PFT on Kliff

[Jetstream Green]

What I see with Murray is his footwork is causing a lot of his issues. He needs to step up into the pocket....but the problem with this this is that he faced so much interior pressure last year. It's a pretty hard thing to step up right into Aaron Donald running right at you.

Rodney Hudson is the biggest free agent the Cardinals have landed in ages, and his presence will dwarf JJ Watt... even if Watt has a Pro Bowl year with the Cardinals

 

[Chopper0080]

You've made it very clear that you think Kyler is REALLY BAD in the intermediate areas - are you saying that KK isn't able to effectively run his offense bc Kyler is below average in intermediate areas? Is that really what's holding this offense back?

I just find it so strange to hone in on that one thing, as if it's the reason for our struggles on offense. It completely ignores the bubble screens, the poor route trees, the lack of motion, the penalties, all which can be directly linked to coaching.

The importance of the intermediate passing game is how it enables you to keep LBs back and Ss from sitting deep.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

The importance of the intermediate passing game is how it enables you to keep LBs back and Ss from sitting deep.

Where do the failures lie in terms of making Kyler effective in the intermediate zone? Is it a physical issue of vision or a messy pocket? Is it a mental issue of poor play design or bad route running?

I know that the Cards rarely attacked down the field, which seemed to create a lot of noise in the intermediate area, and probably makes it a hell of a lot harder to be effective.

 

[BullheadCardFan]

To me it's pretty simple, Kliff wants the title of Head Coach but doesn't want ALL the responsibilities that go with the title of head coach or to put it more succinctly he doesn't have the desire to invest the time (areas that are of less interest to him) into all the areas of responsibility required by the position of head coach.

This is the way it appears

 

[Krangodnzr]

Where do the failures lie in terms of making Kyler effective in the intermediate zone? Is it a physical issue of vision or a messy pocket? Is it a mental issue of poor play design or bad route running?

I know that the Cards rarely attacked down the field, which seemed to create a lot of noise in the intermediate area, and probably makes it a hell of a lot harder to be effective.

They couldn't consistently attack down the field because pressure would usually get to Kyler before he could throw down field.

Go back and watch last season and you will see what I am talking about. Early on Kyler carved up defenses short and deep. Teams figured it out around mid season and squatted the short zones and sent extra blitzers. Then Kyler didn't have time to throw deep and the short stuff was covered.

What I saw was that bad mechanics were the primary culprit. Kylers drifting feet makes those passes sail a lot. He has to do better or teams will continue to do that. Like I said earlier, easier said than done when the pressure is often coming up the guy.

 

[Chopper0080]

Where do the failures lie in terms of making Kyler effective in the intermediate zone? Is it a physical issue of vision or a messy pocket? Is it a mental issue of poor play design or bad route running?

I know that the Cards rarely attacked down the field, which seemed to create a lot of noise in the intermediate area, and probably makes it a hell of a lot harder to be effective.

In my experience success in the intermediate passing area is tied to your ability to diagnose coverages and blitzes pre-snap, confirm those post-snap, and then attack the vulnerable areas. IMO, this is another area where Kyler's inexperience vs high-level defenses shows.

The other issue I feel I have seen is that Kyler likes to see players open/separate prior to delivering the ball. Because of this, he is off a bit on some of his "window" or "spot" throws or those where he needs to trust the WR to get into the window or throw a player away from the coverage. These are the throws you hear on broadcasts where they say the QB threw to a spot. That happens because the QB is able to read pre-snap, confirm post-snap, and then trust his WR is going to get to the vacated area because the ball has to be delivered to beat the defensive player who is rotating to the vacated zone or reading the route.

 

[JeffGollin]

He doesn't even deserve his name spelled correctly

He doesn't even deserve his name spelled correctly

Funny - I spelled it "Wilkes" despite knowing better. Dude's name seems more "Wilkes" than "Wilks", so I preferred to spell it that way.

 

[Cardsfaninlouky]

Excuse me if I don't think a 2-win improvement over possibly the worst Cards team I have ever seen is anything to crow about. And I don't even want to hear the kicker excuses when Kliff was idiotic enough to PURPOSEFULLY PLAY FOR FGs, and LONG FGs at that, at the end of a game with a bad kicker. You literally just argued against your main point in blaming the kicker there.

I didn't see improvement in the play calling, team discipline, clock management, coaching like a scared child at the end of games, or any of his deficiencies last year. I saw more of the same. In order to continue progressing as a HC you kind of have to already be making progress. As another poster has mentioned, we added Nuke to the team. If we hadn't, do you think this offense would have been anything more than the same 5-win team?

He called better plays in 2019 than 2020 with less talent. Used more misdirection, 11, 12 & even 21 personnel. I figured he would expand on the play calling from 2019 in 2020 but instead it seemed like just getting the ball to Hopkins was the plan. I know he's one of the best WR's in the NFL but a play caller has to mix it up to keep defenses off balance. In 2021, we have WR 1, WR 2, a slot & a gadget/jet motion guy so there should be no excuses for not mixing the play calls, personnel groupings & misdirection calls up.

 

[BritCard]

He called better plays in 2019 than 2020 with less talent. Used more misdirection, 11, 12 & even 21 personnel. I figured he would expand on the play calling from 2019 in 2020 but instead it seemed like just getting the ball to Hopkins was the plan. I know he's one of the best WR's in the NFL but a play caller has to mix it up to keep defenses off balance. In 2021, we have WR 1, WR 2, a slot & a gadget/jet motion guy so there should be no excuses for not mixing the play calls, personnel groupings & misdirection calls up.

Spot on. The only place the play calling improved in 2020 was the RZ, and that was predominantly because of Kyler's legs.

In fact, you could easily argue all the offensive improvements and the resulting improved record came from unleashing Kyler as a runner and adding Nuk as a receiver. Which begs the question why we didn't run Kyler more in '19.

I agree that our personnel groupings, formations and play calling were generally less inventive and more predictable than the year before. I'm not sure what people are seeing other than the record that suggests Kliff got better.

 

[QuebecCard]

Spot on. The only place the play calling improved in 2020 was the RZ, and that was predominantly because of Kyler's legs.

In fact, you could easily argue all the offensive improvements and the resulting improved record came from unleashing Kyler as a runner and adding Nuk as a receiver. Which begs the question why we didn't run Kyler more in '19.

I agree that our personnel groupings, formations and play calling were generally less inventive and more predictable than the year before. I'm not sure what people are seeing other than the record that suggests Kliff got better.

Well, the more "inventive" in year one was being blown up because the line was being overwhelmed, and there was a conscious decision not to risk KM's health by running more. Year two saw the incorporation of NUK and more designed runs. Year three???

 

[JeffGollin]

How many on this board were clamoring for Arians' to stay as opposed to those that believed it was time for a change?

No clamor on my part, because I wasn't aware what was happening until BA already stepped down.

Then, after it happened that sinking feeling that we let another good guy get away.

I'm not sure where we should point fingers only to say that the Cardinal brass needs to recognize quality when they've got it and know how to hang onto it.

 

[cardncubfan]

Good article on KK being on the hot seat. I'm surprised we had a top 10 defense with all of the people calling for a new DC.

MSN

The Cardinals defense was a little underrated last season. They finished 10th in Football Outsiders' DVOA, seventh in weighted DVOA (which gives extra credit to late-season performance and indicated improvement for Arizona) and ninth in pass DVOA. That happened with Chandler Jones missing 11 games. The Cardinals get Jones back and added J.J. Watt. While they're both in their 30s, they're elite players. If the Cardinals continue to figure out the best ways to use 2020 first-round pick Isaiah Simmons and get a contribution from this year's first-round pick Zaven Collins, there's no reason the Cardinals can't be a top-10 defense again. Maybe better, if last season's late improvement was legitimate.

 

[Stout]

Good article on KK being on the hot seat. I'm surprised we had a top 10 defense with all of the people calling for a new DC.

MSN

The Cardinals defense was a little underrated last season. They finished 10th in Football Outsiders' DVOA, seventh in weighted DVOA (which gives extra credit to late-season performance and indicated improvement for Arizona) and ninth in pass DVOA. That happened with Chandler Jones missing 11 games. The Cardinals get Jones back and added J.J. Watt. While they're both in their 30s, they're elite players. If the Cardinals continue to figure out the best ways to use 2020 first-round pick Isaiah Simmons and get a contribution from this year's first-round pick Zaven Collins, there's no reason the Cardinals can't be a top-10 defense again. Maybe better, if last season's late improvement was legitimate.

Agreed, that is a good article. This is the big make-or-break year. I would hate for us to finish at or near .500 and this "management" team to deem that enough progress.

As for a top 10 defense, that's misleading to say. DVOA means...? Yeah, we didn't have a top 10 defense in reality.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Agreed, that is a good article. This is the big make-or-break year. I would hate for us to finish at or near .500 and this "management" team to deem that enough progress.

As for a top 10 defense, that's misleading to say. DVOA means...? Yeah, we didn't have a top 10 defense in reality.

DVOA is adjusted for opponents.

The Cardinals defense wasn't bad last year. Neither was the offense.

 

[BritCard]

DVOA is adjusted for opponents.

The Cardinals defense wasn't bad last year. Neither was the offense.

DVOA isn't perfect. It's adjusted for opponents, so it depends which opponents you get. All a 10th ranking means with a -6.6% DVOA is that we were 6.6% better against the teams we faced on average than other teams that faced them. So it also depends on the teams your opponents faced.

We played all 4 NFC East teams, and they played each other 6 times. They all sucked. That's where our bump in DVOA comes from.

That being said the D was generally much improved but still wasn't great and was poor against good teams.

 

[Krangodnzr]

DVOA isn't perfect. It's adjusted for opponents, so it depends which opponents you get. All a 10th ranking means with a -6.6% DVOA is that we were 6.6% better against the teams we faced on average than other teams that faced them. So it also depends on the teams your opponents faced.

We played all 4 NFC East teams, and they played each other 6 times. They all sucked. That's where our bump in DVOA comes from.

That being said the D was generally much improved but still wasn't great and was poor against good teams.

That's not where the bump came from.

DVOA would be NEGATIVELY impacted from feasting on bad offenses. That's the point of it.

 

[DVontel]

DVOA isn't perfect. It's adjusted for opponents, so it depends which opponents you get. All a 10th ranking means with a -6.6% DVOA is that we were 6.6% better against the teams we faced on average than other teams that faced them. So it also depends on the teams your opponents faced.

We played all 4 NFC East teams, and they played each other 6 times. They all sucked. That's where our bump in DVOA comes from.

That being said the D was generally much improved but still wasn't great and was poor against good teams.

You hold PFF as gospel, but seem to judge DVOA? Interesting.

 

[BritCard]

You hold PFF as gospel, but seem to judge DVOA? Interesting.

I literally do neither of those things. I've spoken at length about the weaknesses of PFF. That doesn't mean it doesn't have strengths.

And I'm not judging FO DVOA. Just discussing how it works. No system is perfect.

 

[BritCard]

That's not where the bump came from.

DVOA would be NEGATIVELY impacted from feasting on bad offenses. That's the point of it.

DVOA doesn't adjust for strength of opponents. Not in the way you suggest. You don't get less "points" for a 10 yard pass vs the Jets than you would vs the Bucs. Unless the Bucs give up very few 10 yard passes and the Jet's give up lots. And those stats are effected by who those teams play.

FO explain it here,

"The biggest variable in football is the fact that each team plays a different schedule against teams of disparate quality. By adjusting each play based on the opposing defense’s average success in stopping that type of play over the course of a season, we get DVOA, or Defense-adjusted Value Over Average. Rushing and passing plays are adjusted based on down and location on the field; passing plays are also adjusted based on how the defense performs against passes to running backs, tight ends, or wide receivers. Defenses are adjusted based on the average success of the offenses they are facing. (Yes, technically the defensive stats are actually “offense-adjusted.” If it seems weird, think of the “D” in “DVOA” as standing for “opponent-Dependent” or something.)"

So as you see here "Defenses are adjusted based on the average success of the offenses they are facing" which really all depends on who your opponents are facing.

So let's say for example we play the Cowboys and the Cowboys are averaging 30+ points a game with Dak playing some poor teams in a poor division, but then Dak is out and they only put up 10 (with all the yardage and play stats that go along with a poor performance) then you're going to get a whopping DVOA boost.

How many backup QB's alone did we face last year?

Like I said, the D was better but we didn't have the 10th best D in football in reality. All DVOA says is we had the 10th best D vs the opponents we played based on how those teams played against their other opponents, without factoring if they had a backup QB starting, their star WR or RB missing etc

I'm not trashing DVOA and it's far more complicated than described above factoring alot of variables but like every system in existence it's not perfect. It still has a lot of value.

At least, that's how I understand it from reading their explanation.

 

[BritCard]

According to DVOA we were the worst team in our division last year, which is a fair comparison as we played an almost identical schedule.

SEA 5th.
RAMS 9th.
49ERS 11th.
CARDS 16th.

 

[Krangodnzr]

DVOA doesn't adjust for strength of opponents. Not in the way you suggest. You don't get less "points" for a 10 yard pass vs the Jets than you would vs the Bucs. Unless the Bucs give up very few 10 yard passes and the Jet's give up lots. And those stats are effected by who those teams play.

FO explain it here,

"The biggest variable in football is the fact that each team plays a different schedule against teams of disparate quality. By adjusting each play based on the opposing defense’s average success in stopping that type of play over the course of a season, we get DVOA, or Defense-adjusted Value Over Average. Rushing and passing plays are adjusted based on down and location on the field; passing plays are also adjusted based on how the defense performs against passes to running backs, tight ends, or wide receivers. Defenses are adjusted based on the average success of the offenses they are facing. (Yes, technically the defensive stats are actually “offense-adjusted.” If it seems weird, think of the “D” in “DVOA” as standing for “opponent-Dependent” or something.)"

So as you see here "Defenses are adjusted based on the average success of the offenses they are facing" which really all depends on who your opponents are facing.

So let's say for example we play the Cowboys and the Cowboys are averaging 30+ points a game with Dak playing some poor teams in a poor division, but then Dak is out and they only put up 10 (with all the yardage and play stats that go along with a poor performance) then you're going to get a whopping DVOA boost.

How many backup QB's alone did we face last year?

Like I said, the D was better but we didn't have the 10th best D in football in reality. All DVOA says is we had the 10th best D vs the opponents we played based on how those teams played against their other opponents, without factoring if they had a backup QB starting, their star WR or RB missing etc

I'm not trashing DVOA and it's far more complicated than described above factoring alot of variables but like every system in existence it's not perfect. It still has a lot of value.

At least, that's how I understand it from reading their explanation.

So there is explanation is EXACTLY what I said but with more verbiage.....

As far as the Dak example goes, DVOA balances over time. That's why DVOA is more complete near the end of the season than at the beginning.

It DOES factor in backups because the mathematical models CATCH the variations over time.

 

[Krangodnzr]

According to DVOA we were the worst team in our division last year, which is a fair comparison as we played an almost identical schedule.

SEA 5th.
RAMS 9th.
49ERS 11th.
CARDS 16th.

That's total DVOA, yes? The Cardinals fell apart at the end of the season, and finished 8-8.....which is exactly what you would expect from a team that was ranked 16th in DVOA.

The Niners DVOA is indicative of a team that plays balls to the wall against everyone, but they fell short because of problems at key positions.

 

[kerouac9]

The new FO annual came out yesterday, and they absolutely LIT into Kliff.

The Cardinals offense had a positive DVOA in eight of their first 10 games (Weeks 3 and 4 against Detroit and Carolina being the exceptions), but after that Patriots loss they never had a positive DVOA again. They only won two more games, and those came against moribund Giants and Eagles franchises. Arizona finished 8-8 and out of the postseason entirely. The same team that had moved into playoff position with wins over Russell Wilson and Josh Allen found themselves at home in January after back-to-back losses to C.J. Beathard and John Wolford.

...

Other defenses took New England's game plan and went even farther with it. The Cardinals offense saw more two-lineman sets (115) and dime formations (98) in their last six games than they had in their first 10 (111 and 76). And it's not as if those small defenders were crowding the line of scrimmage, either. Arizona saw a light box (six or fewer defenders) on 56% of plays in their first 10 games, a number that jumped to 69% over the last six contests.

...

The results were catastrophic for Arizona (Table 1). Defenders were able to drop into zone coverage to keep receivers blanketed downfield or come up to fill any available running lane. Murray was suddenly useless on designed runs—through 10 games he was averaging 6.2 yards per carry with an 18.1% DVOA on those plays, figures that fell to 3.6 and -47.5% from the New England game onwards. The Air Raid was limited to short throws with few yards after the catch, and only four quarterbacks finished the year with more failed completions than Murray.

 

[Chopper0080]

The new FO annual came out yesterday, and they absolutely LIT into Kliff.

I would argue that being unable to run vs a light defensive box is a line personnel issue more than anything.

 

[kerouac9]

I would argue that being unable to run vs a light defensive box is a line personnel issue more than anything.

Well, then, let me share some more with you:

Kingsbury seemed unable to adapt to these defensive changes and incapable of dictating anything to the opposition. Though he runs one of pro football's most creative rushing attacks, his passing scheme can be repetitive, dull, and ineffectual. On any given running play, the Cardinals are liable to mix up formations and personnel (single-back shotgun, six-lineman I-formations, two backs to one side of the quarterback in a Go-Go set, etc.) and give the ball to any player on the field (quarterback, running back, or wideout) in an endless variety of play designs (zone read, speed option, power, duo, counters, reverses, sweeps, pitches, and many more). But when it comes time to pass, it often seems like Kingsbury's route tree hasn't branched out to an NFL level yet (Figure 1).

You must be registered for see images attach

The Cardinals threw a curl on 18.1% of all throws, the highest rate in the league. They were also in the top five in rates of comebacks and go/fly throws. Wide receiver screens aren't often listed on the standard route tree, but the Cardinals loved those plays too, finishing second behind Green Bay in that category.

Meanwhile, the Cardinals had the NFL's lowest rate of both dig and post routes, the in-breaking patterns that let receivers find seams in zone coverage and make big catches downfield. They were also in the bottom 10 in both flat and corner routes, while ranking about average in slant and out patterns. These are some of the most basic routes—Arizona didn't use many of the deep cross or drag routes that can be so effective against zone coverage either. In short, Kingsbury loved to call low-risk, low-reward passes that made life easy for his offensive line and quarterback while rarely pushing the ball downfield. The Cardinals basically only threw deep when they had one-on-one opportunities down the sideline. The lack of those zone-breaking routes to the interior—digs, posts, crosses, and drags—is critical for Arizona, because defenses rely on zone coverage to contain Murray's scrambles. In each of his first two seasons, Murray has faced man coverage on just 23% of his passes, ranking him next to last each year.