Dave Gettleman Vs. The Nerds

The following is a guest post by @sunset_shazz.

New York Giants General Manager Dave Gettleman is a true football man (#TrueFootballMan). He has no time for nerds who sit behind their keyboards. Though some may be concerned about drafting a running back second overall, he is not. From his recent presser after picking Saquon Barkley:

I think a lot of that’s nonsense. I think it’s someone who had this idea and got into the analytics of it and did all these running backs and went through their – whatever. Hey, Jonathan Stewart is in his 10th year and he’s hardly lost anything.

Gettleman appears to believe that the case against using a top 10 pick on a running back rests on perceived longevity. He is misapprehended.

Ben Baldwin, an economist (and Seahawks fan) who makes his living sitting behind his keyboard, summarized the case against using a premium pick on a running back in an excellent post at Field Gulls – do read the whole thing. I’m going to expand on two subsets of his argument: that rookie first round running back contracts are bad values, and bad risks.

The objective of the first round of the NFL draft is to sign an above-average player at a below-average contract for 4 years, with an embedded team option in year 5. Article 7 of the 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement specifies a rookie wage scale that varies based on the draft pick used to select the player. Importantly, after the 2011 CBA was implemented, the player’s position doesn’t matter: a player picked 2nd overall is paid the same money over 4 years, whether he is a quarterback, running back or long-snapper. Moreover, the market has reached an equilibrium where first round contracts are fully guaranteed. A quick survey of contracts at overthecap.com shows that position value for post-rookie contracts varies significantly in today’s NFL. As a result, the “rookie contract discount” varies dramatically by position. For example, a QB drafted with the 2nd overall pick in 2018 would be the 25th highest paid QB in the league (by average annual compensation) and would have the 15th highest guaranteed money. An RB selected 2nd overall would immediately become the 4th highest paid player at his position, with the highest guaranteed money – all before taking a single professional snap.

The chart above shows selected positions, with their leaguewide positional salary rank plotted against overall draft number (all data courtesy overthecap.com). Running back is the clear outlier – a top 10 pick is automatically among the highest paid RBs in the league.

Here is the same plot for guaranteed money (the rookie contract is compared to the veterans’ amount guaranteed on their current contracts):

Though the 2011 CBA’s wage scale typically serves as a price ceiling for rookies, with running backs drafted in the first round, it serves as a de facto price floor. In terms of guaranteed money, the three highest RB contracts in the league are Barkley (2018, drafted 2nd overall), Leonard Fournette (2017, 4th) and Ezekiel Elliott (2016, 4th). Here are the top 10 picks in this year’s draft, with their annual compensation and total guarantee compared to their league peers by position group (players in top 10 highlighted in red):

The New York Giants have thus expended the #2 draft pick (a considerable use of capital) for the privilege of paying Barkley the #4 annual salary and #1 guarantee at his position. They are paying (through the nose) not just once, but twice!

But perhaps Gettleman is merely acting upon justified conviction. If Barkley is a generational player, surely he’s worth it?

As Ben Baldwin notes in his piece, 1st round running backs have a high bust rate relative to other positions. Data scientist Dr. Sean J. Taylor sent me the following plot, exploring this idea further:

This plot evaluates the set of running backs drafted (or undrafted) between 2009 and 2014. The x-axis represents draft position. The y-axis is the player’s Wins Above Replacement (nflWAR) over the ensuing 4 years. NflWAR is a statistic developed by Yurko, Ventura and Horowitz of Carnegie Mellon University which uses multinomial logistic regression to isolate the contribution of individual players to NFL wins. NflWAR represents a novel effort to advance beyond Approximate Value (AV), and deserves wider recognition.

I draw 3 conclusions from the scatterplot above:

1. Taking a running back early is risky (bottom left quadrant);

2. It is possible to find success at running back in later rounds;

3. Running backs don’t really matter very much (note the Y-axis scale – over 4 years, you get at best 1.5 extra wins from a running back, and typically 0.25 extra win; quarterbacks are approximately 4x more important).

The risk of a bust is even more acute with highly drafted running backs, because the financial commitment to the player is so much higher, relative to other players at the same position. A bust at QB taken at 2nd overall saddles you with the salary of a bottom quartile starter. A bust at RB at the same pick saddles you with a top 4 salary.

But there is no good alternative to taking such a risk, right? Don’t you need to take risks at RB in order to win championships? Ezekiel Elliott, Leonard Fournette and Todd Gurley (taken 4th, 7th and 10th overall, respectively) are commonly cited as evidence of risks that have paid off.

One recurrent theme here at MoK is the application of insights from behavioral science to football. Our past posts have relied heavily on the work of Gary Becker, Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, William F. Sharpe, Kahneman and Tversky again and Joseph Henrich. Today’s post is dedicated to 1990 Nobel Laureate Harry Markowitz who demonstrated that a portfolio of individually risky assets can collectively carry less risk than any of its underlying constituents, even when adjusted for its prospective return.

The above chart shows the three commonly cited high pick successes, and the RB-by-committee groups of the two Super Bowl teams. The “Draft Capital” column dispenses with the archaic Jimmy Johnson scale, instead using Dr. Michael Lopez’s blended draft curve which improves on prior efforts by not only paying attention to expected/modal outcomes, but also giving weight to the probability of drafting a superstar (i.e. the right tail of the distribution). PHI and NE expended between 1/4 and 1/7 the draft resources for their running backs as JAX, DAL and LAR. Though PHI and NE paid relatively high 2017 cap numbers, they locked up minimal resources over the long term (i.e. they could cut bait in 2018). The “gty” column shows guarantees over the entire contracts of those players (Sproles’ and Blount’s initial guarantees for PHI, Gillislee’s, Burkhead’s and White’s for NE).

The advantage of the portfolio approach is: you can be wrong, and still have success. Donnel Pumphrey is not good at football and Darren Sproles was lost for the season. Gillislee, Burkhead and White did not cover themselves in glory in 2017. The portfolio approach diversifies you against injury, suspension or disappointing play. Yet, each portfolio achieved similar yards/attempt and total yards as the 3 high draft picks, for less overall guarantee / draft capital. As a team, NE and PHI ranked 1st and 8th in offensive DVOA, respectively (the Eagles won the Super Bowl). Also, note that NE’s total 2017 expenditure, while high, was less than Le’Veon Bell’s cap number. JAX additionally paid $6MM in 2017 for Chris Ivory, who offered minimal return for this expenditure. As Harry Markowitz showed, the portfolio approach offers something vanishingly rare in economics: a free lunch. A properly constructed portfolio lowers risk, without sacrificing expected return. (Though running backs are risky, they are independently risky. Idiosyncratic risk is diversifiable.)

In summary, Dave Gettleman in his press conference constructed a straw man. The case for positional value does not rest on running back longevity. Instead the TL;DR argument is as follows:

Using a high draft pick on a running back is a bad bet. At best, you expend draft capital in order to pay a guaranteed contract at a market equivalent price for a good player. At worst, you overpay twice: in draft capital and guaranteed salary for a bad player.
Drafting a running back is risky.
By assembling a portfolio of RBs, one can achieve similar performance to drafting a star, while diversifying risk, and saving draft / guarantee capital to deploy elsewhere.
Your mother was right about eggs and baskets.

The above argument relies upon the prior work of a number of individuals who sit behind keyboards, all of whom have advanced degrees in a quantitative field such as economics, and none of whom have played a snap of professional football. Gettleman, a #TrueFootballMan, will confidently dismiss this argument, regardless of its merit, due to its provenance. Eagles fans should pray he never gets fired, and lives forever.

Will The Eagles Get Better?

If you watched the putrid Thursday Night Football game between the Giants and the Redskins last night, there was some solace for Philly fans. Mainly that everyone else in this division is pretty much just as #terrible as the Eagles.

That does leave room for optimism, despite two of the worst Eagles games in recent memory, strung back to back at the start of this season. The truth is that as bad as the Eagles have been, they still can turn things around. The question is whether their awful play so far is the result of fundamental, uncorrectable problems or something more fixable.

The answer to that question is in the eyes of the beholder. The offensive run blocking has been so bad that it's the worst (through two game sample size, of course) of any offensive line I can find in Football Outsiders' history. Their Adjusted Line Yards (aka roughly the yardage that the line is responsible for) is just 1.11 yards. To put that in perspective, last year's poor line was ranked 29th in ALY with 3.52 yards. Ryan over at ChipWagon can give you both the execution and scheme reasons for such failure.

On one hand, maybe this is a sign that with a historically-bad offensive line and questionable play calling, the Eagles will never get their run game together. On the other hand, we can probably expect the Eagles to revert back at least somewhat to the mean, making the run offense moderately usable at some point. (Optimism!)

Ditto for Sam Bradford. This is a quarterback who has endured very little pressure from defenses (just 23% of the time through two games). The offensive line, for all of its run blocking woes, has allowed just one sack, good for the 3rd-best Adjusted Sack Rate in the NFL of 1.5%. Yet Bradford continues to be unable to throw the ball down the field.

From @PFF, Bradford has attempted just 5 passes (5.6% of att.) of 20+ yards. 0 completions, 2 drops.
— EaglesRewind (@EaglesRewind) September 25, 2015

Bradford has averaged just 6.3 yards per attempt so far, 28th best in the league. To go with that, he's thrown 2 touchdowns against 4 interceptions and has looked out of sync with his receivers the whole time. Maybe Bradford is just bad, and Chip Kelly bet on the wrong quarterback. Maybe Mark Sanchez (barf) is actually the better choice right now. Or maybe Bradford hasn't played much in two years and is still adjusting to a new offense, new personnel, and being hit. Maybe he'll get better.

The defense, meanwhile, has shown promising signs (Malcolm Jenkins, Walter Thurmond, Bennie Logan) and worrisome ones (Byron Maxwell). The stats are slightly above average through the first two games against two potentially decent offenses. The defense certainly isn't good enough to carry an offense this bad, but it isn't the reason the Eagles have lost, either. More tests to come, though.

This weekend's game against the Jets is a must win. You don't go 0-3 and make the playoffs in this league. According to the chart below from FiveThirtyEight, that would leave them with just a 2% chance. But if they go 1-2, that's 25% and a tie for second place in a historically weak division. Then just maybe, there's room for hope...

Is The Eagles Defense One Competent Safety Away From Success?

Alright, no.

But as I was watching the Eagles-Giants game on Sunday, I was drawn to this question. The Eagles defense has problems across the board. The new corners can at least tackle better than their predecessors, but remain inconsistent in coverage. Even at their best, neither Cary Williams nor Bradley Fletcher scares an opposing quarterback. Meanwhile, the front seven is a transitioning mess. Sopoaga barely shows up, and two-gapping hides last year's stud Fletcher Cox. Connor Barwin has been solid, but Trent Cole is hit-or-miss at OLB. Mychal Kendricks makes terrifically athletic plays, then falls down in coverage. The responsibilities in the run game are unclear. The pass rush is nonexistent, which has led to the bizarre move of making Brandon Boykin a rush linebacker.

This is all granted. It's a bad defense with a lot of personnel and scheme questions. But unlike the offensive side of the ball, where a great quarterback or running back can carry a team at times, defense often seems to be about your weakest link. A smart, patient, accurate quarterback can find your weakness and exploit it. Such was evident against the Peytons, but I'm not sure how much there is to learn from a drubbing at their formidable hands.

The Elis posed a much less dangerous threat. The Giants offense only scored 7 points in the two previous games. Yet they put up three times that on Sunday. Why? Again, there are many problems with this defense. The front seven, most notably, failed to register a sack until the end of the game, against a banged-up Giants offensive line.

But looking at the tape and the numbers, I'd single out safety as by far the biggest problem. The Giants only had three scoring drives. The officials gifted them the last one on a bogus pass interference call on Brandon Boykin. On the other two, 80% of the Giants' total yards were gained on four plays of 20 yards or more. What all four plays had in common was the Eagles' safeties.

On the Giants' first drive, Hakeem Nicks caught a 49-yard bomb from Manning, the second attempt in a row to split Nate Allen and Bradley Fletcher. Two plays later, David Wilson plunged into the end zone.

The second scoring drive, in the third quarter, started with a 26-yard pass to Brandon Myers where the tight end found a huge hole down the middle between Allen and Earl Wolff. Two plays later, Manning found a wide open Reuben Randle for 20 yards. Looked like Wolff should have been covering that zone, but ran with Myers over the middle instead.

Finally, the drive culminated in a disgustingly easy 24-yard TD pass to Randle. We don't have All-22 yet, but let's break that one down anyway. The Giants have three WRs, one TE, and one RB. The Eagles are going to play what looks like (again, pre-coaches tape) a variant of Cover One Robber. The defense is in man-to-man across the formation. At the snap, Allen (in blue) is going to drop into a centerfield role while Wolff rolls into the short middle. The rookie's job in Robber coverage is to help in run support if necessary, then read the QB's eyes and jump into those short and intermediate crossing routes.

Below, you can see what happens after the snap. Kendricks has blitzed, and DeMeco Ryans is looping around him (and possibly reading the running back). That leaves Wolff as the sole middle-of-the-field defender. At the top, Randle is going to run a slant against Fletcher.

Below, Manning has stared down Randle, but as he throws, Wolff hasn't moved much. Meanwhile, Fletcher is dropping further back guarding against getting beat deep in man. This leaves a big hole in the zone where Wolff ideally should be:

As Randle catches the ball below, the defense has failed. He's about to pick up a first down because neither Fletcher, who dropped way back, nor Wolff were there to stop an easy slant. Still, with three guys converging -- including Allen from his deep role -- at least it should stop there...

Except wait, no, that's not what happens. You can see below that Wolff was not only late, but he took a terrible angle at Randle and didn't even lay a finger on him. Ditto for Allen, who does this all the time. Randle scampers in for the easy touchdown.

It's worth pointing out that Boykin (bottom) is basically standing still in the last screenshot. If you re-watch the play you'll see that he slows down, seeing what we did, that the Eagles have three defenders set to shut Randle down. As the receiver breaks free instead, Boykin has an "Oh $&!#" moment, where he briefly tries to recover and help out. But it's too late.

So overall, what do we learn? The Eagles defense has a lot of problems, but the biggest mistakes all came from the two safeties. I'd venture that without those, the Eagles might have held the Giants to only 7 or 10 points. That's why I wonder how much better this defense would be with just one competent safety. Getting Patrick Chung healthy again will certainly help some, but I'm already looking ahead to the 2014 free agent class. Jairus Byrd? Donte (W)Hitner? An above-average player at that position would do wonders for this team.

Set Your Expectations Accordingly

Jason Brewer on new Eagles safety Kenny Philips' contract:

Phillips' contract has no signing bonus or guaranteed money. He has a $1 million roster bonus that he'll get if he makes the team and $850k base salary. Adam Caplan reports that he could earn another million if he reaches certain incentives.

According to reports, the Giants did make Phillips an offer in an attempt to keep him from hitting the free agent market. But when you look at how little he signed for, you have to wonder whether the Giants offered even less or whether it was some sort of "take it or leave" deal that he left.

Only about $100,000 more than the veteran's miminum salary and a roster bonus that doesn't kick in unless he makes the team. That's not so much "team-friendly" as it is "this guy has nothing left." It would be tough for the Giants to sneak under that low bar. They clearly didn't want him or his knee issues. At this point, I expect absolutely nothing from Philips.

All-22: Hey Look, An Eagles Run Game!

Was that really Andy Reid on the sideline last Sunday? The Eagles called 17 runs in the second half against the Giants, shocking pretty much everyone. And, as I pointed out on Monday, that new focus on the run game made Michael Vick into a much better quarterback. With the pressure off of his back, Vick completed 8 of 11 attempts for 109 yards in the second half.

Let's dive into the All-22 coaches film on this one. The first thing to note is that the Eagles didn't just run the ball more—they called different run plays. The staple of the Howard Mudd offensive line is the stretch to the outside (read more about that here). Those outside runs behind athletic linemen worked great last year, but the patchwork offensive line the Eagles trotted out last week couldn't execute the same way.

In the second half (except down by the goal line), the Eagles abandoned those run schemes in favor of more straight-up blocking, often with the I-Formation. It worked:

Linemen set the edge, McCoy follows his FB.

Even Dallas Reynolds got great push here.

The Eagles also used Stanley Havili in an H-Back set up for a few plays, giving them some interesting flexibility. Here they fake the toss to Bryce Brown and hand off to Havili coming up the gut instead. He follows Todd Herremans into the hole:

Later, they came back to the same look and used it to get numbers on the right side instead:

Suddenly, with the run game working, Vick's job gets so much easier. The linebackers actually bought this run fake, leaving Brent Celek wide open over the middle:

And with the defense now trying to both stop the run and prevent the pass, remembering to contain and control Vick's scrambling becomes a greater problem. He ran 3 times for 30 yards in the second half:

More All-22: The Eagles Early Offensive Line Struggles, How The Eagles Offense Made It Easy On Mike Vick

The Eagles Early Offensive Line Struggles

The Eagles offensive line didn't have a fun time early in Sunday's game against the Giants. In fact, they were getting beaten at nearly every turn. Michael Vick was taking hits, LeSean McCoy couldn't find holes. It wasn't pretty.

Dallas Reynolds and Demetress Bell played especially poorly, but the scariest thing is that they weren't the only culprits. The whole line was getting beat, sometimes one-on-one and other times because of communication breakdowns. Check out a bunch of the plays below:

Kiwanuka, playing nose guard, manhandles Reynolds while Mathis looks the other way.

McCoy blocks the blitzer, but Watkins doesn't get help from Reynolds on Rocky Bernard.

Reynolds, pulling, whiffs on Chase Blackburn. Bell also can't sustain block on JPP.

Herremans gets beat inside by Justin Tuck.

Communication issue leaves blitzer unblocked.

More All-22: How The Eagles Offense Made It Easy On Mike Vick; Hey Look, An Eagles Run Game!

Mike P's, Ooh-Op-Ooh, and Other Eagles-Giants Notes

I was sure the Eagles were going to lose.

When they had to settle for a field goal with 1:52 left in the fourth quarter. When the Giants kick returner brought out the ensuing kickoff for yet another long gain. When, on 4th and 1, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie was charged with pass interference. When, on the following 3rd and 10, Nnamdi Asomugha drew a second pass interference call. Even when the Giants' Ramses Barden mauled Asomugha for the same call going the other way, there was little hope Lawrence Tynes would miss the 54-yard field goal attempt.

And then he did! ... Only Andy Reid, in all his glory, punched his gift horse in the mouth by calling a timeout. Surely, on the second attempt, Tynes would put it in. But then, in one of the most improbable events in an improbable season, he missed again, and the Eagles won.

I think I'm still in shock.

Let's get to a few notes on the game, and from the locker room after:

Isn't it amazing how much better Michael Vick looks when you establish a run game for him? In the second half, when the Eagles fed LeSean McCoy 17 times, Vick went 8 of 11 for 109 yards, plus he scrambled 3 times for another 30. The Giants, bowed by McCoy's dazzling cutbacks, weren't able to get the same pressure on Vick, and he could sit in the pocket more comfortably.
One of the most amazing things about the Eagles approach to the run game yesterday was how they stuck with it despite poor returns early. In the first half McCoy and Bryce Brown had a combined 8 carries for 1 yard. Add in Damaris Johnson's one carry that lost a yard and you get a big zero in the rushing column. Nine times out of ten, Reid and Marty Mornhinweg would have used that as an excuse to abandon the run. Not last night, and it paid off.
The margin of victory was so close that one turnover certainly would have doomed the Eagles, but they finally kept the ball under wraps. That was huge.
DRC was funny in the locker room. He talked about the 4th and 1 play in which he let Victor Cruz get by him for a 30 yard gain: "He gave me the Ooh-Op-Ooh." When the laughs subsided and he was asked to elaborate, he said, "I go one way, he went the other." All in good fun, especially when DRC picked off Eli Manning in the end zone on the next play. He told me that in film study they saw that Eli often stares down Cruz, and if he's covered, will immediately go to his second option, typically the tight end. DRC's job on the play was to spy on Manning, and it worked beautifully.
I also talked to Jason Babin for a bit, because I'm somewhat fascinated by the Eagles stand-up blitz look. One would think that the defense has shown enough film that offenses would be able to shut it down. Babin described the "infinite possibilities" out of that look, and how the offense really can't anticipate where he or his fellow blitzers will end up.
What's going on in the kickoff coverage? Might be as simple as Akeem Jordan and Colt Anderson, the team's two best special teamers, being inactive. But Bobby April has to do a better job regardless.
Post game, Reid said it doesn't feel so good to try to freeze the kicker and then be "surrounded by 66,000 people who want to rip your throat out." If Tynes makes that second field goal attempt, I think there might have been a riot on Broad Street. But nice to finally be on the right end of some field goal luck.
Continuing a trend, the Eagles defense only allowed 17 points despite poor field position. Still, there are serious holes in this defense. Especially down at the red zone, the coordinated coverage between Brandon Boykin in the slot and the linebackers needs work. Receivers running slants and underneath crossing routes seem to be the real problem. Additionally, the combination of Nnamdi Asomugha's lack of speed and Kurt Coleman's quick bite on play action is deadly. At the end if the day, Nnamdi's not getting any younger, so Coleman has to have better awareness.
On a related note, Rodgers-Cromartie (still) doesn't seem too pleased with zone coverage. He talked about how he likes lining up in man coverage, facing the offense head-on. DRC suggested that a lot of the coverage problems they have come from switching out of that base defense: "Things can get a little confusing."
One final thing. When talking with Cullen Jenkins, Babin stopped by to tell his line-buddy that he did "3 Mike P's" in the game. When pressed for the meaning of that expression, Babin called it an inside joke and would only say it meant "everything and nothing." Derek Landri wouldn't elaborate beyond "throwing everything at them." When asked if a "Mike P" could possibly be named after anyone in particular, both players slyly demurred.

Photo from Getty.

(Not) Looking Forward To The Eagles-Giants Game

I'm not sure I've ever dreaded an Eagles-Giants game as much as this one.

It's not that I don't think the Eagles have a good chance to win. Despite some flaws (see my post here and Derek's more extensive discussion here), the defense looks better than it has in years. The offense, for the first time in a long time, is where the main trouble lies, and just one or two fewer turnovers would help out there immensely. I also think there's at least a reasonable chance that Andy Reid and Marty Mornhinweg will adjust their play calling. Running the ball only five times in the first half last week was inexcusable, no matter what they said after the fact.

I might turn out to be a sucker once more, hoping Andy can change his ways. But there is at least some precedent. Last year against the Giants, LeSean McCoy got an extra workload. He averaged only 17.4 rushes in his other starts, and 23.5 in his two against the cross-Jersey rivals. A heavy dose of Shady is surely the only way Michael Vick is going to stay upright. I shudder to think what Jason Pierre-Paul and his merry gang are going to do if they're keying off on pass plays every down, against this offensive line.

Still, even if the Eagles aren't firing on all cylinders, I'm under no delusions that the Super Bowl-winning Giants are some sort of powerhouse. The Eagles beat them last November with Vince Young at the controls. That has to count for something.

So, yes, I think they can win. But I'm dreading this game because I'm dreading a loss. The Eagles have played three games. Results have certainly been mixed. Two one-point wins, with similar problems but opposite post-game reactions. Then the Arizona disaster. Now they're entering division play, when everything really starts to matter, against a rival no one wants to lose to.

I know it's early in the season, but you can feel it in the air, can't you? If the Eagles lose on Sunday the city will turn on them. Vick and Reid will bear the brunt of it yet again. And that might be reasonable and justified. But it certainly won't be fun. On paper, there will be time to repair the damage. 2-2 is no impossible feat to climb to get to the playoffs. But will it matter?

The next four games after Sunday are at Pittsburgh, home against Detroit and Atlanta, then at New Orleans. None of those will be easy. The Eagles could easily lose two or three of those. But I think our perception of that stretch will be heavily influenced by what happens against the Giants this week. If the Eagles win their first NFC East game, a mixed bag going forward will be tolerated. If not...

If not, I'm not sure both Vick and Reid will still be around by week ten, when the Cowboys come back to town. And if they are, they might be wishing they weren't. It won't be fun any more.

So yeah. Am I overreacting? Probably. Will everyone else? Almost certainly. Hard to look forward to that.

Photo from Getty.