NFL REWIND Kyle Orton Unforced Error Week 5 Detroit Analysis

[Bocephuz]

 

A couple of things: first, I'm not trying to rain on your parade. As I said, what you're doing is not without value. My point is that it's vaule shouldn't be overstated, which is what some readers are doing.

 

Second, this sort analysis for lay-understanding is certainly useful in that it may help folks understand what to look for when they are watching the game. However, all analysis should be qualified, as Joe B. does in his All-22 column, that he doesn't know what plays were called, what checks were made, what routes were called or should have been combo'd, what the hot reads should be, and what the line calls were; and therefore any presentation is incomplete.

 

Finally, the more complex a thing you are trying to evaluate, especially without the benefit of the necessary information, the higher your margin of error becomes. You're attempting to evaluate one of the most complex aspects of the game.

 

 

 

See above.

. Well said.. Disclaimers set good expectations

[JPS]

Nice Bocephuz. You've carved out a niche here. Keep them coming.

[Orton's Arm]

Unforced errors.. bad throws/ How did the O Line do?/ What mistakes are on Orton?

 

I watched the NFL rewind all 22 and here is my unofficial count of how the O-Line did / How Kyle did on every pass play ( I may have missed a snap or two here.. but this should be 95% accurate)

 

TOTAL PASS PLAYS - 44 snaps ( last week was 45 .. so much for being a run first team)

 

LINE BREAKDOWN - 14 snaps or 31% of pass plays ( defined as - O-Line clearly messed up and Kyle did not have much of a chance.. last week was 29% so pass protect was actually slightly worse this week)

 

SUFFICIENT PROTECTION - 30 snaps or 69% of pass plays ( defined as O-Line did sufficient job and Kyle had time to throw). One caveat here... in some cases it was difficult to determine if it was a called short throw or a dump down due to pressure.

 

UNFORCED KYLE ERRORS - 6 snaps or 20% of pass plays where he had time ( unforced error defined as Kyle having time and having unforced accuracy issues... last week with EJ it was 11 or 34%)

 

Bottom Line - The O Line was just as bad this week as last week in pass protect.. however.. Orton handled it very well for the most part. He made several plays where pass protect broke down and he took a hit but delivered accurately. One of the unforced errors was his INT.. another was the throw to Watkins in the 4th qtr that was far behind him but he tipped it to himself and caught it anyway. Of the 6 unforced errors only 2 were egregiously off target. Orton typically stepped forward in the pocket to avoid edge rushers and rarely scrambled horizontally. I also saw zero drops...

 

To sum it up..I would attribute poor Offensive Play fault the following way - 60% O Line/ 25% Hackett/ 15% Orton

 

I love your weekly analysis. It's almost always better to see things as they are, than to live in a world of one's own imagining. Your weekly game analysis quantifies one aspect of the game. A useful tool for seeing things as they are.

 

> Of the 6 unforced errors only 2 were egregiously off target.

 

That doesn't sound so bad. I could be wrong about this, but I think that an elite QB who attempted 44 passes in a game would typically have maybe two or three bad throws. (Assuming he's playing at or above his usual high level.) 6 unforced errors isn't as good as that would be, but it's not too shabby either.

 

The most surprising part of your analysis was that a line breakdown occurred on only 31% of pass plays. My subjective impression was that it was considerably worse. I'm not disagreeing with your analysis. Just a little surprised is all.

 

> I also saw zero drops...

 

That's excellent news. I'm very happy with the quality of the Bills' WR corps; and stats like that reinforce my positive impression.

[SF Bills Fan]

Indeed... being a 10 year vet it is quite obvious that he would look much more comfortable than EJ.. however... the really impressive thing is that he performed so well only having 4 weeks to prepare.. and only one week of getting reps as #1 QB. I was sort of worried that he was there to just collect a paycheck after he took the preseason off.. however it's clear that he's worked hard since coming here and that he cares

 

I was thinking the same. I was worried he may go through the motions and could fall back and say "I just got the job". He was clearly trying to make the statement that he deserves the job abd he was all business.

[Gray Beard]

Thanks for the effort. I appreciate that you define your assumptions and that you are just a guy watching the game and taking notes. I like that you only have a few categories so I don't have to have the brains of a rocket surgeon to understand and absorb the information. That puts things into perspective and allows me to use the information as a way to help an ordinary fan like me to summarize my observations and gut feelings during the game.

[Perk71]

Thank you for your weekly posts!

[Mr. WEO]

How do you know that "75% of it is accurate"?

 

You don't.

 

My issue is not that assumptions are being created through the analysis of data, it's that assumptions are being substituted for data.

 

And while these sorts of exercises don't completely lack value, they aren't overly useful either.

 

How would you then quantify "data" such as hot reads, combination read routes and assignments? Or are you saying that because these things cannot be quantified, no such analysis can be made at all?

 

I think, given what Bocephuz clearly says he is measuring (and something a reasonably informed and observant football enthusiast can see/discern for his or her self), he makes an interesting and useful argument.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Mr. WEO

[Alaska Darin]

My favorite play of the Lions' game was a play on the TD drive that showed the clear difference between Orton and Manuel. It was 2nd-and-long from about our 40. Orton drops back, pump fakes, and as the pocket collapses around him, throws a strike to Woods just past midfield. There are 4 Lions around Woods so Orton throws the ball about a foot off the turf, protecting him from getting killed while getting a first down. Just a savvy veteran recognizing the coverage and making exactly the right decision and throw.

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

 

How would you then quantify "data" such as hot reads, combination read routes and assignments? Or are you saying that because these things cannot be quantified, no such analysis can be made at all?

 

I think, given what Bocephuz clearly says he is measuring (and something a reasonably informed and observant football enthusiast can see/discern for his or her self), he makes an interesting and useful argument.

See my above commentary.

[Dragonborn10]

Great job. But... Offense scored 17 points. Orton gave up 7. That is not going to be good enough most of the time.

[Gugny]

Great job. But... Offense scored 17 points. Orton gave up 7. That is not going to be good enough most of the time.

Against a team like the Lions, yes it will.

 

DET has the best defense in the NFL. 17 points was good.

 

But I'm sure you know that.

[DirtDart]

Unforced errors.. bad throws/ How did the O Line do?/ What mistakes are on Orton?

 

I watched the NFL rewind all 22 and here is my unofficial count of how the O-Line did / How Kyle did on every pass play ( I may have missed a snap or two here.. but this should be 95% accurate)

 

TOTAL PASS PLAYS - 44 snaps ( last week was 45 .. so much for being a run first team)

 

LINE BREAKDOWN - 14 snaps or 31% of pass plays ( defined as - O-Line clearly messed up and Kyle did not have much of a chance.. last week was 29% so pass protect was actually slightly worse this week)

 

SUFFICIENT PROTECTION - 30 snaps or 69% of pass plays ( defined as O-Line did sufficient job and Kyle had time to throw). One caveat here... in some cases it was difficult to determine if it was a called short throw or a dump down due to pressure.

 

UNFORCED KYLE ERRORS - 6 snaps or 20% of pass plays where he had time ( unforced error defined as Kyle having time and having unforced accuracy issues... last week with EJ it was 11 or 34%)

 

Bottom Line - The O Line was just as bad this week as last week in pass protect.. however.. Orton handled it very well for the most part. He made several plays where pass protect broke down and he took a hit but delivered accurately. One of the unforced errors was his INT.. another was the throw to Watkins in the 4th qtr that was far behind him but he tipped it to himself and caught it anyway. Of the 6 unforced errors only 2 were egregiously off target. Orton typically stepped forward in the pocket to avoid edge rushers and rarely scrambled horizontally. I also saw zero drops...

 

To sum it up..I would attribute poor Offensive Play fault the following way - 60% O Line/ 25% Hackett/ 15% Orton

Very Nice!!!! going to be a long year unless the O line picks it up.

[Rocky Landing]

To the OP:

I LOVE this kind of analysis. You have done some remarkable things, and you clearly have some time on your hands. But, you have certainly put a lot of time and creativity into this. Between your analysis, and Bill from NYC's "A Few Thoughts About the Game in No Particular Order," (and, of course, the subsequent discussions) TBD has become my first place to go for game analysis.

 

 

How do you know that "75% of it is accurate"?

 

You don't.

 

My issue is not that assumptions are being created through the analysis of data, it's that assumptions are being substituted for data.

 

And while these sorts of exercises don't completely lack value, they aren't overly useful either.

I have to strongly disagree with this, and your criticism of the OP's methodology. In fact, I think that with his methodology, someone with an advanced understanding of statistics could, over the course of a season, estimate critical values, and/or P-values and confidence intervals that would establish a reasonable margin of error. (Something that you will never see with something as statistically meaningless at the passer rating.) I suspect this because the OP's general conclusions, based on his analysis, are fairly substantiated by what most of us (EJ fanatics notwithstanding) saw in the difference between EJ's play, and that of Orton.

 

I'm not saying that your criticism isn't valid. But, you seem to be assuming the null hypothesis regardless of data. In many statistical models, assumptions are made first, and then the data is used either to prove the null hypothesis, or rule out the null hypothesis, depending on the methodology. And, while there certainly isn't (as far as I know) enough data to effectively apply these models, who cares? It passes the smell test, IMHO. The OP has managed to develop a methodology that actually takes into account other players on the field (again, unlike the passer rating).

 

I think that is very useful indeed, insofar as it provides a quantitative measurement of what we see on the field, and our impressions from game to game. I understand what you are saying about accuracy (and I suspect that Big Cat's "75%" comment was merely off the cuff), but just because there isn't enough data to estimate something like a margin of error, or a significance level doesn't make the data useless. Were that the case, no one would talk about the passer rating ever.

[MDH]

 

How do you know that "75% of it is accurate"?

 

You don't.

 

My issue is not that assumptions are being created through the analysis of data, it's that assumptions are being substituted for data.

 

And while these sorts of exercises don't completely lack value, they aren't overly useful either.

 

It's a post on a message board about football. It entertained me, therefore it was useful.

 

If he was a scientist looking for the cure to cancer I'd agree with you.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Unforced errors.. bad throws/ How did the O Line do?/ What mistakes are on Orton?

 

I watched the NFL rewind all 22 and here is my unofficial count of how the O-Line did / How Kyle did on every pass play ( I may have missed a snap or two here.. but this should be 95% accurate)

 

TOTAL PASS PLAYS - 44 snaps ( last week was 45 .. so much for being a run first team)

 

LINE BREAKDOWN - 14 snaps or 31% of pass plays ( defined as - O-Line clearly messed up and Kyle did not have much of a chance.. last week was 29% so pass protect was actually slightly worse this week)

 

SUFFICIENT PROTECTION - 30 snaps or 69% of pass plays ( defined as O-Line did sufficient job and Kyle had time to throw). One caveat here... in some cases it was difficult to determine if it was a called short throw or a dump down due to pressure.

 

UNFORCED KYLE ERRORS - 6 snaps or 20% of pass plays where he had time ( unforced error defined as Kyle having time and having unforced accuracy issues... last week with EJ it was 11 or 34%)

 

Bottom Line - The O Line was just as bad this week as last week in pass protect.. however.. Orton handled it very well for the most part. He made several plays where pass protect broke down and he took a hit but delivered accurately. One of the unforced errors was his INT.. another was the throw to Watkins in the 4th qtr that was far behind him but he tipped it to himself and caught it anyway. Of the 6 unforced errors only 2 were egregiously off target. Orton typically stepped forward in the pocket to avoid edge rushers and rarely scrambled horizontally. I also saw zero drops...

 

To sum it up..I would attribute poor Offensive Play fault the following way - 60% O Line/ 25% Hackett/ 15% Orton

 

[Bocephuz]

I love your weekly analysis. It's almost always better to see things as they are, than to live in a world of one's own imagining. Your weekly game analysis quantifies one aspect of the game. A useful tool for seeing things as they are.

 

> Of the 6 unforced errors only 2 were egregiously off target.

 

That doesn't sound so bad. I could be wrong about this, but I think that an elite QB who attempted 44 passes in a game would typically have maybe two or three bad throws. (Assuming he's playing at or above his usual high level.) 6 unforced errors isn't as good as that would be, but it's not too shabby either.

 

The most surprising part of your analysis was that a line breakdown occurred on only 31% of pass plays. My subjective impression was that it was considerably worse. I'm not disagreeing with your analysis. Just a little surprised is all.

 

> I also saw zero drops...

 

That's excellent news. I'm very happy with the quality of the Bills' WR corps; and stats like that reinforce my positive impression.

The line play very well may have been worse than the 31% figure I listed here... there were several throws to the running back/TE in the flat where I couldn't really tell if they were called plays or dump downs due to an O Line breakdown.

[BillsBytheBay]

 

 

After watching the rewind, I think that *KO* did an efficient job. EJ can now revert to the originally planned intention for him to develop.

yep, and it appears EJ feels the same way. I hope it works out.

[Orton's Arm]

The line play very well may have been worse than the 31% figure I listed here... there were several throws to the running back/TE in the flat where I couldn't really tell if they were called plays or dump downs due to an O Line breakdown.

 

This is good to know. In that case I will interpret that 31% figure as a minimum estimate. One reason for my curiosity on this matter is to gauge the effectiveness the offense could have attained with decent OL play.

[Bocephuz]

This is good to know. In that case I will interpret that 31% figure as a minimum estimate. One reason for my curiosity on this matter is to gauge the effectiveness the offense could have attained with decent OL play.

I think that is a good way to look at it.. 31% is the minimum.

[Hplarrm]

 

 

How would you then quantify "data" such as hot reads, combination read routes and assignments? Or are you saying that because these things cannot be quantified, no such analysis can be made at all?

 

I think, given what Bocephuz clearly says he is measuring (and something a reasonably informed and observant football enthusiast can see/discern for his or her self), he makes an interesting and useful argument.

 

As Rodney King says, why can't we all just get along. The OP is some great work which adds a lot to trying to understand an activity which can never be fully or accurately described by mere statistical analysis. Also, Tasker's comments are right on target for ADDING to the great analysis provided in the original post.

 

Tasker's comments simply point out the limitations of mere statistical analysis (even good thorough analysis as was done in the OP). His comments to your response suggesting you go back an re=read his post is pretty exactly accurate as I take it he says a couple of things:

 

1. Tasker does NOT claim that the OP analysis is wrong, he merely correctly points out that any statistical analysis which attempts to compare how on player did vs. how another player performed in a different game simply fails IF it purports to be conclusive and anything other than an indicator of reality. He suggests that the OP would be more accurate if it included some correct disclaimers which point out the limitations of any statiscal analysis.

 

I think the main thing which is incorrect in the three way conversation consisting of the OP, Tasker's response and suggested additions (which I do not think should offend the OP at all, and your response to these suggestions is your post which falsely says the only two choices here are that the OP is correct and conclusive or one should not do anything.

 

Tasker's comments in combination with the OP seem to suggest a third way which is that the OP is most accurate (like Joe B's work) if it states the disclaimers about the limitations of any mere stat based analysis.

 

To me, the analysis provided in the OP as it is quite thorough and gives a much more credible indicator of what the Bills should do in thinking through the Orton/EJ to start issues. However, one needs to recognize the limitations inherent in even a sound statistical analysis like the OP. In addition to all the limitations listed in Tasker's comments such as without knowing the play calls (and the blocking assignments it really is impossible for us to know for sure what did (or was supposed to) happen and thus though good analysis is more than worth it for us to see and consider (many thanks to the OP for his great work) it would be incorrect for readers not to recognize the limitations of even good stat analysis.

 

In the end because of what we do not know about the intent and assignments of the play our musings may be good indicators but are pretty far from conclusive.

 

Further, the important thing is always not merely what the players did last week but what will likely happen next week.

 

My sense is:

 

1. Its way to early to give up on EJ and actually I will be quite surprised to not see him start games for the Bills at QB in the 2014 season.

 

2. My sense is that EJ will likely start this year out of necessity if as in past years, Orton gets off to a great start but then gets hurt and cannot play through the end of the season. I think we would all benefit if the OP lent his great skills to analyzing how many hard hits Orton took on Sunday. He did well in my view as even with an older body, Orton seemed to escape any major damage from hard hits. However, Detroit had a solid DL and LBs and Orton struck me as being hit a lot. Sometimes these pressures were effective as when he got sacked early near our goalline and also he had to rush a few throws under pressure from a meltdown of our OL (or the sack when Spiller pulled an Ole on a blitz pick-up. Orton played a good enough game against a good D on the road as we won despite his pick six and failure to get us closer at the end. Fortunately Orton did not need to be great (or even good) to QB to a win he merely needed to be good enough thanks to an outstanding D performance which held the Det O down so we could overcome Orton and the O giving up a pick 6 and that Carpenter has proved to be a GREAT kicker for us nailing a 58 yarder down the middle with room to spare.

 

Orton deserves a ton of credit for QBing this teams to a win with his good enough play on the road against a D playing very well, but if one insists on giving credit to some Bills for this W I would start with our D which repeatedly logged 3 and outs giving us a great field position advantage for the last 2/3 of the game and then to Carpenter and the ST which was the difference compared to Henry and the Det ST which missed three easier FGs than the 58 yarder pulled off by the Bills after Orton failed to lead the team to another first down or two which would have made the final kick a good play or a chip shot. Instead Orton and the O failed to even produce an adequate drive but Carpenter and the ST made a great play to win it.

 

In addition, to the likelihood that I think we will see EJ be forced to start at QB if Orton continues to get hit like Sunday, I also think we may see the Bills braintrust attempt to actually choose to start EJ.

 

This MIGHT happen if:

 

A. One big advantage that Orton had was that there was no tape on him. Its only gonna take 2 or 3 games of tape for opposing DCs and DLs to begin to map out Bills O tendencies and for good DLs to begin reading tendencies in Bills OL players to make their rushed more effective. The real test of how good Orton is will be seen if he continues his good enough or even improves as he knock some of the rust off and he intelligently varies his game or adjusts well in mid-game when a good pass rusher identifies some tendency.

 

B. How does EJ deal with being benched? I think one of the major failings of TSW commentators is that like most of us outsiders and non-professional we do not see the subtleties in the game and make the mistake Mr. Weo did of seeing this as being simply between too extreme choices. Tasker did NOT reject all of the good analysis from the OP, he merely suggested assessment of these useful stats in the OP as best understood in the light of acknowledging the limitations of any statistical analysis. If EJ learns from his benching and diligently dissects what a 10 yr. vet does differently than a player such as him who has great physical talents but has yet to start even a full 16 games, EJ will be a better player because of the benching.

 

Further, EJ needs to toughen up a bit if he hopes to become a good QB and if he learns from this benching he MIGHT become an adequate starter at QB (probably not but Maybe).

 

Hackett/Merrone and our QB coach need to make their primary focus winning next weeks game but in addition someone needs to take on the task (primarily EJ cause he is a big boy or he really should be cut)of using his benching as a teachable moment.

 

Overall, the great stats in the OP are a very useful indicator of what should happen. However, speaking as a stat hound, if one views any mere stats as conclusive you are likely to be wrong as there is way too much important stuff that we outsiders cannot know and even if you are an insider no one knows the future or can say how this oddly shaped ball is gonna bounce.