The Curious Case Of Green Bay's Receivers
The overarching story for the past month has been Green Bay's offensive line and the sense of panic and terror that everyone exudes whenever the discussion turns towards Aaron Rodgers' 20 sacks. And that is certainly an important story. A related thread from the O-line discussion is Rodgers' overall performance through 4 games and how remarkable it has been, given the mitigating circumstances. Despite constantly running for his life, Rodgers has thrown for 1,098 yards (6th in NFL), 6 touchdowns (t-8th in NFL), 1 interception (t-3rd in NFL), 47 first downs (t-8th in NFL), and a passer rating of 101.1 (5th in NFL).
Despite the small sample size, those are still some pretty gaudy stats. So all the team has to do is fix the myriad issues up front to give Rodgers some breathing room, and the offensive woes will simply correct themselves. Right?
Not so fast. There's still a completely unrelated problem that has sprung up from seemingly nowhere, and that problem is known as 'Braylon Edwards syndrome', or in layman's terms, drops.
For the past week or so, I've been working on a new statistical model that measures the consistency of production from an NFL wide receiver. As I trudge my way through knee-deep pools of numbers, statistics, and projections, one of the best raw tools that I've come up with is WR completion percentage. In a nutshell, it takes the number of times that a WR has been targeted for a pass, the number of recorded catches the WR notches, and turns it into a success percentage.I've only been measuring Green Bay's statistics in my research, but what I've found in 2009 has surprised me. Allow me to share some of my findings with you.
- Green Bay's most reliable pass-catcher: Ryan Grant. I know your reaction must be somewhere between "Huh?" and "What?!", but it's true. In four games, Grant has been targeted 11 times and has converted 8 of them, a success rate of 81.8%, with 0 drops. That makes him Green Bay's only receiver that is above 80%, which is the benchmark for "elite-level" production. For instance, the leader in the NFL in completion percentage is Pittsburgh TE Heath Miller, at 88.9%. The top WR on the list is Miami's Davone Bess at 83.3%.
- Green Bay's least reliable pass catcher: DeShawn Wynn. Wynn has played the role of 3rd down back because Ryan Grant (allegedly) isn't as good of a receiver. But Wynn has only 2 catches on the year on 7 targets, with 2 drops. So far, Wynn is converting less than 30% of his targets. JaMarcus Russell thinks that's bad. When does Brandon Jackson get back?
- Green Bay's top receiver: Donald Driver. This is something of a surprise, considering Donald Driver was supposed to be washed up by now. But he's the leader on the team in targets (29), and he's converted 62.1% of those targets. The percentage isn't very good (70.0% is generally the watermark for above-average production), and Driver also has 2 drops to his name. But his 18 catches have come at times when Rodgers has needed him most, and he's proven that he can still play at a high level.
- Green Bay's droppiest receivers: Jordy Nelson and James Jones. The Packers' co-number three receivers have each dropped 3 passes this year, but that's where the similarity ends. Nelson has been better in converting his targets (7 for 11, Jones is 3 for 9), but Nelson's production fluctuates nearly 25.0% from game to game. In any case, both of these guys are severely underperforming their talent level, and I look for them to turn things around soon.
- The difference between Green Bay's TEs: negligible. Donald Lee and Jermichael Finley seem to be trending in opposite directions, but so far their production has been about equal. Lee has converted 72.2% of his targets, and Finley has caught 73.3% of his. Each has one drop to his name (most notably Lee's drop on 4th-and-goal in the third quarter against Minnesota), but both have shown a penchant for breaking big gains. A lot of people think that Finley's big play ability should give him the edge against Lee in the battle for the starting job, but Lee really isn't that much worse than Finley. A two tight end set is a good formation for the offense to use.
- Green Bay's most disturbing surprise: Greg Jennings. Jennings is a top receiver in the league. Why hasn't he played like it? Jennings has been targeted 22 times this season, but has only come up with 11 catches. A 50.0% conversion rate is awful for a number one receiver, as was the drop he had against Cincinnati and the poor route he ran against Antoine Winfield, resulting in Rodgers' lone interception. I would like to think that the reason for Jennings' decline is the wrist injury, but no matter what the reason, it's clear that his timing with Aaron Rodgers is way off. Let's hope the bye week clears that up.
A lot of the reason for Green Bay's 2-2 record is the offense's inability to sustain and finish drives. Part of that is the seive-like line up front, but a big part is Green Bay's case of the dropsies. According to STATS, a leader in measuring NFL statistics, Green Bay is third in the NFL in drops with 10. Based on my own research, I've come to a different conclusion: as a team, Green Bay has 13 drops, which ties them for the league lead. This is a problem that nobody saw coming, and I have no idea how a problem like this gets fixed. More reps in practice with the jugs machine? Special hand lotion? Massages? Acupuncture? StickUm?
In any case, the team has an extra week to shake off whatever has brought this scourge to the receiving corps. Let's hope that it's not the only scourge to be rid of during the bye.
0 recs |
43 comments
|
Comments
We'll have to add that one to the APC dictionary.
Go Badgers ... beat Ohio State!!!!!!
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Oct 8, 2009 12:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But it is not just the drops
Television coverage is so poor that I have no idea what Rogers was looking at while he stood there waiting to get sacked.
But I assume that he was looking at receivers who were not open (if he was looking at open receivers, then what?!?!?!)
I thought part of being an elite receiver corp was the ability to get open.
by RichBeckman on Oct 7, 2009 8:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hard to do when they are rushing 4 and still getting to Rodgers
5 line men + 1 QB = 6 offense accounted for, 5 possible receivers
4 men rushed = 7 people on said receivers
Not a lot of open receivers when at least two people are double covered with man coverage, or a lot of people sitting down in zone coverage.
by Danwood on Oct 7, 2009 8:54 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
keeping a back in on most pass plays too
so it’s more like 6 guys in for protection, 4 going out for passes.
by shaftr on Oct 7, 2009 9:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
A lot of the time we have our 5 lineman and Grant back, so that’s 6 plus Rodgers, leaving only 4 guys to go out on routes. Teams are only sending 4 guys against us most of the time, so that leaves 7 guys back.
Our oline getting themselves together is crucial to our season. If Tauscher can come in and be effective, or at least somewhat close to what he once was then our oline will be much, much improved. Having guys who can constantly anchor the T position is the most important thing to a teams pass protection. Clifton is still consistent and now we just have to hope that Tauscher can be as well.
by packallday555 on Oct 7, 2009 9:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I was just giving the ideal scenario
But definitely it’s been more 7 on 4 than not.
An additional point, look at the play Favre made Monday (I think it was 3rd Quarter) when we only “rushed” 3 (if you can call it that), dropped 8 into coverage and still they were able to complete the pass. That’s what an O-Line gets you. It’s not that people are double covered, it’s that the front 4 are still getting to Rodgers so he doesn’t have time to pick apart the defense.
by Danwood on Oct 8, 2009 5:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
Favre had all day. He made some great throws I know, and I’m not trying to discredit his performance but really any NFL starter can pick apart a defense the way he did when their getting 5-7 seconds to throw.
We played so conservative on defense Monday night it was almost sickening to watch. I read the whole week about how Capers had some great schemes, and blitzes to isolate certain matchups, and really I didn’t see any of that. We need to get Kampman back on the line. Or at least have him rushing the passer on almost every play.
I know that, that might be predictable but who cares?? I watched Pitt last Sunday, and they rush Harrison nearly every play on defense. I saw Kampman back in coverage far, far to much on Monday night.
This guy has the 3rd most sacks in the last 2 years. We need to utilize his strengths.
by packallday555 on Oct 8, 2009 5:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great Post
I had a feeling something was a miss with our receiver, thanks for quantifying it. Does this mean our offense should get better as soon we “drop the drops”?
by PackFaninFL on Oct 7, 2009 8:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm pretty sure Grant had a drop against Cincinatti.
It’s somewhat of a subjective stat, I suppose, but a ball hit the ground after he touched it that I was convinced he should have caught.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Oct 7, 2009 9:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
it's the most subjective of stats
and NOBODY keeps official track of it. So I made do with what I had.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell_M on Oct 7, 2009 9:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you know one when you see one
Completions/targets is a nice stat for production, but I am really curious about the flat out drops by our receivers. It has been painful to watch. If your instant reaction is, “he should have caught that”, or “catch the #$%@ing ball Wynn, you useless turd farmer”, then it’s a drop.
Someone should re-watch all the games and tally the drops. Not it!
by theisman's leg on Oct 8, 2009 8:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if someone provides me with game tape,
I will absolutely watch each game again.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell_M on Oct 8, 2009 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
even better if they pay you for it too, huh?
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
by verno329 on Oct 8, 2009 9:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
pshh
If I could turn this into some sort of income-laden position, I’d never want another job again.
Seriously, NFL teams, hit me up.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell_M on Oct 8, 2009 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha I'm with ya there
That would be a dream job. I would have NO problem watching game film all day and analyzing it.
by packallday555 on Oct 8, 2009 5:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember that as well.
I think the stats still stand, especially with Wynn. His drops are glaring b/c as pointed out they are often on 3rd down. Instant drive killer. Is Jackson due back after the bye? Grant has not been a great reciever in the past, but maybe keeping him in there on 3rd down gets him a few more touches with the ball “in space” as Collinsworth would say.
Some people say the glass is half empty, some say half full. I say, are you going to drink that?
by BleedsbluinMI on Oct 8, 2009 7:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Hands Team
Grant doesn’t surprise me. He’s always had good hands and caught the ball. He just doesn’t do much after the catch.
Driver and Jennings low catch rates aren’t too surprising either; Rodgers has been targeting them deep downfield (aka low percentage plays) often. I do think they need to mix up the offense to get some quick passes to Jennings and use his ability to run after the catch.
I don’t know what’s up with James Jones. He looks lost. His big catch on Monday night was when the Vikings completely blew the coverage and left him wide open.
by Brandon on Oct 8, 2009 12:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Wow.
I’m not saying you’re wrong because I’ve never kept track of his receptions vs. drops, but I’ve always thought that Grant’s hands were below average.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Oct 8, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The offense needs to start using the quick passes and screen’s. Maybe that will start giving guys like Nelson and Jones some confidence.
FIRE BRUCE BOCHY NOW!!!!!!
AND TAKE BRIAN SABEAN WITH HIM!!!!!
by 49er16 on Oct 8, 2009 12:22 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You know
We say that after every game. And I thought that, based on the start of the Vikings game, maybe the coaching staff woke up and said “Hey, let’s try the quick passes and slants!” Quick outs, a screen here and there, and we were moving really well until the fumble.
But as the game went on, it seemed like that died out. And I don’t know why. But screens used to be THE staple of the GB offense. I wish they’d return.
by Danwood on Oct 8, 2009 5:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
YES YES YES!
It was working for awhile. The fumble seemed to be the point where we stopped using the quick method.
The Packers have WR’s and TE’s that can run after the catch. They can and will produce with the ball in their hands. You cannot get them the ball if you are laying on your back with a 300 lb. lineman and your 300 lb. lineman watching that happen.
Coaching staff needs to help out the line and Rodgers does need to do his part to help out the line. I don’t mind Rodgers taking sacks, better than picks.
Looking to buy: General Manager Deputy Badge
by Bush League All Star on Oct 8, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ryan Grant
It’s only 4 games in, but hopefully this force readers to reassess his skills catching the ball. The guy has elite talent, he needs holes to run through.
A great, insightful post with lots of info.
I agree with 49er16, the Pack needs to get back to the ’07 offense. Short passes and screens, spread out the defense. Get rid of the ball before the D has a chance to get to Rodgers, let the receivers run after the catch.
by Wade V on Oct 8, 2009 3:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
why would it?
Let’s hope the bye week clears that up.
The lament of a true fan, believing there’s magic in bye weeks. They’ll heal up some, but how can you clear anything up when Grimace McPadlevel GAVE THEM ALL THE WEEK OFF?! It’s only Week 5 for effsake, can they really be that exhausted already? I’d be going full-Holmgren on them this week. Especially about the drops. It’s embarrassing for me as a fan to watch the receivers and O-line constantly hanging Rodgers out to dry.
by theisman's leg on Oct 8, 2009 8:43 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
We'll be getting a lot of injured people back after the bye week
That should help out the defense immensely.
by Danwood on Oct 8, 2009 9:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This offensive line is the same guys Brett had in 2006-2007….he won with using shorter passes, screens etc. Any team needs time to throw it down field and even when Brett went 13-3 he had to win some late because the coaches kept calling the deeper ball. Wake up packers and use the West Coast Offense for what it is…shorter more controlled passes. Rodgers……..get rid of the ball or run sooner. You hung onto the ball and when you finally decided to run you ran right into the sack and now your 0-line is getting the blame. This packer team is essentially the one that Brett took 13-3 but with more experience…………..what is up with your play. Harris/Woodson…stop blaming other people for your loses….you both were burned Monday night several times. Harris it reminded me of the NFC Championship game.
by gwinn1952 on Oct 8, 2009 8:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This offensive line is the same guys Brett had in 2006-2007
Fail.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell_M on Oct 8, 2009 9:17 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Maybe he meant its the same quality as the line in 2006-07?
Nope, that doesn’t work either.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Oct 8, 2009 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can't win either way
When the offense runs nothing but short passes they get blasted for not going deep to keep the defense honest. When they go deep they get blasted for not staying true to the WCO and running short passes.
When did Woodson get burned on Monday? And when you are supposed to get help that never comes, the blame can’t fall solely on Harris. He did not have a good game on Monday, clearly. But that doesn’t mean that others didn’t play poorly also.
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
by verno329 on Oct 8, 2009 9:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
gwinn
Your only other comment is on the Vikings board about Favre being blamed for every loss that happened in Green Bay. Are you kidding me? The guy was considered a God here even though he hadn’t done anything in the playoffs for over a decade. You also said that he never had good teams around him in Green Bay and with the Jets until the end. Take off your Favrefocals man. The Packers had the best team in the NFL for half of the 90’s and a really good team for most of Favres tenure yet they only won one Super Bowl.
by GGGamer on Oct 8, 2009 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LT – Clifton
LG – Colledge
C – Wells
RG – Spitz/Moll
RT – Tausher
There are some familiar faces but the key is that our 2 tackles were not only 3 years younger and still in their prime, but neither was coming off serious injuries. While the names are the same in some cases, the quality of play is NOT. Sadly I am not convinced that any of these guys have improved since 2006!
its not as easy as saying…oh just do the quick passes.
by TrevorR on Oct 8, 2009 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
You don’t feel that Spitz has improved? I think even Colledge has improved, but it’s been marginal.
by packallday555 on Oct 8, 2009 5:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Woodson burned??
Huh? I honestly don’t think I saw Favre pass a ball Woodson’s way. He went after Harris (who looked terrible) and Williams all night.
by packallday555 on Oct 8, 2009 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
2 tight ends
I think that’s a great idea, they’re both much more valuable than our 3/4 WR’s. Start running more screens to Grant/Lee/Finley, let them block or release randomly will keep the D guessing….hell i’d just line up in this formation to start the game and keep running the same 4/5 plays out of it until they stopped it. Run x 2, screen, slant, TE post…that’s it!
by gangstaff on Oct 8, 2009 9:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
the only formation that really bothers me
is when they line up in shotgun with the RB next to Rodgers and the TE always motions to right in front of the RB. It always means a pass is coming and they never seem to work all that well. Everytime they line up like that I just hang my head and prepare to be disappointed.
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
by verno329 on Oct 8, 2009 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Small sample size anyone?
You’re willing to say that Grant is the best pass catcher on the team based on 11 catches? Please.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Oct 8, 2009 12:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
considering the WR's have been awful
and the only other pass catching RB on the roster is 2 for 7, yeah, I’ll make that claim as of Week 4 of 2009.
Maybe if Jennings shows up we can put this issue to rest. Until then, Grant has been a surprising success thus far.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell_M on Oct 8, 2009 9:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
crap
how many drops could a wide receiver drop before the receiver himself gets dropped? some idiot dropped Jennings in my fantasy league today but I’m tenth in waiver order!!
by warvette on Oct 8, 2009 2:53 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
It's sort of a silly stat
So a ball thrown over a wide receiver’s head counts the same as a drop? A 2-hopper results in negative points? That’s pretty tough on the receiver, don’t you think?
by ktenreb on Oct 8, 2009 3:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Balls that hit receivers square in the chest, bounce out, and the defense catches count as INTs against a QB
Pretty tough on a QB, don’t you think?
by Danwood on Oct 8, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 














