Clearing up some OL Confusion

[thebandit27]

Now that the FA dust has settled a bit, and we're all looking at the next step in the off-season, the draft, I felt this would be a good time to address one of the most bandied-about subjects of the off-season:

 

The Offensive Line

 

I want to point out that this post will contain no opinions, just data-derived analysis; the purpose is to incite meaningful discussion.

 

To start, let's look at the raw data from NFL.com to see what we can glean:

 

http://www.nfl.com/s...false&Submit=Go

 

Key Points

 

*remember, this is just the facts from the raw data--we will add some intelligence into these numbers in a bit (i.e. please don't jump to conclusions here)

 

- The Bills give up too many sacks, 48, which ranked 29th in the NFL

- Same goes for pressures, 108, which also ranked 29th

- Run blocking looks solid, as YPC were 4.2, which ranks 14th in the NFL, just behind Seattle and in front of Carolina, the NFC's #1 and #2 seeds

- Power Success (defined at the bottom of the page) is extremely impressive running to the left (thanks Cordy Glenn), with 88% success rate; Power up the middle is average, while to the right is below average

 

Now as we all know, these are just numbers, and to put them into context requires some evaluation of why the #s come out the way they do. Thankfully, we have resources like Football Outsiders that do the work for us, and I'll be using their analysis as a talking point (Note: not the end-all, be-all determining factor)...so let's take a look in an attempt to add some intelligence to the numbers:

 

http://www.footballo...rs.com/stats/ol

 

Key Points

 

- Adjusted Line Yards put Buffalo right in the middle of the pack with regard to run blocking (to me, this makes sense, as the eyeball test would have me believe they're an average unit)

- Some of this success is attributed to a high number of Open Field Yards by the RBs, however, the relatively high rankings in areas like Stuffed and Power Success--coupled with a middling ranking in Second Level Yards--indicate that this statistic is not wildly skewed.

 

It's worth noting that Adjusted Sack Rate doesn't give a heck of a lot more insight into pass blocking versus the QB's (or WR's for that matter) responsibility for sacks allowed, so we're going to cover that in the next section, where FO breaks down sack responsibility:

 

http://www.footballo...sacks-confusion

 

Per the description in the article, sacks are broken down as follows:

 

Blown Block - a blocker is simply physically beaten by a defender

Confusion - a problem with determining who should block a rusher

Coverage - where the quarterback held the ball for too long until solid pass protection broke down

 

Key Points

 

- 43.8% of Buffalo's sacks allowed (as of 12/6/13) were attributed to Blown Blocks; only 7 teams had a lower such percentage (Car, Chi, Oak, Phi, SF, TB, Was), and KC had the same

- A mere 15.6% of Buffalo sacks allowed came as a result of Confusion; again, only 7 teams had a lower such percentage (Atl, Den, Mia, NO, Oak, Pit, SD)

 

**Let's pause a second to reflect on the above, which tend to indicate that physical & mental ability of the team's blockers seem to be among the top 25% in the league--if indeed the numbers are telling the true story**

 

- A whopping 40.6% of sacks allowed result from Coverage; only 1 team had a greater percentage, and that was Oakland, who's QB situation was arguably as unstable as Buffalo's (if not more so)

 

What does the above tell us? Basically, the numbers are indicating that most of Buffalo's sacks are the responsibility of the QB.

 

Okay, I'm going to take a step back and allow for some discussion at this point. I'll return to put my 2 cents in once we've all had time to digest the data and provide some feedback.

 

Please review and comment at your leisure.

Edited March 17, 2014 by thebandit27

[John from Riverside]

What is concerning to me is how does a team that runs the ball SOOO much......be that far up there in sacks against totals? You would think that honor would go to a pass happy team.

[BigBuff423]

Good information and a healthy insight to the woes of that Offense, not just the Offensive line and not just the QBs, but the unit as a whole. Because, while the QB holding the ball too long is without a doubt the largest looming factor, it also begs the question how often were the WRs not getting open, getting off the jamb, or running the right routes - see Ike Hilliard's departure....so, that tells me that while Pears, by the numbers pointed to above and by anyone watching the games, had difficulty getting an open running lane to the right, and while LG seemed to have real issues in pass protection, it all says that the Offensive Line is not "as bad" as us fans would think....so, signing Williams might have actually been a really smart thing by the FO...imagine that! Furthermore, this Draft is really deep at two positions: Offenisve Line and WRs, two areas the BILLS need to address, so the BILLS ink a run-thumping MLB, add veteran depth to the Offensive line, bring back their most clutch player - Carpenter, and spend some real coin on good Defensive staff while augmenting their Offensive Coaching staff with Hostler and Downing....sounds to me like this ship is headed for a new destination, instead of getting caught in the same currents of yearly redundancy....

[Billshank Redemption]

great post, most of which I do agree with. Looking back on games this year it was very apparent how much EJ struggled stepping up in the pocket. If pressure came from the interior he really struggled. He needs to learn to make quicker decisions and play his foot correctly when dealing with pressure and drive into his throws so they are more accurate.

[Joe Miner]

40.6% coverage sacks isn't that surprising considering we had:

 

1) multiple starting QB's, including multiple rookies

2) multiple injuries to our receiving core

3) an inexperienced receiving core

4) a #1 receiver that can usually get open but doesn't always do so in a traditional manner

5) a rookie OC

Edited March 17, 2014 by Joe Miner

[Billsrhody]

Well the numbers certainly point to EJ as needing to take some serious steps in year #2 if he is to be a successful NFL QB. It may be true that he doesnt have the best weapons in the league, but he certainly has enough at his disposal to improve on the atrocious sack numbers (especially if we add a WR or TE early in the draft).

 

Like many things in the NFL.. this comes down to the QB. We'll find out in the next year if EJ is the answer or if he's just another Joe Schmoe.

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

Now that the FA dust has settled a bit, and we're all looking at the next step in the off-season, the draft, I felt this would be a good time to address one of the most bandied-about subjects of the off-season:

 

The Offensive Line

 

I want to point out that this post will contain no opinions, just data-derived analysis; the purpose is to incite meaningful discussion.

 

To start, let's look at the raw data from NFL.com to see what we can glean:

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=OFFENSIVE_LINE&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2013&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=false&Submit=Go

 

Key Points

 

*remember, this is just the facts from the raw data--we will add some intelligence into these numbers in a bit (i.e. please don't jump to conclusions here)

 

- The Bills give up too many sacks, 48, which ranked 29th in the NFL

- Same goes for pressures, 108, which also ranked 29th

- Run blocking looks solid, as YPC were 4.2, which ranks 14th in the NFL, just behind Seattle and in front of Carolina, the NFC's #1 and #2 seeds

- Power Success (defined at the bottom of the page) is extremely impressive running to the left (thanks Cordy Glenn), with 88% success rate; Power up the middle is average, while to the right is below average

 

Now as we all know, these are just numbers, and to put them into context requires some evaluation of why the #s come out the way they do. Thankfully, we have resources like Football Outsiders that do the work for us, and I'll be using their analysis as a talking point (Note: not the end-all, be-all determining factor)...so let's take a look in an attempt to add some intelligence to the numbers:

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

 

Key Points

 

- Adjusted Line Yards put Buffalo right in the middle of the pack with regard to run blocking (to me, this makes sense, as the eyeball test would have me believe they're an average unit)

- Some of this success is attributed to a high number of Open Field Yards by the RBs, however, the relatively high rankings in areas like Stuffed and Power Success--coupled with a middling ranking in Second Level Yards--indicate that this statistic is not wildly skewed.

 

It's worth noting that Adjusted Sack Rate doesn't give a heck of a lot more insight into pass blocking versus the QB's (or WR's for that matter) responsibility for sacks allowed, so we're going to cover that in the next section, where FO breaks down sack responsibility:

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/under-pressure/2013/under-pressure-sacks-confusion

 

Per the description in the article, sacks are broken down as follows:

 

Blown Block - a blocker is simply physically beaten by a defender

Confusion - a problem with determining who should block a rusher

Coverage - where the quarterback held the ball for too long until solid pass protection broke down

 

Key Points

 

- 43.8% of Buffalo's sacks allowed (as of 12/6/13) were attributed to Blown Blocks; only 7 teams had a lower such percentage (Car, Chi, Oak, Phi, SF, TB, Was), and KC had the same

- A mere 15.6% of Buffalo sacks allowed came as a result of Confusion; again, only 7 teams had a lower such percentage (Atl, Den, Mia, NO, Oak, Pit, SD)

 

**Let's pause a second to reflect on the above, which tend to indicate that physical & mental ability of the team's blockers seem to be among the top 25% in the league--if indeed the numbers are telling the true story**

 

- A whopping 40.6% of sacks allowed result from Coverage; only 1 team had a greater percentage, and that was Oakland, who's QB situation was arguably as unstable as Buffalo's (if not more so)

 

What does the above tell us? Basically, the numbers are indicating that most of Buffalo's sacks are the responsibility of the QB.

 

Okay, I'm going to take a step back and allow for some discussion at this point. I'll return to put my 2 cents in once we've all had time to digest the data and provide some feedback.

 

Please review and comment at your leisure.

Super Job! An educated man on these boards is always welcome. I think this also backs up what the eye test shows.

 

Good information and a healthy insight to the woes of that Offense, not just the Offensive line and not just the QBs, but the unit as a whole. Because, while the QB holding the ball too long is without a doubt the largest looming factor, it also begs the question how often were the WRs not getting open, getting off the jamb, or running the right routes - see Ike Hilliard's departure....so, that tells me that while Pears, by the numbers pointed to above and by anyone watching the games, had difficulty getting an open running lane to the right, and while LG seemed to have real issues in pass protection, it all says that the Offensive Line is not "as bad" as us fans would think....so, signing Williams might have actually been a really smart thing by the FO...imagine that! Furthermore, this Draft is really deep at two positions: Offenisve Line and WRs, two areas the BILLS need to address, so the BILLS ink a run-thumping MLB, add veteran depth to the Offensive line, bring back their most clutch player - Carpenter, and spend some real coin on good Defensive staff while augmenting their Offensive Coaching staff with Hostler and Downing....sounds to me like this ship is headed for a new destination, instead of getting caught in the same currents of yearly redundancy....

Perhaps the most cogent analysis I've seen on these boards.

[YoloinOhio]

I saw this on Twitter today and thought it might fit well in this thread - it breaks down Chris Williams as far as how he fits into this particular OL based on his strength/weaknesses and what the Bills are trying to do on offense.

 

Dictator ‏@BuffaloWins 2h

Beyond the stats: What Chris Williams brings to the Bills http://nblo.gs/UU1mQ

[DefenseWinzChampionshipz]

I saw this on Twitter today and thought it might fit well in this thread - it breaks down Chris Williams as far as how he fits into this particular OL based on his strength/weaknesses and what the Bills are trying to do on offense.

 

Dictator ‏@BuffaloWins 2h

Beyond the stats: What Chris Williams brings to the Bills http://nblo.gs/UU1mQ

 

Simple and understandable. At worst he's an upgrade (if you go by his stats to date) and at best he can fix his issues and become that much better.

 

Good signing. If he brings what he's been doing in the NFL, he's an upgrade (which shows how bad we were at LG). I just hope we see him incline and get better.

 

The LG position is still not a lock. I say we still draft a Guard in the draft.

[LOVEMESOMEBILLS]

What is concerning to me is how does a team that runs the ball SOOO much......be that far up there in sacks against totals? You would think that honor would go to a pass happy team.

Some how opposing teams were able to decipher our offense.Run, run, pass, run, run, pass.That and most pass happy teams have a more experienced QB and tend to get the ball out of their hands quicker.That should come with time with EJ, hopefully.

[QB Bills]

Now that the FA dust has settled a bit, and we're all looking at the next step in the off-season, the draft, I felt this would be a good time to address one of the most bandied-about subjects of the off-season:

 

The Offensive Line

 

I want to point out that this post will contain no opinions, just data-derived analysis; the purpose is to incite meaningful discussion.

 

To start, let's look at the raw data from NFL.com to see what we can glean:

 

http://www.nfl.com/s...false&Submit=Go

 

Key Points

 

*remember, this is just the facts from the raw data--we will add some intelligence into these numbers in a bit (i.e. please don't jump to conclusions here)

 

- The Bills give up too many sacks, 48, which ranked 29th in the NFL

- Same goes for pressures, 108, which also ranked 29th

- Run blocking looks solid, as YPC were 4.2, which ranks 14th in the NFL, just behind Seattle and in front of Carolina, the NFC's #1 and #2 seeds

- Power Success (defined at the bottom of the page) is extremely impressive running to the left (thanks Cordy Glenn), with 88% success rate; Power up the middle is average, while to the right is below average

 

Now as we all know, these are just numbers, and to put them into context requires some evaluation of why the #s come out the way they do. Thankfully, we have resources like Football Outsiders that do the work for us, and I'll be using their analysis as a talking point (Note: not the end-all, be-all determining factor)...so let's take a look in an attempt to add some intelligence to the numbers:

 

http://www.footballo...rs.com/stats/ol

 

Key Points

 

- Adjusted Line Yards put Buffalo right in the middle of the pack with regard to run blocking (to me, this makes sense, as the eyeball test would have me believe they're an average unit)

- Some of this success is attributed to a high number of Open Field Yards by the RBs, however, the relatively high rankings in areas like Stuffed and Power Success--coupled with a middling ranking in Second Level Yards--indicate that this statistic is not wildly skewed.

 

It's worth noting that Adjusted Sack Rate doesn't give a heck of a lot more insight into pass blocking versus the QB's (or WR's for that matter) responsibility for sacks allowed, so we're going to cover that in the next section, where FO breaks down sack responsibility:

 

http://www.footballo...sacks-confusion

 

Per the description in the article, sacks are broken down as follows:

 

Blown Block - a blocker is simply physically beaten by a defender

Confusion - a problem with determining who should block a rusher

Coverage - where the quarterback held the ball for too long until solid pass protection broke down

 

Key Points

 

- 43.8% of Buffalo's sacks allowed (as of 12/6/13) were attributed to Blown Blocks; only 7 teams had a lower such percentage (Car, Chi, Oak, Phi, SF, TB, Was), and KC had the same

- A mere 15.6% of Buffalo sacks allowed came as a result of Confusion; again, only 7 teams had a lower such percentage (Atl, Den, Mia, NO, Oak, Pit, SD)

 

**Let's pause a second to reflect on the above, which tend to indicate that physical & mental ability of the team's blockers seem to be among the top 25% in the league--if indeed the numbers are telling the true story**

 

- A whopping 40.6% of sacks allowed result from Coverage; only 1 team had a greater percentage, and that was Oakland, who's QB situation was arguably as unstable as Buffalo's (if not more so)

 

What does the above tell us? Basically, the numbers are indicating that most of Buffalo's sacks are the responsibility of the QB.

 

Okay, I'm going to take a step back and allow for some discussion at this point. I'll return to put my 2 cents in once we've all had time to digest the data and provide some feedback.

 

Please review and comment at your leisure.

Excellent post. Just reaffirms my belief that this team would have made the playoffs last season with even average QB play.

[FireChan]

What is concerning to me is how does a team that runs the ball SOOO much......be that far up there in sacks against totals? You would think that honor would go to a pass happy team.

 

Because once the QB holds the ball for 10 seconds, the D realizes its not a running play?

[Doc]

One thing, that article was written after just 3/4 of the season. I'd like to see the same analysis after the entire season.

 

Excellent post. Just reaffirms my belief that this team would have made the playoffs last season with even average QB play.

Again, just 5 plays in 3 specific losses would have meant the difference between playoffs and not. And had EJ not gotten himself injured against the Browns, that Bills at least go 8-8.

[Mr. WEO]

Good work. The O-line gets too much blame for the troubles behind center.

[Doc]

Good work. The O-line gets too much blame for the troubles behind center.

Maybe. But a better LG and RT are needed. And OL is easier to fix than the trouble behind center.

[Mickey]

Pro Football Focus rates Pears as the second worst OT in the league when it comes to run blocking and also rates the Bills OL as a whole as the 8th worst run blocking team in the league. So who do we believe, Football Outsiders or Pro Football Focus??

 

Another question I have is how can we relate numbers based on all the games the Bills played to how EJ played when there were so many games he didn't play in? Ideally we would have data on those sacks and pressures for each QB. How do we know how many of the sacks that were due to the EJ holding on to the ball too long when the stats we are relying on include other QB's?

 

Lastly, I don't think that football can be boiled down to simple arithmetic. Stats are useful tools but they have there limits, especially in a situation as fraught with unpredictable variables as is the modern game of professional football. For example, if we are facing 3rd and 10 and no one likely to pick up the first down is open, didn't we draft EJ in part because we want him to extend the play with his feet rather than just throwing the ball away and punting? That increases the risks of a coverage sack or a sack characterized by these numbers as being caused by a QB holding the ball too long. But that is exactly what we want EJ to do, try to rescue a doomed play in a critical situation. And who cares if he gets sacked when the alternative to "holding the ball too long"is punting when it is vital that we move the chains. Desperate times calls for desperate measures. These numbers can't illuminate these critical subtleties.

 

I love the stats as much as anyone but we have to recognize their limits.

[Kellyto83TD]

Maybe. But a better LG and RT are needed. And OL is easier to fix than the trouble behind center.

We just signed our new starting LG, address RT in the 3rd round of the Draft. But the best OL in the world doesn't matter if the QB can't get it working between his ears

[BillnutinHouston]

Excellent, thought-provoking thread.

 

Like BigBuff, my first reaction was to question the WRs. Maybe Hilliard's departure was triggered by perceived lapses in getting across concepts related to shedding coverage or route running that cause the offense to sputter too many times and to cause Stevie's productivity to plummet.

 

Of course, it could be the QBs too.

Edited March 17, 2014 by BillnutinHouston

[Mr. WEO]

Maybe. But a better LG and RT are needed. And OL is easier to fix than the trouble behind center.

 

Which is why replacing a guard isn't going to, in and of itself, change the performance of our QB. Our O-line is pretty good. Ask Wood why it's so difficult to play O-line in Buffalo.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Nice read, however the conclusion is incorrect about QB play.

 

(1) what defines a coverage sack vs a blocker not holding up? It's subjective since some one was ultimately beaten to allow the sack.

 

(2) coverage sacks can be the result of a QB not throwing in time and also WRs not getting open/running routes correctly or a poor play design or the o line failing to open passing lanes.

 

Thus, the data provided is simply too superficial to conclude much of anything.