SB Nation - DeShawn Wynn

Why Ryan Grant Isn't The Answer

Mitchell_M — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:15:18 -0000

Ryan Grant is an enigma of sorts. He is a starting running back in the NFL, yet he is widely regarded as a player with above-average skills at best. He is good at many things, but great at nothing. Even his Scouts Inc. profile from ESPN.com shows how he is simultaneously impressive and limited.

He doesn't have outstanding speed but runs well and has quickness and burst to hit the hole...He has good power to move the pile, but wouldn't be considered an explosive ball carrier...He has adequate hands as a target in the passing game but isn't dangerous in the open field after the catch.

To sum up Ryan Grant's career to this point: "meh." He doesn't have the size of Brandon Jacobs, or the elusiveness of Adrian Peterson, or the power of Michael Turner, or the agility of LaDanian Tomlinson, or the vision of Ronnie Brown, or the afterburner speed of Chris Johnson. He has those things in smaller amounts, but not enough to be considered special.

Despite his rather pedestrian profile, Grant has respectible numbers over his 3-year career: 2654 yards, 15 touchdowns, and a ypc average of 4.3. He has a reputation of being able to produce despite his physical limitations, and that reputation has dubbed him the main rusher on one of the few teams that does not employ a running-back-by-committee.

My question is this: Should Ryan Grant be the lone ball-carrier on the Packers?

In order to explore this question, we first have to look at the state of the running back position in Green Bay since 2007, when Grant burst onto the scene. In 2007, Grant was behind the likes of Brandon Jackson, Vernand Morency, and DeShawn Wynn. It took all the way until Week 8 (the Denver OT game) for Grant to establish himself in the Packer backfield, and even then it was only due to injuries to those in front of him.

In 2008, Grant was the unquestioned starter, and Jackson and Wynn were contributors. That trend continued to this season, with a minor change in personnel. DeShawn Wynn managed to find his way onto the injured reserve list (again), so former Packer Pro Bowler Ahman Green takes his place. Despite his history, Green's addition does little to threaten Grant's job security; the starting job belongs to Ryan Grant until someone is added to the roster that can compete for the position.

While it might be remiss to dismiss Grant's 2007 campaign, I contend that he remained the starter simply because nobody else was good enough to take his place. Brett Favre's 2007 season was as stellar as it was unexpected; defenses had to focus more on the pass, thus opening up running lanes. Almost anybody could have put up decent numbers on that offense so long as they could run without getting winded.

While the story of the undrafted Notre Dame product breaking onto the scene is a popular one, players don't (or at least shouldn't) get paid based on backstory. They get paid for performance; sometimes past, but more often projected. Ryan Grant's major payday during the summer of 2007 was somewhat understated compared to the media frenzy that followed the team (and still does, as we saw from Sunday). But make no mistake, Grant's new contract was based more on the past and less on the future.

From a PR standpoint, I understand why they gave Grant his money. With all the tension pervading the Green Bay fanbase before the 2008 season, the organization needed to do something that the fans could agree upon. What better way to ease that pressure than to extend the contract of a player who had just gained nearly 1,000 yards in half a season? But from a talent and, more importantly, a projected performance standpoint, I think Grant is vastly overpaid.

Let me be clear that I like Ryan Grant and want him on the team. However, I don't think he is being properly used in the offense and the offense is being held back as a result.

Obviously, there's no way I can make these claims without at least attempting to back them up with factual evidence. Therefore, I submit Exhibit A: Ryan Grant's career statistics, supplied by NFL.com. NFL.com has a wonderful feature called "Situational Stats" that breaks down a player's numbers by more in-depth metrics than just per-game or per-carry. These different metrics really show what kind of running back Grant is and why he's being mis-used.

* * *

The first one is dividing Grant's production by the number of attempts he receives. NFL running backs typically carry the ball 20 times in a game. The best way to break down a running back's production is to look at how many yards he gains on attempts 1 through 10, then how much he gains on 11 through 20, and finally anything above carry number 21.

	Attempts	Yards	Average	TDs
1-10	352	1624	4.6	9
11-20	241	992	4.1	8
21+	75	298	4.0	1

As you can see, Grant's numbers start to take a dip once he gets past his tenth carry in a given game. While I like to see coaches stick with the run throughout a game in order to get the back into a rhythm, Grant hasn't demonstrated the ability to maintain a consistent ability to get yards as the game wears on. Another way to show this is to divide Grant's yardage totals by his career number of games.

Carries	Yards per game
1-10	46.4
11-20	28.3
21+	8.5

No wonder Mike McCarthy doesn't stick with the run. Anytime Grant carries more than ten times, his yards gained for the second decuplet of carries is halved. Halved! For a back who's known for explosive gains throughout a game, it sure seems like he can't do much after his tenth attempt.

* * *

The second metric is simpler: it compares Ryan Grant's numbers in the first and second halves of games. While it's more rudimentary, it better shows how consistent (or inconsistent) a back is throughout a game.

	Attempts	Yards	Average	TDs
1st Half	367	1634	4.5	15
2nd Half	300	1278	4.3	3

Surprisingly, this breakdown doesn't show as big of a drop off in any category besides touchdowns. He has fewer yards on fewer carries in the second half, which might be a result of the trailing team focusing more on the pass to ignite the offense. By dividing his totals by his total number of games, however, the discrepancy is a bit more visible.

	Attempts/game	Yards/game
1st Half	10.8	48.1
2nd Half	8.8	37.6

The carries per half are nearly even, but the yardage is not. Again, this might be a result of the Packers being forced into passing on offense, but conventional wisdom suggests that there would be more available on the ground. Grant has not found that room in the second half, even though he's getting the same opportunities.

* * *

The third metric is not available directly on NFL.com, but I went and dug up the stats from each individual box score from 2007, 2008, and 2009 to compile the numbers. I don't have an official name for it yet, but it measures Grant's production based on what percentage of the team's carries he is responsible for. I tried to quantify how well Grant performed when he received a minority of the carries (< 50%), a significant share (51-74%), and a majority (>75%).

% of team carries	Games	Attempts	Yards	Average	TDs
< 50%	5	36	215	6.0	1
51-74%	14	247	1118	4.5	6
> 75%	16	345	1351	3.9	8

While the discrepancies in sample sizes skews the numbers somewhat, it's clear that whenever Grant is more responsible for the rushing offense, he is less effective. Workhorse backs often produce the best whenever they get the bulk of the carries from their offense, and that's how Grant has been treated. However, the numbers simply don't support the notion that Grant needs a large amount of touches to be effective. This is more obvious when you divide the statistical totals by the number of games played.

% of team carries	Games	Attempts/game	Yards/game	Average/game	TDs/game
< 50%	5	7.2	43.0	6.0	0.2
51-74%	14	19.0	86.0	4.5	0.5
> 75%	16	21.6	84.4	3.9	0.5

As you can see, whenever Grant's carries push him into the third category of team carry %, he actually gains fewer yards per game despite the additional opportunities. Conversely, whenever Grant gets minimal opportunities, he seems to do the most with them. He gains yards more efficiently with fewer carries, and he clearly starts to wear down after his twentieth attempt.

* * *

I'm no statistician, but even I'm shocked at how much the numbers back the argument. Ryan Grant simply isn't consistent enough to be the running back that McCarthy wants him to be. Is he effective? In certain situations, yes. But I don't think that he should be a 20+ carry workhorse; he simply isn't that kind of player.

Ted Simmons Speed Camp said it best in response to the question "What happened to Ryan Grant?"

The rest of the league realized he's really a complimentary back.

Shortly thereafter, ktenreb summed up Ryan Grant's football career, how he arrived in Green Bay, why he succeeded, and the circumstances that led to his big payday:

He was a part-time starter in college on a bad Notre Dame team. TT’s plan for finding a f3eature running didn’t work (surprise!), and so at the beginning of the 2007 season it looked like the team needed some depth. TT spent a 6th round pick for what he assumed would be a third-string back who had decent hands (yes, he actually did). Jacobs didn’t work out, Wynne got hurt and lacked toughness, so Grant got his shot. His timing couldn’t have been better, because by that point of the season McCarthy and Favre had abandoned any chance of running the ball (remember, we were so bad on the O-line that we were playing with a gimmick zone-blocking scheme, to cover the lack of talent) and were killing opposing defenses with a 5 WR formation. Defenses adjusted by dropping 5 and 6 into coverage in nickel and dime defenses — against those defenses, Grant was able to run. He killed opposing defenses, and when they countered with putting more men in the box, Favre went back to killing them with slants.

After that season, Grant was a hot commodity to fans, but "real" GMs knew that it was a fluke. In fairness, Thompson knew it too, but he still stubbornly sat on his hands and took no steps to bring in a truly first-rate running back. Grant held out, and Thompson ultimately was forced to give him the big payday.

During that same summer, there was something about a quarterback/GM feud in Packerland that also was prominent, the result being that the quarterback who could run the 5 WR sets was no longer around. As the season began, Grant was not 100 percent healthy as a result of his contract holdout. He seemed to get healthier as the season progressed, and he gained over 1,000 yards, but it was pretty clear that he did not have the vision that first-rate running backs possess. Still, he was the best option on the roster and he got his carries, but at the rate of under four yards-per.

This year is the same as last year, except that Grant doesn’t have an injury excuse (at least not that I know of). The offensive line has regressed from last year, but Grant still does not show that he is truly a feature back. That was the knock against him in college, and that’s why the Giants were happy to dump him for a 6th round pick. 2007 was a fluke occasioned by a perfect storm of opportunity. It won’t happen again, and Ryan Grant is not going to turn into a genuine feature back in the NFL (unless he plays a very bad team with horrible injuries at a time when its roster is decimated by the flu).

That, my friends, is a great comment that should have been turned into a FanPost. But is he right?

For what it's worth, I think so. I think Grant can be very effective as a member of a committee, instead of a lone workhorse. Remember how the Giants used Brandon Jacobs, Ahmad Bradshaw, and Derrick Ward with great success? That's the type of setup I'd like to see Grant in, with Brandon Jackson playing the role of the change-of-pace back. Then again, this is all assuming that the real problem isn't with Grant, but with his blocking, which is a very real possibility.

Man, the Thompson haters are going to have a field day with this one...and the sad thing is that they may have a point.

The Fight For First Place: Round Two

Mitchell_M — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:41:12 -0000

Some are calling it the "Game of the Century". Others are calling it the "Hostile Homecoming". Still others are calling it "Favre-Packers v.2.0".

Me? I call it Week 9 of the NFL season.

Admittedly, our opponent this week is eerily similar to the team that handed Green Bay its second loss of the season. We know this team very well, and the only major change is the injury to their star cornerback. Therefore, the actual matchup preview will be abbreviated. Those of you who hate my lengthy previews: commence rejoycing.

MIN rushing vs. GB defense: Adrian Peterson is still scary-good, as is the offensive line that blocks for him. Phil Loadholt has been somewhat hampered by a few nagging injuries, as had Steve Hutchinson, but both seem to be back to normal now. Peterson's rushing stats have actually been underwhelming in 2009, putting up yardage totals of 85, 55, 63, and 69 in four of the last five weeks.

Green Bay gets a major boost to its rush defense compared to the week 4 version of the team now that Atari Bigby is healthy and playing. The defensive line has also been playing well; B.J. Raji and Cullen Jenkins have managed to get consistent penetration and break up plays as they develop. The linebackers, most notably A.J. Hawk, have been streaky, but I attribute that more to having a surplus of contributors (Hawk, Nick Barnett, Brandon Chillar, Aaron Kampman, and Clay Matthews) and a vast array of sub packages.

Advantage: Still Minnesota, but not as much as before.

MIN passing vs. GB defense: Well, Brett Favre is not playing the same way he did to start the season. He's thrown 79 passes in the last two games, including 50 in last week's incredibly fluky loss to Pittsburgh. He has shown the ability to make any throw at any time, including the deep ball, where he puts it in a place where only his receiver can adjust and catch the football.

Minnesota's receiving corps is somewhat of a question mark. Bernard Berrian is dealing with hamstring problems, Percy Harvin is dealing with illness/shoulder issues (isn't he always?), leaving 2009 breakout Sidney Rice and 2008 Playgirl centerfold Visanthe Shiancoe as the main passing targets. I'd include Chester Taylor on this list, but he nearly got decapitated trying to catch a wildly-overpowered bullet dropped a short screen pass that led to the Vikes' first loss.

Besides Atari Bigby's return, the most important development between Week 4 and now is Dom Capers' realization that Aaron Kampman is effective out of a three-point stance. By shifting him to end on passing downs, Capers has enormous flexibility with his nickel and dime packages. Remember when we saw Kampman in coverage on the play where Favre had 8+ seconds to find a receiver? Don't expect to see that again.

Advantage: Minnesota, if you go by the numbers, but Green Bay has closed the gap.

GB rushing vs. MIN defense: Goodbye 2008 Ryan Grant, hello 2007 Ryan Grant. After seemingly endless questions regarding his ability, his fit in Green Bay, and the deservedness of his contract, Grant had his first breakout game in seemingly forever. This doesn't mean the questions don't still stand, but at least we know he is still capable of what got him his money in the first place. Brandon Jackson takes the place of oft-injured DeShawn Wynn, and might be a better fit as a change-of-pace back.

The offensive line looks much different than it did in the previous meeting, most notably with T.J. Lang likely filling in for Chad Clifton (re-aggravated ankle injury) at LT and Scott Wells possibly taking over for Jason Spitz (back injury). Wells has a huge chip on his shoulder after losing the job to Spitz in pre-season, and Lang has something to prove as a rookie protecting Aaron Rodgers' blind side from The Mullet. Combined with the potential availability of Mark Tauscher, the offensive line is nebulous, to say the least.

Minnesota has regained the notorious run defense that made them famous earlier in the decade, coming in at 5th in the league. Pat Williams' decline has seemed to have stalled for the time being, and the Vikings have avoided major injury to crucial players in their front seven (E.J. Henderson is the only starter listed any lower than questionable).

Advantage: Minnesota by a considerable margin.

GB passing vs. MIN defense: Aaron Rodgers is surpassing more expectations than anyone could have reasonably laid out for him. Every notable stat in the NFL has Rodgers among the leaders. First in yards per attempt (9.3), second in QB rating (110.8), tied for third for fewest interceptions (2), sixth in yards per game (283.7), and eighth in completion percentage (65.8).

Donald Driver has been crucial to Rodgers' success, as the 34-year old receiver leads the team in catches (27) and yards (479), not to mention sick one-handed grabs while his other hand is held by a defender (two). Greg Jennings has been unusually quiet in the first half of the season, and James Jones had to overcome a rough start before he got back on track. The absence of Jordy Nelson and (likely) Jermichael Finley puts more pressure on Donald Lee and Jake Allen, newly-promoted off the practice squad.

Minnesota leads the league in sacks with 25. That statistic is more than enough testament to their talent against the pass. However, with Antoine Winfield dealing with a foot sprain, he may or may not be available for Sunday, and likely won't be 100% if he does play. Karl Paymah and Benny Sapp will team up to replace Winfield's presence, and it's highly likely they won't come close.

Advantage: Green Bay. Aaron Rodgers put up his best statistical game of the season despite getting sacked 8 times. If he gets that number cut by half, it will be a long day for fans of the purple squad.

Preliminary verdict: This game is easily the most important game for Green Bay of the season. I cannot imagine a way for Green Bay to remain relevant in the playoff picture if this game ends up putting the Packers at 4-3. The second tier of NFC teams is too good to risk going for a wild-card berth, especially when the team is only 1.5 games out of first place in the division.

If Green Bay wants to win, they need to do three simple things. They are, in no particular order,

Run directly at Jared Allen. Pull guards, lead with Quinn Johnson, double team him. As a smaller DE, he is less effective against the run, and if there's any hope of stifling his pass rush, it's making him tired early in the game.
Test the Minnesota safeties. With Winfield possibly out and definitely limited, Madieu Williams takes the brunt of the coverage duties. That is a weakness worth exploiting.
Wrap, swarm, and strip AP. Clay Matthews' signature play of his young career is the strip-fumble TD of Adrian Peterson. That might not happen again, but the gang tackling and proper mechanics must if the defense expects to limit Peterson's production.

All of these things must happen in order for Green Bay to win. Not one, not two, but all three. If Jared Allen gets after Rodgers, thus preventing Rodgers from throwing downfield, and Minnesota keeps the ball by using Peterson to chew up the clock, the Vikings will have this game in the bag.

I have no idea how this will play out. I'm certain it will be as entertaining as it will be hard-fought. There's no love lost between these two teams (not to mention their respective quarterbacks), and I expect nothing but the maximum effort from both.

That being said, let's get 'em.

Poll

What outcome do you see for Week 9 vs. Minnesota?

Big GB win.

122 votes

Slim GB win.

288 votes

Too close to call.

94 votes

Slim MIN win.

87 votes

Big MIN win.

94 votes

685 votes | Poll has closed

On Signing Ahman Green

Brandon — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 05:32:47 -0000

UPDATE: It's official, they've signed Green and placed DeShawn Wynn on I.R.

I was waiting until the end of Tuesday for some official word, but no such luck. It's still unclear whether the Green Bay Packers will sign RB Ahman Green.

Greg Bedard reported at JSOnline.com that the signing was reported. But shortly afterwards he reported that it may not happen at all, however, Green already has a copy of the playbook. Now his gut feeling is a signing tomorrow and RB DeShawn Wynn is placed on I.R. And that's all I've got on it.

Assuming Green is signed and Wynn is placed on I.R., it doesn't have much effect. The Packers have not had more than 2 RBs active each week, and I would expect Green would be left inactive for at least a few weeks. Just like RT Mark Tauscher, he's coming off an injury in 2008 and hasn't been in pads since then. Even if he does move ahead of RB Brandon Jackson, at the most, he's looking at 2 carries and 2 receptions/game. He would only play on a couple series in place of RB Ryan Grant.

The biggest impact would be that Green would have a real shot at becoming the leading rusher in franchise history. He's only 45 yards behind FB Jim Taylor.

A Familiar Face At Lambeau Field

Mitchell_M — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:57:02 -0000

Green Bay's running difficulties have been somewhat overlooked this season. But more than a few people (myself included) have voiced their concern with the team's prospects running the football, especially in the red zone. Some members of this faction place the blame on Ryan Grant and DeShawn Wynn, who have been the primary running backs. These people want to see Wynn gone and Grant take a lesser role with the offense. The problem here is that there is no suitable replacement.

These people should be pleased to learn that the team brought in a few free agent running backs for a workout today. They are Dominic Rhodes, recently cut by the Buffalo Bills...and Ahman Green.

Yes, Ahman Green.

Green's departure from the team back in 2007 was non-descript despite his status as one of the better running backs in franchise history. Between 2000 and 2004, Green was an outstanding offensive threat, registering five straight seasons of 1,000+ yards, 40+ receptions, and 8+ total touchdowns. He was the rare back who could be a workhorse on the ground and on flat routes, combining power running with enough burst to break off monster gains.

Then the injuries piled up and turned him into a shell of his former self. Basically, it's what happened to Shaun Alexander before, what's happening to LaDanian Tomlinson now, and what might eventually happen to Adrian Peterson. Running backs hit 30 and start getting hurt and eventually become backups for younger versions of themselves. It's one of the few constants in the NFL.

Still, Green's track record, apparent recovery from his various ailments, and history with the franchise make him an intriguing prospect. After all, one of his best attributes has been his vision, which is something you don't lose until you hit old age in real life. Perhaps he can better avoid hitting his teammate's names on the backs of their jerseys while he keeps Grant fresher and (presumably) more able to produce effectively.

Personally, I doubt that Green would be able to contribute very much, if at all. This may sound good to those of you who doubt Ryan Grant's ability to execute basic run plays without running into the backs of his blockers, but this is no different than when the team worked out Levi Jones a few weeks ago. The team is simply kicking the tires on a couple of veterans to see if they could potentially fill an emergency role if players on the current roster got hurt.

Friday Injury Report: Lions at Green Bay Packers

Brandon — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:36:39 -0000

It's a brutally long injury report this week for the Green Bay Packers and the Lions. While it could be hitting the Lions hard, it's just long for the Packers.

FB Korey Hall and RB DeShawn Wynn are out, but FB Quinn Johnson will come off the inactive list for his first action and RB Brandon Jackson is back from injury for the first time this season. Recently resigned RT Mark Tauscher is out, but that's expected since he's practicing himself back into football shape. Although both centers (Jason Spitz and Scott Wells) are listed, Mike McCarthy expects them both to play.

The injuries have hit hard in Detroit. Obviously WR Calvin Johnson and QB Matthew Stafford are the two big names. At this point in their careers, QB Daunte Culpepper is just as good, so Stafford's loss won't matter much in this game. Except Johnson's absence is a tough loss no matter the QB. I'm not sure which other potential starters are missing, except LB Ernie Sims would start if he were healthy. RT Gosder Cherilus is a starter, but he'll play on Sunday. Even if they aren't missing any other starters, their depth is certainly being tested this week. On all the injuries, from Pride of Detroit:

All I can say is that I'm glad the Lions have a bye next week.

The complete injury lists after the jump.

Green Bay Packers:

Player	Pos.	Injury	Friday Participation	Friday Status
Atari Bigby	S	Knee	Full Participation	Probable
Chad Clifton	T	Ankle	Limited Participation	Probable
Daryn Colledge	G	Knee	Full Participation	Probable
Korey Hall	FB	Calf	Out	Out
Brandon Jackson	RB	Ankle	Full Participation	Probable
Cullen Jenkins	DE	Ankle	Full Participation	Probable
Quinn Johnson	FB	Not Inj. Related	Did Not Participate	N/A
Ryan Pickett	NT	Hip	Full Participation	Probable
Brady Poppinga	LB	Illness	Full Participation	Probable
Jason Spitz	C/G	Back	Did Not Participate	Questionable
Mark Tauscher	T	Knee	Limited Participation	Out
Jeremy Thompson	LB	Knee	Full Participation	Probable
Scott Wells	C	Hamstring	Limited Participation	Questionable
DeShawn Wynn	RB	Knee	Did Not Participate	Out

Detroit Lions:


Player	Pos.	Injury	Friday Participation	Friday Status
Gosder Cherilus	T	Shoulder	Full Participation	Probable
Jordan Dizon	LB	Foot	Limited Participation	Probable
Jerome Felton	FB	Shoulder	Limited Participation	Questionable
Casey FitzSimmons	TE	Thigh	Limited Participation	Questionable
Sammie Hill	DT	Ankle	Did Not Participate	Doubtful
Jason Hunter	DE	Ankle	Did Not Participate	Doubtful
Grady Jackson	DT	Knee	Did Not Participate	Probable
Calvin Johnson	WR	Knee	Did Not Participate	Questionable
Maurice Morris	RB	Hip	Limited Participation	Questionable
Brandon Pettigrew	TE	Hamstring	Full Participation	Probable
Koe Simpson	S	Hamstring	Did Not Participate	Doubtful
Ernie Sims	LB	Shoulder	Limited Participation	Probable
Matthew Stafford	QB	Knee	Did Not Participate	Questionable
Dewayne White	DE	Hamstring	Did Not Participate	Questionable

Ending The Bye Week Blues

Mitchell_M — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:32:36 -0000

It's been a rough fortnight for me, Packer fans. Not only did Green Bay lose round one of FavreFest 2009 (while watching Jared Allen and his lame-unless-he-was-on-your-team stirring sack celebration), but they headed into the bye week at 2-2, re-signed an old favorite who may or may not be ready to play, and draw a feisty Detroit Lions team that looks like it's charging back towards middle-of-the-pack status.

So there's that whole deal. Combine that with the fact that the Milwaukee Bucks are wrapping up their preseason (and Brandon Jennings looks even less ready than we thought he would), the World Series is shaping up to be a showdown between the Dodgers and Yankees (after yet another disappointing Brewers campaign), and hockey is less important to me than the price of high heels in Sri Lanka, and you can see that it's a tough time for a Wisconsin-native sports fan. Even my fantasy teams are imploding (1-4 and 2-3 in the leagues that matter).

It's tough to lose your last game before a bye week. It gives you an awful taste in your mouth about your chances afterwards. But then I remember that the Packers are playing the Lions at Lambeau this week. That makes me feel slightly better.

DET rushing vs. GB defense: Every time I think of the Detroit running backs, I think of Kevin Smith, and every time I think of Kevin Smith, I think of Clerks 2, and every time I think of Clerks 2, I think of the scene where Randal and Elias debate which trilogy was better: Lord of the Rings or Star Wars (definitely NSFW). Specifically, I think of the part where Randal reenacts the LOTR movies by simply...walking.

That scene is oddly parallel to the story of Detroit's run game. Detroit's top 4 running backs (Smith, Maurice Morris, Aaron Brown, and Jerome Felton) are averaging less than 3.6 yards per carry. Not that we're used to dominant running performances around these parts, but Kevin Smith and his 3.1 average (287 yards on 94 carries) does not strike fear into opposing defenses.

It's not even that Kevin Smith is a below-average running back. He has good size (6'1", 217), and excellent speed and agility. He regularly breaks off 10+ yard runs, and is even a decent pass catcher (19 receptions for 143 yards). But his line is giving him no help.

Jeff Backus (6'5", 305) and Gosder Cherilus (6'7", 325) are capable bookends (especially Cherilus, who is a nasty run blocker), but the interior linemen, Daniel Loper (6'6", 320), Dominic Raiola (6'1", 295), and Stephen Peterman (6'4", 323) simply aren't able to move defenders and open running lanes. Smith is the type of running back that needs space to gain momentum and use his second gear, but he can't get started because he's constantly running into brick walls.

Green Bay has fared well this season against opposing running backs. Besides Cedric Benson (who has looked every bit like the player Chicago wanted him to be, including breaking Baltimore's streak of 39 games without allowing 100+ rushing yards to a single player), the Packers have effectively bottled up opposing running backs. As a team, Green Bay is only allowing 3.5 yards per attempt, in no small part because of the "Big Okie" formation that puts 5 linebackers on the field, allowing effective pursuit to the ball, stringing plays out to the sideline, and cutting off gaps. Brandon Chillar is a surprise tackling leader this season (26 on the year), but 7 other players in the front seven have at least 11 tackles.

Advantage: Green Bay. As a team, the Packers do an excellent job of closing running lanes, while Detroit does not do a good enough job at opening them up.

DET passing vs. GB defense: When I was a kid, 'Transformers' was awesome. When Michael Bay tried to turn it into a summer flick, it made me want to further repress my childhood so that I'd have no memory of ever enjoying the battle of Autobots vs. Decepticons. But there's still one guy that makes me glad to have watched that cartoon: Calvin "Megatron" Johnson.

Whoa, nelly. Megatron is a beast. I know I gushed about him last year, but I don't care. The 6'5", 236 lb. Georgia Tech product managed to put up 1331 yards and 12 touchdowns on the putrid 2008 Lions squad. He is big, fast, strong, has great hands, and can make any catch at any time. He has been limited in the last two weeks because of injury, but coach Jim Schwartz says that it isn't serious and he is currently listed as probable.

After Johnson is where the problems start. Bryant Johnson is a first round pick who never lived up to his promise. Dennis Northcutt is a Jacksonville castoff, which is saying something. Derrick Williams has some promise, but is buried on the depth chart. Yamon Figurs is a recent addition, but will likely focus on return duties. Will Heller is a career backup at TE, and first-rounder Brandon Pettigrew was injured in training camp and is still trying to figure out his role.

Behind center, Detroit went all-in on Matthew Stafford, which I thought was a terrible decision back in April. Stafford hasn't looked awful, but he certainly hasn't outplayed fellow rookie Mark Sanchez (who is on a much better team). Stafford has a big arm (894 yards, 3 TDs), but merely average accuracy (56.8% completion) and questionable decision-making (6 INTs, 65.6 QB rating). Basically, I didn't think that Detroit should have spent first-overall money on a guy who may or may not work out at the pro level, but the jury is still out on him.

Ever since dislocating his kneecap against Chicago, however, the Matthew Stafford debate is moot for the time-being. With Stafford likely sidelined another week, Daunte Culpepper takes the reigns again. And you know what that means:

I've got these tiny hands...

While we remember his time with Minnesota in the earlier parts of the 2000's, Culpepper has never been the same since his 2006 knee injury. He's bounced around a bit before settling in Detroit as a stop-gap QB, but he's still a capable passer. He still has a big arm, decent accuracy, and can run a huddle effectively. As weird as it seems, one of Daunte Culpepper's biggest weaknesses is the size of his hands. For a few years, Culpepper was averaging over a fumble per game. He has compensated for his tiny mitts by employing an unconventional throwing motion, but when he tries to run or gets hit in the pocket, he is prone to losing control of the ball.

And Culpepper has been hit a lot lately. Seven sacks against the Steelers is downright Rodgers-esque. Even before that, though, the Lions gave up 10 sacks in 4 games, giving them 17 total for the season. The Lions simply cannot protect their quarterback, something we know all about. Backus is a decent blind-side protector, and Raiola has been around long enough to make good adjustments on the line, but Cherilus is still too raw, the interior linemen are too weak, and the backs do not block well.

Green Bay's 3-4 defense was supposed to be the kind that got after the quarterback and forced turnovers. While the +7 ratio fulfills the second part, the sacks simply haven't been there. Through four games, the Packers have five sacks. Two came against Jay Cutler, and two against Marc Bulger. Brett Favre and his porous offensive line wasn't even touched on Monday night.

The decision to change Aaron Kampman into a pass-rushing OLB was a head-scratcher during the offseason, and it's become downright dumbfounding in October. On the play where Favre had over 7 seconds to find a receiver, Kampman wasn't shut down by a Vikings lineman. He was in zone coverage, someplace he has been found all too often. Dom Capers' blitz-happy defense took a turn for the conservative when Atari Bigby went down in Week 1, so his return is much anticipated. The lack of pass rush has severely hampered the production of the defensive backfield. Charles Woodson, Nick Collins, Al Harris, and Tramon Williams are still ball-hawks. As long as they get opportunities from the front seven, they will break up more than a few passes.

Advantage: Push. While Green Bay has the clear advantage on paper, I want to see more results before I declare them to have any sort of edge.

GB rushing vs. DET defense: Detroit's run defense was one of the many weak points in 2008. Thus far in 2009, it hasn't been fixed. The Lions give up 4.9 yards per attempt on the ground. That includes performances of 142 yards by Mike Bell, 92 yards by Adrian Peterson, 121 yards by Matt Forte, and 77 yards by Rashard Mendenhall. Jim Schwartz has tried to fix the problem by shuffling personnel, but results are mixed. LB Ernie Sims was benched last week for rookie DeAndre Levy, DT Chuck Darby was waived to make room on the field for rookie Sammie Lee Hill, and Grady Jackson has seen more and more snaps.

It doesn't help that the Lions are starting Packer castoff Jason Hunter at LDE with the 240 lb. Julian Peterson playing both at LOLB and at the other DE spot. Aside from Larry Foote, the Lions don't have anyone that can really shoot gaps and take on lead blockers. Ernie Sims was supposed to be that guy, but he's currently in the dog house. Rookie safety Louis Delmas is a big hitter, but he's no Troy Polamalu just yet. The only run-stopper they have is Grady Jackson, who is getting up there in years.

Luckily for Detroit, Green Bay doesn't seem that interested in running the ball. I did a little post last week exploring where the Green Bay rushing attack has gone. As it turns out, it really hasn't gone anywhere, it's just been ignored. The team averages a shade under 100 yards per game, which is somewhat respectable, but they haven't been able to sustain long drives by picking up yards on the ground. 2007 Ryan Grant is still MIA, and DeShawn Wynn has been downright awful. Brandon Jackson is coming back from injury, which might help, but he's best suited to a 3rd down back role anyway.

Up front, Green Bay's injury problems and lack of depth have exposed the team in pass protection, but also showed below-average run blocking. With Chad Clifton returning from injury, Daryn Colledge can resume his normal role at LG, putting Jason Spitz back at C and Scott Wells on the bench. From here, the Packers have a better shot of opening running lanes, especially on the right side (where Allen Barbre performs well).

Advantage: Push. This matchup is like the stoppable force against the movable object. If Green Bay calls an even offensive game, they might have an advantage, but I don't see any at this point.

GB passing vs. DET defense: Quarterbacks like playing Detroit. Against the Motor City Kitties, NFL passers have put up 15 scores against only 3 INTs while amassing a 73.3% completion rating. While the Lions have had middling success getting to the quarterback (10 sacks in 2009), their highest individual total is 2.0 (Jason Hunter). There is no designated pass rusher, unless you count Julian Peterson, who has been a failure as a DE on passing downs. Whether the sacks have been from good downfield coverage, poor blocking by opponents, or a schematic advantage, one thing is for sure: they aren't blitzing very much (bottom third in NFL).

The defensive backfield has been a sore point in Detroit. Anthony Henry has performed well as the #1 corner, but Will James and Philip Buchanon have been switching in and out of the starting lineup. Rookie Louis Delmas is best used in run support, but he is capable in pass coverage. The Lions split time at the other safety between Ko Simpson and former fan favorite Marquand Manuel.

Passing offense has been, for Green Bay, one of the lone bright spots in a disappointing start. Aaron Rodgers has put up big numbers behind an awful offensive line, showing accuracy and poise despite getting sacked 20 times in 4 games and having to run out of the pocket on numerous occasions. The receivers have been somewhat underwhelming, amassing 10 of the team's 14 drops. Greg Jennings has been unusually quiet in the first quarter of 2009, and has gone on record to say that he thinks that the team needs to get back to the short-passing game that allowed he and the other WRs to create yards after the catch. Hear, hear, Greg.

Advantage: Green Bay. If Rodgers can get hit 8 times and still throw for over 300 yards, he will get good looks against Detroit.

Preliminary verdict: Coming off a bye, Green Bay seems to have changed a bit as a team. Mark Tauscher has been re-signed. Brandon Jackson, Jeremy Thompson, Chad Clifton, and possibly Atari Bigby should be returning from injury. The offensive line should get back to the group that started the season, and the defense should get back to the blitzing that gave us all high expectations for 2009. Perhaps this is the week where we see the 2009 preseason team in action instead of the poor impersonation we've watched for the last month.

I can't think of how the timing could be better than hosting Detroit. Unless it was Oakland, or Kansas City, or the Browns, or even the struggling Cowboys. See, Lions fans? Your team has improved a lot!

Poll

What outcome do you see for Week 6 vs. Detroit?

Big GB win.

414 votes

Slim GB win.

197 votes

Too close to call.

26 votes

Slim DET win.

40 votes

Big DET win.

11 votes

688 votes | Poll has closed

Packers News: Game Times, DeShawn Wynn, and Mark Tauscher

Brandon — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:00:43 -0000

More photos » by John Russell - AP

Browse more photos »

I wasn't going to write a post about the change of the Green Bay Packers' November 1st game against the Vikings, from noon to 3:15p.m., because I don't have a preference when it's played. But then I read Greg Bedard's great tweet:

Let's see, 3 hours of additional tailgating time for Favre's return. Yeah, that's going to help things.

Mitchell just pointed out that RB DeShawn Wynn isn't having a good season. Then it's reported that the Packers tried out a couple running backs, RB Ryan Torian and RB Quinton Ganther. Maybe it's a sign GM Ted Thompson has lost faith in in Wynn too. But then Greg Bedard again sets me straight. From JSOnline.com, discussing the news last month that LT Levi Jones came in for a workout:

That the Packers worked out so many offensive lineman does not mean anything. NFL teams, during the first four to six weeks of the season, routinely work out several players at the same position. Two weeks ago, the Packers worked out quarterbacks and receivers. Next Tuesday it could very well be running backs and linebackers.

Final word on the signing of RT Mark Tauscher: Bob McGinn says Tauscher will receive $700,000 in base salary, another $400,000 potential incentives, and comes with a $1.3 million cap charge.

Running Towards Daylight...And Getting Stuffed

Mitchell_M — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 16:36:09 -0000

More photos » by Andy Manis - AP

Browse more photos »

Green Bay's offense has been heavy on the pass this season. Part of that is because the main concentration of talent on offense is in the passing game, but the running attack hasn't been able to take pressure off of Aaron Rodgers and company.

As a team, Green Bay has ran for 399 yards and 4 TDs. Through four games, those averages aren't terrible, but they aren't very good either. Ryan Grant has been underwhelming to say the least, and DeShawn Wynn is not as impressive as I thought he would be. Aaron Rodgers honestly looks like the best runner on the team, and that's a problem.

Several people (myself included) have wondered aloud why the team seems to abandon the run later in games. An obvious question to ask is the difference in production between the first and second halves. Here's what I found:

	1st Half	2nd Half
Attempts	45	49
Yards	142	255
Average	3.1	5.2
TD	3	1

That's right, the team averages over 2 ypc more in the second half of games in 2009. Ryan Grant in particular has been better after halftime; his average increases from 3.0 to 4.8. Aaron Rodgers also runs better in the second half, where he averages 6.7 yards per carry, but that's likely a product of the quarterback figuring out that the offensive line can't protect him.

I simply cannot figure out why this discrepancy exists. If anything, I thought the first half production would outweigh the second half. However, Green Bay had a horrible time running the ball in the first half against Chicago, and Grant only received 11 carries in last week's game against Minnesota, so that might be skewing the numbers.

So what do you guys think? Does Green Bay need to focus on establishing the run sooner in games? Or should we take advantage of opposing defenses softening up in the latter half of games? Is the patchwork offensive line even capable of opening up running lanes? Or are the Packers suffering from a serious talent deficiency in their running backs?

UPDATE: Thanks to a few subtle hints in the comments, I decided to post the same table without Rodgers' rushing stats. Here you go.

	1st Half	2nd Half
Attempts	41	36
Yards	126	167
Average	3.0	4.6
TD	3	0

As you can see, the 2nd half ypc drops by over half a yard, but is still significantly higher than the first half. So my questions still apply.

The Curious Case Of Green Bay's Receivers

Mitchell_M — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 22:23:35 -0000

The overarching story for the past month has been Green Bay's offensive line and the sense of panic and terror that everyone exudes whenever the discussion turns towards Aaron Rodgers' 20 sacks. And that is certainly an important story. A related thread from the O-line discussion is Rodgers' overall performance through 4 games and how remarkable it has been, given the mitigating circumstances. Despite constantly running for his life, Rodgers has thrown for 1,098 yards (6th in NFL), 6 touchdowns (t-8th in NFL), 1 interception (t-3rd in NFL), 47 first downs (t-8th in NFL), and a passer rating of 101.1 (5th in NFL).

Despite the small sample size, those are still some pretty gaudy stats. So all the team has to do is fix the myriad issues up front to give Rodgers some breathing room, and the offensive woes will simply correct themselves. Right?

Not so fast. There's still a completely unrelated problem that has sprung up from seemingly nowhere, and that problem is known as 'Braylon Edwards syndrome', or in layman's terms, drops.

For the past week or so, I've been working on a new statistical model that measures the consistency of production from an NFL wide receiver. As I trudge my way through knee-deep pools of numbers, statistics, and projections, one of the best raw tools that I've come up with is WR completion percentage. In a nutshell, it takes the number of times that a WR has been targeted for a pass, the number of recorded catches the WR notches, and turns it into a success percentage.

I've only been measuring Green Bay's statistics in my research, but what I've found in 2009 has surprised me. Allow me to share some of my findings with you.

Green Bay's most reliable pass-catcher: Ryan Grant. I know your reaction must be somewhere between "Huh?" and "What?!", but it's true. In four games, Grant has been targeted 11 times and has converted 8 of them, a success rate of 81.8%, with 0 drops. That makes him Green Bay's only receiver that is above 80%, which is the benchmark for "elite-level" production. For instance, the leader in the NFL in completion percentage is Pittsburgh TE Heath Miller, at 88.9%. The top WR on the list is Miami's Davone Bess at 83.3%.
Green Bay's least reliable pass catcher: DeShawn Wynn. Wynn has played the role of 3rd down back because Ryan Grant (allegedly) isn't as good of a receiver. But Wynn has only 2 catches on the year on 7 targets, with 2 drops. So far, Wynn is converting less than 30% of his targets. JaMarcus Russell thinks that's bad. When does Brandon Jackson get back?
Green Bay's top receiver: Donald Driver. This is something of a surprise, considering Donald Driver was supposed to be washed up by now. But he's the leader on the team in targets (29), and he's converted 62.1% of those targets. The percentage isn't very good (70.0% is generally the watermark for above-average production), and Driver also has 2 drops to his name. But his 18 catches have come at times when Rodgers has needed him most, and he's proven that he can still play at a high level.
Green Bay's droppiest receivers: Jordy Nelson and James Jones. The Packers' co-number three receivers have each dropped 3 passes this year, but that's where the similarity ends. Nelson has been better in converting his targets (7 for 11, Jones is 3 for 9), but Nelson's production fluctuates nearly 25.0% from game to game. In any case, both of these guys are severely underperforming their talent level, and I look for them to turn things around soon.
The difference between Green Bay's TEs: negligible. Donald Lee and Jermichael Finley seem to be trending in opposite directions, but so far their production has been about equal. Lee has converted 72.2% of his targets, and Finley has caught 73.3% of his. Each has one drop to his name (most notably Lee's drop on 4th-and-goal in the third quarter against Minnesota), but both have shown a penchant for breaking big gains. A lot of people think that Finley's big play ability should give him the edge against Lee in the battle for the starting job, but Lee really isn't that much worse than Finley. A two tight end set is a good formation for the offense to use.
Green Bay's most disturbing surprise: Greg Jennings. Jennings is a top receiver in the league. Why hasn't he played like it? Jennings has been targeted 22 times this season, but has only come up with 11 catches. A 50.0% conversion rate is awful for a number one receiver, as was the drop he had against Cincinnati and the poor route he ran against Antoine Winfield, resulting in Rodgers' lone interception. I would like to think that the reason for Jennings' decline is the wrist injury, but no matter what the reason, it's clear that his timing with Aaron Rodgers is way off. Let's hope the bye week clears that up.

A lot of the reason for Green Bay's 2-2 record is the offense's inability to sustain and finish drives. Part of that is the seive-like line up front, but a big part is Green Bay's case of the dropsies. According to STATS, a leader in measuring NFL statistics, Green Bay is third in the NFL in drops with 10. Based on my own research, I've come to a different conclusion: as a team, Green Bay has 13 drops, which ties them for the league lead. This is a problem that nobody saw coming, and I have no idea how a problem like this gets fixed. More reps in practice with the jugs machine? Special hand lotion? Massages? Acupuncture? StickUm?

In any case, the team has an extra week to shake off whatever has brought this scourge to the receiving corps. Let's hope that it's not the only scourge to be rid of during the bye.

Analysis: Packers Monday Night Injury Roundup

Brandon — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 14:00:44 -0000

From Mike McCarthy's press conference:

OK, I'll start with the injuries. Will Blackmon suffered an ACL injury. He will be lost for the season. Atari Bigby, Chad Clifton,Brandon Jackson and Jeremy Thompson, hopefully over the bye, we're optimistic they'll be ready for Detroit. Desmond Bishop had a rib bruise. I think he'll be fine coming off the bye. Daryn Colledge had a knee sprain. They're anticipating he'll be OK for Detroit. Derrick Martin had a throat contusion. He's checked out of the hospital, he's back in Green Bay, and I think he'll be fine for Detroit. And DeShawn Wynn had a wrist sprain, and I think he'll be OK for Detroit.

That's a lot of injuries; 9 players, almost 20% of the roster. The good news is that everyone is expected back in time for the next game against the Lions.

Everyone except CB Will Blackmon. He's had a history of injury problems, and now he's had another one. He has a history as a top return man, although he's been quiet this season. Despite the dropped punt on Monday night, WR Jordy Nelson has been a solid return man, and maybe it means CB Tramon Williams will go back to returning punts. Blackmon hasn't played at all on defense, as far as I've noticed, so his absence shouldn't be felt. It means rookie 6th round CB Brandon Underwood, who's been inactive for the first 4 games, might be active going forward to take his spot. While they're better with Blackmon, there is enough depth to cover for his loss.