[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back!

Danchat
Content Creator

Posts: 19,018

Likes: 16,589
Member is Online

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 17, 2022 17:10:48 GMT -6

Quote

Post by Danchat on Apr 17, 2022 17:10:48 GMT -6

Apr 17, 2022 16:35:19 GMT -6 Funkytown said:

Apr 17, 2022 15:44:43 GMT -6 PurpleFloyd said:

Collapses were routine during his tenure. And it’s because good coaches knew what his vulnerability was and what it took to beat him. Even with marginal QBs

Is that why, up until last season, his team had never lost a game they were leading going into the 4th quarter?

Post from November:

Nov 8, 2021 12:06:57 GMT -6 Funkytown said:

Since Walsh Walshed it, the Vikes were 45-0 when leading at the start of the 4th quarter

...until yesterday

*poop*

Collapses were routine during his tenure? Try again.

I think me means collapse = complete and total blowout. Zimmer's Vikings would tend to have around one per year between 2015-2019 where both sides of the ball would look horrific, but if you compare that to the average contending team... well, I don't have the stats, but I would guess they had an average amount of collapses. They're not as rare for good teams as you might think.

Though to PurpleFloyd's case, a collapse in the NFC Championship game is something I find to be unable to wave away with excuses. Belichick's defense did get cut through like swiss cheese by Foles, but his offense was able to go nuts against a really good Eagles defense and kept it a close game. Zimmer's squad was terrible on both sides of the ball in the biggest game of his coaching career. It would be easier to swallow if Zimmer's teams were a regular in the playoffs, but going to the playoffs 3/8 years and getting obliterated the one time they made the Championship game...

MidwinterViking
Veteran

Posts: 1,439
Likes: 2,125

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 17, 2022 19:33:19 GMT -6 Funkytown, vikingpwr, and 2 more like this

Quote

Post by MidwinterViking on Apr 17, 2022 19:33:19 GMT -6

Apr 17, 2022 12:31:43 GMT -6 Funkytown said:

2017 – Vikings had a +8.1 PPG advantage, which is very solid. The Minneapolis Miracle was not a fluke; the Vikings were a stronger team than the New Orleans Saints that year.

Yeah, it's always interesting to me how some people jump to place blame on Zimmer for "letting the Saints crawl back into it and needing a miracle to win it." Maybe the Saints with their HOF quarterback and great, offensive-minded head coach (possibly a HOFer, too) crawling back into it was the fluke that day. How about that? Of course that game was going to be a battle, and a close one. I just don't understand the criticism about that game against Zimmer. Strange. And, no, don't bring up the following week...

I took at look back at the 2017 playoffs because I was curious about this. With some time to evaluate what's happened since then, there area some very interesting things to see. The heat map is which units contributed the most PPG advantage to playoff teams (only playoff teams because you don't need a color coding to know that 0-16 Browns stunk).

My take aways here:

1) There was a narrative that the Vikings should win easily because Eagles where sitting ducks, leaderless and hopeless after the loss of the field general and MVP level talent: the irreplaceable Carson Wentz. Four years later does the statement "Carson Wentz isn't really that much better than Nick Foles" seem ridiculous? Because it would have seemed ridiculous in 2017. If you start with the assumption that the Eagles were a really good team that had been saddled with a below average QB all season, then the run with Foles doesn't seem out of place. Then you can look at Carson Wentz and you start to see things like: when healthy, he was 11th in yards per game. His 2017 completion percentage of 60.2% was below his already poor career average and 24th in the league. If Wentz wasn't good even in 2017, the the QB change didn't hurt them much and they suddenly look like a really strong all-round team. In that light, the Vikings didn't choke, they lost a game on the road to team that was even better.

2) Zimmer's strategy won't work. If it would have ever worked, it would have worked in 2017. You can see the offense at +2.2 is better than a league average 0, but not really threatening the other top contenders. The defense had everything: Harrison Smith and Xavier Rhodes were all-Pros, Linval Joseph laughed at puny running backs trying to get past him. Griffen and Hunter combined for 20 sacks. And the offense wasn't a liability, Thielen was good, Diggs was ascending. This was Zimmer's formula where everything worked... and the team had the 5th best PGG margin.

3) I can't help but see a link between the macro level and micro level here. If you look at only the numbers at the top of that chart and were told "One of these teams' offenses is going to face-plant and cost their team the game, who is it?" The Vikings really stand out as the obvious candidate. Low and behold, the Vikings had a lead vs. the Eagles before 4 drives caused that face-plant: Pick 6 - 3 and out - 3 and out - QB fumble.

vikingpwr Living Legend Posts: 21,382 Likes: 4,600	[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 17, 2022 22:09:54 GMT -6 Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top Post by vikingpwr on Apr 17, 2022 22:09:54 GMT -6 Apr 17, 2022 19:33:19 GMT -6 MidwinterViking said: < large quote snipped > Nice work.
	Last Edit: Apr 18, 2022 3:18:40 GMT -6 by Purple Pain

Purple Pain
Hall of Fame Nominee

Posts: 8,733
Likes: 2,877

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 18, 2022 3:20:16 GMT -6 FSUVike likes this

Quote

Post by Purple Pain on Apr 18, 2022 3:20:16 GMT -6

Thought this was interesting.

Purple Insider Mailbag:

@farm_Fields204 Which one of the following Vikings weaknesses from last season, if improved, would make the biggest difference: A. Clock management B. Better 3rd down efficiency on offense C. Giving up TD's on nearly a third of all opponents drives in the last 4 mins of each half

I’d go with B. Out of the top 12 teams on third downs, 10 made the playoffs and the other two were Los Angeles and Indy, who were both good teams but botched landing playoff spots in the final week. Your defense can’t melt down if you are ahead by two touchdowns, right? How many of those end-of-game defensive meltdowns happen if the offense just puts the other team away? We often separate offense and defense like they have nothing to do with each other. The Vikings were on the field for the second most defensive plays in the NFL last year. Long drives created by successful running against them played a role in that, so did three-and-outs on offense. The Vikings were 27th in plays per drive.

wxman91
Practice Squad

Posts: 187
Likes: 164

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 18, 2022 6:52:34 GMT -6 via mobile MidwinterViking and FSUVike like this

Quote

Post by wxman91 on Apr 18, 2022 6:52:34 GMT -6

A ton of good stuff in this thread. I commented over on Reddit, but I do wonder whether a big leap from a first year coaching staff is a reasonable expectation (or even a possibility).

To the 2017 conversation, the Eagles were hands down the better team. It took them a few games to find their footing with Foles, but the advantage on the OL/DL was significant and the NFL had not caught up to Peterson’s offense yet.

Apr 18, 2022 3:20:16 GMT -6 Purple Pain said:

Thought this was interesting.

Purple Insider Mailbag:

@farm_Fields204 Which one of the following Vikings weaknesses from last season, if improved, would make the biggest difference: A. Clock management B. Better 3rd down efficiency on offense C. Giving up TD's on nearly a third of all opponents drives in the last 4 mins of each half

I’d go with B. Out of the top 12 teams on third downs, 10 made the playoffs and the other two were Los Angeles and Indy, who were both good teams but botched landing playoff spots in the final week. Your defense can’t melt down if you are ahead by two touchdowns, right? How many of those end-of-game defensive meltdowns happen if the offense just puts the other team away? We often separate offense and defense like they have nothing to do with each other. The Vikings were on the field for the second most defensive plays in the NFL last year. Long drives created by successful running against them played a role in that, so did three-and-outs on offense. The Vikings were 27th in plays per drive.

I ran an analysis early in the year about play-calling and I think it held throughout the season. It wasn’t a strict run/pass ratio problem. However, if a first and 10 play was unsuccessful, Kubiak would almost invariably call the opposite play on the 2nd down. Incomplete pass? Run on 2nd. Stuffed up the gut? Pass on 2nd. It was obscenely predictable and getting a 3-and-out off of that is an obvious next step.

Purple Pain
Hall of Fame Nominee

Posts: 8,733
Likes: 2,877

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 19, 2022 7:53:33 GMT -6 MidwinterViking likes this

Quote

Post by Purple Pain on Apr 19, 2022 7:53:33 GMT -6

Comments collected from elsewhere:

wxman91:

Excellent research and a good read. It is such a damn shame that those 70s teams didn’t take home at least one title.

This is way too much research to ask, so it is more of a musing. I wonder what the distribution is on +- for a coaching change. How much if an outlier would a 6 point jump be?

Ok-Accountant-6308:

Cool analysis but doesn’t really seem to have a conclusion.

Attempting to extrapolate press conference musings to performance on the field next year? Not super valuable

The meaningful nugget at the beginning raises a question as well. Offense and defense both have to be good, but other research shows that defensive performance is more variable year to year which should lead to a bias in offensive investment.

So i don’t think it really disproves the current best practice that offense is more important

TD_Teddy:

Super interesting post. Using the point differential is a smart way to look at it. Outside looking in it certainly appears the players are re-energized on account of the new coach and GM and in the ultimate team sport that certainly means a lot.

longtimegone65:

Excellent work!! You can tell the effort that was put into this.
One other take away. I watch all of the 1975 season and 1998 season. I believe the 1975 team (stats not withstanding) was the best Viking team ever. Finally yes Jim Marshall belongs in Canton.

BillJam74235538:

I loved those old Vikings teams, but they were in the worst division in football, even the Packers were bad back then! Much like the Patriots, I doubt they would have made the playoffs as often in a top division.

Last Edit: Apr 19, 2022 7:54:44 GMT -6 by Purple Pain

MidwinterViking
Veteran

Posts: 1,439
Likes: 2,125

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 20, 2022 7:20:38 GMT -6 via mobile

Quote

Post by MidwinterViking on Apr 20, 2022 7:20:38 GMT -6

I'm not sure where these came from but they are worth replying to. Feel free to pass my comments back or let people know I'm responding.

wxman91:

Excellent research and a good read. It is such a damn shame that those 70s teams didn’t take home at least one title.

This is way too much research to ask, so it is more of a musing. I wonder what the distribution is on +- for a coaching change. How much if an outlier would a 6 point jump be?

Good idea. This might actually be possible, I'll see if I can do a data extract from pro-football-reference that includes head coach.

Ok-Accountant-6308:

Cool analysis but doesn’t really seem to have a conclusion.

Attempting to extrapolate press conference musings to performance on the field next year? Not super valuable

The meaningful nugget at the beginning raises a question as well. Offense and defense both have to be good, but other research shows that defensive performance is more variable year to year which should lead to a bias in offensive investment.

So i don’t think it really disproves the current best practice that offense is more important

This is a fair critique, however, what did you expect me to conclude? That the 2022 Vikings will be as good as 1975? That's unlikely, since it would require a 1998 like jump in performance. A conclusion on performance would require another entire article or two....

The point was to take a step back from the roster to put the team in context. During the offseason it is easy to get buried in the warts of the team (Thielen is getting old, Hunter was injured, Za’Darius might not return to all pro form). The 1975 team also had flaws like this and was arguably the greatest Vikings team ever.

Where I will disagree is on extrapolating from press conferences. Zimmer's style was very clear from his conferences: often combative with the press and his way was always right. The new leadership has been consistent enough through enough conferences that I'm willing to bake broad conclusions about their style.

TD_Teddy:

Super interesting post. Using the point differential is a smart way to look at it. Outside looking in it certainly appears the players are re-energized on account of the new coach and GM and in the ultimate team sport that certainly means a lot.

Thanks! As I went through this, I was surprised at how strong of an indicator point differential was. I'm going to have to save that lesson for future articles.

longtimegone65:

Excellent work!! You can tell the effort that was put into this.
One other take away. I watch all of the 1975 season and 1998 season. I believe the 1975 team (stats not withstanding) was the best Viking team ever. Finally yes Jim Marshall belongs in Canton.

The 1975 team was certainly more balanced. It does make me wonder if the playoffs would favor balanced teams over teams that are great at one thing.

BillJam74235538:

I loved those old Vikings teams, but they were in the worst division in football, even the Packers were bad back then! Much like the Patriots, I doubt they would have made the playoffs as often in a top division.

I'm not going to dismiss the Vikings because of competition - they put up the results. Blowing out bad teams might actually be a better predictor of success than winning close games against good teams, although that's a broader question.

Raptorman
Hall of Fame Inductee

Posts: 18,504

Likes: 8,261
Fan Since: November 6, 1966.
Member is Online

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 20, 2022 18:43:33 GMT -6

Quote

Post by Raptorman on Apr 20, 2022 18:43:33 GMT -6

Apr 17, 2022 19:33:19 GMT -6 MidwinterViking said:

Apr 17, 2022 12:31:43 GMT -6 Funkytown said:

Yeah, it's always interesting to me how some people jump to place blame on Zimmer for "letting the Saints crawl back into it and needing a miracle to win it." Maybe the Saints with their HOF quarterback and great, offensive-minded head coach (possibly a HOFer, too) crawling back into it was the fluke that day. How about that? Of course that game was going to be a battle, and a close one. I just don't understand the criticism about that game against Zimmer. Strange. And, no, don't bring up the following week...

I took at look back at the 2017 playoffs because I was curious about this. With some time to evaluate what's happened since then, there area some very interesting things to see. The heat map is which units contributed the most PPG advantage to playoff teams (only playoff teams because you don't need a color coding to know that 0-16 Browns stunk).

My take aways here:

1) There was a narrative that the Vikings should win easily because Eagles where sitting ducks, leaderless and hopeless after the loss of the field general and MVP level talent: the irreplaceable Carson Wentz. Four years later does the statement "Carson Wentz isn't really that much better than Nick Foles" seem ridiculous? Because it would have seemed ridiculous in 2017. If you start with the assumption that the Eagles were a really good team that had been saddled with a below average QB all season, then the run with Foles doesn't seem out of place. Then you can look at Carson Wentz and you start to see things like: when healthy, he was 11th in yards per game. His 2017 completion percentage of 60.2% was below his already poor career average and 24th in the league. If Wentz wasn't good even in 2017, the the QB change didn't hurt them much and they suddenly look like a really strong all-round team. In that light, the Vikings didn't choke, they lost a game on the road to team that was even better.

2) Zimmer's strategy won't work. If it would have ever worked, it would have worked in 2017. You can see the offense at +2.2 is better than a league average 0, but not really threatening the other top contenders. The defense had everything: Harrison Smith and Xavier Rhodes were all-Pros, Linval Joseph laughed at puny running backs trying to get past him. Griffen and Hunter combined for 20 sacks. And the offense wasn't a liability, Thielen was good, Diggs was ascending. This was Zimmer's formula where everything worked... and the team had the 5th best PGG margin.

3) I can't help but see a link between the macro level and micro level here. If you look at only the numbers at the top of that chart and were told "One of these teams' offenses is going to face-plant and cost their team the game, who is it?" The Vikings really stand out as the obvious candidate. Low and behold, the Vikings had a lead vs. the Eagles before 4 drives caused that face-plant: Pick 6 - 3 and out - 3 and out - QB fumble.

Want to really see something? Do the Patriots for every year in the Belichek era along with the Packers over the Same time span.

You can't truly call yourself "peaceful" unless you are capable of great violence. If you are not capable of great violence, you are not peaceful, you are harmless.

MidwinterViking
Veteran

Posts: 1,439
Likes: 2,125

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 21, 2022 8:21:52 GMT -6 Danchat likes this

Quote

Post by MidwinterViking on Apr 21, 2022 8:21:52 GMT -6

Apr 20, 2022 18:43:33 GMT -6 Raptorman said:

Want to really see something? Do the Patriots for every year in the Belichek era along with the Packers over the Same time span.

Technically I should make you go over to a Patriots or Packers fan site for this, but since I don't want to force you to snort Cheese-Whiz, I can at least make this about the Vikings. I set the color scale to be as close to the 2017 season as I could. Super Bowl wins are highlighted and non Rodgers / Brady seasons are noted. I'll even throw in Brady's 2 years with the Bucs as a comparison.

Some things here:

This chart explains why I used +6 as the benchmark for the Vikings to be a Super Bowl contender: anything can happen in the playoffs. +6 is enough to get you there and be competitive in any given game. Chasing a really high PPG margin doesn't necessarily guarantee a Super Bowl ('98 Vikings, '07 Pats, '11 Packers, '12 Pats). 3 of the Patriots 6 Super Bowls came with rather pedestrian teams (by playoff team standards).

Oh delicious irony! Look at that 2010 Super Bowl win for the Packers. The only win for Rodgers came in the only season the Packers fielded a great defense - AND - the Packers offense didn't even contribute all that much. I'll file this away in the folder I keep for making ~~flawed~~ very sound arguments that Aaron Rodgers best pro comp is Joe Flacco.

This also really makes me like the Vikings chances of taking the division in 2022. 2020 was an outlier for the entire NFL - there was no sound in any stadium, and Rodgers had a renaissance year playing pitch and catch with Davante Adams. Then, in 2021, that 13-4 record masked a really shaky PPG margin for a #1 seed. In 2021, the 49ers were a +4.5; so by this measurement, their playoff win in Green Bay was barely even an upset. And it gets even worse for the Packers: Over 17 games, +/- 27 points ~= +/- 1.6 PPG. That means that fully 1/3 of the Packers positive PPG margin for the entire season came from their 27 point margin in the Week 17 Vikings game. A game the Vikings played without: Cousins, Thielen, Hunter, Pierce, Dantzler & Griffen (and a dead man walking head coach).

Last Edit: Apr 21, 2022 9:44:04 GMT -6 by MidwinterViking

MidwinterViking
Veteran

Posts: 1,439
Likes: 2,125

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 21, 2022 8:38:03 GMT -6

Quote

Post by MidwinterViking on Apr 21, 2022 8:38:03 GMT -6

And as a bonus, here are McVay's Rams:

Their Super Bowl season was below average for a playoff team. And for all the hype about Aaron Donald, Jalen Ramsey and Von Miller, they were 15th in points allowed. The Todd Gurley led teams outperformed Stafford and the 2021 Rams. The Bengals team they faced in the Super Bowl was also relatively weak by this metric (+4.9) but got there over better teams like the Chiefs (+6.8) and Bills (+11.4).

Uncle
Content Creator

Posts: 7,812

Likes: 11,494

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 21, 2022 12:54:55 GMT -6 MidwinterViking likes this

Quote

Post by Uncle on Apr 21, 2022 12:54:55 GMT -6

What's interesting looking at the statistics - especially the Rams in the McVay years - that they were so good throughout the season in the +PPG metric, but won the Super Bowl in a season (2021) in which their +PPG metric (+5.2) wasn't as good as prior years (2017/2018). That does lend some credence to the theory of getting your team to the postseason and see what happens because it's a completely new ball game once you get there.

MidwinterViking
Veteran

Posts: 1,439
Likes: 2,125

[OC] Run it Back - All the Way Back! Apr 21, 2022 13:57:38 GMT -6

Quote

Post by MidwinterViking on Apr 21, 2022 13:57:38 GMT -6

Apr 21, 2022 12:54:55 GMT -6 Uncle said:

What's interesting looking at the statistics - especially the Rams in the McVay years - that they were so good throughout the season in the +PPG metric, but won the Super Bowl in a season (2021) in which their +PPG metric (+5.2) wasn't as good as prior years (2017/2018). That does lend some credence to the theory of getting your team to the postseason and see what happens because it's a completely new ball game once you get there.

Yep. When two good teams play there odds won't deviate that much from 50/50, there is no such thing as a sure thing in the playoffs. Even within this Rams data the randomness of any given Sunday shows up. That team from 2018 with the big advantage on offense had:
#2 in points scored (behinds the Chiefs), 5th in passing yards and 3rd in rushing yards.
Goff threw for 4,688 yards + 32 TDs
Gurley had over 1,800 yards and + 21 TDs
Robert Woods + Brandin Cooks were both over 1,200 yards
The peerless Sean Mannion as a backup QB (doing whatever it is he does to help the starter)
.
.
.
And then they put up 3 points in the Super Bowl vs. the Patriots.... which you can see in the cart above wasn't even a very good Patriots defense. The Patriots gave up 28 & 31 points in their two games leading up to the Super Bowl that year.