Can't Run On Us

The following is a guest post by @sunset_shazz.

As the inimitable Jimmy Kempski recently explained, the Eagles’ defensive game plan is rather simple:

Stop the run.
Make the opposing offense one-dimensional.
Get after the quarterback.

Indeed, Eagles opponents do appear to give up on the run – this year the defense has faced the fewest rushing attempts per game. One caveat: they also have the second-highest point-differential. As everyone knows, you face fewer run attempts when holding a lead.

Are the Eagles’ opponents giving up on the run because they’ve fallen behind? Or are the Eagles facing fewer rush attempts due to their stout run defense, irrespective of the scoreboard?

I examined Game Script data compiled by Chase Stuart. Game Script is basically the average score margin over a total game. As a stylized example, let’s say Team A returns the opening kickoff for a touchdown, kicks the extra point, then neither team scores for the rest of the game. Team A’s Game Script in this simplified example would be +7 (the average lead held the entire game); Team B’s Game Script would be -7. A higher game script is often associated with more rushing by the team who’s leading (because you run when you win, not win when you run) and more passing by the opposing team (which has a negative game script).

The plot below shows each team’s average Game Script on the X-axis and average Pass/Run Ratio on the Y axis (all data through weeks 1-10). The regression line represents the expected Pass/Run Ratio, given Game Script, computed from the 146 games that were played through week nine. [1] A team that is toward the right (LAR, PHI) has enjoyed a higher average lead, and a team toward the top (SFO) has a higher pass/run ratio.

By comparing each team’s pass-run ratio to what one would theoretically expect given game situation (denoted by the regression line above), one may construct a “Pass Heavy Index”:

This year, Bill Belichick has been 10.9% more likely to call a pass, given game situation, than average. With Mitchell Trubisky behind center, John Fox is 15.5% less likely to call a pass, given game situation, than average. Despite almost being run out of town after a week 2 game in which his Pass Heavy Index was +27%, Pederson is basically in the middle of the pack.

What about the defense? One may similarly plot each team’s opponent’s average pass/run ratio against the opponent’s average game script:

Did you notice the outlier on the upper left? One may also compute each team’s opponents’ Pass Heavy Index:

The table above shows that Eagles opponents are not only passing more than any other team’s opponents (70.1% of the time), but that they are the most pass heavy adjusted for game situation. The evidence supports Kempski’s thesis: Eagles opponents this year have become one dimensional. One way to look at it is that opponents have a healthy respect for the Birds’ run defense. Another way to view it: they think they can attack the secondary. Somebody please inform the Green Goblin that he’s being disrespected.

Stick Figure GIF reprinted with permission, courtesy Jimmy Kempski — *Stick Figure GIF reprinted with permission, courtesy* *Jimmy Kempski*

Alternatively, perhaps this is an artifact of sampling bias – maybe the Eagles just happen to have faced teams who pass a lot (like Arizona).

Looking at it game-by-game, 6 out of 9 teams the Eagles played chose to pass more than they typically do, adjusted for game situation. There were three exceptions: the Cardinals 76.7% pass ratio, though 8.3% higher than expected, was a tad (0.5%) less pass heavy than Bruce Arians’ typical game; this was due to an extreme game script driven by a three touchdown first quarter by Carson Wentz. In the most recent two weeks, the Niners and Broncos both continued to run more than would be expected, despite falling behind by two scores in game script. Could this portend a change in opponent strategy, perhaps due to the absence of LB Jordan Hicks, whose season ended in the first series of Week 7? Or was this merely due to the injury to Joe Staley for the Niners and the move to Brock Osweiler for the Broncos? The next few weeks should be interesting.

The analysis presented above demonstrates that Eagles opponents are 10% less likely to run the ball than average, given the game situation. If opponents indeed are choosing to attack the Eagles’ passing defense, they are picking a different, though still potent, poison. The Eagles passing defense is ranked 7th in ANY/A allowed, and ranked 8th in defensive passing DVOA.

Interestingly, the Rams’ and Jaguars’ average lead has been similar to the Eagles’, though their opponents are running more than typical, given such a deficit. Those teams are ranked 2nd and 1st against the pass, respectively, in DVOA, and are ranked 15th and 30th against the run. Though opponents of each team are falling behind during games at a similar rate, they are choosing to attack the Eagles differently, given the relative strengths of their defensive units.

Thanks to Eagles fan Noah Becker and MoK Editor-in-Chief Brian Solomon for discussion leading to this post.

[1] The Y-intercept indicates the neutral pass/run ratio, 57.8%, which also mathematically corresponds to the league average pass-run ratio.

There Are No Shortcuts To The Super Bowl

Last March, Jeff Lurie told reporters he was was tired of waiting for the Eagles to be great. He’d seen sustained success, he’d been to a Super Bowl, and he’d watched his franchise post a solid 20-13 record (including a playoff loss) over the prior two seasons. It wasn’t enough.

“I’ve lived through a lot of division championships, a lot of playoff appearances, a lot of final four appearances, but our goal is we want to deliver a Super Bowl,” he said at the time. “And sometimes maybe I’m influenced by the notion of it’s very difficult to get from good to great, and you’ve got to take some serious looks at yourself when you want to try to make that step. It’s a gamble to go from good to great because you can go from good to mediocre with changes, but I decided it was important enough…”

On Wednesday, after firing Chip Kelly before the final game of the season, Lurie didn’t walk away from his words earlier in the year.

“I said, with Chip’s vision, it was an opportunity that he wanted to lead the way, to try to go from good to great,” he said. “In fact, I remember saying to all of you, there’s dangers in that, in terms of having two 10-6 seasons in a row, and when making significant changes, you can easily achieve mediocrity. I think it would be a shame not to try, but… that is the danger when you take a risk.”

I hope Lurie learned more than that, because his "strategy" was little more than a desperate hope. He handed over all power to Kelly, a moderately successful coach with zero experience running the intricacies of a NFL organization.

The road to the Super Bowl is not paved with such gambles, with an outsider making a bunch of questionable bets that luckily pay off. You don’t win by cutting talent and building #culture. You don’t win with a rigid set of measurables that dictate player acquisition. You don’t win by ignoring critical positions and spending excessive guaranteed money on less important ones. You don’t win by overpaying for a subpar quarterback coming off two major knee injuries, or turning over half the roster in one offseason. That’s how you end up 7-9 in one of the worst divisions ever.

There are no shortcuts.

Remember Andy Reid’s binder? Reid came to Philadelphia with a detailed multi-year plan of how to build an organization. He arrived in 1999, overhauled the roster, brought in an impressive group of experienced coaches (including 6 eventual head coaches), drafted a quarterback in the first round, and went 5-11. In 2000 the team and young quarterback improved, overachieving to reach the playoffs. By 2001 they were one of the best teams in the conference. In 2002 and 2003 they missed the Super Bowl by inches. In 2004 they came minutes away from the trophy itself.

Lurie said he doesn’t want the middle steps, he just wants the Super Bowl, and he was willing to gamble to get there. But those middle steps are important. That’s how you build a champion—not overnight, but consistently, step by step.

The best teams in the NFL have the best talent. The best teams in the NFL have a top quarterback they drafted and groomed. The best teams in the NFL have smart, experienced coaches who adjust their schemes to the players they have. The best teams in the NFL have a front office structure that empowers multiple voices and balances scouting with analytics and financial understanding.

Going into 2016, the Eagles need to avoid the quick fix, or the allure of competing for the playoffs in year one of a new regime. That won't set the team up for long term success. (Plus, they'll likely be in the running anyway unless the putrid NFC East changes significantly in a year.)

The blueprint needs to be for a Super Bowl contender in 2018. Let's lay out what that looks like...

Front Office: Howie Roseman has a mixed reputation among fans and league sources, but he can succeed in the Joe Banner role. He has experience on the personnel side to pair with a firm grasp of the league's economics. Roseman does need to find a qualified general manager-type to run player personnel, someone less washed-up than Tom Donahoe, with more experience than Ed Marynowitz, who's not obvious idiot Ryan Grigson.

Coaching: A NFL team is a crazy thing to manage, and any head coach needs to be able to bring in the right people and command respect across the organization. He doesn't have to be a brilliant innovator on the cutting edge, but he does need to be flexible enough to adapt his schemes and techniques to get the most out of his players in each situation. The single most important skill set within that is the ability to find and develop a franchise quarterback, which is what makes a candidate like Adam Gase so attractive.

Quarterback: You cannot be a consistent Super Bowl contender until you have a quarterback. As such, you should exhaust every possible avenue to get one, especially the draft. I stand by my recipe for QB hunting laid out four years ago, on the eve of Andy Reid's firing:

Draft a quarterback early and late. Sign somebody in free agency. Trade for a promising backup. Rinse and repeat. You're never going to be able to compete for the Super Bowl until you find your one franchise guy. Might as well cycle through as many potentials as you can until you do. The financial cost of doing so is less than the opportunity cost of sitting pat with one player, [Bradford], who is statistically unlikely to ever become an elite quarterback.

In the Eagles' case, that means avoiding any multi-year guarantee to a still-unproven quantity like Sam Bradford, and perhaps letting him go entirely depending on the cost.

Roster Building: Outside of quarterback, which takes priority over everything else, the offensive line is next on the list of must-haves. Though I don't know many of the names, Jimmy Kempski's mock draft would thrill me based on the selection of two quarterbacks and three offensive linemen. Lane Johnson and Jason Kelce are the only long term building blocks you can count on there. Meanwhile, don't waste resources on the rest of the offensive skill positions, none of which will matter much until the offensive line and quarterback are fixed.

The Eagles defense needs more talent across the board, but it also likely needs a scheme that better takes advantage of the players in house. Kelly wanted a two-gapping 3-4 system, but it would be nice to see what Fletcher Cox and company could do in a one-gapping 4-3 instead.

Overall: Both the organization and its fans need patience. We were spoiled by Chip's quick turnaround, but where did that leave us? Let's plan for sustainability.

Ranking The 2013 NFL Kickers (Or Why Alex Henery Doesn't Deserve Your Support)

Everyone knows that NFL kickers are getting better. The numbers make this obvious. We saw an all-time high for field goal accuracy in 2013: over 86%. And that's despite many more long attempts. Field goal tries from over 50 yards have increased 57% in the last decade.

When ranking kickers, we have to take into account the new landscape. For an example, just look close to home. After his first three seasons, Alex Henery is tied for fourth all time in overall field goal accuracy among players with at least 80 attempts. But if you check out the top 20 on that list, 17 of them played in the last two years. This is like the late 1990s in baseball -- everyone's breaking records.

More to the point, we can't quote field goal accuracy without taking distance into account. As Jimmy Kempski noted, Henery doesn't look nearly as good when you compare him to his peers. Among full time kickers since 2011, Henery is tied for the fewest attempts over 50 yards (5). He also has the shortest "long field goal" (51). If everyone else is taking longer attempts and making them, Henery's value is significantly lower than his overall accuracy would suggest.

Last offseason, I took a deep dive into Henery's value, comparing him to other kickers in 2012. By generating an estimated value for every kick, we could plot how much each kicker actually contributed to his team as compared to the league standard. The results put Henery just a hair above average, with the noted caveat of having not a single make over 50 yards.

This year I wanted to go deeper. To start, I pulled all 2013 field goal attempts and plotted them out. While upgrading from last year's 5-yard buckets required a little smoothing, the granular data this year should be more exact:

Cool, right? As you can see, kicks from in close are automatic and everything up to about 32 yards out is a 90% success rate or higher. But perhaps even more impressive, kickers in 2013 maintained over 80% accuracy up to 45 yards out -- and 70% all the way to 55 yard attempts. The data gets meager from there, but the graph is proof of how great NFL kickers have become.

Anyway, with this data, it becomes fairly easy to generate an estimated point value for every field goal attempt. For example, a 35 yard try is worth 2.63 points while a 50 yarder is worth 2.1 points. If a kicker makes a kick from that distance, he adds points to his team above the expected value. Missing, he loses his team the expected points. (The only major caveat here is weather conditions. Certainly a field goal into strong wind would have a lower expected value than one in a dome.)

This year, we'll also add kickoff analysis. I spent some time playing with large data sets of kickoffs and ultimately was disappointed by the many problems in the NFL's play by play data. So at least until Football Outsiders releases its always-awesome game charting this summer, I can't work with the type of granular data on field goals above. The next best thing is Pro Football Focus' kickoff stats. They track distance, touchbacks, and average yard line start. I adjusted that data to eliminate the effect of onside kicks, but there are other variables (including weather) which still exist outside the scope of the investigation.

For kickoffs, the goal is to reach a similar expected value score. With help from Derek Sarley, we calculated a quick and dirty correlation between touchbacks and starting drive position of .67, suggesting that kickers have about two-thirds of the responsibility on kickoffs. Using that, we can multiply each kicker's total drive start yardage difference from the league average by .67, then by the approximately 0.06 expected points each extra yard is worth. Again, it's not a perfect score, but it will give us a good estimate.

Got all that? Click on the table below to enlarge the full results:

Hopefully the table isn't too confusing. Let's break it down. The left hand side is kickoff data, and you can see adjusted kickoff distance and drive start. From there you can calculate points generated in relation to the average kicker (KICKOFF PTS). On the right side are field goals, first the basic data then the estimated values based on the calculations above, leading to the FG PTS above or below average. Finally, TOTAL PTS combines the two scores and ranks all kickers (including those who only kickoff or attempt field goals).

The best kickers of 2013 did well on both metrics. Dan Bailey of the Cowboys, for example, helped force opponents to start their drives 1.9 yards further back than average. Over the course of the season, that was worth just over a touchdown in field position. On field goals, he made over 93% of his attempts, when the average kicker would have only made 84.5%. That was another 8 points he generated for Dallas, bringing Bailey's total points over average to a league-leading 15.1. If we can translate that using Brian Burke's data at Advanced NFL Stats, Bailey was worth about as much in expected points added as the 25th-ranked quarterback.

On the other end of the spectrum, Henery ranked third-worst in the NFL last year. He lost the Eagles approximately 10.8 points, split about equally between kickoffs and field goals. Henery was near the bottom of the pack in kickoff distance and average drive start, losing 1.6 yards per kickoff. Meanwhile, his 80% field goal accuracy should have been better, given he took mostly shorter kicks. The league average accuracy for his attempts would have been 85.8%.

Though Henery has some ardent supporters, it's tough to find any silver lining for him in these numbers. Only two kickers in this sample had worse results: a historically-bad rookie and a veteran who was fired in December. Maybe Henery can improve this offseason and post a better effort in 2014. But I wouldn't count on it. At the very least, the Eagles must bring in competition for what is clearly one of their weakest positions.

Eagles-Patriots Preseason Thoughts: This Offense Is Going To Be Fun

I'm not fretting about Fletcher Cox. As Derek Sarley laid out quite plainly, the problem on those first few run plays was much more about spacing in the new 3-4 defensive lineup. The bigger problem was Trent Cole, who looked totally out of place as a stand-up linebacker. Maybe he'll get better, but I wouldn't count on it. The sample size wasn't large, but I thought Brandon Graham looked a lot more comfortable out there.
In nickel packages the Eagles tended to switch to a four-down linemen look, and Cole looked like his normal self there. Back in April I suggested that the coaches keep Cole as a down rusher -- even consider starting him at 3-4 defensive end. That latter option is probably off the table now that Cole has slimmed down for his OLB role, but I wouldn't be surprised to see him has a dedicated pass rush specialist in exclusive four-linemen looks before long.
As a broader point, the 3-4 defensive transition is going to be rough. Not only do some of the players not fit into their defined roles, but the spacing issues will probably continue. Good offensive coaches will exploit this inexperienced front, and Mychal Kendricks and DeMeco Ryans are going to get mauled at the second level.

On the touchdown pass, Sheil Kapadia says: "Vick said [DeSean] went deep because the Patriots had a single high safety." Jackson's ability to stretch coverage is even more necessary now that Jeremy Maclin is out for the year. If can't keep safeties honest, the run game and short passes become difficult.
Zach Ertz looks like he needs some serious work. He's not a speedy receiver (only 4.68 second 40 yard dash) and he looks totally lost blocking. Here Ertz is at the top of the formation letting Jerod Mayo (admittedly a good linebacker) get by him without so much as slowing him down. While the offensive line is getting a good push up the middle, Mayo comes in off the edge unblocked and makes the tackle:

Here's a cool play: a zone-read design where the quarterback is looking at the defensive tackle instead of the end. It's the Eagles' fourth play from scrimmage, with Vick deciding whether to hand off to Chris Polk or keep it himself. The typical zone-read we've seen in the NFL so far (and we also saw from the Eagles on Friday night) involves letting the defensive end come upfield unblocked. If he goes for the QB, you hand it off. If he goes for the RB, the QB keeps it. Same idea here, but Vick is reading Vince Wilfork at defensive tackle. If he had sprinted to his left to get Polk, Vick would have had a huge hole up the middle. Because he stayed in his lane, Polk gets the hand off and has two double teams to run behind on the right (click to embiggen):

Just as I was drawing this play up, Chris Brown posted an extensive review of Chip's play calling, including this one (with a gif). You should definitely check that out.
Brown talks about "packaged plays" as well, and Sheil has a glorious medley of screen caps on those run-pass options.
However, my favorite play of the night was the one below. What looked like a zone-read play to the left was really a play-action rollout to the backside. Vick has a clear run-pass option on this play and it's killer for the defense. This is something Foles doesn't present -- a dangerous running threat out of the backfield. The Patriots defenders who weren't sucked in by the play action aren't sure whether to converge on Vick or cover their receivers, so neither happens. Easy 19-yard completion to Riley Cooper:

Lane Johnson looked athletic and powerful. Sheil had good shots of him pancaking defenders and getting to the second level: here and here.
Fellow Eagles Almanac scribe Dan Klausner is trying to convince me that Chris Polk is ready for the big time. I'm open to the idea, but haven't seen it yet. Certainly he is the better pass blocker (see Sheil's screencaps here), but Bryce Brown is a much more dangerous weapon. Watching him explode through holes or grab passes out of the backfield, it's obvious that Brown's someone you want to have the ball. Perhaps it's a silly hypothetical, but I can't shake the feeling that Brown would have exploded through that hole for a first down on the Wilfork zone-read.
Nick Foles moved the ball very efficiently in the Eagles' first real up tempo test. See more from Jimmy Kempski.

For much much more on everything Chip Kelly and the Birds, buy the Eagles Almanac!

The Biggest Question Mark

The Eagles have now made a number of free agent moves, almost all on the defensive side of the ball. Given that unit's poor play, such focus wasn't unexpected. The team needed at least four new defensive backs and some 3-4 building blocks. But I'm puzzled as to the front office's seaming lack of worry about one offensive position -- and it isn't quarterback.

Whither the offensive line? This is an area that so far at least has been totally ignored in free agency, despite a multitude of questions. I understand there's a lot of optimism surrounding the o-line, as everyone comes back from injuries. Football Outsiders tracks injuries with their Adjusted Games Lost metric:

Not that Eagles fans need another reason for self-loathing, but congratulations, your team had the highest offensive line AGL on record and the largest-ever increase in offensive line AGL. In 2011, only Jason Peters had an AGL above 1.0. In 2012, there were five: Peters (16.0), Jason Kelce (14.0), Todd Herremans (8.0), King Dunlap (2.0), and Danny Watkins (2.0). I don't think it's a stretch to muse that the offensive line injuries played a role in producing the third-worst quarterback AGL this year as well.

That kind of historic injury collapse is unlikely to happen again, so there's a lot of potential for a rebound season. But that conveniently avoids the underlying fact that the team has three starters returning from season-ending injuries -- including Peters coming back from a wicked ruptured Achilles tendon. We don't know if any of these players, especially Peters, will be the same players they once were.

Moreover, even putting aside the injuries themselves, we're looking at an increasingly aging line. The four presumed starters -- Peters, Mathis, Kelce, Herremans -- have an average age of 30. Teams can do well despite older offensive lines (Jimmy Kempski has tracked average age the last two seasons and coincidentally both times the oldest line has worked for the Super Bowl winner). But that doesn't mean it's a good idea overall to trust aging players during a rebuilding process. Are we sure that Peters and Herremans and Mathis are solid options for the next 2-3 years?

There are also major questions about performance. Danny Watkins is still around, for now. He's likely an unsalvageable bust at guard but there's no obvious replacement on the roster. Herremans had a subpar year in 2012 at right tackle. Is he capable of manning that spot long term, or does the team need to kick him back inside as an expensive guard? If so, they'll need a new offensive tackle, which is even harder to find than a new interior lineman.

And all of the above is just about the starting spots. As we saw last year, it's vital to have depth that you can count on. Right now, with the possible exception of Dennis Kelly, there's not a lot to like about any of the backups.

Howie Roseman and Chip Kelly have talked about filling holes now so that they are free to take the best player available in the draft. That's a good strategy, but they seem to have completely ignored this one glaring need. There were three intriguing right tackles on the open market, including Jake Long, who has already signed. Could Andre Smith or Sebastian Vollmer be on the docket next? Both have serious question marks, but a young, talented tackle would do so much to shore up this position.

There may be top linemen available with the Eagles' first pick, but you can't count on that -- and you also don't want to prevent yourself from going after a different player that you like better. Unless they make a late move here though, that's looking like the path the team is headed down.

Photo from Getty.

Putting the Stopwatch on QB Release Times

Fantastic work by Jimmy Kempski (two links in two days). He timed every throw by Michael Vick and Nick Foles last year:

The Eagles have a very dynamic set of skill position players. When your QBs are holding the football for 2.87 seconds on average, you're essentially asking the QB to do a large portion of the work in your offense. That is not ideal when you have one aging QB that is in steep decline and another that was a rookie 3rd round pick. The quicker you can get the ball out of your QB's hands and into the hands of the guys who should be making plays, the better the offense will be.

Definitely check out his full breakdown. You can even tell when the Eagles decided it was time to change things up for Vick (as confirmed by All-22 tape).

Drafting on the O-Line

In addition to a spate of life-altering Microsoft Paint jobs, Jimmy Kempski had a great post on Tuesday that looked at how NFL teams drafted for their offensive lines in recent years. You can see the whole chart at Blogging the bEast, but the Eagles in particular stood out. Over the last five years, they've had more draft picks than any other team: 51. They also tied for the most total offensive linemen picked: 10. Except... only one of those ten picks was in the first three rounds.

And that was Danny Watkins.

Nick Foles' Pocket Presence

Jimmy Kempski had a great post earlier this week about Nick Foles' ability to move around the pocket and keep his eyes downfield, even though he's not exactly the fastest guy on the field. Great stills from the Bucs game really prove his point, and it's obviously one of Foles' biggest strengths. However, and I'm no quarterback technique expert, it does seem that he often ends up throwing off his back foot in a very Eli Manning-esque way. That's probably something he needs to fix if he wants to become a more consistent player.