Mike Pettine's Defence

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,085
Reaction score
7,901
Location
Madison, WI
Personally, I think some bad personnel decisions over the years has put the Packers behind the 8 Ball on defense. Gute made some strides with Alexander, Amos, Savage and the Smiths, but he still has a ways to go to field a solid defense each year. I guess with a few more good off season acquisitions (ILB and DL), the 2 big questions will be, is Pettine the guy you want coaching them and do you have enough resources left over to get the offense some much needed players?

Stay tuned.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
A poor time of possession (TOP) ranking could be a symptom of things good and bad, usually bad, but not always. It is best to look at it within a constellation of other factors. You could start with the fairly strong correlation between TOP and how a team performs on 3rd. down on both sides of the ball. We should all agree that winning 3rd. downs is an unqualified good. 3rd. downs are by far the most frequent single set of occurrances where possession is retained or lost, and possession is far and away the single most frequent prerequisite for scoring. And third down conversions burn clock, and denying them puts clock in your own hands.

TOP has meaning even when a team is an outlier, where 3rd. down performance strays significantly from TOP and/or the win-loss record, in telling you some significant other factors come into play and whether to go look for them.

Here are the top 5 teams in TOP and their offensive and defensive ranks on 3rd. down:

1.Baltimore 35:15: O=5th. ranked, D=20th.
2 San Francisco 34:31: O=3rd. ranked, D=3rd.
3 New Orleans 33:18: O=8th. ranked, D=4th.
4 New England 32:58: O=15h. ranked, D=1st. (extremely low 18.87% more than offsetting mediocre offesensive performance)
5 Philadelphia 32:13: O= 4th. ranked, D=13th.

The more precise way to do this would be to subtract the offensive 3rd. down rate from the defense's and rank those results. That's frankly too much work for this cowboy. That might zoom NE to the top of the list in 3rd. down differential. New England's +17 turnover differential to go along with that 3rd. down defensive performance amounts to a historically dominant defense to date which more than compensates for a lackluster offense. Defense doesn't always win championships, but it can. However, without getting into the 3rd. down % differential business the rankings as presented go some way in showing how to look at the question.

The ranking outlier would be Baltimore where the O and D 3rd. down performance doesn't sync with TOP even if the TOP syncs with the won-loss record. How do we explain that? Running the ball consumes something like twice as much time as passing on a per-yard-gained basis, and they run the ball alot and well, moving the chains, with a big contribution from their running QB. Baltimore is the poster child for the method of winning most closly associated with TOP dominance: keeping the ball out of the opponents hands. The fact they rank tied for 5th. with fewest turnovers with 9 contributes to the cause.

Philly ranks well in TOP and 3rd. downs suggesting their record should be a little better than 5-4. Nothing immediately jumps to my mind as to the other factors involved, but it does say there are factors to look at. I won't dig into why Philly is where they are, but the first place I'd look is turnovers and red zone performance. After that there is a constellation of other factors to look at which I'm not going to list. They are numerous.

The point being, if TOP, 3rd. down performance and winning sync up, you probably don't need to look much further. The constellation of other factors likely work out to average or better. This combination TOP and 3rd. down performance is a reliable way of winning which doesn't rely on one-off factors in any particular game. Though not a certainty, the odds suggest SF and NO should be regarded as having the best combination of factors in getting to the #1 and #2 seeds.

Let's look at the Packers, whether they are an outlier, and how we would account for that.

TOP: 31:03, 10th. ranked. This is a case where rankings can be deceptive. The Packers are only a trivial 28 seconds behind 6th. ranked Houston. I would not consider this an outlier stat. It's fairly consistent with the 7-2 record.

3rd. down offense: 36.5%, 22nd. ranked
3rd. down defensive: 40.8%, 18th. ranked

This is an outlier. The offense/defense differential suggests TOP should be sub-30:00 and the record should be a losing one. How do we account for this?

One factor is the +7 turnover differential. There is a doubling factor with turnovers in subtracting a possession scoring opportunity and TOP from the opponent's column while adding to your own unless you actually score on the turnover, which is not common. Nearly two possessions per game in the doubling will compensate for a lot of ills on 3rd. down. New England's 4 per game is a huge factor in winning. In the loss to Baltimore, the turnovers were even-Stephen which tells us something.

A secondary factor on the other side of the ledger is defensive and special teams scoring. Those plays put points on the board while burning a trivial amount of clock while in essence forfeiting a possession. It is a trade off anybody would take but it does skew TOP negative on a very positive play. The Packers don't have any of those.

While TOP is fairly consistent with the 7-2 record, even the turnover differential doesn't seem to fully account for poor 3rd. down performance vs. the W-L. That takes me to red zone TD scoring performance. The Packers offense is 4th. at 67.7% on 3.4 trips per game. The defense is 6th. at 48.3% on 3.3 trips per game. The idea that the defense is a bend-don't-break is legit; the idea that they bend more than their opponents is not.

You could also look at big play scoring for and against, plays that put points on the board without taking time off the clock, akin to scoring on defense or ST. Without looking that up, I'd say the eye test says the Packers give what they get. And the fact of the matter is these plays are not that common.

The bottom line is TOP, to repeat, doesn't by itself say much about one game or one team's season, but when you put it together with 3rd. down performance it can point you to other key factors in the win-loss record if there is a disconnect.

In the case of the Packers, their key to winning is fairly clear: turnover differential and red zone performance. I don't consider these edges over opponents to date the most reliable predictor of future performance since they hinge on a small handful of plays in any particular game. SF and NO, on the other hand, are winning on consistent play throughout game as indicated by high TOP and 3rd. down performance on both sides of the ball consistent with TOP.

It's kinda funny how with all the stats that are available, there is little attempt to put them together to create an overall picture. You can look at any one in isolation and find a lot of weak correlations, but when you start putting them together you get a more coherent picture. This just scratches the surface.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

greengold

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Messages
688
Reaction score
93
Nail on the head. TOP is just one indicator of something...

No S. Funny. We've won many games where we did not own TOP, mostly because we jumped up early on teams and they had to fight and claw. Our STs specialists have been good, making those drives where we can either get a FG or flip the field with a Punt was a factor most of the way through. TOP is insanely obscure alone. It can just help tell the story of a game. Sometimes it can be more significant than other times. I believe it was significant for the Chargers. They had the right plan working all day on us, and we let other aspects of our game, slip, compounding the problems, on both O and D.

You're not kidding HRE, there are so many stats that can help explain a game, but, they can lie if you're looking for something specific. Like Martinez's tackles totals to support he is a really good player, or lack of running game when your QB is hitting long gainers through the air and lighting it up when combined with solid D, forcing a catch up situation for the opponent, and on and on.
 

Patriotplayer90

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 2, 2015
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
130
“I think based on what this defense was giving us,” Rivers said, “we just stayed with it. You saw the same formation, I don’t know, maybe 25 snaps. We were in three receivers and a tight end. We just kept getting the same look, and kept getting the same look, and kept getting the same look. I think we said, ‘Let’s just keep doing the same thing.’"

So basically Pettine doesn't know how to make adjustments. Just like Capers.
Exactly. He's **** LeBeau, Dom Capers, and any of these other prehistoric DCs. He can't coach against modern offenses.
 

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
2,737
Location
20 miles from Lambeau
Exactly. He's **** LeBeau, Dom Capers, and any of these other prehistoric DCs. He can't coach against modern offenses.
I'll let these quotes speak for me
Defense looks to be the best it's been since the SB.

Okay, it's pretty clear that the defense has been almost completely addressed by now. It's also clear that the offense has been neglected over the years in an attempt to do so.
... Skill position talent acquisition must be the #1 priority this off-season, and I'm not even against trading for some help during the season, given how good the defense looks.
 

gbgary

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
3,420
Reaction score
185
Location
up the road from jerrahworld
something changed a quarter or so into the season. we've gone from a ball-hawking pressure defense to a passive one that only gets serious in the red zone. again...it's baffling. might be injury related. king's gone from starter to a platoon guy. what's up with that? savage's absence for so long probably had something to do with it. clark isn't 100%. martinez is on an island by himself.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
king's gone from starter to a platoon guy. what's up with that?

King has played every single snap in two of the last three games. It's pretty obvious he wasn't completely healthy for the Chargers game.
 

Ceodore

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
815
Reaction score
135
Location
Dixon, IL
While the D is better than in prior years, I wish I could have more faith in them to put a game away. It'd be nice to feel confident about stopping a team from going 90 yards in 2 minutes. And while to be fair, they ultimately did, can it please not come down to a goal line stand as time expires? Pass coverage is still very soft. Opportunities to put the game away with an int missed. Miscues with penalties. Etc. When we pin a team back deep in their own territory, it would be great to feel like we had some juicy field position coming our way.
 

greengold

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Messages
688
Reaction score
93
something changed a quarter or so into the season. we've gone from a ball-hawking pressure defense to a passive one that only gets serious in the red zone. again...it's baffling. might be injury related. king's gone from starter to a platoon guy. what's up with that? savage's absence for so long probably had something to do with it. clark isn't 100%. martinez is on an island by himself.
Savage's absence has had something to do with it, as has Kenny Clark playing through 2 injuries. King has also played through injury for much of the season. Montravius Adams has been playing through as well.

I'm wondering if Pettine isn't playing his cards closer to the vest through this part of the season? Guessing he may not want to reveal a whole lot on tape for the playoffs, and we've played so much base D. Hardly any blitzing. DBs are obviously being coached to keep as much in front of them as they can, giving up some space, which is allowing for more completions. Might be something to keep an eye on as we progress. The self scout during this bye may prove beneficial too. I'm very happy with their 8-2 record. If they can tighten up the middle, get more turnovers, we will be onto something special.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
4,611
Reaction score
1,285
It'd be nice to feel confident about stopping a team from going 90 yards in 2 minutes. And while to be fair, they ultimately did, can it please not come down to a goal line stand as time expires? .
I know you hear about bend but don't break a lot, but letting them take it down to the one inch line and then stopping them is taking it a little far.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,085
Reaction score
7,901
Location
Madison, WI
"Bend but don't break".....sometimes improperly used slang for a defense that gives up a lot of yards, but for various reasons, the floodgates didn't open all the way on the points scored in that particular game.

Give me a defense that only gives up 3 or 4 long field goals and I am fine with calling THAT defense one that "bends, but doesn't break". At times this season, the Packers defense has definitely looked......broken!
 

Pugger

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
2,613
Reaction score
756
Location
N. Fort Myers, FL
That may be so, but that's not our problem :)
They would have still needed to make that two point conversion too.

And then they still would not be in the lead. Of course we'd be in trouble if they won the toss...

This situation wouldn't have been so damn stressful had we kicked the darn FG right before the half. It would have been nice to have had that 3 point cushion for my blood pressure... ;)
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,085
Reaction score
7,901
Location
Madison, WI
This situation wouldn't have been so damn stressful had we kicked the darn FG right before the half.

You never know what may have happened, even had they kicked that FG. That could have changed the whole course of the game, its called the butterfly effect. I will take the win, even with the nail-biting ending, which I found to be extremely entertaining, when it was all over. :)
 

pacmaniac

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
2,085
Reaction score
571
I'm wondering if Pettine isn't playing his cards closer to the vest through this part of the season? Guessing he may not want to reveal a whole lot on tape for the playoffs, and we've played so much base D.

That really makes no sense at all.
 

PackerfaninCarolina

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
4,162
Reaction score
316
Mike Pettine's Defense:

28th in YPG - Not good

BUT ....

12th in PPG - That there is the only thing that counts


We don't have to score 35 ppg to win ... Well for the most part.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,085
Reaction score
7,901
Location
Madison, WI
Not sure we should start telling Pettine just how to play his cards, at least not until he is holding a few more Aces. He was dealt a pretty crappy Defense when he first sat down at the table. While I wish it was a bit better, I think he is still doing pretty good with the cards dealt to him.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!
 

BrokenArrow

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
Messages
2,923
Reaction score
1,354
Keep in mind that we have played against more winning teams that anyone else at this point. That's a major factor. Compare with the Patsies who were exposed the first time they played a real team.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,085
Reaction score
7,901
Location
Madison, WI
I would like to see the math that went into this statement, but if its true, a somewhat plausible explanation for some of the Packers struggles thus far on Defense.

Peter Bukowski
@Peter_Bukowski


For all the consternation over the Packers defense, they've faced the toughest offensive schedule in football to this point in the season according to
@fboutsiders
. By a lot. In fact, the gap between 1 and 2 is bigger than between 2 and 5.
 

pacmaniac

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
2,085
Reaction score
571
I would like to see the math that went into this statement, but if its true, a somewhat plausible explanation for some of the Packers struggles thus far on Defense.

Peter Bukowski
@Peter_Bukowski


For all the consternation over the Packers defense, they've faced the toughest offensive schedule in football to this point in the season according to
@fboutsiders
. By a lot. In fact, the gap between 1 and 2 is bigger than between 2 and 5.

Wonder if their analysis assumes we played against Mahomes instead of Matt Moore.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top