Every week, we’re digging into some stats from the Green Bay Packers game by using SumerLive, a new product from SumerSports that tracks a bunch of stats in real time. Last week we got a loss. This week we got an overtime win. So that’s fun.
Offense
This week saw an uptick in usage of 11 personnel. This week, the Packers were in 11 personnel on 55.1% of their snaps, up from 47.8% last week. They were in 12 personnel 30.6% of the time, 13 personnel 14.3% of the time and “Other” 2% of the time (I’d say that’s
likely their package with an extra o-lineman, but I’ll know a little better when I finish my charting). Just as a refresher, personnel tells you who is on the field. The first number is the number of running backs, the second number is the number of tight ends, and the number of wide receivers is assumed based on there being 5 available skill players. So 11 personnel would be 1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR.
In the run game, the Packers leaned heavy in gap scheme runs this week. A third of their runs were in the Zone family (11.1% inside zone, 22.2% wide zone), while the rest was a mix of gap/power scheme. Nothing they ran was particularly effective. On the day, they had 18 attempts for 63 yards (55 of those yards coming after contact) for -0.48 EPA per Play. Their best performance of the day was on Inside Zone runs, in which they had a -0.06 EPA per Play. Their power run game was bad from an efficiency standpoint (-0.76 EPA per Play), but it worked really well from a Success Rate perspective (60% Success Rate). Not particularly efficient, but it kept them ahead of the chains.
Just like last week, we got a pretty nice run/pass ratio from the Packers. They passed on 64% of their offensive snaps this week, after passing on 68.7% last week. After an offseason of begging for LaFleur to let Love loose a bit more, it looks like they’re starting this season by leaning into the passing game more than we had previously seen. I’m taking that as a positive sign.
The pass game wasn’t particularly good (-0.17 EPA per Play, 34.4% Success Rate), but I like that they’re looking to push it. Between the rain and Love’s numb fingers, it wasn’t quite as smooth in the passing game as I would have liked, but I’ve seen enough from Love to believe he’ll have a bounce-back.
The more encouraging thing from the passing game is that protection held up better this week than it did against the Vikings in Week 1. This week, the Jets blitzed on 28.13% of snaps (0.3% above the NFL average), but had a pressure rate of 31.25% (7.86% below NFL average).
From his pass performance by zone chart, Love kept more to the short-to-intermediate portion of the field this week.
We just talked about the offense being more pass-heavy this week, but one area they were not was on 1st and 10. On that down, they had a run rate of 64%. Were they good at it? Dear Reader, they were not! They had an EPA per Play of -0.60 and Success Rate of 29%. They weren’t exactly burning down the house when passing on 1st & 10 (-0.07 EPA per Play, 33% Success Rate), but it was an improvement over the run game. Their 1st & 10 run rate in Week 1 was 48%, so I’m curious to see if this run-heavy approach on 1st & 10 is a product of a very rainy afternoon or whether that’s going to be their approach going forward. Please let this run-heavy approach on 1st & 10 just be a blip.
Matthew Golden had himself a nice day. He had 4 catches (on 6 targets) for 58 yards, good for +1.27 EPA per Reception. He had an ADOT (Average Depth of Target) of 13.33 yards, and averaged 8 yards after the catch. His YAC ability keeps showing up, and I’ve really been enjoying watching him with the ball in his hands. Four of his targets came when he was aligned wide (+1.2 EPA per Reception) and two of his targets came from the slot (+1.48 EPA per Reception). The play that got the Packers into chip-shot field goal range saw Golden aligned outside.
Defense
Last week, the Packers were pretty balanced in terms of defensive personnel used (49.2% Base, 49.2% Nickel, 1.6% Dime). This week they leaned much heavier into Nickel. They used Nickel personnel on 72.2% of their defensive snaps, 11.02% above the NFL average. That likely is a response to the Jets personnel (69.4% 11 personnel), but it’s something to monitor going forward.
In terms of their coverage menu, the Packers were predominantly in Zone coverage (87%) zone. Here is their breakdown of zone coverages:
Cover 3: 32.6%
Cover 4: 32.6%
Cover 2: 13%
Cover 6: 8.7%
The rest was either Cover 1 (10.9%) or Cover 0 (2.2%). As expected, a lot of stuff based in the Quarters family.
The Packers had a blitz rate of 34.69% this week, 6.87% above the NFL average. There was a lot of talk about Gannon’s lack of blitzing during his time as a defensive coordinator, but we’ve seen him more willing to blitz for his first two weeks in Green Bay. He has been actively looking for ways to use his best players to impact the game, and that’s been extremely encouraging so far.
Lukas Van Ness had himself a day, man. On the day, he had 5 solo tackles, 5 assisted tackles and 3 tackles for loss (including 1.5 sacks). As a pass rusher, he had a 23.3% pressure rate, with an average time to pressure of 2.6 seconds. His 3 tackles for loss has him tied for the Week 2 lead in that category with Will Anderson, Elijah Ponder and Nick Herbig. His 7 pressures has him tied for 4th this week and his 3 stuffed runs has him tied with Will Anderson for the lead in week 2.
Dani Dennis-Sutton also had a pretty nice day. He played 40% of the Packers defensive snaps and, while the box score numbers aren’t eye-popping (2 solo tackles, 4 assisted tackles) some of the underlying numbers are very good. He had a 29.4% pressure rate and an average time to pressure of 2.4 seconds. That pressure rate was good for 4th overall in week 2 among players who played at least 25 snaps. He has looked really impressive so far this season.
Albums listened to: beabadoobee – Pylon; Orville Peck – Mule
