Post by Funkytown on Jun 30, 2018 16:33:57 GMT -6
Vikings’ Defense Surprisingly Low on Big Plays by Sam Smith
Rest at the link:
fullpresscoverage.com/2018/06/30/vikings-defense-surprisingly-low-on-big-plays/
The Vikings’ 2017 defense was consistently lauded as one of the best units in recent memory, and for good reason. They boasted three All-Pros, Pro Bowlers at all three levels and the top defense in both yards and points per game. But for all that praise, there was something lacking in the overall performance of the group: They were not the most prolific when it came to big plays.
For the purpose of this discussion, we will define “big plays” as three key drive-altering results: Turnovers, sacks and negative plays. The Vikings were either near the bottom or around the 50th percentile in virtually every aspect of all three categories. Granted, because of the general stoutness of their overall defense, they did not need a high quantity of game-changing plays. But the discrepancy between their defensive proficiency and their ability to end drives in one snap is a little jarring.
Let us start with turnovers. As far as interceptions go, the Vikings were decent, if not quite elite. Their pick total of 14 was tied for 13th in the league. Now, that number is pretty pedestrian, given their All-Pro secondary, but respectable nonetheless. The real head-scratcher is their ability to force fumbles. The Vikings forced a measly 16 fumbles last season, 29th-best in the NFL, and recovered only five. Remember, the Vikings defensive line was one of the bets at stopping the run in football. Their linebacking corps was tremendously productive. And on top of all that, the secondary is about as physical a unit as the league has to offer. Yet, they could only force 16 fumbles.
The Vikings do get credit in two areas when it comes to turnovers, however. For one, they were among the best in football at red zone takeaways; they had three last season, tied for fifth. Plus, their offense was so effective at taking care of the ball that the defense truly only needed to be what they were: Dominant without being necessarily exciting. That was evident in the team’s record when getting a small number of takeaways. They played in nine games with only zero or one takeaway, going 6-3 in such games. Of course, they were undefeated when they took the ball away two or more times.
As a pass rushing team, the Vikings were slightly less proficient than reputation would indicate. Though they boasted top-notch players up and down the starting unit, the lack of pass rush depth ultimately made Minnesota an average team, at least by the numbers. According to STATS’ Protection Index, which measures offensive line performance by a variety of factors, the Vikings were 15th-best in football at rushing the passer. They were relatively average in terms of hurries (18th-tied) and knock downs (18th-tied). Minnesota also forced the fewest holding penalties with nine, tied with three other teams.
And then there are general negative plays. The Minnesota defense ranked near the bottom in the league in total negative plays (25th) and runs for negative yardage (30th). They were middle-of-the-road in total negative yards (22nd) and sacks (17th-tied).
For the purpose of this discussion, we will define “big plays” as three key drive-altering results: Turnovers, sacks and negative plays. The Vikings were either near the bottom or around the 50th percentile in virtually every aspect of all three categories. Granted, because of the general stoutness of their overall defense, they did not need a high quantity of game-changing plays. But the discrepancy between their defensive proficiency and their ability to end drives in one snap is a little jarring.
Let us start with turnovers. As far as interceptions go, the Vikings were decent, if not quite elite. Their pick total of 14 was tied for 13th in the league. Now, that number is pretty pedestrian, given their All-Pro secondary, but respectable nonetheless. The real head-scratcher is their ability to force fumbles. The Vikings forced a measly 16 fumbles last season, 29th-best in the NFL, and recovered only five. Remember, the Vikings defensive line was one of the bets at stopping the run in football. Their linebacking corps was tremendously productive. And on top of all that, the secondary is about as physical a unit as the league has to offer. Yet, they could only force 16 fumbles.
The Vikings do get credit in two areas when it comes to turnovers, however. For one, they were among the best in football at red zone takeaways; they had three last season, tied for fifth. Plus, their offense was so effective at taking care of the ball that the defense truly only needed to be what they were: Dominant without being necessarily exciting. That was evident in the team’s record when getting a small number of takeaways. They played in nine games with only zero or one takeaway, going 6-3 in such games. Of course, they were undefeated when they took the ball away two or more times.
As a pass rushing team, the Vikings were slightly less proficient than reputation would indicate. Though they boasted top-notch players up and down the starting unit, the lack of pass rush depth ultimately made Minnesota an average team, at least by the numbers. According to STATS’ Protection Index, which measures offensive line performance by a variety of factors, the Vikings were 15th-best in football at rushing the passer. They were relatively average in terms of hurries (18th-tied) and knock downs (18th-tied). Minnesota also forced the fewest holding penalties with nine, tied with three other teams.
And then there are general negative plays. The Minnesota defense ranked near the bottom in the league in total negative plays (25th) and runs for negative yardage (30th). They were middle-of-the-road in total negative yards (22nd) and sacks (17th-tied).
Rest at the link:
fullpresscoverage.com/2018/06/30/vikings-defense-surprisingly-low-on-big-plays/
... and neither is this Chris guy.