Commanders Analytics

[SilentThreat]

So after the post I made in the other thread, I wanted to throw this up so we can be comparing different aspects of stats


I dug quite a bit deeper into the averages of the team in 2 different scopes.

Wins vs Losses
Heinicke vs Wentz

A couple notes here, I removed Defensive points (td vs GB, td vs Hou, safety vs Phi)
I also removed opponent Defensive points scored

A couple things jump out at me, and I think we all knew it.

The defense is giving up almost 10 points less per win, and 6 points less with Heinicke
we average almost 9 more carries per game in wins, and 24 additional yards. That number gets bigger with 11 more carries Heinicke vs Wentz, and almost 50 additional yards.

TOP disparity is almost identical, and generally about 1:25 on avg more per game in W vs L, and H vs W.



This data is actually pretty easy to compile so this wont be the last 'table' I look at, but if you all have a request of comparison.. let me know, and if it's possible, I'll put it together. I plan on doing some other stuff like this going forward.

 

[Neophyte]

Fumbles per game should probably get added.

I'd probably add opponent defensive points scored back in as that speaks to the price of offensive turnovers and, more specifically, the real/perceived carelessness of our QBs.

Otherwise, really good stuff, Derek.

I think this seriously points to just how much difference who is under center this year doesn't make. I'm reminded of something Parcell's said once - "if you think you have 2 QBs, it means you don't have One."

Although, it might make Boone's case for Howell even stronger.

 

[MikefromOH]

Dunno...I don't see anything that makes me outright say "yeah, we need to swap QBs". I just don't. I see the numbers, appreciate the work, and believe it.

But, I just don't see this TEAM as anything that can win with a QB swap. We need an OC swap more then anything.

If Wentz comes in and is eaten alive by clowney and Garrett where do we turn? Heinicke is probably pissed and not motivated....and Howell has never even played a snap in the regular season. Do we just sit with Wentz or try to motivate Heinicke?

 

[Canadian Hog]

Essentially, Heinicke benefitted from a defensive unit resurgence and an improved rushing attack that was sparked by Brian Robinson's emergence.

Those to me are the two main differences that Carson Wentz did not have the luxury of having in the games he started in.

Even with a solid defense and a promising RB, Heinicke couldn't provide us with enough on the scoreboard to say he is a guy we can confidently hitch our wagon to for the next several seasons. If you compliment Wentz's arm strength with those same complimentary pieces (good running back corps and solid defense), it gives you something to think about and leaves you with a decision to make in the offseason.

You have to find out though, and Cleveland and Dallas in the two most meaningful games of the season are great pressure-filled stages in which to see what you truly got in Wentz. You would have to think that he would be super-motivated to perform well given how last year in Indy he was made out to be the scapegoat after a late season collapse.

The way I see it playing out is as follows:

1. Carson does enough to earn an opportunity to come back in 2023 and compete for a starting job vs. Howell and any other vet or draft pick we bring in.

2. Carson lays an egg against Cleveland/Dallas and is jettisoned much like he was after the Colts faltered vs. the Jags in the final week of the season a year ago.

Under no scenario do I see this team retaining Heinicke in 2023 regardless of what happens with Wentz.

 

[MikefromOH]

One look at actual numbers shows that Heinicke was not below Wentz. In fact, he beats him in most categories in less games.

You can't blame Taylor for constant 3rd and short with Samuel up the gut. That's on turner. Most of it is on turner.

 

[Chris]

Not to beat a dead horse (kidding…I’m going to beat it all off-season)-

Without a good o-line whoever is receiving the snaps from center is living on a knife’s edge. Rivera & Co have shown an ability to draft but an inability to attract or obtain quality veterans to fill holes. Their approach to the o-line this past year was organizational malfeasance. Especially when coupled with expending serious money on Wentz. It’s like hiring a good chef and giving them inferior ingredients and shitty equipment to work with.

Maybe it’s due to Snyder being house poor.

 

[Boone]

I'll keep asking it. When you do not have a QB on your roster who can consistently execute the plays called, how can you truly evaluate playcalling and the performance of the OC? Also factor in everything else that has to go right in an NFL offense - pass pro, player health, officiating... it's a lot more complicated than 'the OC sucks'. Playcalling and design of the offense, what gets called when, setting up an offense that takes advantage of the talents of the players on the field, those are all important things that a good OC needs to focus on. But again - if you have QBs who just aren't NFL starters (whether because of physical limitations or decision-making/poise/leadership), you are playing championship poker with Uno cards.

 

[MikefromOH]

Because the OC continues to call dumb plays and play against the strength of the drive as well as the players. It's easy to see that Turner gives up when he thinks a drive is stalling out.

 

[Boone]

Not to beat a dead horse (kidding…I’m going to beat it all off-season)-

Without a good o-line whoever is receiving the snaps from center is living on a knife’s edge. Rivera & Co have shown an ability to draft but an inability to attract or obtain quality veterans to fill holes. Their approach to the o-line this past year was organizational malfeasance. Especially when coupled with expending serious money on Wentz. It’s like hiring a good chef and giving them inferior ingredients and shitty equipment to work with.

Maybe it’s due to Snyder being house poor.

This. It's really hard to understand what they were thinking in the offseason, isn't it? Between the state of our OL and the mounting injuries on defense now, I'm not sure we have enough talent to win games even if the guys who are out there play reasonably well.

 

[SilentThreat]

One look at actual numbers shows that Heinicke was not below Wentz. In fact, he beats him in most categories in less games.

You can't blame Taylor for constant 3rd and short with Samuel up the gut. That's on turner. Most of it is on turner.

and to your point it's sad that Heinicke has a higher Yards per attempt and Net yards per attempt average.

The offenses have not been set to be the most productive with the QB behind center. These analytics show me we've been asking Heinicke to throw less, but more down field passing. That's an offense that Wentz is a better fit for. Heinicke's air yards 'should' not be higher than Wentz, knowing he's got 'less' of an arm.

I 100% agree with you about Turner causing 'bigger' issues than the QBs, but I do feel Heinicke has been regressing. Wentz was regressing also, but as you said.... Nothing screams at you to change QBs... Nothing screams to me that we 'cant'

I think Wentz can be more explosive in THIS offense we've seen... The question is... will it remain the same?

 

[SilentThreat]

I'll keep asking it. When you do not have a QB on your roster who can consistently execute the plays called, how can you truly evaluate playcalling and the performance of the OC? Also factor in everything else that has to go right in an NFL offense - pass pro, player health, officiating... it's a lot more complicated than 'the OC sucks'. Playcalling and design of the offense, what gets called when, setting up an offense that takes advantage of the talents of the players on the field, those are all important things that a good OC needs to focus on. But again - if you have QBs who just aren't NFL starters (whether because of physical limitations or decision-making/poise/leadership), you are playing championship poker with Uno cards.

It's a fair point, and I've watched Heinicke miss open guys like you have.

I've also watched us drop Heinicke / Wentz back behind 5 down lineman, 4 WRs, and a TE split wide... and asked them to make plays when you're not only overmatched, but you're also telling the defense what you're doing. That takes the amount of time a QB has to run through the progressions and lessens it. I've also watched Heinicke be looking left at Terry on a curl, while Dotson / Samuel are man to man on the other side.... lending the idea that the progression is what it is and there's no flexibility.

The other way to truly judge an OC is if they have the ability to adapt.

Scott Turner IS NOT JOE GIBBS, so I'm not trying to say anything less than that is unacceptable.

Joe Gibbs went 0-5 in his first 5 games, nuked his offensive playbook and the rest is history. Joe Theisman was a prototype QB. Doug Williams wasn't even named the starter til the final week of the season, and Mark Rypien threw a beautiful deep ball while not being able to hit his center in the ass if he tried (sound familar?). All 3 offensive schemes had their similarities (including the best offensive line to touch a field, and arguably one of the best position groups in all of football ever) but the pass game responded based on what the QB could do.

The offenses in New England with Edelman / Amendola were vastly different than the one with Randy Moss. The offense in Baltimore changed big time with Lamar Jackson instead of trying to force him to run the same offensive game plan Joe Flacco ran.

The sad thing is it's EASY to adapt it without changing the whole scheme. If you normally run play action out of a shotgun, just simply move the QB under center and run play action boot.... NOTHING has to change with any other member of the offense.

 

[MikefromOH]

Derek, thanks for the hard work you did on this thread. You're a stat monster.

 

[SilentThreat]

Derek, thanks for the hard work you did on this thread. You're a stat monster.

 

[Boone]

So - the measuring stick for a 3rd year OC is a Hall of Famer ST?

I have no issue criticizing Turner - as he has said repeatedly (for those interested enough to actually listen to his responses) he himself self-critiques his performances and wishes he'd done things differently in many games. I have criticised him as much as anyone at times and he deserves some criticism. He's not close to being our only issue on offense. How many times do we have to see a really good QB cover up offensive deficiencies to get that it's a huge factor? Look at the top 5 QBs in the league. They don't have unlimited weapons. They don't have dominant OLs. They don't have perfect playcalling. They execute, and executing covers up a lot of ugly imperfection.

I don't know if Turner can become a great OC. But I don't think many OCs could make this offense with this OL and these QBs a prolific offense.

 

[MikefromOH]

He's obviously under qualified for the job. He can't string any drive together where you don't wonder "what the heck is he doing?"

If I was this bad at my job 2 years in a row I'd be fired. He should be no different just because he's "new" and the coaches buddy.

 

[SilentThreat]

So - the measuring stick for a 3rd year OC is a Hall of Famer ST?

I have no issue criticizing Turner - as he has said repeatedly (for those interested enough to actually listen to his responses) he himself self-critiques his performances and wishes he'd done things differently in many games. I have criticised him as much as anyone at times and he deserves some criticism. He's not close to being our only issue on offense. How many times do we have to see a really good QB cover up offensive deficiencies to get that it's a huge factor? Look at the top 5 QBs in the league. They don't have unlimited weapons. They don't have dominant OLs. They don't have perfect playcalling. They execute, and executing covers up a lot of ugly imperfection.

I don't know if Turner can become a great OC. But I don't think many OCs could make this offense with this OL and these QBs a prolific offense.

I put in big bold letters that he was no Joe Gibbs, so i'm not saying that's the measuring stick.

The point is flexibility... the successful ones have it. And to hammer home your point... we KNOW we don't have a HOF Qb.... so Turner HAS to be more creative to compensate for that. We dont have a top 5 QB on this roster... we don't have a top 15 Qb on this roster, so if you want to give Turner the curve on the grading scale because he doesn't have a QB to cover up deficiencies, i argue the same the other direction... that we need to look at the QBs we have and change the way we look at them on some level, because we know we don't have a top 5 offensive mind in the NFL.

Baker Mayfield was at practice with the Rams for 3 weeks and that offense put up 35 offensive points against Denver. We put up 16 offensive points against the Texans. I don't think ANYONE would trade our offense for theirs, including the O-line.

 

[Boone]

McVay is a great offensive mind, maybe the best in the NFL, but Turner almost beat the eventual Super Bowl champs with a guy off the street awhile ago. Of course, some would say that was due to the greatness of Taylor Heinicke. I think Turner may have had a little something to do with it myself. I'm not sure a single game tells us much.

I respect your POV here, because you recognize it's complicated and multi-factorial - which is the same position I'm taking. That's not what I'm arguing against - and you know that.

 

[SilentThreat]

McVay is a great offensive mind, maybe the best in the NFL, but Turner almost beat the eventual Super Bowl champs with a guy off the street awhile ago. Of course, some would say that was due to the greatness of Taylor Heinicke. I think Turner may have had a little something to do with it myself. I'm not sure a single game tells us much.

I respect your POV here, because you recognize it's complicated and multi-factorial - which is the same position I'm taking. That's not what I'm arguing against - and you know that.

I know, and I agree. I don't think the two can't both be true.

I think we could have gotten more out of the QB position than we have this year. Seeing things like CONSTANT empty backfields and 7 step drops behind an inferior O-line. We watched Brian Robinson run for 7 YPC then get 4 carries in the 2nd half of the 2nd game vs the Giants. We've been lead to believe that there is no ability to Audible in this scheme... which may offset and mitigate a 'better' QB from being able to cover up those deficiencies.

I'll double down that ALL of these things are simple fixes as long as Turner can grow up as a play caller.... so part of it is also on Rivera for not constituting that maturation. I think Turner 100% has the skill to design an offense, we've seen guys open... the play calls appear to have the ability to work, but as an OC, it also falls on him for the QB to know what to do to NOT miss seeing those open guys, or holding the ball too long... he doesn't only have 1 job... to design plays.. He's gotta design the WHOLE offense.

 

[Boone]

I know, and I agree. I don't think the two can't both be true.

I think we could have gotten more out of the QB position than we have this year. Seeing things like CONSTANT empty backfields and 7 step drops behind an inferior O-line. We watched Brian Robinson run for 7 YPC then get 4 carries in the 2nd half of the 2nd game vs the Giants. We've been lead to believe that there is no ability to Audible in this scheme... which may offset and mitigate a 'better' QB from being able to cover up those deficiencies.

I'll double down that ALL of these things are simple fixes as long as Turner can grow up as a play caller.... so part of it is also on Rivera for not constituting that maturation. I think Turner 100% has the skill to design an offense, we've seen guys open... the play calls appear to have the ability to work, but as an OC, it also falls on him for the QB to know what to do to NOT miss seeing those open guys, or holding the ball too long... he doesn't only have 1 job... to design plays.. He's gotta design the WHOLE offense.

I agree with every word!

 

[DieselPwr44]

The late Red Auerbach used to talk about feeling the game when you coached it.

It's pretty clear that Scott feels the game for brief flashes but rarely sustains it for a whole game.

His father was much the same way here. One of the many examples is when they faced the Giants in NY and Stephen Davis had 100+ yds and 2 tds at halftime and then only saw the ball 2 times the whole second half.
In Dallas, sure he had Aikman,Irvin and Emmitt but he also had a head coach that didn't put up with any BS either and I always thought that Johnson kept his straying tendencies reigned in.

Here, Ron seems reluctant to reign Scott in. Rivera has always professed to want a physical run team but we all saw as Scott wanted to sling the ball all over the field with Wentz to start the season off...even though he knew that his new QB wasn't well versed in his offense yet.
Some fans blow that off by saying he didn't have BRob to start the season with but that's a lazy and pretty flimsy excuse when he had Gibson available,who could've carried the load like he did last season until BRob got back.
IMO, the only reason Scott went to a ball control offense(and he did so reluctantly imo) was because of Heinicke's physical limitations and Taylor's penchant for putting the ball in peril.
The fact that even then,he still tries to go seven step drop at times when he has almost a season's worth of data that tells him his Oline can't block those kind of plays up and that during the last Giants game had a back that was averaging almost 7.5 yards a carry and he forgot about him.......
Those are fireable offenses imo,along with only going with your HC's offensive vision when you're forced to.
Ron is loyal to a fault and he probably wants Scott to work out due to his relationship with the Turners and he doesn't want to be wrong about taking a chance on Scott.

As Boone has mentioned,sometimes the right decision is often the hardest. This offseason,if Ron stays, he has to look elsewhere for an OC.