Bills Offense - Why it Frustrates- Why Total Productivity is Not Likely to Improve (there will Math)

[FireChans]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

So we agree. The only stat that mattered in your heat by year comparison was the increase in turnovers. All of the others are skewed by that single one. 

It’s certainly possible. Not sure I’d say definitively.

[GoBills808]

21 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

Good question. 

 

Here are some raw numbers I looked up. The percentage in parentheses is the share percentage that went to the backs out of total number of targets divvied out by the offense.  Pretty much every team below was a top 10 offense (and top 5 in many cases) in both points and yards with a couple of exceptions (2019  Bills and 2022 Packers. And the 2021 Bengals were top 10 in points but not yards and same for the 2020 Saints and 2014 Patriots). 

 

Some things to note:

 

-Perhaps no team has been more consistent than the Chiefs. And they have maybe found that sweet spot of 18% targets to the backs.

 

-Arguably the two most dominant and consistent offenses of the last decade not including the Chiefs, are the Patriots and Saints. Both targeted the RB's far above average compared to the other teams listed here. 

 

-The Eagles and Rams have had success in four different seasons with four different QB's and targeting the RB's well below 20% of target share in each season. Even well below 18% in 3 out of the 4 seasons. They have found a slightly different recipe for success. 

 

- The Bills actually noticeably increased their target share to the backs last year at 20%. Mixed results. They had their best offensive finish since 2020 in terms of rankings. But their best offensive year to date saw the lowest target share to the Rb's at only 14%. 

 

 

2022 Bills 111 targets (20%)

2021 Bills 96 targets (15%)

2020 Bills 78 targets (14%)

2019 Bills 80 targets (16%)

 

2022 Chiefs 112 targets (18%) Super Bowl

2021 Chiefs 112 targets (18%)

2020 Chiefs 111 targets (18%) Super Bowl

2019 Chiefs 112 targets (20%) Super Bowl

2018 Chiefs  102 targets (18%)

 

2022 Packers 116 targets (21%)

2021 Packers 106 targets (19%)

2020 Packers 115 targets (23%)

 

 

2022 Bengals 133 targets (22%)

2021 Bengals 97 targets (18%) Super Bowl

 

2022 49ers 110 targets ( 21%)

2019 49ers 103 targets (22%) Super Bowl

 

2022 Eagles 61 targets (12%) Super Bowl

2017 Eagles 75 targets (14%) Super Bowl

 

2021 Rams 76 targets (13%) Super Bowl

2018 Rams 97 targets (18%) Super Bowl 

 

2020 Saints 137 targets (27%)

2019 Saints 154 targets (28%)

2018 Saints 144 targets (28%)

2017 Saints 179 targets (34%)

 

2018 Patriots 172 targets (31%) Super Bowl

2017 Patriots 158 targets (27%) Super Bowl

2016 Patriots 128 targets (23%) Super Bowl

2015 Patriots 143 targets (23%)

2014 Patriots 108 targets (18%) Super Bowl

 

Looking at the numbers above I would probably like to be in that 18% range at minimum. Bills were on the low end of the spectrum up until this past season. 

 

 

Awesome

 

so assuming this is all accurate the conclusion I draw is that Bills targeted RB at about the appropriate rate (in league winner context) in 2022? maybe even a little too high?

22 minutes ago, FireChans said:

I don't think PFR includes those in their points per drive number.  Looking at their PF total and adding ALL points from the 16 games does equal 455 (and I know Milano had a pick six in there somewhere).  But when you divide 455/# of drives, you get 2.66, which is much higher than their listed 2.52.

 

I don't know about productivity either man. 2021 scored more total points but they had an extra game too.

 

I think the offenses were different philosophically. Recency bias aside, Josh went deep A LOT more in 2022 compared to the other years. 

 

9.2 intended air yards in 2022 vs 8.2 in 21 and 8.3 in 20. 

 

That's gonna give you high variance when it comes to efficiency.

 

Now, maybe we went deep more because Diggs was being bracketed and Gabe can't run short routes, and we've come full circle as to how bad this team missed their prime Cole Beasley and how much we really needed an upgrade at WR.

 

 

They were very different but I liked it tbh

 

I think leaning into Allen's singular ability to get the ball to all areas of the field is the right approach

 

imo Dorsey is being innovative, maybe lacking a few pieces but he clearly has an identity for the offense

[PBF81]

2 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

i guess its important, i mean its as important as anything i might else be scrolling through on a Sunday lol

 

LOL BTW!  

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

1 hour ago, GoBills808 said:

Awesome

 

so assuming this is all accurate the conclusion I draw is that Bills targeted RB at about the appropriate rate (in league winner context) in 2022? maybe even a little too high?

 

I wouldn’t say too high. I think 18-23% is around where you want to be. The Chiefs have made a dynasty out of 18% but they also target the TE a ton which most teams do not. Without Kelce the Chiefs would probably resort to targeting the backs over 20% of the time.

 

And again, two of the best offenses to do it season after season have targeted the backs closer to 30% of the time. 
 

Rams and Eagles have had success in the 12 - 15% range but it hasn’t carried over for multiple seasons like the Saints and Patriots. 
 

I’m glad the Bills were at least at 20% last year as being in that 12-15% range was far too low. I think that works if you have Beasley playing like the best slot in he league like he was in 2020 but we don’t have that anymore.

 

Unless the a lot production and/or TE production goes up a lot I think he Bills will be better served to get closer to 23% of targets to the backs. 
 

That said, targets to the slot and TE’s are expected to go up a lot this year with Kincaid. On paper anyway. Have to see it work on the field still.

 

 

[Chaos]

27 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

I wouldn’t say too high. I think 18-23% is around where you want to be. The Chiefs have made a dynasty out of 18% but they also target the TE a ton which most teams do not. Without Kelce the Chiefs would probably resort to targeting the backs over 20% of the time.

 

And again, two of the best offenses to do it season after season have targeted the backs closer to 30% of the time. 
 

Rams and Eagles have had success in the 12 - 15% range but it hasn’t carried over for multiple seasons like the Saints and Patriots. 
 

I’m glad the Bills were at least at 20% last year as being in that 12-15% range was far too low. I think that works if you have Beasley playing like the best slot in he league like he was in 2020 but we don’t have that anymore.

 

Unless the a lot production and/or TE production goes up a lot I think he Bills will be better served to get closer to 23% of targets to the backs. 
 

That said, targets to the slot and TE’s are expected to go up a lot this year with Kincaid. On paper anyway. Have to see it work on the field still.

 

 

Is the goal of this additional targeting more points? Fewer punts?  

[GoBills808]

33 minutes ago, Chaos said:

Is the goal of this additional targeting more points? Fewer punts?  

The missing info is the quality of the pass catchers I think... obviously if you have a back comfortable catching passes and productive in YAC targeting him at a higher rate would make sense

 

My guess in increasing specifically the Bills' rate of targeting RB would be more in service of system-specific results...keeping a back in on pass downs to leak out for check down occupies a LB or safety, setting up wheel motion to disguise something, etc

 

I don't think there's any real need to get the ball in the hands of RBs near the LOS otherwise, esp in our offense

[Chaos]

9 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

The missing info is the quality of the pass catchers I think... obviously if you have a back comfortable catching passes and productive in YAC targeting him at a higher rate would make sense

 

My guess in increasing specifically the Bills' rate of targeting RB would be more in service of system-specific results...keeping a back in on pass downs to leak out for check down occupies a LB or safety, setting up wheel motion to disguise something, etc

 

I don't think there's any real need to get the ball in the hands of RBs near the LOS otherwise, esp in our offense

The original purpose of the thread is to flag the reality that there is not a lot more total point production to be squeezed out of the offense.  We also score more points per possesion than 30 other teams.  So a strategy of slowing down the game, hurts us more than our opponents.  My general thesis is that the offense is fine, and the problems the Bills have getting over the division game hurdle lies elsewhere.   It is not clear to me how this parsing of "we need x percent of this or that" or need to "get the ball out of Allen's hands more" is intended to help anything.  

Edited July 17, 2023 by Chaos

[GoBills808]

Just now, Chaos said:

The original purpose is to flag, there is not a lot more total point production to be squeezed out of the offense.  We also score more points per possesion than 30 other teams.  So a strategy of slowing down the game, hurts us more than our opponents.  My general thesis is that the offense is fine, and the problems the Bills have getting over the division game hurdle lies elsewhere.  

Overall yes but redzone efficiency there's some meat left on the bone

 

Stylistically yes...all things considered slower games/longer drives will favor the other team as they tend to keep the game closer

[Shaw66]

43 minutes ago, Chaos said:

The original purpose of the thread is to flag the reality that there is not a lot more total point production to be squeezed out of the offense.  We also score more points per possesion than 30 other teams.  So a strategy of slowing down the game, hurts us more than our opponents.  My general thesis is that the offense is fine, and the problems the Bills have getting over the division game hurdle lies elsewhere.   It is not clear to me how this parsing of "we need x percent of this or that" or need to "get the ball out of Allen's hands more" is intended to help anything.  

Thanks for this.  The "we need x percent of this" and "we need a #2 who gets y yards per game" arguments tend be made by all of us amateurs who look at a stat that seems out of line and then conclude that by the fixing that stat things somehow are going to be different.  Your original points were the right ones.  The Bills already have one of the most productive offenses in the league, in yards and in points, and it's unreasonable to expect that there's going to be some massive improvement in one stat or another.  If all things remain the same except the Bills get DHop and he goes for 1400 yards in place of Davis's 800, well, sure, that's better, but even that would be only a marginal improvement.  

 

The point was made in a different way by Dawkins when he told Cowherd that the media, including Cowher, somehow seem to think that just because the Bills have Allen and Diggs they should be winning every game by 20.   The league just doesn't work that way.   No team, with very few exceptions, dominates the league, week after week.  

 

Which leads to the conclusion you just said - the improved performance the Bills need cannot be measured in statistics.   Well, the red zone numbers offer at least a suggestion of the problem, which seems to be that the Bills aren't as effective finishers as they need to be to be a great team.  They need to finish better in the red zone, they need to finish games better, and they need to finish the season (i.e, the postseason) better.   They have to learn to seal the deal, as they say.   That's not Davis having a higher reception/target ratio, and it's not increasing the percentage of targets for the running backs.   It's getting into the right play in a given situation and executing it.  

 

I wrote earlier in favor of more targets for the running backs, not because I want the percentage, but because in certain situations Allen seems to go after the high-risk, high-reward play when he should be taking the low risk play.   I think the offense has to be more disciplined in that way to make the Bills better finishers.  

[SoCal Deek]

What the heck is all of this navel contemplating about? The Bills were 13-3 last season and crapped the bed out of sheer exhaustion in a home playoff game against Cincinnati. Literally NONE of this examination and re-examination had a thing to do with them not winning a championship last season. Let me say it again for emphasis….none of it! 

[Shaw66]

11 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

What the heck is all of this navel contemplating about? The Bills were 13-3 last season and crapped the bed out of sheer exhaustion in a home playoff game against Cincinnati. Literally NONE of this examination and re-examination had a thing to do with them not winning a championship last season. Let me say it again for emphasis….none of it! 

Well, um, sheer exhaustion.   I'm not trying to be funny here, but how do you know this?  Frankly, I think you're largely right, but this is a fan forum where people discuss the Bills.   Pretty much anyone who watched them last season knows that they could play better than they did, so where's the harm in talking about what they might do to get better?

[GoBills808]

15 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

What the heck is all of this navel contemplating about? The Bills were 13-3 last season and crapped the bed out of sheer exhaustion in a home playoff game against Cincinnati. Literally NONE of this examination and re-examination had a thing to do with them not winning a championship last season. Let me say it again for emphasis….none of it! 

well what tf else are we supposed to talk about then

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, Shaw66 said:

Well, um, sheer exhaustion.   I'm not trying to be funny here, but how do you know this?  Frankly, I think you're largely right, but this is a fan forum where people discuss the Bills.   Pretty much anyone who watched them last season knows that they could play better than they did, so where's the harm in talking about what they might do to get better?

Shaw, there is no such thing as perfection in the modern NFL. I’ve said it for awhile now, the problem with the Bills getting over the hump that we’d all like to see them get over is the coaching staff being in, and getting the players to play, “in the moment” when it counts come playoff time. No amount of midseason offensive or defensive perfection would’ve provided the Bills with any MORE of a home field advantage than they had against the Bengals. They got bit by a ton of injuries and a coaching staff that didn’t have their team prepared to play that day. I’m praying they have learned from the latter, but sadly I believe they’re going to lean on the convenient ‘excuse’ of the former. 

8 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

well what tf else are we supposed to talk about then

Hopkins…..obviously! 😉

[BillsShredder83]

7 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

We had fewer Yards, fewer Points Scored, by nearly 2/game.  Fewer 1st-Downs by nearly 2/game.  Fewer passing yards, one less passing TD.  More TOs & FLs.  

 

Not sure how that's all better.  

 

In the playoffs our production dropped from 41.5 PPG and 26 1st-Downs to 22 PPG and 22 1st-Downs.  

 

 

Forget the stats. The eyeball test is all that's needed. I don't understand how this perception could even exist

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

2 hours ago, Chaos said:

Is the goal of this additional targeting more points? Fewer punts?  

 

I think the goal should be to be able to sustain one of the league's best offenses consistently year in and year out. Create a offensive system that will last. That is exactly what the Patriots and Saints did for well over a decade. Both offenses used a system that targeted the RB's a lot. Far more than league average. 

 

To the Bills credit they have had a high-octane offense for three years now which is great. Can they keep up their top 5 offense with their particular style for another 7 years and only target the RB's 13%, 15% and 20% of the time year to year? It's possible, the Chiefs have done it for five years only targeting the RB's about 18% of the time. 

[Shaw66]

8 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Shaw, there is no such thing as perfection in the modern NFL. I’ve said it for awhile now, the problem with the Bills getting over the hump that we’d all like to see them get over is the coaching staff being in, and getting the players to play, “in the moment” when it counts come playoff time. No amount of midseason offensive or defensive perfection would’ve provided the Bills with any MORE of a home field advantage than they had against the Bengals. They got bit by a ton of injuries and a coaching staff that didn’t have their team prepared to play that day. I’m praying they have learned from the latter, but sadly I believe they’re going to lean on the convenient ‘excuse’ of the former. 

Hopkins…..obviously! 😉

Well, reluctant as I may be to quote 808, what are we supposed to talk about?

 

I mean, is every Bills fan supposed to kneel at the feet of the great Deek and acknowledge that the one and only subject worth talking about is whether McDermott and his staff can do a better job motivating their players?   That's it?   It's not worth talking about whether McGovern will start and be an upgrade, not worth talking about when Miller might return, not worth talking about whether Cook can come through as a quality number 1 back?    It's all about McDermott's pregame speech?

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, Shaw66 said:

Well, reluctant as I may be to quote 808, what are we supposed to talk about?

 

I mean, is every Bills fan supposed to kneel at the feet of the great Deek and acknowledge that the one and only subject worth talking about is whether McDermott and his staff can do a better job motivating their players?   That's it?   It's not worth talking about whether McGovern will start and be an upgrade, not worth talking about when Miller might return, not worth talking about whether Cook can come through as a quality number 1 back?    It's all about McDermott's pregame speech?

Oh come on. The great Deek…hardly. I just don’t understand what fans want to see here. The history of this era of the Buffalo Bills will be written on their ability to get to the Super Bowl. And maybe, just maybe, win one. They have every bit of the on field talent they need. The front office has spent the money. They clearly have a franchise quarterback. Getting another first down per drive, or throwing to the RB twice more per game in October will not be going down as the reason for their ultimate demise. 

[GoBills808]

14 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:

Forget the stats. The eyeball test is all that's needed. I don't understand how this perception could even exist

His numbers there were incorrect just fyi

[PBF81]

14 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:

Forget the stats. The eyeball test is all that's needed. I don't understand how this perception could even exist

 

So by the eyeball test, IYO we were  better in the '22 Playoffs than in the '21 Playoffs?  

 

Well, OK.  My eyes tell me differently however.   I'm also not sure that there's even any support for that outside of a subset of Bills fans.  

 

 

[Shaw66]

2 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

I think the goal should be to be able to sustain one of the league's best offenses consistently year in and year out. Create a offensive system that will last. That is exactly what the Patriots and Saints did for well over a decade. Both offenses used a system that targeted the RB's a lot. Far more than league average. 

 

 

It's an interesting point to me, because it supports what I've been saying about Allen.   Who ran the offenses for the Patriots and the Saints?  Two of the best game managers of all time, Brady and Brees.  Why were they great game managers?  Because both were content to take what the game gave them.  They knew every time they got a completion for positive yardage, it was a win for the offense, so they took the highest percentage throw every time.   Often, the highest percentage throw was to the backs. 

 

The point is how many more yards or how many more points can be generated by throwing to the backs.   The point is minimizing incompletions, interceptions, and negative plays.  All-time career completion percentage list:

 

Burrow is 1, Brees is 2, Mahomes is 10, Brady is 21, Josh is 37.  Completing passes wins football games.  

4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Oh come on. The great Deek…hardly. I just don’t understand what fans want to see here. The history of this era of the Buffalo Bills will be written on their ability to get to the Super Bowl. And maybe, just maybe, win one. They have every bit of the on field talent they need. The front office has spent the money. They clearly have a franchise quarterback. Getting another first down per drive, or throwing to the RB twice more per game in October will not be going down as the reason for their ultimate demise. 

Well, I agree whole-heartedly with your last sentence, but that doesn't mean that talking about improving the team's performance is irrelevant.  Whether O'Cyrus Torrence can start and play effectively can have a lot to do with whether the Bills win a Super Bowl, and talking about it is something that may interest fans here.  

 

What you're saying is, I think, unlike you and more like others who come into a thread and declare that the discussion is a waste of time.  If you think it's a waste of time, isn't the better solution to move on to another thread than to tell the rest of us we shouldn't talk about it?