Arizona State football is still in good shape, but expect another crazy-volatile 2016

Check out the advanced-stats glossary here. Below, a unique review of last year's team, a unit-by-unit breakdown of this year's roster, the full 2016 schedule with win projections for each game, and more.

1. I was, uh, wrong

The point of 2014 was to survive a reset. ASU returned eight total starters, played at a top-30 level, and won 10 games.

And now the experience level doubles. ASU returns 16 starters, including most of its skill position players, an all-conference offensive lineman, four of the top five on the line, the top six linebackers, all but one defensive back, and the fruits of another exciting recruiting class.

Barring injuries, unexpected setbacks, or a drastic turn in turnovers luck, this is going to be a top-20 team in 2015. Lucky or not, Graham and his Sun Devils proved a ton last year.

-- 2015 Arizona State guide

I like to think I have a good read on a program's trajectory. That only helps so much when it comes to figuring out a season's results -- the ball is still pointy, and injuries have a massive impact -- but from a 20,000-foot view, trends become noticeable.

Arizona State's 2015 caught me completely off guard. The Sun Devils were lucky to finish with 10 wins the previous year; they benefited from extreme turnovers luck and stole the USC game with the easiest Hail Mary completion of all time. Still, they maintained quality while turning over the two-deep, then returned a ton of starters. That's typically a sign of experience and depth and a steady harbinger of success.

Instead, ASU played like a thin, inexperienced team last fall. The offense was dramatically up-and-down, starting slowly before finding its form, sometimes too late. The defense played one of the smallest rotations in the country, which was a bit of a problem, considering the offense was moving at a fast pace and stalling out a lot. Predictably, it faded horribly in the second half of games, just as the offense was getting things figured out.

The result was massive instability, the type you're not supposed to see from a seasoned team. ASU won five games by 14 or more points and lost four by 14 or more. The Sun Devils looked the part of a top-30 team for about two-thirds of the year but laid five significant eggs.

And now that strangely thin roster has been thinned out further.

The only quarterback to throw a pass is gone, as are two players who combined for 208 targets, four offensive linemen who combined for 106 career starts, and four of the top five defensive backs. In all of the areas in which returning production seems particularly important, ASU doesn't have much.

So which one was I wrong about in last year's preview: ASU's trajectory or ASU's 2015? Did a weird 6-7 season reveal a program on iffy footing, or was last year a case of a singular cause?

Graham has recruited at a top-30 level and produced 10-game winners in two of his first three years. He still has a roster with speed and potential star power. But his 2016 Sun Devils have a spectacular amount to prove.

2015 Schedule & Results

Record: 6-7 | Adj. Record: 8-5 | Final F/+ Rk: 50 | Final S&P+ Rk: 57
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Win Expectancy	vs. S&P+	Performance vs. Vegas
5-Sep	vs. Texas A&M	34	17-38	L	29%	4%	-21.8	-17.5
12-Sep	Cal Poly	N/A	35-21	W	73%	95%	-25.1
18-Sep	New Mexico	99	34-10	W	94%	100%	-2.5	-4.0
26-Sep	USC	17	14-42	L	14%	0%	-24.6	-22.5
3-Oct	at UCLA	28	38-23	W	69%	48%	+26.5	+28.5
10-Oct	Colorado	94	48-23	W	93%	100%	+1.1	+10.0
17-Oct	at Utah	22	18-34	L	15%	0%	-8.1	-9.5
29-Oct	Oregon	23	55-61	L	67%	52%	-7.5	-8.5
7-Nov	at Washington State	54	24-38	L	45%	19%	-11.1	-11.5
14-Nov	Washington	13	27-17	W	78%	71%	+18.6	+7.5
21-Nov	Arizona	77	52-37	W	81%	89%	+9.0	+15.0
28-Nov	at California	29	46-48	L	41%	12%	+4.4	+2.0
2-Jan	vs. West Virginia	31	42-43	L	66%	42%	+9.6	0.0

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	34.8	31	29.7	77
Points Per Game	34.6	32	33.5	99

2. 5 duds

ASU's poor performances weren't necessarily correlated to whether the Sun Devils were playing good or bad teams. Sure, they got blown out by USC (F/+ No. 17) and, to a lesser degree, Utah (No. 22). But they also lost by 14 to No. 54 Washington State while handling No. 13 Washington. They thumped No. 28 UCLA in Los Angeles while fading late against No. 34 Texas A&M. They beat UCLA by more than they beat Cal Poly.

When ASU didn't have it, ASU really didn't have it.

• 5 duds (Texas A&M, USC, Utah, Wazzu, Cal):
  Record: 0-5 | Average percentile performance: 29% (~top 90) | Yards per play: Opp 6.8, ASU 5.0 (-1.8)
• 8 other games:
  Record: 6-2 | Average percentile performance: 78% (~top 30) | Yards per play: ASU 6.3, Opp 5.9 (+0.4)

S&P+ struggled all season to get a read on what this team was capable of. The Sun Devils were projected awfully high and drastically underachieved in September, but they rallied and overachieved their projections most of the rest of the season.

• ASU vs. S&P+ projection (first 4 games): -18.5 PPG (record: 2-2)
• ASU vs. S&P+ projection (next 5 games): +0.2 PPG (record: 2-3)
• ASU vs. S&P+ projection (last 4 games): +10.4 PPG (record: 2-2)

The late-season improvement could be seen as a good thing if the core of the roster was returning the next year. But I'm not sure that's the case. ASU does return two exciting (if inefficient) junior running backs in Demario Richard and Kalen Ballage, the return of receiver Cameron Smith from injury will offset the losses a bit, Salamo Fiso is a missile disguised as a strongside linebacker, and sophomore safety Kareem Orr is a ballhawk. But this feels like a rebuild of sorts.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.34	30	IsoPPP+	105.2	49
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	40.4%	80	Succ. Rt. +	98.4	79
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	28.2	37	Def. FP+	27.6	27
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.5	62	Redzone S&P+	106.6	48
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	26.8		ACTUAL	19	-7.8

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	24	62	79	49
RUSHING	56	77	98	60
PASSING	20	54	55	56
Standard Downs		57	89	47
Passing Downs		67	64	63

Q1 Rk	102	1st Down Rk	67
Q2 Rk	63	2nd Down Rk	87
Q3 Rk	70	3rd Down Rk	28
Q4 Rk	26

3. A Chip Lindsey offense

Graham has a fantastic résumé when it comes to hiring offensive coaches. He hired current Auburn head coach Gus Malzahn as his offensive co-coordinator at Tulsa. He brought in current SMU head coach Chad Morris as a Malzahn replacement. And in his first four years at ASU, his offense was run by Mike Norvell, now the Memphis head coach after three straight years of ranking 31st or better in Off. S&P+.

Graham's selection of Chip Lindsey to replace Norvell, then, feels as much like a crowning as a hire.

Lindsey checks all the boxes Graham seems to seek. He's got a significant high school coaching background, which Graham values. ("I believe in the teacher model. I started off coaching seventh grade football, then moved up to high school, then to small college, then mid-major, then to the majors.") And he utilized a fast-paced spread offense as Southern Miss coordinator the last two years. The Golden Eagles ranked 41st in Off. S&P+ in 2015 after three consecutive years of ineptitude.

Southern Miss threw a little bit more frequently than ASU last year and didn't move with quite the same tempo, but the intent was similar. And while efficiency was just decent, the Golden Eagles were the only team in the country to produce more than 100 gains of 20-plus yards.

Lindsey seems to be exactly what Graham looks for. And when he succeeds and moves on, Graham will probably find another one who fits the bill.

Quarterback

Note: players in bold below are 2016 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.

Player

Ht, Wt

2016 Year

Rivals

247 Comp.

Comp

Att

Yards

TD

INT

Comp Rate

Sacks

Sack Rate

Yards/ Att.

Mike Bercovici

318

531

3854

30

9

59.9%

37

6.5%

6.4

Manny Wilkins

6'3, 190

So.

3 stars (5.7)

0.8938

Brady White

6'2, 200

RSFr.

4 stars (6.0)

0.9660

Bryce Perkins

6'3, 215

RSFr.

3 stars (5.7)

0.8647

Dillon Sterling-Cole

6'3, 200

Fr.

3 stars (5.7)

0.8889

4. The value of random reps

Of course, any coordinator is going to need a quarterback. Lindsey will also serve as QBs coach. His charges possess upside and almost no experience.

Manny Wilkins was Mike Bercovici's backup last season and threw fewer passes than punter Matt Haack. He did rush seven times, and he obviously did all the studying and prep work that comes with being the backup. But we didn't see a single pass in a real game.

Does that actually matter? Most of what you learn is in practice; does it make a difference that Wilkins has thrown zero passes as opposed to, say, 17 passes in garbage time? Probably not.

Regardless, Wilkins did not secure the starting job this spring, and either of two redshirt freshmen could surpass him, particularly 2015 blue-chipper Brady White.

Wilkins is a pretty mobile QB, so the winner could be determined by Lindsey's philosophy. He was pass-heavy at Southern Miss, but he might not be married to that. An offense built around read option might be best served by Wilkins. But White is far from immobile, and he has the best arm on the roster.

Intent could also be dictated by the offensive line. Four starters, including Christian Westerman, are gone, and the two-deep will be made up of only a couple of seniors and mostly sophomores, redshirt freshmen, and two JUCOs. There are some former star recruits, but chemistry up front could be an obvious issue.

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Demario Richard	TB	5'10, 220	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8838	211	1132	7	5.4	5.2	39.3%	3	2
Kalen Ballage	TB	6'3, 230	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8904	125	653	4	5.2	6.1	36.8%	3	1
Mike Bercovici	QB					72	302	6	4.2	3.4	44.4%	11	3
D.J. Foster	WR					55	280	1	5.1	6.2	32.7%	0	0
De'Chavon Hayes	RB	5'11, 190	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8610	16	57	0	3.6	2.4	37.5%	1	1
Manny Wilkins	QB	6'3, 190	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8938	7	55	0	7.9	8.7	42.9%	0	0
Jacom Brimhall	RB	5'8, 185	Jr.	NR	NR
Jason Lewis	TB	6'3, 235	RSFr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9189
Nick Ralston	TB	6'1, 240	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8261
Tre Turner	TB	5'10, 190	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8590

Receiving Corps

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Targets	Catches	Yards	Catch Rate	Target Rate	Yds/ Target	%SD	Success Rate	IsoPPP
D.J. Foster	WR-Z					109	59	584	54.1%	21.1%	5.4	58.7%	41.3%	1.21
Devin Lucien	WR-X					99	66	1074	66.7%	19.2%	10.8	57.6%	54.5%	1.88
Tim White	SLOT	5'11, 185	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7000	82	57	633	69.5%	15.9%	7.7	68.3%	47.6%	1.54
Cameron Smith (2014)	WR-Z	5'11, 193	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8189	63	41	596	65.1%	14.1%	9.5	66.7%	N/A	N/A
Kody Kohl	TE	6'3, 235	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7969	51	32	368	62.7%	9.9%	7.2	60.8%	58.8%	1.08
Demario Richard	RB	5'10, 220	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8838	48	31	303	64.6%	9.3%	6.3	47.9%	31.2%	1.86
Gary Chambers	SLOT					38	26	486	68.4%	7.4%	12.8	39.5%	50.0%	2.51
Ellis Jefferson	WR-X	6'5, 212	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8488	25	12	160	48.0%	4.8%	6.4	64.0%	44.0%	1.31
Kalen Ballage	RB	6'3, 230	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8904	20	12	60	60.0%	3.9%	3.0	40.0%	25.0%	1.13
De'Chavon Hayes	RB	5'11, 190	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8610	16	11	44	68.8%	3.1%	2.8	50.0%	12.5%	1.99
Frederick Gammage	WR-Z	5'11, 185	Sr.	NR	NR	10	4	44	40.0%	1.9%	4.4	80.0%	40.0%	0.99
Jalen Harvey	WR	6'1, 200	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8971	8	4	73	50.0%	1.6%	9.1	75.0%	37.5%	2.39
Raymond Epps	TE	6'5, 235	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8347	8	4	52	50.0%	1.6%	6.5	75.0%	50.0%	1.37
Eric Lauderdale	SLOT	6'2, 194	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8969
Ryan Jenkins	WR	5'9, 197	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8833
Grant Martinez	TE	6'5, 235	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8401
Terrell Chatman	WR-X	6'3, 190	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8632
Tommy Hudson	TE	6'5, 255	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8569
N'Keal Harry	WR	6'4, 200	Fr.	5 stars (6.1)	0.9732
Jared Bubak	TE	6'4, 230	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8600
Kyle Williams	WR	5'10, 175	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8583
Jeremy Smith	WR	6'2, 180	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8529

5. Still enough weapons

If the ASU offense is to stumble, it will be because of inefficiency. It was an issue last year, and that was without a new QB or coordinator. Whatever Lindsey's plan of attack is, it might not be able to avoid third-and-longs and other inefficiency issues.

The big plays should still be there, though, and while you can't always count on them, they can bail you out of a lot of problems.

Richard and Ballage both topped 5 highlight yards per opportunity -- a general benchmark for solid explosiveness -- and Cameron Smith averaged nearly 15 yards per catch in 2014. And the youngsters are thrilling: blue-chip freshman N'Keal Harry, four-star sophomore Jalen Harvey, etc.

The offense could start as few as three seniors and as many as six freshmen or sophomores. Whatever it is in 2016, it will be stronger in 2017 and maybe stronger in 2018, too. But there's enough turnover here to assume that avoiding further regression for at least one year could be hard.

Offensive Line

Category	Adj. Line Yds	Std. Downs LY/carry	Pass. Downs LY/carry	Opp. Rate	Power Success Rate	Stuff Rate	Adj. Sack Rate	Std. Downs Sack Rt.	Pass. Downs Sack Rt.
Team	98.7	3.02	2.99	38.9%	65.9%	18.6%	98.2	6.2%	7.2%
Rank	80	44	87	66	69	51	66	88	61

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	2015 Starts	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Christian Westerman	LG					13	25	2015 2nd All-Pac-12
Vi Teofilo	RG					13	43
Nick Kelly	C					13	26
William McGehee	RT					12	12
Evan Goodman	LT	6'4, 310	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9243	11	11
Sam Jones	LG	6'5, 297	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8722	3	3
Stephon McCray	RG	6'3, 314	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8428	0	1
Connor Humphreys	RG	6'3, 290	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8937	0	0
Quinn Bailey	RT	6'5, 311	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8457	0	0
Tyler McClure	C	6'1, 271	Jr.	NR	NR	0	0
Zach Robertson	LT	6'6, 330	RSFr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9504
Mason Walter	RT	6'5, 294	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8650
Cade Cote	C	6'4, 281	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8553
Steven Miller	LG	6'5, 310	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8498
Dillon Faamatau	RG	6'4, 283	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8407
Tyson Rising	OL	6'5, 275	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8567
A.J. McCollum	OL	6'2, 280	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8479
Cohl Cabral	OL	6'5, 285	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8801
Marshal Nathe	OL	6'3, 290	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8504

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.49	125	IsoPPP+	95.7	82
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	38.6%	37	Succ. Rt. +	117.9	13
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	31.1	41	Off. FP+	31.5	31
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	5.0	110	Redzone S&P+	103.7	50
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	18.9		ACTUAL	21.0	+2.1

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	113	49	13	82
RUSHING	20	27	9	36
PASSING	128	65	19	92
Standard Downs		34	9	59
Passing Downs		89	48	97

Q1 Rk	24	1st Down Rk	52
Q2 Rk	22	2nd Down Rk	40
Q3 Rk	54	3rd Down Rk	112
Q4 Rk	125

6. No depth, no risk-reward balance

Arizona State basically played about four linemen and six defensive backs and faded drastically in the second half: the Sun Devils ranks 24th in Q1 S&P+, 22nd in Q2, 54th in Q3, and 125th in Q4. With the tempo ASU prefers, depth is a must, and ASU simply had none. Almost nobody outside of the returning starters made an impact. That was, to me, unexpected.

You could still see the bones of the Graham-Keith Patterson defense. ASU attacked the run on standard downs and the passer on passing downs and ranked eighth in Adj. Line Yards, 11th in stuff rate, and 13th in passing downs sack rate. But the dam never cracked; it only broke. The Sun Devils allowed 67 passes of 20-plus yards, at least four more than everyone else in FBS, and 24 of those went for 40-plus (also by far the worst).

There's a risk-reward balance to aggression. You make more big stops and give up more big gains. As evidenced by the fact that the Sun Devils gave up at least 34 points in eight of 13 games, that balance was skewed a bit. And in weighing how to attempt to move the ball against ASU, opponents clearly saw the pass was a more favorable option; they threw 10.4 percent more than the national average on standard downs and 5.3 percent more on passing downs.

An anonymous coach told ESPN that opponents had "figured out" Graham's defense. And maybe that's true. But if you have the weapons, it doesn't necessarily matter whether opponents know what you want to do; and besides that, it's been obvious what Graham wants to do for a while. What matters is if he has the horses to do it. He did for a while in 2015, but those weapons faded.

Defensive Line

Category	Adj. Line Yds	Std. Downs LY/carry	Pass. Downs LY/carry	Opp. Rate	Power Success Rate	Stuff Rate	Adj. Sack Rate	Std. Downs Sack Rt.	Pass. Downs Sack Rt.
Team	118.1	2.40	3.24	35.8%	65.8%	24.8%	119.9	4.3%	11.4%
Rank	8	10	67	36	64	11	34	93	13

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Tashon Smallwood	TIGER	6'1, 280	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8904	13	34.0	5.0%	8.5	2.0	0	1	0	0
JoJo Wicker	DE	6'3, 275	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9570	13	17.0	2.5%	7.5	4.0	0	0	2	0
Demetrius Cherry	NT					13	13.0	1.9%	3.5	0.5	0	2	0	1
Viliami Ami Latu	NT	6'2, 290	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8711	12	11.5	1.7%	7.0	3.5	0	0	1	0
Tramel Topps	NT	6'2, 280	Sr.	NR	NR
Corey Smith	NT	6'6, 290	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8408
Renell Wren	TIGER	6'5, 290	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8613
Emanuel Dayries	NT	6'3, 295	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7667
Dougladson Subtyl	DE	6'4, 245	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8975
Christian Hill	DE	6'6, 265	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8834

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Salamo Fiso	SAM	6'0, 230	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8849	13	88.5	13.0%	20.0	4.5	1	2	0	0
Christian Sam	WILL	6'1, 240	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8659	13	82.5	12.1%	6.5	3.0	1	2	2	0
Antonio Longino	DEVIL					13	57.0	8.3%	22.5	11.0	0	2	2	0
Viliami Moeakiola	SPUR	6'1, 215	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8711	12	42.0	6.1%	6.5	2.0	1	5	0	1
DJ Calhoun	WILL	6'0, 225	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9271	13	22.0	3.2%	7.5	6.5	0	1	0	0
Ismael Murphy-Richardson	DEVIL					12	13.5	2.0%	2.5	2.5	0	1	0	0
James Johnson	SPUR	6'1, 200	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8254	10	9.5	1.4%	0.5	0.5	0	1	1	0
Marcus Ball	SPUR	6'2, 225	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8631	11	7.5	1.1%	1.0	0.0	1	0	0	0
Edmond Boateng	DEVIL	6'4, 265	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8641	10	4.5	0.7%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jay Jay Wilson	DEVIL	6'3, 250	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8901	11	3.0	0.4%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Carlos Mendoza	WILL	6'1, 231	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8469
Alani "A.J." Latu	DEVIL	6'2, 250	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8441
Chans Cox	SAM	6'3, 244	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9222
Khaylan Thomas	SAM	6'2, 220	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8979
Jalen Bates	DEVIL	6'4, 245	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8690
Malik Lawal	SPUR	6'1, 220	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8613
George Lea	DEVIL	6'2, 276	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8544
Koron Crump	DEVIL	6'4, 220	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8857

7. Got a line?

ASU does seem deep at linebacker. Fiso was one of the best run-attacking linebackers in the country, making 15.5 non-sack tackles for loss; he made plays against the pass, too. He is a keeper. And between Christian Sam, Viliami Moeakiola, and DJ Calhoun, ASU seems just about set. If converted end Edmond Boateng can click at the devilbacker position, of if a four-star youngster like Jay Jay Wilson or Chans Cox clicks (or if JUCO transfer Koron Crump is an immediate hit), ASU is set. The Sun Devils have play-makers here.

And in theory, we know that ASU's starting line could be pretty big. The top three returnees -- Tashon Smallwood, JoJo Wicker (one of the first 2015 newcomers to have a strong year), and Viliami Latu -- combined for 23 tackles for loss and 9.5 sacks in 2015.

But heaven help ASU if anyone gets hurt up front. Outside of the top three, all other returning ASU linemen combined for zero tackles. Sophomore Renell Wren was a late-bloomer recruit in the 2014 class and could still bloom, but he's proven nothing so far. And let's just say there's probably a reason why Graham signed two JUCO ends (good ones, no less): it might have been hard to fill the two-deep without them.

If a couple more younger players click, then maybe there's nothing to worry about here. After all, there were more problems in the back of this defense than the front. But the front was still overworked, and the rotation on the line was too small. Will that change?

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Lloyd Carrington	CB					13	49.5	7.2%	2	1	1	6	0	0
Jordan Simone	BS					10	82.5	12.1%	9	4	2	4	0	0
Kweishi Brown	CB					13	40.0	5.9%	1	0	2	10	0	0
Kareem Orr	BS	5'11, 195	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8578	12	34.5	5.1%	1.5	0	6	2	1	0
Solomon Means	CB					12	20.5	3.0%	1	0	0	3	0	0
Chad Adams	CB	5'10, 185	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8370	12	19.0	2.8%	1	1	0	1	0	0
Armand Perry	FS	6'1, 200	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8390	2	12.5	1.8%	0.5	0	0	0	0	0
Dasmond Tautalatasi	FS	6'0, 194	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8195	12	4.0	0.6%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Tyler Whiley	CB	6'0, 210	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9259
Coltin Gerhart	BS	6'0, 205	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8491
J'Marcus Rhodes	DB	6'1, 195	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8954
Maurice Chandler	DB	6'1, 190	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8732
Chase Lucas	DB	6'0, 170	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9106
Robbie Robinson	DB	5'10, 175	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8777

8. A lot of production gone

Turnover is less alarming when it happens to a bad unit. But ASU's unit was good and bad at the same time -- the Sun Devils were quite efficient at defending the pass, with a good pass rush and a No. 19 ranking in Passing Success Rate+. But ... well, we covered the big-play issues above. Any breakdown was a significant one.

ASU struggled to keep its base secondary on the field last year. Despite a small rotation, only two of seven primary DBs played in all 13 games. Safety Jordan Simone missed three games, and Armand Perry missed 11 and got a medical redshirt.

As with the front, ASU had what seemed like some high-upside backups but didn't hardly play them, electing to stick with the first string as much as possible. Was that a simple preference, or was it because none of the younger guys were ready? I lean latter. When Graham was forced to make changes because of injury, he seemed to prefer moving the top guys around to unfamiliar positions rather than going with a younger player who played the right position.

Whether sophomores like four-star corner Tyler Whiley or safeties Dasmond Tautalatasi or Coltin Gerhart were ready last year doesn't matter -- they'll have to be this year. So will JUCOs J'Marcus Rhodes and Maurice Chandler. Without them (or perhaps a freshman or two), there might not be enough warm bodies for a two-deep. Only four returnees made the stat sheet.

I think there's more of a concern at corner than safety. Orr should be a good one, and there are enough younger players and newcomers to assume that a couple of them break through. But last year's breakdowns, combined with Graham's unwillingness to play the younger guys, gives me significant pause.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Matt Haack	6'1, 199	Sr.	74	43.1	2	13	29	56.8%
Mike Bercovici			3	35.7	0	0	3	100.0%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Zane Gonzalez	6'1, 190	Sr.	88	64.2	66	2	75.0%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Zane Gonzalez	6'1, 190	Sr.	52-52	22-24	91.7%	4-10	40.0%

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Tim White	KR	5'11, 185	Sr.	36	27.0	1
De'Chavon Hayes	KR	5'11, 190	Sr.	10	17.2	0
De'Chavon Hayes	KR	5'11, 190	Sr.	17	8.4	0
Tim White	PR	5'11, 185	Sr.	6	5.8	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams S&P+	57
Field Goal Efficiency	78
Punt Return Success Rate	55
Kick Return Success Rate	43
Punt Success Rate	72
Kickoff Success Rate	15

9. Gonzalez has a cannon

Zane Gonzalez only made four of 10 field goals of 40-plus yards; that he was asked to attempt 10 of them, and that he managed an incredible 75 percent touchback rate on kickoffs (and underrated asset), prove that he's got all the leg strength you need. We'll see if he can harness that strength a bit more as a senior.

Gonzalez leads a solid special teams unit. Tim White is a dangerous kick return man, and given the option between being good at kickoffs and kick returns or punts and punt returns, ASU probably has it right here. There are plenty of kickoffs, in both ways, in Sun Devil games at the moment.

2016 Schedule & Projection Factors

2016 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. S&P+ Rk	Proj. Margin	Win Probability
3-Sep	Northern Arizona	NR	26.8	94%
10-Sep	Texas Tech	43	0.6	51%
16-Sep	at UTSA	116	13.4	78%
24-Sep	California	49	2.4	56%
1-Oct	at USC	8	-17.1	16%
8-Oct	UCLA	12	-9.3	30%
15-Oct	at Colorado	82	2.4	56%
22-Oct	Washington State	48	2.2	55%
29-Oct	at Oregon	18	-14.8	20%
10-Nov	Utah	39	-0.6	49%
19-Nov	at Washington	10	-16.8	17%
25-Nov	at Arizona	64	-2.5	44%
Projected wins: 5.6

Five-Year F/+ Rk	21.2% (28)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	22 / 28
2015 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin*	2 / -7.9
2015 TO Luck/Game	+3.8
Returning Production (Off. / Def.)	35% (27%, 43%)
2015 Second-order wins (difference)	6.3 (-0.3)

10. Restoring the risk-reward balance

I think Graham has proven too much to guess ASU's 2015 problems indicated deeper issues. And I think his Tulsa tenure is a nice reminder of the balance required when you're playing as aggressively as Graham wants.

In four years at Tulsa, Graham went 10-4, 11-2, 5-7, and 9-3. The three successful teams all ranked 54th or better in S&P+, and the iffy team slumped to 77th. But the Golden Hurricane rebounded. Graham's pedal-to-the-metal approach can lead to some crashes, but I like how he's been recruiting, and I think the long-term health of this program is still solid.

That said, it could easily take one more year before he rebounds. His offense will feature almost no seniors, and his defense might not feature any either. The upside will remain obvious, but the breakdowns might persist.

There are the bones of an excellent 2017 team here, but against a schedule that features four projected top-20 opponents and eight projected top-50s, there might be a few too many missteps to jump back up into the nine-win range. And with six games with a win probability between 49 and 56 percent, the luck of the bounce could make a significant impact on the overall record.