SB Nation User Blog: calvinandhobbes

A Statistical Analysis of the 2008-2009 Denver Broncos Running Game

calvinandhobbes — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 05:13:14 -0000

When people think of the Denver Broncos they often think of an Offensive Line where, "that would let my grandmother run for 1,000 yards." This year the Denver Broncos have proven that your grandmother most definitely could not run for 1,000 yards.

In this article I will attempt to show three things:

1.) The state of the Denver Broncos’ running game in comparison with the rest of the league.

2.) The state of the Denver Broncos’ running backs in comparison with the rest of the league.

3.) The effect of the Denver Broncos’ running game on their overall performance.

This article is hopefully the first in a series of articles examining the Denver Broncos Offensive and Defensive Lines.

via cache.daylife.com

1.) The state of the Denver Broncos’ running game in comparison with the rest of the league.

via cache.gettyimages.com

According to Football Outsiders Offensive Line Rankings (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol) the Denver Broncos are ranked number one in run blocking. The Denver Broncos have an Adjusted Line Yards per carry of 5.01. This is .81 higher than the league average of 4.20. 5.01 Adjusted Lines Yards per carry is also .37 or 8% higher than the fifth ranked San Francisco 49ers. Further, 5.01 is .99 Adjusted Line yards higher than the twenty-second ranked Kansas City Chiefs (or %23.13 percent higher), who rank second highest in the A.F.C. West.

This remarkably high Adjusted Line Yards per carry of 5.01 would suggest that the Denver Broncos are dominating the league with their running game. However, this is not the case. Instead, the Denver Broncos are ranked fourth in rush offense by Football outsiders, their rushing DVOA of %11.0 is less than half of the %23.8 Rushing DVOA of the number one ranked New York Giants.

These statistics may make one ask how the disparity between Rushing DVOA and Adjusted Line Yards per carry can occur. Football Outsiders attempts to describe this possible separation:

"Why are these rankings different from the team offense DVOA ratings for rushing? Among other reasons, they don't include quarterbacks or fumbles, long runs are truncated, and a different set of adjustments is used, attempting to isolate line playrather than total team offense.

A team with a high ranking in Adjusted Line Yards but a low ranking in 10+ Yards is heavily dependent on its offensive line to make the running game work. A team with a low ranking in Adjusted Line Yards but a high ranking in 10+ Yards is heavily dependent on its running back breaking long runs to make the running game work.

However, it is important to understand that these ratings only somewhatseparate the offensive line from the running backs. A team with a very good running back will appear higher no matter how bad their line, and a team with a great line with appear lower if the running back is terrible."

Football Outsiders’ suggestion for the difference leads us to the second part of this article.

2.) The state of the Denver Broncos’ running backs in comparison with the rest of the league.

via media.scout.com

The Denver Broncos rank twenty-sixth in runs over ten yards, with only %13 of their runs going over ten yards. The thirty-second ranked Indianapolis Colts have %9 of their runs go over ten yards. So, only four percent more of the Denver Broncos’ runs are in excess of ten yard, than the worst team in the Nation Football League at runs over ten yards. If Football Outsiders is correct in their assertion that a team with a low percentage of ten plus yards and high Adjusted Line Yards per carry means that the team has a better Offensive Line than Running Back, the Denver Broncos therefore probably have mediocre Running Backs and an excellent Offensive Line.

Football Outsiders’ third assertion that, "a team with a great line with appear lower if the running back is terrible" seems to suggest that the Denver Broncos must not have terrible running backs. I will set out to prove that the Denver Broncos in fact do have mediocre running backs, but an absolutely amazing Offensive Line.

The first thing I noticed when researching the Denver Broncos running backs this year was the amazing amount of injuries the backfield has suffered. No Denver Bronco has more than ninety-five carries, while EVERY other team in the National Football League has at least one Running Back with at least ninety-five carries. Eight teams even have two Running Backs with ninety-five carries.

The highest ranked Running Back according to Football Outsiders DYAR (as shown here http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb) is Michael Pittman at fifteenth (due to his low amount of carries I had to add him to Football Outsiders list by myself, which is rather telling). However, due to Michael Pittman’s age and injury he has very limited carries. The second ranked Denver Bronco is Selvin Young, who is ranked thirtieth in DYAR, however he has not played in awhile. The Denver Broncos’ current starting Running Back Peyton Hillis is ranked fortieth.

Unfortunately, I do not have the time to calculate the success rates of these Running Backs, as defined by Football Outsiders.

These statistics seem to suggest that the current Running Backs of the Denver Broncos are not mediocre, instead they are awful. This means that the Denver Broncos’ Offensive Line is in fact absolutely amazing; they are managing to rank first Adjusted Line Yards per carry by a sizeable margin, despite their poor running backs.

3.) The effect of the Denver Broncos’ running game on their overall performance.

To find the effect of the Denver Broncos’ running game on their overall performance I compared Football Outsiders’ Offensive Lines and their Rushing DVOA to Football Outsiders’ Drive Charts. The rushing rank of a team’s Offensive Line seems to have no correlation to a team’s yards per drive. However, a team’s percentage of stuffed runs does seem to strongly correlate to their touchdowns per drive. This bodes well for the Denver Broncos’ as they rank seventh in stuffed runs.

I would imagine however that as the season comes to close and the weather worsens the running game will become more important.

In closing, imagine a Denver Bronco Running game where the running back is as good as the Offensive Line and what this could allow the Denver Broncos’ Offense to do.

Terrell Davis Tribute (via broncofan547)

An In-depth Look at the Denver Broncos 2007 Season

calvinandhobbes — Thu, 29 May 2008 07:22:39 -0000

Hello all, this is my first “entry” at The Mile High Report and I hope to bring a different perspective to this wonderful community of fans. As a Broncos fan I was not very happy with the way the season went last year. Like most of you reading this I watched every Broncos game and consider myself a pretty knowledgeable person about football, so I ended the season with some pretty firm ideas on why the Broncos failed last season. I placed the blame mainly on our offensive and defensively lines, specifically in the red zone for the offensive line and in run defense for our defensive line.

Since then I have stumbled upon an excellent football statistics website which I urge you all to explore, www.footballoutsiders.com. Using the statistics provided by this website I have began to reexamine the Broncos last season and this is what I found.

My first question was what did Football Outsiders say were the Broncos problems last season. To determine this I would find the N.F.L. ranking of our offense, defense, and special teams. I would break these areas down further and see which specific parts of the offense and defense were ranked twelfth or better (I used twelfth because I would consider most seasons a success if the team makes the playoffs because once you are in the playoffs anything can happen).

RANK

Total

DVOA

Last Year

NON-ADJ

TOT VOA

W-L

OFF.

DVOA

OFF.

RANK

DEF.

DVOA

DEF.

RANK

S.T.

DVOA

S.T.

Rank

3.2%

18 0.4%

0.4%

7-9

7.8%

6.3%

-4.8%

(I apologize for the tables, they got messed up in the transfer from word.)

For those of you who have not visited Football Outsiders the most important term in that chart is probably a complete mystery, DVOA. (thirty-two is the worst one is the best in these rankings.)

“THE SHORT VERSION: DVOA is a method of evaluating teams, units, or players. It takes every single play during the NFL season and compares each one to a league-average baseline based on situation. DVOA measures not just yardage, but yardage towards a first down: five yards on 3rd-and-4 are worth more than five yards on 1st-and-10 and much more than five yards on 3rd-and-12. Red zone plays are worth more than other plays. Performance is also adjusted for the quality of the opponent. DVOA is a percentage, so a team with a DVOA of 10.0% is 10 percent better than the average team, and a quarterback with a DVOA of -20.0% is 20 percent worse than the average quarterback. Because DVOA measures scoring, defenses are better when they are negative.”

For more information here is an article on their website: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/methods.php

The first thing that jumped out at me was how much higher the Broncos’ offensive rank was than either their defensive or special teams rank. I was skeptical about the offense being ranked ninth after having watched their red zone struggles all of last season. So, I delved into the statistical breakdown of our offense last season.

Here are the Football Outsider statistics about the Denver Bronco’s offense last season:

These are the weighted offensive statistics from last season. With all Football Outsiders statistics 0% is the league average. On offense a team wants to have a high number and on defense a low number.

Weighted

OFF. DVOA

Rank

Pass

OFF.

Pass

Rank

Rush

OFF.

Rush

Rank

8.0%

16.0%

-1.5%

These are the unweighted offensive statistics from last season.

OFF. DVOA

Rank

Pass

OFF.

Pass

Rank

Rush

OFF.

Rush

Rank

7.8%

12.9%

-.5%

And here are three other statistics you all might be interested that involve our offensive rank.

Variance	Rank	OFF. Rank 2006	OFF. Rank 2005
10.1%	4	23	4

The first thing that jumped out at me is that both the passing and rushing sections of our offense were ranked lower than our total offense. This however can be explained by the Simpson’s Paradox (for those of you who are interested here is a quick explanation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson's_paradox ).

The most discouraging part of these rankings to me was our rushing offense, not so much because it is two places higher than out passing offense, but because a team like Denver who relies on the run should have a rushing offense in the top five, not the top fifteen. In 2005 when Denver went to the AFC Championship game their rush offense had an adjusted ranking of first on the Football Outsider website. So, seeing these rushing rankings I decided to further research our running backs and offensive line. (Due to time constraints I will only cover our rushing offense in this first post.)

I decided to look up the Broncos offensive line first because the Bronco’s running backs continually rotated due to injury our play quality all season long. I looked up the running backs to answer specific questions, but I really believe that the offensive line holds the answer to the majority of the questions about our offensive line.

Here are the run block statistics for the entire offensive line:

Rank

ALY

RB Yards

Power Success

Power

Rank

10+

Yards

10+

Rank

Stuffed

Rank

4.25

4.63

49%

23%

25%

N.F.L.

4.17

63%

18%

24%

Here are the run block statistics broken down for specific sections of the offensive line:

Rank	ALY	Rank	ALY		Rank		ALY	Rank		ALY	Rank		ALY	Rank
	Left End			Left Tackle		Mid/Guard			Right Tackle			Right End
13	4.88	5	4.78		8		3.86	25		3.81	26		4.72	6
N.F.L.	4.06		4.35				4.15			4.23			4.05

And here is how often Denver runs in certain directions compared to the rest of the N.F.L.

Rank	RB Carries	Left End	Left Tackle	MID/Guard	Right Tackle	Right End
22	375	15%	16%	41%	14%	14%
N.F.L.	389	11%	15%	50%	14%	10%

And here are some definitions:

ALY= “Adjusted Line Yards. Based on regression analysis, the Adjusted Line Yards formula takes all running back carries and assigns responsibility to the offensive line based on the following percentages:

Losses: 120% value
0-4 Yards: 100% value
5-10 Yards: 50% value
11+ Yards: 0% value

These numbers are then adjusted based on down, distance, situation, and opponent, and normalized so that the league average for Adjusted Line Yards per carry is the same as the league average for RB yards per carry (current baseline: 4.08).” (More can be found here: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/methods.php#lineyards ).

Power Success= Percentage of runs on third or fourth down, two yards or less to go, that achieved a first down or touchdown. Also includes runs on first-and-goal or second-and-goal from the two-yard line or closer. This is the only statistic on this page that includes quarterbacks.

Stuffed= Percentage of runs that result in (on first down) zero or negative gain or (on second through fourth down) less than one-fourth the yards needed for another first down. Since being stuffed is bad, teams are ranked from stuffed least often (#1) to most often (#32).

N.F.L.= Average N.F.L. percentages and statistics.

Ok, now that is a lot to digest. The most apparent thing is how amazing horrendous our “power running is”, thirty second in the N.F.L. entirely unacceptable. Power runs are the runs that truly count, while it is nice to be ranked sixth in runs that are ten yards or longer is almost useless and irrelevant. As Football Outsiders explains:

“If their overall yards per carry are equal, a running back who consistently gains yardage on every play is more valuable than a boom-and-bust running back who is frequently stuffed at the line but occasionally breaks a long highlight-worthy run.

You may start a drive 80 yards away from scoring, but as long as you can earn 10 yards in four chances, you get another four chances. Long gains have plenty of value, but if those long gains are mixed with a lot of short gains, you are going to put the quarterback in a lot of difficult third-and-long situations. That means more punts and more giving the ball back to the other team rather than moving the chains and giving the offense four more plays to work with.

The running back who gains consistent yardage is also going to do a lot more for you late in the game, when the goal of running the ball is not just to gain yardage but to eat clock time. If you are a Carolina Panthers fan watching your team with a late lead, you don't want to see three straight DeShaun Foster stuffs at the line followed by a punt. You want to see a game-icing first down.”

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/pregame.php

I decided to look up Denver’s power rank of the last few last years, in 2006 they ranked sixteenth with a 63% success rate and in 2005 they ranked ninth with a success rate of 68%. This shows the obvious correlation between success in power running and overall success as a team. To test this hypothesis I looked up a few other run focused teams. I used Pittsburgh, Seattle, and Kansas City I then charted their points a drive for that year and power success and power rate.

Team	Year	Power Success	Power Rank	Pts. a Drive Rank
Denver	2005	68%	9	8
Pittsburgh	2005	68%	12	6
Seattle	2005	81%	1	2
Kansas City	2005	68%	10	5

In 2006, none of my four sample teams did too well, but 14-2 San Diego had a Power Rank of 4.

Team	Year	Power Success	Power Rank	Pts. a Drive Rank
Denver	2006	63%	16	16
Pittsburgh	2006	63%	20	11
Seattle	2006	70%	10	20
Kansas City	2006	74%	2	13

Team	Year	Power Success	Power Rank	Pts. a Drive Rank
Denver	2007	49%	32	17
Pittsburgh	2007	60%	21	6
Seattle	2007	52%	20	14
Kansas City	2007	61%	20	31

The data does not show as strong of a correlation as I would of liked, but it is strong enough (variables should be factored in that I have ignored like QB play) to prove my point that the horrible power running of this team will be their undoing. Only six teams were within ten percent of Denver’s 49% success rate and of those six teams four of them lost the starting running back for the majority if not all of the season. Fortunately, this is one of a few ratings that can significantly change from season to season.

Some would look at the stuffed percentage of the Broncos and assume since they are only one percent higher than the average it is not too big of a deal, however when all the teams are examined it becomes apparent most teams are within a percent of the N.F.L. average for stuffs (fifteen teams in fact). This means the Broncos could easily have been ranked significantly higher or lower. Looking at their power success rank I think it is safe to assume that it is more likely they would be ranked lower than higher.

I also examined specific parts of the offensive line. When comparing our adjusted lines yards on certain sections of the OL to the percent of runs that were directed to that area the Mid/Guard area raises some real concerns. It seems as if Shannahan was running into a wall (pun intended) as he continued to pound the ball into Denver’s weakest area.

However, upon closer examination only two teams ran the ball fewer times straight up the gut. So, Shannahan really did try to cut down on runs to the Mid/Guard area. This is directly connected to our power running failures and high stuff rate. In power running scenarios a run straight up the gut is often the best scenario, further dives and slams are stuffed far less often than tosses and sweeps. The two teams who ran up to the Mid/Guard area had power success rates of 29 and 7 ( the second teams is the New York Giants I am truly baffled they didn’t run to the Mid/Guard area more with a big back like Jacobs) and a stuff rate of 25 and 5 (again the second team is the New York Giants and it is hard to stuff a back like Jacobs).

So, while the focus on Denver’s offensive line right now seems to be the tackles maybe it should move towards the guard and center? Actually, with the return of Nalen and hopefully Hamilton (I still have my doubts about him really coming) Denver can begin to raise its power success rate and lower its stuff rate.

The ranking of fifth and sixth for the left and right ends respectively would suggest Denver’s tackles were great last year is actually pretty misleading. This is for three main reasons. First, when Denver ran to an end Daniel Graham was often on that side as an extra blocker. Second, since Denver runs a lot of plays where the guards pull the offensive tackles get even another extra blocker. Third, outside runs often allow the runner to “get in space” so more of the runs success is determined on the runners ability to avoid defenders than on interior runs. Lastly, Lepsis pubically admitted is failure at the left tackle spot last year and Denver’s right tackle from last season sounds like he has already been replaced by Kuper.

I also looked up Denver’s running backs. Young was ranked 20th in DPAR (“or Defense-adjusted Points Above Replacement. This number represents the total number of points scored due to plays where this RB carried/caught the ball, compared to a replacement-level RB in the same game situations”) 17th in DVOA (“or Defense-adjusted Value Over Average. This number represents value, per play, over an average RB in the same game situations. The more positive the DVOA rating, the better the player's performance.”) and 40th in Success Rank (“his number represents the player's consistency, measured by successful running plays (the definition of success being different based on down and distance) divided by total running plays.”). While both Youngs DVOA and DPAR are mediocre his Success Rank is poor, this is worrisome because as Football Outsiders points out, “A player with higher DVOA and a low success rate mixes long runs with downs getting stuffed at the line of scrimmage. A player with lower DVOA and a high success rate generally gets the yards needed, but doesn't often get more.” This unfortunately, sounds like our running game last year in general, gets the easy yards, stuffed on the hard yards. So, Selvin Young better work on his vision and put on some weight before he gets those 2,000 yards.

Travis Henry while ranking 39th in DPAR and 40th in DVOA ranks 27th in Success Rate. This seems to imply if he weren’t injured all season or if Denver’s offensive line were better Travis Henry could have placed higher. Still, even if Henry had placed higher it most likely would still have been in the mid 20’s, just mediocre.

These statistics clearly explain Shannahan’s comments about Young not being an every down back and probably explains the drafting of Torain.

I will try to right up an article on our passing offense tomorrow and finish up my entire section on the offense.

Please comment, and if you got this far thanks for reading.

What the Broncos Will do this Offseason and Why:

calvinandhobbes — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 22:56:04 -0000

What the Broncos will do this offseason and why:

Now we as Broncos fans all have our own opinions on what the Broncos should do, but often what they actually do is something completely different. So, I will take a moment to take off my orange shaded glasses and put on someone else's, the Shannahan Brain Trust.

I intend to use two main sources Ted Sundquist's Draft Blog (http://blog.denverbroncos.com/tedsundquist/2007/11/20/i-feel-a-draft-in-here/)and Shannahan's postseason press conference (Andrew Mason's transcript, on his blog http://blog.denverbroncos.com/mason/2008/01/10/live-from-shanahans-season-wrap/#more-682). I will also be using scouting reports of various college players and will site my information accordingly. Lastly, I will have to guess a little, but I will try to keep this to a minimum.

First, I will start with what kind of players I think the Broncos will go after, and then give the specific players I believe fit these profiles. I will only look at positions that I feel the Broncos organization believes are needs in the second section.

Offense:

While I believe the Broncos have some serious needs on offense (just see my previous two diaries) I don't believe the Broncos believe the same.

Shannahan in his postseason press conference said:

"I saw us getting better. Even though we didn't play as well as we'd like to play consistently, I think there's a big future there."

"You always have the personnel to win 10-plus games. We've got to get a little healthier. We've never lost 62 (games) for guys on offense."

To me this says that Shannahan thinks the Broncos have all the necessary pieces. Shannahan seems to believe that the Bronco's offense just needs some more experience, and fewer injuries.

QB:

I believe almost all Bronco fans believe Cutler is the real deal, and so does Shannahan, here are his thoughts:

"Strong arm, a guy that'll compete ... Now he's got to go out there and do it, just like John (Elway) did ... John had to prove himself in a playoff situation and finally got to that Super Bowl ... His first four years all you heard was that he never played in a bowl game and that he never won a playoff game ... But he believed in himself and kept on working his rear end off and finally got to the promised land ... I was in the same situation with Steve Young, following Joe Montana."

However, like most all our other offensive positions he believes we need more experience:
"There's a million things (Cutler) can work on -- ball position, consistency with his short throws, blitzes and how to react to them, footwork, pressure, stepping up, scrambling. Different things that all quarterbacks go through."

RB:

On Travis Henry, I believe Shannahan will keep him with a restructured contract. This is mainly based off two quotes, first "Any time there's a setback with a guy you have to look back at what he did in the first four or five games...You kind of get out of football shape ... He tried, but he could never get back in shape." This quote seems to imply Henry got unlucky and that without injuries Shannahan felt he could have been a strong back. In Henry's first five games he average 6.0, 4.9, 3.2, 5.0, and 4.1 yards a carry with 139, 128, 35, 131, and 61 yards a game. I believe it is safe to assume if he had stayed uninjured he would have had quite the season, or at least that is what the first five games show, and Shannahan therefore says he will look at.

The second quote is Henry's, "I want to make it right to the Broncos, the fans and myself," Henry said. "I want to be a Bronco and make it all right. I don't want to be anywhere else. I owe those people something for all that happened last year. I want to clear my name there. I'm so hungry to do right there." This says that Henry really realizes how much he owes to Shannahan, Henry is most likely going to redo his contract. These quotes would seem to suggest we will not go after a high profile RB (through the draft or FA).

Something to consider though is the average life span of the Broncos running backs in Shannahan's span as head coach. This year was suppose to be Henry, last year was suppose to be Tatum Bell, the year before Mike Anderson, and so on. This suggests we will get a low profile RB like we do every year, however I believe we will keep all of our current RBs as well, regardless to how illogical this may seem.

However, when talking about Young, Shannahan seems to feel the way most Bronco fans do, he can't handle ""20-25 carries" 16 games in a row, but that for 15-20 carries he can get five yards a carry , Shannahan expressed a similar sentiment with Andre Hall. Both dealt with injuries this year." This quote says that Shannahan would like to keep Hall and Young to back up another back (most likely Henry as suggested above).

TE/FB:

These two are related to me for this team, because I believe as we see more two TE sets, as we did at the end of the season we will see less of the FB. Graham was one of, if not the best, blockers on our team towards the end of the season. Graham also is, I believe, the highest paid TE in the league, therefore he will get playing time. As for Sheffler, Cutler is taking him and Marshall to go train before the season suggesting their already good chemistry will only get better. Our star QB would also not take a TE on a training trip if he didn't think he would get his touches. Therefore, I believe we will run multiple two TE sets as we did towards the end of the year and neither position is much of a need.

When one looks at the catches our TEs pulled in during the season there is no discernable pattern with Graham. The most catches he ever had this season in a single game was four and he only average 1.71 catches and 17.6 yards a game. However, Sheffler's receptions went up steadily over the course of the season. In his 12 games he averaged 4.1 catches a game (this includes both weeks 13 and 16 when he only had 3 total catches) , more than double Graham, and he averaged 45.8 yards a game. These statistics support the idea our FB will get less and less playing time between the 20s.

WR:

The first question anyone has about the Broncos WR situation is Javon Walker. I think the Broncos will do everything in their power to keep him, and if not they will trade him. In his postseason press conference Shannahan had nothing but good things to say about Walker, he said "Guys like him, I will talk to before March 1." Ted Sundquist said that in reference to Lelie that "Lelie's absence takes nothing away from our current WR unit with the likes of Javon Walker, Brandon Marshall and Brandon Stokley." In reference to whether we would cut or trade him, Mr. Sundquist when referring to former Bronco George Foster and his situation said, "The emergence of Erik Pears as a step-in for the injured Matt Lepsis in `06 gave us an option to deal George for another player of need (DC Dre' Bly). With the money invested in Lepsis and the quality of play we received from Pears (along with his emerging upside), it became apparent that we wouldn't resign Foster for what it would require in `08. Why not get something of value rather than eventually let him go through free agency?". This seems to suggest they really don't want to cut Walker, but with the emergence of young players like Marshall and Sheffler they might trade him.

Marshall really emerged as a top WR in the N.F.L. last season, and his production didn't seem to suffer at all when Walker was on the field. Some people are suggesting that we need another dominant WR to keep top CBs off Marshall, but I disagree and I believe Shannahan does as well. The Broncos in no point in Shannahan's career have had two "dominant" WRs. Marshall did well against #1 CBs almost all season. Instead if the Broncos pursue a WR he will be more in the mold of Lelie or Nash ( I know neither really worked out, but you get the idea).

OL:

While I think this is a pressing need I feel the front office disagrees. Right after his retirement Matt Lepsis said, ""I was really impressed by Ryan Harris and the veterans are coming back, and Chris Myers and Chris Kuper did a good job. They'll be fine." I believe Shannhan places the poor play of the OL this past season almost solely on the decline in play of Lepsis and the injuries of Nalen and Hamilton. This is 3/5 of our OL so this is a reasonable assumption.

I will add defense and my predictions later this week. Feel free to make any comments or suggestions.

In defense of my previous diary.

calvinandhobbes — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 01:03:25 -0000

First my thoughts to HoosierTeacher's in defense of post on offense being a bigger need than defense .

"DT - Rookie Thomas looked good when he finaly got a shot. But he isn't domineering, and he needs help either way. I think he is a future great at the position, but we need two DTs now. Why? Because we need at least three to four for rotation (include Thomas and McKinley). We can debate on if Thomas is ready to start or not. We need a bare minimum of 1, but really 2 DTs. McKinley (like Thomas) is, in my opinion, solid as a rotational DT, but not a strong starter."

I agree we need one more good DT, but I don't think he needs to be great. What I think we disagree on his how high of a draft pick, or how high of a salary this player will warrant. I don't think anyone would disagree we need one even two DTs. I just disagree on where we get them. I think we simply need a big DT next to Thomas, what Sam Adams should have been when in shape. I think Frank Okam from Texas in the second would work well. However, if Patt Simms drops I would draft him over Okam, or if we trade back (as I want to) I would like to take him late in the first.

"OLB - Wherever you think Williams should play (OLB or MLB), we need two more guys. Winborn got signed to an extension, so he might be considered a project (perhaps for special teams). But Gold and Webster did not perform well this year (and I say this as a big Gold fan). Like DT, we need a bare minimum of one, but really need two."

I think Williams should stay in the middle. Honestly, I would like Wilson on the strong-side, but I doubt that will happen. I really think we only need one starting caliber OLB (Boss Bailey, or a 4th round pick). I think it the poor performance of our OLBs can be improved through coaching and a better DL. They were struggling with gap control and tackling, both coachable mistakes, the question is do we have the staff to fix that. However, above all they were having to shed blocks to get to the ball carrier most every down, something that really shouldn't happen to all the LBs every play. The OL is not supposed to easily get to the secondary. So, I really think our LBs poor play had more to do with coachable mistakes and a poor DL, therefore they are not as big of a need as most say.

"SAF - Lynch may return, but his two neck injuries and the fact that he is slowing with age at the very least makes his value debatable. He is good in zone near the line of scrimmage, but he can't cover a fast TE as well as he should, and his speed won't improve if he is needed in deep zone. Hamza looks like a good fit for SAF. Whether Lynch leaves, or stays to play a short yardage role, we really need a coverage safety."

I couldn't agree more. However, from what I understand we will be running more of a 4-4 4-6 defense next year, similar to what we ran the second half of the year. This would mean, assuming we don't bring in a safety, that Hamza Abdullah is deep, and Lynch is in the box. This would allow him to do what he does best, tackle and read plays, and his speed would be less of a factor. We cold simply run a 4-6 defense with nickel personnel, on passing downs, allowing us to put Foxworth at WLB, manning him up with the TE. I don't believe Safety is as big a need as OT, WR (if Javon leaves), DT, just to name a few.

"So our biggest disagreement is on the OL. First let me say that I agree with Styg's comment above that Pears is the real deal. I think you sold Pears a little short, but I won't eleborate beyond Styg's comment.
Harris has been getting positive press from the coaching staff. The word is that he has learned the scheme quicker than normal, and the staff is eager to get him on the field (this was well before Lepsis announced retirement).
I thought Nalen would retire, but it looks like he wants to stay another year. He was on IR this year, and is an injury risk in my opinion. But he still plays very well. For Hamilton, read my comments about Nalen. I advocate two OL pick-ups for depth in case of injury or to develop for '09 and beyond. I think Hamilton is a serious injury risk; Nalen very much less so."

This is where the disagreement really comes form, I pretty much agree with HoosierTeacher on numbers of players needed for each side of the ball, it is simply priority that we disagree on. I think in similar way to how we leapt at the opportunity to draft a franchise QB in Cutler, we should jump at the opportunity to get a franchise Tackle.

"5. I also agree with some of the commentors above, that we are already getting gashed by the run. Our offense can't win games if opposing teams can control the clock. We must fix our run defense."

I believe our abysmal run defense is a product of a few major components not related to personnel.
First, it is chicken vs. egg whether the offense not being on the field causes the run defense to suffer, or whether the run defense keeps the offense of the field. I really think both deserve some attention. The idea that the offense getting off the field to quickly hurts the run defense does not apply to the Broncos of last season due to the large amounts of yards the offense compiled. As far as staying on the field our offense was good if not great (just look at Cutler's third down percentage). However, our offense could not score. This meant the opposing offense would run the ball a lot, therefore leading to more broken tackles and longer runs as the game went on. Opposing offense could run a lot because they almost never were playing from behind, and they need to rest their defense. Now for the run defense keeping the offense off the field. The Broncos were actually in the very strange position where teams could run so easily that they really weren't burning to much clock. Teams would just quickly march down the field when they could run.

"6. Also don't forget that the depth we build on defense has a direct correllation to our special teams personnel. That's an area we need help in too."

I agree, however players that are taken to start on the defense often don't start on defense. Therefore I don't see that as an argument for defense being a bigger need.
As for the great teams being great on both sides of the ball, well I disagree. I believe they are great on one side of the ball and that makes the other side look much better than it really is. They do have talent on defense don't get me wrong, they just have far more on offense. I agree Sanders is a great player, just Manning is better. I believe we have almost have the personnel to have a good defense, we just need the offense to step up.

I intend to write another diary that is more my own thoughts later tonight.

Why offense is a bigger need than defense.

calvinandhobbes — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 01:36:31 -0000

Why offense is a bigger priority than defense
I firmly believe that offense is a far bigger need for this team than defense. This is for a few major reasons, the N.F.L. is an offense oriented league; the Broncos have a better core of players on defense than offense, and this team's strength lies in offense (I am not contradicting myself, I mean in coaching and talent evaluation, which are more long lasting than personnel).

It is pretty the well known that the N.F.L. is an offense oriented league. Just look at how ridiculous the pass interference penalties and roughing the QB penalties are. To truly show that these penalties have such a large effect on the makeup of teams simply watch the playoffs. The four teams left the Giants, Patriots, Packers, and Chargers are all known (at this point in time) as offensive teams. Those teams with good defenses that even made it to the playoffs lost early. The Jaguars, Titans, and Steelers, all lost because of the inability of their offenses to put up enough points, and the fact that their defenses could not make the critical stop. Every time the Patriots have looked like they are going to lose it is their offense that pulled them through, with a game winning drive. It is quite obvious the dominant teams in the league are those with great offenses and decent defenses.

Those teams with great offense also make their defenses look better than they are. A perfect example would be the Patriots, every team feels like they have to pass the ball to beat the Patriots, and this puts the Patriots defense in a perfect position, they don't have to worry about fast HBs and TEs exposing their defense's slow LBs and safeties. They know what teams are going to do and can dictate the game with complicated blitzes. Further, teams like the Colts who have a reliably good offense have an easier time at putting together a good defense. The Colts put together one of the NFLs best defenses with only two star players (I don't consider Mathis a star). This is because they knew they only had to look for role players. Whereas defenses like the Ravens and Panthers that have no offense to lean on have to really on many multi-talented defenders.

As for having a better core of players on defense, I always read/hear people say that the Broncos have a great young "nucleus" of players on offense with Sheffler, Marshall, and Cutler. I would have to disagree, I don't think those players are bad by any means, but they all play skill positions. The nucleus of any offense or defense is made up in the trenches not by skill players. Manning's receivers may have been injured, but it was the injury of Tony Ugough that truly hurt that team.

Even if the skill players are considered to make a nucleus, I would rather have Williams, Lynch, Bly, and Bailey than Marshall, Sheffler, Graham, and Cutler. Bailey is on average (he had an off year due to a change in scheme), the best CB in the league, Bly is a top 15 corner, Lynch is a top 10 safety, and Williams was second in the AFC in tackles. Marshall is a top 10 Wide Receiver, Sheffler is a top 15 TE, Graham is a great blocking TE, but until the Broncos improve our OL he is nothing more than an OT, and Cutler is a top 15 QB. The Broncos simply have more talent on defense.

I believe our OL is far worse than our DL. I believe our DL simply needs one more DT, and some time.

At DL the Broncos currently have three-four good and improving defensive ends. It often takes two-three years for defensive ends to develop, so there is no need to get more defensive ends as the Broncos have two rookie defensive ends, and a great second year pass rusher specialist.

As for the tackle position, I believe given the time Thomas could develop into a good DT, however he most definitely needs time. At the second DT spot the Broncos need another DT, it is quite possible after cuts the Broncos won't have more than two DTs on the roster (McKinely, Thomas, Mallard is a DE technically right?). Hothe Broncosver, I don't think the Broncos need a great DT to line up opposite of Thomas. Instead the Broncos just need a serviceable DT. If one looks around the league they realize that very few teams have more than one good DT, in fact only Jacksonville and Minnesota come to mind. Further, those teams with the "big, space eating, run-stopping" DT that everyone wants can be found on the following teams; Detroit, Carolina, Baltimore, and Tennessee (I excluded Jacksonville and Minnesota because I already addressed them). Something should jump out at you, none of these teams made the playoffs except Tennessee, and Tennessee did not look like a playoff team. I believe the Broncos would be fine with a second maybe third round Defensive Tackle, and some depth. This can be achieved through FA and a draft pick or two.
Now the Broncos look at our OL, I firmly believe that our OL is in far more trouble than our DL. Unlike the DL there is no position that I can say the Broncos don't need help with, maybe the Broncos have right guard settled, maybe. Also, unlike the DL those teams that are truly dominant have good OLs, Brady and Peyton would never have the years they have without their OL. Now, let's look at the OL player by player.

Nalen is our next to ancient center. He says he will be coming back after his messy bicep injury (his muscle was literally disconnected from the bone). Hothe Broncosver, the Broncos have to wonder how much he has left. I mean his play has been declining as it is, I think he will have a year like Lepsis had this year. His only value will be as a veteran presence. In fact I am extremely surprised he is returning.

Hamilton is a big question mark for me. Truly I thought he was done with football period. He will probably be the best player on our OL, or he could be inactive and call it quits. However, Shanahan loves him and if Hamilton can play he will start. If he does come back and plays for the Broncos he will fix the center spot. Yet, he is simply too big of a question mark to count on.

Myers played decently at center, however, if one looks at styg50's post "NPLB End of Season Report: Holding the Lines" it is quite clear the Broncos need some work on the interior of the OL. As most all 3rd and 4th short runs are from between the Tackles, a place the Broncos particularly struggled. This really can be placed on Myers shoulders in my mind.

I think the Broncos will be fine at center next year, not great, but fine. The Broncos should draft a late round center and work on developing him over the next two-three years. Even if Hamilton comes back to play center he is pretty old, and as I said before that injury really worries me.

Kuper and Holland, played decently, but the Broncos really struggled in the interior running game. These two players seem pretty similar to me, they are both bigger than the typical Denver OL and a little slower. I think Kuper has more potential than Holland, and Holland is just a temporary replacement. I think that with time Kuper will develop into a good guard, and that Holland will be fine. In a ZBS scheme the guards really need to play together a lot, something our OL has missed for years, I think other than depth guard is fine.

I really hope the Broncos draft maybe a guard, or sign a decent guard from FA. As long as the Broncos don't sign Faneca I will be fine.

Tackle is where I am really worried. We did well running off tackle this year, but in my opinion that was due more to the Bronco's guards and Graham than the Bronco's Tackles.

I am not to sure about Ryan Harris, but since the team invested a third round draft pick in him I believe he deserves a chance to start. I think Pears is nothing more than a backup. My preferred solution for Tackle would be to draft a LT in the first (Oher would be my favorite, his potential is amazing, and he could spend almost his entire career with Cutler) and put Harris at RT. The only problem with this is that Shananhan never starts first year players and I think his ego is too big to draft a OL in the first (especially with the Foster incident). So, I think it is more likely we putt Harris at LT, draft a Guard and maybe a Center, and pick up Gordan Gross in the FA market.

Now after, coming close to the end of this I have had a few realizations. We really need OL help, probably need another WR, and need a HB. However, I believe Shanahan will draft a DT in the first and address our other needs with later round draft picks.

I don't believe we will draft a RB because of Shanahan's comments about "thinking of a players first few games" when evaluating a player with an injury. This is clearly talking about Henry, and to me is a sign we look to keep Henry. I think a healthy Henry, Selvin Young, and Andre Hall is fine. I just don't think it will happen.

As for WR, I really hope we keep Javon, but if we don't we need to draft a WR who can spread the defense, and has good hands. I am all in favor of the WR from Vanderbilt.

Well, that is it for now.

This is my first "diary", so let me know what you think.