Mike Pettine Defense

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

4 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Yeah, full context is important.  The defense did their job to hold the Rams under 30.  It's as simple as that.  Any context of Gurley lying down is washed away with the additional context of Montgomery Montgomering. 

More important to the context was Cooper Cupp being out.

It will be interesting to see how they finish the season offensively now that they have lost one of their top receivers, which will make Cooks job harder.

Still, it was a good performance by the defense in LA, and a performance that showed we can play with anybody if we get our **** together.

[Leader]

14 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Could Jaire set the rookie record for passes defensed despite missing games? I"m note sure where to find that stat.

JA has 9 passes defended.
League leader is Clairborne/NYJs with 13
Dont know/cant say the stats are updated to include this weekends games - but would think so.

[MacReady]

Just now, KingOfTheNorth said:

Agree to disagree. The Rams forced Monty to fumble. They earned the opportunity to score again. They also earned that last TD but chose to instead take a quicker finish to the game. I am not saying the Packers defense didn't do a solid job that game. I just think it's misleading to use the final score as a measuring stick for this defense. The Rams chose not to score over 30.

Did the Rams force Ty Montgomery to take the ball out of the endzone when there was an impending 2 minute warning? 

That is again like blaming the defense for the 7 points the Lions scored from the one yard line after the refs gave them the ball there on King's "touch" on the punt. 

It's ridiculous. 

[TheOnlyThing]

53 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

I mean, depending on how you classify that, the defense has been top 10 this year in ypg.

Top 15 in PPG. 

I like Pettine.

Personally, I view offensive points against as the best indicator of a defense's performance short of a deep dive into overall stats.

At this point, the Pack are 13th. https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-offensive-points-per-game

That represents a material improvement from the recent past.

I too like Pettine. I think his schemes and overall approach have been critical to the D's success to date.

I also like that despite the fact he has had a lot of moving pieces in and out of the lineup he has not reverted to making excuses for defensive failures.

Very different vibe on defense this season.

Here's hoping Pettine gets a chance to coordinate the 2019 D after Gute has added some more pieces and gotten rid of the remaining "rot" from that side of the ball.

[KingOfTheNorth]

Just now, Outpost31 said:

Did the Rams force Ty Montgomery to take the ball out of the endzone when there was an impending 2 minute warning? 

That is again like blaming the defense for the 7 points the Lions scored from the one yard line after the refs gave them the ball there on King's "touch" on the punt. 

It's ridiculous. 

 All I was saying is the Rams chose not to score +30. They had the TD and chose not to take it and it wasn't because of anything the Packer defense did.  I didn't say anything about the defense being to blame for that TD.

[MacReady]

Just now, TheOnlyThing said:

Personally, I view offensive points against as the best indicator of a defense's performance short of a deep dive into overall stats.

At this point, the Pack are 13th. https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-offensive-points-per-game

That represents a material improvement from the recent past.

I too like Pettine. I think his schemes and overall approach have been critical to the D's success to date.

I also like that despite the fact he has had a lot of moving pieces in and out of the lineup he has not reverted to making excuses for defensive failures.

Very different vibe on defense this season.

Here's hoping Pettine gets a chance to coordinate the 2019 D after Gute has added some more pieces and gotten rid of the remaining "rot" from that side of the ball.

Have to like this one.  I typically dislike everything you say, but I agree here completely.  Offensive points against is ultimately the best and foremost way to judge a defense.  Don't care about yards, don't care about DVOA, if you keep teams out of the end zone or from scoring, you're doing something right. 

Can't imagine what our offensive points against ranking would be if they didn't allow 17 points on 22 yards gained against Detroit or a bunch of other BS times they were put in crap positions. 

[MacReady]

Just now, KingOfTheNorth said:

 All I was saying is the Rams chose not to score +30. They had the TD and chose not to take it and it wasn't because of anything the Packer defense did.  I didn't say anything about the defense being to blame for that TD.

And the Rams decided not to score more up 29 against the Niners.
They decided not to score more up 34-0 against the Cardinals.
They decided not to score more up 35-23 against the Chargers.

What if I told you running up the score on a game that's over shouldn't count against a defense? 

What if there had been 40 seconds left when Montgomery fumbled and the Rams got the ball at the 20 yard line, took three knees and kicked a field goal with 3 seconds left.  Would that have been held against the defense, too?  Nope. 

Maybe the Packers defense forced Gurley to lie down because he was afraid of taking an unnecessary hit as he crossed the goal line.  That would have been defense forcing a stop. 

[KingOfTheNorth]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

And the Rams decided not to score more up 29 against the Niners.
They decided not to score more up 34-0 against the Cardinals.
They decided not to score more up 35-23 against the Chargers.

What if I told you running up the score on a game that's over shouldn't count against a defense? 

What if there had been 40 seconds left when Montgomery fumbled and the Rams got the ball at the 20 yard line, took three knees and kicked a field goal with 3 seconds left.  Would that have been held against the defense, too?  Nope. 

Maybe the Packers defense forced Gurley to lie down because he was afraid of taking an unnecessary hit as he crossed the goal line.  That would have been defense forcing a stop. 

You do see how the situations are different, right? The Rams weren't running up the score on an out of hand game against the Packers. The game was close and had yet to be decided. It was only decided when Gurley made that last run. Sometimes, I don't even think you want a discussion, you just want to lecture.

 

[MacReady]

Just now, KingOfTheNorth said:

You do see how the situations are different, right? The Rams weren't running up the score on an out of hand game against the Packers. The game was close and had yet to be decided. It was only decided when Gurley made that last run. Sometimes, I don't even think you want a discussion, you just want to lecture.

I can just as easily say that the defense played a game where scoring one more touchdown was the wrong decision.  They were NOT different situations.  Those situations, scoring more meant SIMPLY scoring more.  In the Packer game, scoring more put the Rams in jeopardy of LOSING.  I'm not lecturing, you're just upset because I continue arguing the point, which I am correct on.  The Packer defense held them under 30 points. 

And it WAS the wrong decision.  The Rams were up by two points.  Gurley scoring would mean they would have had to kick an extra point to go up by 9.  Otherwise, he would be giving Rodgers a chance at a miracle play. 

So the defense kept the Rams to a point where scoring was a bad strategic decision.

You're wrong.  I don't just want to lecture.  I want you to see that the defense held the Rams under 30 points.  Any way you look at it, that is the truth. 

@KingOfTheNorth, did the defense or did the defense not play a game in which scoring a TD there was the wrong decision, effectively having held the Rams under 30 points?

@KingOfTheNorth, was it or was it not a wrong decision to score a TD and score over 30 in that situation, up by 2 with time left on the clock? 

If it was the right decision, the defense PLAYED A GAME IN WHICH THE POINT TOTAL THEY PLAYED WAS A PROPER REFLECTION OF WHAT THEY ALLOWED. 

[KingOfTheNorth]

13 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I can just as easily say that the defense played a game where scoring one more touchdown was the wrong decision.  They were NOT different situations.  Those situations, scoring more meant SIMPLY scoring more.  In the Packer game, scoring more put the Rams in jeopardy of LOSING.  I'm not lecturing, you're just upset because I continue arguing the point, which I am correct on.  The Packer defense held them under 30 points. 

And it WAS the wrong decision.  The Rams were up by two points.  Gurley scoring would mean they would have had to kick an extra point to go up by 9.  Otherwise, he would be giving Rodgers a chance at a miracle play. 

So the defense kept the Rams to a point where scoring was a bad strategic decision.

You're wrong.  I don't just want to lecture.  I want you to see that the defense held the Rams under 30 points.  Any way you look at it, that is the truth. 

@KingOfTheNorth, did the defense or did the defense not play a game in which scoring a TD there was the wrong decision, effectively having held the Rams under 30 points?

@KingOfTheNorth, was it or was it not a wrong decision to score a TD and score over 30 in that situation, up by 2 with time left on the clock? 

If it was the right decision, the defense PLAYED A GAME IN WHICH THE POINT TOTAL THEY PLAYED WAS A PROPER REFLECTION OF WHAT THEY ALLOWED. 

Pretty sure Gurley downing the ball had nothing to do with the defense, and everything to do with#12.

I am not disputing the end score, only that using the end score as a measuring stick is misleading. All this other stuff is fluff to take everyone's eyes away from what the original discussion was between you and I. This is only about the end score of that game and whether it is a misleading measuring stick for this defense. I say it is because it lacks context. You say it isn't because that final drive by the Rams is washed out by Montys boneheaded play. That's all this discussion is about.

 

You know it is ok to disagree, right?

[MacReady]

Just now, KingOfTheNorth said:

Pretty sure Gurley downing the ball had nothing to do with the defense, and everything to do with#12.

Are you saying the defense is supposed to play like they've got Brett Hundley at QB?  Either way, if you're Gurley, that's the right decision if it's Aaron Rodgers or if it's Scott Tolzien on the other side.  The defense did their job and held the Rams under 30.  Period.  That is the only fact in this conversation.  The only fact here is that the Rams did not score 30 points.  If you want to dispute that, I'll point you towards some video evidence. 

Quote

I say it is because it lacks context. You say it isn't because that final drive by the Rams is washed out by Montys boneheaded play. That's all this discussion is about.

I say your context of Gurley not scoring is entirely, wholly, irrevocably, unmistakably, undoubtedly and completely erased by the context that Montgomery took the ball out of the end zone.  You don't get context if you can't allow context. 

Quote

You know it is ok to disagree, right?

Oh, I know.  That's why some people think the Earth is flat.  It being okay to disagree doesn't mean that one person is wrong. 

[KingOfTheNorth]

13 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Are you saying the defense is supposed to play like they've got Brett Hundley at QB?  Either way, if you're Gurley, that's the right decision if it's Aaron Rodgers or if it's Scott Tolzien on the other side.  The defense did their job and held the Rams under 30.  Period.  That is the only fact in this conversation.  The only fact here is that the Rams did not score 30 points.  If you want to dispute that, I'll point you towards some video evidence. 

I say your context of Gurley not scoring is entirely, wholly, irrevocably, unmistakably, undoubtedly and completely erased by the context that Montgomery took the ball out of the end zone.  You don't get context if you can't allow context. 

Oh, I know.  That's why some people think the Earth is flat.  It being okay to disagree doesn't mean that one person is wrong. 

You are once again making this into something its not. Never disputed the end score, so please stop bringing it up like it did. This discussion is about your opinion, and my opinion on this defense and how it differs. You believe the end score of the Ram game is an accurate measuring stick for the Packers defense, I do not. SIMPLE AS THAT. No need to discuss further, I think it's obvious we wont agree.

[skibrett15]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

Offensive points against is ultimately the best and foremost way to judge a defense. 

It's an easy simple way.  But it doesn't account for things you were just talking about in this thread, like the 14 points scored by Blount off of turnovers which landed them on the 1 yard line.

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

What if I told you running up the score on a game that's over shouldn't count against a defense?

exactly correct. when the situation is garbage time, i.e up 9 or more points in clock killing mode, scoring shouldn't count against that defense.

56 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

the defense PLAYED A GAME IN WHICH THE POINT TOTAL THEY PLAYED WAS A PROPER REFLECTION OF WHAT THEY ALLOWED

What I think you're missing about his point is the the Defense's job was, in that scenario, not to prevent points, but to prevent the running out of the clock.  Once they surrendered the first down, they failed to improve their team's odds of winning the game.  No one is disputing that they got dealt a crappy hand by Montgomery.  You seem to be saying that the entire thing didn't happen at all because Montgomery made a huge mistake.

This is one of those scenarios you mention above where points falls short of capturing what is going on.  The winningest play for the D would be to get the stop and force a kick, hoping for a miss which preserves a 1 score game.  The winningest play for the O would be to get a first down without scoring and end the game.  The packers O surrendered the winningest play to the O

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

Don't care about yards, don't care about DVOA,

Yards are pretty useless.    What if I told you there was a metric which accounts for basically every exception you list to points scored, and used points scored by opposing O as its baseline?

I think you'd agree also that points scored by opposing O doesn't account for pace - like how many opportunities did the opposing offense get.  If you give up 30 in a game where the opponent got 15 drives, that's clearly way better than giving up 30 when they only had 5 drives.  So opposing O points per drive is a pretty good one, call that "defensive efficiency" or something similar.  And then you work in things like did the opponent start on your 1 yard line, etc.  Or did the opponent get a drive with only 6 seconds left which started on their own 12 yard line... Clearly that doesn't count as a 3 and out the same way that a normal drive does.  In the long term with good sample sizes, points against gives you a good enough approximation.  When discussing 1 game, it's usually more accurate to give a lot more context.

------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the best thing you can say about this team is that the defense is improving on a semi regular, consistent basis.  SF was a hiccup and injury to DBs continues to plague the team, but the direction is 1000x better than with Capers.  Atlanta will be a good test if we can win if we play from a lead (hopefully we get a lead) against a good opposing offense.

[Arthur Penske]

Hail Pettine. Imagine what he could do with some elite talent at EDGE

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, Arthur Penske said:

Hail Pettine. Imagine what he could do with some elite talent at EDGE

I really do question whether or not Pettine would actually utilize them?  I feel like @AlexGreen#20 touched on this before, but the EDGE guys Pettine have had in the past haven't been big pass rush threats.  In 2015, Desmond Bryant, Armonty Bryant, Christian Kirksey, and Nate Orchard were the top sack leaders.  The previous year they had Paul Kruger (11 sacks), Desmond Bryant, and Karlos Dansby as the top sack leaders.  Going to 2013 with Buffalo, you had Mario Williams (13), Kyle Williams (10.5), Jerry Hughes (10), Marcel Dareus (7.5), and Manny Lawson were the top sack getters.  Even going back to his days with the Jets, the highest sack total was 6 sacks by Bryan Thomas (2010) and Aaron Maybin (2011).  I'd argue that the 2013 Bills' D was the most talented that Pettine had and they were 20th in PPG.