WARHORSE
07-22-2009, 10:46 PM
Football Outsiders’ Aaron Schatz talks 2009 Broncos (http://gazettebroncos.freedomblogging.com/2009/07/21/football-outsiders-aaron-schatz-talks-2009-broncos/765/)
July 21st, 2009, 3:09 pm · Post a Comment · posted by Frank Schwab
Had a chance to ask Aaron Schatz, founder of the brilliant Football Outsiders and author of the Broncos’ chapter in their 2009 almanac, some questions about Denver this year.
Football Outsiders doesn’t expect big things for the Broncos this year. Denver fans might not like all of the gloom and doom for the team this year, but I respect that FO comes by their opinions by intense statistical analysis. That usually takes the human element and biases out of it. Here’s what Schatz had to say about the 2009 Broncos:
FS: Your almanac ran 10,000 simulations using your DVOA (defense-adjusted value over average) formula for offense, defense and special teams. The Broncos were projected for 4.9 wins with a 78 percent chance of finishing with six or fewer wins. Why do your numbers think Broncos are going to be so bad?
AS: Oh, a combination of all kinds of things. The projection system has tons of variables, from specific splits of performance in 2008 to personnel-based variables like age, injury record, and experience at various positions. On offense, you start with the quarterback change, replacing one of the top quarterbacks in the league with an average-level player. The Broncos had the same offensive line for all 16 games last year; that’s not likely to happen again. People expect Knowshon Moreno to be a big improvement on the backs they had last year, but is he really going to do better than the 4.8 yards per carry those guys averaged as a group?
So the offense looks to decline a bit, and the defense is probably going to be as bad as last year, or close to it. Based on our DVOA ratings - which take every single play, break each one down by situation, and adjust for yardage towards a first down or touchdown, with opponent adjustments as well - the 2008 Broncos were the second-worst defense in the NFL since 1994. (The worst was also last year, Detroit.) They’re going to switch schemes with a bunch of veteran backups and guys playing out of position, although they’ve got good inside linebackers. They will have the oldest starting secondary of any team in the past decade, and teams where all four defensive back starters are over 30 do not have a good history.
That’s just the big stuff. There are also a bunch of little trends that add up. Plus, overall, you have to deal with the fact that teams with new coordinators that are learning new schemes tend to take to perform a little worse, and the Broncos have the hardest projected schedule in the NFL based on our projections of their 16 opponents. Our projections are based on overall trends, looking for teams over the last decade that were similar and what happened to them. Obviously, there are reasons to believe that the Broncos won’t be affected by these things in the same way - there are plenty of teams who had new coordinators and turned things around to go to the playoffs - but overall, when you put all the trends together, this is what we come up with. The Broncos did have a winning record in seven percent of the simulations, so it isn’t like it can’t happen.
FS: In the almanac you write that the Broncos’ offseason strategy should have been clear, that the offense was fine and likely to get better, so “the team needed to throw as many resources possible at the defense, both in free agency and the draft.” Everyone knows that didn’t happen. Let’s start with the first decision of the offseason, firing Mike Shanahan and hiring an offensive mind in Josh McDaniels. Do you think they made a mistake not hiring a defensive-minded coach like Steve Spagnuolo or Raheem Morris?
AS: Not necessarily. I think the biggest mistake was not to hire McDaniels, but to hire him with the idea that he wanted to overhaul everything the team did from soup to nuts. Look at Mike Tomlin in Pittsburgh. He was supposed to be a young defensive guru of the Tampa-2. He gets the job in Pittsburgh and keeps Dick LeBeau on as defensive coordinator, because why change what the Steelers did well? They still run the zone-blitzing 3-4 with mostly Cover-3 behind it, and the difference with Tomlin is more about his new attitude and the infusion of fresh blood after Bill Cowher won the ring and lost a little bit of his drive. There’s no reason McDaniels could not have followed a similar path.
FS: Jay Cutler ranks very high in your formulas and you don’t seem to like Denver’s decision to trade him. How much of an impact will Cutler have in Chicago, and how will Kyle Orton perform as his replacement?
AS: Chicago has the best projection of any team in the NFC. Cutler helps improve their offense to average in our projections, and that combines with the fact that we expect their good defense to bounce back to being very good and their special teams to be excellent as always. It isn’t like Cutler will lead them all the way — it is more like Cutler won’t stand in the way of winning like seemingly every Bears quarterback of the last decade except Jim Miller. (I’ll be honest – subjectively, even if the Bears win the most games in the NFC, I think the Giants or Eagles are a better bet to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl.)
I think Orton’s performance will probably be pretty close to what he was doing in Chicago before he injured his ankle at midseason. He’ll probably have a higher completion percentage but fewer yards per completion, because that’s how McDaniels’ offense differs from the one the Bears run. He’s got better players around him, but faces a tougher schedule, which should even out.
FS: Onto free agency. Your analysis shows Denver will have the oldest starting secondary of any NFL team since at least 2000. You write that Brian Dawkins’ coverage skills have slipped and too many of his run tackles were after the opponent got a first down, that Renaldo Hill has “never been more than a league-average safety” and Andre Goodman might have simply had a career year in 2008. Were any of those signings beneficial? Or is this secondary headed for disaster?
AS: Look, if you had a good young safety or two, signing Brian Dawkins would be a good thing. He’s still a good player, despite having more holes in his game than he used to, and he’s a great clubhouse presence I’m sure. If you had good players everywhere else, I’m sure Renaldo Hill is fine. Andre Goodman would be a swell nickel back. But those three combined? I mean, Champ Bailey is great and he probably will be healthier this year but the man can only do so much.
FS: Which of Denver’s other free agent moves did you agree with, and which ones might be mistakes?
AS: Well, before they drafted Moreno I thought the various running backs they signed were a nice answer to the depth problems of a year ago, a good mix of low-cost veterans with complementary skills.
FS: Do you like receiver Jabar Gaffney, nose tackle Ronald Fields, and does the replacement of Mike Leach for Lonie Paxton at long snapper add any value to the team (assuming Paxton is slightly better than the reliable Leach)?
AS: Gaffney is a perfectly reasonable third or fourth receiver who has the advantage of already knowing McDaniels’ offense. A good signing. I don’t understand why I’ve seen some Broncos fan websites get so excited about Fields in the middle of the 3-4 - we’re talking about a guy who couldn’t break into the starting lineup in San Francisco. That’s not really a good sign. As to long snappers, as far as I know a long snapper is a long snapper, they’re all pretty much the same. I guess I’d rather have a guy like Zak DeOssie who can also serve other roles on the team.
FS: You have the 2008 Broncos ranked as the second-worst defense in the NFL since 1994, when Football Outsiders started keeping DVOA stats, ahead of only the winless 2008 Lions. What made Denver’s defense so historically bad, and can they be much better this year?
AS: Well, in the NFL, anything can happen. I just don’t think it is likely. It’s hard to say exactly why they were so bad. I mean, they were bad in every way. The best cornerback by far was injured half the season, and was horribly un-Champ-like when he came back late in the year. The safeties were lousy. There was very little pass rush. They were starting two linebackers who probably wouldn’t have started on any other team. They were terrible on every down, in the red zone, in late and close situations, against both the pass and the run.
FS: Peyton Hillis scored very well in your DVOA rankings as a runner and a receiver. His 41 percent DVOA on running plays was well ahead of Correll Buckhalter (11 percent) and LaMont Jordan (22.2 percent). Does this tell us that Hillis should get a longer look at tailback, or is the sample size too small to get an accurate read on him?
AS: A combination of two things. First, the sample size is too small. Second, remember that a running back’s performance is partly related to the quality of the offensive line. It is really hard to overstate how good the Denver line was when it came to run-blocking in 2008.
July 21st, 2009, 3:09 pm · Post a Comment · posted by Frank Schwab
Had a chance to ask Aaron Schatz, founder of the brilliant Football Outsiders and author of the Broncos’ chapter in their 2009 almanac, some questions about Denver this year.
Football Outsiders doesn’t expect big things for the Broncos this year. Denver fans might not like all of the gloom and doom for the team this year, but I respect that FO comes by their opinions by intense statistical analysis. That usually takes the human element and biases out of it. Here’s what Schatz had to say about the 2009 Broncos:
FS: Your almanac ran 10,000 simulations using your DVOA (defense-adjusted value over average) formula for offense, defense and special teams. The Broncos were projected for 4.9 wins with a 78 percent chance of finishing with six or fewer wins. Why do your numbers think Broncos are going to be so bad?
AS: Oh, a combination of all kinds of things. The projection system has tons of variables, from specific splits of performance in 2008 to personnel-based variables like age, injury record, and experience at various positions. On offense, you start with the quarterback change, replacing one of the top quarterbacks in the league with an average-level player. The Broncos had the same offensive line for all 16 games last year; that’s not likely to happen again. People expect Knowshon Moreno to be a big improvement on the backs they had last year, but is he really going to do better than the 4.8 yards per carry those guys averaged as a group?
So the offense looks to decline a bit, and the defense is probably going to be as bad as last year, or close to it. Based on our DVOA ratings - which take every single play, break each one down by situation, and adjust for yardage towards a first down or touchdown, with opponent adjustments as well - the 2008 Broncos were the second-worst defense in the NFL since 1994. (The worst was also last year, Detroit.) They’re going to switch schemes with a bunch of veteran backups and guys playing out of position, although they’ve got good inside linebackers. They will have the oldest starting secondary of any team in the past decade, and teams where all four defensive back starters are over 30 do not have a good history.
That’s just the big stuff. There are also a bunch of little trends that add up. Plus, overall, you have to deal with the fact that teams with new coordinators that are learning new schemes tend to take to perform a little worse, and the Broncos have the hardest projected schedule in the NFL based on our projections of their 16 opponents. Our projections are based on overall trends, looking for teams over the last decade that were similar and what happened to them. Obviously, there are reasons to believe that the Broncos won’t be affected by these things in the same way - there are plenty of teams who had new coordinators and turned things around to go to the playoffs - but overall, when you put all the trends together, this is what we come up with. The Broncos did have a winning record in seven percent of the simulations, so it isn’t like it can’t happen.
FS: In the almanac you write that the Broncos’ offseason strategy should have been clear, that the offense was fine and likely to get better, so “the team needed to throw as many resources possible at the defense, both in free agency and the draft.” Everyone knows that didn’t happen. Let’s start with the first decision of the offseason, firing Mike Shanahan and hiring an offensive mind in Josh McDaniels. Do you think they made a mistake not hiring a defensive-minded coach like Steve Spagnuolo or Raheem Morris?
AS: Not necessarily. I think the biggest mistake was not to hire McDaniels, but to hire him with the idea that he wanted to overhaul everything the team did from soup to nuts. Look at Mike Tomlin in Pittsburgh. He was supposed to be a young defensive guru of the Tampa-2. He gets the job in Pittsburgh and keeps Dick LeBeau on as defensive coordinator, because why change what the Steelers did well? They still run the zone-blitzing 3-4 with mostly Cover-3 behind it, and the difference with Tomlin is more about his new attitude and the infusion of fresh blood after Bill Cowher won the ring and lost a little bit of his drive. There’s no reason McDaniels could not have followed a similar path.
FS: Jay Cutler ranks very high in your formulas and you don’t seem to like Denver’s decision to trade him. How much of an impact will Cutler have in Chicago, and how will Kyle Orton perform as his replacement?
AS: Chicago has the best projection of any team in the NFC. Cutler helps improve their offense to average in our projections, and that combines with the fact that we expect their good defense to bounce back to being very good and their special teams to be excellent as always. It isn’t like Cutler will lead them all the way — it is more like Cutler won’t stand in the way of winning like seemingly every Bears quarterback of the last decade except Jim Miller. (I’ll be honest – subjectively, even if the Bears win the most games in the NFC, I think the Giants or Eagles are a better bet to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl.)
I think Orton’s performance will probably be pretty close to what he was doing in Chicago before he injured his ankle at midseason. He’ll probably have a higher completion percentage but fewer yards per completion, because that’s how McDaniels’ offense differs from the one the Bears run. He’s got better players around him, but faces a tougher schedule, which should even out.
FS: Onto free agency. Your analysis shows Denver will have the oldest starting secondary of any NFL team since at least 2000. You write that Brian Dawkins’ coverage skills have slipped and too many of his run tackles were after the opponent got a first down, that Renaldo Hill has “never been more than a league-average safety” and Andre Goodman might have simply had a career year in 2008. Were any of those signings beneficial? Or is this secondary headed for disaster?
AS: Look, if you had a good young safety or two, signing Brian Dawkins would be a good thing. He’s still a good player, despite having more holes in his game than he used to, and he’s a great clubhouse presence I’m sure. If you had good players everywhere else, I’m sure Renaldo Hill is fine. Andre Goodman would be a swell nickel back. But those three combined? I mean, Champ Bailey is great and he probably will be healthier this year but the man can only do so much.
FS: Which of Denver’s other free agent moves did you agree with, and which ones might be mistakes?
AS: Well, before they drafted Moreno I thought the various running backs they signed were a nice answer to the depth problems of a year ago, a good mix of low-cost veterans with complementary skills.
FS: Do you like receiver Jabar Gaffney, nose tackle Ronald Fields, and does the replacement of Mike Leach for Lonie Paxton at long snapper add any value to the team (assuming Paxton is slightly better than the reliable Leach)?
AS: Gaffney is a perfectly reasonable third or fourth receiver who has the advantage of already knowing McDaniels’ offense. A good signing. I don’t understand why I’ve seen some Broncos fan websites get so excited about Fields in the middle of the 3-4 - we’re talking about a guy who couldn’t break into the starting lineup in San Francisco. That’s not really a good sign. As to long snappers, as far as I know a long snapper is a long snapper, they’re all pretty much the same. I guess I’d rather have a guy like Zak DeOssie who can also serve other roles on the team.
FS: You have the 2008 Broncos ranked as the second-worst defense in the NFL since 1994, when Football Outsiders started keeping DVOA stats, ahead of only the winless 2008 Lions. What made Denver’s defense so historically bad, and can they be much better this year?
AS: Well, in the NFL, anything can happen. I just don’t think it is likely. It’s hard to say exactly why they were so bad. I mean, they were bad in every way. The best cornerback by far was injured half the season, and was horribly un-Champ-like when he came back late in the year. The safeties were lousy. There was very little pass rush. They were starting two linebackers who probably wouldn’t have started on any other team. They were terrible on every down, in the red zone, in late and close situations, against both the pass and the run.
FS: Peyton Hillis scored very well in your DVOA rankings as a runner and a receiver. His 41 percent DVOA on running plays was well ahead of Correll Buckhalter (11 percent) and LaMont Jordan (22.2 percent). Does this tell us that Hillis should get a longer look at tailback, or is the sample size too small to get an accurate read on him?
AS: A combination of two things. First, the sample size is too small. Second, remember that a running back’s performance is partly related to the quality of the offensive line. It is really hard to overstate how good the Denver line was when it came to run-blocking in 2008.