Re: ah but the main point is nevertheless also true! -:) ...

Quote
dzrams

Good discussion here...

It is my understanding that PFF, only tracks when a long pass play is completed. And I thought the metric specifically pertained to deep shots that traveled in the air. If so, completions under 31, long attempts, and PI calls would definitely not be included. I don't believe anyone is tracking long unsuccessful attempts or PI calls so including them in the numbers would give a distorted picture. Huge runs after the catch may not be included in the metric either but that needs to be verified.

Also, do you have a link to the PFF metrics you're citing? And a link to the stats you cite about the intermediate game. It seems interesting, I would like to take a look.

I'm not convinced yet that the SF was a wake up call or an outlier. It may well still be within the range of what this offense is capable of. It's possible the 38 point TB game is an outlier. Too soon to say either way IMO. So I don't exclude any numbers until there is more data.

But here's my question. Neither you or I can say that the Bills defender was inaccurate. Between the three of us, only he would know what their game plan was. Given that, why do you suppose other teams have a strategy of overloading the box and stopping Gurley while being willing to give up deep shots to Keenum?

My theory was that, while Keenum takes the deeper shots, maybe teams realize he misses enough in the intermediate game to not care. Maybe they are banking that he is not going to make them pay often enough. What's your theory on why teams are willing to allow that? And if the Rams are so great at that aspect of the game, why is the scoring still 20th and not much better?

You didn't read the edited version, unfortunately.

That version includes these 2 paragraphs:

1, Another stat, though it's a completely different metric. According to Stats LLC, the Rams are 8th in the league in big plays passing which they define as 25 yards or more. That was before this game...I don't know what the newest numbers after Sunday will reveal. ADDED BY EDIT. I just looked at the source and my previous figures for this need to be updated. To start over: Another stat, though it's a completely different metric. According to Stats LLC, the Rams are 3rd in the league in big plays passing which they define as 25 yards or more (here for those who don't know the source: [stats.washingtonpost.com] ). I don't know how current their numbers are at this moment or how many games they include.

2. . ALSO, besides that, the play by play details show that big plays generally, whether thrown long in the air, are a central part of how the Rams gain advantages. All I am doing here btw is staying true to sources and distinguishing between "big passing plays" (which may or may not include RAC) and long passes of 31 yards or more. There are different metrics out there, but here I am just including both, because it's not easy to separate out what the sources give you. So...it includes both. But either way if teams are willing to essentially let Keenum beat them deep, great. Fine with me.

Well you would think this is good discussion, because it's minutia diving. When to me it's just obvious if you watch them that the Rams throw deep (and deep medium). I am not even sure why it has to be disputed. It's there and it's visible. I think one preconception holding people back is that they think, well Keenum doesn't have much arm. But that's a fallacy. A big one in fact. The fallacy is that long passing is a simple direct function of arm strength. It isn't. It helps to have a power arm, but then lots of strong armed qbs aren't very good throwing long. And you can throw long with less of an arm, like Keenum, if you have the accuracy, touch, timing, anticipation--and work at it.

Anyway. Yeah it is a part of their game and has been for a while now.

In terms of the metrics, there are several. The sources look for different things so you have to sort through them.

In terms of just straight ball in the air numbers, the source is espn splits. I look at those to see attempts and completions for passes of 31 yards or more. That's all pure yards in the air, no RAC. You have to be careful with them, though, because they do not always update every portion of their pages at the same time. So sometimes the listed number for total attempts does not match the number of attempts they record within the different ranges (1-10, 31-40, etc.) They're usually a game behind on updating that portion, although they do update other portions. If you're not aware of that, you can end up with weird numbers.

With espn splits, I do percentage of total attempts within a given range, completion percentage, and then number of attempts. For example right now with Keenum...and this does not include the recent game of course...passes of 31+ yards are 4.2% of total attempts, with a 40% completion percentage, and 1.67 attempts per game (excluding the SF game where they didn't throw long). That's still a little mixed up because the percentage of total attempts doesn;t account for the difference the SF game makes. Either way you do the math yourself with espn splits. They don't do percentages...you have to do the work.

Incidentally, in the years I have been looking at espn splits, this is my sense of how the numbers work comparatively--30% completions is pretty good (as in, it's okay); 40% is solidly good; and 50% or more is excellent (and rare).

With PFF, I just accept their numbers and list it as a separate metric. I don't know if they distinguish between yards in the air or not.

With Stats LLC, they do 25 yards or more on what they call big pass plays and I am fairly certain they don't distinguish between yards in the air and RAC.

My thing as I say above is to do both---pure deep throws in the air, and big passing plays. I mean the Rams not only set up long passes, the set up all kinds of big plays which are designed to take advantage of particular defenses. That's what Austin is to them---a big play guy. More, really, than a receiver.

Play by play numbers make no distinctions whatsoever between yards in the air and RAC. So that's just another source with another metric for the long pass in the air/big play (which might include RAC) numbers, though it's all on one side of that---it's all "big play" v. "ball in the air."

The reason you want to include PIs is because that is one of the 2 positive outcomes of a long throw. You can complete it, or you can draw a penalty. You certainly never draw the penalty if you don't throw it, and the penalty is an advantage.

None of those sources---PFF, espn splits, Stats LLC, or play by plays--look at the same thing. So you just have to live with that. The purest measure for balls in the air is espn. But then espn doesn't include gains from pass interference.

As long as you keep clear which is which and what each actually tells you, it's fine.

Other points. I am completely convinced SF was a wake up call. It was followed by the only players only team meeting I know of in Fisher/Rams history. So it certainly worked that way with the players.There's a good article on how the defensive scheme change worked after that game. The team was different in every respect. I don't call anything an "outlier"---to me that word has been so abused it's now just phony. People can randomly dismiss anything that doesn't fit their agenda by calling it an "outlier." I am not doing that. I saw a substantial difference that came as a result of the team reacting to that game. That happened in the real world. I literally mean that the Rams actually changed in several ways after and because of the SF game and that that is visible. To me that therefore means that an accurate picture of the Rams looks at what they have been doing since that game. When you do that you find substantial differences and improvement at every single level---3rd down, long passes, points scored, points per play, and on and on. Because I see the difference I simply can't ignore it...to me not seeing the difference that game made means being blind to something.

The Bills player? Enh. I don't even take him to be saying what you do. We know the Rams throw deep...it's visible, it's actual, it happens right in front of us. In fact ignoring it just plain means not knowing the Rams. Upon reflection, later after my first reactions, I took the guy as saying they shut down the long game...and did it by harassing Keenum. They didn't let him set it up and do it. Not that it wasn't called, they attacked IT by going after HIM. The Bills are as creative in their pass defense and blitz schemes as the Rams, and it's part of their attack. In fact, Keenum was sacked in that game at a much higher rate than any other game. Before that game, his sack percentage was 6.6%, which is okay (but just okay). In this game it was 12.9%, which is really bad. So I think they deliberately took the long ball away by going after the qb.

To give you some idea how good they were at it (which means good at the defensive game plan level), before that game there were three team in the top 5 of DEFENSIVE sack percentage who played the Rams: Arizona (ranked 3rd), Seattle (ranked 5th), and Bufflao (ranked 4th). Only one of those teams had great success going after Keenum and disrupting the pass. I actually think what Buffalo did was not defend the run at the expense of the pass, they did the opposite---they did not sell out against the run as much as Seattle and ARz did, but instead geared up to attack the passer. In fact it would be obvious to any defensive minded head coach that Seattle and Arizona lost in part because they killed the run but let the Rams get some big plays passing. A good defensive mind would then say, well we can make an effort to contain the run but we need to do more than those 2 other teams did to disrupt Keenum.



.

...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/10/2016 02:10AM by zn.