2 Playoff Questions for those with some time

[Deus Irae]

I'm busy this evening, so I don't have the time to check this right now, but it's important to a discussion I've been having with someone:

In the playoffs, what is Brady's record against (mostly) zone defense teams?
In the playoffs, what is Brady's record against (mostly) man defense teams?


Thanks in advance

 

[Deus Irae]

Nobody had the time for this last night? I don't know if that's good or bad...

 

[luuked]

I'm busy this evening, so I don't have the time to check this right now, but it's important to a discussion I've been having with someone:

In the playoffs, what is Brady's record against (mostly) zone defense teams?
In the playoffs, what is Brady's record against (mostly) man defense teams?


Thanks in advance

If there is one thing I learned working in IT it's that the fastest way to get someone to do research for you is to simply claim something.

Most times where after hours of trying I have been losing my mind trying to figure something out in unix/linux, I just went to a board that is full of knowledgable people and claimed that what I wanted to do is impossible to do in that OS and using MacOS/whatever would be much easier. Within an hour I had clear explanations what to do.

In other words.. you should have just said something very outlandish "Brady sucks against man more than against zone" and I am sure someone would have bit on that.

 

[Deus Irae]

If there is one thing I learned working in IT it's that the fastest way to get someone to do research for you is to simply claim something.

Most times where after hours of trying I have been losing my mind trying to figure something out in unix/linux, I just went to a board that is full of knowledgable people and claimed that what I wanted to do is impossible to do in that OS and using MacOS/whatever would be much easier. Within an hour I had clear explanations what to do.

In other words.. you should have just said something very outlandish "Brady sucks against man more than against zone" and I am sure someone would have bit on that.

Well, here's the thing. I've always credited BB for putting together defenses that can get it done in the regular season with lesser talent, and then noted that one of the Problems for the Patriots then becomes when those same talent-deficient defenses finally meet offenses that are able to overwhelm them (2011 SB, for example).

I've also always credited Brady with the same basic thing on offense, in the sense of making lesser players better. What's interesting about my question, to me, is the idea that those lesser offensive players are getting shut down against the better defenses of the playoffs, and that's forcing Brady to make the kind of throws he doesn't have to make in the regular season, and that's where the INTs are coming from. That's where man v. zone comes in.

So, I'll go for your tactic....

 

[Deus Irae]

.... Patriots wide receivers suck and, except for Edelman (and Welker when he was around), aren't good enough to beat man coverage against good teams in the playoffs, and they haven't been good enough since 2007, which is why Brady has thrown so many interceptions.

 

[Mack Herron]

Interesting question. I don't view it as a bad thing that the Steelers play a lot of zone.

 

[luuked]

.... Patriots wide receivers suck and, except for Edelman (and Welker when he was around), aren't good enough to beat man coverage against good teams in the playoffs, and they haven't been good enough since 2007, which is why Brady has thrown so many interceptions.

I can't even disagree with that statement. Especially because you made sure to say wide receiver.

I don't think anyone can deny that the farther you get in the postseason the better opponents you typically face. This means that the margin of error in general (turnovers, blown coverages, missed tackles) and also specifically for Brady gets thinner and thinner. If you have one or multiple standout players on offense that can win consistently when they are covered it obviously gives you more room to maneuver. With Gronk out, we don't really have that at all on offense.

 

[fightingirish595]

If memory serves me correctly the zone killed us in 2010 against the jets. Hard to beat a zone if no one can get deep

 

[Tony2046]

Nobody had the time for this last night? I don't know if that's good or bad...

I wouldn't mind looking into this but would need to know where I could find data to determine zone or man.

 

[long distance]

.... Patriots wide receivers suck and, except for Edelman (and Welker when he was around), aren't good enough to beat man coverage against good teams in the playoffs, and they haven't been good enough since 2007, which is why Brady has thrown so many interceptions.

Well, can't be said you didn't try ..
Maybe just the wrong weekend..

 

[Deus Irae]

I can't even disagree with that statement. Especially because you made sure to say wide receiver.

I don't think anyone can deny that the farther you get in the postseason the better opponents you typically face. This means that the margin of error in general (turnovers, blown coverages, missed tackles) and also specifically for Brady gets thinner and thinner. If you have one or multiple standout players on offense that can win consistently when they are covered it obviously gives you more room to maneuver. With Gronk out, we don't really have that at all on offense.

What really adds to it is the Gronk injury history. His being absent/decoy for so many of those playoff games has upped the ante for the wideouts.

 

[Nikolai]

I wouldn't mind looking into this but would need to know where I could find data to determine zone or man.

Yeah, I didn't see this until today, but that's the problem I have as well. We can ASSUME certain teams run zone (Seattle, Pittsburgh, etc), but on a game-to-game basis, I'm not sure where you can easily find the breakdowns.

 

[Deus Irae]

Well, can't be said you didn't try ..
Maybe just the wrong weekend..

It seems to a pretty basic thing, and a pretty straightforward argument, at least to me. I just didn't/don't have the exact numbers. Man defenses with effective rush from the front 4:

Jets
Ravens
Seahawks
Texans under BOB
Broncos under Wilson

The INT numbers seem to follow this type of defense. We can see that they certainly didn't follow, for example, games against the Colts, earlier Texans and Chiefs (essentially no Justin Houston that day). In 4 games against that group, Brady's TD:INT ratio is 8:1.

 

[Deus Irae]

In short, looking at it, I see two things:

1. The so-called "Blueprint!" is a legitimate, and valid, thing, in terms of at least slowing down Brady.
2. God help you if your team isn't talented enough to implement the "Blueprint!"

What I'm not sure of, is the 3rd thing, which is how much item #1 is because of Brady having receivers (especially wide receivers) that can't shake good defenders.

 

[fumbrunner]

i don't know if its much of a factor as the offense is designed to adjust based on what they see. I suspect that teams that can disguise their coverage well, along with disguising their pass rush, (the latter in particular) is what gives the Pats fits from time to time.

 

[goheels22002]

I'm busy this evening, so I don't have the time to check this right now, but it's important to a discussion I've been having with someone:

In the playoffs, what is Brady's record against (mostly) zone defense teams?
In the playoffs, what is Brady's record against (mostly) man defense teams?


Thanks in advance

"I'm busy this evening, so I don't have time to check this right now,..." Yeah, right!

Did you get any Steelers' autographs after you pulled the fire alarm at their hotel last night?

 

[Deus Irae]

i don't know if its much of a factor as the offense is designed to adjust based on what they see. I suspect that teams that can disguise their coverage well, along with disguising their pass rush, (the latter in particular) is what gives the Pats fits from time to time.

That might be true, but 2012 Houston would set up as one hell of an outlier, if it is.

 

[long distance]

It seems to a pretty basic thing, and a pretty straightforward argument, at least to me. I just didn't/don't have the exact numbers. Man defenses with effective rush from the front 4:

Jets
Ravens
Seahawks
Texans under BOB
Broncos under Wilson

The INT numbers seem to follow this type of defense. We can see that they certainly didn't follow, for example, games against the Colts, earlier Texans and Chiefs (essentially no Justin Houston that day). In 4 games against that group, Brady's TD:INT ratio is 8:1.

It was (is) a great Q .. but its about fire alarms now ..

 

[Tony2046]

In short, looking at it, I see two things:

1. The so-called "Blueprint!" is a legitimate, and valid, thing, in terms of at least slowing down Brady.
2. God help you if your team isn't talented enough to implement the "Blueprint!"

What I'm not sure of, is the 3rd thing, which is how much item #1 is because of Brady having receivers (especially wide receivers) that can't shake good defenders.

Good stuff Deus.

 

[luuked]

In short, looking at it, I see two things:

1. The so-called "Blueprint!" is a legitimate, and valid, thing, in terms of at least slowing down Brady.
2. God help you if your team isn't talented enough to implement the "Blueprint!"

What I'm not sure of, is the 3rd thing, which is how much item #1 is because of Brady having receivers (especially wide receivers) that can't shake good defenders.

Good thoughts. I would also add -- like you pointed out already before -- that the opponents in the playoffs generally have a higher level of talent and better execution than your average regular season opponent. So you rarely see #2 happening in he postseason.

Does the few times we had Gronk healthy in the offseason give a little insight into #3 ?