Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ESPN -- 2006 Denver Broncos Preview.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ESPN -- 2006 Denver Broncos Preview.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/previe...age=Broncos/06

    Discuss.

  • #2
    I like how the science thing just said how great the blocking is, but ESPN ignored it to simply say its gonna fall off the map


    Homers...
    Bronco fan from Packer Land.
    Lefty Writer on The Sports Show with Woody Paige and Les Shapiro
    Tweet me @JoRo_5551

    Comment


    • #3
      "expert" opinions?

      nothing new here execpt the stats on the o-linemen. but while mr joyner waxes scientific on the accomplishments of the denver o-line, he fails to mention that none of these #s meant anything last yr when the patriots and steelers stuffed our run game. i guess stats don't tell the whole truth - and neither does mr joyner.

      jeremy green is the only one, imo, who comes close to nailing it on the head for the offense when he says that denver needs a balanced air attack that can shoulder the load when teams stop our running game. ideally, that will come from whomever becomes the no 3 wr, but it's looking like sheffler may fit that role if he can carry over his impressive preseason performance.

      green also touches the broncos' sore spot on defense last yr when says that we "sometimes struggled against the pass", but he doesn't identify the source of the problem which was our over-reliance on the blitz to pressure the qb. the result was that we gave up a lot of passing yds and had to rely on many timely picks to avoid giving up a lot of points. i don't think we can count on being so lucky again this yr. the d-line will have to get pressure w/o the benefit of blitzing lbs/dbs.

      so much for "expert" opinion. the talking heads are too far removed from the teams to really know what's going on. only the guy from scouts inc who presumably has access to real scouts has a clue about the broncos.
      Go Bears!

      Comment


      • #4
        I didn't agree with everything, but I seldom agree with everything in such an analysis.

        All in all, not bad.

        Thanks, Dream.

        -----

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by cabroncofanatic
          nothing new here execpt the stats on the o-linemen. but while mr joyner waxes scientific on the accomplishments of the denver o-line, he fails to mention that none of these #s meant anything last yr when the patriots and steelers stuffed our run game. i guess stats don't tell the whole truth - and neither does mr joyner.
          We didn't produce a lot of running yards against Pittsburgh, but we did have success running against Pittsburgh. The thing is that we fell WAY behind very early and THAT took our run game out. We simply couldn't run it because we had to score quickly to get some points on the board. Nonetheless, against Pittsburgh, on any given run, we averaged 4.6 yards per carry which is pretty good.

          Now, Pittsburgh had the best run defense in the league measured by yards per carry allowed over the course of the year and New England had allowed an absolutely phenomenol average over the second half of the year once they were healthy.

          The point is that we DID hold our own against Pittsburgh when given the chance, but that New England was able to stop us up pretty well. But, they game planned to stop our running game and they are a superb run defense so you have to take their success with a grain of salt.

          Of that article, KC Joyner's was the best if you ask me.

          The magazine's I give very little clout because they chose to knock our line which is really just absolutely superb. I mean, we gained both the second most yards and the second most yards per carry last year with only Mike Vick stopping us from leading the league in each category. Combine with that the fact that only two teams (Indy and Cincy) allowed fewer sacks than us and it's easy to see that we have a pretty damn affective offensive line.

          If somebody were to criticize us, it would definitely have to be with the defensive line which it seems that they all left alone.
          My adopted fan is dogfish

          . . . . . . . . . . .
          . Post Your Artwork .
          . . . . . . . . . . .

          Comment


          • #6
            joyner's omission

            Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
            We didn't produce a lot of running yards against Pittsburgh, but we did have success running against Pittsburgh. Nonetheless, against Pittsburgh, on any given run, we averaged 4.6 yards per carry which is pretty good.
            we had 5 runs for 16yds - or 3.2 ypc - on the first drive, and 11 runs for 38 yds in the first half. that's 3.5 ypc. both figures are well below our reg season avg of 4.7 ypc.

            so, yeah, i'd say the steelers stopped our run, even before they built up a big lead!


            Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
            New England was able to stop us up pretty well. But, they game planned to stop our running game and they are a superb run defense so you have to take their success with a grain of salt.
            but that's the point, isn't it? the elite defenses - like new england and pittsburgh - are going to game plan our running attack in the playoffs. the question is, how will the broncos run game do in the post-season? they failed against new england and against pittsburgh.


            Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
            Of that article, KC Joyner's was the best if you ask me.

            The magazine's I give very little clout because they chose to knock our line which is really just absolutely superb...it's easy to see that we have a pretty damn affective offensive line.
            yes. in the regular season. but in the playoffs, we don't. the #s don't lie. joyner misses this point, too. which is why i think his stats mean diddly squat.

            everyone knows denver's backs will rush for a gazillion yds in the reg season. but who cares? it's all about the playoffs.
            Go Bears!

            Comment


            • #7
              our run attack against the steelers

              Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
              We didn't produce a lot of running yards against Pittsburgh, but we did have success running against Pittsburgh. The thing is that we fell WAY behind very early and THAT took our run game out. We simply couldn't run it because we had to score quickly to get some points on the board. Nonetheless, against Pittsburgh, on any given run, we averaged 4.6 yards per carry which is pretty good.
              we had 59 yds on 10 carries in the second half, when the steelers were sitting back and defending the pass. a lot of those yds came on plummer scrambles. so the inflated - and misleading - 4.6 ypc figure was the result of padding the #s in garbage time.

              the steelers stopped our run game in the first half, when it counted.
              Go Bears!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by cabroncofanatic
                we had 5 runs for 16yds - or 3.2 ypc - on the first drive, and 11 runs for 38 yds in the first half. that's 3.5 ypc. both figures are well below our reg season avg of 4.7 ypc.
                Breaking it down to a single drive really tells us absolutely nothing. 3 yards per carry can be a good average on a particular drive if we didn't really lose any yards.

                Really, what you have to realize is that most teams don't really gain their average on most drives. On most drives they gain less than their average and then that is supplimented big time when they get a good run.

                And, for the game (Which in itself is also too small a sample size to really make a judgement), we averaged right near our season average against the team that allowed the league's lowest yards per carry.




                but that's the point, isn't it? the elite defenses - like new england and pittsburgh - are going to game plan our running attack in the playoffs. the question is, how will the broncos run game do in the post-season? they failed against new england and against pittsburgh.




                yes. in the regular season. but in the playoffs, we don't. the #s don't lie. joyner misses this point, too. which is why i think his stats mean diddly squat.
                Stats are really the best tool that we have to truly measure the play of a team. Sure, they're imperfect, but if one knows how to read them well, they tell us a ton.

                There are several things to keep in mind when reading stats:

                1. Are the stats based on a per play average or a per game average. The per play average is better because it depends less on the types of games that a team plays.

                2. Ranking teams based on a single stat or two without really looking at and analyzing the stats is fruitless.

                3. A game or two isn't really a good sample size for stats because there are too many factors. If a team has a lead and they want to run the clock out, they will have a lower per carry average as the other team has a good idea of what they'll do.

                4. They are imperfect and we have to watch the games and ask ourselves if what the stats say matches with what we see if we truly want to gleam something from them, but just watching the games is also very limited. We only see a small percentage of the games and most of them relating to our favourite teams, so unless you record every game and have good footage that really shows the routes that the recievers are running and whether they were open and you have expert knowledge to understand what each team was trying to do and where it failed, well designed stats will tell you so much more.


                everyone knows denver's backs will rush for a gazillion yds in the reg season. but who cares? it's all about the playoffs.
                His stats showed that our linemen won the battle against a whole bunch of teams most times. This is over the course of a season and against good and bad run defenses. If we were near tops in the league at most positions when it comes to his metric, well that really does mean something. It means that we were better than pretty much everybody else most of the time.

                It is true that even as the best in the league at run blocking, we could succomb to the best at run defense. If a team that is elite at run stopping tries hard enough, they will stop our run. What a team has to be able to do is to go to the passing game and to take advantage of they're weakness.

                Anyway, he didn't say that our run game was infallible. He just noted that our is the least fallible in the league and that we should expect another year of such success as we did last year.

                The question isn't whether we can be stopped if a great run defense game plans to stop our run, the question is whether we can still have success despite this. The question is, if they gameplan to stop our run, can we pass the ball to move the chains and can our defense hold us in the game when our offense does faulter for whatever reason.



                EDIT: I misread your post. I thought you said stats in general mean diddly squat, but you only meant his stats.

                My bad. I'm not going to change my post, though.
                Last edited by Archimedes Owl; 08-30-2006, 04:14 PM.
                My adopted fan is dogfish

                . . . . . . . . . . .
                . Post Your Artwork .
                . . . . . . . . . . .

                Comment


                • #9
                  "Past run-game success might be clouding Mike Shanahan's judgment. The offensive line, although adequate, is no longer capable of paving the way for overachieving 1,000-yard rushers. And make no mistake, tentative vet Ron Dayne, straight-liner Tatum Bell and undrafted rookie Mike Bell aren't elite chains-movers. "

                  I really do believe that our o-line and running game will be fine.

                  It usually takes about 4 games into the season to see who'll be the go to guy.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Great read!! I kinda question these guys theories though, like how they point out why they thought the broncos drafted Cutler was because of Plummer's TD/Int ratio in the playoffs (5:6). Another theory for the Cutler pick was, "Shanahan likes to get his QB outside the pocket, where he makes his best decisions. But in the AFC title game, the Steelers forced Plummer to beat them from the pocket and picked him off twice." So these guys think Plummer cant get out of the Pocket? Not too sure about that. Other than that it was a great read.
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      stats

                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      Breaking it down to a single drive really tells us absolutely nothing.
                      wrong. it tells us how we actually did on the first drive. i also cited our ypc for the first half. it was also well below our season avg.

                      try to spin it any way you want, but when it counted, the steelers stopped our run game. the #s don't lie.

                      (it'd be ideal if we could repeat the experiment an infinite number of times, under different conditions, but that isn't possible, or, in this case, even necessary. there was nothing unusual about the conditions that game was played under - game time conditions were representative of that place and time of yr, and neither team had significant injuries or "issues" that adversely affected their performance. and there's no reason to think either team would have significantly altered their game plans had they been able to repeat the contest. so that leaves pure random gameday factors, the influences of which are reduced by the repitition of plays. in fact, the uncertainty surrounding these estimates falls precipitously with the number of plays. since you're the stats prof, why don't you tell us what the probs are that the discrepancies between the first half stats and the season avg are statistically significant.?

                      pure common sense would tell you they are. the season avg is based on competition against good and bad teams. it's only plain statistical and common sense that the avg against the best rushing defense would and should be smaller.

                      which is exactly what they were.)


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      Really, what you have to realize is that most teams don't really gain their average on most drives. On most drives they gain less than their average and then that is supplimented big time when they get a good run.
                      thank you, i understand the concept of random variability. and you're right: the broncos did "supplement" their anemic first half output with a "big time" second half performance. but who cares? it was over by the 2nd half.


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      And, for the game (Which in itself is also too small a sample size to really make a judgement), we averaged right near our season average against the team that allowed the league's lowest yards per carry.
                      yes, but only after we padded our rushing stats in garbage time.

                      do you really think the 59 yds we gained in the second half was meaningful?

                      the season stats were compiled against defenses that were almost always trying to stop our run - we played from ahead in most games. the steelers were trying to stop our pass in the 2nd half. do you think the second half stats are drawn from a comparable population? aren't you comparing "apples and oranges"?


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      There are several things to keep in mind when reading stats:
                      really? like what?


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      1. Are the stats based on a per play average or a per game average. The per play average is better because it depends less on the types of games that a team plays.
                      i don't know if that is true, but per play stats are better because they're based on larger sample sizes.


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      2. Ranking teams based on a single stat or two without really looking at and analyzing the stats is fruitless.
                      what did joyner's "analysis" tell us that our ypc stat didn't? and are you saying our ranking based on the 4.7 ypc is misleading - or, to borrow your word, "fruitless"?


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      3. A game or two isn't really a good sample size for stats because there are too many factors.
                      if you believe this, then you shouldn't cite the 4.6 ypc figure as "proof" of our success against the steelers' run defense. you can't have it both ways.

                      a "game or two" can be a sufficient basis for stats, especially per play stats, if the conditions are not far from normal. see above.


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      4. They are imperfect ...well designed stats will tell you so much more.
                      how do you know joyner's stats are "well designed"?


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      His stats showed that our linemen won the battle against a whole bunch of teams most times. This is over the course of a season and against good and bad run defenses... It means that we were better than pretty much everybody else most of the time.
                      "most of the time" is precisely the problem. his stats are padded by reg season games against avg and below avg teams. in the playoffs, you face above avg opponents, and therefore stats based on "most of the time" will not generally be good predictors of how a team will perform "this particular time".

                      last season provided compelling proof of this.


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      It is true that even as the best in the league at run blocking, we could succomb to the best at run defense. If a team that is elite at run stopping tries hard enough, they will stop our run.
                      What a team has to be able to do is to go to the passing game and to take advantage of they're weakness.
                      that's precisely why joyner missed the point and his article is irrelevant. how deep the broncos go into the playoffs will depend on its passing game, not its run blocking.


                      Originally posted by Archimedes Owl
                      The question isn't whether we can be stopped if a great run defense game plans to stop our run, the question is whether we can still have success despite this. The question is, if they gameplan to stop our run, can we pass the ball to move the chains and can our defense hold us in the game when our offense does faulter for whatever reason.
                      precisely. which, again, is why joyner missed the point.

                      i'm glad you agree with me.
                      Last edited by cabroncofanatic; 08-30-2006, 09:03 PM.
                      Go Bears!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X