Packers Huddle

I decided to make a new thread about this. We can discuss guys we have, needs we have, prospects we like or whatever.

But I was just looking at the mold of Packer OLine under Gutey, and I came up with a couple ways to look at it.

First, Gutey has drafted 8 OL in 4 years. However, we only have full measurables for 5 of them. If you look at the height/weight/arm/bench for all 8 prospects and the rest of the measurables for the 5 prospects Gutey has drafted for whom we have full info, you can look at minimums/maximums/averages.

I noticed, though, that most of the outlier numbers came from Cole Madison. So I wanted to look at things as a whole that we drafted under Gutey, and the drafted players except Madison.

Similarly, if you look at the Olinemen on the current roster, and do the same exercise (again, only height/weight/arm/bench for Hanson and Myers), almost all of the outlier numbers were Yosh Nijman, an UDFA, whose athletic numbers are just way better than everyone else's. So I wanted to take a look at those numbers with and without him, as well.

The result, as you can see by comparing the right pane of the picture above and the right pane of the picture below, is a very narrow band of measurables that likely show us the target range for Green Bay Olinemen. This butts against the notion that we are moving toward bigger guys in favor of athleticism. We may prefer bigger AND athletic, but it hasn't yet materialized as such.

Some prospects:

Tackles:

Guards:

I don't see us moving toward bigger vs athletic, but I do see the organization moving toward established run blockers vs potential high caliber pass blockers.

we don't zone block as much as we use to in short yardage situations, our inside zone blocking has become inside duo blocks which are G and tackle teaming to drive the DT, the RB has the option depending on position of play side inside lber of going through the A or the B gap.

so not only do we want big strong OL that have the power to drive back DT's, we also require them to be agile and quick to seal second level lbers on outside stretch runs.

our backup G's did OK last year, but OK should not be our goal, improving our run blocking should be, we missed Jenkins at g, it would be great to get another like him.

this from Acme Packers shows Nijman and Runyan doing it to perfection, plus a lot more on uptempo helping the OL protect Rodgers

Yosh Nijman has been playing quite well when he has come in the game at left tackle. Against the Ravens on Sunday, he had two nice blocks that led to two touchdowns: one when he sealed the B-gap on A.J. Dillon’s 3-yard touchdown run and another when he helped spring Rodgers free on a play where Rodgers extended and found Aaron Jones in the end zone for a touchdown.

On Dillon’s touchdown run, the Packers are running “duo”, a man blocking scheme that creates double teams at the point of attack. Unlike the inside zone, the two double team blocks up front do not disengage from their defender to the second level and instead give the running back a read on the middle linebacker for his path. If the middle linebacker fits downhill in the A-gap, then the running back will bounce outside the tight end. If the middle linebacker fits over the top away from the gap, then the running back will hit the A or B-gap hard.
heres the link to watch it

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2021 ... adams-film

I new I saw this somewhere, our run blocking ranked 23rd in the league last year, down from the #6th ranking from 2020, obviously injury's and the loss of Linsley where the culprit, with the departure of Turner we have a open spot at RT, obviously Nijman will try and fill it, but has he ever played RT??? if he fails to impress I'd expect Jenkins to get a shot, either way we could use a starter capable G or T to groom up quickly.


Green Bay Packers Run Game Doesn’t Generate as many Big Plays in 2021

In 2020, the Packers would average 4.8 yards per rush as a team, which ranked sixth in the NFL. This year, they would average 4.2 yards, and that ranked 21st. We also didn’t see the big plays being generated as frequently either. Sharp Football defines an explosive run as a play of 10 or more yards on the ground. Last season, Green Bay had an explosive run rate of 11 percent and generated 53 explosive runs. This year, those figures fell to just eight percent and 36.

On first down, Green Bay would find similar success rushing the ball, averaging 4.7 yards per carry this season compared to 4.6 in 2020. But on second and third downs is where we really saw the difference. The Packers would average 3.6 yards per rush on second down this season and 4.4 on third down. A season ago, however, they would average 4.8 yards per attempt on second down — 1.2 yards more than this season — and 5.5 yards on third downs.

https://dairylandexpress.com/2022/01/27 ... -plays-202

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2022 07:50

Green Bay Packers Run Game Doesn’t Generate as many Big Plays in 2021

In 2020, the Packers would average 4.8 yards per rush as a team, which ranked sixth in the NFL. This year, they would average 4.2 yards, and that ranked 21st. We also didn’t see the big plays being generated as frequently either. Sharp Football defines an explosive run as a play of 10 or more yards on the ground. Last season, Green Bay had an explosive run rate of 11 percent and generated 53 explosive runs. This year, those figures fell to just eight percent and 36.

On first down, Green Bay would find similar success rushing the ball, averaging 4.7 yards per carry this season compared to 4.6 in 2020. But on second and third downs is where we really saw the difference. The Packers would average 3.6 yards per rush on second down this season and 4.4 on third down. A season ago, however, they would average 4.8 yards per attempt on second down — 1.2 yards more than this season — and 5.5 yards on third downs.

https://dairylandexpress.com/2022/01/27 ... -plays-202

I'd like to highlight a different part of that article:

Now, there is very rarely ever one reason behind why something happens in football, but I have to imagine all of the movement and injuries along the Green Bay offensive line didn’t help. Including the playoffs, the Packers utilized seven different offensive line combinations over the course of the season, and they ranked 23rd in run-blocking by PFF’s grading system. For added context, the Packers finished seventh in 2020.

For transparency purposes, while PFF was never a huge fan of Green Bay’s run-blocking, ESPN had the Packers ranked fourth in their run-block win rate metric. Football Outsider’s DVOA metric also had Green Bay’s rushing offense as a top-10 unit.

Again, I’ll reiterate just as I have all season long, this Green Bay Packers run game was still effective, for the most part, but I think we can all agree that it wasn’t at the same level that it was at a season ago. I also believe those high rankings from ESPN and Football Outsiders are, in part, a testament to just how good Jones and Dillon are.

According to PFF ($$), both would finish inside the top-20 out of 64 eligible running backs in yards after contact average, with Jones also finishing 13th in missed tackles forced and Dillon 22nd–showcasing their abilities to make plays on their own.

I'm intrigued by this, combined with the first part of your quote:

In 2020, the Packers would average 4.8 yards per rush as a team, which ranked sixth in the NFL. This year, they would average 4.2 yards, and that ranked 21st. We also didn’t see the big plays being generated as frequently either. Sharp Football defines an explosive run as a play of 10 or more yards on the ground. Last season, Green Bay had an explosive run rate of 11 percent and generated 53 explosive runs. This year, those figures fell to just eight percent and 36.

So if PFF differed from ESPN and Football Outsiders, there must be something in the methodologies that helps explain it. I know, for instance, that Football Outsiders' run blocking metric cuts off yards per carry beyond a certain number of yards because beyond the second level, the play's outcome has nothing to do with run blocking.

ESPN's run block win rate, for its case, has this to say: "First, each block is identified -- that's the easy part. Next, our system determines whether the defender was able to defeat the block. It does this by using a large set of rules based on relative distance to the runner, relative velocity to the runner and many other more complicated measures. A defender doesn't have to make the tackle to win his block. He can penetrate the backfield to cause a disruption, contain the runner behind the line of scrimmage, or squarely fill his assigned gap to earn a win. If a blocker allows his defender to win, he is debited with a loss."

So both of those metrics focus almost entirely on what happens near the line of scrimmage. I don't know how PFF calculates their run blocking metrics, because the list linked is behind a paywall.

But it occurs to me that if the yards per carry declined, big plays declined, while the Football Outsiders and ESPN metrics focused on the first level blocking remained high, that the issue was NOT that the yards before contact was too low and the blocking was bad, but actually that the explosive plays on the next level, into the secondary, were less successful. Or simply that we had less big play luck (for instance a perfectly executed play that sprung a 25 yard TD run that would have been a 60-yard TD run had we simply been on the opposite 40 yard line instead of the 25).

But I'm not sure that PFF's run blocking grades alone are enough to dissuade me from the ESPN, FO, and anecdotal evidence that the decline of the run game metrics stemmed from blocking up front rather than from the lack of more explosive plays farther downfield.

It may mean that we are missing more of those second level blocks on LBs, which would certainly be an OL (and specifically, usually, an OG) issue. But it doesn't indicate that we're getting fewer yards before contact. Let me look to see; I think football outsiders actually tracks yards before contact and is publicly available....

Ok, not quite. But let's look at what football outsiders found.

First, here are some definitions:

Teams are ranked according to Adjusted Line Yards. Based on regression analysis, the Adjusted Line Yards formula takes all running back carries and assigns responsibility to the offensive line based on the following percentages:

• Losses: 120% value

• 0-4 Yards: 100% value

• 5-10 Yards: 50% value

• 11+ Yards: 0% value

Second Level Yards: Yards which this team's running backs earn between 5-10 yards past the line of scrimmage, divided by total running back carries.

Open Field Yards: Yards which this team's running backs earn more than 10 yards past the line of scrimmage, divided by total running back carries.

The Packers in 2021 ranked 3rd in adjusted line yards, meaning that the bulk of their rushing success happened inside 5 yards from the line of scrimmage. This is further exemplified by the other rankings: Second level yards (5-10 downfield), they ranked 13th. Open field yards (yards beyond 10 yards of a carry), they ranked 20th. This jives perfectly with the original article's focus on the reduction in big plays.

It's also worth noting that the Packers' OLine again ranked 3rd in "stuff rate," meaning they had the 3rd lowest percentage of their runs go for 0 or negative yards; and 6th in power rank, meaning they had the 6th-highest success rate on converting 3rd or 4th and 2 or less to go.

All signs point toward the Packers' run blocking being, in fact, a strength of the team last year. The injuries and rookies had a greater impact on the pass game, where Newman for sure struggled, and Nijman was solid but a downgrade from Bakhtiari or Jenkins.

But even there you see that Football Outsiders has the Packers ranked 6th in "Adjusted sack yards," their metric for pass blocking. While ESPN's pass block win rate (which calculates wins and losses on blocks for the first 2.5 seconds) ranked 5th.

So we have to get into PFF's paywall to really see what PFF and Andy Herman and Go Pack Go have against our OL performance. But what I like about both ESPN and Football Outsiders is that their stats are outcome-based, and thus FAR less subjective. Football Outsiders, really, takes no subjectivity aside from where it sets the lines. It simply states that x% of run plays were 0-negative; and then separates out runs by their length. ESPN still determines "winners and losers" of blocks, but that is definitely less subjective than assigning a grade to a player without knowing their assignment. I certainly agree with the eye test and some numbers that the line was not as good in 2021 as it was in 2020, but that's a given, since we lost a Pro Bowl LT and a Pro Bowl C and filled the gaps with rookies.

well I'am sure stats could be found to support what ever , point is our yrds per down declined on 2nd and 3rd down to, it's the reason Lafluer and years ago McCarthy where accused of abandoning the run, if the run wont support down and distance why use it.

also second level blocking probably struggled, big yrd plays depend on second level blocking, so if we had a decline with that it does fall back to poor OL blocking.

Lastly Yoho the dcline with run blocking and run success is supported by what I saw, Dillon carrying defenders almost as soon as he got to the los, and Jones having to bounce it out because his pre destined run lane was closed, there where reality's.

and I'm just over here like... oh, he drives people off the ball? Well then, let's go get him!! PEOPLE MOVER YEE!! PEOPLE MOVER YEE!!

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2022 12:26

well I'am sure stats could be found to support what ever , point is our yrds per down declined on 2nd and 3rd down to, it's the reason Lafluer and years ago McCarthy where accused of abandoning the run, if the run wont support down and distance why use it.

also second level blocking probably struggled, big yrd plays depend on second level blocking, so if we had a decline with that it does fall back to poor OL blocking.

Lastly Yoho the dcline with run blocking and run success is supported by what I saw, Dillon carrying defenders almost as soon as he got to the los, and Jones having to bounce it out because his pre destined run lane was closed, there where reality's.

But what I’m saying is that no. The statistics you brought in your article do not allow people to conclude anything they want. The statistics, from multiple sources, indicate that the decline in running efficiency stem from a decline in yards gained beyond the 5- and 10-yard level from the line of scrimmage.

The down analysis does tell us WHY the run game declined. Just when it declined. The yardage numbers tell us where it declined. It declined from 5-10 yards and from 10+ yards downfield. It remained strong both in the first five yards, and in short yardage first down conversion situations.

That allows us to figure out whether the issue is in our run game more precisely, and particularly, to acknowledge that those successes are not possible of the line is not opening up initial holes.

I do remember one game this year, though not which game, when the yards per carry were slightly lower than yards after contact, indicating a first hit in the backfield. That was atrocious. If it happened all season we would have not been successful. But I think maybe the negative examples, like that game, are sticking too strongly in your mind compared to the frequency in which they occurred. That’s a natural and common mind trick.

Your article also pointed out that Jones and Dillon were “top twenty” in forced missed tackles. And I hate to break this to you, but in a league of 32 teams where typically only one running back plays at a time, being top twenty at something isn’t much better than average. So it wouldn’t explain a large discrepancy.

Anyway, we clearly need better second level production to remain a force. And obviously a lot of that comes from interior OL hitting in their reach blocks and moving into space. So Newman, Myers, Patrick, and JRJ May beat some blame as you suspect.

But nothing here suggests that our starting players are deficient. And nothing here suggests we need to adjust what we’re doing and who we’re selecting along the line.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2022 14:00

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2022 12:26

well I'am sure stats could be found to support what ever , point is our yrds per down declined on 2nd and 3rd down to, it's the reason Lafluer and years ago McCarthy where accused of abandoning the run, if the run wont support down and distance why use it.

also second level blocking probably struggled, big yrd plays depend on second level blocking, so if we had a decline with that it does fall back to poor OL blocking.

Lastly Yoho the dcline with run blocking and run success is supported by what I saw, Dillon carrying defenders almost as soon as he got to the los, and Jones having to bounce it out because his pre destined run lane was closed, there where reality's.

But what I’m saying is that no. The statistics you brought in your article do not allow people to conclude anything they want. The statistics, from multiple sources, indicate that the decline in running efficiency stem from a decline in yards gained beyond the 5- and 10-yard level from the line of scrimmage.

The down analysis does tell us WHY the run game declined. Just when it declined. The yardage numbers tell us where it declined. It declined from 5-10 yards and from 10+ yards downfield. It remained strong both in the first five yards, and in short yardage first down conversion situations.

That allows us to figure out whether the issue is in our run game more precisely, and particularly, to acknowledge that those successes are not possible of the line is not opening up initial holes.

I do remember one game this year, though not which game, when the yards per carry were slightly lower than yards after contact, indicating a first hit in the backfield. That was atrocious. If it happened all season we would have not been successful. But I think maybe the negative examples, like that game, are sticking too strongly in your mind compared to the frequency in which they occurred. That’s a natural and common mind trick.

Your article also pointed out that Jones and Dillon were “top twenty” in forced missed tackles. And I hate to break this to you, but in a league of 32 teams where typically only one running back plays at a time, being top twenty at something isn’t much better than average. So it wouldn’t explain a large discrepancy.

Anyway, we clearly need better second level production to remain a force. And obviously a lot of that comes from interior OL hitting in their reach blocks and moving into space. So Newman, Myers, Patrick, and JRJ May beat some blame as you suspect.

But nothing here suggests that our starting players are deficient. And nothing here suggests we need to adjust what we’re doing and who we’re selecting along the line.

our Guards had C grades, and a big reason for that was pass pro, the other thing that helped the run blocking was our success with PA and uptempo passing, Rodgers was a master at beating the pass rush, defenses had to honor that.

my article did say the running game wasn't atrocious, it simply declined from the previous year, lots, #6 to #23, yes injury was a big reason.

we don't know how Jenkins will do, he could have the same set backs as Bak, hell Yoho, we don't even know how well or how long Bak will do or play, so bringing in a more ready to play prospect just seems logical to me.

and PFF was not the only site that ranked us mid league or worse run blocking, SI did the same.

I don't know what people expect considering that the Packers started 2 rookies and a 2nd year man for the bulk of the season and their 2 best Olinemen, Bakh and Jenkins missed most of the season and the playoff game. Frankly, the fact that the line was respectable is nothing short of a miracle.

Given that they let Turner go, it seems to me a near certainty to me that Jenkins starts at RT and Nijman is the swing tackle. Meyers at center of course and Runyan and Newman at guard. This, baring injury, could easily be the best Oline in the league. Next year the 2 rookies won't be rookies and the 2 tackles hopefully won't be on IR. And Runyan who was a pleasant surprise will be a real veteran.

The only downside is that the backup guard and the backup center are both totally unproven.

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2022 14:22

my article did say the running game wasn't atrocious, it simply declined from the previous year, lots, #6 to #23, yes injury was a big reason.

No, that was just ONE source your article quoted. Your article mentioned that PFF decreased our line's run game grades from 6th to 23rd, but that ESPN and Football Outsiders still had us in the top ten. Your article also said that explosive plays dropped from 53 to 36, from occurring on 11% of runs to on 8% of runs.

Like you, yourself, just confessed, the C-grades McGinn gave to the guards was mainly a result of pass blocking.

I feel like last year the pass blocking really struggled--and was assisted by play action and run success--as we swapped people in and out, but that the run blocking MOST of the time, was still a strength. And I'll be danged if that's not what we're seeing in most of these numbers and grades.

If anyone has any insight into where/if we can find average yards before contact, explicitly, I'd love to see it. But until then, I don't think there's much room to claim that the line did not do better than average at run blocking last year, at least on the initial blocks. There's room to improve, but it's by no means the weakness of the offense or of this line. If Newman improves his awareness on pass blocking responsibilities (a ton of his blown blocks seemed to come from not recognizing twists and stunts and slants and whatnot), we're already better off than we were.

If we have any semblance of health, we're again already better off than we were last year.

And if we draft a player who can provide better pass blocking upside or depth, then we can make up some ground in what we lost (Turner, Patrick).

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2022 14:43

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2022 14:22

my article did say the running game wasn't atrocious, it simply declined from the previous year, lots, #6 to #23, yes injury was a big reason.

No, that was just ONE source your article quoted. Your article mentioned that PFF decreased our line's run game grades from 6th to 23rd, but that ESPN and Football Outsiders still had us in the top ten. Your article also said that explosive plays dropped from 53 to 36, from occurring on 11% of runs to on 8% of runs.

Like you, yourself, just confessed, the C-grades McGinn gave to the guards was mainly a result of pass blocking.

I feel like last year the pass blocking really struggled--and was assisted by play action and run success--as we swapped people in and out, but that the run blocking MOST of the time, was still a strength. And I'll be danged if that's not what we're seeing in most of these numbers and grades.

If anyone has any insight into where/if we can find average yards before contact, explicitly, I'd love to see it. But until then, I don't think there's much room to claim that the line did not do better than average at run blocking last year, at least on the initial blocks. There's room to improve, but it's by no means the weakness of the offense or of this line. If Newman improves his awareness on pass blocking responsibilities (a ton of his blown blocks seemed to come from not recognizing twists and stunts and slants and whatnot), we're already better off than we were.

If we have any semblance of health, we're again already better off than we were last year.

And if we draft a player who can provide better pass blocking upside or depth, then we can make up some ground in what we lost (Turner, Patrick).

Do you think either of those 2 reserve centers on the roster (Menet, Hanson)can play backup guard and not embarrass themselves?

I’d like to see Rhyan and Tom cross trained by side.

Rhyan works at RT and RG; Tom works at LT and LG.

Let Walker, Rhyan, and Nijman battle for the RT spot until Jenkins gets back.