Jeremy Hill far ahead of his production last year

[Stormborn]

(10-21-2015, 10:24 AM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: What is wrong with this picture?

The QB didn't keep it.

[*Nately120*]

Hill is fumbling like the Hill of 2014 but he's rushing like he's Trent Richardson. This hain't good, but I guess it can improve.

[magikod]

Wasn't Gio the starter at the beginning of last season?

[*Go Cards*]

Hill will be fine and perfect complimenting  running style to go with Gio.

Much needed to keep each other fresh down the stretch as well.

Hill needs to get his fumble-itis  under control though.

But I believe he will. Him and Gio are in for great seasons. 

[wolfkaosaun]

It's a change in running scheme and style. Hill works better in a FB formation. Whether strong, weak, or even I formation.

The Bengals have been running much more zone and shotgun runs, something Gio excels at.

Just like last year, Gio didn't do as well in those formations that involved a FB. They have different running styles but are both deadly in their own right.

[3wt]

(10-21-2015, 12:30 AM)TRsome Wrote: I haven't done any kind of analysis but from just watching the games, I feel like he is dancing and moving horizontally too much this year. I felt like he hit the line and took the open 5 yards consistently last year, but he's just looking for homeruns on the outside now.

On the flip side, Gio is running straight down the middle at full speed and gashing the defense. I can't imagine those same holes are not available to Hill - if he is looking for them.

Agree with this.  I was watching Lynch last night, and there were just downs where there was little if any hole.  He just plowed into it full tilt and ended up with 2-3 yards.   Then when a hole developed he gashed them for 7 or 8.  I feel like Hill is trying a little too hard to get daylight.

[*Nately120*]

So what is different from last season and why did it decrease Hill's effectiveness? Forgive me if someone pointed this out before in this thread, but did we change our offense or something? Is our o-line drastically different? Are we power blocking or zone blocking, or what?

[Shake n Blake]

Hill is fine, he's just off to a slow start. Gio was viewed as a disappointment around this time last year. Gio had averaged 3.4 ypc or less in 4 of his first 6 games (8 of 13 for the whole season). It seems he's recovered. It was unfair last year for people to assume Gio was done. Just like it's dumb to assume Hill was a 1 hit wonder.

A lot of people thought Doug Martin was a one hit wonder and he's off to a great start this year. Scheme changes and unreported injuries often have a big impact on performance.

[*Nately120*]

I sure hope you are right. If you would have predicted he'd have a 3.1 YPC during the offseason you would have been run out of town in these parts.

[fredtoast]

(10-22-2015, 12:54 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: But he gets a head-start with Andy under center and he's not waiting for Andy to hand him the ball.

With Andy under center, he starts towards the line immediately and, even if he picks his spots before he goes to full speed, it's much easier to kick it up a notch than when he waits for Andy to hand him the ball and then starts towards the hole.

Hue said Hill's the starter and we'll go back to feeding him the rock, so we'll see if he starts lining Andy up under center and if my theories hold true.

Brad, we all understand the theory behind your argument.  Hill gets more momentum from starting 2 yards deeper in the backfield. 

The problem is that your theory does not apply to reality.  The facts are that Hill has always been more productive ("production" is a fact not an opinion) running the ball from the shotgun formation.

Your theory might work if the only play Hill ever ran was a dive play, but the truth is that it is not always the best plan for a RB to line up deep in the backfield and run straight ahead every play.  That is the reason that every team in the league does not run with the RB under center.  

You may also argue that even though it is not best for every RB it is the best for a power back like Hill.  But I would argue that Hill is more than just a straight line bull.  He has the skills to run all sorts of plays like the outside zone, stretch zone, counter traps and sweeps, outside sweeps.  

Hill doesn't have to be lined up 7 yards deep to hit the hole harder.  He just needs to be more decisive when he gets the ball. 

[BFritz21]

(10-23-2015, 07:06 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Brad, we all understand the theory behind your argument.  Hill gets more momentum from starting 2 yards deeper in the backfield. 

The problem is that your theory does not apply to reality.  The facts are that Hill has always been more productive ("production" is a fact not an opinion) running the ball from the shotgun formation.

Your theory might work if the only play Hill ever ran was a dive play, but the truth is that it is not always the best plan for a RB to line up deep in the backfield and run straight ahead every play.  That is the reason that every team in the league does not run with the RB under center.  

You may also argue that even though it is not best for every RB it is the best for a power back like Hill.  But I would argue that Hill is more than just a straight line bull.  He has the skills to run all sorts of plays like the outside zone, stretch zone, counter traps and sweeps, outside sweeps.  

Hill doesn't have to be lined up 7 yards deep to hit the hole harder.  He just needs to be more decisive when he gets the ball. 

Fred, you fail on so many levels.

When Hill gets the ball from the shotgun, as I pointed out, he's getting it standing still, meaning the defense has more time to react and commit to the run before he gets started.

I also pointed out how that stats from the gun are skewed since he has the one long run on less attempts.  To further that point, I went back and looked at play-by-play from games and noticed that Hill didn't otherwise have much success running from the gun.

The problem with you is you very rarely look at the reality of situations or the facts and instead pretend that your opinions make things fact.

Once again, I don't know how many times I've pointed out that lining him up in the backfield with Dalton under center doesn't mean just dives up the middle every play (in fact, only a small percent of his runs are actually classified as middle).

He doesn't even necessarily need to be "deep" in the backfield, as he never is that deep in the lone setback formation, which you ignore and claim that I'm saying "7 yards deep."  They're that deep sometimes in an I formation, but even that is usually 5 or 6.  Typical Fred.

To be decisive, Hill needs to be running downhill with momentum, as-is the case with most backs.

Case-in-point:  why don't all teams just run shotgun every down all game?  It's so easy for the backs to run from- just as easy as with the QB under center- and the quarterback doesn't have to drop back and has more time with a better view of the entire defense to see the pass coverages.

See, your arguments fail when faced with reality.

[WestCoastBengalsFan]

(10-20-2015, 05:38 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Filled in some crucially "missed" data for you, Fred.

Nailed it.

[fredtoast]

(10-23-2015, 10:30 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: The problem with you is you very rarely look at the reality of situations or the facts and instead pretend that your opinions make things fact.

In this case I am the one looking at reality.   Hill has been more productive running from the shotgun than from under scrimmage.

Shotgun...........84 carries for 442 yards and a 5.3 avg
Under center....212 carries for 914 yards and a 4.3 avg

The long run from the shotgun does not skew the stats any more than his long run with Andy under center.  In fact even if you remove Hill's 85 yard run from the shotgun he still averages 4.3 yards per carry which is still just as good as he does when Andy is under center.  But to be fair you have to remove his 60 yard run from when dalton was under center and that lowers his average from under center to 4.0.

And your claim that you charted every single carry based on where he lined up just does not match the reality. As I said befor i am talking about a fact (production) when you are just talking about a theory.

If you really do have any facts to back up your opinion then post them.  Otherwise it is clear that you have a theory, but it does not match reality. All you do is keep repeating your theory over and over again as if that was some sort of proof that it was true.

[fredtoast]

(10-23-2015, 10:30 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Case-in-point:  why don't all teams just run shotgun every down all game?  It's so easy for the backs to run from- just as easy as with the QB under center- and the quarterback doesn't have to drop back and has more time with a better view of the entire defense to see the pass coverages.

See, your arguments fail when faced with reality.

Some teams do run almost exclusively from the shot gun, but some teams don't have the O-line or the RB suited to run exclusively zone, counters, and sweeps.

[*Synric*]

(10-25-2015, 11:51 AM)fredtoast Wrote: In this case I am the one looking at reality.   Hill has been more productive running from the shotgun than from under scrimmage.

Shotgun...........84 carries for 442 yards and a 5.3 avg
Under center....212 carries for 914 yards and a 4.3 avg

The long run from the shotgun does not skew the stats any more than his long run with Andy under center.  In fact even if you remove Hill's 85 yard run from the shotgun he still averages 4.3 yards per carry which is still just as good as he does when Andy is under center.  But to be fair you have to remove his 60 yard run from when dalton was under center and that lowers his average from under center to 4.0.

And your claim that you charted every single carry based on where he lined up just does not match the reality. As I said befor i am talking about a fact (production) when you are just talking about a theory.

If you really do have any facts to back up your opinion then post them.  Otherwise it is clear that you have a theory, but it does not match reality. All you do is keep repeating your theory over and over again as if that was some sort of proof that it was true.

Sorry Fred but stats are not everything. How effective was each play. What that shows me is that he was more effective when the QB was under center because they ran it over 2× more from those than in shotgun.

[fredtoast]

(10-25-2015, 12:00 PM)Synric Wrote: What that shows me is that he was more effective when the QB was under center because they ran it over 2× more from those than in shotgun.

You can not just make up your own definitions of "more effective".

[*Synric*]

(10-25-2015, 03:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You can not just make up your own definitions of "more effective".

You can't just say 1 more yard per carry makes it better. What's the first down percentage? What's the TD percentage? You are only giving part of the equation.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(10-25-2015, 03:15 PM)Synric Wrote: You can't just say 1 more yard per carry makes it better. What's the first down percentage?  What's the TD percentage? You are only giving part of the equation.

Sorry, I am with Fred on this. How can you NOT say 1 more yard per carry makes it better?

"Who is better? Todd Gurley (5.7ypc) or DeAngelo Williams (4.6ypc)?"

Pretty sure that's actually a seriously easy thing to say.

- - -
1st YPC Offense in the NFL: 4.8
25th YPC Offense in the NFL: 3.9

Difference? 0.9 YPC

1 YPC is the difference between the 8th and 32nd teams.

[*Synric*]

(10-25-2015, 03:20 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Sorry, I am with Fred on this. How can you NOT say 1 more yard per carry makes it better?

"Who is better? Todd Gurley (5.7ypc) or DeAngelo Williams (4.6ypc)?"

Pretty sure that's actually a seriously easy thing to say.

That's all formations averaged on a season. What Fred is arguing is different.

How many of the shotgun formations were on 3rd and long an stopped short? There's so much more than just saying hey he runs better out of this certain formation than this one than saying averaged 1 more yard per carry.

What Fred is saying could be right I don't know but he needs more information to prove his point is all I'm saying.

[fredtoast]

(10-25-2015, 03:15 PM)Synric Wrote: You can't just say 1 more yard per carry makes it better. What's the first down percentage?  What's the TD percentage? You are only giving part of the equation.

I gave my part.  So it is up to you to proved your part.

ProFootballOutsiders has a great stat for RBs called "success rate".  A run is a "success" if it gains 40% of the yardage needed on first down (typically 4 yards on first-and-ten), 60% on second down, or 100% on third down.  (I think they adjust these percentages in the fourth quarter if the RB's tream is either losing or winning by a large margin)

So if you can find Hill's success rate in the shotgun versus "under center" then I will concede that number might be more important than yards-per-carry.  But I have watched a lot of Bengal games and I do not get the impression that Hill is more successful when Dalton is under center.