INSIDE THE NUMBERS: A Look at the Patriots Offense in Short Yardage Situations

[PatsFans.com Article]

INSIDE THE NUMBERS: A Look at the Patriots Offense in Short Yardage Situations Last Season
By: Ian Logue

With the offense currently in transition, here's a look back at how the Patriots fared in short yardage situations last season....

CLICK HERE TO READ THIS STORY​

 

[jmt57]

Re: INSIDE THE NUMBERS: A Look at the Patriots Offense in Short Yardage Situations La

A few of those stats that jumped out at me:

- When passing the ball in short yardage situations Welker was very good, which was not a surprise; what was a surprise was how very good he was (89% for a TD or 1st down).

- Conversely Lloyd and Hernandez were not particularly effective in those situations, with passes to Lloyd being converted for a first down a mere 4 out of 12 times, and to AH at under 50%.

- Ridley was very good in the red zone, but not good at the goal line; Vereen was pretty good in both situations

 

[Demosthenes]

Re: INSIDE THE NUMBERS: A Look at the Patriots Offense in Short Yardage Situations La

A few of those stats that jumped out at me:

- When passing the ball in short yardage situations Welker was very good, which was not a surprise; what was a surprise was how very good he was (89% for a TD or 1st down).

- Conversely Lloyd and Hernandez were not particularly effective in those situations, with passes to Lloyd being converted for a first down a mere 4 out of 12 times, and to AH at under 50%.

- Ridley was very good in the red zone, but not good at the goal line; Vereen was pretty good in both situations

One thing to note is that the "short yardage situation" doesn't stipulate 3rd and short. I'd imagine that on 2nd and short (or 1st and short due to a defensive penalty), they would take a chance on shots down the field, which could explain the lower conversion numbers for Lloyd and Hernandez.

 

[Sciz]

Re: INSIDE THE NUMBERS: A Look at the Patriots Offense in Short Yardage Situations La

One thing to note is that the "short yardage situation" doesn't stipulate 3rd and short. I'd imagine that on 2nd and short (or 1st and short due to a defensive penalty), they would take a chance on shots down the field, which could explain the lower conversion numbers for Lloyd and Hernandez.

Even worse. On 3rd and 3 or less, Lloyd caught 1/7 of his balls.

 

[Ian]

One thing to note is that the "short yardage situation" doesn't stipulate 3rd and short. I'd imagine that on 2nd and short (or 1st and short due to a defensive penalty), they would take a chance on shots down the field, which could explain the lower conversion numbers for Lloyd and Hernandez.

I set it up where you can view it by whatever down you want, just use the drop down menu at the top:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/stats/2012/offense-short-yardage/

 

[Gwedd]

Nice stuff, Ian, thanks for this!

I'll post something tomorrow after I've had a chance to think it all over (and get some sleep).

 

[supafly]

So, between Ridley and Bolden (two RB's that you'd consider to be the stronger, downhill, "tough yard" type) inside the 5 yard line they combined for the following statline:

Ridley/Bolden--25 carries for a total of ZERO yards

That's interesting, and would likely point to more of a problem with our blocking even in "big" goal line packages, which would seem strange with the addition of a bigger grouping. I suppose we should attribute a lot of that to the defense selling out to the run and playing "up" more.

 

[Gumby]

So, between Ridley and Bolden (two RB's that you'd consider to be the stronger, downhill, "tough yard" type) inside the 5 yard line they combined for the following statline:

Ridley/Bolden--25 carries for a total of ZERO yards

That's interesting, and would likely point to more of a problem with our blocking even in "big" goal line packages, which would seem strange with the addition of a bigger grouping. I suppose we should attribute a lot of that to the defense selling out to the run and playing "up" more.

Hmmmm.

I was definitely a proponent for MORE running inside the 5 in the red zone as I thought they didnt do enough and were too obvious predictable when they would run or pass (although where exactly TB would throw to was unpredictable).

So, I think either you are pointing out the REASON WHY they (coaches) weren't doing that (no confidence in blocking when in tight)

OR

they were telegraphing it as a run whenever they actually did get around to trying to run it in.

I personally can't believe the blocking would be good for 50-80 yards and then just disappear; so I tend toward explanation B. (And I certainly dont want to say I was wrong about them not running enough.... )

 

[RobertWeathers]

So, between Ridley and Bolden (two RB's that you'd consider to be the stronger, downhill, "tough yard" type) inside the 5 yard line they combined for the following statline:

Ridley/Bolden--25 carries for a total of ZERO yards

That's interesting, and would likely point to more of a problem with our blocking even in "big" goal line packages, which would seem strange with the addition of a bigger grouping. I suppose we should attribute a lot of that to the defense selling out to the run and playing "up" more.

Thats a pathetic stat..Sheesh.

Not sure what that speaks to. Physicality of the O-line? RBs telegraphing their runs or running more upright? Either way it stinks and needs to improve