PDA

View Full Version : Ponder wants to complete 75% of his pass attempts



singersp
08-16-2012, 06:47 PM
Christian Ponder has lofty goals


Christian Ponder has lofty goals for Minnesota Vikings - NFL.com (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000050841/article/christian-ponder-has-lofty-goals-for-minnesota-vikings)

singersp
08-16-2012, 06:55 PM
As for his completion percentage, Mark Craig of the Star Tribune reports Ponder wants to complete 75 percent of his pass attempts on first and second down, a mark that not even Drew Brees (71.1 percent, 71.2 percent), Aaron Rodgers (69.8 percent, 69.4 percent) or Tom Brady (68.3 percent, 67.3 percent) reached last season.

So you think you can be better than Brees, Brady & Rodgers?

LOL! Better take a closer look at the WR corp & a peek or two in the mirror.

Zeus
08-16-2012, 09:45 PM
So you think you can be better than Brees, Brady & Rodgers?

LOL! Better take a closer look at the WR corp & a peek or two in the mirror.

What's wrong with setting a lofty goal?

=Z=

PurpleTide
08-17-2012, 12:20 AM
Good to see CP is expecting big things. It can't hurt to set lofty goals.

vikinggreg
08-17-2012, 12:27 AM
Well its nice that he has goals even if they are a reach (could have gone for 80%). I do find it better than when the staff asked Jackson to take some MMA training, his response was no and Pat Williams said you have to work hard this isn't like college and Jackson response was I work hard enough. Who knows maybe the Vikings won't have to talk Peyton Manning out of retirement in 3 years, and then again the next year

singersp
08-17-2012, 06:54 AM
What's wrong with setting a lofty goal?

=Z=

Ask Ray Edwards what fans here thought of his goal, as just 1 example.

For many fans here, it's all about who's setting the goal. It can be "great to see he's setting a high goal" if he's a well liked player or "He needs to just shut his pie-hole and prove it on the field", if he's not well liked.

singersp
08-17-2012, 07:14 AM
Well its nice that he has goals even if they are a reach (could have gone for 80%). I do find it better than when the staff asked Jackson to take some MMA training, his response was no and Pat Williams said you have to work hard this isn't like college and Jackson response was I work hard enough. Who knows maybe the Vikings won't have to talk Peyton Manning out of retirement in 3 years, and then again the next year

Actually, Jackson was willing to take MMA training...


As he gets ready for his fourth year, Jackson is willing to try some unorthodox measures to improve.

What do I mean by "unorthodox"? I mean MMA.

Tarvaris Jackson Willing to Try MMA Training to Not Suck at Job (http://www.aolnews.com/2009/01/30/tarvaris-jackson-willing-to-try-mma-training-to-not-suck-at-job/)

NodakPaul
08-17-2012, 10:42 AM
I was listening to the interview on Sirius XM NFL when Ponder said this. He didn't say it as a personal goal, or a prediction style goal like Edwards did. He said it in the context of what the he and the coaches have identified as an area that needed significant work over last season. Ponder said that they needed to be more efficient on first and second downs so they wouldn't have to face many third and longs.

I also think that this statement was taken a bit out of perspective, but to be fair, Ponder didn't really elaborate on it. From a coaching perspective, this sounds like a series goal to me, not a game goal. Yes, it would be unreasonable to expect that for a game or a season, but not during a good drive. Going 3 for 4 on first and second would set up a pretty good drive. In fact...

Ponder completed three of his first four attempts on first and second down in Friday's 17-6 loss. They went for 72 yards and three first downs and helped the Vikings kick a pair of field goals. He said it's a tough balance trying to be efficient yet explosive on first and second down. His first pass on one of those downs on Friday was a 52-yard deep ball to Stephen Burton.
It makes sense to me - ever time Ponder starts a drive he wants to be 75%+ on first and second. He isn't going to get it every time (nobody does), but that is still a very attainable short term (i.e. series) goal.

vikinggreg
08-17-2012, 04:02 PM
Actually, Jackson was willing to take MMA training...



Tarvaris Jackson Willing to Try MMA Training to Not Suck at Job (http://www.aolnews.com/2009/01/30/tarvaris-jackson-willing-to-try-mma-training-to-not-suck-at-job/)

he must of reconsidered


That's because he had plans to work with famed trainer Tom Shaw in Orlando, Fla. Here's the link for your story, but this was back in January. Things could have changed since then.
Jackson Has No MMA Plans (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/02/jackson-has-no-mma-plans/)

That was page 368 of the T-jack thread

Caine
08-17-2012, 04:50 PM
Goals are nice....but they have to be realistic to be taken seriously.

Further, just because you state a lofty goal doesn't mean you're suddenly a great player. I'm sure Jackson had plenty of lofty goals (like, "I won't suck anymore or rely on the Defense/Running game to win)....or McNabb and his goals (I won't skip the ball to the receiver)....or Favre and his goals (I won't send pictures of my wiener to Jen Sterger, ooops...Brad Childress, ooops....Marrdro, ooops....anyone else). OK, Favre WAS a great player, once, but that's sort of the point.

Ponder needs to PUT up...not TALK up. I get that the media is chasing HIM for a quote, not the other way around, but let's keep it in the realm of believable progress, alright Christian?

Caine

gamecocksbaseball31
08-17-2012, 06:43 PM
Ask Ray Edwards what fans here thought of his goal, as just 1 example.

For many fans here, it's all about who's setting the goal. It can be "great to see he's setting a high goal" if he's a well liked player or "He needs to just shut his pie-hole and prove it on the field", if he's not well liked.

I don't think people were as upset with him setting a lofty goal as they were with his production trying to accomplish it.

NodakPaul
08-17-2012, 10:18 PM
Ponder went 8 for 10 on first and second downs tonight. 80%. Still think it is a a ridiculous goal? :)

VIPER420
08-17-2012, 10:37 PM
Ponder went 8 for 10 on first and second downs tonight. 80%. Still think it is a a ridiculous goal? :)

+1 lol

12purplepride28
08-17-2012, 10:51 PM
Ponder went 8 for 10 on first and second downs tonight. 80%. Still think it is a a ridiculous goal? :)

Over a season, yes. Although I don't think any goal is ridiculous, because if you aren't aiming for the stars then you shouldn't be in the NFL.

PurpleTide
08-18-2012, 07:36 AM
Shoot for the moon, hey if ya only get half way that isn't so bad. I agree that 75% is gonna be tough, but by focusing, not just Ponder, the whole offense to get better on 1st, and 2nd down to achieve this goal is a good thing.

NordicNed
08-18-2012, 08:31 AM
Talking about lofty goals, I remember TJ saying once, He wanted to be the best NFL QB who ever played.....

singersp
08-18-2012, 12:54 PM
Goals are nice....but they have to be realistic to be taken seriously.

Further, just because you state a lofty goal doesn't mean you're suddenly a great player. I'm sure Jackson had plenty of lofty goals (like, "I won't suck anymore or rely on the Defense/Running game to win)....or McNabb and his goals (I won't skip the ball to the receiver)....or Favre and his goals (I won't send pictures of my wiener to Jen Sterger, ooops...Brad Childress, ooops....Marrdro, ooops....anyone else). OK, Favre WAS a great player, once, but that's sort of the point.

Ponder needs to PUT up...not TALK up. I get that the media is chasing HIM for a quote, not the other way around, but let's keep it in the realm of believable progress, alright Christian?

Caine

The problem I had with his goal that he set is that it isn't simply a personal goal. It also involves the receivers who must then actually catch the ball in order for his goal to even be feasibly possible & with our teams very limited talent at pass catching ability, that goal is way out there, unless we continue to see those little dump off passes as a huge part of our game.

singersp
08-18-2012, 12:57 PM
I don't think people were as upset with him setting a lofty goal as they were with his production trying to accomplish it.

Yes they were. Revisit the thread.

singersp
08-18-2012, 12:59 PM
Talking about lofty goals, I remember TJ saying once, He wanted to be the best NFL QB who ever played.....

And I'm sure the replies here to that weren't......

"What's wrong with setting a lofty goal?"

"Good to see TJ is expecting big things. It can't hurt to set lofty goals."

singersp
08-18-2012, 01:11 PM
Ponder went 8 for 10 on first and second downs tonight. 80%. Still think it is a a ridiculous goal? :)

10 passes is a small sample size out of an entire season. It wasn't even a complete game. It was nice to see while he was in there, but I don't expect the regular season to go as easily as a preseason game.

Of those 10 passes only one was deep. Of the 9 remaining passes how far were the passes actually thrown, excluding YAC?

marshallvike
08-18-2012, 10:58 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54yGSDBXdCM&feature=fvwrel

kyleburkle
08-19-2012, 01:40 AM
ponder looks good, minnesota is laughing all the way they didnt enter the matt flynn sweepstakes and just stick to the kid

MrFlix
08-19-2012, 03:33 AM
If you don't put the bar high you are not gonna get somewhere. It's a goal and thats good. Just like AP's goal was to start Week 1 and we all know how many critics told him it couldn't be done. He has potential in him.

NodakPaul
08-19-2012, 09:29 AM
10 passes is a small sample size out of an entire season. It wasn't even a complete game. It was nice to see while he was in there, but I don't expect the regular season to go as easily as a preseason game.

Of those 10 passes only one was deep. Of the 9 remaining passes how far were the passes actually thrown, excluding YAC?

Who cares how far the passes were actually thrown? The point behind the 75% goal is to minimize third and long situations. And it is working...

singersp
08-19-2012, 03:17 PM
Who cares how far the passes were actually thrown? The point behind the 75% goal is to minimize third and long situations. And it is working...

At least for 1 quarter of a pre-season game it's working, thanx to the YAC.

I don't think come the regular season we are going to see 33% of our short dumps on 1st & 2nd downs going for 19 yards+ like we did in this game, especially when Adrian Peterson is in there.

When Ponder did pass on 3rd down, we only converted once & averaged 2.7 yards per attempt.

Again, it was only a pre-season game & only a little over 1 quarter of play we're talking about.

Are small sample sizes relevant again & are pre-season games meaningful again? That seems to constantly change depending on what QB or player we are talking about.

It shows a little more promise, which is more than we had last year.

Purple Floyd
08-19-2012, 11:51 PM
It's only pre season so you have to take things with a grain of salt but the thing that did stand out to me is that they were getting YAC and in this WCO that is a key thing. The way you get YAC in the WCO is to deliver the ball on time and hit the WR in stride without having to stop, reach or change his direction to catch it.

While I am not convinced this is a sure fire thing with Ponder, or even that it is happening to a large degree right now, one thing we should agree with is that is how it is supposed to look and if we are finally getting a QB other than Farve that can do it we are on the right track. We have been missing that for many years now.

singersp
08-20-2012, 05:38 AM
It's only pre season so you have to take things with a grain of salt but the thing that did stand out to me is that they were getting YAC and in this WCO that is a key thing. The way you get YAC in the WCO is to deliver the ball on time and hit the WR in stride without having to stop, reach or change his direction to catch it.

While I am not convinced this is a sure fire thing with Ponder, or even that it is happening to a large degree right now, one thing we should agree with is that is how it is supposed to look and if we are finally getting a QB other than Farve that can do it we are on the right track. We have been missing that for many years now.

It is a good thing to see, but is part of it because the veteran defensive players aren't giving 100% in a preseason game? Hopefully not, but were going to find out in 3 weeks.

Part of it is in play calling & I've always wanted to see more of it. Too often in the past we sent receivers out, had them stop short of the 1st down, turn wait for the ball, catch it & then turn & try to get a 1st down, only to be tackled by the defender at the point of the catch, short of the first down.

vikinggreg
08-20-2012, 09:50 AM
Ponder In Command On 1st And 2nd Down (http://blog.vikings.com/2012/08/19/a-closer-look-ponder-in-command-on-1st-and-2nd-down/)


Ponder put the theory to practice on Friday night against the Buffalo Bills. He was 8 of 10 for 128 yards with 1 TD on 1st and 2nd downs, an impressive display of passing that left the team and its fans optimistic about Ponderís continued develop and the progression of the offense. Furthermore, Ponder connected with 7 different receivers on those 8 completions, and 5 of the 8 completions resulted in a 1st down or touchdown.

Minniman
08-22-2012, 12:52 PM
In context, it is a reasonable goal. Ponder simply stated that, in the Vikings ball control offense, they will need to have a 75% completion ratio on 1st and 2nd down to allow the offense flexibility on 3rd down.

That's the goal. Ponder and the coaches know it will not always work out that way. They are just looking for goals that will allow the team to evaluate their own performances. I do not believe Ponder or the coaches expect a 75% completion ratio overall for season stats. They do expect that they will not reach the goal at times and will likely lose some games because of it.

Watching preseason games, the Vikings offense may have trouble with this, as receivers have dropped many catchable balls from Ponder.

NoCalOnline
09-07-2012, 07:35 PM
The good - this is a west coast aka Vikings of the 70s w Foreman offense which relies on a heavy dose of short and intermediate passes. Harvin, Carlson, Rudolph and AP r terrific targets in that scheme.
The bad - minniman u r correct. Too many drops by WRs in preseason makes me wonder even if Ponder puts the ball where Brees Rodgers and Brady do which often requires athletic adjustments, completion pct is likely to b less than Ponder's goal
The ugly - too many injuries and Simpson's suspension create real doubts if the timing and chemistry r strong enough to have an efficient passing game early

gregair13
09-07-2012, 09:09 PM
He'll be lucky to complete 25% ofhis passes

NoCalOnline
09-07-2012, 09:25 PM
I'll take the over and give 3:1 odds on 25%

NodakPaul
09-08-2012, 08:11 AM
He'll be lucky to complete 25% ofhis passes

I will take that bet. There is no way in hell he only completes 25%. Now we're just being ridiculous.

singersp
09-08-2012, 10:57 AM
Who cares how far the passes were actually thrown? The point behind the 75% goal is to minimize third and long situations. And it is working...

What I care about are what happens on those 3rd downs. He was 8-10 on 1st & 2nd down, which was all well & good, but that means he was 2-5 on 3rd down passes, which isn't good.

In the following week, he was 7-10 on 1st & 2nd down, which is still good, but that means he was 2-6 on 3rd down passes, which is terrible.

I care about that.

NodakPaul
09-08-2012, 10:40 PM
What I care about are what happens on those 3rd downs. He was 8-10 on 1st & 2nd down, which was all well & good, but that means he was 2-5 on 3rd down passes, which isn't good.

In the following week, he was 7-10 on 1st & 2nd down, which is still good, but that means he was 2-6 on 3rd down passes, which is terrible.

I care about that.

I agree.

High percentage on 1st and 2nd downs minimize 3rd and long situations, which have a lower success rate. How many of those 3rd downs that you references came on 3rd and long?

FYI, your math is off in the Bills game - Ponder was 10 for 13 against the bills and you have him going 10 for 15. If you are including the times he had to scramble, then you need to count it when he makes the first down scrambling, putting his 3rd down rate to 3/5, which isn't bad.

singersp
09-09-2012, 12:10 PM
I agree.

High percentage on 1st and 2nd downs minimize 3rd and long situations, which have a lower success rate. How many of those 3rd downs that you references came on 3rd and long?

FYI, your math is off in the Bills game - Ponder was 10 for 13 against the bills and you have him going 10 for 15. If you are including the times he had to scramble, then you need to count it when he makes the first down scrambling, putting his 3rd down rate to 3/5, which isn't bad.

I stand corrected on the Bills game. He was actually 2 for 3 on those 3rd downs.

As far as 3rd & long goes, what do you consider long or short?

In the 49ers game, Ponder was 4-9. He was 3 of 7 on 1st & 2nd downs & 1-2 on 3rd.

3rd downs were 4, 6 & 7 yards. None of those came a result of completed passes on 1st or 2nd. The 6 & 7 yarders had prior incomplete passes on 1st or 2nd.

We converted on only the 4 yarder with a short pass.

In the Bills game 3rd downs were 2, 2 4, 6 & 8 yards. All were a result of completed passes on 1st or 2nd except the 8 yarder which was the result of 2 runs.

The 2, 2, & 6 were converted with 2runs & a pass. The other two failed after a short incomplete & short completed pass.

In the Chargers game 3rd downs were 1, 3, 9, 9, 10, 16, 18 & 19 yards. The 1, 9 & 10 yarder were the result of 2 runs. The 3, 18 & 19 yards were a result of completed passes on 1st or 2nd. The other 9 & the 16 each had a prior incomplete pass on 1st or 2nd.

7 of the 8 conversions failed. the 1 & 16 failed on run attempts. Both 9's & the 19 yarders failed with incompleted short pass attempts. The 3 yarder was intercepted. The 18 yarder failed after a short complete pass. The 10 yarder was converted with a pass.

So, he is 18 of 27 (67%) on 1st & 2nd so far & 5-11 (45%) on 3rd.

10 of our 16 3rd downs were 5 yards or more. 4 had prior incomplete passes, 3 had prior completed passes & 3 were prior runs. We converted 2 of the 10 (6, 10). Both with passes

6 of our 16 3rd downs were 5 yards or less. 4 had prior completed passes & 2 were prior runs.
We converted 3 of the 6. 2 with runs, 1 with a pass.

All 3rd down pass attempts were short regardless of the distance we needed. 5 were complete, 1 was intercepted, 5 were incomplete.

Take it for what it's worth.

Purple Floyd
09-09-2012, 01:56 PM
So far it isn't looking too good against one of the worst teams in the NFL.

The only thing that looks worse than our pass offense is our pass defense.

NodakPaul
09-09-2012, 04:17 PM
Ponder finished with 74% overall. 270 yards.

Anyone? Anyone?

Didn't think so. ;)

Jereamiah
09-09-2012, 04:21 PM
For sure a clutch throw there at the end to get into fg range. Can't argue with a "W"

NodakPaul
09-09-2012, 05:23 PM
Can't argue with a "W"

Someone will. Just wait... :)

NodakPaul
09-09-2012, 05:33 PM
Love it!

FYI - Ponder was 17 for 20 on passing of first and second downs.

For those who need help with the math, that is 85%. :D

The shitty start had more to do with the play calling. They were running the ball constantly on first and second down, and Ponder was left with third and long. When our coaching staff finally pulled their heads out and began passing on first and second to set up the run, we started owning the game.

NodakPaul
09-09-2012, 05:56 PM
Love it!

FYI - Ponder was 17 for 20 on passing of first and second downs.

For those who need help with the math, that is 85%. :D

The shitty start had more to do with the play calling. They were running the ball constantly on first and second down, and Ponder was left with third and long. When our coaching staff finally pulled their heads out and began passing on first and second to set up the run, we started owning the game.

To be fair, I will point out that Ponder was 3 for 7 on third downs, and that isn't good. Almost all of those were third and longs.

singersp
09-09-2012, 09:18 PM
Love it!

FYI - Ponder was 17 for 20 on passing of first and second downs.

For those who need help with the math, that is 85%. :D

The shitty start had more to do with the play calling. They were running the ball constantly on first and second down, and Ponder was left with third and long. When our coaching staff finally pulled their heads out and began passing on first and second to set up the run, we started owning the game.


I still think the shitty start had more to do with not being allowed to play last week. It took awhile for him & others that were rested to get going. Otherwise we might have scored earlier.

I'm not so concerned with Ponder's ability to deliver the ball in his quest for 75% completion on 1st & 2nd down as I am our receivers ability to catch the ball, which I've mentioned before. I'm still impressed with both Jenkins & Aromashodu catching 3 passes each without dropping them. Especially on some critical plays. As you mentioned, I don't think we can count on that being the norm, but that's what I'd like to see.

3 of Ponder's passes were behind the LOS to Harvin. Those passes usually result in a gain of zilch or maybe 1 or 2. Harvin really turned those into positive yards. I don't know if we can count on that working as well against better defenses, but I enjoyed seeing that this week.

3 for 7 on 3rd down is still an issue, but if we convert/score on 1st or 2nd, we can reduce the number of 3rd downs we see.

NodakPaul
09-09-2012, 09:28 PM
I still think the shitty start had more to do with not being allowed to play last week. It took awhile for him & others that were rested to get going. Otherwise we might have scored earlier.

I don't disagree with this.

Purple Floyd
09-09-2012, 10:54 PM
I don't think it was as much not playing last week as it was what they were doing personnel and scheme wise. Once they committed to getting percy the ball and put him in the backfield they started to dominate the game. It also seems that once they lost that OG that their offense slowed and our defense was more successful against them.

Marrdro
09-12-2012, 10:51 AM
Good for him.

We also need some tude on the field. Anyone else notice that the Jags quit their crap real quit when Harrison layed the lumber and got up on the guy which was followed by Chad doing the same after making a nice play on a short throw?

Made me want to strap it on and talk some shit. Quick note, I let a Take that M.....r F...r out on the Harrison hit.

i_bleed_purple
09-12-2012, 11:35 AM
Update: Ponder is 20./27 on the season. 74%. not too shabby. I dont' have a breakdown of his first and second down throws though.

Marrdro
09-12-2012, 12:02 PM
Ask Ray Edwards what fans here thought of his goal, as just 1 example.

For many fans here, it's all about who's setting the goal. It can be "great to see he's setting a high goal" if he's a well liked player or "He needs to just shut his pie-hole and prove it on the field", if he's not well liked.

Do you really think these players put that much thought into what the fans think when they say things like this?

Marrdro
09-12-2012, 12:02 PM
Update: Ponder is 20./27 on the season. 74%. not too shabby. I dont' have a breakdown of his first and second down throws though.
Someone thought I was crazy when I put a bench mark of 60% on him.

NodakPaul
09-12-2012, 02:50 PM
Update: Ponder is 20./27 on the season. 74%. not too shabby. I dont' have a breakdown of his first and second down throws though.

17/20 on first and second downs. 85%.

Yup.

singersp
09-13-2012, 07:02 PM
Update: Ponder is 20./27 on the season. 74%. not too shabby. I dont' have a breakdown of his first and second down throws though.



He's 17-20 on 1st & 2nd (85.0%) which is really good, but only 3-7 on 3rd (42.8%) which is poor.

Here's the breakdown;


The success is attributable to Ponder's accuracy as well as offensive coordinator Bill Musgrave's sensible play-calling. With downfield receiver Jerome Simpson serving a suspension, the Vikings didn't wander too far past the line of scrimmage. In fact, only two of Ponder's attempts traveled longer than 20 yards in the air.

Christian Ponder: 85 pct. on early downs

Christian Ponder: 85 pct. on early downs - NFC North Blog - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/46142/christian-ponder-85-pct-on-early-downs)

tastywaves
09-14-2012, 01:23 PM
He's 17-20 on 1st & 2nd (85.0%) which is really good, but only 3-7 on 3rd (42.8%) which is poor.

Here's the breakdown;



Christian Ponder: 85 pct. on early downs

Christian Ponder: 85 pct. on early downs - NFC North Blog - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/46142/christian-ponder-85-pct-on-early-downs)

I would guess that 42.86% puts him right in the league average for 3rd down conversions. That's why he wants to emphasize a higher percentage on 1st and 2nd downs, to hopefully avoid 3rd downs all together.

In any event, 7 throws on 3rd down is not very many.

NodakPaul
09-16-2012, 05:10 PM
In case anyone is curious - Ponder was 17/22 on first and second down against the Colts. :) 77.3%

On 3rd downs he was 9/12 (75%) but only converted 6 of them. Still, 50% is getting better...

Reignman
09-16-2012, 05:47 PM
Not to be a negative nancy, but most of those are 5yd swing and screen passes haha. To be honest, it seems like we've rolled out the Brad Johnson offense from several years ago. All short passes. At least we actually try to throw to the sticks on 3rd though, something BJ can't say. Hopefully Simpson will help stretch things out a little more when he returns.

singersp
09-16-2012, 08:01 PM
In case anyone is curious - Ponder was 17/22 on first and second down against the Colts. :) 77.3%

On 3rd downs he was 9/12 (75%) but only converted 6 of them. Still, 50% is getting better...

I'd be OK with getting less than 75% on 1st & 2nd down if they'd be thrown more than 5 yards down field.

The positive side of those behind the LOS & 5 yard passes is we are getting damn good YAC were as in prior years our receivers were getting popped when they caught the ball.

Minniman
09-16-2012, 08:09 PM
This is playing out as the Randy ratio all over again. The Vikings are playing for a percentage instead of playing their game and allowing the percentage to be an outcome of the natural flow of the game. They are playing for the end to the means rather than the means to the end.

Yes, backfield and flat passes will result in a high percentage, but will they accomplish what is needed for the game situation? Sometimes they do, but often they do not. Being afraid of twelve yard passes leaves me shaking my head. The Vikings need to stretch the field. If the receivers on the field cannot do that, they should be benched.

Marrdro
09-18-2012, 06:46 AM
I would guess that 42.86% puts him right in the league average for 3rd down conversions. That's why he wants to emphasize a higher percentage on 1st and 2nd downs, to hopefully avoid 3rd downs all together.

In any event, 7 throws on 3rd down is not very many.
One thing to consider, on third downs, for the most part the defense knows that the offense is going to pass.

Makes it easier on them to defend and harder on the offense to complete.

vikinggreg
09-18-2012, 09:22 AM
One thing to consider, on third downs, for the most part the defense knows that the offense is going to pass.

Makes it easier on them to defend and harder on the offense to complete.

Not for the Vikings defense, 3-19 still seems to be a makeable first down for most of their opponents

NodakPaul
09-18-2012, 09:27 AM
I'd be OK with getting less than 75% on 1st & 2nd down if they'd be thrown more than 5 yards down field.

The positive side of those behind the LOS & 5 yard passes is we are getting damn good YAC were as in prior years our receivers were getting popped when they caught the ball.

I don't mind 5 yards on 1st and 2nd down. That puts us in second and short or third and short. But it would be nice to see a few throws down field to stretch it out a little. I am hoping the return of Simpson helps that out a bit.

Definitely correct about the YAC though. I like it.

Marrdro
09-19-2012, 07:12 AM
Not for the Vikings defense, 3-19 still seems to be a makeable first down for most of their opponents
Well played my friend. Well played indeed. :)

singersp
09-23-2012, 08:56 PM
Don't know what his % was on 1st & 2nd down, but he was 60% total (21-35) today. As I said earlier in this post, I'd rather see a lower completion % and a win like the one today, rather than a 75% completion & a loss.

NodakPaul
09-23-2012, 09:08 PM
Don't know what his % was on 1st & 2nd down, but he was 60% total (21-35) today. As I said earlier in this post, I'd rather see a lower completion % and a win like the one today, rather than a 75% completion & a loss.

He was 14/24 on first and second down, so 58%, although that is a little misleading... 5 of those incompletions (and one completion) came in the last 52 seconds of the first half when they were trying to get into FG position - deep shots that they dont mind being incomplete because it stops the clock. He was 13/18 on first and second down the rest of the game (72%) - and THAT is exactly what we are looking for.

Minniman
09-24-2012, 09:28 AM
... deep shots that they dont mind being incomplete because it stops the clock.
Deep shots that are complete and then out of bounds or in the endzone are better. :cool:

singersp
09-24-2012, 09:37 AM
He was 14/24 on first and second down, so 58%, although that is a little misleading... 5 of those incompletions (and one completion) came in the last 52 seconds of the first half when they were trying to get into FG position - deep shots that they dont mind being incomplete because it stops the clock. He was 13/18 on first and second down the rest of the game (72%) - and THAT is exactly what we are looking for.

That might be what you want, but I actually want us to be better than 2 for 6 when trying to get into scoring position before the half. I mind if they are incomplete, I'd like them caught. Being able to score when time is waning down before the half & end of the game IS when I'd like to see the Vikings perform well, just like we saw the past 2 weeks or should we not count those final drives?

It's not misleading, that's what it was. No, those 6 passes weren't all "deep shots" like you're insinuating. 4 were short, 2 were deep. 2, not 1 was complete, 4 were incomplete.

(sarcasm on) Incidentally, Gerhart's stats are a little misleading. He was 8 for 18 with 3 fumbles, but 3 of those yards and 3 of those fumbles on 4 carries came in the final minutes of the game when we were simply trying to eat up the clock. The rest of the game he had 4 carries for 15 yards with no fumbles and THAT is exactly what we are looking from a back up RB. (sarcasm off)

Look, I'm not trying to knock Ponder at all. I think he did great. I don't care if he made the 75% or not, he played a heck of a game & we won. That's what matters. There's no need to "cherry pick" & toss out certain 1st & 2nd down pass attempts to make his completion % look better. We could do that with any player's stats.

Purple Floyd
09-24-2012, 10:00 AM
We will see if the deep ball rate goes up with Simpson on the field. He is no superstar but should be better than any deep threat we have now. In the end Ponder will never be a threat to go 80 yards in the air. If we are lucky he will be good enough to be able to put the ball in the gaps of zone defenses and let the WT get the yards after the catch.

NodakPaul
09-24-2012, 10:20 AM
That might be what you want, but I actually want us to be better than 2 for 6 when trying to get into scoring position before the half. I mind if they are incomplete, I'd like them caught. Being able to score when time is waning down before the half & end of the game IS when I'd like to see the Vikings perform well, just like we saw the past 2 weeks or should we not count those final drives?

It's not misleading, that's what it was. No, those 6 passes weren't all "deep shots" like you're insinuating. 4 were short, 2 were deep. 2, not 1 was complete, 4 were incomplete.

(sarcasm on) Incidentally, Gerhart's stats are a little misleading. He was 8 for 18 with 3 fumbles, but 3 of those yards and 3 of those fumbles on 4 carries came in the final minutes of the game when we were simply trying to eat up the clock. The rest of the game he had 4 carries for 15 yards with no fumbles and THAT is exactly what we are looking from a back up RB. (sarcasm off)

Look, I'm not trying to knock Ponder at all. I think he did great. I don't care if he made the 75% or not, he played a heck of a game & we won. That's what matters. There's no need to "cherry pick" & toss out certain 1st & 2nd down pass attempts to make his completion % look better. We could do that with any player's stats.

I'm not cherry picking - you are missing the point.

The gameplan is to be more successful on first and second down to eliminate 3rd and long situations. I am watching for him to have success in those situations - and he is. In the last 52 seconds of a half with no time outs, the gameplan is different - they want to take shots that will either be incomplete or allow the player to run out of bounds to allow the clock to stop. They were successful in that as well (we got the FG, as I am sure you remember).

I said from the very beginning of this thread that the 75% was a series goal, not a game or career goal. There are times in games, like that FG drive, in which short, accurate passes are not as beneficial, so the percentage will naturally go down.

I am not trying to make anybody's stats look better, but I am adding context to the stats. Looking at stats without context is too easily manipulated. For instance, Ponder had a higher QB rating against Indy than he did against San Fran. In fact, the San Fran game was his lowest rated game this year - and yet it was probably his best this year...

The fact is that Ponder was 13/18 on first and second down during the majority of the game. That is right in line with the goal.

NodakPaul
09-24-2012, 10:22 AM
We will see if the deep ball rate goes up with Simpson on the field. He is no superstar but should be better than any deep threat we have now. In the end Ponder will never be a threat to go 80 yards in the air. If we are lucky he will be good enough to be able to put the ball in the gaps of zone defenses and let the WT get the yards after the catch.

I think it will go up marginally. I actually think it will improve out middle game more than our deep. But with that it will add another WR threat that will help open up our other WRs and RBs for additional YAC.

singersp
09-24-2012, 11:20 AM
I'm not cherry picking - you are missing the point.

The gameplan is to be more successful on first and second down to eliminate 3rd and long situations. I am watching for him to have success in those situations - and he is. In the last 52 seconds of a half with no time outs, the gameplan is different - they want to take shots that will either be incomplete or allow the player to run out of bounds to allow the clock to stop. They were successful in that as well (we got the FG, as I am sure you remember).

So then, if you're not looking at 1st & 2nd downs in situations when we are trying to score in the waning minutes/seconds of the half or end of game on our final drives, then you shouldn't include them in your criteria for the past two games as well, as the game plan was different in those drives also.

Selecting which games too include them or exclude them is cherry picking.

I'm pretty sure you used his last 7 completions to 2 incompletions on 1st & 2nd in your total last week.

NodakPaul
09-24-2012, 01:57 PM
So then, if you're not looking at 1st & 2nd downs in situations when we are trying to score in the waning minutes/seconds of the half or end of game on our final drives, then you shouldn't include them in your criteria for the past two games as well, as the game plan was different in those drives also.

Selecting which games too include them or exclude them is cherry picking.

I'm pretty sure you used his last 7 completions to 2 incompletions on 1st & 2nd in your total last week.

Again, missing the forest for the trees...

The whole point behind the 75% completion on first and second downs is to keep the team in a manageable third down. Ponder has been doing exactly that all three games.

When I looked at his first ans second down completion percentage for this game and noticed it was 58.3%, I was surprised, because during the game it looked to me like he was managing the ball fairly well in early downs. Did he fail at his goal of having a high percentage on first and second? Is this something the OC should look at and either correct or change the scheme? Was his previous success the result of playing poor defenses?

I was curious, so I looked at the play by play and realized that the completion percentages were skewed by the series at the very end of the first half. The rest of the game he was very close to his stated goal. That made sense to me, which is why I posted BOTH his overall completion percentage as well as some context around it.

I am NOT ignoring the final two minutes of any game. I AM looking at situational stats to see if Ponder is achieving or failing at his goal of having a high completion percentage on first and second downs. I think he is succeeding. If you viewed it as cherry picking, I'm sorry... I really don't know how else to explain it.

The fact that Ponder IS achieving his goal of having a high completion percentage on first and second is a pretty big deal to me. I think we are moving in the right direction as an offense, and I expect to continue to see us making short, accurate passes on first and second down.

tastywaves
09-24-2012, 02:28 PM
16 plays, 82 yards, TD -- time off clock 7:40
11 plays, 80 yards, TD -- time off clock 6:44
12 plays, 86 yards, TD -- time off clock 7:00

3 drives that consumed close to 22 min. That's what they are trying to accomplish with high percentage 1st and 2nd down passing plays. Sunday was a great example of it working out.

As Nodak, points out, when they are going for a quick score to end a half or a game with limited time, they will not be in their normal offense.

Marrdro
09-24-2012, 02:38 PM
16 plays, 82 yards, TD -- time off clock 7:40
11 plays, 80 yards, TD -- time off clock 6:44
12 plays, 86 yards, TD -- time off clock 7:00

3 drives that consumed close to 22 min. That's what they are trying to accomplish with high percentage 1st and 2nd down passing plays. Sunday was a great example of it working out.

As Nodak, points out, when they are going for a quick score to end a half or a game with limited time, they will not be in their normal offense.
Love those drives........but....lets not forget.....



Minnesota Vikings at 0:20
JAC
MIN


1st and 10 at MIN 31
C.Ponder pass deep right to D.Aromashodu to JAX 43 for 26 yards (M.Owens).




1st and 10 at JAC 43
(Shotgun) C.Ponder pass short right to K.Rudolph pushed ob at JAX 37 for 6 yards (D.Landry).




2nd and 4 at JAC 37
B.Walsh 55 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-C.Loeffler, Holder-C.Kluwe.
23
23



He's shown he can do that as well.

singersp
09-24-2012, 09:17 PM
16 plays, 82 yards, TD -- time off clock 7:40
11 plays, 80 yards, TD -- time off clock 6:44
12 plays, 86 yards, TD -- time off clock 7:00

3 drives that consumed close to 22 min. That's what they are trying to accomplish with high percentage 1st and 2nd down passing plays. Sunday was a great example of it working out.


As Nodak, points out, when they are going for a quick score to end a half or a game with limited time, they will not be in their normal offense.

I know & understand why NP excluded the 1st & 2nd down passes when they went for a score at the end of the half when they weren't in their normal offense.

He's the one missing the forest thru the trees. I simply said, if you're going to do that, you need to exclude them from week 1 & week 2's % as well. He did not. He used 100% of the 1st & 2nd down passes including the ones when they went for a quick score to end a half or the game with limited time when they weren't in their normal offense.

They helped out the percentage numbers the past two weeks & were included. They didn't help out the percentage numbers yesterday & were excluded.

tastywaves
09-24-2012, 09:18 PM
Agreed

Purple Floyd
09-24-2012, 11:53 PM
16 plays, 82 yards, TD -- time off clock 7:40
11 plays, 80 yards, TD -- time off clock 6:44
12 plays, 86 yards, TD -- time off clock 7:00

3 drives that consumed close to 22 min. That's what they are trying to accomplish with high percentage 1st and 2nd down passing plays. Sunday was a great example of it working out.

As Nodak, points out, when they are going for a quick score to end a half or a game with limited time, they will not be in their normal offense.


The difference between the first two games and this one were penalties. In the first 2 games we had more penalty calls that stalled drives that could have chewed up more clock and this one we really didn't for the most part.

The biggest factor in trying to build a ball control, clock eating offense is discipline because more plays= more opportunities for the offense to get called foe a penalty and losing 10 yards on a call just makes it too hard to make up ground when you are gaining it a few yards at a time.

NodakPaul
09-25-2012, 11:09 AM
I know & understand why NP excluded the 1st & 2nd down passes when they went for a score at the end of the half when they weren't in their normal offense.

He's the one missing the forest thru the trees. I simply said, if you're going to do that, you need to exclude them from week 1 & week 2's % as well. He did not. He used 100% of the 1st & 2nd down passes including the ones when they went for a quick score to end a half or the game with limited time when they weren't in their normal offense.

They helped out the percentage numbers the past two weeks & were included. They didn't help out the percentage numbers yesterday & were excluded.

LOL. ARGH! :)

Fine, you want them excluded - then Ponder went 15/18 in game 1 (83%) and 10/13 (77%) in game 2. And I was being generous by excluding the last two drives in game 2, even though the second to last (the scoring drive) started with 3 minutes left in the game and they were playing their standard offense... Wow, that is WAY different from 85% in game 1 and, uh, well, 77% in game 2... I don't know what I was thinking of by including those drives and inflating the numbers SO badly...

So what exactly is your point again?

This isn't about numbers - it is about whether or not Ponder and the offense are being successful in their goal of a high completion rate on first and second down. AND HE IS. You are looking for ticky tack reasons to complain.

Can`t see the forest for the trees
Definition: overly concerned with detail; not understanding the whole situation
Explanation: Used when expressing that a person is focusing too much on specific problems and is missing the point
can`t see the forest for the trees (http://esl.about.com/library/glossary/bldef_130.htm)

So let's try this again...

When I looked at his first ans second down completion percentage for this game and noticed it was 58.3%, I was surprised, because during the game it looked to me like he was managing the ball fairly well in early downs. Did he fail at his goal of having a high percentage on first and second? Is this something the OC should look at and either correct or change the scheme? Was his previous success the result of playing poor defenses?

I was curious, so I looked at the play by play and realized that the completion percentages were skewed by the series at the very end of the first half. The rest of the game he was very close to his stated goal. That made sense to me, which is why I posted BOTH his overall completion percentage as well as some context around it.

tastywaves
09-25-2012, 03:05 PM
The difference between the first two games and this one were penalties. In the first 2 games we had more penalty calls that stalled drives that could have chewed up more clock and this one we really didn't for the most part.

The biggest factor in trying to build a ball control, clock eating offense is discipline because more plays= more opportunities for the offense to get called foe a penalty and losing 10 yards on a call just makes it too hard to make up ground when you are gaining it a few yards at a time.

No doubt, penalties take this offense completely off track.

The more games you see played in the NFL the more you see how closely teams are matched. Mistakes seem to determine the outcome as much as anything else.

singersp
09-26-2012, 07:40 AM
LOL. ARGH! :)

Fine, you want them excluded - then Ponder went 15/18 in game 1 (83%) and 10/13 (77%) in game 2. And I was being generous by excluding the last two drives in game 2, even though the second to last (the scoring drive) started with 3 minutes left in the game and they were playing their standard offense... Wow, that is WAY different from 85% in game 1 and, uh, well, 77% in game 2... I don't know what I was thinking of by including those drives and inflating the numbers SO badly...

So what exactly is your point again?

This isn't about numbers - it is about whether or not Ponder and the offense are being successful in their goal of a high completion rate on first and second down. AND HE IS. You are looking for ticky tack reasons to complain.

Can`t see the forest for the trees
Definition: overly concerned with detail; not understanding the whole situation
Explanation: Used when expressing that a person is focusing too much on specific problems and is missing the point
can`t see the forest for the trees (http://esl.about.com/library/glossary/bldef_130.htm)

So let's try this again...

No need to get your panties in a bunch. I am not complaining nor looking for ticky tack reasons to downplay the 75% on 1st & 2nd downs, unless you are now stating the omission of drives when the goal is to score quickly due to time as ticky tack.

My point is simple. In weeks 1 & 2 you looked at the completion % & determined, based on 100% of the throws on 1st & 2nd down, that "it was working".

In week 3, you tried to do the same, only you came up with 58%, (not working) so it prompted you to look at why. You found that during crunch time, when the clock mattered, the pass completions on 1st & 2nd down dropped considerably because it was crunch time & the goal was to score quickly & not simply set up a 3rd & short. Rightfully so & I concur with that assessment.

With that said then, taking into consideration the big difference in completion % that you found between crunch time & non-crunch time numbers and knowing that in weeks 1 & 2 we had success in drives during those crunch times when the clock mattered, it only seems 100% reasonable to go back & look at weeks 1 & 2, factor out those "crunch time" drives & see how it affected the numbers to verify it was "still working". That way you have an apples to apples comparison as to how he did on those 1st & 2nd throws for setting up a 3rd & short when it wasn't crunch time.

I didn't know if omitting the crunch time drives in week 1 & 2 would drop him way below the 75%, push him up even higher or if it would stay the same. All I stated was it should be re-evaluated to determine if indeed it really was "working" in weeks 1 & 2 after factoring out those drives.

Like I said before, the 75% on 1st & 2nd is, in theory, supposed to play out to mean you have 3rd & short. In reality, it doesn't necessarily mean that at all.

He could complete the first two passes and still be 3rd and long, especially if there's a penalty or passes are thrown down the LOS for little or no gain.

He could complete a pass on 1st down or 1st & 2nd down & never see 3rd because we already moved the chains.

There could also be a run on one of those first two downs to go along with one of those passes which could have made it a 3rd & short or a 3rd and long.

Too many scenarios and why those numbers don't mean a lot other than the completion %, unless you're looking at what the 3rd down distance was when he passed on 1st and 2nd. Was it 3rd and short or still 3rd and long.

What concerns me more is if we do hit 3rd down are we converting it into another 1st down.

I'm also more concerned with the significant drop in pass completion you found during crunch time in week 3. It's not to say we did or didn't convert on a 3rd down pass, but during crunch time, when the clock is winding down & we need to score points to win, I want to see the higher completion % to make those drives winning drives.

Minniman
09-26-2012, 11:14 AM
What concerns me more is if we do hit 3rd down are we converting it into another 1st down.
YPA, 3rd down %, and the turnover ratio can usually show who won a game without seeing the score.

One problem I see, that will hurt the Vikings in the long run, is that the offense has too many third downs in a drive. There are not enough first downs gained on first and second down. Even for a great third down team, the odds will catch up to them and stall drives.

tastywaves
09-26-2012, 11:40 AM
YPA, 3rd down %, and the turnover ratio can usually show who won a game without seeing the score.

One problem I see, that will hurt the Vikings in the long run, is that the offense has too many third downs in a drive. There are not enough first downs gained on first and second down. Even for a great third down team, the odds will catch up to them and stall drives.

I agree with issue of having a high number of 3rd downs. Are we seeing this is a high number compared to other teams? I would think that part of the goal with trying to hit 75% on 1st and 2nd down throws is to minimize the number of 3rd downs altogether. Not just attempting to get in 3rd and short situations.

For the Vikings, I would think the number of 1st downs would be a more direct metric.

If Ponder is able to hit 75% of 1st and 2nd downs with the YPA where it's currently at, it will lead to more first downs in the first two plays. Factoring in of course run plays that get mixed in at 4 ypc'ish average.

Best part of this thread is we are getting to see how meaningless stats really are without a lot of context put behind them. A lot of context.

NodakPaul
09-26-2012, 11:47 AM
YPA, 3rd down %, and the turnover ratio can usually show who won a game without seeing the score.

One problem I see, that will hurt the Vikings in the long run, is that the offense has too many third downs in a drive. There are not enough first downs gained on first and second down. Even for a great third down team, the odds will catch up to them and stall drives.

Just some stats for thought:

Minnesota has a 41% third down completion percentage. That is tied for 12th.
Minnesota has seen 39 third downs, tied for 15th.
Minnesota has made 64 first downs, tied for 13th.

tastywaves
09-26-2012, 12:00 PM
Just some stats for thought:

Minnesota has a 41% third down completion percentage. That is tied for 12th.
Minnesota has seen 39 third downs, tied for 15th.
Minnesota has made 64 first downs, tied for 13th.

Interesting, they all much pretty much tell the same story. Is that 3rd down conversion rate or completion percentage? I tried to find 3rd down completion rate a while back and couldn't find it.

Marrdro
09-27-2012, 07:37 AM
I was listening to Ross Tucker and his guest this morning (Evan Silva) and they were talking about young Ponder. One of their comments/observations is how hard it has been for Ponder to throw all those short passes.

Their rationale was mostly related to the fact that we have no outside threat. All of the "Passing Targets" that Ponder have are "around the line of scrimmage" guys. That makes it easier for defenses to clog those close passing lanes.

Thought it was a interesting take.

singersp
09-27-2012, 07:41 AM
Just some stats for thought:

Minnesota has a 41% third down completion percentage. That is tied for 12th.
Minnesota has seen 39 third downs, tied for 15th.
Minnesota has made 64 first downs, tied for 13th.

Which means the Vikings have gotten 25 1st downs on 1st or 2nd down with possibly 1 or 2 4th down conversions in there. I don't know where that ranks, but I like not having to deal with 3rd downs.

Where are you finding those interesting stats?

singersp
09-27-2012, 07:52 AM
I was listening to Ross Tucker and his guest this morning (Evan Silva) and they were talking about young Ponder. One of their comments/observations is how hard it has been for Ponder to throw all those short passes.

Their rationale was mostly related to the fact that we have no outside threat. All of the "Passing Targets" that Ponder have are "around the line of scrimmage" guys. That makes it easier for defenses to clog those close passing lanes.

Thought it was a interesting take.

Apparently you missed me saying it more than once several weeks ago or didn't find it to be an interesting take at the time, until the proof was in the pudding. It's one of the reasons I felt Ponder would have a hard time hitting that 75%.

Also, like I said, when those defenders are in like they are, it also shortens our run game too.

Thus the need, that a few of us have been clamoring since the offseason, to add some deep threat WR's that could stretch the field & keep our opponents secondary back.

Marrdro
09-27-2012, 07:59 AM
Apparently you missed me saying it more than once several weeks ago or didn't find it to be an interesting take at the time, until the proof was in the pudding. It's one of the reasons I felt Ponder would have a hard time hitting that 75%.

Also, like I said, when those defenders are in like they are, it also shortens our run game too.

Thus the need, that a few of us have been clamoring since the offseason, to add some deep threat WR's that could stretch the field & keep our opponents secondary back.

Two things....I miss nothing. I just elected not to get into it with you.....:)

As to the running issue. You know my stance on that. Almost every team on almost every play, when they are in their base defense, stack the box. It isn't something we see just because of AD.

2012 NFL Team Rushing Stats - National Football League - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/rushing)

Don't get me wrong, we might see it a bit more often, but not as much as you (and others on here) contend.

On a side note.....AD is 12th in rushing and as a team we are 9th. I don't think that is to bad considering all the "Stacked" boxes we face.

On a side side note. I need to go dig up that thread were a couple of people were calling crazy when I said how the star RB's were going to do bad this year. Looking at the league leaders might make them a bit hungry for crow. :)

NodakPaul
09-27-2012, 10:17 AM
Interesting, they all much pretty much tell the same story. Is that 3rd down conversion rate or completion percentage? I tried to find 3rd down completion rate a while back and couldn't find it.

It was conversion rate, thanks for the correction. A little later today I will figure out what the completion % is.

NodakPaul
09-27-2012, 10:22 AM
Which means the Vikings have gotten 25 1st downs on 1st or 2nd down with possibly 1 or 2 4th down conversions in there. I don't know where that ranks, but I like not having to deal with 3rd downs.

Where are you finding those interesting stats?

2012 NFL Team Downs Stats - National Football League - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/downs)