There are 186 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

OUR PASSING GAME---ANOTHER LOOK

Just for comparison sake here is Denver/manning's reception distribution:

WR1 - (20.4%)
WR2 - (19.3%)
WR3 - (16.2%)
TE1 - (14.4%)
HB1 - (13.3%)
TE2 - (4.4%)

Again this not meant to compare kaep to manning, it just to illustrate distribution while taking shear total numbers out of the equation and look at were completions are taking place. Again the numbers don't lie in showing that since kaep took over we have become heavily reliant on WR1. This is no shock to anyone who has followed the team in the last season and a half. Basically we have been more reliant on WR1 than we were when Jerry was running routes for us. The big difference is tho those dynasty team employed a more precision/high completion % attack that spread the ball around.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 13,051
We should remember when we look at these stats, that the position (WR 1, WR 2, TE 1, TE 2, etc.) might not be as important as the quality and availability of the particular player (Crabtree, Boldin, Davis, Walker, etc.)



Consider this:

If Kyle Williams is your #3 wide receiver, it might not be a good idea to give your #3 wide receiver many targets.


  • Kelv
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,467
If I think back through the season it feels like we back ourselves into a corner too often - most of the time we throw the ball we have to throw the ball. A balanced O should be able to open up throwing the ball and make the front 7/8 play with more hesitancy than we faced the past year. The running game is less prevalent in todays NFL because defensive players are so much quicker reacting to plays happening in front of them and our play calling made it even easier for them. In addition to that for the first half of the season Kap had two reliable targets and our coaches did not help him. Hunter and James were totally ignored as 3rd down options which to my mind is criminal - what were they drafted for? People talk about Kap only making one or two reads but how much of that is down to he fact that he didn't trust any of the other guys? So as the season progresses he zeros in on Boldin and Davis and looks stiff when he can't get the ball to them. Did we actually have a deep threat during the course of the season on the perimeter? Young QBs need weapons to progress and Kap did not have that at his disposal during much of the season - fix that and I honestly believe he'll take a massive step forward next season.
Originally posted by buck:
Maybe these tables will help.











Originally posted by buck:
We should remember when we look at these stats, that the position (WR 1, WR 2, TE 1, TE 2, etc.) might not be as important as the quality and availability of the particular player (Crabtree, Boldin, Davis, Walker, etc.)



Consider this:

If Kyle Williams is your #3 wide receiver, it might not be a good idea to give your #3 wide receiver many targets.



I agree with this, I chose position titles just to take names out of the equation for ease of compiling numbers and to look specifically at position groups catching the ball. I also chose to use catches rather than targets cause I plan on looking back at some of Walsh's teams and looking at the %'s. I just don't think target numbers are readily avail going back that far.

Your chart is awesome and catches all the important data. That's a great breakdown of the last 3 years.
[ Edited by Niners816 on Apr 4, 2014 at 7:19 AM ]
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 13,051
Originally posted by Niners816:
Just for comparison sake here is Denver/manning's reception distribution:

WR1 - (20.4%)
WR2 - (19.3%)
WR3 - (16.2%)
TE1 - (14.4%)
HB1 - (13.3%)
TE2 - (4.4%)

Again this not meant to compare kaep to manning, it just to illustrate distribution while taking shear total numbers out of the equation and look at were completions are taking place. Again the numbers don't lie in showing that since kaep took over we have become heavily reliant on WR1. This is no shock to anyone who has followed the team in the last season and a half. Basically we have been more reliant on WR1 than we were when Jerry was running routes for us. The big difference is tho those dynasty team employed a more precision/high completion % attack that spread the ball around.

Maybe. But, last year our passing game relied on Boldin, in good part because Crabtree and Manningham missed so many games.

In 2012, Mario Manningham, whose share of targets and receptions was almost the same as Vernon Davis's, missed 4 games.
If he had not missed those games, he would almost certainly have been the #2 target on the 2012 team.

In 2011, Josh Morgan only played in 5 games. We had Kyle Williams and Ted Ginn as our #2 and #3 receivers.

Offensive philosophy or offensive scheme AND personnel have played a major role in shaping our passing game.

It makes no sense to analyze the passing game without looking at both.

With a little luck, we will actually have better options at wide receiver for the coming season.
[ Edited by buck on Apr 4, 2014 at 7:26 AM ]
Originally posted by buck:
Maybe. But, last year our passing game relied on Boldin, in good part because Crabtree and Manningham missed so many games.

In 2012, Mario Manningham, whose share of targets and receptions was almost the same as Vernon Davis's, missed 4 games.
If he had not missed those games, he would almost certainly have been the #2 target on the 2012 team.

In 2011, Josh Morgan only played in 5 games. We had Kyle Williams and Ted Ginn as our #2 and #3 receivers.

Offensive philosophy or offensive scheme AND personnel have played a major role in shaping our passing game.

It makes no sense to analyze the passing game without looking at both.

With a little luck, we will actually have better options at wide receiver for the coming season.

I agree with all of this and Again bringing in Denver's distribution was not meant to compare but was meant to be more of a goal to shoot for in regards to a modern passing attack. I get all of the injuries have played a major role but we have to find a way to get a better spread with our receptions.

I would love to see crabs get 25%, boldin 20%, vd around 20% and the rest evenly distributed between the backs/backup TEs and WR core.
[ Edited by Niners816 on Apr 4, 2014 at 7:37 AM ]
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 13,051
Originally posted by Niners816:

Your chart is awesome and catches all the important data. That's a great breakdown of the last 3 years.


Thank you.
1994 - WR (52.0%) TE (17.6%) Backs (30.4%)
Reception distribution:
WR1 - (32.3%)
HB1 - (18.4%)
TE1 - (13.6%)
WR2 - (11.4%)
WR3 - (5.8%)
HB2 - (5.3%)
HB3 - (4.5%)
TE2 - (3.6%)

LOVE THIS! Now this is how you use the entire field, get your QB into an early rhythm and distribute the ball and make the defense defend everything. Who do you cover, the WR1, RB1 or TE1? And oh yeah, there is a WR2 and HB2 to contend with as well and we've always had tremendous FB's as well from Rathman to Floyd to Miller now.

I went back and watched the NFCCG. You want to know what the real issue has alwaye been with the HaRoman offense? I've been posting about it since Alex has been here.

FIRST DOWN PRODUCTION:
Total Yards Gained on First Down = 140 yards on 20 attempts but...
Of those 140 yards, CK accounted for our only (running) production with runs of 58 & 22 & 4 (84) yards and there was only 2 passes completed (22 & 11) the entire game and both were in the second half. The rest? Of the 20 attempts, there were only 6 passing attempts total with 4 incompletions and 2 completions. In short, we ran on first down the entire game and (lack of) production is noted as follows with Gore giving way to Hunter/James late in the 4Q: 2 yards, 1, -1, 0, -1, -1, 9, 0, 3 (Hunter), 11 (Hunter)& 0 (James). So between our 3 RB's, that's a total of 23 yards on 11 carries or 2 yards a carry thanks to Hunter's 11 yard run late in the 4Q off tackle. Gore had a total of 12 yards for the entire GAME on first down.

To me, this has always been our issue and playing quality teams magnifies your issues/weaknesses. When you are in 2nd and 10+ every down, naturally, you are forced back into the intermediate+ passing game (lower completion %) and with Seattle's rotating pressure on the DE edges, we played right into their strengths (pass rush and physical coverages). The defense knew to stack the box on first down inside the DE's and b/c we take the play clock down to 1 second each time, they even knew when to fire off the LOS to stuff our run for absolutely no production. Also, with Gore, there is zero threat of a run off tackle. Seattle's game plan was simply to stuff the run on first down, force us into our intermediate passing game (no worry about a short or deep pass) and spy CK in the second half with a LB or S. Technically, this is every good defenses game plan against us.

To see where we could have attacked Seattle, jonnydel showed the intermediate slants were open also. I also contend the short game would have eaten up Seattle as well in the second half given they had to devote a spy to CK (usually a LB) and with their single-high S press and Cover 3 coverages (or mix of rolling to the strong side where we tend to flood receivers to get isolation on the weak side); the edges were wide open. Also the roll-right with a TE coming across the formation (i.e. one and only McDonald play) probably could have been run against their defensive grain all game long, to the left or right side.

I went back to NFL Rewind (don't show all the plays) just to watch the RB's. From the second half of the season on, the RB's would stay in to block, delay and then flare out either behind the DL in the middle of the field or out in the flats as a receiving outlet for CK. This is what I saw on passing downs:
1) The edges were open with designed runs by CK and Hunter/James (not Gore) off tackle; Gore, Boldin, VD & Crabtree are amazing blocking on the edges out there in front of CK/RB. In fact, several times Gore just sprinted out of the backfield and ran down the sideline and chop-blocked a DB and never once turned his head back (same with McDonald & VD and the recievers). Clearly, the design in the first half was to attack with CK's legs with great downfield blocking. It worked. Then...
2) The second half was all about the pass and THAT is when these delayed check-outs by the RB's from the backfield were not only open, but WIDE open with the LB's focused on spying CK right at the LOS and with single coverage or deeper zone coverage of VD, Crabtree and Boldin b/c of our typical "go routes" coupled the rest of our intermediate routes d/t zero production on first downs. In short, there was space for the RB's in the passing game all second half and Seattle absolutely took the trade off...they focused on intermediate coverage and spying CK and completely ignored the RB's and took that calculated risk. They chose wisely as we never adjusted IMHO.
[ Edited by NCommand on Apr 4, 2014 at 8:27 AM ]
Originally posted by Niners816:
I agree with this, I chose position titles just to take names out of the equation for ease of compiling numbers and to look specifically at position groups catching the ball. I also chose to use catches rather than targets cause I plan on looking back at some of Walsh's teams and looking at the %'s. I just don't think target numbers are readily avail going back that far.

Your chart is awesome and catches all the important data. That's a great breakdown of the last 3 years.

Kyle Williams was always our 3rd WR and sadly, he was only used at the X & Z where he was weakest. You need the big boys out there on the edges and this is why VD was used as a #2 WR (not his traditional TE role) with Boldin as the #1. We still had two primary receivers and they did well in that role. Then when Crabree came back, he and Boldin rotated as the two primary receivers with VD going back to his traditional TE role and his numbers fell off dramatically. So stop blaming the #3 option. Teams would kill to have Crabtree and Boldin and VD as a TE. It's HOW you use them that matters.
Originally posted by NCommand:
1994 - WR (52.0%) TE (17.6%) Backs (30.4%)
Reception distribution:
WR1 - (32.3%)
HB1 - (18.4%)
TE1 - (13.6%)
WR2 - (11.4%)
WR3 - (5.8%)
HB2 - (5.3%)
HB3 - (4.5%)
TE2 - (3.6%)

LOVE THIS! Now this is how you use the entire field, get your QB into an early rhythm and distribute the ball and make the defense defend everything. Who do you cover, the WR1, RB1 or TE1? And oh yeah, there is a WR2 and HB2 to contend with as well and we've always had tremendous FB's as well from Rathman to Floyd to Miller now.

I went back and watched the NFCCG. You want to know what the real issue has alwaye been with the HaRoman offense? I've been posting about it since Alex has been IMHO.

Great breakdown!....it really is frustrating cause if they did employ more of a classic WCO philosophy, namely passing to set up the run and using backs more in the passing game this offense could be a top 10 type attack. Again a major overhaul is not needed, just some tweaks/tendency breakers.
Originally posted by buck:
Maybe these tables will help.












Awesome work Buck as this makes it even easier to see!

2011:
Primary Receiver = 4.5 catches a game
Secondary = 4
Everyone Else = Approximately 1 to
2012:
Primary Receiver = 5.3 catches a game
Secondary = 2.6
Third = 2.6
Everyone Else = Approximately < 2 a game

2013:
Primary Receiver = 5.3 catches a game
Secondary = 3.2
Everyone Else = Approximately < 2 a game

Unless we dramatically change our passing game, you better hope you are the #1 or #2 receiver on this team and play WR or TE.
[ Edited by NCommand on Apr 4, 2014 at 9:09 AM ]

Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by Niners816:

Your chart is awesome and catches all the important data. That's a great breakdown of the last 3 years.


Thank you.

Seriously, thanks for all the work as always, Buck
Originally posted by Niners816:
Great breakdown!....it really is frustrating cause if they did employ more of a classic WCO philosophy, namely passing to set up the run and using backs more in the passing game this offense could be a top 10 type attack. Again a major overhaul is not needed, just some tweaks/tendency breakers.

We have all the tools we've needed from day 1. Even McDonald is excellent at finidng the soft zones like a traditional WCO TE. And can someone seriously justify NOT using Gore, Hunter and James in the passing game as not only a huge RAC benefit in open space but also one that would help CK get into an early rhythm in the passing game? Make the defense defend the entire field...force them out of 8-9 in the box on first downs?

I do want to note that some of this is on coaching and teaching CK as well. We seem to install the offensive incrementally. CK right now, clearly has tunnel vision and doesn't always seem to even know where his outlets are. For instance, 13:40 of 3Q. Patton starts out in the X and slants immediately to the right side of the field across the formation. Gore flares out to the right side of the field behind Patton, wide open. CK ignores both and is forced left and hits Crabtree down field in double coverage. Patton's man leaves him following CK's downfield eyes to the left and makes the tackle on Crabtree immedaitely coming all the way across the field to the strong side. It worked...BUT Gore was wide open on the right side of the field WITH a blocker in front with only 1 defender on that side of the field (some 20 yards down field). In short, if he hits Gore here, that's a TD.
[ Edited by NCommand on Apr 4, 2014 at 8:43 AM ]
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 13,051
Here is a breakdown for 1994.

Originally posted by NCommand:
We have all the tools we've needed from day 1. Even McDonald is excellent at finidng the soft zones like a traditional WCO TE. And can someone seriously justify NOT using Gore, Hunter and James in the passing game as not only a huge RAC benefit in open space but also one that would help CK get into an early rhythm in the passing game? Make the defense defend the entire field...force them out of 8-9 in the box on first downs?

I do want to note that some of this is on coaching and teaching CK as well. We seem to install the offensive incrementally. CK right now, clearly has tunnel vision and doesn't always seem to even know where his outlets are. For instance, 13:40 of 3Q. Patton starts out in the X and slants immediately to the right side of the field across the formation. Gore flares out to the right side of the field behind Patton, wide open. CK ignores both and is forced left and hits Crabtree down field in double coverage. Patton's man leaves him following CK's downfield eyes to the left and makes the tackle on Crabtree immedaitely coming all the way across the field to the strong side. It worked...BUT Gore was wide open on the right side of the field WITH a blocker in front with only 1 defender on that side of the field (some 20 yards down field). In short, if he hits Gore here, that's a TD.

You brought up a good point about primary, secondary and third rec per game. I know making my % charts and looking at buck's table, 33-35% to the primary just seems like a lot. Especially when you don't have the spread like the '94 squad did. Again what is so frustrating is that sort of reliance on one guy should open up others, and based on your breakdown it seems that it in fact is opening the flats and backs out of the backfield. It's just time to start taking advantage of this. The results are gonna be stunning, increase in comp%, qb rating and a bigger spread in reception distribution.