A look at the improvement in the rushing defense. - Page 2

Coogs · 10-07-2004, 08:44 AM

Last year, after two games our rushing defense was first in the NFL allowing just over 60 yards a game. That was against San Diego and Pittsburgh. It seemed like the rushing defense was looking up at that point, and we all saw where it headded and we ended up. Pretty much at the bottom of the heap.

Enter Gun, and his "take away their heart by stopping the run" philosophy. The stats are starting to bear out that Gun is living up to what he promised.

After two games this year, we were right at dead last in rushing defense and yards per attempt. Now, after 4 games, we have climbed to 25th in rushing defense, and 20th in yards per attempt.

And I realize stats can be minipulated to do just about anything, but a couple of interesting things show up if you take out 2 runs.

In terms of stats, those two runs are starting to look like outliers. There are 121 pieces of data that can be analized at this point. In those 121 pieces, we have given up 531 yards for a 4.4 average.

Without those two runs (47 by QG from Denver and 71 to Foster from Carolina), there would be 119 pieces of data to look at. On those 119, we have given up 413 yards, which would rand us at 13th in the league vs the rush, and 3.5 yards per attempt which would rank us 5th.

I realize you can not throw out those two attempts, and I know I am basing my results off of "mean" only statistical analysis, but those two runs look to be outliers after 4 games worth of data.

It looks as if Gun really is taking away the run after being dead last after two weeks, and GR really wasn't taking away the run after being ranked 1st after two weeks.

We are only 1-3, but I have faith now that we may be on to something that could turn out better than 13-3 and an early playoff exit.

KCTitus · 10-07-2004, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by donkhater

I saw all four sacks. With the exception of a corner blitz they were all the result of the coverage or line stunts.

feh..so what...a sack is a sack.

Coogs · 10-07-2004, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

It took two games to get the players DeRobbed. The first game of the season our D looked just like the one we saw get toasted by the Colts. Week 2 still it had some GRob moments but in week 3 they they were much better and then in week 4 much better still. IMO when studying this years D the 1st two game of the season should be thrown out. AFter the next three games we'll be able to better evaluate the Chiefs 2004 D. It appears though that with Guns scheme the D will get better all year instead of going down the tubes as the season prgresses.

PhilFree

All the indicators at this time point in the direction we are better. I realize everyone wants to wait until the Falcons (and Vick more precisely) and Colts games are in the books to form an opinion on if we are better or not. Will Vick hurt us, because we all saw what Plummer did? Will Manning rip us apart again. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say no ahead of time. My guess is defensive ends have been taught a thing or two since the Plummer debacle. And, as someone here earlier here said, we are getting "coverage sacks"

I think we will contain Manning and force a few punts. The Jags did. I think we will too.

Coogs · 10-07-2004, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCTitus

I certainly hope this is improvement we're seeing...

I wouldnt mind seeing an anti-2003 season where KC's playing its best ball in Dec/Jan rather than Sep/Oct.

Exactly! I really believe that is the direction we are heading in too.

KCTitus · 10-07-2004, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

...Will Vick hurt us, because we all saw what Plummer did? Will Manning rip us apart again...

They way KC is getting called for illegal contact and PI, it really makes me nervous. At this point in the season, KC has been getting really ticky tack calls.

Swanman · 10-07-2004, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

OK, the 4 teams we have faced have interesting rankings in offensive rushing. The two we have faired the best against were Baltimore, ranked 4th overall and Houston ranked 12th overall. The two we did the worst against has Denver at 18th (keep in mind they have a 47 yarder in that ranking against us), and Carolina at 25th (and they have a 71 yarder against us to boost their ranking).

I think our rushing defense is legit.

I think that's further evidence that they are becoming more comfortable within the defensive scheme marked by the good performances against good runners in the most previous 2 weeks. I'm hoping Atlanta comes to town still undefeated so the Chiefs can take the wind out of their sails.

stevieray · 10-07-2004, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by donkhater

I saw all four sacks. With the exception of a corner blitz they were all the result of the coverage or line stunts. Until KC has a player that dominates the lineman across from him, they will not even touch those teams from the 90s. The tackling has been better, but the explosiveness in getting off blocks still isn't at that level IMHO.

You wouldn't see those 90s team give up as many 3rd and longs in the entire season as this team has in the first four games.

huh? I'm referring to seeing guns scheme again. I never said they were or are going to be just like or as good as those defenses. They can't be.

donkhater · 10-07-2004, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCTitus

feh..so what...a sack is a sack.

Sure. But you can't compare this team to the 90s squads until a dominant, consistant threat emerges.

While getting sacks off blitzes, coverage, and line stunts are well and good, it's not a consistent, fear-inducing method found in dominant teams.

I'll be shocked if this team ends up in the top ten defensively. There are plenty of talent holes still in it. But a top 15 or top 20 defense certainly isn't out of the question. Should the offense and special teams return to form, that will be enough to make this squad extremely hard to beat. And that was the basis behind the Chiefs' strategy in the offseason anyway.

philfree · 10-07-2004, 10:06 AM

Quote:

All the indicators at this time point in the direction we are better.

No doubt about it. The question is How much better? We were about the best in the league the last two weeks but we were about the worst the 1st two. If we play Jax like we played Balt we'll be a top 10 D regardless but we'll be the best in the league over a 3 game span. We've got some big test coming up but I think we'll do well on them.

PhilFree

KCTitus · 10-07-2004, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by donkhater

Sure. But you can't compare this team to the 90s squads until a dominant, consistant threat emerges.

While getting sacks off blitzes, coverage, and line stunts are well and good, it's not a consistent, fear-inducing method found in dominant teams.

I'll be shocked if this team ends up in the top ten defensively. There are plenty of talent holes still in it. But a top 15 or top 20 defense certainly isn't out of the question. Should the offense and special teams return to form, that will be enough to make this squad extremely hard to beat. And that was the basis behind the Chiefs' strategy in the offseason anyway.

Im not comparing this team to the 90's. Getting sacks helps stop drives. I dont really care how it gets done, just get to the QB and put him down.

'domination' is relative and can be argued in infinite ways, but what KC did against the #1 rushing defense in the league was pretty damned good.

Coogs · 10-07-2004, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swanman

I think that's further evidence that they are becoming more comfortable within the defensive scheme marked by the good performances against good runners in the most previous 2 weeks. I'm hoping Atlanta comes to town still undefeated so the Chiefs can take the wind out of their sails.

I agree on both counts. There are 119 pieces of information that indicate our run defense is significantly better. There are 2 pieces of data that says it is not. I'm going with the 119.

I hope the Falcons and Colts come into Arrowhead on win streaks. If we beat the Jags, Arrowhead will be rocking. And unlike the playoff game when GR sort of took the crowd out of the game (at least from my couch at home it sounded quieter as the game wore on. And it was GR not Manning as the Pats showed a week later), I expect the crowd to be rocking all game long.

Coogs · 10-07-2004, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

but we were about the worst the 1st two. PhilFree

Statistically, we were the worst after the first two weeks.

Toss out those two runs though, and we are 13th in overall yardage, and 5th in yards per attempt for 119 carries after 4 games. Those two runs are outliers in the data. We have to count them, but they really don't fit into the picture of what is happening.

Coach · 10-07-2004, 10:32 AM

Someone mentioned to me that the tackling was somewhat "shoddy" on one drive in the 4th Q where Baltimore got their TD. I can understand the "shoddy" tackling, especially in the 4th Q which lead to Lewis's only TD. Of course though, it was a determined Lewis, because he was pissed off the fact that he wasn't getting his carries. However, did you see the one clip where Lewis was at the sideline, trying to catch his breath, but for some reason, he couldn't? Looked like someone popped him good.

As for the limited carries, there's multiple ways of making that logic. You can say that KC's Offense kept them off of the field (the 8 min drive), the Raven's suspect playcalling. But the general rule is to shut down their best player, no matter what you have to do. They just did that by offense and defense.

KingPriest2 · 10-07-2004, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

Someone mentioned to me that the tackling was somewhat "shoddy" on one drive in the 4th Q where Baltimore got their TD. I can understand the "shoddy" tackling, especially in the 4th Q which lead to Lewis's only TD. Of course though, it was a determined Lewis, because he was pissed off the fact that he wasn't getting his carries. However, did you see the one clip where Lewis was at the sideline, trying to catch his breath, but for some reason, he couldn't? Looked like someone popped him good.

As for the limited carries, there's multiple ways of making that logic. You can say that KC's Offense kept them off of the field (the 8 min drive), the Raven's suspect playcalling. But the general rule is to shut down their best player, no matter what you have to do. They just did that by offense and defense.

Please don't post this way again (first paragraph about Jamal being pissed)

Coogs · 10-08-2004, 05:56 AM

Here is the breakdown of all 121 carries...

3 carries for -4 yards
3 carries for -3
5 for -2
14 for -1
15 for 0
10 for 1
10 for 2
13 for 3
6 for 4
6 for 5
9 for 6
6 for 7
3 for 8
1 for 9
3 for 10
1 for 11
2 for 12
2 for 13
1 for 14
2 for 16
1 for 17
1 for 18
1 for 19
1 for 25
1 for 47
1 for 71

The mode is 0. A whopping 40 rushes were for no gain or less. Keep in mind sacks are not included in this total. It looks like we have 10 sacks on top of this for 64 more yards.

The median is 3. In fact, 72 of the 121 rushes have been for less than 3 yards. So I would think the median would be a better indicator of the performance of the defense than the mean of 4.4 that is inflated by the 47 and 71 yard runs.

Gaz · 10-08-2004, 06:53 AM

How refreshing to read a statistical analysis that even references the median and the mean, much less knows what they are.

Yes, the median is far more representative of the population than the mean. The mean is a crude, blunt-instrument approach that requires almost no effort to calculate and delivers no useful information.

Unfortunately [and irritatingly, to those of us who understand statistics] the mean is what the vast majority of Planet stat-mongers throw out as “statistical analysis.”

Good job, Coogs.

xoxo~
Gaz
Impressed to see it done right.

10-07-2004, 08:44 AM
Coogs In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Northern Kansas Casino cash: $-2055651	A look at the improvement in the rushing defense. Last year, after two games our rushing defense was first in the NFL allowing just over 60 yards a game. That was against San Diego and Pittsburgh. It seemed like the rushing defense was looking up at that point, and we all saw where it headded and we ended up. Pretty much at the bottom of the heap. Enter Gun, and his "take away their heart by stopping the run" philosophy. The stats are starting to bear out that Gun is living up to what he promised. After two games this year, we were right at dead last in rushing defense and yards per attempt. Now, after 4 games, we have climbed to 25th in rushing defense, and 20th in yards per attempt. And I realize stats can be minipulated to do just about anything, but a couple of interesting things show up if you take out 2 runs. In terms of stats, those two runs are starting to look like outliers. There are 121 pieces of data that can be analized at this point. In those 121 pieces, we have given up 531 yards for a 4.4 average. Without those two runs (47 by QG from Denver and 71 to Foster from Carolina), there would be 119 pieces of data to look at. On those 119, we have given up 413 yards, which would rand us at 13th in the league vs the rush, and 3.5 yards per attempt which would rank us 5th. I realize you can not throw out those two attempts, and I know I am basing my results off of "mean" only statistical analysis, but those two runs look to be outliers after 4 games worth of data. It looks as if Gun really is taking away the run after being dead last after two weeks, and GR really wasn't taking away the run after being ranked 1st after two weeks. We are only 1-3, but I have faith now that we may be on to something that could turn out better than 13-3 and an early playoff exit.
Posts: 21,898

10-07-2004, 10:32 AM	#27
Coach Champs! Join Date: Mar 2004 Casino cash: $3808476	Someone mentioned to me that the tackling was somewhat "shoddy" on one drive in the 4th Q where Baltimore got their TD. I can understand the "shoddy" tackling, especially in the 4th Q which lead to Lewis's only TD. Of course though, it was a determined Lewis, because he was pissed off the fact that he wasn't getting his carries. However, did you see the one clip where Lewis was at the sideline, trying to catch his breath, but for some reason, he couldn't? Looked like someone popped him good. As for the limited carries, there's multiple ways of making that logic. You can say that KC's Offense kept them off of the field (the 8 min drive), the Raven's suspect playcalling. But the general rule is to shut down their best player, no matter what you have to do. They just did that by offense and defense. __________________ Super Bowl IV, LIV, LVII & LVIII Champions 2020, 2021, 2023, 2024, & 2025 AFC Champions 1985 & 2015 Major League Baseball World Series Champions 1980, 1985, 2014, & 2015 Major League Baseball American League Champions 2015 American League Central Division Champs
Posts: 54,691

10-08-2004, 05:56 AM	#29
Coogs In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Northern Kansas Casino cash: $-2055651	Here is the breakdown of all 121 carries... 3 carries for -4 yards 3 carries for -3 5 for -2 14 for -1 15 for 0 10 for 1 10 for 2 13 for 3 6 for 4 6 for 5 9 for 6 6 for 7 3 for 8 1 for 9 3 for 10 1 for 11 2 for 12 2 for 13 1 for 14 2 for 16 1 for 17 1 for 18 1 for 19 1 for 25 1 for 47 1 for 71 The mode is 0. A whopping 40 rushes were for no gain or less. Keep in mind sacks are not included in this total. It looks like we have 10 sacks on top of this for 64 more yards. The median is 3. In fact, 72 of the 121 rushes have been for less than 3 yards. So I would think the median would be a better indicator of the performance of the defense than the mean of 4.4 that is inflated by the 47 and 71 yard runs.
Posts: 21,898

10-08-2004, 06:53 AM	#30
Gaz Defense Homer Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Rancho Gaz Casino cash: $10010793	Wow...REAL statistical analysis...what a concept... How refreshing to read a statistical analysis that even references the median and the mean, much less knows what they are. Yes, the median is far more representative of the population than the mean. The mean is a crude, blunt-instrument approach that requires almost no effort to calculate and delivers no useful information. Unfortunately [and irritatingly, to those of us who understand statistics] the mean is what the vast majority of Planet stat-mongers throw out as “statistical analysis.” Good job, Coogs. xoxo~ Gaz Impressed to see it done right.
Posts: 5,911