SB Nation User Blog: Florida Danny

Football Outsiders and the 49ers: Player Stats through Week 7

Florida Danny — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:32:20 -0000

Welcome back for another look at Niner player statistics and rankings as published by Football Outsiders (FO). Unfortunately, I'm not going to present full stats for each player this week. The reason is pretty simple: most are meaningless right now. Of the 8 Niners for whom I could present stats, Shaun Hill just got benched, Alex Smith has only played one half of football, Frank Gore might as well have still been injured given his lack of opportunities against the Texans, Glen Coffee has been relegated to kickoff returns, Josh Morgan was benched, and Michael Crabtree's only played 1 full game. Basically, with that much turmoil, I'm skeptical that the stats - as they currently sit - are a valid reflection of what the current starting lineup has produced or will produce for the rest of the season.

So, in lieu of the full modicum of stats, I'm going to simply touch one specific topic: Why did Hill suck so bad all of a sudden?

If you're unfamiliar with FO's player stats (i.e., DYAR, individual DVOA, and EYds) and line stats (i.e., ALY and ASR), or if you need a refresher course, take a look at my explanations here.

THE DECLINE OF SHAUN HILL

By now, we're pretty much all in agreement that benching Hill was the right move. Whether or not we believe Smith is the short-, medium-, or long-term answer at QB is a topic for another day, with the answer likely becoming evident over the next 4 or 5 games. The question we can answer now is, "What the hell happened to Hill?"

It's useful to start with a chart:

After the jump, I'll discuss the chart, and give you my theory for what happened to Shaun Hill. Here's a hint to make you scratch your head: VD...

This chart tracks Hill's DYAR and EYds per Pass (both on the left axis), along with his DVOA (on the right axis), as they stood at different points over the last year or so (i.e., after 2008, after Game 2 in 2009, after Game 3 in 2009, etc.). In other words, this is not a game-specific ratings chart, it's a tracking chart. For an analogy, consider my chart akin to this one, which tracks Barack Obama's approval rating over the past year or so.

What we can plainly see from the chart is that Hill's stats have declined precipitously since the end of 2008. His DYAR/P has fallen over a full yard, meaning he's far less valuable to the 49ers' passing OFF right now than he was at the end of 2008. Meanwhile, his EYds/P has fallen over 2 yards and his DVOA has fallen nearly 20%, which suggests that he's a far less efficient QB now than he was at the end of last season. Obviously, these conclusions can be filed under, "Duh!" Nevertheless, it's useful to visualize just how far the mighty have fallen.

To me, the most interesting thing about Hill's decline is how it really makes no sense. What I mean by "makes no sense" is that it is totally backwards when considering the type of OFF in which he excelled as compared to the type of OFF in which he seems to have fallen off a cliff. Specifically, if aliens were to have landed on the Earth right now, and they looked at Hill's repertoire of QB skills, Mike Martz's OFF, and Jimmy Raye's OFF, they'd surely say - in whatever language they speak - that Hill would be trash in Martz's OFF, but treasure in Raye's OFF. If they were to look at my chart, they'd guess - incorrectly - that Hill's decline coincided with a move from Raye to Martz as OC, not vice versa.

Of course, we don't need an alien invasion to hear these positions articulated. Surely, a good part of the reason for hiring Raye was that his OFF better suited the dink-and-dunk, high-percentage-passing skills of the starting QB in place at the time of his hiring. Furthermore, the whole reason why Hill wasn't even given a chance to win the starting job during training camp of 2008 was precisely because his skill set fit Martz's OFF just about as good as Tom Delay's skill set fit Dancing with the Stars or William Hung's skill set fit American Idol.

So it turns out, in truly peculiar fashion, that Hill performed much better in the OFF that didn't suit him, and his decline coincided with the installment of an OFF that seemingly suited him to a tee. Now, you might argue that Martz dialed back his OFF considerably once Mike Singletary made the QB switch last season. You'd be right, of course. However, even the Martz Lite OFF during the second half of 2008 was more of a downfield passing OFF than the "3 yards and a cloud of dust" passing OFF run by Raye until the 2nd half of the HOU game.

The question becomes, "Why was Hill's performance trajectory backwards?" My theory revolves entirely around one player, who's changing role this season has influenced the entire OFF. He's next...

THE RISE OF VD

My theory is simply that Vernon Davis is going out for more passes this season, which is helping his stats, but seriously damaged Hill's ability to be successful. Why? Because VD is no longer a blocking TE, which is what he was in Martz's OFF, and so the OL has basically lost its best pass blocker on the right side of the line. Worse pass blocking means more pressure on Hill, and Hill's lack of mobility means more sacks against, and more errant throws by, Hill.

Let's take a look at VD's rise:

In total contrast to Hill's tracking chart, VD's chart shows massive improvement in every stat. He's now over 2 DYAR more valuable per target to the pass OFF, about 5 EYds more efficient per target, and nearly 40% more efficient per target in terms of DVOA. So, this is pretty clear. The decline of Hill seems to have coincided - almost eerily - with the rise of VD.

So what about the second half of my theory? Has the rise of VD also coincided with worse pass protection for Hill?

OFFENSIVE LINE

To finish the story, here's the OL's tracking chart according to ASR:

For 2008, ASR includes only those games with Hill at QB. As you can see, the OL's ASR has increased about 2.5% this season. In other words, they're giving up sacks more frequently through 6 games this year than they did with the same starting QB last year.

What's crazy about this, again, is that Raye's offense is supposed to be the conservative one; the one that minimizes the chance of a QB losing the game. And yet it seems that for Hill and the OL, the opposite has occurred. My view is that, like a lot of precipitous declines in life, VD - or at least the breakout of VD - is most likely to blame.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the matter.

Enjoy the game today. Go Niners!

**DVOA, DYAR, EYds, and ASR statistics used to produce this article were obtained from Football Outsiders.

Football Outsiders and the 49ers: Team Stats Through Week 7

Florida Danny — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:04:24 -0000

Welcome back for this week's look at how the 49ers' team stats rank in the NFL according to Football Outsiders (FO).* If you want a less stat-intensive look at 49er rankings, check out Fooch's weekly post on how the team stacks up against the rest of the NFL according to the internet punditocracy.

Two things have happened since the last time I posted 49er team stats and rankings. First, they had a bye, meaning that some of their DVOA rankings changed simply by virtue of the NFL average for specific game situations changing during their bye week. Second, and much more important, the Niners played a really weird game against HOU in which the offense (OFF) couldn't move the ball with Shaun Hill at QB, but moved it pretty easily with Alex Smith during the 2nd half, and the defense (DEF) couldn't stop the Texans at all during the 1st half, but held them to only 3 points in the 2nd half. Because of these two circumstances, the 49ers' team stats and rankings according to FO have actually changed quite considerably. I'll try to flesh things out as best as I can.

TEAM RANKINGS

Here are the 49ers' overall team DVOAs and rankings (bold = top 8 in the NFL; italics = bottom 8):

Total	Rank	Offense	Rank	Defense	Rank	Special Teams	Rank
-6.6%	21	-10.9%	21	-6.1%	10	-1.8%	22
Total VOA	Rank	SOS	Rank	Variance	Rank
-9.3%	22	0.5%	13	10.3%	14

Despite the fact that the Niners lost @ HOU, and had practically no OFF during the 1st half, their Total (TOT) DVOA actually improved by 3.2% behind the strength of an OFF that improved 5.1%. This must be attributed, at least in part, to the dominance of SF's OFF during the 2nd half of the game. As I've said all week in various threads, we need to keep the OFF's 2nd half performance in perspective. Nevertheless, it appears from these stats that Smith and company outperformed the NFL average in the relatively easy game situations they were presented with during the 2nd half of a blowout.

On the defensive side of the ball, that unit dropped out of the top 8 for the first time this season thanks to a 3.0% decline in DEF DVOA. With respect to special teams (ST), the unit somehow improved by 1.1% despite Arnaz "The Blackmailer" Battle's muffed punt.

A couple of interesting changes in the above stats regard DVOA Variance and DVOA Strength of Schedule (SOS). Specifically, the 49ers actually moved up 8 spots in the Variance rankings, suggestive of increased week-to-week consistency, which is probably due to the fact that they've displayed the same relatively mediocre performance for the past 3 games. In terms of SOS, the Niners have now played a schedule so far that's above the league average in opponent difficulty. With games against the Vikings, Falcons, and Texans, along with the Cardinals' re-emergence as a high-DVOA team, it's evident that the Niners have played a reasonably difficult schedule thus far this season. And it doesn't get any easier this week with their trip to Indy (42.4% TOT DVOA, 2nd).

Finally, in case you're wondering, the 49ers' TOT DVOA ranking puts them behind ARI (22.0%, 10th) and SEA (-2.9%, 19th) among NFC West teams.

After the jump, I'll present the rest of the 49ers' stats, rankings, and situation splits...

OFFENSIVE RANKINGS - OVERALL

Here' how the offensive rankings look overall and by type of play (bold = top 8 in the NFL; italics = bottom 8):

OFF	Rank	Pass	Rank	Run	Rank	Variance	Rank
-10.9%	21	6.6%	20	-20.9%	27	3.0%	3
OFF VOA	Rank	Pass VOA	Rank	Run VOA	Rank
-7.2%	21	11.6%	17	-18.4%	26

The changes here are pretty staggering. Because of one half-long aerial display, the OFF is now 5.1% more efficient overall, and 15.2% more efficient in the passing game. Going from -8.6% (26th) in Pass OFF DVOA to 6.6% (20th) is one incredible leap in efficiency. What's even more impressive is that their unadjusted VOAs improved 7.0% overall and 17.3% via the pass. To put an exclamation on this, the 49ers' pass OFF was 132.0% more efficient against HOU than it was against ATL (71.4% vs. -61.6%). Whatever it is they did during the 2nd half of the HOU game, they need to bottle it and drink it before each game for the rest of the season. With these differences, it's kind of hard to argue against the reality that "Starting QB Alex Smith" is what needs to be bottled.

OFFENSIVE RANKINGS - SITUATIONAL SPLITS

Here are the OFF's pass and run DVOAs by down:

Down	OFF	Rank	Pass OFF	Rank	Run OFF	Rank
1st	8.8%	15	32.9%	14	-7.0%	18
2nd	-35.6%	30	-35.4%	28	-29.1%	28
3rd	-11.5%	22	17.3%	15	-54.4%	31

For the Niners' OFF, 2nd and 3rd down stats remain pretty similar to what they were going into the bye. In contrast, they've improved to an almost-absurd degree on 1st down. Specifically, their overall 1st Down OFF DVOA is 10.9% better this week, and their 1st Down Pass OFF DVOA is - I'm not kidding - 34.5% better. The cause of this is clear: All 3 TDs thrown by Smith to Vernon Davis against HOU came on 1st down. Combining these stats with the OFF's below average efficiency on 1st down runs, I think there's a pretty strong argument in favor of passing the ball more on 1st down. Indeed, at least a part of this improvement was probably due to play-calling that went against their previously established tendencies.

Here are the OFF's down splits by distance (Short = 0-3 yards; Mid = 4-6 yards; Long = 7+ yards):

Distance	OFF	Rank	Short	Rank	Mid	Rank	Long	Rank
1st	8.8%	15	N/A
2nd	-35.6%	30	-29.4%	25	-40.3%	29	-35.7%	27
3rd	-11.5%	22	9.3%	16	-55.8%	28	9.6%	17

There's nothing really to see here. The Niners' OFF remains abysmal on 2nd down from all distances, ranks near the bottom of the league on 3rd & mid, and is middling on 3rd & long. However, one stat that did take a big hit this week was 3rd & Short OFF DVOA: The 49ers dropped from 29.7% (8th) to 9.3% (16th). Looking back at the play-by-play, the Niners encountered three 3rd/4th & short situations, with each coming during the 1st half and resulting in an incomplete Hill pass.

So I think we've established that inserting Smith improved the 49ers' pass OFF. As many have argued, Smith's skill set allows for a more wide-open OFF, with relatively frequent 3-or-more WR formations and increased use of shotgun. Good thing we have their shotgun splits through 6 games:

% of Plays

in Shotgun

Rank

Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Non-Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Difference

Rank

34.7%

2.5%

-16.1%

18.6%

As has been the case all season, the Niners' OFF performs more efficiently in the shotgun. We have to believe that this bodes well for the rest of the season if Smith remains the starter. Basically, if they're already almost 20% more efficient in the shotgun with a traditional passer like Hill, the sky's the limit with a spread-bred QB like Smith.

Finally, let's take a look at the OFF's red zone efficiency:

Red Zone

Rank

Red Zone

Pass

Rank

Red Zone

Run

Rank

Goal-to-Go

Rank

16.8%

82.6%

-21.6%

10.3%

Although the Niners have vaulted themselves back into the top 8 in overall and passing Red Zone OFF DVOA, don't let it fool you. They had only 1 red zone snap against HOU, which resulted in one of VD's TDs. So I guess that's about as efficient as you can get; it just doesn't carry much meaning because of the small sample size.

DEFENSIVE RANKINGS - OVERALL

Here' how the offensive rankings look overall and by type of play (bold = top 8 in the NFL; italics = bottom 8):

DEF	Rank	Pass	Rank	Run	Rank	Variance	Rank
-6.1%	10	2.8%	13	-17.6%	7	7.2%	23
DEF VOA	Rank	Pass VOA	Rank	Run VOA	Rank
1.1%	16	19.5%	25	-22.5%	5

For the first time since I've been posting about the Niners' stats and rankings, their DEF is not in the top 8 of DEF DVOA. Of course, that's not altogether surprising giving the lackluster performances they've had the past 2 games. Where things get interesting is in the passing game. Namely, although still in the top half of the NFL, they're now a below-average pass DEF in terms of play-by-play efficiency. In addition, if you want a perfect example of why we must account for SOS when evaluating performance, look no further than the difference between the 49ers' DVOA and VOA in pass DEF. If you ignore SOS, the 49ers' are the 8th-worst pass DEF in the league, so you conclude that they suck. If you go by the NFL's pass DEF rankings, the Niners are 21st, so you conclude that they borderline suck. But, if you correctly adjust for things like, oh, I don't know, the fact that, except for the Rams, Niner opponents have an average pass OFF DVOA of 29.7%, then you end up with the more-valid conclusion, "The Niners' pass DEF is about average. They just look like they suck because they're playing really good pass OFF's every week." And, by the way, the Colts are currently #1 with a Pass OFF DVOA of 64.7%. Expect more of the same, then, in Week 8.

DEFENSIVE RANKINGS - SITUATIONAL SPLITS

Based on the above, we should expect for the splits to show increased inefficiency on pass DEF. Let's take a look. Here are the DEF's pass and run DVOAs by down:

Down	DEF	Rank	Pass DEF	Rank	Run DEF	Rank
1st	0.7%	15	28.7%	23	-23.1%	4
2nd	-30.2%	3	-37.1%	3	-21.8%	8
3rd	14.0%	20	12.9%	17	17.6%	24

Every week it's like whack-a-mole with the DEF's situational splits. Earlier in the season, their problem was on 2nd down. Last week, they had a huge decline on 3rd down. Now, this week, 1st down crops up as the new problem du jour. Specifically, the Niners' 1st Down DEF DVOA fell 6.4%, which dropped them from 8th to 15th in the NFL. What's worse, though, is that their pass DEF is now 18.0% worse on 1st down, which dropped them from the top 10 to the bottom 10 in that situation.

As I have a penchant for doing, I went back and looked at the play by play. Not surprisingly, it's instructive: On 1st down passes, Matt Schaub went 10 of 11 for 164 yards, 3 new 1st downs, and a TD. Furthermore, he started the game 10 of 10 on 1st down, not throwing an incompletion until there was only 3:38 left in the 4th quarter, and 3 of his 10 1st-down completions went for gains over 30 yards or more. For those of you who like the NFL QB Rating, that works out to a near-perfect rating of 149.1. To put it mildly, SF's 1st-down pass defense left something to be desired against HOU.

Here are the DEF's down splits by distance (Short = 0-3 yards; Mid = 4-6 yards; Long = 7+ yards):

Distance	DEF	Rank	Short	Rank	Mid	Rank	Long	Rank
1st	0.7%	15	N/A
2nd	-30.2%	3	10.1%	24	81.5%	31	-73.7%	2
3rd	14.0%	20	24.5%	22	-12.1%	19	27.8%	22

There are 2 changes in this table when compared to last week: (1) an improvement of 17.5% on 2nd & short, and (2) a decline of 11.7% on 3rd & long. Pretty much, HOU was a great passing team and crappy running team going into the game, and the 49ers' DEF didn't do much to change that during the game. Therefore, their efficiency on a running down (i.e., 2nd & short) got better, while their efficiency on a passing down (i.e., 3rd & long) got worse. Most likely, sample size is also a contributor to the huge swings on these 2 down-and-distance situations.

Here are the Niners' defensive shotgun vs. non-shotgun splits:

% of Plays

in Shotgun

Rank

Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Non-Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Difference

Rank

34.0%

-12.3%

-3.5%

-8.8%

HOU ran only 10 of their 59 plays from the shotgun formation (16.9%), so, as is to be expected, the 49ers' defensive shotgun rate fell considerably. Unfortunately, 3 of those 10 plays picked up a first down for HOU and another resulted in Steve Slaton's illegal-block-aided receiving TD. Therefore, SF's Shotgun DEF DVOA dropped 5.4%.

Finally, let's take a look at the DEF's red zone efficiency:

Red Zone

Rank

Red Zone

Pass

Rank

Red Zone

Run

Rank

Goal-to-Go

Rank

8.6%

-48.3%

50.5%

102.5%

This week, the Niners' Red Zone DEF DVOA is 8.6% worse than last week's, their Red Zone Pass DEF DVOA is 29.4% worse, and their already-abysmal Goal-To-Go DEF DVOA managed - amazingly - to get 13.4% worse. Against HOU, the 49ers defended 8 plays in the red zone, of which 3 were the goal-to-go situations. Two of the 3 goal-to-go plays resulted in TDs, 1 via the pass and 1 via the run, so that explains the odds-defying Goal-To-Go DEF DVOA decline. Of the 5 red zone plays that weren't of the goal-to-go variety, the lone successful play for HOU was a passing first down. Add these two things together, throw in a little sampling variation, and that's how we get the this week's red zone stats.

SPECIAL TEAMS RANKINGS

Below are the Niners' ST DVOA stats broken down by unit:

ST	Rank	FG/XP	Rank	Kickoff	Rank	Punt	Rank
-1.8%	22	-0.1	14	-2.7	26	7.4	3
ST VOA	Rank			Kickoff Return	Rank	Punt Return	Rank
-1.1%	23			-2.8	23	-6.0	29

Everything is pretty much status quo for the 49ers' ST this week. Andy Lee continues to be a hero, Joe Nedney continues to be an average kicker, and everything else pretty much sucks. However, it is worth noting that, despite a muffed punt by Battle, the punt return unit's field position points only decreased by 0.2, and the ST's Overall DVOA actually got 1.1% better. Here's hoping that (a) some Watergate-style operation separates Battle from his naked pictures of Scot McLoughan, and (b) Mike Singletary never again lists a backup TE as "primary kick returner" on the depth chart.

TONY ROBBINS SPLITS

Just in case you forgot, the 49ers' TR splits include net Inside-the-20 DVOA, net 1st Quarter DVOA, net 4th Quarter DVOA, and DANLOLS**, which is basically net average starting field position adjusted for opponent (Defense-Adjusted Net Line of Scrimmage). Below are the 49ers' OFF, DEF, and net TR splits:

	DANLOLS	Rank	Inside the 20	Rank	1st Quarter	Rank	4th Quarter	Rank	Avg Rank
OFF	-0.48	19	-50.6%	32	-46.4%	29	25.0%	10	22
DEF	-1.58	10	-2.9%	14	-4.3%	14	19.5%	23	15
Net	1.10	16	-47.7%	28	-42.1%	26	5.5%	12	20

In terms of similarities, the 49ers' Inside-the-20 and 1st-quarter DVOAs continue to indicate that the team isn't using all of Singletary's Formula for Success, i.e., the OFF is not creating good field position for the DEF, and the OFF is doing a poor job of executing the 15-play script. Further evidence for the 49ers' growing inability to create good field position comes from DANLOLS: They dropped from 4th to 16th this week, a freefall most likely due to "The Human Roster Exemption," Arnaz Battle. Finally, the only thing that seems to be getting better with respect to the Formula is 4th-quarter DVOA. Namely, the HOU game showed that the OFF can, in fact, finish games well: They're now 14.2% more efficient than last week.

BOTTOM LINE

OK, so through 6 games, we can draw the following conclusions about the 2009 49ers:

Mediocrity rules the day, but offensive help is on the way.
The jury's still out in my mind, but, if the pass OFF continues what they did during the 2nd half @ HOU, the 49ers are likely to develop into a pretty darn good team this season.
Memo to Jimmy Raye: Passing on 1st down and using more shotgun makes your offense better.
The DEF, especially against the pass, has suffered from a treacherous schedule so far, but they seriously need to pick a down to suck at and stick with it.
If only Andy Lee could return kicks and punts, and bust a wedge on kickoff returns. If only Arnaz Battle didn't have those pictures.
The 49ers are playing like the Formula for Success was developed for quantum mechanics by a guy named Einstein rather than for football by a guy named Singletary. Memo to players: You don't need a PhD in physics to win football games.

Bright and early tomorrow morning, I'll break down the player stats and rankings. See you then.

*DVOA statistics used to produce this article were obtained from Football Outsiders.

**In the comments section, I've posted stats and rankings for every NFL team according to DANLOLS.

Poll

Which of the following recent developments will have the GREATEST impact on the 49ers' overall success for the rest of the season?

How the West Was Won: The Importance of 3-0

Florida Danny — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:38:08 -0000

Fooch's Note: Don't forget to head over to our open thread for today's game.

Since the Falcons debacle, doom and gloom seems to be cropping up more and more on our threads. So I figured now would be a good time to inject a little optimism to Niners Nation (NN), and talk some of us down off the ledge...

A few weeks ago, I posted an article about the meaning of being 2-0 overall and within the NFC West. Just to remind you, here was my bottom line:

So, to sum up...By virtue of their 2-0 record both overall and within their division, the 49ers

are about 30 times more likely to win the NFC West than if they started 0-2 in the division

can expect to win about 10 games this season

are about 5 times more likely to make the playoffs than if they started 0-2 overall

That sounded pretty good at the time, especially the part about being 2-0 in the division. Obviously, as much as I'd like to be telling you what 5-0 overall means right now, the 49ers have lost 2 of their past 3 games, which puts them at a pretty-much-meaningless 3-2 overall. Therefore, today's report from Optimismland will focus solely on the meaning of being 3-0 in the division. As you'll find out, it actually means quite a bit.

After the jump, I'll show you just how meaningful it is, and even give you some optimism were the Niners to end up not winning the division...

WINNING THE WEST

Based on the 2002-2008 NFL seasons*, here's a table showing how likely a team was to win their division when they started 0-3, 1-1, or 2-1, or 3-0 in division games:

	Div Champ?
Div Record Through 3 Div Games	No	Yes
0-3	100.0%	0.0%
1-2	92.4%	7.6%
2-1	73.1%	26.9%
3-0	25.0%	*75.0%*

From this table, we can clearly see the implications of SF's 3-0 start within their division: 30 of the 40 teams since 2002 that have started 3-0 in their division have gone on to win the division. Furthermore, by virtue of their 3-0 division record, the 49ers are 10 times more likely to win the NFC West than the Seahawks, who are 1-2 in the division right now. The Cardinals are currently 1-1, so losing their next division game (Week 10 vs. SEA), will put them in the same probability boat that SEA's in right now. However, even if ARI wins that game, the 49ers would still be about 3 times more likely the Cardinals to "Win the West" (75.0% vs. 26.9%).

For the skeptics out there, who still won't come down off the ledge, I'll add two little tidbits of stat geek optimism. First, the 49ers' relevant percentage (75.0%) is 3 times higher than what you'd expect just by chance, and the likelihood of 3-0 being absolutely meaningless for predicting division championships is about 3 in 10 billion. Second, the likelihood that all percentages in the above table have occurred by chance alone - aka the last 7 years of NFL football have been unlike normal NFL football - are about 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000, which I think translates into 100 one-trillionths of 1%. So basically, it's beyond any shadow of even the biggest doubter's doubt that (a) winning an NFL division is dependent on what a team's record is through 3 division games, and (b) the success of previous 3-0 teams is unbelievably unlikely to be a totally random phenomenon.

Finally, in case you're wondering, 10 of the 14 Super Bowl participants since 2002 started 3-0 in their division, including 4 of the 7 NFL champions. This isn't statistically meaningful because of the small sample size, but we're trying to be optimistic, so love it if it cheers you up.

LOSING THE WEST

OK, so let's say you're somehow still out on the ledge. You're saying to your pessimist self, "Hey! Ten of those 3-0 teams didn't win the division!" Well, for you guys, here's another stat: Of the 10 teams who choked away their division, 6 still made the playoffs. So that leaves only 4 teams who were unbeaten through 3 division games, and yet didn't even make the playoffs that season. Here are some details about those 4 teams:

2003 Minnesota Vikings - This team played 3 division games right out of the gate in Weeks 1-3, got to 6-0 overall, and then collapsed; losing 7 of their last 10 games - including 2 of their last 3 in the division - for a 9-7 non-playoff finish.
2006 Denver Broncos - This team played 2 of their first 3 division games against a Raiders team that ultimately finished 2-14, so you could say that they lucked into 3-0 by virtue of a creampuff division schedule early in the season. Nevertheless, the 2006 Broncos got to 7-2 overall, and then collapsed; losing 5 of their last 7 games - including all 3 remaining division games -- to finish 9-7 overall and out of the playoffs.
2007 Detroit Lions - This team was simply the mother of all chokers (a motherchoker?). Through 8 games, they were 6-2 overall and 3-0 in the NFC North; well on their way to Jon Kitna's predicted 10-6 finish. Unfortunately, they went 1-7 in their last 8 games - including an 0-3 finish within the division - and ended up 7-9 for the season.
2008 Chicago Bears - This team resembles the 2006 Broncos in that they lucked into a 3-0 division record via a scheduling quirk that gave them 2 early games against the ultimately winless Lions. Furthermore, this team was actually 2-3 outside the NFC North at the point in time that they got to 3-0 within the NFC North. Over their final 8 games, they went 4-4, but only 1-2 in their last 3 division games, with both division losses coming on the road.

This is waaaaay too small of a sample size to draw any real conclusions. However, I do notice 2 trends among these 4 teams. First, it sure seems like the NFC North has been a magnet for monumental 2nd-half collapses within the division. Last time I checked, the 49ers play in the NFC West, so we probably don't have to worry about this "Curse of the Norris."

Second, from 2004 to 2006 - and 2008 for that matter - DEN kind of perfected the magic trick of making division titles disappear. In 2004, they started 3-0 in the AFC West, but didn't end up winning the division. In 2005, they started 3-0 in the division, won the division, but then choked in the playoffs to a team I'll talk about in a second. In 2006, well, I've detailed that team above: started 3-0, but no division championship, and no playoff appearance. So, given that our favorite team isn't the "Denver 49ers," and that the Niners don't seem to have developed a penchant for meaningless 3-0 starts within their division, we probably don't have to worry about them being like the 2006 Broncos either.

I'll wrap things up with the ultimate "glass is half full" anecdote from my analysis. As I mentioned previously, 6 of the 10 teams that started 3-0 in their division made the playoffs that season as wild cards rather than division champions. One of these 6 teams stands head and shoulders above the rest. They started 3-0 in the division, but ended up narrowly missing the division crown because of a tiebreaker. The finished the season 11-5, but all that got them was a #6 seed, which pitted them in the Wild Card Round against the same team that beat won their division on tiebreakers. They beat that team, then beat one of those motherchoking DEN teams, and ended their season with a Super Bowl championship.

So even if the 49ers somehow buck the trend and fail to win the NFC West, they're still more likely than not to make the playoffs. And if they make the playoffs, they have a Super Bowl champion to model themselves after. I'd say that's about as optimistic as I can possibly envision things. Oh, and in case you still haven't figured out which 3-0, non-division-winning team they'd be OK to model themselves after, here's a hint:

Enjoy today's game against the Texans. And remember, even if the 49ers lose, they're still a 3-to-1 favorite to win the NFC West.

*Just in case you're wondering, I constantly use 2002-2008 as my data set because 2002 is when the NFL went to its current 8-division alignment. Going back farther in time than that would be like comparing apples to oranges.

Poll

As of right now, how confident are you that the 49ers will win the NFC West this season?

0-25% confident

31 votes

26-50% confident

37 votes

51-75% confident

90 votes

76-100% confident

51 votes

209 votes | Poll has closed

The 49ers’ Remaining Schedule: Statistical Past is Prologue

Florida Danny — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:24:07 -0000

AUTHOR'S NOTE: This post is one part mental exercise and one part debate catalyst. Please don't respond in the comments section telling me all the ways my - admittedly - very crude analysis is limited. I know I'm extrapolating from a small sample size, I know that the addition of Michael Crabtree changes things, I know that the return of Frank Gore changes things, I know that Glen Coffee is the new kick returner, and I know that Mike Singletary is not Mike Nolan (i.e., an inevitable mid-to-late-season swoon). The objective here is simply to point out a few matchups that seem to matter when it comes to 49er wins and losses, to see how their remaining opponents rate with respect to those matchups, and to elicit your opinions on the matter.

With their bye week over, the 49ers are preparing to begin an 11-week stretch run towards the playoffs. Therefore, now is as good a time as any to take a look at their remaining schedule. Of course, knowing me, you're not surprised to find out that my interest is in examining the schedule from a statistical perspective.

Generally, I try to keep my matchup evaluation process as simple as possible. At its most basic level, a team has several paths to winning a game:

The team's ability to play up to their strengths
The team's ability to minimize the effect of their weaknesses
The team's ability to exploit their opponent's weaknesses
The team's ability to nullify their opponent's strengths
Luck

I throw luck in there at the end because, sometimes, a team does most of the other things, and yet still loses a game they should have won. Two quick examples come to mind. The Dolphins pretty much executed their game plan perfectly against the Colts in Week 2. They ran the ball (i.e., played up to their strength), and nullified IND's strength (i.e., they kept Peyton Manning off the field for over 75% of the game). Despite this, they still lost. The second obvious example is the Niners' loss to the Vikings. SF passed the ball really well in that game (i.e., exploited MIN's weakness on DEF) and nullified MIN's strength (i.e., they held Adrian Peterson to a sub-par game). Despite this, they lost because of a miracle play. So, even though the NFL is all about matchups, sometimes winning the matchup doesn't translate into winning the game.

After the jump I'll identify the important matchups and break down the remaining schedule. Pay close attention for the Phil Luckett appearance...

IDENTIFYING THE IMPORTANT MATCHUPS

So, the first thing to do is try to identify what stats seem to contribute to 49er wins and losses. Below is a table showing how the 49ers and their opponents actually performed in their 5 games this season:

49ERS' DVOA PERFORMANCE IN WINS
Matchup	TOT	OFF	Pass OFF	Rush OFF	DEF	Pass DEF	Rush DEF	ST
SF	14.7%	-20.9%	1.9%	-51.0%	-28.2%	-15.8%	-56.1%	7.3%
ARI	3.4%	-27.3%	2.3%	-54.9%	-24.3%	8.3%	-65.5%	6.4%
Difference	11.3%	-45.2%	10.2%	-116.5%	-55.5%	-13.5%	-111.0%	0.9%
SF	5.5%	5.8%	-11.6%	24.6%	7.6%	17.2%	-8.9%	7.3%
SEA	-1.7%	1.3%	20.5%	0.7%	7.5%	-12.0%	22.0%	4.5%
Difference	7.2%	13.3%	-23.6%	46.6%	8.9%	37.7%	-8.2%	2.8%
SF	35.2%	-6.0%	20.5%	-31.1%	-43.7%	-50.7%	-35.9%	-2.4%
STL	-64.0%	-49.3%	-46.6%	-52.0%	9.4%	35.9%	-17.0%	-5.3%
Difference	99.2%	3.4%	56.4%	-48.1%	-93.0%	-97.3%	-87.9%	2.9%
49ERS' DVOA PERFORMANCE IN LOSSES
Matchup	TOT	OFF	Pass OFF	Rush OFF	DEF	Pass DEF	Rush DEF	ST
SF	-23.5%	-24.6%	15.0%	-39.2%	-21.0%	-8.1%	-42.9%	-19.9%
MIN	35.0%	-2.5%	22.3%	-31.5%	-11.9%	28.2%	-44.7%	25.6%
Difference	-58.5%	-36.5%	43.2%	-83.9%	-23.5%	14.2%	-74.4%	-45.5%
SF	-54.9%	-27.9%	-56.1%	22.0%	21.2%	20.0%	22.1%	-5.8%
ATL	47.1%	28.8%	58.5%	26.8%	-12.0%	-33.0%	26.3%	6.3%
Difference	-102.0%	-39.9%	-89.1%	48.3%	50.0%	78.5%	48.9%	-12.1%

In this table, the "Difference" row shows how each Niner unit compared to the opposing unit. For example, the -45.2% "Difference" for OFF against the Cardinals is simply the difference between SF's OFF DVOA during the game (-20.9%) and ARI's DEF DVOA during the game (-24.3%).

As you can see, there are only two performances that seem to have much rhyme or reason in their contribution to 49er wins and losses. First, they won all 3 games in which they were more efficient than their opponent overall (i.e., they had a better TOT DVOA). However, that's not all that enlightening because the team that plays better wins most of the time. In contrast, the second influential performance is a little more enlightening. Namely, they won all 3 games in which their ST outperformed the opponent's, but lost both games in which their opponent's ST outperformed theirs. Therefore, as odd as it might seem and as much as it may only be a coincidence, not screwing up on ST seems to be relatively important for 49er game outcomes.

The next thing to look at is the caliber of opponents they've beaten and lost to (Attention grammar police: Sorry for the dangling participle there). Below is a table showing the DVOAs for each of the Niners' opponents as they were going into the game:

PREGAME DVOAs FOR TEAMS 49ERS BEAT
Opponent	TOT	OFF	DEF	ST
ARI	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
SEA	36.5%	17.7%	-15.1%	3.7%
STL	-46.5%	-19.3%	24.2%	-3.0%
PREGAME DVOAs FOR TEAMS 49ERS LOST TO
Opponent	TOT	OFF	DEF	ST
MIN	47.3%	15.3%	-30.0%	2.1%
ATL	3.3%	17.8%	15.3%	0.8%

From this table, it seems like the 49ers have a hard time with teams that are good on OFF. The only anomaly is the Seahawks, who also were good on OFF going into their game with the Niners. However, as I'm sure you'll remember, the game was actually pretty close until Matt Hasselbeck got a lumbar adjustment from Patrick Willis.

Now, to confirm this "lose to good OFFs" trend, as well as to get a more detailed picture, let's look at the DVOAs for each Niner opponent as they stand right now:

CURRENT DVOAs FOR TEAMS 49ERS BEAT
Opponent	TOT	OFF	Pass OFF	Rush OFF	DEF	Pass DEF	Rush DEF	ST
ARI	8.3%	-2.5%	29.3%	-30.1%	-7.3%	11.4%	-37.7%	-1.6%
SEA	-3.1%	-3.1%	11.7%	-14.1%	0.8%	8.4%	-9.6%	0.7%
STL	-41.3%	-18.4%	-6.6%	-18.5%	21.1%	36.9%	6.0%	-1.7%
CURRENT DVOAs FOR TEAMS 49ERS LOST TO
Opponent	TOT	OFF	Pass OFF	Rush OFF	DEF	Pass DEF	Rush DEF	ST
MIN	29.7%	19.5%	48.5%	-0.4%	-1.7%	13.3%	-21.7%	8.5%
ATL	19.9%	18.3%	46.8%	-2.9%	2.2%	8.0%	-5.9%	3.8%

Again, we see a trend towards the 49ers losing to teams with good OFFs and good STs. For a little more nuance, notice that they specifically have lost to really, really, good pass OFFs, and have beaten really, really bad run OFFs. Although the Cardinals' Pass OFF DVOA seems pretty good right now, it's only ranked 13th in the league; whereas the Vikings are currently ranked 7th and the Falcons are currently ranked 8th. Also, don't forget that ARI's pass OFF was still in the midst of their Super Bowl hangover when they played the 49ers.

Now, for one last piece of the puzzle, I've identified one game situation where the 49ers were at a massive disadvantage vs. teams they lost to as compared with teams they beat. Given the potential sample size issues, I made sure that, when looking at specific situations, I only focused on the ones that were highly unlikely to be totally coincidental. In other words, I looked for reeeeeeally big differences. Here are the two situations:

	Avg of Tms 49ers Beat		Avg of Tms 49ers Lost To		Difference
Category	DVOA	Rk	DVOA	Rk	DVOA	Rk
3rd & Long OFF	-50.2%	25.0	84.4%	4.5	134.6%	20.5

3rd & 7+ yards isn't a situation that would classify as a 49er weakness or strength (15.7%, 18th). However, given the magnitude of the difference shown in the above table, there kind of has to be something "there" there. My theory is that teams that are good on 3rd & long are generally good passing teams overall; and we've already found out the Niners don't do that well against good passing teams.

EVALUATING THE REMAINING SCHEDULE

Just to recap, here's my matchup-based picture of what Niner wins and losses are all about so far this season:

The lose to teams with great passing OFFs
They beat teams with horrible running OFFs
They beat teams that are horrible on 3rd & Long, but lose to teams that are great on 3rd & Long
They win when they don't screw up on ST

Now, let's take a look at their remaining schedule and see how each opponent rates in these DVOA categories (49er advantages in bold; 49er disadvantages in italics):

Game	Opponent	Pass OFF	Rk	Rush OFF	Rk	3rd & Long OFF	Rk	ST	Rk	Advantage
6	HOU	44.3%	9	-34.0%	32	15.8%	15	3.0%	7
7	IND	69.1%	2	-0.5%	14	2.7%	19	-1.1%	19
8	TEN	-23.8%	27	-1.7%	15	15.3%	16	-6.6%	32
9	CHI	1.7%	21	-26.6%	30	-148.2%	30	8.1%	3
10	GB	28.0%	14	8.4%	10	52.5%	6	-0.3%	15
11	JAC	13.1%	17	19.7%	5	60.3%	4	1.4%	10
12	SEA	11.7%	18	-14.1%	24	-38.6%	24	0.7%	12
13	ARI	29.3%	13	-30.1%	31	-58.6%	26	-1.6%	21
14	PHI	22.1%	15	13.6%	7	63.0%	3	4.3%	5
15	DET	-27.9%	28	-11.1%	23	-16.3%	21	-5.7%	27
16	STL	-6.6%	22	-18.5%	28	-53.3%	25	-1.7%	22

Based on the crucial situations I've identified, I think the 49ers are at a situational advantage in 6 of their last 11 games, at a situational disadvantage in 4 games, and in a situational coin flip for 1 other game. Like genes, however, the Niners aren't prisoners of their statistical past. Refining what I said in the intro, 49er wins and losses will come down to whether or not the they're able to nullify the Colts, Packers, Jaguars, and Eagles' advantages, and whether they're able to exploit their own advantages against the Titans, Bears, Seahawks, Cardinals, Lions, and Rams. Oh, and did I mention luck?

Past may not be a prison warden, but if it's prologue, then the Niners should finish the season either 9-7 or 10-6. All I know is that this week's Texans game may end up being a lot more important than we think.

**DVOA statistics used to produce this article were obtained from Football Outsiders.

Poll

Which of the following best characterizes your opinion of the 49ers' remaining schedule?

It's a cakewalk

8 votes

It's not quite a cakewalk, but it's still pretty easy

51 votes

It's pretty average

253 votes

It's not quite a gauntlet, but it's still pretty difficult

344 votes

It's a gauntlet

65 votes

721 votes | Poll has closed

Citizens Blame Weatherman for Sun

Florida Danny — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:24:07 -0000

via www.cartoonstock.com

Danny here...Just wanted to pass along a link that I think is pretty relevant for Niners Nation (NN) in general, but especially relevant to those of us who've engaged in the whole "football stats matter" vs. "football stats don't matter" debate.

In his post introducing the Week 6 DVOA ratings, Aaron over at Football Outsiders discusses a few things that I'd like to call attention to for the sake of debate.

First, Aaron talks about how their preseason predictions for the Broncos and Chargers were very wrong, and -- get this -- asks the audience for assistance in coming up with objective reasons that might identify where DVOA was deficient. As I've said on NN, "Stats are NOT people too." DVOA is not some master plan executed by FO at their secret headquarters ala Dr. Evil calling for "the laser" or Don Corleone doing a favor for Bonasera the undertaker. Rather, it is an objective measure refined over and over again to account for instances in which it doesn't seem to spit out a valid result. Acknowledging a DVOA deficiency and asking for assistance is proof positive of this refinement process.

Second, Aaron talks about how the Eagles are -- just like last year -- much higher in the DVOA rankings than their winning percentage would otherwise indicate. In 2008, FO was hammered all season for PHI's weekly top 5 ranking. Then the playoffs arrived, and the 6th-seeded Eagles vidicated FO by advancing to the NFC championship game. Through Week 6 in 2009, PHI is #2 in Total DVOA despite a pedestrian 3-2 record, and thus FO is once again under fire. In the post, Aaron -- with the help of commenters -- tries to figure out why the Eagles are DVOA darlings.

Finally, motivated by the Titans' 59-0 loss to the Patriots this past weekend, Aaron lists the worst 10 single-game team performances in the history of DVOA. This is relevant to NN because (a) the 2005 49ers hold 2 out of the 10 spots, and (b) NFC West teams hold the top (bottom?) 3 spots, and 6 out of the top 10.

So, if you've been involved in the DVOA debates on NN and/or you'd like to see how the 2005 49ers (or 2000-2003 Cardinals or 2008 Rams) were the embodiment of game-specific situational inefficiency, click here and give Aaron's post a read.

Football Outsiders and the 49ers: Player Stats through Week 5

Florida Danny — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 06:11:19 -0000

Welcome back for another look at Niner player statistics and rankings as published by Football Outsiders (FO). As the title of this post indicates, I'll be presenting 49er player stats and rankings through Week 5. So nothing you saw yesterday (or the day before) is included in anything I talk about in this post. I think that's the cleanest way to proceed given that the 49ers' aggregate (i.e., non-per-play) stats will otherwise have been disadvantaged by their bye week. If you're unfamiliar with FO's player stats (i.e., DYAR, individual DVOA, and EYds) and line stats (i.e., ALY and ASR), or if you need a refresher course, take a look at my explanations here.

This week, QBs need a total of at least 50 passes to qualify as having valid FO stats, RBs need at least 40 carries, WRs need at least 20 targets, and TEs need at least 10 targets. Therefore, the players I'll be breaking down this week are Shaun Hill, Glen Coffee, Isaac Bruce, Josh Morgan, and Vernon Davis. I'll also, of course, be presenting FO stats for the OL, the DEF front 7, and the secondary.

Just a word of warning. This is going to be ugly. Starting with...

QUARTERBACKS

Here are Shaun Hill's stats through 5 games (bold = ranked 8th or better [top 25% of starters]; italics = ranked 25th or worse [bottom 25% of starters]):

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	Rank	EYds Per Pass	Rank
-78	33	-19.4%	30	29	4.04	31
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Rank	Yds Per Pass	Rank
-50	28	-16.4%	27	27	5.05	27

What a difference a week makes. Compared to his stats prior to the Falcons game, Hill's DYAR and YAR both decreased by about 100 yards, his DVOA and VOA both decreased by about 12.5%, and his EYds Per Pass decreased by nearly a full yard. Essentially, what happened here is similar to what I discussed in the team rankings post. Hill's stats took a major hit due to his poor performance while getting blown out during the 2nd half last week. He couldn't play efficient QB even when ATL didn't care if he was successful or not. If you're a QB, and you can't matriculate the ball down the field while getting blown out, then you're probably not a good QB. Hill's stats reflect that reality, especially with respect to the situational efficiency stats, DVOA and EYds Per Pass.

Bottom line here is that, whether in terms of value or efficiency, Hill is one of the worst 5 QBs in the NFL so far this season. Somewhere, Mike Martz is laughing.

After the jump, I'll present and discuss the rest of the stats, and offer my two cents about the recent news regarding Josh Morgan's demotion. Be prepared to shield your eyes. This could get ugly...

RUNNING BACKS

With Frank Gore's 39 carries now failing to qualify him for the rankings, Coffee is the only 49er RB to make the charts this week. I kind of wish he didn't. Here's why (bold = ranked 8th or better; italics = ranked 25th or worse):

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	EYds Per Run	Rank
-111	37	-49.0%	38	0.79	38
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Yds Per Run	Rank
-92	36	-41.8%	37	2.58	37

There's barely a nickel's worth of difference here when compared to last week. Coffee is still the worst-rated RB according to DVOA and EYds Per Run, and is in the bottom 3 of every category displayed in the table. Needless to say, Gore can't come back soon enough.

WIDE RECEIVERS

Here are Bruce's stats (bold = ranked 16th or better; italics = ranked 49th or worse):

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	EYds Per Target	Rank
-31	66	-25.9%	67	4.93	65
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Yds Per Target	Rank
-29	63	-25.2%	65	5.76	58

Ugh. Bruce's freefall continues; with each passing week, it becomes more and more apparent that he's no longer a starting-caliber NFL WR. After the ATL game, Bruce's stats took an especially big hit in the (in)efficiency department. Specifically, his DVOA decreased by over 10%, dropping him 10 spots in the rankings (i.e., out of the top 64), and his EYds Per Target decreased by over a yard-and-a-half, resulting in a similar rankings descent.

What's also becoming more and more apparent is Morgan solidifying his spot as the 49ers' best WR. Here are his stats through 5 games:

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	EYds Per Target	Rank
50	29	17.2%	20	9.64	20
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Yds Per Target	Rank
56	28	20.3%	16	9.18	18

While it's true that Morgan's efficiency-based stats were adversely affected by the ATL game, his DYAR basically remains unchanged. And given that last week's stats were based on only 13 targets, it's not altogether surprising there's some volatility in his stats. Nevertheless, I think the important points here are threefold: (1) Morgan had 9 targets vs. ATL, while Bruce only had 4; (2) Morgan is over 40% more efficient than Bruce despite having 7 fewer targets this season; and (3) Morgan is in the top 32 WRs according to all FO stats, while Bruce isn't even in the top 64 for any of them. Taken together, these comparisons suggest that Morgan is emerging as the 49ers' go-to WR.

With that said, isn't it altogether ironic - not to mention, depressing - that the coaching staff has decided Michael Crabtree will take over Morgan's starting WR spot??? Here you have a situation where the 49ers have no downfield passing attack. Every stat points to them being the dinkingest and dunkingest of dink-and-dunk passing OFFs. So the solution - of course - is to keep as a starter the WR who averages about 5 yards per target, and bench the one who averages about twice that. Having Crabtree replace Bruce would provide an instant injection of downfield passing possibilities. Having him replace Morgan essentially keeps the status quo, except with an even less experienced starter opposite Bruce. Newsflash to the powers that be: Bruce owning naked pictures of Mike Martz doesn't count as starting lineup leverage anymore.

OK, that was a bit hyperbolic. From reading Maiocco's blog post, it seems that this will all work itself out in the long run (read: next season). Bruce will be gone, leaving Morgan and Crabs as the starting WRs. I sure hope it works out that way. What I don't buy for one second, however, is that it'd be impossible for the locker room to accept a Bruce demotion. Question: Would it be possible for the locker room to accept another season without making the playoffs? As far as Bruce is limiting the OFF's ability to complete a pass beyond 5 yards, and as far as completing passes beyond 5 yards is important for offensive football, and as far as offensive football is important for winning, and as far as winning is important for making the playoffs, it's likely that keeping Bruce in the starting lineup does more harm than any "preventing locker room mutiny" does good. In other words, if Crabs were to replace Bruce, and the 49ers subsequently won 7 or 8 of their last 11 games, I'm sure the locker room would be saying, "Isaac, who?" in short order.

Somewhere, Mike Martz is doing cartwheels.

TIGHT ENDS

Here are VD's stats (bold = ranked 8th or better; italics = ranked 25th or worse):

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	EYds Per Target	Rank
28	20	4.6%	23	6.69	26
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Yds Per Target	Rank
24	22	3.1%	26	6.72	25

If the Vikings and Rams games were VD's breakouts, then the Falcons game was his antibacterial ointment. Despite being targeted 12 times in the ATL game, VD dropped 10 spots in the DYAR rankings, is now over 20% less efficient, and saw his EYds decreas by over 2 yards per target. Saying that he and Hill weren't on the same page against ATL would be quite an understatement. If VD's going to continue to be the most-targeted Niner in the passing game, he's going to have to produce more with, and play more efficiently in, his numerous opportunities; especially if he's going to be one half of the Niners' Tainted Twosome. The good news is that his next game will be against the Texans, whose DEF is currently ranked 20th in Yards per TE Target and 16th in DVOA vs. TE.

OFFENSIVE LINE

Here are the 49ers' OL stats through 4 games (bold = ranked 8th or better; italics = ranked 25th or worse):

ALY	Rank	Power Success Rate	Rank	ASR	Rank
2.86	31	43%	30	10.7%	30
RB YPC	Rank	Stuffed Rate	Rank	Sack Rate	Rank
3.90	18	22%	23	9.9%	29

Move along. There's nothing to see here. The OL still sucks. Until it improves, the Niners' OFF will have a hard time doing anything successfully.

Somewhere, George Warhop is throwing a party.

Here's the OL's directional ALY chart:

These stats and rankings are nearly identical to the ones I presented after Week 4. The biggest difference - and it's quite a peculiar one given how the ATL game went - is that the Niners' OFF ran the ball disproportionately up the middle, increasing their frequency from 67% to 69%. Obviously, this is not a meaningful difference in the grand scheme of things. However, when you consider the team was behind the entire game, it's kind of mind-boggling that they decided to run the ball up the middle even more often than they had been through 4 comparatively competitive games. I'm really starting to believe that there's no coincidence in the fact that the offensive play-calling duties in both 2007 and 2009 were handled by guys named James (no offense, Ninjames).

Somewhere, Jim Hostler is making it rain.

DEFENSIVE FRONT SEVEN

Here are the 49ers' DEF front 7 stats through 4 games:

ALY	Rank	Power Success Rate	Rank	ASR	Rank
3.38	8	88%	31	6.3%	17
RB YPC	Rank	Stuffed Rate	Rank	Actual Sack Rate	Rank
3.68	10	24%	8	5.6%	20

There are a couple of peculiar things in this table for which I honestly don't have a good explanation. First, despite it appearing that Michael Turner and Jerious Norwood were constantly running through wide-open holes, it turns out that the Niners' front 7 didn't drop out of the top 8 in ALY. To boot, their ranking in Actual RB YPC Allowed didn't drop either, which means that this wasn't a situational thing. Your guess is as good as mine on this one.

What's way more dumbfounding - at least to me - is how the same front 7 can be 1 of the best 8 in the league at stopping runs for 0 or negative yardage (i.e., stuffing the run), yet also be 1 of the worst 8 at stopping runs on 3rd & 1 or 2 (i.e., limiting power-running success). I'm not a football coach, but I'm assuming that both of these situations require the DL to get good penetration at the point of attack. Why would the Niners' front 7 be getting good - no, great - penetration generally, but getting horrible penetration in short-yardage situations specifically? I remember Moose and Goose railing against the Niners' DL being in a standing position on short-yardage plays. Is that all there is to it? Are they telling me that the only adjustment required is to have the DL get in their normal stances? Or does this have more to do with an increase in the number of blockers on 3rd & 1 or 2, which makes it harder for the DL to get penetration? Or is this a defensive play-calling issue? Please advise.

One thing that's not at all peculiar in the table is the change in ASR ranking, which fell from 11th to 17th this week. If you read last week's post, you might remember me saying the following (emphasis mine):

What makes matters worse is that the secondary is unlikely to be getting much help from the pass rush this week given that ATL has the #1 OL in the league when it comes to pass-blocking: they give up less than 1 sack per 30 pass attempts, whether you adjust for situation and opponent or not.

If you're wondering, yes, I'm going to copy and paste that quote every time someone says, "Stats don't matter." How many sacks did ATL's OL give up to the 49ers last game? 0 in 32 attempts - aka they gave up less than 1 sack per 30 pass attempts. Think that had any impact on the Niners' horrible pass DEF during the ATL game? Nah. Stats don't matter.

p.s. HOU, the 49ers' next opponent, is ranked 14th in ASR through 5 games, allowing about 1 sack every 20 pass attempts.

Below is the DEF front 7's directional run-stopping chart:

Similar to what we saw with directional ALYs for the OL, the percentage of up-the-middle runs faced by the DEF front 7 increased after the ATL game. However, unlike the OL's increase, this one actually makes sense. Salting away a 25-point lead tends to involve a ton of clock-eating runs up the middle. See, James, that's how offensive play-calling is supposed to work.

Otherwise, there wasn't a lot of change in this chart when compared to last week's. The Niners still can't stop runs behind tackle. I wonder if any of that is due to this season's increased emphasis on pass rush for the OLBs. Could it be that Manny Lawson and Parys Haralson are taking themselves out of the run DEF by pushing too far up the field? I distinctly remember one Turner TD run that was the direct result of Lawson overcommitting to pass rush on bootleg action, thereby vacating the lane that Turner proceeded to run through untouched.

Two silver linings I should probably point out in this otherwise gloomy tale are that (a) Nate Clements and company actually ascended to the top of the rankings with respect to stopping runs to the defensive outside left, and (b) opposing OFFs still haven't figured out that the 49ers are horrible at stopping runs behind LT.

DEFENSIVE BACKFIELD

Finally, here's the chart showing stats for the secondary against various intended receivers:

Back when I was a pint-sized math nerd (oh, wait, I still am), one of my favorite parts of Sesame Street was when they had 4 kids in 4 boxes on the screen, with 3 of the 4 doing the exact same thing. My job was to answer the question, "Which of these kids is doin' his own thing?" I'm reminded of this when I look at the above table. The Niners' secondary is in the top 8 at defending against #2 WRs, #3 WRs, and TEs. Hell, they've even moved up to 13th (from 27th) when it comes to defending RBs in the passing game. So, which of these kids is doin' his own thing? It's our old friend Nate Clements again.

Not only do #1 WRs perform 20% more efficiently than average when facing Clements, their 11.4 average yards per target is the best in the league. Turning that around, Clements is ranked 32nd (aka dead last) in terms of yards per target allowed. And don't think for one second that Clements is one of those CBs whose "shutdown corner" status results in so few pass attempts to his receiver that one big play (e.g., a 90-yard TD) skews his yards per target allowed. On the contrary, only 9 teams have faced more pass attempts to the #1 WR than the 49ers. So it seems to me that, rather than teams shying away from throwing in Clements' direction, they're throwing in his direction even more because he's, um, not that good. Oh, and if you're wondering if Clements shouldn't get the bulk of the blame because he's not always covering the opponents' #1 WR, take a look at that 90-yard TD by Roddy White. Clements was on the right side of the DEF, not his usual left side, because he was following White wherever he lined up.

Here's an idea. Given that Clements seems to be such a good run-stopper and such a bad pass-defender, along with the fact that Michael Lewis is old and now concussion-prone, perhaps the 49ers should consider moving Clements to SS next season. Obviously, in this mental exercise there's an element of, "there's no way Clements would agree to it." Just for the sake of argument, though, isn't this something Mike Singletary and Greg Manusky should consider?

BOTTOM LINE

OK, so through 5 games, we can draw the following conclusions about several players on the 2009 49ers:

Hill is one of the worst starting QBs in the league.
Coffee is one of the worst starting RBs in the league. O Frank, O Frank, wherefore art thou Frank?
Bruce is one of the worst starting WRs in the league.
Morgan is emerging as the 49ers' #1 WR...just in time to be benched for a rookie while one of the worst starting WRs in the league remains a starter.
VD's taken 2 steps forward and 1 step back so far this season.
The OL is one of the worst in the league.
The DEF front 7 is good at getting penetration overall, but they're really bad in power-running situations, and their OLBs seem to be focusing too much on their pass rushing responsibilities.
Clements is one of the worst "shutdown" corners in the league.

How's that for a rosy picture? Can't take any more can you? Well, I have just the remedy. Namely, I won't be doing player or team rankings through Week 6 because the 49ers were on bye. Enjoy your week off from "49ers Player X sucks."

**DVOA, DYAR, EYds, ALY, and ASR statistics used to produce this article were obtained from Football Outsiders.

Poll

If it were up to you, whose starting WR spot would Michael Crabtree take this season?

Isaac Bruce's

377 votes

Josh Morgan's

163 votes

Nobody's. He should stay on the bench for the rest of the season.

89 votes

629 votes | Poll has closed

Football Outsiders and the 49ers: Team Stats through Week 5

Florida Danny — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 22:32:29 -0000

Welcome back for this week's look at how the 49ers' team stats rank in the NFL according to Football Outsiders (FO).* If you want a less stat-intensive look at 49er rankings, check out Fooch's weekly post on how the team stacks up against the rest of the NFL according to the internet punditocracy.

The obvious focus of this week's post is going to be how the Niners' FO stats and rankings were affected by Sunday's - holding back vomit - 45-10 loss at the hands of the Falcons. When a team is on the wrong end of a 45-10 game, you'd assume that both their offense (OFF), who only scored 10 points, and their defense (DEF), who gave up 45 points, are going to take a statistical beating across the board. However, there are two issues we need to keep in mind when evaluating the effect of the ATL game:

Situations Matter. Make sure to remember that DVOA is a measure of situational efficiency. So just because the Niners performed like a JV team based on the final score, don't assume that they performed that bad in every specific game situation. For instance, the fact that the OFF scored only 10 points in the game isn't nearly as bad as the fact that they scored 0 points during the 2nd half despite being in a situation (i.e., down at least 25 points) where ATL's defense (DEF) was minimally interested in stopping them. In other words, an OFF can score only 10 points, and yet still be efficient provided that their not - ala the Niners vs. ATL - playing half of the game in the easiest of easy offensive situations.
Ceiling/Floor Effect. Also make sure to remember that, going into Week 5, the 49ers' OFF was ranked near the bottom of the league in most OFF DVOA categories, while their DEF was ranked near the top of the league in most DEF DVOA categories. For you Olympics buffs out there, I'm basically saying that the OFF was diving from the 3m springboard going into the ATL game, while the DEF was diving from the 10m platform. In statistics, having, at-most, a 3m dive is called the floor effect, while having, at-most, a 10m dive is called the ceiling effect. So, after the ATL blowout, it's much more likely that the DEF's stats dove farther than the OFF's stats; simply because the DEF was diving from higher up.

So keeping these situational and diving event differences in mind, let's take a look at the stats and rankings through Week 5.

After the jump, I'll present the 49ers' overall stats, rankings, and situation splits, as well as introduce a new member of the Tony Robbins splits...

TEAM RANKINGS

Here are the 49ers' overall team DVOAs and rankings (bold = top 8 in the NFL; italics = bottom 8):

Total	Rank	Offense	Rank	Defense	Rank	Special Teams	Rank
-9.8%	21	-16.0%	26	-9.1%	6	-2.9%	22
Total VOA	Rank	SOS	Rank	Variance	Rank
-15.6%	23	-0.8%	16	13.6%	22

So much for last week's post-Rams stat improvements: the 49ers' Total (TOT), OFF, and Special Teams (ST) DVOA rankings all returned to where they were prior to Week 4. Based on their TOT DVOA, the Niners are now the worst of the nine 3-win teams, and have fallen behind the Seahawks (8.2%, 14th) in DVOA among NFC West teams.

The only unit that didn't drop in the rankings was the DEF. However, although the DEF's ranking remained #6, their actual DEF DVOA dropped from -16.6% to -9.1%, meaning that the DEF is now 7.5% less situationally efficient after 333 plays than they were after 261. Considering that number of plays, the DEF's DVOA decrease is mathematically equivalent to a hitter's batting average dropping from .305 to .286 during a 12-game stretch in late May.**

When compared to their VOA, the Niners' TOT DVOA indicates that they've benefitted a good bit from playing in situations where their opponent is relatively weak. Interestingly enough, though, their overall DVOA-based strength of schedule (SOS) isn't weak at all; it's actually just about average. The discrepancy between these two seemingly similar pieces of information just means that, although the Niners have played against a relatively average group of teams, they've nevertheless played in a relatively easy group of game situations.

One last thing I'll mention about the team stats is that the Niners' TOT DVOA Variance, which you'll recall is a measure of week-to-week consistency, skyrocketed from what it was before the ATL game (8.0%, 11th). When your latest performance is so wildly uncharacteristic from past performances, as the 49ers' was this past week, anything measuring consistency - simply by definition - is going to show that you're more inconsistent. The question becomes, however, "Are they who we thought they were?" I think a lot of Niner fans have been asking themselves that very question since Sunday (at least I know Ninjames has been).

OFFENSIVE RANKINGS - OVERALL

Here' how the offensive rankings look overall and by type of play (bold = top 8 in the NFL; italics = bottom 8):

OFF	Rank	Pass	Rank	Run	Rank	Variance	Rank
-16.0%	26	-8.6%	26	-18.0%	27	2.9%	8
OFF VOA	Rank	Pass VOA	Rank	Run VOA	Rank
-14.2%	25	-5.7%	23	-17.4%	25

Another game, and yet the stats stay pretty much the same. That top row of stats is especially (un)impressive. On every stat that measures how good they are, the OFF is ranked in the bottom 8. But on the one stat that measures how consistent they are, the OFF is ranked in the top 8. Basically, we can set our clocks to incredibly bad 49er OFF: the cuckoo sings every Sunday at 1:00 p.m. Pacific.***

What's most interesting to me about the above table is what the ATL game did to Pass OFF DVOA and Run OFF DVOA. With respect to pass OFF, the Niners' Pass OFF DVOA decreased by a whopping 15.4%; taking them from an above-average pass OFF to a below-average one. There's no doubt in my mind that this was the result of being unable to pass the ball during the 2nd half despite ATL committing defensive indifference (Sorry for all the baseball analogies today). An average NFL OFF would have been eating the Falcons' DEF alive while down by 25 points in the 2nd half. You know, the proverbial "garbage time" padding of stats. Unfortunately, the Niners don't have an average NFL offense.

This year's OFF is starting to remind me a lot of the pre-Singletary, Hostler and Martz 49er OFFs. With those OFFs, I fully expected mediocrity. Unlike some, I wasn't disappointed by their inability to score 30 points in a game. Rather, what (site decorum) killed me was their total inability to do even the most basic things well. It was like their playbook was written in a foreign language, and no one had bothered to pick up Rosetta Stone. Going up against a horrible DEF? They still couldn't move the ball. Getting blown out and the DEF is playing prevent? They still couldn't move the ball. It was like each and every yard was a constant struggle. That's what I see from the 2009 OFF so far. Nothing at all is coming easy to them, despite the fact that many of their plays have come in the easiest of game situations. To me, the next best thing to being great at most things (ala the Saints) is being great at one thing (ala the Dolphins). So far, this year's OFF is great at nothing. They don't seem to have a single play that they can dial up for guaranteed yards, no matter the score, opponent, or situation. If you want to be a running OFF that relies on its DEF to win games, fine. If you want to run the ball 50 times a game, fine. Just be (site decorum) great at running the ball, then!

Speaking of running the ball, the run OFF still sucks, although not as badly as they did through 4 games. Specifically, the Niners' Run OFF DVOA increased by 6.7% and "jumped" 3 spots in the rankings. I presume that this was mostly a case of floor effect: the running game was still bad, just not as horrifically bad as it had been. In other words, Shaun Hill's 3rd-down scrambles, and Glen Coffee's "really, I'm not the worst starting RB in football" mediocre performance, were not more efficient than the NFL average; they were just more efficient than their average.

OFFENSIVE RANKINGS - SITUATIONAL SPLITS

Here are the OFF's pass and run DVOAs by down:

Down	OFF	Rank	Pass OFF	Rank	Run OFF	Rank
1st	-2.1%	20	-1.6%	24	1.1%	14
2nd	-45.0%	31	-48.5%	30	-34.1%	28
3rd	-0.3%	19	20.4%	12	-51.6%	28

By far, the biggest changes on this table relate to 3rd down. Overall, the Niners' OFF is now 6.9% worse on 3rd down than they were prior to the ATL game. However - get this - the run OFF is 50.2% better on 3rd down, while the pass OFF is 22.2% worse. Again, there's no doubt in my mind these changes are a case of ceiling and floor effects. The 49ers' 3rd-down pass OFF could not get much better than the 42.6% DVOA they had after 4 games, whereas their 3rd-down run OFF could not get much worse than their previous -101.8% DVOA. For those of you who questioned the sustainability of some 49er stats, it looks like we've identified one area (i.e., 3rd-down OFF) in which they haven't been sustained, for better or worse.

Maybe the changes in 3rd-down efficiency have something to do with down and distance. Here are the OFF's down splits by distance (Short = 0-3 yards; Mid = 4-6 yards; Long = 7+ yards):

Distance	OFF	Rank	Short	Rank	Mid	Rank	Long	Rank
1st	-2.1%	20	N/A
2nd	-45.0%	31	-45.9%	31	-31.2%	25	-49.3%	31
3rd	-0.3%	19	29.7%	8	-49.1%	22	9.7%	19

Not surprisingly, 3rd down is where the stats in this table changed drastically from last week. Specifically, the Niner's 3rd & Short OFF DVOA increased by 19.8%, while their 3rd & Mid OFF DVOA decreased by 51.8%. When you combine these changes with those of the run vs. pass 3rd down changes above, we can conclude that the 49ers had a good number of efficient 3rd down runs against ATL (e.g., Hill scrambles for 1st down), and an even larger number of inefficient 3rd down passes (e.g., Hill throws incomplete pass).

Taken together, the 3rd down splits suggest that the Niners were passing a lot on 3rd down. Of course, this is to be expected in a lopsided game. However, what's important for the purposes of discussion is that the 49ers' OFF couldn't pass the ball efficiently in this relatively easy game situation. Again, passing yards on 3rd down while getting blown out in the 2nd half are a dime a dozen in the NFL; they're as easy to come by as grapes in Napa. Unfortunately, the 49ers spent all of the ATL game in San Francisco.

If you recall, the Niners OFF was 40% better in the shotgun through 4 games. Here are their shotgun splits through 5 games:

% of Plays

in Shotgun

Rank

Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Non-Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Difference

Rank

32.9%

0.6%

-21.8%

22.4%

As you can see, the OFF's shotgun prowess vis-à-vis non-shotgun formations is about half of what it was going into the ATL game. Furthermore, nearly all of this difference is accounted for by decreased efficiency in shotgun; from 19.8% to 0.6%. So, with this added bit of information, the picture of offensive inefficiency vs. ATL is complete. Namely, they played over half the game in easy passing situations, but yet they passed the ball inefficiently in shotgun, on 3rd down and mid, and on 3rd down overall, despite the fact that they had previously performed above average in such formations and situations.

Finally, let's take a look at the OFF's red zone efficiency:

Red Zone

Rank

Red Zone

Pass

Rank

Red Zone

Run

Rank

Goal-to-Go

Rank

10.7%

46.4%

8.5%

35.1%

You'll recall that the 49ers' pass OFF was #1 in Red Zone DVOA last week at 109.1%. So much for that. Despite still being almost 50% more efficient than the NFL average, the 49ers' red zone pass OFF fell out of the top 8 after posting 0 successful plays in 4 red zone pass attempts against ATL. If not for the Red Zone Run DVOA improving by 4.2% - thanks mostly to a Glen Coffee TD - the OFF's overall red zone efficiency would have declined even further.

DEFENSIVE RANKINGS - OVERALL

Here' how the defensive rankings look overall and by type of play (bold = top 8 in the NFL; italics = bottom 8):

DEF	Rank	Pass	Rank	Run	Rank	Variance	Rank
-9.1%	6	-3.1%	10	-17.2%	9	6.3%	22
DEF VOA	Rank	Pass VOA	Rank	Run VOA	Rank
-0.3%	13	11.3%	15	-17.3%	11

Well, that stint at the top of Run DEF DVOA sure was short-lived, eh? The 49ers' run DEF was so inefficient against ATL that they dropped 8 spots in the rankings and saw their Run DEF DVOA decrease by 18.7%. Yikes. In addition, their DVOA Variance took a predictable turn for the worse just like the OFF's.

Another big change this week involves the effect of SOS on DVOA. Whereas the 49ers DVOAs and unadjusted VOAs were pretty similar after 4 games, these stats are much more divergent after the ATL game, especially with respect to overall and pass defense. This suggests that the inefficiency of their pass defense is largely a byproduct of the fact that it came against an ATL pass OFF that was only average going into the game.

DEFENSIVE RANKINGS - SITUATIONAL SPLITS

Based on the above, we should expect for the splits to show increased inefficiency on pass DEF. Let's take a look. Here are the DEF's pass and run DVOAs by down:

Down	DEF	Rank	Pass DEF	Rank	Run DEF	Rank
1st	-5.7%	8	10.7%	10	-19.9%	8
2nd	-31.6%	4	-37.3%	4	-24.4%	9
3rd	14.0%	22	13.5%	19	16.1%	21

By far, the biggest change in these splits was in 3rd down pass DEF, which dropped from an 8th-ranked -3.6% to a 19th-ranked 13.5%. Explaining this is pretty easy. Let's consult the play-by-play to look at how the pass DEF fared in 3rd-down situations of varying difficulties (unsuccessful plays in bold):

Distance	Yard Line	Qtr	Time	Score	Play	Direction	Result	Yards
Easy Pass Situation for SF DEF
8	SF 19	1	11:43	SF 0 - ATL 0	Pass	Short Left	Complete to White	12
9	ATL 30	1	2:14	SF 7 - ATL 14	Pass	Short Left	Complete to White	12
4	ATL 10	2	7:13	SF 10 - ATL 14	Pass	Short Left	Complete to White	90 (TD)
13	ATL 26	3	2:58	SF 10 - ATL 38	Pass	Deep Left	Incomplete to Jenkins	0
Average Pass Situation for SF DEF
4	SF 22	3	5:59	SF 10 - ATL 35	Pass	Short Left	Incomplete to Gonzalez	0
Difficult Pass Situation for SF DEF
4	ATL 46	1	14:13	SF 0 - ATL 0	Pass	Short Middle	Incomplete to Booker	0
6	ATL 36	1	8:00	SF 0 - ATL 7	Pass	Short Middle	Complete to Finneran	8
3	SF 37	3	8:07	SF 10 - ATL 35	Pass	Short Right	Complete to Gonzalez	9

Adding these plays up by difficulty, we get the following:

Difficult situations: 1 of 3 successful, giving up 17 yards, 2 first downs, and 0 TDs
Average situations: 1 of 1 successful, giving up 0 yards, 0 first downs, and 0 TDs
Easy situations: 1 of 4 successful, giving up 114 yards, 3 first downs, and 1 TD

So, taken together, the play-by-play tells us that the 49ers' pass DEF was horrifically bad in the easiest situations. Indeed, giving up a 90-yard TD on 3rd & 4 at your opponent's 10-yard line is just about as inefficient as you can possibly get as a pass DEF.

Here are the DEF's down splits by distance (Short = 0-3 yards; Mid = 4-6 yards; Long = 7+ yards):

Distance	DEF	Rank	Short	Rank	Mid	Rank	Long	Rank
1st	-5.7%	8	N/A
2nd	-31.6%	4	27.6%	29	89.1%	31	-82.7%	2
3rd	14.0%	22	23.5%	20	-5.1%	19	16.1%	21

The two big changes here are the DEF's increased inefficiencies on 2nd & short and 3rd & mid. For an explanation of their 32.2% decrease in 3rd & Mid DVOA, refer back to ATL's 3rd-down play at 7:13 left in the 2nd quarter (Hint: Rowdy Roddy). Regarding their 26.9% decline in 2nd & Short DVOA, they actually didn't play that bad except for giving up a rushing first down on 2nd & 1 down 45-10 in the 4th quarter and, way more importantly, giving up 1 of Michael Turner's 3 TDs on 2nd & 3. The obvious conclusion here is "don't give up TDs." However, what's more likely going on is a sample size issue: The 49ers' DEF simply hadn't faced many 2nd & short plays through the first 4 games, so allowing a TD had an undue impact on their 2nd & Short DVOA.

Here are the Niners' defensive shotgun vs. non-shotgun splits:

% of Plays

in Shotgun

Rank

Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Non-Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Difference

Rank

37.3%

-17.7%

-4.7%

-12.9%

As they were comfortably ahead for most of the game, ATL's OFF only used the shotgun formation on 18.1% of their plays. Therefore, it's no surprise that the only real change from Week 4 to Week 5 was increased defensive inefficiency vs. non-shotgun plays. Incidentally, a sample size effect - although in the opposite way - occurred here as well because Roddy White's 90-yard TD came on a play in the shotgun, and therefore should have had a much bigger effect on the Niner DEF's Shotgun DVOA. It didn't, though, because they've now defended 124 shotgun plays; a sample size that's large enough to prevent massive fluctuations based on a single play.

Finally, let's take a look at the DEF's red zone efficiency:

Red Zone

Rank

Red Zone

Pass

Rank

Red Zone

Run

Rank

Goal-to-Go

Rank

0.0%

-77.7%

56.8%

89.1%

Yesterday, Fooch discussed the rush DEF's 31st-ranked Red Zone DVOA, so there's no need to rehash that here. Instead, I'll simply mention that the more shocking stat is their Red Zone Pass DVOA, which is over 80% better than last week. Something (aka my knowledge of statistics) tells me that this huge improvement is a byproduct of small sample size. Namely, the 49ers DEF had been so good through 4 games that their opponents weren't even getting to the red zone very much to begin with. Under such circumstances, the sample size is so small that any epic fail or epic success is going to have a huge impact on the stats. In the case of Red Zone Pass DEF DVOA, we saw epic success - albeit pre-Deioning - in the form of Dre Bly's interception (INT). In contrast, we saw epic fail in run DEF for the reasons Fooch cited yesterday. All in all, I'd take it with a grain of salt.

SPECIAL TEAMS RANKINGS

Below are the Niners' ST DVOA stats broken down by unit:

ST	Rank	FG/XP	Rank	Kickoff	Rank	Punt	Rank
-2.9%	22	-1.3	18	-3.8	30	9.0	2
ST VOA	Rank			Kickoff Return	Rank	Punt Return	Rank
-2.1%	23			-3.4	25	-5.8	31

Overall, the ST continues its decline: the last 4 games, the 49ers' ST DVOA has decreased from 6.4% to -2.0% to -2.1% to -2.9%. Among specific units, the biggest declines came in FGs and kickoff returns. Missing a 48-yard FG and fumbling a kickoff return will do that to you. The worst thing about the Kickoff Return DVOA, though, is that it's actually fallen 14 spots in the rankings since the last time the banished Allen Rossum returned a kickoff. In other words, benching Rossum seems to have hurt rather than helped the kickoff return unit.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Punt Returner X still sucks.

"TONY ROBBINS" SPLITS

Last week, I introduced the TR splits as a way of crudely evaluating 49er motivation in general, and Mike Singletary's Formula for Success specifically. This week, I'm going to fine-tune the TR splits a little bit.

The first improvement is that I'm going to add net TR splits (i.e., OFF TR split minus DEF TR split) to the mix, because it's interesting to evaluate Singletary's Formula for Success for the 49ers as a team rather than just for specific team units.

Second, some of you may have already noticed that Red Zone DVOA is out as a TR split because it really doesn't fit as a measure of "create good field position." In its place, I've inserted a new FO-based statistic I'll call DANLOLS (hat-tip for the name: howtheyscored).

To address a comment by nickbradley, who seems to be quite a fan of field position, I've taken the average starting line of scrimmage per drive for each NFL team's OFF and DEF, which are displayed on FO's drive stats page as LOS/Dr, and adjusted them for SOS to make them a defense-adjusted line of scrimmage stat (LOLS for short). LOLS is interpreted as the number of yards of starting field position not due to SOS. Simply subtracting a team's DEFLOLS from their OFFLOLS gives us Defense-Adjusted Net Line Of Scrimmage; hence, DANLOLS. Just like DVOA, positive numbers are good for OFFLOLS and DANLOLS, whereas negative numbers are good for DEFLOLS.

So to recap, the new version of TR splits includes Inside-the-20 DVOA, 1st Quarter DVOA, 4th Quarter DVOA, and now DANLOLS.**** Below are the 49ers' OFF, DEF, and net TR splits:

	DANLOLS	Rank	Inside the 20	Rank	1st Quarter	Rank	4th Quarter	Rank	Avg Rank
OFF	1.06	11	-66.5%	32	-36.5%	28	10.8%	15	21
DEF	-3.33	2	-18.4%	9	-2.6	14	19.0%	20	11
Net	4.39	4	-48.1%	28	-33.9%	24	-8.2%	20	19

Just to make sure we're all on the same page about LOLS here, the Niners' OFFLOLS stat of 1.06 means that their average starting field position has been 1.06 yards better than what SOS would predict, and the Niners' DEFLOLS stat of -3.33 means that their opponents' average starting field position has been 3.33 yards worse than what SOS would predict. In other words, the 49ers' OFF has been starting drives about 1 yard closer to a TD than what their opponents have allowed on average this season, and the 49ers' DEF has been starting drives about 3 yards farther away from giving up a TD than what their opponents have enjoyed on average this season. Both of these are good things.

So, now that you hopefully understand what DANLOLS means, we can see that the 49ers are one of the best teams in the league when it comes to creating good field position. As was discussed in last week's thread, ATL had the #2 DANLOLS going into Sunday's game. It turns out the 49ers' SOS when it comes to unadjusted Net LOS/Dr has been murderously difficult this season: Their OFF has faced the 3rd-toughest LOS/Dr schedule, while their DEF has faced the 9th-toughest. It's not surprising, then, that whereas their 2 losses have come against the #1 and #3 teams in unadjusted Net LOS/Dr (ATL & the Vikings, respectively), their 3 wins have come against the #12, #21, and #28 teams in Net LOS/Dr (SEA, the Cardinals, & the Rams, respectively).

When we break DANLOLS down by OFF and DEF, however, we see that, the DEF has been 3 times better than the OFF at creating good field position. The reason for this is quite apparent from the other "create good field position" stat in the table; namely, the 49ers' efficiency inside the 20. The OFF and DEF Inside the 20 DVOAs suggest that the DEF has been almost 85% more efficient at keeping the other teams pinned deep in their own territory than the OFF has been getting out of the shadow of their own goal line. In other words, with respect to being pinned deep, the DEF has been creating good field position, while the OFF has been failing to prevent their opponents from creating good field position; hence, the massive discrepancy between DANLOLS and Net Inside-the-20 DVOA.

Regarding the "execution" and "finish" components of Singletary's Formula for Success, we see from the table that the 49ers haven't been that successful through 5 games. Again, there's a dichotomous relationship between the OFF and DEF. Whereas the OFF has been starting games poorly and finishing them well, the DEF has been starting games well and finishing them poorly. This suggests that the OFF and DEF are spending (at least) half the game picking up each other's slack when the other unit isn't playing well. This makes sense because 4 quarters of complete team domination is something we have yet to see from the Niners. Even the STL game was largely a one-unit-for-one-half display of domination.

BOTTOM LINE

OK, so through 5 games, we can draw the following conclusions about the 2009 49ers:

Ala Socrates via Dennis Green, "Are they who we thought they were?"
Their OFF can't even do the easy stuff well.
Their DEF is still an above average unit against the run, but they need to shore things up during the bye week on 3rd down and in the red zone. The ATL game needs to be the exception, not the rule.
They need to find a competent kick/punt returner stat!
Tony Robbins and Mike Singletary have to be disappointed. The Niners - especially on OFF - need to get their collective heads in the game.

On Sunday, I'll break down the player stats and rankings. See you then.

*DVOA statistics used to produce this article were obtained from Football Outsiders.

**In case you're wondering how I calculated this, here it is in all its geekish glory. For the 49ers DEF, 333 plays through 5 games prorate out to 1065.60 plays through 16 games, so going from 261 plays to 333 plays in 2009 equals going from 24.49% of a season's worth of plays to 31.25% of a season's worth of plays. If you consider NFL plays as at-bats (ABs), then, based on the MLB average of 3.79 ABs per game in 2009, a "hitter" going from 24.49% to 31.25% of a season's worth of ABs equals going from 150.45 ABs to 191.98 ABs, which happens from games 39 to 50 in a 162-game season. For my favorite team (feel free to guess who that might be), games 39 to 50 happened between May 19th and May 31st this season. The MLB average for batting average in 2009 was .262, so a batting average 16.6% better than the MLB average was .305, whereas a batting average 9.1% better than the MLB average was .286. Therefore, the Niners' DEF DVOA decrease from -16.6% to -9.1% over plays 261 to 333 this season is mathematically equal to a hitter's batting average dropping from .305 to .286 during 11 games in late May (i.e., from games 39 to 50)...Hey kids, stay in school. Cross-sport math is pretty cool.

***Pre-emptive strike: I know they don't play at 1:00 p.m. Pacific every Sunday. So forward all complaints about using a loose metaphor to my attorney.

****In the comments section, I've posted stats and rankings for every NFL team according to DANLOLS.

Poll

In your opinion, who are the 2009 49ers?

The horrible team that got massacred by the Falcons in SF

13 votes

The average team that beat the Seahawks and Cardinals

197 votes

The above-average team that was one play away from beating the Vikings in MIN

259 votes

The great team that massacred the Rams

7 votes

476 votes | Poll has closed

Football Outsiders and the 49ers: Player Stats through Week 4

Florida Danny — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 11:15:25 -0000

Fooch's Note: Make sure and check out our game-day thread now up.

Welcome back for this week's look at Niner player statistics and rankings as published by Football Outsiders (FO). If you're unfamiliar with FO's player stats (i.e., DYAR, individual DVOA, and EYds) and line stats (i.e., ALY and ASR), or if you need a refresher course, take a look at my explanations here and here.

This week, QBs need a total of at least 30 passes to qualify as having valid FO stats, RBs need at least 32 carries, WRs need at least 13 targets, and TEs need at least 6 targets. The only Niner that qualifies this week, but didn't qualify last week is Josh Morgan, presumably because Jimmy Raye and Shaun Hill decided last week to starting throwing the ball to other WRs besides Isaac Bruce. Therefore, the players I'll be breaking down this week are Hill, Glen Coffee, Bruce, Morgan, and Vernon Davis. I'll also, of course, be presenting FO stats for the OL, the DEF front 7, and the secondary.

Two more things I'd like to mention before I get the party started. First, as I said in this week's team rankings post, all FO stats are now adjusted for opponents. In that case, I'll be presenting YARs and VOAs (i.e., stats that aren't defense-adjusted) alongside DYARs and DVOAs (i.e., stats that are defense-adjusted) to gauge the effect that strength of schedule (SOS) has had on 49er player stats. Second, I won't be presenting cumulative stats (i.e., passes/runs/targets, actual yards, and EYds) because bye weeks mean more opportunities for some players to accumulate them than others.

QUARTERBACKS

Here are Shaun Hill's stats through 4 games (bold = ranked 8th or better [top 25% of starters]; italics = ranked 25th or worse [bottom 25% of starters]):

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	EYds Per Pass	Rank
29	22	-6.9%	22	4.96	26
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Yds Per Pass	Rank
49	22	-4.1%	21	5.12	27

Compared to last week, Hill's DYAR and DVOA rank 7 spots higher, thereby vaulting him out of the bottom 8 starting QBs. However, he's still in the bottom 8 with respect to both actual yards per pass and EYds per pass. On the bright side, though, at least the gap separating his EYds per pass and actual yards per pass decreased by 63.6%; to the point that there's only a negligible difference between the two.

Looking at the effect of opponent adjustments, it's clear from Hill's stats that he's been throwing the ball against weaker pass defenses. Specifically, strength (weakness?) of schedule has accounted for 20 YAR and +2.8% efficiency.

After the jump, I'll present and discuss the rest of the stats, as well as introduce you to the 49ers' new dynamic duo. Oh, and also, look closely for the hidden, real-life Billy Mays (RIP) gem...

RUNNING BACKS

Frank Gore's still out, so my "Ignore Gore" policy remains in effect. Here are Coffee's stats, now based on almost 60 carries (bold = ranked 8th or better; italics = ranked 25th or worse):

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	EYds Per Run	Rank
-115	43	-58.2%	43	0.22	43
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Yds Per Run	Rank
-98	43	-51.0%	43	2.34	43

You probably don't know this, but 43 RBs qualified for FOs rankings this week; so the fact that he's ranked dead last in each of the above stats is literally as bad as you can possibly get. Hey, at least there's nowhere to go but up!

Two things are worth discussing here aside from just sitting back and marveling at Coffee's (im)perfect rankings. First, even if we don't adjust for opponents, Coffee is still nearly 2 yards per carry worse than the average backup (i.e., -98 YAR divided by 59 carries). Second, and more vomit-inducing is that, based on the difference between his EYds per run and actual yards per run, opponents and/or game situations account for nearly all of Coffee's run yards. In other words, if it weren't for the fact that he's run against relatively weak defenses and/or run in relatively easy situations, it would almost be in the 49ers' best interest to simply forfeit the down rather than hand the ball to Coffee.

WIDE RECEIVERS

Here are Bruce's stats (bold = ranked 16th or better; italics = ranked 49th or worse):

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	EYds Per Target	Rank
-5	58	-15.1%	57	6.24	57
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Yds Per Target	Rank
-2	56	-13.6%	57	6.68	48

All of these stats and rankings are basically the same as last week. The one thing that has changed is the gap between Bruce's EYds per target and actual yards per target. Namely, it shrunk by 48.8%. However, about 3/4 of the decrease was due to a drop in his actual yards per target, meaning that it was only minimally impacted by opponent adjustments and the situations he encountered during the STL game. In other words, it's not like his receiving yards are any more efficient.

I've been saying this for 3 weeks, so I won't harp on it today. By NFL standards, Bruce - at least in Raye's offense - is more of a borderline #2 WR than he is a #1 WR. Thankfully, help seems to be on the way. Help goes by two names: Michael Crabtree and Josh Morgan. I'll get to Crabtree in a second, but here are Morgan's newly minted stats:

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	EYds Per Target	Rank
43	26	29.7%	8	11.23	8
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Yds Per Target	Rank
47	25	33.2%	8	9.54	16

Granted they're based on only 13 targets, but these stats better resemble a #1 WR - both in value and efficiency. Whereas Bruce has played about as good (bad?) as the average backup WR, Morgan has averaged over 3 yards per target better than the average backup. Furthermore, unlike Bruce, Morgan is almost 2 yards better per target than his NFL stats would otherwise indicate. The difference between his EYds per target and actual yards per target is especially important because, based on the fact that caliber of opponent has had little effect on his YAR and VOA, this difference suggests Morgan's receiving yards are predominately coming in relatively important and/or relatively difficult game situations.

TIGHT ENDS

Here are VD's stats (bold = ranked 8th or better; italics = ranked 25th or worse):

DYAR	Rank	DVOA	Rank	EYds Per Target	Rank
51	9	25.4%	17	9.07	19
YAR	Rank	VOA	Rank	Yds Per Target	Rank
51	9	24.9%	17	7.81	18

With each passing week, VD is overtaking more and more TEs (pun obviously intended). As the table shows, he's now just outside the top 25% in DYAR and just outside the top half in DVOA. Considering where he was when I first started doing these posts, the rise of VD has been nothing short of pandemic (this is too easy). However, I'd just like to point out that VD looks to have an appointment with the urologist this week: the Falcons have the 10th best pass defense DVOA against TEs. You could say they're not like the cheap streetwalkers VD encountered the last 2 games (the Rams rank 31st vs. TEs; the Vikings rank 30th).

If VD continues his stellar play and becomes Crabtree's receiving mentor as much as he's been his fashion mentor, the 49ers might finally have the dynamic pass-catching duo they've been searching for since the days of Jerry Rice and John Taylor. If that happens, we'd certainly have to dub the dynamic duo with a nickname. The Dolphins had their Marks Brothers. The Broncos had their Three Amigos. Hmm..."Crabtree" and "Davis" don't really work for a name-based nickname. "Crabs" and "VD," however, are pretty amenable to both a name-based nickname and a punny nickname. My suggestion: The Tainted Twosome. Here's the Tainted Twosome getting ready to infect an unsuspecting houseguest (the "headgear" on VD and Crabs is obviously just for show):

OFFENSIVE LINE

Here are the 49ers' OL stats through 4 games:

ALY	Rank	Power Success Rate	Rank	ASR	Rank
2.74	32	25%	32	11.5%	30
Actual YPC	Rank	Stuffed Rate	Rank	Sack Rate	Rank
3.92	20	22%	20	10.8%	30

Clearly, the 49ers' OL sucks. Failing to open up holes against the 18th-ranked defensive front 7 in ALY cemented them their place as the worst run-blocking OL in the league. That's not good. What's worse, though, is that their pass-blocking stats took a major hit after giving up 4 sacks in 28 dropbacks against the 23rd-ranked defensive front 7 in ASR. Specifically, after the STL game, the OL's ASR increased twice as much (2.1%) as did its actual sack rate (1.0%).

But let's get back to the run-blocking. Their ALY increased (thankfully) by over 1/4 of a yard, yet still ranks dead last in the NFL. In other words, they had - and still have - a long way to go to get out of the cellar. To put it in perspective, KC's is the only other OL with an ALY below 3.30 yards per carry. Therefore, the Niners' OL would have to increase their ALY by an additional half-yard per carry just to move up to 30th!

One other thing I'll mention is that Gore's absence is having a profound effect on the OL's yards-per-carry stats. Specifically, their ALY is increasing every week, while their actual yards per RB carry is decreasing every week. The dwindling impact of Gore's twin 80-yard TD runs has been a major cause of the latter, but has had no effect on the former because ALY is computed based on only the first 10 yards of a run; with 100% attribution to the OL up to the first 5 yards. In contrast, the reason ALY has been increasing since Gore's injury is because (a) it was so low prior to his injury; and (b) Coffee has a lot of 3- or 4-yard runs; which necessarily increase a sub-3.00 ALY, but not by much. In other words, the absence of long Gore runs is making the actual yards per carry stat nosedive, while the absence of intermediate-length runs by Gore is making the OL's abysmal ALY increase at a very slow rate.

Below is a chart displaying the OL's directional run-blocking performance:

To those hoping that the OL was at least good at blocking in a specific direction, you're out of luck. This chart displays nothing short of complete and utter epic fail. Specifically, the Niners' OL remains ranked in the bottom 5 of the NFL for 4 of the 5 run directions. For the remaining optimists out there, there does seem to be a silver lining though. Namely, the OL has improved at blocking in their most frequent run direction: their C/G ALY "jumped" 3 spots in the rankings this week.

Taken together, it's becoming increasingly clear that the 49ers' offense has two major problems right now. One is that, either because Raye has been handcuffing him or he's just not that good, Coffee has been a massive downgrade from Gore. The other problem is that the OL can't run-block or pass-block. There's really no nice way to put this except to say that the offense has been getting by on smoke and mirrors for the past 2 games. The only thing that's saved them is that the OL's weaknesses - and there are a lot of them - just happen to be nullified in one very important area of the game: the red zone. Inside the opponent's 20, the OL doesn't have to open holes for intermediate-to-long running plays, and it doesn't have to pass-block long enough for intermediate-to-deep receiver routes to come open. All that's required in the red zone is run-blocking good enough for a 3-yard run and pass-blocking good enough for a 7-yard pass. Luckily for the Niners, that's their OL's raison d'etre.

DEFENSIVE FRONT SEVEN

Here are the 49ers' DEF front 7 stats through 4 games:

ALY	Rank	Power Success Rate	Rank	ASR	Rank
3.26	6	67%	22	6.9%	11
Actual YPC	Rank	Stuffed Rate	Rank	Actual Sack Rate	Rank
3.51	10	21%	14	6.6%	13

The 49ers' front 7 continues to be stout against the run, and their success rate on runs of 3rd & 2 or less improved 7 spots in the rankings. Where they've made considerable strides is with respect to rushing the passer. Specifically, they're now only 1 spot away from the top 10 in ASR. Honestly, going into this season, I was fully expecting the pass rush to improve, simply based on (a) their permanent move to a 3-4 defense, (b) having the OLB talent necessary to get pass rush from a 3-4 defense, (c) Greg Manusky not being handcuffed by Vanilla Mike Nolan anymore, and (d) actually having a starting FS who can cover someone. What I did not expect was this much of an improvement. "49ers front 7" and "top 10 in ASR" were two phrases I never thought I'd include in the same sentence this season. Kudos to them for outperforming my wildest expectations. Let's hope they keep it up.

Below is the DEF front 7's directional run-stopping chart:

Nate Clements and company continue to be beasts when it comes to stopping outside runs to the defense's left. Most everything else in this chart is relatively unchanged from last week. The one thing I will note, however, is that STL must have gotten wind of the Niners' ineptitude at defending runs behind LT. That's because the relative frequency of facing such runs doubled after the Rams game. The good news is that said ineptitude was a statistical mirage - the victim of sample size - and so STL's logical strategy backfired. To be sure, the front 7's ALY against runs behind LT is still not good. However, "4.88 yards allowed per carry" doesn't scream, "Hey! Over here!" to an opposing offense quite like "7.32 yards allowed per carry" does.

DEFENSIVE BACKFIELD

Finally, here's the chart showing stats for the secondary against various intended receivers:

Defending passes to opposing RBs continues to be the defense's bugaboo: their yards allowed per pass attempt to a RB is basically the same as last week, and their DVOA vs. passes to a RB remains in the bottom 8 of the NFL. Two things that did change from last week were Clements' efficiency getting worse, and, more drastically, the secondary's efficiency against #3 WRs getting much, much better. I don't think this latter difference is due to opponent adjustments because the only good #3 WR the 49ers have faced is Steve Breaston (FYI...Greg Lewis has only been good on one suicide-watch-inducing play this year).

The stats in the above chart have clear implications for the ATL game today. First, the 49ers seem to have as good a shot as anyone at containing Tony Gonzalez. They're even better in yards allowed per attempt to a TE (ranked 2nd) than their top 8 DVOA vs. TEs. Second, if the Niners are going to slow down ATL's passing game, they're going to have to outplay their stats with respect to defending passes to RBs and #1 WRs. Unfortunately, the Falcons are pretty good at both of those spots with Roddy White and Jerious Norwood. What makes matters worse is that the secondary is unlikely to be getting much help from the pass rush this week given that ATL has the #1 OL in the league when it comes to pass-blocking: they give up less than 1 sack per 30 pass attempts, whether you adjust for situation and opponent or not.

BOTTOM LINE

OK, so through 4 games, we can draw the following conclusions about the 2009 49ers based on their player statistics thus far:

Hill is improving, but still needs to throw (and complete) more passes downfield. Oh wait, the OL can't pass-block long enough for him to do that.
Gore needs to start doing double doses of cortisone, stat!
"#1 WR Bruce and #2 WR Morgan" seems backwards to me.
Call the CDC! The NFL is getting infected by The Tainted Twosome.
If the OL's dismal performance is a stain, then the red zone is OxiClean.
It's getting increasingly difficult to run in any direction against the 49ers' defensive front 7.
If Roddy White or Jerious Norwood have a good game this week, no big deal. On the other hand, if Tony Gonzalez has a good game, the 49ers are in trouble.

OK, that's it for this week. Go Niners!

**DVOA, DYAR, EYds, ALY, and ASR statistics used to produce this article were obtained from Football Outsiders.

Poll

Which of the following statements do you agree with more?

Hill would be a better QB if he had a better #1 WR

92 votes

Bruce would be a better #1 WR if he had a better QB

56 votes

148 votes | Poll has closed

Football Outsiders and the 49ers: Team Stats through Week 4

Florida Danny — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:43:56 -0000

AUTHOR'S NOTE: If you're interested in a discussion of the 49ers' #1 ranking in Red Zone Pass Offense DVOA, mosey on over to Fooch's post from earlier today. In my post, I'm just rubbernecking it. His post stops and stares.

Welcome back for this week's look at how the 49ers' team stats rank in the NFL according to Football Outsiders (FO). Now that the season is 25% done, there are 2 changes that affect the stats and rankings in this post:

All FO stats are now adjusted for opponent. So beginning this week, and for the rest of the season, all of the 49ers' overall and situational stats should be interpreted as if they've played a league-average schedule. In other words, FO has removed the effect that playing good teams (e.g., the Vikings) or bad teams (e.g., the Rams) has had on the 49ers' overall and situational performance.
I've included two new sets of stats because their sample sizes are now large enough for them to actually give us valid information: (a) DVOA by quarters and halves, and (b) DVOA in the shotgun formation.

OK, so with that housekeeping taken care of, it's onward ho!

TEAM RANKINGS

Below are the 49ers' overall team DVOAs and rankings (See here for my explanation of FO team stats). Based on the incorporation of opponent adjustments, I've added three new stats to the table:

VOA, which is DVOA without the opponent adjustments. I present this so we can see the effect that the 49ers' schedule has had on their performance.
SOS, which is strength of schedule according to DVOA. I present this for the same reason as VOA.
Variance, which is the consistency of DVOA from week to week. I present this to show how consistently (or inconsistently) the 49ers have performed from week to week. Lower percentages mean more consistency, and teams are ranked from most to least consistent.

Here's the new table (bold = top 8 in the NFL; italics = bottom 8):

Total	Rank	Offense	Rank	Defense	Rank	Special Teams	Rank
1.4%	15	-13.0%	24	-16.6%	6	-2.1%	16
Total VOA	Rank	SOS	Rank	Variance	Rank
4.7%	17	-7.6%	24	8.0%	11

After the jump, I'll (a) discuss this table; (b) break down the offensive, defensive, and special teams rankings; and (c) unveil a new feature that pays homage to the world's most famous motivational speaker (no, I don't mean Mike Singletary)...

Last week, the Niners were 22nd in Total (TOT) DVOA, 27th in Offense (OFF) DVOA, 10th in Defense (DEF) DVOA, and 20th in Special Teams (ST) DVOA. So, essentially, the STL game and the incorporation of opponent adjustments resulted in improvements across the board. Shutting out a team 35-0 will do that, though, regardless of how bad that team is. Two other things I'll mention about the 49ers' TOT DVOA are that they're ranked 6th out of the 8 one-loss teams, and that their opponent this week, the Falcons, is the team immediately ahead of them in the rankings (3.3%, 14th).

Going a little deeper into the effect of opponent adjustments, the 49ers' 24th-ranked SOS and the fact that their VOA is better than their DVOA both suggest that they're not quite as good as what we've been seing from them through 4 games. This isn't to say that they're not good. On the contrary, they're a slightly above average team regardless of their opponents thus far. I simply bring this up to make the point that they have benefitted to some degree from an easier-than-average schedule.

Finally, from the 49ers' Variance statistic, it looks like they're one of the more consistent teams in the league from week to week. What's important to realize, however, is the difference between this year's Variance and those of previous seasons. Specifically, during the Mike Nolan Era, they went from 32nd in 2005 to 23rd in 2006 to 15th in 2007 to 2nd in 2008. In other words, they went from bad and inconsistent to just plain bad, which is pretty much the normal trajectory of a rebuilding team - except for the "still bad after all these years" part. This season, though, they're good and consistent. Now that's more like it. Thank you, Mike Singletary.

OFFENSIVE RANKINGS - OVERALL

Here' how the offensive rankings look overall and by type of play (bold = top 8 in the NFL; italics = bottom 8):

OFF	Rank	Pass	Rank	Run	Rank	Variance	Rank
-13.0%	24	6.7%	19	-24.7%	30	2.8%	9
OFF VOA	Rank	Pass VOA	Rank	Run VOA	Rank
-10.4%	25	11.7%	19	-24.2%	30

From the above breakdown, we can draw several conclusions:

Overall, the OFF has been pretty inefficient, but very consistently so (sounds Nolan-esque to me). The Niners' Variance statistic suggests that their OFF has generally fluctuated between 20% and 5% below average from week to week this season.
The running game is definitely anchoring the OFF, but, by "anchoring," I mean holding it down. Whereas the pass OFF is actually above average compared to the rest of the league, the run OFF is 3rd-worst in the league. Like I said last week, if you're going to have a run-first mentality on OFF, at least be good at it.
Whereas the passing game has benefitted from going up against weaker pass DEFs, the running game has been horrible regardless of the opponent. Indeed, except for their game against the Vikings, the Niners have played the 18th, 22nd, and 28th ranked teams in Pass DEF VOA (average = 23.4%). In contrast, they've played two top-6 run DEFs (i.e., the Cardinals & MIN; average = -28.5%), but also two bottom-11 run DEFs (i.e., the Seahawks & Rams; average = 2.5%). So, whereas the OFF's best 3 passing games have come against bad pass DEFs, their run OFF has been really good against one bad run DEF (i.e., SEA), but also really bad against another bad run DEF (i.e., STL); in addition to being understandably bad against 2 good run DEFs.

OFFENSIVE RANKINGS - SITUATIONAL SPLITS

So we know that the pass OFF has been good and the run OFF has been really bad. Maybe the situational stats have something to say about, "Why?"

Here are the OFF's pass and run DVOAs by down:

Down	OFF	Rank	Pass OFF	Rank	Run OFF	Rank
1st	0.4%	19	5.8%	21	1.2%	14
2nd	-42.9%	31	-33.5%	27	-41.4%	30
3rd	6.6%	17	42.6%	10	-101.8%	31

As this table shows, the pass OFF plays efficiently on 1st and - especially -- 3rd downs, but sucks on 2nd down. In contrast, the run OFF gets progressively worse with each subsequent down, culminating in that horrendously bad 3rd Down Run OFF DVOA. I have a strange feeling that some of you are going to use these 3rd-down splits to reiterate your displeasure with Jimmy Raye's call for a running play on 3rd & 6 @ MIN.

But, of course, you might say that distances matter. Here are the OFF's down splits by distance (Short = 0-3 yards; Mid = 4-6 yards; Long = 7+ yards):

Down	OFF	Rank	Short	Rank	Mid	Rank	Long	Rank
1st	0.4%	19	N/A
2nd	-42.9%	31	-33.8%	28	-29.6%	22	-52.0%	31
3rd	6.6%	17	1.9%	18	2.7%	13	14.7%	21

Based on this table, as well as the previous one, it's apparent that the 49ers throw the ball a lot more on 3rd down than they run it, and that they're not encountering many 3rd & short situations. I don't need to consult the play-by-play to figure this out. Rather, if the 49ers were running the ball a lot on 3rd down, their overall 3rd-down split wouldn't be above average because that -101.8% 3rd Down Run OFF DVOA would be spread like a cancer over more plays. Similarly, if the 49ers were encountering a lot of 3rd & short situations, their 3rd-down split wouldn't be above average because 3rd & short is a high-frequency running down, again meaning that their -101.8% 3rd Down Run OFF DVOA would infect their 3rd down split more. So, all in all, just pray the Niners continue to throw the ball on 3rd down.

Another argument for more passing comes from the formation splits. Here's a table showing the Niners' OFF DVOAs based on whether they're in the shotgun formation or not:

% of Plays

in Shotgun

Rank

Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Non-Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Difference

Rank

25.8%

19.8%

-21.2%

41.0%

Shaun Hill takes a snap in shotgun once every 4 plays, a ratio that's 4th-lowest in the league. But notice, the Niners' OFF is over 40% more efficient when Hill is in shotgun than when he's not; a difference in efficiency that ranks in the top 10. For sure, part of this has to do with FO's general finding that OFFs are more efficient in shotgun formations. Indeed, only 10 OFFs in the league right now are better when they're not in shotgun. However, the average difference in the NFL right now is 18.3%, meaning that shotgun plays benefit the 49er OFF over twice as much as they do for the average NFL team.

Now, I'm certainly not saying the Niners need to become the Patriots or anything (i.e., go shotgun almost 60% of the time), but these stats don't lie. Working in a few more plays per game from the shotgun would most likely help the OFF play more efficiently; especially given the fact that the 49ers' OL can't seem to pass block worth a damn (I'll get to that in my Saturday player rankings post).

OFFENSIVE RANKINGS - "TONY ROBBINS" SPLITS

Two sets of situational splits provided by FO are something akin to psychological indicators: field zone DVOAs and quarter/half DVOAs. Kind of like what hustle stats tell you about NBA teams, these stats tell you whether NFL teams are playing motivated football. Besides physically assessing the 49ers' motivation during games, what better (and easier) way to see if their collective heads are in the game than looking at whether they play smart football inside the 20s, come out of the locker room hot, and finish games well. After all, do you think it's any coincidence that motivational guru Mike Singletary includes "create great field position," "total ball security," "execute," and "finish" in his formula for success? A team that doesn't play well inside the 20s is not creating great field position. When is total ball security most important? Inside the 20s. What does coming out of the locker room flat look like? Poor execution in the 1st quarter. And finally, what is finishing if not performing well in the 4th quarter? Oh, and if that didn't convince you, then also know that FO has found red zone and 1st quarter efficiency to be 2 of the 3 stats most highly correlated with winning.

So, rather than bombarding you (aka making you even dizzier) with all field zone and quarter/half DVOAs, I'll just give you what I'll call FO's "Tony Robbins" DVOA splits (TR splits for short). Here they are for the 49ers' OFF:

Inside

SF 20

Rank

Red

Zone

Rank

1st

Quarter

Rank

4th

Quarter

Rank

-41.1%

39.6%

-29.9%

15.3%

Clearly, we can see why Singletary believes his OFF has a long way to go as it relates to his formula for success. Based on these stats, the OFF is great in one TR split, middling in another, below average in another, and horrible in another. Taken together, that's pretty average. However, viewed from an optimist's perspective - I mean, we're talking about Tony Robbins here after all - these stats suggest that the sky's the limit for this team if the OFF ever gets their collective heads in the game.

DEFENSIVE RANKINGS - OVERALL

Here' how the defensive rankings look overall and by type of play (bold = top 8 in the NFL; italics = bottom 8):

DEF	Rank	Pass	Rank	Run	Rank	Variance	Rank
-16.6%	6	-5.0%	9	-35.9%	1	4.0%	19
DEF VOA	Rank	Pass VOA	Rank	Run VOA	Rank
-16.2%	7	-1.4%	10	-40.7%	1

All I can say is, "ZOMG!!!!!! NINERZZ D ROOLZZ!!!" That's right, the San Francisco 49ers have the most efficient run DEF in the NFL right now. Consider the Nolan Era dead and buried (thankfully). Also consider the fact that none of the DVOAs in the table seem to have been affected by SOS, i.e., their DVOAs are not that much different from the non-opponent-adjusted VOAs. Finally, I should point out that, according to official NFL stats (i.e., yards allowed per game), the run DEF is ranked 4th. So thank FO's superior stat methods for allowing us to bask in the glory of a "We're #1" ranking.

DEFENSIVE RANKINGS - SITUATIONAL SPLITS

So we know that the DEF is pretty awesome all-around. But how awesome (or not) are they on specific downs?

Here are the DEF's pass and run DVOAs by down:

Down	DEF	Rank	Pass DEF	Rank	Run DEF	Rank
1st	-16.2%	5	4.8%	12	-40.8%	2
2nd	-29.2%	5	-20.2%	6	-40.2%	4
3rd	-2.4%	13	-3.6%	11	4.4%	21

I'd say that's pretty awesome. What I like most about the stats in this table is that the Niners' DEF is great both on high-frequency running downs (i.e., 1st & 2nd), as well as high-frequency passing downs (2nd & 3rd). To me, the fact that they're ranked 21st in defending 3rd-down runs is totally inconsequential. Teams pass the ball the vast majority of the time on 3rd down, so I'd rather they be above average against the pass - which they are - than above average against the run - which they're not. Basically, what you see above is a near-spotless record of situational efficiency.

Here are the DEF's down splits by distance (Short = 0-3 yards; Mid = 4-6 yards; Long = 7+ yards):

Down	DEF	Rank	Short	Rank	Mid	Rank	Long	Rank
1st	-16.2%	5	N/A
2nd	-29.2%	5	0.7%	19	94.1%	31	-70.7%	1
3rd	-2.4%	13	16.6%	20	-37.3%	12	10.8%	16

There are two take-home messages from these stats. First, the most important (only?) area where the DEF seems to need improvement is on 3rd & short. Giving up 1st downs on 3rd & short can lead to a downward spiral in hurry. I'm not too worried about this, though, because of Singletary's "no downward spirals" coaching style, and the fact that their 1st and 2nd down performances seem to be creating very few 3rd & short situations.

Second, I've never seen one yard mean so much to a down-and-distance split like it does to the Niners' DEF on 2nd down. Specifically, they're 164.8% better (!!!) when their opponent has 7+ yards to go on 2nd down than when their opponent has 4-6 yards to go. Their overall prowess on DEF seems to hinge on stopping 1st down plays for minimal gain, thereby putting the opposing OFF in a 2nd & long situation. Therefore, in order for the DEF to keep up their recent domination, they're going to have to continue to be stout on 1st down.

Another indicator of their across-the-board awesomeness is the DEF's shotgun vs. non-shotgun splits. Here they are:

% of Plays

in Shotgun

Rank

Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Non-Shotgun

DVOA

Rank

Difference

Rank

42.6%

-16.3%

-16.8%

0.5%

The DEF has been facing a fair amount of shotgun so far this season, which is to be expected given that (a) shotgun is essentially ARI's base offense, and (b) teams like STL tend to be in shotgun a lot when they're on the wrong end of a blowout. As you can see though, facing more shotgun than normal hasn't affected the DEF's DVOA. Specifically, they're in the top quarter of the league regardless of whether the opposing OFF is in shotgun or not, and their DVOA difference is infinitesimally small.

DEFENSIVE RANKINGS - TR SPLITS

We saw earlier that the OFF needs to get their head in the game a little bit more. Now it's time to check out the DEF's TR splits:

Red

Zone

Rank

Inside

OPP 20

Rank

1st

Quarter

Rank

4th

Quarter

Rank

8.2%

-45.8%

-23.2%

9.2%

If the OFF was 1/4 of the way to Singletary's motivation destination, then the DEF is twice as far along in the journey. Namely, they come out of the locker room on fire (mabe Singletary learned firewalking as a motivational tactic from Tony Robbins?), and they're great at keeping teams pinned deep inside their own territory. The DEF still has plenty of room for improvement with respect to the other TR splits; but, unlike the OFF, they're not atrociously bad in either of those two aspects of motivated football.

SPECIAL TEAMS RANKINGS

Below are the Niners' ST DVOA stats broken down by unit:

ST	Rank	FG/XP	Rank	Kickoff	Rank	Punt	Rank
-2.1%	16	0.4	8	-3.6	30	6.8	4
ST VOA	Rank			Kickoff Return	Rank	Punt Return	Rank
-1.1%	18			-1.2	15	-5.5	30

Before I discuss the table, I'd like to clear up something about the interpretation of ST DVOA. To be honest with you, I was a little confused about whether the net points stat for each specific ST unit is supposed to be interpreted on a per-kick/punt, per-game, or year-to-date basis. In other words, even I didn't know the answer to, "Compared to the league average, has the kickoff coverage team cost SF 3.6 points per kickoff, 3.6 points per game, or 3.6 total points so far this season?"

Well, I had a little e-mail convo with Aaron at FO, and he was kind enough to clear this up for me. Basically, net points in the above table should be interpreted in a year-to-date fashion. So, going back to my previous example, the correct interpretation is that, compared to the league average, SF's kickoff coverage unit has cost the team 3.6 total points so far this season. Incidentally, Aaron also told me they're going to be converting net points into a per-kick stat at some point in the near future, which I think is a good idea from an interpretation perspective. Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. Back to the stats...

Unlike last week, there actually are a few things to discuss regarding ST. First, Andy Lee and company have reclaimed their spot in the top 8, netting the Niners over a touchdown's worth of points so far this season. Second, Joe Nedney is 1 of only 8 Ks in the NFL this season who is netting his team more FG points than the league average. Finally, when comparing the Niners' ST DVOA to their ST VOA, we see that they've faced a relatively weak ST schedule thus far. Indeed, aside from MIN, who has the #3 ST VOA, they've faced STs ranked 13th (SEA), 22nd (ARI), and 28th (STL). And even in the MIN game, the 49ers' ST played far worse (game-specific ST DVOA = -19.8%) than how the average team would be expected to play against the Vikings (ST DVOA = -8.4%), all else being equal.

Oh, and, by the way, Allen Rossum or Arnaz Battle or whichever Player X is back there this week still sucks at returning punts.

BOTTOM LINE

OK, so through 4 games, we can draw the following conclusions about the 2009 49ers:

They're an above-average team that plays consistently from week to week.
Their schedule has been relatively soft so far this season.
Their OFF would really benefit from passing the ball more, especially out of the shotgun.
Their OFF needs to start games better and do a better job deep in their own territory.
Their DEF is a juggernaut for sure, but it needs to finish games better (ala the STL game) and do a better job when other teams enter the red zone - that is, if other teams ever do enter the red zone.
As expected, Andy Lee and Joe Nedney are having yet another great season. Punt returner X...not so much.

On Saturday, I'll break down the player stats and rankings. See you then.

**DVOA statistics used to produce this article were obtained from Football Outsiders.

Poll

According to DVOA, the Niners are #1 in red zone pass offense and #1 in run defense through 4 games. Which of these two #1 rankings do you think is more vital to their success the rest of the season?

#1 in red zone pass offense

196 votes

#1 in run defense

356 votes

552 votes | Poll has closed

49ers 35 - Rams 0: A Tale of Two Halves

Florida Danny — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 22:59:33 -0000

More photos » by Marcio Jose Sanchez - AP

Browse more photos »

Florida Danny here subbing in for Fooch at the moment. By my estimation, he's currently watching the end of the 3rd quarter on DVR, so I'm sure he'll be available for comment soon. Don't worry, though. I spend enough time on here talking about stats, so this is a victory celebration thread, not a stats thread. And what a victory it was!!!!

Here are my 4 immediate impressions from the game:

At the end of the 1st half, when the Niners meekishly chose to settle for a 7-0 halftime lead, my friends and I all agreed that there was simply no way the Niners should only be up 7 at home against as bad a team as the Rams. I'm going out on a limb here, but it sure seems like Singletary said something along those same lines in the locker room between halves. If not that, then someone must have spiked the Gatorade. That second half was an awesome display of utter dominaton, especially by the defense.
Speaking of the defense, their second half performance was definitely sparked by -- who else -- Patrick Willis. What amazed me about Willis' "half of destruction" was how varied it was in its dominance. Ferocious tackles? Check. Sacks? Check. Interception? Check. I mean, after today, is there really anything this guy can't do at Mike LB?
Watching the game, I was constantly thinking, "Man, Singletary and Raye must have read my post this morning." OK, just kidding. I'm not that much of a narcissist. Really, though, I couldn't believe my eyes watching the plays being called on offense. Actually running off tackle and toward the edges? Check. Throwing to a WR other than Bruce? Check. Throwing the ball downfield more? Check. Basically, I saw everything I wanted to see from the offense in terms of post-MIN adjustments.
I don't want to end on a negative note, but my last immediate impression was, "Wow. The OL is really bad." We have to keep in mind that the Niners' offense only scored 14 points in this game. To me, it was almost a miracle they scored that many. Shaun Hill was constantly under duress from a JV defense, and it seemed like Coffee had absolutely nothing in the way of holes to run through. One play stood out in particular. In the 2nd quarter, Hill takes a 3-step drop, and gets sacked on his 3rd step!!! That's just unacceptable, and it's especially bad against the lowly Rams. I mean, the interior of the OL can't pass block for 1 second? C'mon guys.

Like I said, though, I don't want to end on a downer. All in all, this was an important win. First, it means the Niners are 3-0 in the division. I'll have a post during the week on how important that is. Second, and this is coming from a M.S. in Sport Psychology, the 49ers showed a lot of mettle and stick-to-it-iveness between the ears. Nolan teams would have folded after a big offensive injury and bad loss in that MIN game. In fact, Nolan's 2007 team did just that after losing Alex Smith and losing at home to SEA in Week 4. After that game, the Niners lost 8 of their next 9. This team is not that team. They don't fold after tough losses.

Another thing they don't do is lose to teams they should kick the crap out of, a definite Nolan trademark. One thing I learned a while back is that -- contrary to conventional wisdom -- what separates the good teams from the great teams is that the great teams always destroy the worst teams. They don't lose to them, they don't toy around with them. Great teams dispatch sorry teams in the manner that befits their sorriness.

So...'twas a great win for the Niners. I saw a alot that I liked. Willis is a beast. That defense is becoming studly. The offense, to their credit, made smart adjustments. Now, just start getting competent blocking by the OL, and this team has a really good chance to become a great team.