Can We Expect the Steelers OL to Improve in 2009?
Here is another post from Checking the Numbers. I meant to have this done this past Monday for the start of Training Camp, but I had to some computer issues that set me back. So, I decided to wait until after the HOF Inductions.
Photo Credit: Robin Rombach/Post-Gazette (Willie Colon celebrates Super Bowl XLIII)
Since the Steelers' 2009 Training Camp is upon us, I thought it was a good time to take a look at the group that has caused Steeler Nation the most concern each of the last two years, particularly from a pass protection standpoint. I realize that we have seen a drop in the Steelers' rushing game in 2008, but the issue that has caused the most serious concern is that Big Ben has been sacked nearly 90 times in the last two seasons. Steelers fans have discussed the lack of pass protection at great length the past two seasons, and we have voiced great concern over the fact that the Steelers have passed on several OL draft picks that we wanted. Because of these concerns, I wanted to compare the level of defenses that the OL has faced in the 2007 and 2008 seasons. The Steelers faced a much easier schedule in 2007 than 2008 but still had approximately the same number of sacks per season. So I asked "Was it possible that the OL was actually better in 2008 than 2007, just that they faced a much stronger defensive schedule?" I thought it possible. So, lets take a look at the numbers (from www.pro-football-reference.com).
For the past two seasons, I compiled the following defensive statistics for Steelers' opponents:
- Defensive Rank in Points (Opp D Rk-Pt)
- Defensive Rank in Yards (Opp D Rk-Yd)
- Defensive Rank in Rush Defense (Opp D Rk-Rush)
- Defensive Rank in Sacks (Opp D Rk-Sk)
- Number of Defensive Sacks (Opp No. Sk)
- Number of Defensive Sacks per Game (Opp Sk/Gm)
I also compiled or calculated the following statistics for the Steelers' offense:
- Steelers' Sacks Allowed for each game (Pit Sk Allowed)
- Steelers' Sacks Allowed minus Opponents' Sacks per Game (Pit Sk All - Opp Sk/Gm)
I pulled numbers for Opponents' Defensive Ranks in Points, Yards, and Rush Defense because they give a good idea of the general quality of the defense overall. I included rush defense instead of pass defense because strong run D tends to be pointed to as evidence of a physical defense. Obviously, I compiled the Sacks data because the number of sacks given up the last two years are our primary concern right now. However, even if an opposing defense wasn't highly ranked in terms of sacks, a high quality, physical defense would more likely create situations where Ben would hold the ball longer. For example, top ranked defenses would be more likely to create 3rd and longs or to cover the WRs down the field, thereby adding more stress to the OL.
Below are the tables containing the 2007 and 2008 data. I added a line below the bottom row of numbers (which is in bold) to let you know whether the bolded numbers are averages of the columns above or the sum of the column above. The data for 2007 is shown in the first table.
| 2007 Opponent | Opp D Rk-Pt | Opp D Rk-Yd | Opp D Rk-Rush | Opp D Rk-Sk | Opp No. Sk | Opp Sk/Gm | Pit Sk Allowed | Pit Sk All - Opp Sk/Gm |
| Cleveland Browns | 21 | 30 | 27 | 26 | 28 | 1.75 | 1 | -0.75 |
| Buffalo Bills | 18 | 31 | 25 | 29 | 26 | 1.63 | 1 | -0.63 |
| San Francisco 49ers | 20 | 25 | 22 | 22 | 31 | 1.94 | 2 | 0.06 |
| Arizona Cardinals | 27 | 17 | 9 | 13 | 36 | 2.25 | 4 | 1.75 |
| Seattle Seahawks | 7 | 15 | 12 | 4 | 45 | 2.81 | 3 | 0.19 |
| Denver Broncos | 28 | 19 | 30 | 17 | 33 | 2.06 | 4 | 1.94 |
| Cincinnati Bengals | 24 | 27 | 21 | 32 | 22 | 1.38 | 1 | -0.38 |
| Baltimore Ravens | 22 | 6 | 2 | 20 | 32 | 2.00 | 3 | 1.00 |
| Cleveland Browns | 21 | 30 | 27 | 26 | 28 | 1.75 | 4 | 2.25 |
| New York Jets | 19 | 18 | 29 | 25 | 29 | 1.81 | 7 | 5.19 |
| Miami Dolphins | 30 | 23 | 32 | 24 | 30 | 1.88 | 5 | 3.13 |
| Cincinnati Bengals | 24 | 27 | 21 | 32 | 22 | 1.38 | 0 | -1.38 |
| New England Patriots | 4 | 4 | 10 | 2 | 47 | 2.94 | 3 | 0.06 |
| Jacksonville Jaguars | 10 | 12 | 11 | 11 | 37 | 2.31 | 5 | 2.69 |
| St. Louis Rams | 31 | 21 | 20 | 23 | 31 | 1.94 | 4 | 2.06 |
| Baltimore Ravens | 22 | 6 | 2 | 20 | 32 | 2.00 | 0 | -2.00 |
| 20.5 | 19.4 | 18.8 | 20.4 | 31.8 | 2.0 | 47 | 0.95 | |
| Avg | Avg | Avg | Avg | Avg | Avg | Total | Avg |
And, here is the data for the 2008 season:
| 2008 Opponent | Opp D Rk-Pt | Opp D Rk-Yd | Opp D Rk-Rush | Opp D Rk-Sk | Opp No. Sk | Opp Sk/Gm | Pit Sk Allowed | Pit Sk All - Opp Sk/Gm |
| Houston Texans | 27 | 22 | 23 | 27 | 25 | 1.56 | 2 | 0.44 |
| Cleveland Browns | 17 | 26 | 28 | 31 | 17 | 1.06 | 2 | 0.94 |
| Philadelphia Eagles | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 48 | 3.00 | 9 | 6.00 |
| Baltimore Ravens | 3 | 2 | 3 | 12 | 34 | 2.13 | 3 | 0.88 |
| Jacksonville Jaguars | 21 | 17 | 14 | 20 | 29 | 1.81 | 3 | 1.19 |
| Cincinnati Bengals | 19 | 12 | 21 | 30 | 17 | 1.06 | 0 | -1.06 |
| New York Giants | 5 | 5 | 9 | 6 | 42 | 2.63 | 5 | 2.38 |
| Washington Redskins | 6 | 4 | 8 | 27 | 24 | 1.50 | 4 | 2.50 |
| Indianapolis Colts | 7 | 11 | 24 | 19 | 30 | 1.88 | 2 | 0.13 |
| San Diego Chargers | 15 | 25 | 11 | 22 | 28 | 1.75 | 4 | 2.25 |
| Cincinnati Bengals | 19 | 12 | 21 | 30 | 17 | 1.06 | 0 | -1.06 |
| New England Patriots | 8 | 10 | 15 | 15 | 31 | 1.94 | 1 | -0.94 |
| Dallas Cowboys | 20 | 8 | 12 | 1 | 59 | 3.69 | 5 | 1.31 |
| Baltimore Ravens | 3 | 2 | 3 | 12 | 34 | 2.13 | 3 | 0.88 |
| Tennessee Titans | 2 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 44 | 2.75 | 5 | 2.25 |
| Cleveland Browns | 17 | 26 | 28 | 31 | 17 | 1.06 | 0 | -1.06 |
| 12.1 | 12.0 | 14.4 | 18.2 | 31.0 | 1.9 | 48 | 1.06 | |
| Avg | Avg | Avg | Avg | Avg | Avg | Total | Avg |
Taking a look at this data, there are a few points of interest that stick out to me. First, the quality of defensive opponent was clearly higher in 2008 than in 2007. The average defensive opponents' ranking jumped from around 20 in yards and points to around 12 from 2007 to 2008. The Steelers played 3 games against top 10 defenses in 2007 and 8 games against top 10 defenses in 2008. Conversely, in 2007, they had 10 games against defenses ranked 20 or lower in points allowed (8 for yards allowed), while in 2008 it was 3 games against defenses ranked 20 or worse in points (4 for yards). So, clearly, the 2008 OL faced much higher quality defenses for a much larger portion of the season than in 2007.
When reviewing the numbers for opposing defenses' sacks, it appears that the two seasons were close to even. The average defensive rank in sacks for 2008 was only slightly higher than 2007, and the average number of opponents' sacks was actually slightly lower in 2008 than 2007. However, I think that the 2008 numbers are skewed by the Browns and Bengals. They had 17 sacks each and accounted for 4 games in 2008. It's worth noting that the Steelers only allowed 2 sacks total to those two teams (week 2 against the Browns, when they still had hope).
I say that these numbers skew the 2008 data because, in the last 20 years, only 5 defenses have had 17 or fewer sacks for the season. Oddly, three of them were this season (Chiefs had 10!), and the Steelers faced 2 of them, holding both teams without a sack in 3 games. Because the only sacks given up against these two teams was in week 2, I think this is further indication that the OL improved as the season progressed. But, since both teams were also so poor pass rushing, holding them sackless doesn't tell much.
Anyway, statistically, the major differences between the defenses faced in 2007 and 2008 were in overall quality, moreso than overall pass rushing. In my opinion, the huge jump in overall quality of defenses faced from 2007 to 2008 is enough to suggest that the OL has improved. Again, when facing a string of quality opponents, one would have expected that the weak link on the team would have faced more situations of adversity, probably leading to even more sacks in 2008. Instead, the number held relatively steady; still too high, yes, but steady. But, I don't want to rely on just the average difference in the quality of opposing defense. So, let's take a look at a couple of graphs that I think will show better a trend of improved play by the Steelers' OL.
Below are two graphs: one for 2007 and one for 2008. In each graph, the red line graphs the number of sacks that the Steelers gave up in each game. The blue line graphs the average number of sacks per game of the opposing defense (i.e. the opposing defense's total sacks for the year divided by 16).
2007 Defensive Opponents' Sacks per Game versus Steelers Sacks Allowed each game
2008 Defensive Opponents' Sacks per Game versus Steelers Sacks Allowed each game
When I look at these two graphs, a couple of things jump out at me. First, the worst spikes in Steelers' sacks allowed occurred between the middle of 2007 and early 2008. So, it appears that the worst period for Steelers pass protection was between week 8 of 2007 to week 3 of 2008. The other thing I see is that in the second half of 2007, the spikes in sacks do not correspond to spikes in opposing defenses' sacks/game. However, in 2008, for the most part, the Steelers gave up more sacks to teams with a higher sacks/game and fewer sacks to teams with a lower sacks/game statistical. This tells me that in mid to late 2007, the Steelers OL pass protection was terrible, while in 2008, it was more or less average to mediocre. But, in particular, when we look at the final six games of 2008, the sacks allowed in each of those games is around what one would expect for an average (perhaps even slightly above average) offensive line. Against the poorer pass rushing teams, they gave up fewer than that team's average sacks/game, while against the better pass rushing teams, they were overwhelmed a little. But, at least in those cases, we don't see any more cases like Week 10 of '07 against the Jets or Week 3 of '08 against the Eagles, where they gave up more than 5 and 6 sacks more than the teams' averages, respectively.
My conclusion is that, yes, I do think the OL is improving. As some have noted, the starting 5 have had about 14 or 15 weeks together as a unit, including last year's playoffs. And, that schedule last year was quite a gauntlet for any OL. I haven't posted the table, but I also pulled the numbers for the 2009 Steelers opponents. Based on their 2008 rankings, we should expect a significantly lower average defensive rank this year: 17 for points, 18 for yards and rush defense. In addition, 10 of the games are against opponents that averaged fewer than 2 sacks/game last season.
So, with greater cohesiveness as they continue to work together, there is hope for improvement. I know that there is talk of Urbik beating out Stapleton, but even that change would be less change than we had over the last 2 years. From the open of 2007 to the end of 2008, only Willie Colon started every game. Every other position has gone through at least one transition. If Urbik beats Stapleton, that will only be one change, as opposed to four.
So, Steeler Nation, what are your thoughts? Still worried about the OL, or do you feel better about it now (at least a little)?
40 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think you're missing a few tricks
the biggest one being that in 2007 Big Ben hald onto the ball A LOT. IN 2008, especially down the stretch you could se ehim really mature into a cerebral QB. He would get outside the tackles and just throw the ball away rather than hold it and end up being sacked.
Yes they faced better defenses in 2008 than 2007 and I think the OL did improve in some facets. I think Stapleton was, at least at first, an improvement over Kendall Simmons. He wore down as the season went on though. Secondly Max Starks really became an average to slightly above average NFL LT. He’s not great and he won’t be going to any Probowls anytime soon but he was not a liability, which sadly is what several back injuries had done to Marvel Smith. Also worth noting that in 2007 Faneca did not have his best season. Hartwig is also an obvious upgrade of Sean Mahan. So yes they did improve but they are still one of the worst OLs in the league. The majority of the players have youth on their side and little NFL experience though so there is reason to be hopeful they will improve this year with the same personnel.
But personally I think Big Ben’s improvement in the finer arts of QB play has more to do with the sack total staying roughly static.
Good points
I agree that Ben has shown better judgment in getting rid of the ball if it’s just not there in 2008 over 2007. However, I believe there were many more times in 2007 when Ben didn’t even have time to think. Whereas, in 2008, it seems there were more examples of sacks where he expected someone to open up who didn’t. Maybe I’m “misremembering,” but it seems that the defense had guys on Ben faster more often in ’07, making it hard to get rid of the ball on time.
But, I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that facing a large number of higher quality defenses would be expected to add more stress to the OL (and offense as a whole, for that matter).
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 9, 2009 9:12 PM EDT up reply actions
good analysis wolf pack
If you ever have any free time, I’d like to know just how full of crap Arians was when he said that only 19 sacks this past season were on the O-line. The most important thing that Kiwi alluded to was Ben’s maturation as a cerebral QB.
I love Ben but he’s no Manning when it comes to his pre-snap reads. If he can better read the defense and call effective hot routes, I think we’ll see the sack numbers decline.
I'd like to
But, I’m not sure if I could actually do it. For one thing, Arians knows the plays called and who was responsible for what, which I don’t. For another, I’d have to review the film of every sack to see whose fault it was. Sounds like something I would have had time for in college. :)
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 9, 2009 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Excellent!
Thanks for the link. It is a great read and one I totally agree with.
about those figures...
I note that Mewelde Moore got the blame for 4.5 sacks, I remember one sack in that Eagles game where he didn’t pick up a blitz, mainly because he got caught trying to decide which of the 2 blitzers he should pick up. It wouldn’t have made any difference to Ben getting sacked on that play because if he picked up one, the other still makes the sack. That one should be on the OL but I suspect it’s been “credited” to Mewelde Moore because technically he missed a block.
by KiwiSteelerFan on Aug 10, 2009 8:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Totally true...
But this is just one of those stats. An interception still counts on a QB if it hits the WR in the hands or numbers then bounces off and gets caught on a deflection. Just one of those things I guess.
by NYSteelersFan4 on Aug 11, 2009 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions
good stuff wolfie
Keep it up. be sure to check out his blog out for other good posts if you enjoyed.
Freel free to email me anytime at behindthesteelcurtain@gmail.com with questions, suggestions, complaints, etc, or to just say what's up. -Michael Bean (Blitz)
Thanks, Blitz! Appreciate it.
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 10, 2009 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Great statistical analysis
My only quibble with this outstanding post is that we also need to be looking at running stats to get a full picture of the O-line.
As Arians is quick to point out, you cannot blame the O-line completely for success and failure. Part of the credit and blame in the running game goes to the backs (injuries to FWP and Mendenhall certainly hurt), the TE’s (ohh Matt Spaeth!) and to the scheme. However the big guys up-front set the tone. My sense is that the big drop-off we saw last year was at least partly related to the weakness and lack of cohesion among our front 5.
Just for some perspective our running game went from being ranked number 3 in yards gained in 2007 to number 23 in 2008. (In 2006 we were 10th and in 2005 5th and in 2004 we were 2nd)
Also, last year only three teams averaged less Y/A then us. Of course one of those was our opponent in the Super Bowl the Arizona Cardinals – so it’s hard to be dogmatic about need for an effective running game. Still I find it hard to believe that
Another good point
And, I think that’s where we missed Faneca more than anything else, in the run game. But, again, when you’re facing a string of quality opponents, I think it would be hard to build consistency in the run game. I don’t think I highlighted that well enough. Not only did the OL face better defenses in general, but the cumulative effect of facing so many good D’s probably increased the impact over the course of the season(or, at least, could be reasonably expected to).
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 9, 2009 9:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Great point about the running game
Outstanding post BTW Wolf Brother…I can’t possibly research this, but I would like to know the percentage of runs the Steelers had of two yards or less, and where that percentage fit into all the other teams ranking of the same. That might be the best barometer. I remember Ben, after the first half of the first Ravens game (which followed the Eagles debacle), coming out and throwing passes like the ball was a hot potato. If you take three steps and heave it, me, Shake and Blitz can be the interior of the line and we won’t allow a sack. But the running game is more of a true barometer, and I remember getting stuffed way, way too many times.
Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history
you can go up against Haloti Ngata and company…I will pass on that one
I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!
by Frank Mineo (DYMS) on Aug 11, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Throw me in there...
I’m 5’7", but I’ll block T Suggs. Dude is soft.
by NYSteelersFan4 on Aug 11, 2009 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Our OL
One can only hope our OL will improve. I just watched the Philly game again, and that was pretty pathetic! I’m going back and seeing how many sacks could be accounted for by Big Ben holding on to the ball. In the Philly game he had no time at all! He could not even drop back and set his feet before Eagle defenders were on him.
Many times Big Ben extending a play was a result of quick pressure, not him holding onto the ball in the pocket. If Manning or Marino played behind the Steelers ’08 line, they would have been sacked quite a few times more than Big Ben was.
We are lucky that we are not playing a tough schedule this year. Hopefully they will gain that chemistry needed for an OL to be good.
If you want to keep Ben upright, establish the running game. Our OL struggled mightily last year clearing holes and getting people off the line.
but,
I don’t disagree with anything said, but if we had a stronger run game it would change the strategies of opposing defenses. Sure the Bus is gone but no one can make yards when there are no holes to run through. I still wish we would have pursued OL higher in the draft each of the last two years.
Not even necessarily higher...
I think there were guys who we passed over to select some of the guys we have who just looked flat out better football players. This year is possibly the first time I can say maybe that isn’t true. Urbik looked like a 3rd round prospect, we took him in the third, at the time I’d have been hard pushed to pick a guy who I could say would definitely work out better. He was probably value at that pick with no-one, at least to me, being head and shoulders better at that point. Just looking back over the last few drafts, there were a few picks I felt we’d have been better off making. Last year it was Carl Nicks over Tony Hills. I have no idea what caused Nicks to fall as far as he did. Going into the draft he was talked of as a possible late first rounder. He ended up going in the 5th and started at Guard for the Saints, doing a great job. He’s a likely starting Tackle for them this year.
2006 we selected Willie Colon who’s started a good number of games, but up to now has never really shown he was good enough to be doing so. Though training camp signs so far this year are promising, we skipped over a really good zone blocking guy in Chris Kuper, who a friend of mine was particularly high on, to draft Colon. The same friend was livid when we picked Trai Essex instead of Jason Brown (Baltimore Center). In 2007, trading up for a punter when we probably didn’t need to. We end up getting Cameron Stephenson who never made it out of camp whilst a guy like Josh Beekman slips through.
So yeah this buddy of mine, if he’d been allowed to draft the Offensive Linemen we might be headed into this season with an OL of:
Max Starks(4/11)/Josh Beekman(1.25/16)/Jason Brown(2.25/16)/Chris Kuper(0/16)/Carl Nicks(0.5/13)
The numbers in brackets? How many sacks each one was deemed to have given up this year divided by the number of starts (though Nicks played predominantly LG in 2008).
Ah well…
by KiwiSteelerFan on Aug 10, 2009 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions
v. interesting points
still, the question in my mind – would those guys have numbers that low if they had been coached by Z? No way to answer it, of course, but I have a feeling that we’re lacking something besides quality raw material…
Rushing game
I agree that the rushing game needs to improve this year. I do think that it will at least have better numbers, based on the level of D’s faced last year versus this year. I also think it will help alot if Mendenhall can stay heathy. I know that the opponents’ average defensive Rush rank wasn’t as high as the overall defense last year, but it was still on the stout side.
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 10, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Good point
I really wanted us to replace him with Cam Cameron.
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 10, 2009 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Both
“Still worried about the OL, or do you feel better about it now”
Both. I think your premise is right on, and I think this year we’ll see improved sack numbers and better YPC numbers in the run game and we’ll hear a lot about the “improved” o-line but much of the supposed improvement will just be an easier schedule.
But it’s still the one part of the team that worries me. No matter how good they look early, when we face Baltimore for the first time I’ll be worried that they’re about to get exposed.
by Steelers in XLIV on Aug 9, 2009 10:04 PM EDT reply actions
At least I "lost" my Cordell Stewart jersey...
Granted it was a gift…
But does this mean I should give up my “Mr. Carter” #23 jersey too?
I know he is getting old and has never been more than a back up behind Troy and Ryan… but I always loved his enthusiasm and will never forget him bouncing up and down with the dreadlocks after the win in the AFCCG in early 2006 before SB XL.
by Pollock in Pittsburgh on Aug 9, 2009 10:55 PM EDT reply actions
I am and have been a diehard Steelers fan all my life
I was a member of the old pittsburghlive forum which was discontinued
I had a strange sense of humor there and some ppl misunderstood me and were offended (and I apologize for that)
I am asking you if you can please vote for my mom’s chihuahua
Online Cutest Dog Competition
http://www.cutestdogcompetition.com/vote.cfm?h=878A6B8638A6B08C782D78A284826D50
You can vote everyday until this Friday, August 14
I think you need to have cookies on to vote and view the photo
I don’t mean to spam, but i wanted to ask some of my fellow Steeler fans for some help here
Thank you and God bless!
Excellent Poast
First off, this thought never occurred to me until you said it. But it does make sense. Essentially, if you perform the same, under tougher conditions, than you have improved.
This is encouraging.
I also think Ben has improved on his ball toss-aways. However I prefer he holds onto it on 3rd and long. Because whats the real difference between 3rd and 10, and 3rd and 15? I’d rather him give it a shot. I think a lot of his long holds are on crucial downs.
But a great breakdown with the numbers as usual my good hombre.
Thanks
The other reason that I am hopeful for an improved line is that the FO hasn’t been going after a ton of new OL picks, as much as we’ve wanted them to. And, I just think that the defensive schedule faced last year may have been among the strongest in a single season ever (that may be another post:)).
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 10, 2009 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Good post
But I think in order to compare the OL for two years you have to compare Sacks per Pass. Not just total sacks.
I don’t have the numbers but I think we passed a lot more in 2007. So the sacks per attempts increased last year.
To me the most telling stat where your graphics
In 2007 they where 4 times below average, 4 times they where average and 8 times above
In 2008 they where 4 Times below average, 1 time average and 11 times above.
This plus our average yards per attempt made me think that our OL is not getting better.
Sacks per attempts
In 2007, we passed 442 times + 47 sacks = a total of 489 drop backs. So, 9.6% of dropbacks ended in a sack.
In 2008, we passed 506 times + 48 sacks = a total of 554 drop backs. So, 8.7% of dropbacks ended in a sack. (NOTE: in Pro Football Reference‘s site, they say we gave up 49 sacks, but when I add up the totals from the individual games, I get 48. I don’t know where the discrepancy came in, and I double checked it, but I figured one sack didn’t make a big difference).
If they had given up the same percentage in 2008, opponents would have had 53 sacks.
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 10, 2009 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Averages
I can see your point. But, what I saw in the graphs was that, except in the Eagles game, the amount above average was less than the previous year, and we certainly didn’t see the huge spikes in sacks against bad defenses (like 2007 against the Jets). Also, I would argue that one would expect a cumulative effect of facing a strong defense just about every week. I think the only time we saw that late in the year was against the Titans, after having played, I think, four tough games in a row.
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 10, 2009 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions
2007 Offense = 2008 Offense
I’ve been pretty well convinced for a while that the 2007 “awesome” offense and the 2008 “shitty” offense were just about identical offenses with vastly different schedules. I did a post going into the playoffs last year that showed a pretty strong trend that our offense tends to dominate lesser competition while being dominated by top competition; when we faced a top ten defense, we underperformed against them compared to the rest of the NFL while we outperformed the rest of the NFL against poor defenses.
Looking at the graphs above, that trend seems to have leaked over into the sack numbers as well – teams that averaged considerably above 2 sacks (weeks 3, 7, 13, 15) sacked us more than their averages while teams that averaged closer to one sack (weeks 6, 11, and 16) didn’t get us at all.
We have an easy schedule this year, so I have no doubt we will put up offensive numbers that make our offense look serviceable, but those numbers will be deceptive, as they were in 2007. As a team, we aren’t trying to put together a 13-3 season; we’re trying to win the Super Bowl. The closer we get to the Super Bowl, the better our competition will get, which doesn’t bode well for our offense. We got lucky last year; we played 2 bad defenses and one great defense whose offense imploded. If we had to face the Titans, Giants, or Eagles, there’s a very good chance that we would have lost. Hell, we still just about lost to Arizona, and they weren’t even that great of a team.
Even if all goes well in the regular season, I’d bet on a tougher road in the playoffs this year – games in which we play good defenses combined with good offenses. So no, I don’t feel better about our offense – outside of its ability to rack up cheap wins – and I won’t until we get real offensive linemen, a real offensive line coach, and above all, a real offensive coordinator.
charity standing orders
Differences
I think there is one big difference. Last year, we had some games where our offense (OL in particular) sucked pretty bad against some mediocre defenses. I believe that also coincided with some injuries to Smith and Simmons, as well as Mahan just sucking pretty bad in general. This year, our offense struggled, yes, but it was more against an overall schedule of tough competition. I go back to what Blitz said after the 2007 season, that based on our upcoming schedule, we’d be lucky to go 8-8. I think most of us agreed to that statement largely because of the offensive line struggles. Yes, the defense was historically good, but the offense actually faced a tougher schedule in terms of opponents’ ranking than the defense did. Honestly, if the sack total for 2009 drops to under 30 for the year, I don’t see how you can’t give any credit to the OL for improving over 2007. Even though it will be easier than the 2008 schedule, the defensive opponents will still be better overall than what we faced in 2007 (based on last year’s rankings, anyway).
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 10, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Excellent analysis
Great work wolfpack; Really well researched. The only thing I think you may have overlooked would be the age of our offensive line. Compared to the rest of the league, many of our starters are relatively young. So it’s not just a matter of cohesiveness, but also individual experience that is contributing to our line’s improvement. Many of the starters have yet to reach the prime of their careers and I believe that we’ll continue to see the line improve.
"Whats the worst thing that can happen to a quarterback? He loses his confidence." -Terry Bradshaw
Good points
I didn’t address that in this analysis, but I do think it is also a factor.
For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 10, 2009 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Agree with BadMaafala
I believe BadMaafala hit it on the head with his assessment. As a matter of fact the following excellent article — http://pit.scout.com/2/878178.htm comes to almost the exact same conclusions; the offensive line lacks talent and struggles against top-10 pass rushing teams.
It also argues against the consistency angle because that will get you only so far. At the end of the day talent usually wins out. Take for example the Denver Broncos which finished in the top-5 in both Adjusted Sack Rate and Adjusted Line Yards as measured by FO’s. The Broncos last year were starting a rookie at LT, a 2nd yr player at RT and a 3rd year player at RG. Pittsburgh even though they were starting 2 first year starters also had players that had been drafted/acquired by the organization, having taken time to learn the system before given a chance to start. Max is a 6th year player, Kemo a 5th year player, Colon a 4th year player and Hartwig was a veteran free agent. Only Stapleton could be argued to be green as a player and even then he had one full year to learn the playbook.
Good point about ages
We know who these players are now, and (outside of possibly Stapleton) they’re not going to get dramatically better. The OL sucks. Stop making excuses for it. We need good coaching, a commitment to spend real resources on the line, and proper use of the resources we do spend on it – all of which have been lacking.
charity standing orders

by 



















