1:23 PM MST reply actions  

bfree, I agree with that point

This year will be a better gauge for several players:

1) Royal
2) Orton
3) Moreno
4) Hillis (if he’s truly here)

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 6:03 PM MST up reply actions  

Great piece! Thanks for the insight TJ!

Last year, I took Eddie Royal in my fantasy draft. His performances were giving me headaches left and right. I think I might take a risk on him next year and hopefully things pan out. If they don’t…oh well. Thanks again for the post TJ and Rec’d! :)

"When you put on that jersey, the name on the front is more important than the name on the back." - "Miracle".

"Winning means you're willing to go longer, work harder, and give more than anyone else." - Vince Lombardi.

by broncoholic on Feb 17, 2010 2:00 PM MST reply actions  

Broncoholic, think about this, man:

Next year you’ll be able to get him in the very late rounds in most leagues, possibly as a FA post draft. The potential return for the value is worth this in my opinion.

As always, thanks for the rec! I always appreciate them. Makes me continue to want to do the highest quality work I can do.

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 6:01 PM MST up reply actions  

how about this song?

And I think it’s gonna be a long, long time
before trade time brings ‘round again to find
he’s not the man we thought he was at home…
oh no, no, no….

He’s got a ROCKET ARRRRRRRRRRRMMMMMM
Burning out his fuse out there, alone.
He’s got a ROCKET ARRRRRRMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Burning out his fuse out there, alone!

Guess who its about?

by poorboywilly on Feb 17, 2010 2:59 PM MST reply actions  

He has the same initials as John Candy?

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 6:00 PM MST up reply actions  

Jackie Chan?

If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6

by Troy Hufford on Feb 17, 2010 8:23 PM MST up reply actions  

Jenny Craig?

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 10:00 PM MST up reply actions  

James Caan?

Precision in thought, concision in style, decision in life.

"That's MR.Styg..."

by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 17, 2010 10:14 PM MST up reply actions  

John Cleese?

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 11:21 PM MST up reply actions  

Jacques Chirac?

Precision in thought, concision in style, decision in life.

"That's MR.Styg..."

by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 17, 2010 11:48 PM MST up reply actions  

Jesus Christ?

Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds. - Albert Einstein

Once we accept our limits, we go beyond them. - Albert Einstein

by c_style on Feb 19, 2010 2:35 PM MST up reply actions  

Rec'd

Eddie is my favorite player too! Great job, and I think you have some very valid points. As you can see by my signature, I agree that we will see a different Eddie next year.

Eddie Royal will have a breakout season in 2010. Count on it.

by stedtfeld on Feb 17, 2010 3:12 PM MST reply actions  

Haha me neither

it won’t though

Eddie Royal will have a breakout season in 2010. Count on it.

by stedtfeld on Feb 17, 2010 6:02 PM MST up reply actions  

Dude I aced your Quiz

I wonder how Ryan Harris’ injury contributed to having to throw to the left side of the field so often. I guess the answer to this question would solve the mystery of whether so many receptions on that side of the field were by design or due to a lack of adequate pass protection from the RT.

"All credibility, all good conscience, all evidence of truth come only from the senses." Friedrich Nietzsche

by Horsepower on Feb 17, 2010 4:10 PM MST reply actions  

HP, not a bad point.

I suspect the injury to Harris would affect the drops (3 or 5 or 7) more than the side of the field, but I’m not saying this couldn’t be a factor.

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 5:58 PM MST up reply actions  

Tht is a good point

The TE on that side was often kept in to block. Polumbus just didn’t hold up, sadly. Scratch one receiving option. You know, that’s the only place that stat work requires access to things like film – the good kind, that we don’t have access to yet. We need to know who was there, where the defending top CB was, what formations each was in, what happened on the blocking and how many of the short patterns are timing patterns (since your window is about 1/8 of a second, being held up briefly is a major issue). Other than that, we’ve pretty much got it nailed ;-)

Don't say rebuild - say reload...

by Doc Bear on Feb 17, 2010 6:21 PM MST up reply actions  

Competition

While Harris heals and hopefully returns to action no later than November, Polumbus will compete with Brandon Gorin, D’Anthony Batiste, and possibly someone from FA and/or the draft. Being a CO native, I hope he will train hard to improve physically, and study film with great tenacity, because I’d like for the guy to make it as a solid backup for the Broncos.

In addition to the way he underperformed last season, it’s possible that he has physical limitations due to his frame. He seems more top-heavy at a height of 6’8". That’s 2" taller than Clady. Establishing leverage must be a real challenge for him and since he can’t shrink, I believe his only choice is to add strength, beginning with his legs. He needs to be able to stay low, avoid being stood up by the defense, and force the opponents away from the QB at every turn. There is little scouting info on him, but from what I could find, his “Flaws” is the most telling, but something he can improve upon:

Assets: A huge specimen. Moves surprisingly well for a man his size. Has good footwork and hand technique. Can really pull.
Flaws: Needs to work on his smarts and decision making. Loses balance on lateral movements and can get pushed backwards.
Career potential: Good rotation lineman.

The good news for him is, that Polumbus has all offseason to improve and impress the coaches, but he had better get it done, or he’ll be looking for work on another team.

"All credibility, all good conscience, all evidence of truth come only from the senses." Friedrich Nietzsche

by Horsepower on Feb 17, 2010 11:17 PM MST up reply actions  

Great comments, HP.

I always had a soft spot for the guy. I hope that he can turn it around, but having that ability to anchor with the low body while keeping the balance centered and the feet moving is a heck of a skillset. The genetics – his height and where he carries his weight – makes a huge difference.

Don't say rebuild - say reload...

by Doc Bear on Feb 17, 2010 11:25 PM MST up reply actions  

Tempting, really

but I’m going to be very busy near the end of this year. Perhaps in 2011…

"All credibility, all good conscience, all evidence of truth come only from the senses." Friedrich Nietzsche

by Horsepower on Feb 17, 2010 10:41 PM MST up reply actions  

Excellent as always TJ!

I always suspected that I was qualified to replace Tom Cable and I now know it to be true. Thanks for that and thanks for your excellent contributions to the best site in the known universe.

In The Dude we trust!

Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds. - Albert Einstein

Once we accept our limits, we go beyond them. - Albert Einstein

by c_style on Feb 17, 2010 4:27 PM MST reply actions  

C_Style, I thought about putting in a quiz in there for replacing Al Davis, and it was this:

You have the 8th pick in the NFL Draft, who do you take:

1) The guy with the fastest 40
2) The guy with the fastest 40
3) The guy with the fastest 40
4) All of the above.

Thanks for reading my stuff. I keeps me wanting to set the bar high.

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 5:57 PM MST up reply actions  

I've read some of the best posts I've seen, here,over the last couple of weeks.

I don’t say much on your posts, because I’m always analyzing and trying to dissect the data. Even for a blue collar engineering type like me (where data and figures are tantamount), you put up enough to make my eyes bleed. Nonetheless, I tune in regularly, because I love humor, and love to be entertained. I will give my preference to 70s rock, as will those of my…ahem…experience on this planet, but I’ll concede that the 80s had it’s moments. “Space Oddity” was pretty badass in it’s day, but was dwarfed by “The Man Who Sold the World”. I have a special appreciation for “Life on Mars”, as well. Check out “All the Madmen”, sometime.

Your stats,today, were very informative and enlightening.
That was enjoyable.

by jayrockstone on Feb 17, 2010 5:22 PM MST reply actions  

Thanks, Jay. Are you not entertained!!!!! Haha! I went into the 70s on the piece when I referenced Reservoir Dogs

had a bunch of links to 70s music. You can see it here:

http://www.milehighreport.com/2009/12/23/1206864/the-dude-abides-the-stats-that

I’ll see what I can do to remedy this lack of 70s music. I’m a fan of it too.

The trick for all of this to be entertaining is that enough of the audience gets the reference from pop culture. If I referenced June Christy from 1952, not thinking I’ll get a lot of play out of that one:-)

Experience is what they call a guy who “gets” David Bowie:-)

I just re-watched those clips on youtube. All the MadMen is great on a lot of levels, Jay. I’m glad you got me to re-watch that one.

The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that.

by TJ Johnson on Feb 17, 2010 5:54 PM MST up reply actions  

Awesome job once again.....Thanks.

These expected point value posts are very interesting to read and really give you a better feel of where the ball goes and how effective the Broncos are in doing so. I knew Royal wasn’t getting the ball as much, however I am surprised by the lack of plays over the middle. Those crossing routes would really play into his speed.

The one thing I noticed in your passing by downs is Orton on 3rd down. This is the QBs down and hopefully Orton will be better at this. While I don’t know the average distance the Broncos had, I would think that with McDaniels/Orton in the second year of this system they will be able to improve on this. Maybe some crossing routes by Royal will do the trick.

Floyd Little: HOF Class of 2010.

2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant

by weazel on Feb 18, 2010 12:03 AM MST reply actions  

Don't mean to be a Buzzkill but.....

We do all know that the song is NOT actually about an astronaut right? I mean just checkin here…….

ROFL kk I know its common knowledge but…..STILL FUNNY!

"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
- Thomas Alva Edison

"Success is not a place at which one arrives, but rather... the spirit with which one undertakes and continues the journey."
- Alex Noble

by DenBronx on Feb 18, 2010 12:13 PM MST reply actions  

Nice work TJ as always

my head is about to explode with so much info, I love it.

BTW, the Bowie piece is from the 70s not 80s.

"A great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do" Walter Gagenot
"Hope sees the invisible, feels the intangible and achieves the impossible."

by bchiper on Feb 18, 2010 1:39 PM MST reply actions  

I don't know why so few people understand

that Kyle was playing with HUGE obstacles and disadvantages this last year.

Is it lost that he played the first few games with a severe compound dislocation of a finger on his throwing hand?
Is it lost that he played the last half of the season on a high ankle sprain?
Is it lost that he was in a radically new system with new coaches and teammates, not only to him but to each other?
Is it lost that the running game did a poor job of supporting him?
Is it lost how porous the offensive line had become?

And yet Kyle still managed 3,800 yards, a 62% completion ratio, and an 89.8 quarterback rating throughout that disaster.

And he’s an “average” quarterback? Well, I wouldn’t know because “average” is such a general term. But I would like to see how many “average” quarterbacks would cope with those situations.

That fact is, Kyle has no problem stretching the field when he is allowed to. The fact is he is more mobile than the obviously uninformed think he is.

Damn. Put a 100-pound barbell on a sprinter then call him “slow,” why don’cha?

BILLY THOMPSON GOT SHAFTED!!

by AZDynamics on Feb 19, 2010 2:18 AM MST reply actions   1 recs

Almost every QB can laim claim to some form of arguement though

Look at Jason Campbell’s numbers in Washington. Exact same numbers at Ortons. Not sure about the injuries but worse offensive line in the league, terrible recievers, coach that was going to be fired, no running game whatsoever, his best weapon (cooley) hurt for half the year, yet he put up the same numbers, consistently having to learn a new scheme every year.

I’m just saying, if we get into factoring why every QB in the league did what they did we have to account for every known variable for every QB. Its the job of the QB to overcome this factors.

You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?

You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen

by johnnystarr on Feb 19, 2010 6:29 AM MST up reply actions  

So you're saying

If a QB breaks his leg, it’s his job to overcome that and play on that leg anyway.

I see.

That fact is, Orton did overcome it. I don’t know that Campbell played with a compound (through the skin) dislocation on his throwing hand, do you? And why is it McDaniels obviously would have had Orton over Campbell?—After all, he could have gotten Campbell and a higher selection than he did with Orton.

Now, go back and look at allllllllllll the obstacles Kyle had to overcome. I do not know of a QB who had to overcome so many of them at once. It took one hell of a QB to do a good job in the face of all that. And that is why McDaniels is high on Orton. McDaniels knows enough about football and the QB position to know what a terrific job Kyle did.

This next year, the only reason Kyle will not go to the Pro Bowl (assuming he stays healthy) will be because of the likes of Peyton Manning and Tom Brady being in the same conference. You heard it here first.

BILLY THOMPSON GOT SHAFTED!!

by AZDynamics on Feb 19, 2010 10:42 AM MST up reply actions  

T.J.!!!

I couldn’t help but noticed the statistics of all of the left and right targets for passing. These statistics support my idea that McDaniels offense (and the whole team philosophy) aim to stretch the opponent laterally as often as possible (wearing them down to take advantage of the altitude in the fourth quarter). He wants a tough, physical team… those are words of hard work… and an opposing team is going to have to be just as tough and physical to beat us.

Check out my post and give me your opinion. I really feel like i’m on to to something here!

History has a history of making fools of the foolish. - Alexander Wall and.... BAM, Coined!

by USMCWall on Feb 19, 2010 2:57 AM MST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

MileHighReport(MHR) is the ultimate independent resource for the Denver Broncos on the web. Along with MHR Radio, the official podcast of MHR, we look to provide hardcore Denver Broncos fans positive, independent insight about the Broncos, 24/7/365!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Imgres_small
Running Backs, The Shortest Tenured Position.
P1_plummer_small
For those Bronco Fans Who have served....

Recent FanPosts

Broncos_small
Realistic Rookie Expectations
Small
Studying the Quarterback Position: Part Two
Small
Is Quantity, Quality? And The Sophomore Slump...
Small
Am I the only one with that feeling?
Small
Studying the Quarterback Position
Angels_small
Moreno Out the Door this Offseason
Small
What Do You Expect From Our Draftees ?
Small
An in depth look at "PLAN A"

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Getting Social With MHR

Facebook_badge_medium_medium
Black_generated_button

Milehighreport_email_medium

Web Stuff


 

Listed on BlogShares Top NFL Fan Sites


General Manager/Head Coach

Milehighreport_small John Bena

2011_small KaptainKirk

Asst. Head Coach

2_small Sayre Bedinger

Bronco-pride_small Brian Shrout

Broncohoodie_in_africa_small Troy Hufford

Img_0007_small Topher Doll

Position Coach

182px-jesus_small Jezru

Flag_canada_small Colby

Broncos-von-miller_small Scotty Payne

Ph_small BroncoPH

Small zsheely

Hottie_small Sarah_Marshall