Spring practice thread - Printable Version

Spring practice thread - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Spring practice thread (/thread-13544.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Re: Spring practice thread - Goose - 03-23-2017

(03-23-2017, 03:44 PM)CTcard link Wrote:While that has been the standard theme in describing Stanford's offense in recent years, using that idea in such a blanket fashion obscures how Stanford has controlled the ball. What Stanford actually has usually done is run on first and second downs to where we have a manageable third down, and then convert by some kind of play from the quarterback. [Though that is somewhat simplified. In fact Stanford has run very heavily on first down, but has a reasonably strong tendency to pass on second down and run if possible on third down. That sequence is similar, and also collapses with a sack on second down.]

I basically agree. When one says "recent years" though, I think one needs to qualify that by how recent. You may have some stats on this, and if so, I would be interested in seeing them, but it is my sense that with Gerhart and Taylor, we were pretty likely to run on all three downs a good deal. With Gaffney, less so, and with CMAC even less. Part of that was that we got better at recognizing what the defense was giving us, and part of that was that CMAC and to some degree Gaffney are more outside runners than "up the gut" guys. In recent years we tended to get more second and long and second and short, not as many second and 6 as we did with say Gerhart. The variance was larger in later years.

Quote:The problem vs many teams last year was that the formula was more like run on first and second downs to create a manageable third down and then get sacked.

So, McCaffrey (while injured) averaged 4.08 yds/carry vs UW and 4.38 vs WSU. But in neither game did he have nearly enough carries (12 and 8). That was partly because we fell behind and started passing, partly because McCaffrey was injured and wasn't the guy we really know, and partly because we couldn't convert on third downs to keep drives alive so we simply didn't run many plays - especially while the game was still undecided.

While I agree with lots of the statement, I would add the assertion that we couldn't convert because despite CMAC averaging 4 yac, we couldn't reliably run for a first down on third down. If we could, we would have. And we couldn't do that because the line couldn't make a hole. Now, I agree that third and 2 is not a sure thing, even with Gerhart, but it was pretty probable. In 2015, we would run CMAC behind the left side of the line (or more probably Wright) and we would get it. The defenses knew it, everybody knew it, didn't matter. This year, we couldn't do that reliably against anyone (even some of the "bad" teams), and certainly not against Washington/WSU. In line with your comments, in 2015, if we lined up as if we would do that and instead Hogan ran/passed, it was a big play. You won't get that if the defense can stop you without selling out.

Quote:In 2015, McCaffrey averaged 3.48 yds/carry vs und, 2.9 yds/carry vs UCF, 4.42 yds/carry vs $C. Those range from worse to about the same as his bad games in 2016. However, we won the three games listed because that was good enough running to complement that pass game - and in fact those were some of our better passing games as those teams were selling out to stop the run.

It is also worth remembering that we basically did not have a healthy running back in our three worst running games in 2016: vs UW, WSU, and Colorado. The run game struggled those games. That was important and contributed to the losses and was indeed partially due to the OL's substandard performance. But, that happens over the course of a season - and against good defenses; and given the health situation was not completely due to the OL.

Fully agree. But some of it was. One thing we really got used to with Hogan was that he would get us into the correct play, quite possibly a pass, when the defense was loaded up for a run. This year, our quarterbacks (yes, Chryst as well) often didn't do that. When that happens, it is man on man, hat on hat. Not where you want to be if you can avoid it, but if you are, you need to prevail at least some of the time. Generally, we didn't, which was a change from 2015 certainly. It is a lot easier to win football games when we get a good "read" on the defense. But we need to survive when we don't That said, our overall execution in these three games was poor enough that it is hard to point fingers in a meaningful way.

Quote:Another interesting data point is the $C game. That was probably the last time over the first half of the season that the team was reasonably healthy. $C was the third best run defense in the Pac 12, second best we faced (in the Pac 12 - KSU was a better run defense overall). We rolled over those guys. 302 yards rushing, 6.29 yds/carry. That was awfully good; almost certainly the team's best performance of the year. No complaints about the run game there.

Yes, but as I recall SC had two important defensive players get hurt before/during that game. Their defensive line was not at full strength. This undoubtedly made our line look a lot better. And, we were playing from ahead, which is always easier. But you are correct, we looked much better against KSU and USC than we did subsequently. So did Burns. What happened, I don't know.

Re: Spring practice thread - pcgoode - 04-03-2017

Did spring practice start again today?

Re: Spring practice thread - BobK - 04-03-2017

Tomorrow

Re: Spring practice thread - OutsiderFan - 04-04-2017

What are the things to watch for in the second Spring session?Â Will Love be participating?Â Might he have his touches limited like CMac did last Spring?

My hope is Costello makes a big jump in performance, the RG spot is sorted out, and we hear more good things about the RS Frosh DL quartet.Â My expectation is Donald Stewart and Kaden Smith really solidify themselves in the offense.

Re: Spring practice thread - Hulk01 - 04-04-2017

I've rewatched several of last season's games--USC, Rice, Oregon, and North Carolina--with a close focus on the OL play.Â The eyeball test makes our stat--- ~50th in run blocking, 125th in pass blocking--look about right.Â It didn't look like a Stanford OL.

Re: Spring practice thread - fullmetal - 04-05-2017

During the 2014 season (Hogan's down year), we had a mid-season tweak by Bloomgren to alter the OL tactics with a pin-pull method, right?Â Are we still using that?Â Why did the OL underperform in run-blocking this season?Â (In pass-blocking, we were exploited at LT, and that's all she wrote :-X )

Re: Spring practice thread - Goose - 04-05-2017

(04-05-2017, 03:09 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:(In pass-blocking, we were exploited at LT, and that's all she wrote :-X )

I certainly agree we often had issues at LT for pass blocking. However, we also had problems right up the middle against Colorado, very serious ones. Against Arizona, while we were pretty good pass blocking against their line generally, we "leaked" quite a bit around right guard it seemed. Chryst always seemed to be evading towards the left, which was a change. So LT wasn't the entire problem, IMHO.

Re: Spring practice thread - JJJ - 04-05-2017

https://twitter.com/StanfordFball/status/849665061446483968

Re: Spring practice thread - fullmetal - 04-05-2017

(04-05-2017, 03:21 PM)Goose link Wrote:[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=16635.msg191243#msg191243 date=1491430145]
(In pass-blocking, we were exploited at LT, and that's all she wrote :-X )

Re: Spring practice thread - qwerty49 - 04-05-2017

(03-23-2017, 03:02 PM)Goose link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=16635.msg190473#msg190473 date=1490299468]
Maybe UW beat us by getting 8 sacks against Burns in 30 dropbacks, a ridiculous sack rate of 27%, and burying us in such a big hole that we only ran McCaffrey 12 times.

But it goes to the main point, which is that the offensive line was dreadful in pass protection, but was ok in run blocking.

Actually, I think this game demonstrated that they were NOT OK in run blocking. We got down big early, which did influence the play calling. But a "normal" Stanford approach to having two important defensive backs hurt would be to keep the ball away from Washington, dominate the time of possession, run, run, and run some more. We wouldn't even attempt to get into a shoot-out with them, because we aren't built for it. We would try and keep it close so we could win it in the end. I have seen us do that against Oregon for years. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. In the Washington game, we couldn't get first downs, so we couldn't keep the ball. Burns was passing in the first quarter not because we were so far behind (yet), but because it was third and 8. If CMAC was making 4 yards per carry reliably, we wouldn't have been passing. We would have also scored more than 6 points in the game. No way was that an acceptable OL performance on either pass blocking OR run blocking. Washington controlled the tempo, not us.
Perhaps it is a relative thing, that the run blocking was better than the pass blocking. However, even that would be damning with faint praise. I hate to quote a now-departed ×ÉÉ coach, but sometimes you do need to be able to run the ball when everyone in the building knows you are going to run the ball. For Stanford, that has been on most downs. Normally, we can, at least most of the time, and even against "good" teams. This year, we couldn't. I don't think anybody would suggest we didn't have talented backs. What does that leave?
[/quote]

I pretty much agree with you all the way down the line (oops no pun intended!)

There's always the feeling that Gerhart's last year and Taylor's year were high water marks, outliers as it were.Â I mean, Toby's senior year it seemed like we routinely ran on 3rd and 7, and converted a very high percentage of the time.Â Taylor ran tough, basically a smaller version of Toby, but definitely a tackle-breaker and probably overall a bit underappreciated.Â Of course there was always that guy, what's-his-name at QB who made the running game even more effective.

And all of this was before the bumper crop of Peat-Murphy-Garnett really matured.

But it was Gaffney's year that I think defenses started being a lot more prepared for us, and for Power/Ogre specifically.Â Gaffney was never the quickest guy into the line, and he got hit a lot by the weakside rusher behind the LOS, but he was such a load to bring down that he almost always got positive yardage even when he was hit 2 yards behind the line.Â Friends of mine who were former OL were crying out in the stands for wider line splits to force the weakside defenders further away, but I think Bloom/Pritchard/Shaw didn't see the need, and I think that carried over to the CMac era.Â IMHO CMac got stuffed a lot at the LOS, but he also broke some incredible runs to create impressive YPC stats.Â (I'd love to see the distribution of YPC for CMac each year -- I wonder how much it may have differed from other backs.)

I'm in the camp that cringed watching our OL last year -- but I'm not sure how much of the dropoff I saw in performance was due to 1) talentÂ 2) scheme or 3) some combination of the two.Â The only observation I can offer on #1 is that Caspers was probably considered the 5th best OL in our big recruiting class, and that he was the most experienced of the 5-6 starters we had last year.Â Yes, the season was spoken for by Mid-October, and Colorado was an ugly, ugly loss, but it just might be true that staff got the most they could out of what they had to work with last year.

.

Â

Re: Spring practice thread - CTcard - 04-05-2017

I pretty much said my piece on the run blocking last year up above, but want to reiterate that the point was that reexamining the results (stats) and film was worth posting about precisely because the result is surprising: it seems the OL performed run blocking better than what I thought I had been watching all season. Of course there we some games and many plays where there weren't holes and linemen couldn't get a push, but there are always such plays and it is hard to mentally average over the entire body of work merely by watching. In the good years, one more easily forgets the bad runs because the overall offense is keeping the ball, driving, and scoring.

I think the stats below are pretty interesting, though of course they don't tell you everything.
It's pretty common to focus on carries by running backs in trying to get a feeling for the OL run blocking, for example Football Outsiders uses RB carries as the basis for their adjusted line yards stat, which Hulk apparently referred to above.

For the last several years, here are the RB avg per carry (for efficiency), the RB yds/game (for total contribution/degree to which running carried the load), the Football Outsiders Ajusted Line Yards for the three years available, and notes giving the QB, main RB, and season finale.

yearÂ Â RB avgÂ Â RB yds/gmÂ FO ALYÂ NotesÂ Â Â Â
2008Â Â 5.52Â Â Â Â Â Â 166Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Pritchard, Gerhart, no bowl
2009Â Â 5.33Â Â Â Â Â Â 183Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Luck, Gerhart, Sun Bowl
2010Â Â 4.77Â Â Â Â Â Â 163Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Luck, Taylor, Orange Bowl
2011Â Â 5.42Â Â Â Â Â Â 190Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Luck, Taylor, Fiesta
2012Â Â 4.77Â Â Â Â Â Â 150Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Nunes/Hogan, Taylor, Rose vs Wisconsin
2013Â Â 5.03Â Â Â Â Â Â 168Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Hogan, Gaffney, Rose vs MSU
2014Â Â 4.81Â Â Â Â Â Â 126Â Â Â 103.6/59thÂ Hogan, Wright, Foster Farms
2015Â Â 5.60Â Â Â Â Â Â 201Â Â Â 108.0/41st*Â Hogan, McCaffrey, Rose Bowl vs Iowa
2016Â Â 6.18Â Â Â Â Â Â 193Â Â Â 106.2/48thÂ Burns/Chryst, McCaffrey, Sun Bowl

Now I certainly don't think this means the 2016 OL was better are run blocking than 2015, but I think the numbers are surprising enough that they are worth a reexamination towards the thought that the run blocking itself was okay but that the offense floundered in the pass game (QB and OL).

*I am not entirely sure why, but it appears that the Football Outsiders stat undervalues our type of running game. I refuse to believe that in 2015 our OL anywhere near 41st best in run blocking.

Re: Spring practice thread - Goose - 04-05-2017

(04-05-2017, 10:14 PM)CTcard link Wrote:I think the stats below are pretty interesting, though of course they don't tell you everything.
It's pretty common to focus on carries by running backs in trying to get a feeling for the OL run blocking, for example Football Outsiders uses RB carries as the basis for their adjusted line yards stat, which Hulk apparently referred to above.

For the last several years, here are the RB avg per carry (for efficiency), the RB yds/game (for total contribution/degree to which running carried the load), the Football Outsiders Ajusted Line Yards for the three years available, and notes giving the QB, main RB, and season finale.

I would be interested in knowing the median yards per attempt each year as well, and/or the standard deviation of the yards per attempt. I think that this yearsÂ averages are inflated by 1) the last 6 opponents being "bad" run defenses, and 2) CMAC breaking a few long runs. The problem can be seen as follows. Suppose a back runs 4 times and makes 5 yards each time. The mean and median are 5 yards per carry and we have the ball and a first down. Now, instead, he makes 20 yards, and then 0 yards 3 times. Same average, but we punt. The mean is 5 but the median is 0. That was us last year. CMAC/BL could work magic sometimes, but not enough. Granted, this is an extreme, contrived example, but things like it seemed to happen in the games we lost, which caused us to have to give up the ball much more often than usual. It is also very fair to note that the OL had to contend with defenses that didn't fear the pass much (Washington State and Colorado anyway) and loaded up against the run. In those cases it seemed we would get a 10+ yard run and then negate it by getting stuffed a couple of times. Note also in my contrived example above, we probably wouldn't have run on third and 10. We would have attempted a pass, most probably. It would be incomplete or a sack, and we punt. The run average goes UP to 6.66 YPC, but we still punt. The average can be a very misleading statistic if the distribution is skewed byÂ large outliers, which I think ours was.
Now, if those outliers are large enough that they result in touchdowns, that is a different case, and the fans (at least) don't care. I think the coaching staff smiles in public but worries in private about that case. But last year in a few games there were too few "big plays" to compensate for the no/short gains. Stanford isn't trying to be a "big play" offense, at least on the ground. We want to control the ball. We rely on the OL to stay away from the "bad" plays on the ground. If that doesn't happen, we have a problem.

Re: Spring practice thread - qwerty49 - 04-06-2017

(04-05-2017, 11:45 PM)Goose link Wrote:[quote author=CTcard link=topic=16635.msg191261#msg191261 date=1491455691]

I think the stats below are pretty interesting, though of course they don't tell you everything.
It's pretty common to focus on carries by running backs in trying to get a feeling for the OL run blocking, for example Football Outsiders uses RB carries as the basis for their adjusted line yards stat, which Hulk apparently referred to above.

For the last several years, here are the RB avg per carry (for efficiency), the RB yds/game (for total contribution/degree to which running carried the load), the Football Outsiders Ajusted Line Yards for the three years available, and notes giving the QB, main RB, and season finale.

Re: Spring practice thread - Hulk01 - 04-06-2017

Ive rewatched the SC, Rice, Oregon, and North Carolina games.Â For purposes of contrast, over the years Ive also rewatched Orange Bowl game.

What seemed apparent about our 2017 offense:

The absence of push, and of significant holes, for the running backs.Â

The number of running attempts stalled behind, or at, the line of scrimmage.

The extent to which our impressive yards per carry reflected several exceptional runs by Love and Mac.

Our relative dependence on Daniel Marx to spring a running play.

The quick collapse of our pockets; the pressure often was immediate.Â It also appeared that Burns became more affected by it than Chryst.

The near-absence of any plays that would cause a commentator to say, brobdingnagian block there by (name of offensive lineman) to spring that play.

Id love to think there is true competition for spots on the 2017 offensive line.Â Herbig can be fine and Burkett good enough.Â Tucker, Hall, and Bright have had time enough to become very good offensive linemen.Â They werent.Â

Re: Spring practice thread - BostonCard - 04-06-2017

Our opponent's run defense in the latter half of the year is frequently cited as a reason that the stats for last year "lie".Â However, it is worth noting that every year we face some good run defenses and some bad ones.Â The breakdown between "first half" and "second half" is not usually as stark, so it is not noticeable, but it's not like the Orange bowl team was always facing top-25 run defenses.Â Indeed, was Sacramento State that much better of a run defense than Rice?Â Here are the rest of the opponents:

team - run defense
Washington State 5.61 ypc
UCLA 5.21 ypc
Virginia Tech 4.69 ypc
UW 4.67 ypc
Wake Forrest 4.67 ypc
OSU 4.26 ypc
Notre Dame 4.02 ypc
USC 4.39 ypc
Cal 3.66 ypc
Arizona 3.56 ypc
Oregon 3.51 ypc
ASU 3.27 ypc

So that year, we had easy games and hard games too.

BC

Re: Spring practice thread - washingtonismoney - 04-06-2017

I suspect injuries were a big factor for our offensive line play. Tucker, for instance, was pretty solid in his first two games. Then, for (poorly or un-)explained reasons, they switch Tucker with Hall and performance collapses. (Also Tucker kind of flips in and out of the lineup.) So I think there were lots and lots of factors impacting the poor performance. Better health and more experience will equate to a better line play.

Re: Spring practice thread - Goose - 04-06-2017

(04-06-2017, 08:03 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:So that year, we had easy games and hard games too.

BC

For sure each year we have easy games and hard games. I am not saying the average yards per carry lies. I am saying it delivers exactly what the average of a small number (12 or so) of differently distributed,Â time varying, and probably not very random measurements promises to deliver. The YPA delivers not very much. This is probably a good thing. If it were a good, strong statistic, we could use it to predict the scores of games with very high accuracy. Fortunately, we can't, and therefore we can talk about itÂ ;D.Â We use these statistics not because they are particularly strong, but because they are all we have. They are not meaningless, but exactly what they mean is very open to debate.Â

Re: Spring practice thread - CTcard - 04-08-2017

(04-06-2017, 01:14 AM)qwerty49 link Wrote:[quote author=Goose link=topic=16635.msg191262#msg191262 date=1491461144]

I would be interested in knowing the median yards per attempt each year as well, and/or the standard deviation of the yards per attempt. I think that this yearsÂ averages are inflated by 1) the last 6 opponents being "bad" run defenses, and 2) CMAC breaking a few long runs. ... The average can be a very misleading statistic if the distribution is skewed byÂ large outliers, which I think ours was.

Spot on.Â I'd love to see a histogram distribution of CMac's carries because I suspect it confirms your observations.Â
[/quote]

Well, I certainly cannot create the stats you'd like to see. I can give the following comparison which is Stanford runs of 10+ yards and 20+ yards each season. Once you get up to 30+ yards the numbers aren't large enough to be meaningful.

YearÂ Â Â Â Â 10+ yd runsÂ Â Â Â 20+ yd runs
2016Â Â Â Â Â Â 74Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 26
2015Â Â Â Â Â Â 84Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 31
2014Â Â Â Â Â Â 64Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 21
2013Â Â Â Â Â Â 81Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 25
2012Â Â Â Â Â Â 71Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 12
2011Â Â Â Â Â Â 75Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 25
2010Â Â Â Â Â Â 75Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 21

I don't really see anything standing out there in terms of number of an inordinate number of particularly long runs in 2016.

Re: Spring practice thread - CowboyIndian - 04-09-2017

(04-05-2017, 11:45 PM)Goose link Wrote:I would be interested in knowing the median yards per attempt each year as well, and/or the standard deviation of the yards per attempt.

Well, that makes two of you.

Re: Spring practice thread - Stymie - 04-09-2017

(04-09-2017, 06:44 AM)CowboyIndian link Wrote:[quote author=Goose link=topic=16635.msg191262#msg191262 date=1491461144]
I would be interested in knowing the median yards per attempt each year as well, and/or the standard deviation of the yards per attempt.

Well, that makes two of you.
[/quote]

I would prefer a Monte Carlo simulation which could give us a clue as to how our running game will improve (or degradate) over the next 5 years.