How did our defense become so offensive??

[vike daddy]

Last season, the Vikings allowed opponents to convert only 25.2 percent of their third downs — the lowest rate since the league started tracking the statistic in 1991. The Vikings started this season by allowing teams to convert 35.5 percent of their third-down attempts but are now ahead of last year’s pace and have dropped the season-long rate to 23.4 for the season.

Over the past three games against the Eagles, Cardinals and Jets, Minnesota has allowed its opponents to convert just four of 32 third-down attempts.

https://www.vikings.com/news/lunchbreak-vikings-defense-clamping-down-on-3rd-downs

[Krauser]

On 2018-10-01 at 9:15 AM, upriser7 said:

 

5 weeks later, Vikings pass defense (for the year as a whole):

• QB rating (actually, passer rating): 90.2 (10th)
• Y/A: 7.8 (25th)
• Y/C: 12.1 (24th)
• 20+ completions: 32 (T-22nd) — note, 6 teams who’ve only played 8 games are at 29 or more, so the Vikings likely end up 16th by next week
• Passing TDs: 12 (T-7th) — every team ahead of them has played fewer games

[Krauser]

The panic over the defense boiled down to a loss to the Bills that was really the offense’s fault (defense made some mistakes too but that’s a competitive game if Cousins doesn’t fumble and they get more than 3 first downs or whatever it was before garbage time) and a shootout in LA on TNF where McVay exploited their system and play calling.

And both of those games happened 4 days apart right after their captain and MVP last year was admitted to a psych ward with mental health problems.

The defense otherwise this year has been somewhere between solid and excellent. They weren’t great in a couple of end of half situations in GB and had trouble getting off the field against the Saints (though no one’s done any better against Brees lately). They allowed a couple of drives each to the Cards and Jets but those outcomes were never in doubt, and they elevated their game against the Eagles and Lions. They got the best performances of several teams (Garoppolo and Rosen not Beathard and Bradford, a highly motivated Rodgers and Goff playing at an incredibly high level) and have come through that with top 5-10 stats in terms of EPA and DVOA.

The Rams game at this point is a huge outlier.  556 yards and 38 points allowed when the next closest totals are 364 yards (Eagles) and 27 points (excluding return TDs by GB and NO) by the Bills, helped by several short fields. The Vikings have only allowed 300 yards 4 times this year, none since October 7 in Philly.

Looking at the stats excluding the fiasco in LA:

Rams game:

• 556 yards
• 55 plays (10.1 yards/play)
• 38 points
• 10 drives (excluding 2 EOH for 9 yards, so 54.7 yds/drive and 3.8 pts/drive)
• 26/34 passing for 465 yards, 5/0 — passer rating 158.3

The other 8 games combined:

• 2344 yards: 293 yards/game
• 496 plays: 4.73 yards/play
• 166 points: 20.75 pts/game
• 166/265 passing for 1635 yards, 7 TDs/8 INTs — passer rating 76.2
• 24.8 yards/drive
• 1.53 points per drive

And here’s the Vikings defense rankings if the Rams game hadn’t happened and they’d only played 8 games (current leaders):

• Yards per game: 1st (Ravens 305)
• Yards per play: 1st (Ravens 4.8)
• Points per game: 8th (Titans 17.6) — note, this stat includes 3 return TDs allowed by the Vikings 
• Passer rating: 1st (Bears 80.5)
• Yards per drive: 1st (Ravens 26.25)
• Points per drive: 2nd (Bears 1.49, Ravens 1.64)

[HitStickAllDay]

6 hours ago, Krauser said:

The panic over the defense boiled down to a loss to the Bills that was really the offense’s fault (defense made some mistakes too but that’s a competitive game if Cousins doesn’t fumble and they get more than 3 first downs or whatever it was before garbage time) and a shootout in LA on TNF where McVay exploited their system and play calling.

And both of those games happened 4 days apart right after their captain and MVP last year was admitted to a psych ward with mental health problems.

The defense otherwise this year has been somewhere between solid and excellent. They weren’t great in a couple of end of half situations in GB and had trouble getting off the field against the Saints (though no one’s done any better against Brees lately). They allowed a couple of drives each to the Cards and Jets but those outcomes were never in doubt, and they elevated their game against the Eagles and Lions. They got the best performances of several teams (Garoppolo and Rosen not Beathard and Bradford, a highly motivated Rodgers and Goff playing at an incredibly high level) and have come through that with top 5-10 stats in terms of EPA and DVOA.

The Rams game at this point is a huge outlier.  556 yards and 38 points allowed when the next closest totals are 364 yards (Eagles) and 27 points (excluding return TDs by GB and NO) by the Bills, helped by several short fields. The Vikings have only allowed 300 yards 4 times this year, none since October 7 in Philly.

Looking at the stats excluding the fiasco in LA:

Rams game:

• 556 yards
• 55 plays (10.1 yards/play)
• 38 points
• 10 drives (excluding 2 EOH for 9 yards, so 54.7 yds/drive and 3.8 pts/drive)
• 26/34 passing for 465 yards, 5/0 — passer rating 158.3

The other 8 games combined:

• 2344 yards: 293 yards/game
• 496 plays: 4.73 yards/play
• 166 points: 20.75 pts/game
• 166/265 passing for 1635 yards, 7 TDs/8 INTs — passer rating 76.2
• 24.8 yards/drive
• 1.53 points per drive

And here’s the Vikings defense rankings if the Rams game hadn’t happened and they’d only played 8 games (current leaders):

• Yards per game: 1st (Ravens 305)
• Yards per play: 1st (Ravens 4.8)
• Points per game: 8th (Titans 17.6) — note, this stat includes 3 return TDs allowed by the Vikings 
• Passer rating: 1st (Bears 80.5)
• Yards per drive: 1st (Ravens 26.25)
• Points per drive: 2nd (Bears 1.49, Ravens 1.64)

What I think I hear you saying is: Fire Zimmer

[wcblack34]

7 hours ago, Krauser said:

The Rams game at this point is a huge outlier.  556 yards and 38 points allowed when the next closest totals are 364 yards (Eagles) and 27 points (excluding return TDs by GB and NO) by the Bills, helped by several short fields. The Vikings have only allowed 300 yards 4 times this year, none since October 7 in Philly.

Looking at the stats excluding the fiasco in LA:

 

While I agree with the sentiment, the road to the Super Bowl will most likely go through LA or New Orleans. Zimmer and Edwards are going to have to do better against them. They will have to figure out how to deal with the matchup problems. Otherwise Kamara and Gurley will eat them alive again. 

[Krauser]

1 hour ago, wcblack34 said:

While I agree with the sentiment, the road to the Super Bowl will most likely go through LA or New Orleans. Zimmer and Edwards are going to have to do better against them. They will have to figure out how to deal with the matchup problems. Otherwise Kamara and Gurley will eat them alive again. 

The Rams exploited some tendencies in the Vikings play calling and checks. May have done us a favor in the long run, as that prompted Zimmer to change things up. 

If you subscribe to the Athletic, Ted Nguyen has an excellent article this week detailing some of the changes: https://theathletic.com/634369/2018/11/06/ted-nguyens-film-room-how-the-patriots-and-vikings-adapted-and-won/

Here's an example he gives of them taking a different approach to covering a RB out of the backfield -- a comparable formation/design to the TD Gurley scored vs Barr: 

His point more generally is that the Vikings have been using concepts that look more similar pre-snap, mostly based on quarters or cover-2, with the corners pressed up, but then evolve differently post-snap based on zone-matching principles. The similarity between the concepts but changing patterns mid-play makes it hard for QBs to anticipate when receivers are going to come free vs run into coverage, so they have to hold the ball more or check it down. 

The other factor for the Rams game in particular was that Goff played out of his freaking mind. If you've watched the Rams last couple of games vs GB and NO you've seen him miss open receivers on some admittedly challenging throws (15-20 yard sideline routes, digs, etc). In the Vikings game, throw after throw was a perfect dime. The TD to Kupp (IIRC) in the back corner of the end zone, just past Hughes and Waynes (Waynes was at fault on the coverage -- it was cover 3 and he shouldn't have been beaten deep to that corner), was the most obvious example. Goff's downfield accuracy and touch were just ridiculous.

The Vikings defense since making changes have already held their own vs the Saints, a performance that should've produced a close game or a win if the offense hadn't given away a pick 6 and a 70 yard fumble return.

They've only had Griffen back for 2 games, and he didn't play much or well vs NO. Rhodes has been struggling, maybe due to nagging injuries, and we can hope he plays better after the bye. Kendricks is still a weak point, and got exploited by Kamara in particular. 

The good news is that most of the younger guys are playing well: Weatherly has been respectable against the run and a good pass rusher, Jaleel Johnson has held up OK, Wilson has been very good in space even if he's not great in traffic in run support, Holton Hill has been excellent in limited work, and Harris has been very good. Alexander makes one dumb mistake per game (in the Lions game, allowing the completion over his head while defending the flat that no one was running into), but has otherwise played well. Waynes is playing better again after some early season hiccups, and of course Hunter has elevated to a DPOY level edge rusher. The development of their younger guys, plus the addition of Tom Johnson, has made them better, deeper than they've ever been as a unit under Zimmer, even with the loss of Hughes for the season. 

If they can come back healthy after the bye, I think the pass rush and DL rotation should be top level, not far off where the Eagles were last year. I want Barr back in there for his size coming downhill in the run game and as a blitzer. If Kendricks continues to struggle, I'd put Wilson in for him especially against the better receiving backs (Tarik Cohen right after the bye, for one). I'd keep Harris in over Sendejo even when healthy and play Hill more if Rhodes continues to struggle. 

I think there's a very good chance they end up top 3-5 in all the major defensive stats and metrics by the end of the year. 

[PrplChilPill]

To be clear, we should remove the bad game against a good team from the stats, but keep the stats against bad teams, when trying to rate them?

I don't really care if the D is the best against terrible teams, I care how they play against the great teams. I'm not interested in 10 wins and a playoff exit this year or next. They are all in. So are my expectations/desires. YMMV, of course, but I'm only interested in this team being great at this point in the process.

[SotanKing]

Rams game has done ton of good for the team. We seemed to have rectified a lot of mistakes after that game, especially secondary has looked better since then. Post Rams game, we played against 1 high octane offense - Saints and I thought defense did fine against Saints. I don't think you can blame defense for the game against Saints..infact our defense did a good job in holding Brees for his worst game of the season. It was Thielen Fumble and Cousins Pick6 which literally gifted 14 points to Saints. I am much more confident over our defense now than in first few weeks of season. Even when Barr, Rhodes were out, our secondary has done a decent job in last few weeks

[Krauser]

2 hours ago, PrplChilPill said:

To be clear, we should remove the bad game against a good team from the stats, but keep the stats against bad teams, when trying to rate them?

No, but the point being made earlier in the thread, and elsewhere on the board, was that the Vikings defense had been "figured out" or "exposed", that Zimmer couldn't get the job done, etc. 

And while they've had some struggles outside the Rams game (2-minute drills in the Packers game, a few big plays to TEs/FBs vs the Niners and Bills, allowing the Saints to sustain a few drives), it's worth pointing out that they're statistically the best defense in the league again this year if you remove the one game against the Rams -- a game that happened under bad circumstances (cross country flight on a short week to face a team playing at an extremely high level right after losing their defensive captain indefinitely due to an unforeseen crisis). 

Football stats are most predictive when they include all data, but there is such a thing as a statistical outlier, and the Rams game was definitely that. Here's the Vikings defensive performances rated by Expected Points: 

						Scor	Scor	Defe	Defe	Defe	Defe	Defe	Expe	Expe	Expe
Week	Date				Opp	Tm	Opp	1stD	TotYd	PassY	RushY	TO	Offense	Defense ▼	Sp. Tms
7	October 21	boxscore	W	@	New York Jets	37	17	16	263	192	71	4	-2.03	25.19	-3.85
6	October 14	boxscore	W		Arizona Cardinals	27	17	16	268	208	60	2	-3.32	14.20	4.41
9	November 4	boxscore	W		Detroit Lions	24	9	18	209	143	66	1	1.94	13.43	3.31
1	September 9	boxscore	W		San Francisco 49ers	24	16	20	327	237	90	4	-2.52	12.02	-1.38
5	October 7	boxscore	W	@	Philadelphia Eagles	23	21	21	364	283	81	2	4.35	1.49	-3.35
3	September 23	boxscore	L		Buffalo Bills	6	27	16	292	164	128		-10.71	-3.26	-3.62
2	September 16	boxscore	T	@	Green Bay Packers	29	29	24	351	253	98		16.42	-4.92	-10.38
8	October 28	boxscore	L		New Orleans Saints	20	30	17	270	164	106	1	5.30	-5.19	-6.75
4	September 27	boxscore	L	@	Los Angeles Rams	31	38	25	556	456	100		15.88	-31.54	7.29

Interestingly, they haven't won a game where the defense had a net negative effect. They've had 4 very good to excellent performances (Jets, Cards, Lions, Niners), 4 mediocre performances (albeit against 3 very good offenses plus the Bills), and one absolutely horrible, brutal performance -- the Rams game. 

Quote

I don't really care if the D is the best against terrible teams, I care how they play against the great teams. I'm not interested in 10 wins and a playoff exit this year or next. They are all in. So are my expectations/desires. YMMV, of course, but I'm only interested in this team being great at this point in the process.

Sure, fair enough. But if you're trying to predict how good or bad the defense will be when it matters most (say, at Chicago and home to Green Bay after the bye, or in the playoffs assuming they make it), it's easier to be confident if the defense has mostly been playing well aside from one bad game than if they've fallen off in general. 

My point is that they had one terrible game, and otherwise haven't really fallen off. In fact, they've been very good for the last month or so. So I think it's reasonable to be optimistic that the defense will play well enough to win big games later this year. 

 

[PrplChilPill]

Those great performances were against terrible teams, one of whom had just traded their best playmaker days before. Let's see how they play against good teams. I hope you are right.... I'm skeptical right now

[SteelKing728]

25 minutes ago, PrplChilPill said:

Those great performances were against terrible teams, one of whom had just traded their best playmaker days before. Let's see how they play against good teams. I hope you are right.... I'm skeptical right now

Chicago will be a good test then.

[Krauser]

8 hours ago, PrplChilPill said:

Those great performances were against terrible teams, one of whom had just traded their best playmaker days before. Let's see how they play against good teams. I hope you are right.... I'm skeptical right now

The Lions aren’t a terrible team, at least not a terrible offense. Stafford had only been sacked 13 times in 7 games before the Vikings got to him 10 times. The only game where they’d put up less than 330 yards offense was vs GB, where they had several short drives on offense after turnovers (Vikings held them to 209). 

The Saints are a good team, and the Vikings held them to season lows in yards and first downs, and their second lowest points total (NO scored 21 vs CLE, 24 at BAL, and 23 excluding the pick 6 at MIN). It wasn’t a great performance because they allowed too many long drives, but they forced a turnover (Brees’ only INT of the year) and would’ve been in position to win the game if the offense hadn’t given the ball away twice including the pick 6. 

The Eagles are a good team and would’ve had their lowest points total of the year (14) if it weren’t for the garbage time TD the Vikings gave them playing prevent defense.

The Jets aren’t good but they played them on the road after scoring 34 and 42 points vs DEN and IND and the Vikings still held NYJ to their worst EXP performance of the year.

Most of their competition hasn’t been great, but they did get the better QB for the Niners, Bills and Cards — Garoppolo and Allen were better than their replacements and Rosen has been better than Bradford. They also faced Rodgers in maybe his best game of the year. 

9 hours ago, SteelKing728 said:

Chicago will be a good test then.

The Bears in Chicago will be an excellent test, they’re averaging nearly 30 points per game (though that’s helped by 4 return TDs). Packers the following week will be another good one, and then the Patriots at Foxboro. 

I expect the defense will be up to its usual standards, and the disaster in the Rams game will continue to be an outlier. 

[Cearbhall]

4 minutes ago, Krauser said:

They also faced Rodgers in maybe his best game of the year

This is really concerning. There are too many QBs having their best games of the year against the Vikings. It reminds me of the 90s when all sorts of QBs from rookies (Joey Harrington), has-beens (Jeff Hostetler), never-was journeymen (Jim Miller) were seeming to have their best games of the year (or career) against the Vikings.

This year the Vikings have Josh Allen putting together his only game that wasn't completely terrible, Jared Goff, and Aaron Rodgers putting up their best games of the year.  That is a rookie, a has-been, and some young guys that look to have a bright future in the league but still might prove to be a one year wonder too. I am not saying that Josh Allen will ever be as good as Joey Harrington's disappointing career or that the Vikings defense is anywhere near as bad as it was in the 90s but I am saying that I don't think QBs playing their best games against the Vikings is a good point to bring up in defense of the Vikings '18 defense.

Nor do I think the Vikings putting up numbers against rookies like Sam Darnold and Josh Rosen with their terrible offenses is a great defense of the Vikings '18 defense. It is a better story than blaming rookie Allen having the best game of his career, has-been Rodgers having the best game of his career, or possible one-year wonder Jared Goff/seven game wonder Jimmy Garoppolo putting up their best games of the year.

[Krauser]

Wait, you’re calling Rodgers a “has been”? Seriously?

Do you watch football? Rodgers has been very good this year. The Vikings game wasn’t any kind of outlier, he’s graded 4th by PFF as a passer, and had comparably excellent grades against the Lions, Niners and Rams. 

It’s no indictment of the Vikings defense that Rodgers played well in perfect weather in a home game in what was a revenge game for him, blaming Barr for his injury last year. 

Goff is an MVP candidate, graded by PFF as the 3rd best QB in the league, and was playing at home in perfect weather. The Vikings defense was exploited schematically but even aside from that, he was extremely accurate on deep throws —  full credit to him for that. It’s not like that was an unlikely good game for Goff, who’s been somewhere between good to amazing all year.

They also faced Brees, the league MVP if the season ended today, and he had his worst game of the year by yardage, passer rating and PFF grade.

They faced Wentz, PFF’s 10th graded QB and beat him at home. They faced Stafford, another good QB, and gave him his 2nd worst PFF grade and passer rating of the year.  Garoppolo isn’t a bad QB, he has only ever had one game in his career with a passer rating under 80 — the Vikings held him to 45.1.

The only QB who had a career day against them was Allen, and even that wasn’t a case of him lighting up the scoreboard (196 yards, 1 TD) because the Vikings defense played badly (aside from the Joseph penalty and 2 blown coverages in the 1st quarter) so much as the offense and special teams repeatedly giving the Bills the ball in excellent field position with a lead.

All this is “really concerning”? Or reminds you of Joey Harrington? Stahp it. 

The Vikings defense has been pretty good overall this year, and the best in the league aside from the Rams game (which, again, was played in unusual circumstances).

It’s 2018, and defense doesn’t matter as much as it used to, but there’s good reason to be confident in the Vikings defense going forward.

 

[vike daddy]

i didn't know Canadians said stahp. lol