SB Nation User Blog: Chibronx

They Write Letters: Chibronx Shares E-Mail from Woody Paige, Peter King and Others

Chibronx — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:55:24 -0000

It looks like the MSM is in the holiday spirit. This morning, Woody Paige, Mark Kiszla and a few others wrote me in response to letters I sent earlier this year. I thought I'd share what they said. Here we go:

Dear Woody Paige,

For my money, no Bronco has been more disappointing in 2009 than Chris Simms, the quarterback you thought should take the helm for Orton. What went wrong? Who else do you think has let the team down?

Signed, Chibronx

***

Dear Chibronx,

In 2009, I thought Denver would be Simms' City. The Simms (Phil the Rivers and Chris the Collinsworth-less) were an ideally designed family. Chris was primed to cross into the upper tier of NFL quarterbacks. He would make Clay Street Simms' Lane. But if only the quarterback without a spleen had a brain. Then his ample heart would guarantee that his kidney wasn't just kiddin' me when I pronounced him the best QB 2 B there for the Broncos.

But it was not 2 B for kid QB. I thought Simms' son would play better than Sampson (Clint and Old Testament both). But he got no help from Delilah, and made our (predominantly) orange hearts turn (mostly) blue. Instead of bringing Chris-Kringle cheer, Chris krumpled, and now kid Simms' destiny as the Simms-ply best in the first family of QB will B un-full-philled.

Robert Ayers, despite heralding from Tennessee, is also a disappointment. When the kid they got for the QB chases the other guys' QB, he whiffs like Ryan Howard. He'll never throw back the quarterback like Bri-an Orakpo, the player the Broncs needed for more sack-pos. No sacks, no soreness, no Bayer. Without Bayer, Ayers the Player will never be Gayle Sayres. He'll just fade in the glay-er of the lights, like another sinfamous Robert, Bobby K. Like Robert A., Robert K. had his career taken from him before it could be fulfilled. What Sirhan Sirhan did to the kid Prez 2 B, No-Lan No-Lan did to Bobby A. by moving him from End to LB.

Woody

***

Hey Kiz. Let's kick it!

I feel really great about the Broncos this year. Where do you think they go from here? I think they need to draft some bigger interior offensive linemen. What do you want the team to do?

Signed, Chibronx.

***

Dear Chibronx,

If Josh McDaniels is serious about taking the next step with this team, he must do the bold and unthinkable: Cut Mario Haggan and Lonnie Paxton. After starting so strong, this team has gotten too secure. Make no mistake about it, McDaniels is smart, but he's still just a kid. He will lose the team instantly unless he starts admitting his own mistakes. What better place to start then cutting one of the old and one of the new? Haggan is a holdover who gets no sacks and could only receive a contract extension from an arrogant kid. Paxton is the ultimate sin of pride, and the last Patriot player McDaniels will bring to Denver, if he wants to win. With those two bold decisions, McDaniels will have this team on its way.

Kiz

***

Dear Peter King,

Now that the Broncos are approaching a playoff spot, the Bears are headed for one of the worst records in the NFL, and Jay Cutler is going to lead the league in interceptions, isn't it time to declare the Broncos the winners of the Cutler trade?

Signed, Chibronx

***

Dear Chibronx,

Wow, great question. In a league with so many great quarterbacks, can you blame a team for trying so hard to get one? Peyton Manning and Tom Brady both playing. Right now. Right in front of us. And we're here - to witness it! It's a shame that the rest of the NFL sometimes takes away from their brilliance. They're both just so amazing.

I mean, the Patriots, the Chargers and the Colts. Wow. Just wow. What great teams. What a league. Commissioner Goodell was telling me the other day that there's never been a better time to root for football or buy tickets to a game. Pretty cheeky stuff, I thought. But then I thought some more. Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, both playing. And then some other quarterbacks and teams, too. You've got to hand it to the Commish: He's pretty sharp.

Here are 7 more things I think I think:

1) That's some good coaching, Rex Ryan. You'll make dad proud. Keep this up, and you might even have as good a head coaching record as he did.

2) Coffeenerdness: In Terminal B at O'Hare this weekend, the Barista introduced me to the Caramel Pumkinchino Macchiatto. Great stuff. What a time to be alive. Then I went next door to some restaurant called Wolfgang Puck's. The special was lobster-mango ravioli. What's a mango?

3) NCIS Los Angeles Thoughts: You've got to handle the Russians, better than that, Callen. By the way, one word on Chris O'Donnell: Wow. He hasn't been this good since Batman Forever. He's the new David Caruso. Hooo-ahh!

4) The Office Thoughts: At the recommendation of some readers, I tried the British Office, the one with the British guy. Apparently they copy our shows now. I don't get it. Was he trying to be funny? Here's a tip on jokes: Make sure to include a punch line. Then have the camera cut away to other peoples' faces, so I know how to react.

5) Factoid That May Only Be Interesting to Me: The Chargers, Patriots and Colts have combined to win one of the last 4 Superbowls. What teams! What a game.

6) The secret reason the Ravens have declined: The drop-off in play from Haloti Ngata. 11 games, half a sack. A top defensive linemen has to do much, much better than that.

7) Eleven games, 600 yards, and nearly 3-and-a-quarter yards per carry. LT is still one of the best in the game. We're lucky to be watching this guy.

***

Dear Bill Williamson,

I'm really thrilled about the Broncos' season this year. But with the Bears' draft pick and another year for the players to learn the system, I'm even more excited about next year. What do you think?

***

Dear Chibronx,

The Broncos really surprised a lot of people this year. Nobody could have seen it coming. Next year? Yeah, I can definitely see it. If they have a really great draft, all of their player improve, Orton gets better, the coaching continues to be solid, the schedule is easy, and they catch some lucky breaks, I could see them definitely having a decent chance to be competitive.

Count on it.

Porkchop

Urlacher Out: The 2010 Draft Just Got Sweeter

Chibronx — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:59:44 -0000

Just in from the Sun-Times: Brian Urlacher is out for the year. Others who watch the Bears may disagree, but this will be worth something to the Broncos in the draft next year. Urlacher covers so much ground for that D; everything about their attacking style rests on his ability to move fluidly in four directions. He also helps the Bears defense to cover many of its weaknesses.

The Bears were a team in defensive decline before this happened. I'm increasingly happy to hold their first-round pick.

Getting Over the 2008 Broncos: The Numbers are So Much Worse Than You Think

Chibronx — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:50:21 -0000

As we approach game one of the Josh McDaniels era, one thing is clear: The new coach will be judged against our wildest dreams – and not the cold truths – about the 2008 team. It’s grossly unfair, but I understand the impulse. The 2008 Broncos left a greater impact on me than any Broncos team in memory, including all of the Superbowl teams and the 2005 team that came oh-so close. The roller-coaster nature of the season and, above all, the wild, reckless hope produced by the team’s new-found love of the passing game were riveting. Win or lose, I was hooked. Who could possibly stop thinking about a team that beat the Falcons on the road one week, got blown out by the Raiders at home the next, then thumped the Jets on the road the week after?

Like a flight that nearly ends in disaster, the turbulence of the Broncos’ season produced unusually strong memories. Not good memories, but strong ones. And when I have to reach for a memory of 2008, I come up with the wide-open passing game of the first three weeks. We all know the 2008 Broncos were the beauty that kills. I’m here to tell you how much. A lot of folks around here have done some legwork on this. We know that the team was outscored, and badly. We know that the players the team cut were bad. But a closer, statistical look adds an extra dimension of pain. For all the hope the passing game inspired, the 2008 Broncos were the worst mediocre team in memory. Mediocre and falling, like an anvil. I’ve crunched the numbers to document the pain.

First, I’m going to show you that the 2008 Broncos were the second-worst 8-8 team of the last 10 years. Second, I’m going to look at the current fortunes of 28 players who are no longer with the team. Here’s what I promise. No matter how bad you expect the results to be, they’re, so, so much worse.

What follows below is so bad, it should be NSFW.

Mediocre? We wish

In the 10 NFL seasons from 1999 to 2008, 38 teams finished with a record of 8-8.

Perceptions matter, and our first-blush perceptions from 2008 were compelling. The opening-night thumping the Broncos gave the Raiders lives in our memories. It should – in none of the following 15 games did the team play anywhere near as well. The 41 points the team scored that night were its highest total of the season. The 17 it allowed were the second-lowest total of the season. After dropping 39 and 34 in the next two weeks, the offense averaged less than 20 points per game the rest of the way.

We all know how bad the defense was. But when you combine a historically bad defense with terrible special teams and an average offense, you get the second-worst 8-8 team since Monica Lewinsky was the talk of the nation.

The 2008 Broncos in Context: Scoring Differentials of 8-8 teams over the past decade

Teams sorted from worst to best

Year	Team	Points For	Points Against	Scoring Margin	Total League Scoring	Average Team Scoring	Adjusted Scoring Differential
2006	Ten	324	400	-76	10577	330.5	-0.23
2008	Den	370	448	-78	11279	352.5	-0.22
2004	STL	319	392	-73	11000	343.8	-0.21
2006	GB	301	366	-65	10577	330.5	-0.20
2004	NOR	348	405	-57	11000	343.8	-0.17
2001	Was	256	303	-47	10024	323.4	-0.15
2006	SDC	269	316	-47	10324	333	-0.14
2006	Car	270	305	-35	10577	330.5	-0.11
2000	Buf	315	350	-35	10254	330.8	-0.11
2002	San	333	367	-34	11097	346.8	-0.10
2008	Was	265	296	-31	11279	352.5	-0.09
2008	Hou	366	394	-28	11279	352.5	-0.08
2003	Cin	366	384	-18	10666	333.3	-0.05
2002	Buf	379	397	-18	11097	346.8	-0.05
2006	NYG	355	372	-17	10577	330.5	-0.05
2006	Stl	367	381	-14	10577	330.5	-0.04
2006	NYJ	308	309	-1	10324	333	0.00
2006	Det	322	323	-1	10324	333	0.00
2001	Den	340	339	1	10024	323.4	0.00
2004	Cin	374	372	2	11000	343.8	0.01
2007	AZ	404	399	5	11104	347	0.01
2004	Min	405	395	10	11000	343.8	0.03
2005	Atl	351	341	10	10556	329.9	0.03
2000	Was	281	269	12	10254	330.8	0.04
2003	NOR	340	326	14	10666	333.3	0.04
2006	NEP	299	284	15	10324	333	0.05
2006	GB	357	341	16	10324	333	0.05
2006	Pit	353	315	38	10577	330.5	0.11
2006	Car	421	381	40	10324	333	0.12
2006	Cin	373	331	42	10577	330.5	0.13
2006	Balt	324	277	47	10324	333	0.14
2007	Min	365	311	54	11104	347	0.16
2006	Oak	390	329	61	10324	333	0.18
2002	Kan	467	399	68	11097	346.8	0.20
2008	NOR	463	393	70	11279	352.5	0.20
2006	Dal	352	276	76	10324	333	0.23
2008	SDG	439	347	92	11279	352.5	0.26
2006	Jax	371	274	97	10577	330.5	0.29

Why are the Broncos only the 37th worst 8-8 team in the past decade, and not the absolute worst? Well, I adjusted the numbers to account for total league offense. The more points NFL teams score, the wider the spread we’ll see in scoring differential. If the “average” NFL team scored 3 points per game, the best scoring differential in the league would probably be 1 point. If the “average” team scored 1,000,000 points per game, the best scoring differential would be, I don’t know, several hundred thousand points. When we account for the fact that 2008 was the highest-scoring year in the past decade, the 2008 Broncos come in second to last, just below the 2006 Titans, as the worst 8-8 team in memory.

Some other fun facts: You’ll notice that the 2008 Broncos allowed 448 points, the worst figure on this list. You’ll also find that the second worst team allowed “just” 405 points. I could pull out the heavy-duty stats to explain how big that difference is, but I think you get the point. The 2008 Broncos’ defense wasn’t just bad, it was historically, epically bad.

On the flip side, if you look at the points for column, you’ll find that the high-scoring Cutler & co. bandwagon was outscored by 10 teams on this list, including such awesome juggernauts as the 2006 Jaguars and the 2004 Bengals. You’ll also notice that one of the highest-scoring teams on the list was the 2008 Chargers, who dropped 439 points (nearly 1/8 of them on December 28!) and outscored their opponents by nearly 100 points. In other words, the season-ending meeting between the two teams ended about like it should have: The 2nd-best 8-8 team in memory pounded the 2nd-worst.

Clayton’s Heroes

Oh, but it gets worse. On Sunday, we were treated to a new tongue-lashing by John Clayton, who invented some new metrics to bash away at the current Broncos. Clayton pointed out that only 8 Broncos on the current roster came to the team in 2006 or before, leaving the team with 15 new players per year over the past 3 years. The result he says, is that the Broncos have become a joke, an expansion team.

Cutting your players is only bad, of course, if the players you cut are good players. So, who are Clayton’s heroes? Who are these awesome Broncos, part of the formerly bright future, whom the ignorant new administration has cut loose?

I’m glad you asked. Here are the details. And no, don’t say I didn’t warn you:

McDaniels’ Cuts (Or, Victories Lost!)

Starters	Current Team	Status
Jay Cutler	Chicago Bears	Starter
Dre Bly	San Francisco	Back-Up
Marquand Manuel	Detroit	Back-Up
Selvin Young	None
Ebenezer Ekuban	None
DeWayne Robertson	None
Jamie Winborn	None
Boss Bailey	None
Nate Webster	None
Marlon McCree	None

Back-ups	Current Team	Status
John Engelberger	None
Josh Bell	Denver Broncos	IR
Niko Koutouvides	Tampa	Back-Up
Mike Leach	Arizona	Long-Snapper
Kory Lichtensteiger	Minnesota	Back-Up
Andre Hall	Houston Texans	Back-Up
Tatum Bell	None
Cory Boyd	None
Nic Clemons	None
Keary Colbert	None
Tim Crowder	None
Vernon Fox	None
Louis Green	None
Chad Jackson	None
Nate Jackson	None
Jeb Putzier	None
Darrell Jackson	None
Herana Daze-Jones	None
Calvin Lowry	None

Does McD-Bag know no mercy? Of 10 – TEN! – 2008 starters no longer on the team, one is a current NFL starter. Three if you count all of his chins. Beyond that, there are two back-ups. Seven – SEVEN! – players who started a lot of games for the Broncos last year are out of football. If we expand the list to the back-ups, you can see just how terrible last year’s team was. Nobody wanted the starters. Nobody wants the back-ups. I guess that’s good news for Coach Clayton. With the exception of one player, the Broncos can easily re-sign all of these fallen heroes.

I like the new Broncos, and I like them a lot. I’m optimistic. But no matter what your take on this year’s team is, it’s time to get over 2008. That team was going nowhere, and the long list of ex-Broncos on the unemployment line is the proof.

The WR Position is Incomplete with or without Marshall

Chibronx — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:05:45 -0000

True or false: If the Broncos trade Brandon Marshall, they'll need to draft a wide receiver in 2010.

Trick question. They'll need to either way. Keeping Marshall in town and getting him happy doesn't complete the WR position. Even if Marshall and Royal stay happy, health and members of the Broncos for the next 10 years, there's still work to do. And I think we'd be nuts not to keep this in mind as we sort through the latest melodrama.

There are two main reasons why.

I'll start with the obvious one. If Marshall plays this year and plays well, the Broncos have gained nothing in terms of long-term certainty at the position. To state the obvious, would you count on this guy long-term? Let's say he plays well and they even negotiate a team-friendly, incentives-based contract (unlikely under any collective bargaining agreement). If my team depends on that guy enough to give him a big contract, they'd better have a stellar back-up plan in place. He's the solution who's not a solution, the player whose presence virtually requires the team to handcuff another talented receiver in anticipation that he gets suspended, ends up in the clink, loses flexibility in his hip, loses feeling in his right hand, or walks out on the team.

That the obvious argument. But there's another one that I think is more potent. As they're built right now, the Broncos are a team stacked with possession receivers. Last year, Marshall played in a pass-centric offense that emphasized the medium- and long-range passing games. Apparently he also played with a quarterback who's arm was so strong, the earth's axis shifted each time he threw. Playing in that offense, Marshall led Broncos' receivers with 12.2 yards per reception -- the 33rd highest number in the NFL. 33rd. I love Eddie Royal and Brandon Stokely. But they were good for about 8 yards per reception. Kenny McKinley looks good, but he's the same kind or receiver.

The Broncos need a field-stretching receiver in their arsenal, and keeping Marshall happy, healthy and free doesn't solve that problem. Hmm, excuse me? Yes, you in the back? OK, you're asking what good it does to have a field-stretching wide receiver when the quarterback's arm is so weak, his deep balls go backwards. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the offense will not consist entirely of bubble screens, that the one and only Devin Hester averaged more yards per catch than Marshall last year despite a supposedly Jell-O armed quarterback, and that a stronger-armed quarterback awaits in the future. The Broncos need a deep threat one way or another.

This brings us, inevitably, to the salary cap. First, teams that dish out multiple cap-busting contracts to wide receivers find themselves pinched for cap space at other positions. If you had to give out two high-dollar contracts to wide receivers, would you give them to receivers who are both possession receivers? If you only decided to give out one big WR contract, as Xanders almost surely will do, who would you give it to? Don't think too hard.

As a quick addendum, I know that some folks around here are big at pointing out that 2010 will most likely be an uncapped season. Let's start with "most likely." If a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA) is worked out in advance, then it will be a capped season, and a big contract to Marshall would be a problem. Now let's move on to the 2010 part. As stands, that season will be uncapped. But just that season -- the salary cap will come back in 2011. Why do I say that? Well, the 2010 season will be uncapped only because that condition was written into the previous CBA, as recompense for the owners terminating it early. That's a sign of strength, not weakness, on the owner's part, and the NFLPA is not a particularly hard-fighting union. The owners remain in the driver's seat, and when the new CBA is settled, it will bring back the salary cap. To state the obvious, the salary cap benefits management, not labor, and we can count on management to push it through (heck, the NHL management was willing to kill their sport to get one).

So we're looking at an uncapped season and a free-agent spending bonanza next year. Followed by the resinstitution of a cap of uncertain size. If there's one thing I know, it's that I want my team to keep its commitments low and let other spend like drunken sailors -- they'll have to make some big cuts when the cap comes back and their 2010 contracts count against it. I want the team with the flexibility and low cap commitments to pick up the many good players who are cut. The Broncos won't be that team if they're committed to two possession receivers long-term. And, just to twist the knife, they also wouldn't be that team if they had two first-round draft picks in 2010 -- those first-rounders are going to get crazy contracts in the uncapped season.

All things being equal, I'd prefer David Harris and a pick. The upgrade over Andra Davis would far outweigh the downgrade from Marshall to Stokley in 3-receiver sets. The salary cap situation would be better. But whatever they do, they need a deep-threat receiver. We can't lose sight of that.

Brandon Marshall's On-Field Problems

Chibronx — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 01:22:00 -0000

In just 15 games in 2008, Brandon Marshall caught 104 passes. The feat ranked third in the NFL for the season (behind Andre Johnson and Wes Welker) and second in the all-time history of the Denver Broncos. With our own eyes, we saw the remarkable degree to which he keyed the offense. We marveled at his acrobatic catches (think of the rising, back-of-the-endzone grab in Kansas City) and his often astonishing ability to stay on his feet, describing a perfect circle behind the defense as he hauls in the ball on the sideline, shakes off a defender, and cuts back behind the grain. It was wonderful, and as much as we all loved Rod Smith's dedication to the game and technical expertise, Marshall's physical gifts captured our attention in a unique way.

But our eyes often deceive us, and the highlight-reel memories we assemble of a player can misled - often badly - when it comes to assessing his impact on the team. This article looks at the considerable cost at which Marshall's accomplishments came, and asks what a fair appraisal of his production (as opposed to his talent and potential) looks like. Two points before we jump in. First, a hat tip to Jaffe28, who posted a more concise form of these statistics earlier today. I've been working on this for awhile, and don't want it to be seen as plagiarism. Second, I want Marshall to stay on the team - this is not a hit job. My point of departure is the observation that he has asked the Broncos to evaluate his potential. Given all the if's attached to this young man, I want to ask what his production has looked like once we account for the disproportionate number of times Jay Cutler threw to him last year. Every throw on the football field comes at a cost - of another receiver not thrown to, or of a run not taken. To me, the dominant question is: how efficient were the Broncos when they directed the action Marshall's way? The analysis below doesn't try to answer the quesiton of whether Brandon Marshall or Jay Cutler or Jeremy Bates is at fault for Marshall's underwhelming numbers. It just asks what those numbers are, and contextualizes them via comparison to the league's other frequently targeted wide receivers.

Putting aside his injuries, legal troubles, contract demands and attitude, a closer look at the numbers suggests several important qualifications to Marshall's on-field performance. We all know about his relative lack of touchdowns. Marshall reached the end zone just six times last year, and just seven times the year before that. But a bigger concern to my mind is the relative inefficiency of the passing game when it has been directed Marshall's way. Rather than dance around the point, I'll cut straight to the table:

Table 1: Reception Percentage (Receptions/Targets)

Name	Team	Target	Rec	Reception Percentage
Wes Welker	NE	150	112	74.7%
Anquan Boldin	ARI	126	89	70.6%
Eddie Royal	DEN	129	91	70.5%
Lance Moore	NO	113	79	69.9%
Donald Driver	GB	107	74	69.2%
Steve Breaston	ARI	113	77	68.1%
Andre Johnson	HOU	170	115	67.6%
T.J. Houshmandzadeh	CIN	137	92	67.2%
Greg Camarillo	MIA	83	55	66.3%
Derrick Mason	BAL	121	80	66.1%
Hines Ward	PIT	126	82	65.1%
Greg Jennings	GB	125	80	64.0%
Jerricho Cotchery	NYJ	112	71	63.4%
Kevin Walter	HOU	95	60	63.2%
Reggie Wayne	IND	130	82	63.1%
Larry Fitzgerald	ARI	154	96	62.3%
Lee Evans	BUF	102	63	61.8%
Michael Jenkins	ATL	81	50	61.7%
Antwaan Randle El	WAS	87	53	60.9%
Antonio Bryant	TB	138	84	60.9%
Steve Smith	CAR	129	78	60.5%
Laveranues Coles	NYJ	116	70	60.3%
Bobby Wade	MIN	88	53	60.2%
Ted Ginn	MIA	93	56	60.2%
Muhsin Muhammad	CAR	108	65	60.2%
Matt Jones	JAC	107	64	59.8%
Roddy White	ATL	149	88	59.1%
Vincent Jackson	SD	101	59	58.4%
Brandon Stokley	DEN	85	49	57.6%
Santana Moss	WAS	138	79	57.2%
Brandon Marshall	DEN	182	104	57.1%
Devin Hester	CHI	92	52	56.5%
Isaac Bruce	SF	107	60	56.1%
Marvin Harrison	IND	107	60	56.1%
Dwayne Bowe	KC	157	86	54.8%
Randy Moss	NE	126	69	54.8%
Chad Ochocinco	CIN	97	53	54.6%
Marques Colston	NO	87	47	54.0%
Amani Toomer	NYG	89	48	53.9%
Torry Holt	STL	119	64	53.8%
Donnie Avery	STL	104	54	51.9%
Calvin Johnson	DET	151	78	51.7%
DeSean Jackson	PHI	121	62	51.2%
Bernard Berrian	MIN	95	48	50.5%
Mark Clayton	BAL	82	41	50.0%
Terrell Owens	DAL	140	69	49.3%
Santonio Holmes	PIT	114	55	48.2%
Roy Williams	DET	82	36	43.9%
Braylon Edwards	CLE	138	55	39.9%

On his way to completing those 104 throws to Marshall, Jay Cutler threw the ball his way 182 times. Andre Johnson, the league's second most thrown-to receiver was targeted "just" 170 times and finished with 310 more yards. Putting aside, for a moment, the question of what kinds of throws the quarterbacks in question made, we have an easy explanation for Marshall's comparatively low yardage production: Compared to the league's best wide-outs, he caught a small percentage of the balls thrown his way. To be specific, Marshall's catch-conversion rate (that is, the share of times he caught balls thrown his way) was 57.1% -- the thirty-first best rate for wide receivers targeted at least 80 times.

Pro football has many kinds of receivers, routes, and plays, so I'll try to put the number in context. First of all, look at the top three receivers in the table. Wes Welker and Eddie Royal (OK, I buried the lede on that one) run different kinds of routes - shorter, lower-reward, and far more likely to result in completions. Welker caught nearly three out of four balls thrown his way, and Royal caught seven out of ten. Anquan Boldin, while more obviously athletic, plays a similar-ish role on the Cardinals' offense. As far as I'm concerned, he's a revelation, and if I were a desperate team targeting a disenchanted wideout with iffy health and dollar signs in his eyes, I know who it would be.

OK, let's take another cut at the numbers. Draw an imaginary line below Michael Jenkins. That line marks the league-wide completion percentage of 61% for last year; every Wide Receiver above the line had a catch-rate (or, if you prefer, completion percentage) above the league average. That's a noteworthy achievement for a wide-out because the league-wide completion rate includes lots of low-risk, check-down throws to running backs, #4 wideouts, and other players who make good targets precisely because they're such lesser threats that the defense often leaves them open. Look closely at the twenty players above the line, and you see many (although not all) of the truly elite #1 wide-outs: Andre Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Lee Evans, Greg Jennings. What's notable here is that Marshall comes in behind not only these highly accomplished monsters, but behind a number of receivers - Matt Jones, Tedd Ginn, Jerico Cotchery, Kevin Walter, Antonio Bryant - who earn far less acclaim.

OK, fine, he didn't catch a lot balls, you say, but catching the ball is not a wide receiver's only job. He's also supposed to make big plays. Sure, the Walsh offense and increasing sophistication of the passing game have made it a lower-risk, lower-reward endeavor, but a deep threat that stretches the defense and moves the team down the field in big leaps still has a lot of value. Despite his physical gifts, Marshall is not that player. To the contrary, despite his low reception rate, he performs better as a short, possession receiver - drops and all - than he does as a deep threat.

Table 2: Yards per Reception

Name	Team	Rec	Yard	Yards/Reception
Bernard Berrian	MIN	48	964	20.1
Vincent Jackson	SD	59	1,098	18.6
Steve Smith	CAR	78	1,417	18.2
Calvin Johnson	DET	78	1,331	17.1
Mark Clayton	BAL	41	695	17.0
Marques Colston	NO	47	760	16.2
Greg Jennings	GB	80	1,292	16.2
Lee Evans	BUF	63	1,017	16.1
Braylon Edwards	CLE	55	877	15.9
Roddy White	ATL	88	1,382	15.7
Michael Jenkins	ATL	50	777	15.5
Terrell Owens	DAL	69	1,052	15.2
Kevin Walter	HOU	60	899	15.0
Larry Fitzgerald	ARI	96	1,434	14.9
Santonio Holmes	PIT	55	821	14.9
Antonio Bryant	TB	84	1,249	14.9
DeSean Jackson	PHI	62	912	14.7
Randy Moss	NE	69	1,008	14.6
Muhsin Muhammad	CAR	65	923	14.2
Ted Ginn	MIA	56	790	14.1
Reggie Wayne	IND	82	1,145	14.0
Isaac Bruce	SF	60	833	13.9
Andre Johnson	HOU	115	1,575	13.7
Donald Driver	GB	74	1,012	13.7
Santana Moss	WAS	79	1,044	13.2
Steve Breaston	ARI	77	1,003	13.0
Derrick Mason	BAL	80	1,037	13.0
Devin Hester	CHI	52	665	12.8
Hines Ward	PIT	82	1,047	12.8
Donnie Avery	STL	54	684	12.7
Torry Holt	STL	64	796	12.4
Bobby Wade	MIN	53	645	12.2
Brandon Marshall	DEN	104	1,265	12.2
Laveranues Coles	NYJ	70	850	12.1
Jerricho Cotchery	NYJ	71	858	12.1
Amani Toomer	NYG	48	580	12.1
Roy Williams	DET	36	430	11.9
Dwayne Bowe	KC	86	1,022	11.9
Lance Moore	NO	79	928	11.7
Matt Jones	JAC	64	750	11.7
Anquan Boldin	ARI	89	1,038	11.7
Antwaan Randle El	WAS	53	593	11.2
Greg Camarillo	MIA	55	613	11.1
Brandon Stokley	DEN	49	528	10.8
Eddie Royal	DEN	91	980	10.8
Marvin Harrison	IND	60	636	10.6
Wes Welker	NE	112	1,165	10.4
Chad Ochocinco	CIN	53	540	10.2
T.J. Houshmandzadeh	CIN	92	904	9.8

More interesting than Marshall's numbers are the overall numbers for the Broncos' passing game. Marshall ranks 33rd in yards per reception among the highly-targeted players here, but first among

Broncos. Eddie Royal and Brandon Stokely followed, each at 10.8 yards per catch. (Tony Scheffler is another story, but he plays another position). This fascinates me because I believed that the Broncos employed a high-risk, high-reward passing game last year. The numbers here suggest it was more like a medium-risk, low-reward game.

OK, before wrapping it up, let's look at the most commonly cited mitigating factor in Marshall's production. The guy racks up a lot of first downs. In fact, it was posited - quite smartly - early today that his low Yards per Catch rate owes to the fact that the team asked him to run lots of routes only as far as the first-down marker. On this count, most of us feel that he succeeded. But once again, the numbers tell a different story.

Table 4: First Downs per Times Thrown to on Third Down

Name	TARG	FD	First Downs per Target
Derrick Mason	36	23	0.64
Hines Ward	37	23	0.62
Steve Smith	31	19	0.61
Greg Jennings	35	21	0.60
Steve Breaston	27	16	0.59
Matt Jones	27	16	0.59
Anthony Gonzalez	29	17	0.59
T.J. Houshmandzadeh	46	26	0.57
Roddy White	51	28	0.55
Wes Welker	33	18	0.55
Steve Smith	32	17	0.53
Vincent Jackson	37	19	0.51
Reggie Wayne	39	20	0.51
Dwayne Bowe	39	20	0.51
Brandon Stokley	39	20	0.51
Laveranues Coles	26	13	0.50
Jason Avant	26	13	0.50
Anquan Boldin	34	17	0.50
Davone Bess	25	12	0.48
Patrick Crayton	25	12	0.48
Andre Johnson	30	14	0.47
Donald Driver	39	18	0.46
DeSean Jackson	37	17	0.46
Santonio Holmes	44	20	0.45
Isaac Bruce	40	18	0.45
Jerricho Cotchery	34	15	0.44
Bernard Berrian	26	11	0.42
Brandon Marshall	43	18	0.42
Amani Toomer	25	10	0.40
Brandon Jones	30	12	0.40
Lance Moore	35	14	0.40
Chad Ochocinco	28	11	0.39
Devin Hester	29	11	0.38
Antonio Bryant	46	17	0.37
Mark Clayton	28	10	0.36
Kevin Walter	34	12	0.35
Bobby Engram	26	9	0.35
Justin McCareins	26	9	0.35
Muhsin Muhammad	35	12	0.34
Braylon Edwards	38	13	0.34
Santana Moss	35	11	0.31
Terrell Owens	43	13	0.30
Calvin Johnson	45	13	0.29
Torry Holt	39	9	0.23

In 2008, 44 NFL receivers were targeted 25 or more times on Third Down. Collectively, Quarterbacks threw 1,509 passes their way. They converted 687 into first downs, for an average conversion rate of 46%. Brandon Marshall earned 18 first downs on 43 third-down targets - a success rate of 42%. That figure places him 28th in the group.

Overall, Marshall is in the middle or the bottom of the pack for every statistic that describes a specialized wide-receiver skill. He did not catch a particularly large number of the balls thrown his way. His receptions went for short yardage. And on third down, he moved the chains at a below-average rate. On none of the receiving statistics above did he rank above 28th in the NFL.

So am I saying he's a lousy receiver, and that the Broncos should kick him to the curb? No. I think he can flourish, and mightily, in the McDaniels system. My analysis is not the most charitable. He probably should not be blamed for Cutler forcing the ball to him as often as Cutler did. The problems of the Jeremy Bates scheme are not his fault. And yet those problems are the reason why Marshall, despite the many what-ifs surrounding his future performance - can he stay healthy? Will he give his all to the team? Will he stay on the roster? Will he stay out of lock-up? - is demanding his payday. If Cutler had spread the ball around more or the Broncos had called more running plays (as they should have), his numbers would not be so gaudy. As the tables above show, the single most impressive thing about Marshall's on-field performance was the number of times Jay Cutler threw him the ball.

Marshall's talent captivates me. I want him to succeed. And I want him to do it in a Broncos uniform. But when weighing the many risks of his future against the documented inefficiency of his production with the Broncos, I don't like the results. I hope the team can keep him this year under his current contract. Barring that, I hope that some other team - hello, Dan Snyder - focuses on his upside rather than his production. Because I fear that's the only way the Broncos will get maximum value out of this gifted, frustrating athlete.

Long-Term Value, Short-Term Fix: The Hidden Strengths of the 2009 Draft

Chibronx — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:09:23 -0000

Let’s face it: Even if you subscribe to the “Best Player Available” draft philosophy, it can be hard to watch. The logic behind each and every Broncos’ pick made sense to me. Yet I can’t tally the number of times I nearly spat out my coffee when they moved up to trade a player who wasn’t a Defensive End or Inside Linebacker.

Then I looked more closely at the nubmers for 2008. And I really liked what I saw. Below is a chained series of second-order statistics about the 2008 Broncos. These are culled from NFL.com, Football Reference, and Football Outsiders (references available upon request). After looking through these, I am very comfortable in arguing that the 2009 draft:

a) Will have more positive impact on the 2009 Broncos than a draft full of D-Lineman would have

b) Combined the long-term payoff of a best player available strategy with player selections that smartly address the most fixable problems about the 2008 Broncos.

Here’s a more careful read of the numbers, which compiles many of the arguments made by Hoosier Teacher, Broncobear, Ted Bartlett and NYCBroncosFan, and hopefully adds some new points:

1) At 28:43 per game, the Broncos’ ranked 25th in Time of Possession.

2) At 38.8, the Broncos ranked #3 in passing attempts per game

3) The Broncos ranked 28th in rushing attempts per game, totaling just 387.

4) The Ravens, Falcons, Patriots, Panthers and Giants all ran more than 500 times.

5) The Broncos’ offense ranked #24 in turnovers (coughing up the ball 30 times).

6) Broncos’ rushers lost 12 fumbles, a figure good for 20th place in the NFL

7) Fully 29% of the rushes attempted against the Broncos went for 10 yards or more. This figure ranks dead last in the NFL

8) The Broncos allowed 20 rushes of 20 yards or more, ranking 29th in the NFL

9) The Broncos allowed 6 rushes of 40 yards or more, tying for 31st in the NFL

10) The Broncos “stuffed” opponents – holding them to zero or negative yardage on first down and less than a quarter of the yardage needed for a new set of downs on second through fourth downs – 24% of the time. This figure ranks 16th in the NFL

11) The Broncos ranked tenth in the NFL at stopping opposing rushers on 3rd or 4th down with two yards or less to go

12) In statistical terms, the Broncos’ 2008 rushing defense skews left. Atypical for a team with high average yards against, the Broncos ranked in the middle of the pack on cutting running plays short. The high rushing average against the Broncos is a product of the ease with which opponents turned 4- and 5-yard gains into 10- and 15-yard gains.

13) At minus-17, the Broncos ranked 32nd in turnovers.

14) Playing without Champ Bailey for a good portion of the year, the Broncos’ defense ranked 23rd in the NFL in yardage given up to another team’s top Receiver.

15) The Broncos’ defense ranked 29th against #2 Receivers, 30th against #3 Receivers, and 31st against Tight Ends.

16) The Broncos’ defense intercepted 6 passes all year. Only Detroit intercepted fewer.

17) The Broncos’ defense gave up just 6 passing plays of 40 yards or more, a figure that ties for ninth in the NFL.

18) The Broncos’ defense gave up 41 passing plays of 20 yards or more, a figure that ranks 15th in the NFL.

19) Avert your eyes on virtually all other passing statistics.

20) Adjusting for the distortions of high altitude, the Broncos’ special teams ranked 32nd in the NFL – and by a comfortable margin – in total yardage impact (this according to Football Outsiders, whom I trust immensely).

21) The Broncos’ special teams were worse in preventing return yardage than in generating it.

22) A total of eight AFC teams apart from the Broncos will run 3-4 defenses (or hybrids thereof) in 2009. These include the Patriots, Steelers, Ravens, Dolphins and Chargers.

23) Put another way, five of the six AFC playoff teams, and eight of the last nine superbowl entrants, run 30 fronts.

That’s a lot of information, and I’m no head coach. But I will argue strongly that four specific team weaknesses emerge from the chart above. And that the draft picks do a remarkable job of addressing the weaknesses.

First, the 2008 Broncos hurt for ball control (tip of the hat to Ted Bartlett, HT, and everyone else who identified this point). The defense spent a lot of time on the field. And remarkably, Broncos running were near the top of the league in coughing the ball up, despite the fact that they were near the bottom of the league in carries. Flooding the team with new running backs potentially solves several problems at once: It improves time of possession and eliminates part of the horrific turnover problem. It will take the pressure off Orton (it is entirely noteworthy that the Patriots offense on which Matt Cassell flourished last year was a top-five offense in rushing attempts).

Second, the rushing defense was terrible in specific ways that the new regime has taken great care to address. Yes, the Broncos gave up five yards per carry, and yes it’s unacceptable. And while we all want more and better beef on the defensive line, the breakdown of the distribution of rushes against the Broncos suggest that the need isn’t as urgent as we thought. As many posters here noted last year, and as the McDaniels team identified when it took over the Broncos, terrible play at middle linebacker and terrible tackling by the secondary played a huge role in the running-defense breakdowns. I’ll put it another way: If the tackling behind the defensive line had been merely average, the running defense would have improved from 30th in the league to middle-of-the-pack.

And so we are no presented with new starters at MLB and both safety positions. Dre Bly was swapped for a cornerback who’s better in run support (among other merits). Alphonso Smith is good in run support. And so on. I’m a big believer in investing in the defensive line, but the numbers said the most glaring problem in run support originated in the backfield.

Third, the strategy of drafting pass defenders who will cover #3 and #4 WRs and TEs also seems well fitted the problems with the Broncos’ pass defense. The pass defense on the whole was wretched. But again, the story is more complicated. We all know there was a lack of pressure on the QB. The most obvious response has been to draft Ayers and shift to a defensive alignment that provides more options for rushing the passer. But adding Smith and McBath fits this strategy, too. The statistics tell us what our eyes told us all year: it wasn’t the #1 receiver we needed to fear, it was the second and third receiving options, and, above all else, the tight end. I can’t speak to the coverage skills of whoever the new LB corps will be on game day. But drafting two skilled pass defenders who will contribute heavily on third down – you know, the down when the Broncos just couldn’t get off the field – sure seems like a good fit for the problems out there. If you’re ready to pound your keyboard and yell about the pass rush now, please stop. They drafted a highly rated pass rusher in the first round, remember?

Fourth, if you adjust for the skewing impact of altitude, the Broncos’ special teams were even worse than we thought they were. Smith, McBath, McKinley, Bruton are all noted special teams contributors.

Fifth, the road to the Super Bowl is paved with domineering 3-4 fronts. Richard Quinn rates as a fantastic blocker at a position that’s key to stopping 3-4 rushes (which can avoid or work around monsters like Clady if properly used).

There are a host of other arguments to be made about the draft strategy. Richard Quinn and the trade of a #1 in 2010 were probably part of some cap-management strategy designed to free up future money for Royal and Clady. The available DL prospects underwhelmed. For better or worse, team McXanders really likes Ronnie Fields and Andra Davis.

My argument is that the most readily fixable problems with the 2008 Broncos were:

Ball control

Turnovers (on both sides of the ball)

Long rushes against

Pass plays targeted against nickel backs, dime backs and safeties

Special teams

The draft executed this weekend maximized value by avoiding reaches for front-seven players. That’s good in the long run. But in the short run, it a actually goes a long way to fixing what was most broken with the 2008 Broncos.

It's Official: Shannon Has to Wait

Chibronx — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:11:47 -0000

I think we all knew this was coming. Six men were elected to the Hall of Fame today, and none was Shannon Sharpe.

Here's the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3874838

I guess they'll have to wait for some other TE to completely redefine the position in order for him to make it in on the first ballot.

In case you want to fuel your rage, here' s a link to his stats:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SharSh00.htm

When he was young, he played in conservative offenses doing business in a league that did not have the passing sophistication of today's game. A person can only wonder what the guy's stats would be like if he'd entered the league 5-6 years later and played through the pass-wacky period of today.

Seeking Your Thoughts -- Simon Fletcher vs. Andre Tippett

Chibronx — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:07:52 -0000

Now, I personally try to minimize the amount of time I spend obsessing over the Hall of Fame's indifference to the Broncos. But as a grown man who had to live in Boston for one painful year (fun details below) the following issue drives me to distraction:

Why is Andre Tippett in the Hall of Fame when Simon Fletcher hasn't got a sniff?

That's an honest question. There may be unmistakable reasons why Tippett was head-and-shoulders better. Their heydays in the NFL coincided with Junior High School for me, so I make no claims to possessing a holistic interpretation of their overall contributions as 3-4 linebackers. What I do have is stats. And the stats say that Tippett recorded 100 sacks in 12 seasons (8.33 per), while Fletcher notched 97.5 in 11 (8.86 per). We also know that Fletcher was an excellent tackler through the middle of his career (average better than 100 per year from 88-93), although his final 12 sacks over the '94 and '95 seasons came primarily in a specialist's pass-rushing role.

Can anybody out there who watched the game with an eye for detail in the late '80s and early '90s explain the difference between the two players? I'm not alleging a theory of media bias here. I just want to know what made Tippett such the clearly superior player.

OK, and while I'm at it, does anybody have stories to share about so-called Patriots fans? In the one year (2007-2008) I did time in Boston, I watched a lot of football games in bars. And I talked to lots of self-declared life-long Patriots fans. True exchanges from those conversations:

Chibronx: Now that I moved here, I've looked into Patriots history. I didn't know that Jim Plunkett was originally drafted by the Pats.

Die-Hard, Hardcore Pats Fan: Jim Plunkett?

Or:

Chibronx: So tell me, who all was on that '85 Pats team?

Hardcore Lives-and-Dies-by-the-Pats Fan: Um, Steve Grogan?

Chibronx: Right, and Craig James and Irving Friar and Andre Tippett. But somebody else must have had a really good year for them to make the Superbowl, right?

Rabid, Slobbering Pats Fan: I don't know.

And on and on....

Feel free to weigh in on either topic!