PDA

View Full Version : PFF: Ranking offensive lines through week 5



tomjonesrocks
10-08-2015, 08:13 AM
Denver comes in 20th. Raiders 5th.

20. Denver Broncos (10th)
Pass blocking rank: 22nd
Run blocking rank: 20th
Penalties ranks: 16th

Stud: It's Evan Mathis (+3.7), but he hasn't reached anywhere near the levels of play he was at in Philadelphia.

Dud: It was a lot to ask of Ty Sambrailo (-10.6) to adjust to life as an NFL left tackle—indeed, proving too much. He has struggled throughout the season.

Summary: The line does seem to be getting better, and the play of Matt Paradis can be considered a success. But with so much invested on defense, there is a feeling that Denver may have neglected this unit.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/10/07/ranking-all-32-nfl-offensive-lines-entering-week-5/

Ravage!!!
10-08-2015, 08:48 AM
1)You might want to edit some of the mis-typed letters in that post.

2)Better ranking I would have given with the eye/watching test.

Timmy!
10-08-2015, 09:00 AM
Through week 5? Whoa.....I missed an entire week? That was some good shit.

VonDoom
10-08-2015, 11:15 AM
As always, a lot of this depends on how much weight you give PFF. If you buy into their methods, this says that we're below average but not bottom five or whatever, so I'd probably agree with that. The Colts are at #19 though, and their line is worse than ours.

I will agree that the Seahawks line (#30) and the Lions (#32) are probably right, though that last one had something to do with us, I'm sure.

If the Raiders are really as good as #5, this game Sunday will be interesting.

OrangeHoof
10-08-2015, 12:22 PM
Interesting that the AFC Suck Division (tm) are all in a group: 16. Houston, 17. Tennessee, 18. Jackassville, 19. Indy.

VonDoom
10-08-2015, 02:32 PM
Speaking of our O-line, Football Outsiders has a great in depth look at the line in last week's game and its problems in pass protection. Really interesting read:


There are really only two reasons that offensive lines struggle: lack of talent and lack of chemistry. Usually, when things are really bad, it's both. I'm still undecided on if the Broncos are suffering from lack of talent. I like their guards (Evan Mathis and Louis Vasquez), who have both been getting better as the season has gone along. Right tackle Ryan Harris is a veteran offensive tackle that is really nothing more than a stopgap (there's a reason he's on his third team in four years) but if he's your worst offensive lineman, you can have a decent unit. It's the other two spots that could end up making or breaking Denver's line.

At left tackle, Denver went with a rookie, Ty Sambrailo, who has struggled early on but has shown some things that I find encouraging. The problem is that he's already banged up, and he sat out last Sunday with a shoulder injury. If he's going to be where the Broncos need him to be come January, he needs to be playing. At center, Matt Paradis had a terrible first game but has looked better since. He still gets pushed around by nose tackles in the run game, but looks good at the second level and may develop into an above-average pass-blocker. I think he has a shot to be at least a league-average center, and paired with above-average guard play, that could give Denver a nice interior line.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/word-muth/2015/word-muth-rocky-mountain-sigh

Joel
10-08-2015, 08:59 PM
Speaking of our O-line, Football Outsiders has a great in depth look at the line in last week's game and its problems in pass protection. Really interesting read:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/word-muth/2015/word-muth-rocky-mountain-sigh
Great article, thanks, and the kind of incisive nuts and bolts stuff that makes me like FO (and its inspiration) so much better than PFF (note to those guys: You can't explain stuff you don't understand. ;)) It's a far more depressing read, but also far more informative and reliable, and does a fine job highlighting why our lines unfamiliarity with the playbook, each other and (in Sambrailo and Paradis' case) actual NFL games is probably a bigger issue than talent (though, as FO notes, Paradis and Sambrailo are still young unknown quantities there, and will likely look it for a while.)

The other one though... ranking our line only slightly below average is a textbook example of why so many people don't take PFFs gloss of football sophistication seriously. We're 28th in passing yds/att and 25th in Ints, while 29th in rushing yds/att. Our average ToP, plays and yards are mirror images of our defenses: And that's a TOP FIVE D in every meaningful category but ONE, #1 in most. In other words, our offense is producing as if facing a top five D weekly, yet Minnesota's the only opponent with multiple rankings even in the top ten (and still very) few and all are below average in most things.

That's without breaking down tape of each play in all their games, but still, we've had nearly the worst performance in the league so far against average (at best) resistance. 5.5 yds/att through the air, 3.5 on the ground, against teams with unimpressive stats even with big boost from our awful offense. I guess in PFF Land, where our line's below average, but not awful, that means all our "skill" players suck. That might be plausible to most folks if this were still the early '80s, but it's a lot easier for the general public to verify (or refute) superficial analysis now.

I'll stick with FO; they actually know what they're talking about when they tell us what's happening, and have enough snap to figure out WHY it's happening.

Simple Jaded
10-10-2015, 03:46 PM
As always, a lot of this depends on how much weight you give PFF. If you buy into their methods, this says that we're below average but not bottom five or whatever, so I'd probably agree with that. The Colts are at #19 though, and their line is worse than ours.

I will agree that the Seahawks line (#30) and the Lions (#32) are probably right, though that last one had something to do with us, I'm sure.

If the Raiders are really as good as #5, this game Sunday will be interesting.

PFF grades players and ranks them but as far as I know there's no way of putting these into context, like who these players actually played against.

They're grades, probably similar to how position coaches grade their players, but theres a difference between a negative grade going against Justin Houston and a positive grade going against Barkevious Mingo.

I'd also like to know how/if PFF adjusts grades when players get help, such as TE/RB's chipping or when a G helps a T because he's uncovered.

There's a lot I don't know about their rankings but I still like having them.

Joel
10-10-2015, 04:27 PM
PFF grades players and ranks them but as far as I know there's no way of putting these into context, like who these players actually played against.

They're grades, probably similar to how position coaches grade their players, but theres a difference between a negative grade going against Justin Houston and a positive grade going against Barkevious Mingo.

I'd also like to know how/if PFF adjusts grades when players get help, such as TE/RB's chipping or when a G helps a T because he's uncovered.

There's a lot I don't know about their rankings but I still like having them.
Its quality varies by individual authors; some know their stuff, others don't. Example: Around the start of 2013, there was a debate here over whether to keep Mike Adams or Rahim Moore, and someone arguing for Moore linked a PFF article claiming Moore had performed better. That claim was based on stats showing our defense performed better with Moore on the field than with Adams—even though the author cited but dismissed stats showing that, when TARGETED, Adams had a lower catch rate and far more deflections and tackles.

I don't know why our defense was worse OVERALL with Adams; maybe we mostly used him on long yardage downs (when defenses will eagerly surrender a 12 yd catch to reach a 4th and 5 punt.) What I DO know is that their RECORDS show Adams INDIVIDUALLY outperformed Moore in 2012 (even ignoring the playoff game) and went to last years Pro Bowl after posting 5 Ints (this year he has 3 through 5 games) while Moore's continues posting pedestrian stats starting for a Texans team so bad it couldn't beat a mediocre Colts team that had the only starting QB older than Manning (fresh off an early morning ER trip.)

Ultimately, PFFs analyses and conclusions (as everyone elses) stand or fall on the merits of content, not name recognition. But ranking Denver and Houstons awful lines merely a bit below average doesn't pass the smell nor eye test. Such dubious "stats" are only relevant to fans so rabid they view everything through team-color-tinted glasses and use stats as drunks use lightposts: For support, not illumination.

Simple Jaded
10-10-2015, 04:45 PM
Pff > fo.

Joel
10-10-2015, 05:08 PM
Pff > fo.
That's classic baiting; one might even call it masterful. ;)

Simple Jaded
10-10-2015, 05:22 PM
That's classic baiting; one might even call it masterful. ;)

I see what you did there, well done sir.

Cugel
10-10-2015, 07:49 PM
Denver comes in 20th. Raiders 5th.

20. Denver Broncos (10th)
Pass blocking rank: 22nd
Run blocking rank: 20th
Penalties ranks: 16th

Stud: It's Evan Mathis (+3.7), but he hasn't reached anywhere near the levels of play he was at in Philadelphia.

Dud: It was a lot to ask of Ty Sambrailo (-10.6) to adjust to life as an NFL left tackle—indeed, proving too much. He has struggled throughout the season.

Summary: The line does seem to be getting better, and the play of Matt Paradis can be considered a success. But with so much invested on defense, there is a feeling that Denver may have neglected this unit.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/10/07/ranking-all-32-nfl-offensive-lines-entering-week-5/

These statistics really mask the putrid play of the Denver OL this season because they ignore several key points:

1. Peyton Manning has one of the quickest releases in football. If a QB like Brock who has a slower release were in there, there would be a lot more sacks, fumbles and interceptions that would make these stats look a lot worse.

2. Peyton has been in the shot-gun virtually the entire time, which makes it much easier for him to see the rush, and get rid of the ball quickly. That helps his OL look better than they are.

If a QB like Peyton is getting sacked in 2 seconds while he's in the shot-gun, that's just a horrible play by the OL. That should never happen.

Elway refused to go out in FA and shore up the piss-weak OL in free agency. Instead he insisted on relying on rookies, and re-treads. All offseason it looked terrible and fans and reporters were saying "how can this possibly work? They are starting a rookie at LT!"

And the line of B.S. out of Dove Valley was "don't worry! We'll be just fine! We have complete confidence in our OL and Ty Sambrailo!"

Well, that was complete bull-shit and the critics were right. This OL has been terrible and all the jolly talk from the crew of the Titanic about how "no need to panic! We have everything under control" has been exposed for exactly what it was - total and complete corporate ass-covering.

They flat screwed up. They didn't go out and get a stud veteran FA RT, which was a huge need. Instead they're using a career backup in Ryan Harris. Then Ryan Clady goes down for the season.

Well, he's done that repeatedly the last 3 years, so it's not actually a huge surprise. They might have anticipated something like that could happen and be prepared instead of just throwing in a rookie LT! But, no!

And while the signing of Evan Mathis was a coup - it was both unexpected and not the result of planning. Chip Kelly is a moron who is shipping all the talented players out of Philly, including Mathis, and bringing in "his players" - exactly as McMoron did here in Denver. Kelly's going to be fired, probably after this season.

Mathis missed the entire off-season and is trying to get into football shape during the regular season. It's been a struggle. But, at least we can expect him to get better. It's difficult to imagine either Paradis or Harris, let alone Micheal Schofield ever becoming good OL. They are at best mediocre.

Joel
10-10-2015, 09:28 PM
Mathis and Vasquez are All Pros but STILL look like crap: That suggests the deficiency is familiarity (with both each other and the complex new playbook) not talent. Harris when we drafted him, in Houston and in KC; not stellar, but he wouldn't be a career starter if he sucked, and, as I recall, what got kept him off the field and then cut in Denver was his inability to stay healthy, not play.

I wanted more aggressive FA and draft moves on the line, too, as I always do, but the group we had was awful, and even the best GM and coaches can only do so much with a single seasons draft picks and cap space, especially when an All Pro blindside protector and road grader goes down in preseason. This is why I wish we'd brought in Kubiak and Dennison last year; if we had, we'd have at least a decent line by now, and pretty much everyone would know the playbook. As it is, we're doing all that learning and mending THIS year, and I doubt Manning has another season left to wait for that.

Simple Jaded
10-10-2015, 10:32 PM
Mathis and Vasquez are All Pros but STILL look like crap: That suggests the deficiency is familiarity (with both each other and the complex new playbook) not talent. Harris when we drafted him, in Houston and in KC; not stellar, but he wouldn't be a career starter if he sucked, and, as I recall, what got kept him off the field and then cut in Denver was his inability to stay healthy, not play.

I wanted more aggressive FA and draft moves on the line, too, as I always do, but the group we had was awful, and even the best GM and coaches can only do so much with a single seasons draft picks and cap space, especially when an All Pro blindside protector and road grader goes down in preseason. This is why I wish we'd brought in Kubiak and Dennison last year; if we had, we'd have at least a decent line by now, and pretty much everyone would know the playbook. As it is, we're doing all that learning and mending THIS year, and I doubt Manning has another season left to wait for that.

You keep talking about Kub and Rico like they're some kind of OL gurus.

Cugel
10-11-2015, 01:08 PM
Mathis and Vasquez are All Pros but STILL look like crap: That suggests the deficiency is familiarity (with both each other and the complex new playbook) not talent. Harris when we drafted him, in Houston and in KC; not stellar, but he wouldn't be a career starter if he sucked, and, as I recall, what got kept him off the field and then cut in Denver was his inability to stay healthy, not play.

Harris hasn't started everywhere he played. He started 15 games last year for the Chefs, but didn't even want him back, and he only started 5 games out of 32 in his last 2 seasons with the Texans. He's the classic definition of a "journeyman OL." If Ryan Harris is your starter, you need to go out and get a better OL because he's career backup quality.

As for Mathis, we presume he's going to be good because he was a pro-bowler in 2013. But, he turns 34 this November and he's coming off serious knee surgery from a year ago.

Perhaps there's a reason why nobody in the NFL wanted to pay him the money he wanted and he had to settle for even less $ than the $5 million he was scheduled to earn in Philly? He may NEVER return to his 2013 form, just as Peyton Manning will never be the player he was in 2010 before his 4 neck surgeries. So what do they have there? A Pro-Bowler or a guy who USED to be great but is now mediocre at best? So far based solely on the evidence we'd have to say the latter.

As for Paradis. He's been pretty bad, but he hasn't started a game in the NFL till now. Same for Sambrailo. They might be decent players - next season, but they certainly aren't any good right now, and it would be foolish to expect them to be much better their rookie years.

If they are relying on those players to help you get to a SB that's not good!

As for Vasquez, again you're saying "they are Pro-bowlers" based off what exactly? The fact that they were good in the past? Well, they are not playing well this season and there's some indication that Vasquez really isn't very well suited to a ZBS. He's more of a mauler.

That doesn't leave a lot of room for optimism about how far this OL can improve. They certainly shouldn't play any worse, and it might get better, but so far it's been horrible to barely tolerable.

And that's not remotely good enough when you have 39 year old Peyton Manning.

7902
Actual image of Peyton from 2015

Dean
10-11-2015, 08:55 PM
I had thought that I was seeing a slight trend of improvement in our O-line. Today they took a big step backward.

Cugel
10-12-2015, 01:20 AM
I had thought that I was seeing a slight trend of improvement in our O-line. Today they took a big step backward.

I think that "slight improvement" is an optical illusion. Teams are ignoring the run, and blitzing Peyton on every play now. DBs are anticipating throws because Peyton is telegraphing throws.

Why? Did he suddenly get stupid and forget how to look a DB off his WR? Does anybody really believe that? No! He doesn't have time to throw because his OL is putrid.

And they can't run the ball so the play-action fake is just meaningless. Defenders just pay no attention to the fake. Why should they be concerned with the run when the Broncos are the worst rushing team in football?

One dimensional offense. DBs jumping routes? Peyton making bad decisions?

Where have we seen all this before? Super-Bowl!

He was under pressure all Super-Bowl and couldn't step into his throws and was hurrying to get the ball out of his hands in under 2 seconds. Bad things happened.

Bad offensive pass-blocking + old, slow, weak armed QB = lots of turnovers.

CrazyHorse
10-12-2015, 02:40 AM
With everyone healthy what would be the ideal lineup?
I'd say
LT: Sambrailo
LG: Mathis
C: Paradis
RG: Vasquez
RT: Harris

Ravage!!!
10-12-2015, 09:46 AM
With everyone healthy what would be the ideal lineup?
I'd say
LT: Sambrailo
LG: Mathis
C: Paradis
RG: Vasquez
RT: Harris

So you aren't counting the healthy Clady?

Simple Jaded
10-12-2015, 11:14 AM
So you aren't counting the healthy Clady?

I get what he's saying but in this scenario I'd say.

LT -- Clady
LG -- Mathis
C -- Garcia
RG -- Vasquez
RT -- Sambrailo

VonDoom
10-12-2015, 11:35 AM
I get what he's saying but in this scenario I'd say.

LT -- Clady
LG -- Mathis
C -- Garcia
RG -- Vasquez
RT -- Sambrailo

I for one would like to see some more Garcia.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-12-2015, 11:37 AM
Paradis isn't the problem.

Cugel
10-12-2015, 11:56 AM
Paradis isn't the problem.

I'd say he's "a" problem but certainly not THE problem, so you're right.

Realistically nobody (including Clady) is coming to the rescue of this putrid OL.

So, what hope is there for improvement?

The best I can see is to get Sambrailo healthy.

Here's Pro-Football Focus grades on the Broncos OL in the last game:

G Louis Vasquez (+3.4)
G Evan Mathis (+2.8)

So, Evan Mathis played worse than his season through the first four games: PFF on Mathis through 4 games: "Stud: It’s Evan Mathis (+3.7), but he hasn’t reached anywhere near the levels of play he was at in Philadelphia." But he's still the best Broncos OL.

Still the best takeaway from the Raiders game for the OL was the slight improvement in the play of Louis Vasquez. He grade out positive for this game which is a nice change.

So, with Paradis, Vasquez and Mathis all mediocre the real problems on the OL boil down to RT where Michael Schofield and Tyler Polumbus are total hot garbage, and LT where Ryan Harris is filling in for Sambrailo.

Sambrailo might be one of the worst LTs in football with a PFF -10.6 grade, but at least with him in the game, they can move Ryan Harris back to RT, and ship Michael Schofield off to the Philippines in exchange for some coconut.

Then they can pair a TE with Sambrailo to help him out. That might make the entire OL at least mediocre!

And if they can get to mediocre, then maybe they can run the ball a little. And if they can run the ball a little, then maybe the play-action pass can work a little. And if the play-action can work a little, then the LBs and S's have to slow down their rush a little, which gives Peyton a little more time to throw, and a little cleaner pocket in which to step up and throw. And if Peyton has a little more time and a cleaner pocket to throw, then he can start to look DBs off his WRs, so he can throw fewer picks. And he can have more time to complete the deep ball downfield. And if he can complete a few deep passes downfield, then the S's will have to back off and defend the pass instead of walking down into the box every play and blitzing Petyon.

And if the S's back off a bit, then some of the underneath patterns will be open and Peyton can throw some of the short balls. And if those patterns open up that might help the running game a bit more.

This offense might be able to score 30 points on occasion and win some games!

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-12-2015, 06:24 PM
I watched one run play where the NT made a stuff on a stretch play. At first glance you would assume Paradis didn't do his job, but that's not the case at all.

Paradis moved Williams 1 yard off the line of scrimmage and held his block for about 2 seconds, then went to the next level and blocked someone 5 yards up field.

The problem: we got beat so bad on the edge, by the time CJ made his cut the NT had time to make the play.

NightTerror218
10-12-2015, 06:31 PM
I don't blame Ty for being rated so bad. He has been asked a lot for a roomie. Suggs and Hali already have squared off with him in first two weeks. They make guys look bad all the time. Game 3 he was injured.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-12-2015, 06:34 PM
I don't blame Ty for being rated so bad. He has been asked a lot for a roomie. Suggs and Hali already have squared off with him in first two weeks. They make guys look bad all the time. Game 3 he was injured.

I agree, I'm just pointing out we have major issues on the edge. They were starting to improve, seemingly.

NightTerror218
10-12-2015, 06:36 PM
I agree, I'm just pointing out we have major issues on the edge. They were starting to improve, seemingly.

Which is to be expected with this system. And it seems obvious they see the problem when you are rotating back ups in at tackle. Garcia and polumbus got snaps at RT.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-12-2015, 06:37 PM
Which is to be expected with this system. And it seems obvious they see the problem when you are rotating back ups in at tackle. Garcia and polumbus got snaps at RT.

Agreed, I'm just trying to point out if we can solidify OT we might have a decent line.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-13-2015, 01:04 AM
We are down to our #4 and #5 OT's. I guess we shouldn't be surprised the line is struggling so badly.

CrazyHorse
10-13-2015, 01:15 AM
I get what he's saying but in this scenario I'd say.

LT -- Clady
LG -- Mathis
C -- Garcia
RG -- Vasquez
RT -- Sambrailo

That's not happening this year, but at least it wouldn't be terrible.