I agree with this. We know Bill doesn't love RBs who fumble, but whether you thought you were down or not, you have to fight for possession there.I would have to watch the replay to be sure, but on first watch, it also looked like he made no attempt to get the ball back after he let it go, just counting on the call to go the right way. That wouldn't sit well with the coaching staff either.
They're out:It will be interesting to see how the snaps were distributed among the defensive linemen. It felt like some ineffective run defenders were on the field a lot (Wise/Winovich).
I mentioned this in the game thread, but Howe said there seemed to be some communications issues on the first few drives, particularly w/r/t zone defense. That jibed with what my eyes told me, as you saw KVN running onto the field at the very last second on the first drive and guys talking to each other right up until the Fins snapped the ball. Also, it seemed that the defense struggled playing against uptempo/2-minute-drill-type offense -- which IIRC, the Dolphins only did on the two drives they scored on.They just had too many uncharacteristic mistakes with penalties and putting the ball on the ground. They had 4 chunk plays in the game of over 20 yards. I’m still concerned about their inability to generate chunk plays but Mac did convert some 3rd and longs…
Overall the goats to me were Harris and Stevenson but I don’t think Stevenson fumbled.
The run defense was supposed to be improved but when it was crunch time they let the Dolphins run 3 times for a 1st down. That’s inexcusable.
It was also a close game and the refs had an impact calling the Wynn hold and awarding Miami the ball from the Stevenson fumble. I’m not blaming the refs for the entire outcome but their decisions did cause a negative outcome for the Pats.
I saw a win probability graph that had them at 84% on the play prior to the fumble. With the ball, the clock running, and in chip shot field goal range, their chances were very good to win. They also had a chance to get into the end zone and go for two, which is certainly being factored into that percentage.Almost immediately before the Harris fumble, I was thinking to myself how impressed I was with him. The dude was running HARD and making extra yards on every single run. That last drive was methodical and excellent. It's really too bad how much the narrative shifted due to the fumble.
It would have been interesting to see how the game played out if the Pats ended up kicking a FG on that drive. I'm not sure I could honestly say I'd peg their chances of winning at much better than 50-50. But would have liked to see the D get a chance knowing Tua had to pass.
He actually brought him back in and he absolutely botched a block and almost got his QB injured. That was the final straw. You make major mistakes on 40% of your snaps you're done for the dayI thought the same. BB benched Stevenson and he really shouldn’t have.
To me, he did a nice job. He pushed the pocket back on a few occasions resulting in incompletions or pressures.Decent amount of snaps for Barmore. Anyone know how he did?
I can't agree with the last sentence, with due respect.Do you break down every team's games like this to see if their stats are also "misleading"?
Don't get me wrong - I appreciate your thoroughness and you do a good job breaking things down. But you seem to be mostly interested in doing it to show that the Pats are worse than people think.
I will third this. He committed two cardinal sins on that play. Don't put the ball on the turf, regardless of whether you're down or not (because you give the refs a chance to screw you). And don't assume the refs are going to give you the ball even if you know you were down, go after it so they don't have a chance to screw you.I agree with this. We know Bill doesn't love RBs who fumble, but whether you thought you were down or not, you have to fight for possession there.
That's fair. He's an excellent poster and clearly knows his stuff. It just feels to me like more often than not, his analysis is one that shows the Pats as not being as good as people think.I can't agree with the last sentence, with due respect.
I appreciate SN's breakdowns because it pokes holes in my (and sometimes) most Pats fans' assumptions and popular narratives.
I never felt the original intention was to show the team in a more negative light, especially on purpose.
Situationally, this play reminded me a lot of Cam's fumble late in the first Pats/Bills game last year. I'd have to dig up the game log to compare, but my memory says it was a similar situation that without the fumble, and even not gaining another yard, there would have been a pretty straightforward GW-FG attempt without much clock left.Other than the plays that we remember for years (Malcolm Butler, Miami Miracle type plays), this was about as big as it gets. It was a 40% swing, and at a glance it was the second highest shift in win % so far this week, across all games. I could see your point if the Pats needed a TD or if the fumble happened early in the drive when they were at midfield, but they were just about in old school extra point range for the go ahead points. It was that bad.
But this isn’t the case, like, at all.Situationally, this play reminded me a lot of Cam's fumble late in the first Pats/Bills game last year. I'd have to dig up the game log to compare, but my memory says it was a similar situation that without the fumble, and even not gaining another yard, there would have been a pretty straightforward GW-FG attempt without much clock left.
You're already assuming a ton of the upside out of their situation. Sure, if Miami holds on the very next series they may be in OK shape to have one drive to try to win the game. But a first down changes that. A touchdown changes that. And even if they get the ball back with over 2 minutes, Tua would be forced to pass when the Pats know he's passing. I give their chance of driving all the way down to score a good deal less than 50/50. They had only scored on 3 of a previous 8 drives when they had the benefit of their whole playbook.But this isn’t the case, like, at all.
It was first and 10 from the 11 with 3:31 left. Miami had all 3 timeouts. If they kept the Pats out of the end zone and used all 3 timeouts they would still have had 3 minutes left down by 2. Or more likely 2+ minutes with 1-2 timeouts depending on whether the Pats ran or passed. Point is Miami would have had plenty of time to mount a drive. Clock would barely have even been a factor.
Edit beaten by @BaseballJones
I agree with you, but I thought the lack of compete when the ball came out was kind of unacceptable. Maybe as a vet you get a little leeway, but as a rookie you have to play to the whistle. Couple this with getting absolutely blown up on that pass protection showed that, fundamentally, Rhamondre didn't come to play. Both seem like pretty easy (and quick) fixes.Overall the goats to me were Harris and Stevenson but I don’t think Stevenson fumbled.
This is a pretty standard distribution. If you strip out Harris' 35 yarder his stats look a lot worse too. Running average is distorted pretty severely by long runs because the shortest runs are so much closer to the average. League-wide average yards per carry is 4+ but median is between 2 and 3. 4 of 9 runs being successful is a good rate.So Gaskin had two huge runs - 2 rushes for 30 yards. But otherwise had 7 rushes for 19 yards (2.7 ypc).
So out of the 9 rushes by Gaskin, 5 of them were below-average gains.
50/50ish? That's like saying that if you could choose to be the Dolphins or the Patriots before that snap, you'd have to think about it for even half a second?Almost immediately before the Harris fumble, I was thinking to myself how impressed I was with him. The dude was running HARD and making extra yards on every single run. That last drive was methodical and excellent. It's really too bad how much the narrative shifted due to the fumble.
It would have been interesting to see how the game played out if the Pats ended up kicking a FG on that drive. I'm not sure I could honestly say I'd peg their chances of winning at much better than 50-50. But would have liked to see the D get a chance knowing Tua had to pass.
Per the game charts the Pats went from about 70% to win to 70% to lose on the play. I don't think I'm assuming a ton of upside for Miami. The Pats red zone offense was lousy all day. It was 2nd and 9 or 8. The chance of the Pats getting a first down were very small IMO - the chances of a touchdown were higher, for sure. The Pats were playing fairly conservatively at that point. I think the likeliest outcome of that scenario is a field goal with 1 or 2 timeouts burned by Miami and some ~2:30 left on the clock. But I agree I would have liked to see the Pats D against Miami there knowing they (mostly) would have had to throw.You're already assuming a ton of the upside out of their situation. Sure, if Miami holds on the very next series they may be in OK shape to have one drive to try to win the game. But a first down changes that. A touchdown changes that. And even if they get the ball back with over 2 minutes, Tua would be forced to pass when the Pats know he's passing. I give their chance of driving all the way down to score a good deal less than 50/50. They had only scored on 3 of a previous 8 drives when they had the benefit of their whole playbook.
The Pats were heavy favorites at the time of the fumble. When you factor in the TD possibility, it may be 80%+ at that point in time. Given that in the Cam situation, a FG would only have forced overtime instead of put the Pats ahead, I'd guess Harris's fumble had an even bigger impact on win probability than Cam's last year.
They couldn't have run any more clock since Miami had all 3 timeouts. A TD would certainly have made things very difficult for Miami.50/50ish? That's like saying that if you could choose to be the Dolphins or the Patriots before that snap, you'd have to think about it for even half a second?
It was first down. They could have run off a lot more clock before kicking a FG, or could have punched it in for a TD and put the Dolphins in a really tough spot, or both.
Yeah, and if Miami burned all their timeouts, the situation on the following drive is even tighter, being limited in their ability to stop the clock and set up a FG, etc.Per the game charts the Pats went from about 70% to win to 70% to lose on the play. I don't think I'm assuming a ton of upside for Miami. The Pats red zone offense was lousy all day. It was 2nd and 9 or 8. The chance of the Pats getting a first down were very small IMO - the chances of a touchdown were higher, for sure. The Pats were playing fairly conservatively at that point. I think the likeliest outcome of that scenario is a field goal with 1 or 2 timeouts burned by Miami and some ~2:30 left on the clock. But I agree I would have liked to see the Pats D against Miami there knowing they (mostly) would have had to throw.
They couldn't have run any more clock since Miami had all 3 timeouts. A TD would certainly have made things very difficult for Miami.
I fully agree I'd have rather been the Pats in that situation. All I'm saying is that if Miami held the Pats to a field goal, that game would still have been very much up in the air. I don't know what you want to call the chances of winning - probably still 60-70% - but Miami would have had a much better chance to win than, say, the 2018 finale.
I feel like we're in RMPS talking about how the Broonz put 42 shots on goal and lost to the Habs who only shot 24 times but won 3-1. Maybe it's Tuukka's fault.How often do you lose when you outgain a team 393-259 and outgain them on a per play basis: 5.6 to 5.0? Not often. 8 penalties for 84 yards, fumbling 4 times, and the run D coming up short all day. Still 393-259 and that 393 yards is on 8 drives... that's almost a 50 yards per drive!
Yeah, the loss is one that you feel between the cheeks but ultimately there's no reason to come away from it with anything other than optimism, at least as long as the Trent Brown injury isn't too serious. (But even then, I think we can swing Onwenu out to tackle again.)How often do you lose when you outgain a team 393-259 and outgain them on a per play basis: 5.6 to 5.0? Not often. 8 penalties for 84 yards, fumbling 4 times, and the run D coming up short all day. Still 393-259 and that 393 yards is on 8 drives... that's almost a 50 yards per drive!
I don't consider being up by a point with over 2 minutes left and the other team getting the ball "great, great" shape, but YMMV. It's such a passing league that teams can score without timeouts with like half that amount of time. Hell the Seahawks went 75 yards for a touchdown in 30 seconds in SB49.Yeah, and if Miami burned all their timeouts, the situation on the following drive is even tighter, being limited in their ability to stop the clock and set up a FG, etc.
The Pats would have been in great, great shape after that score. It wasn't "the game", but it was an enormous mistake by Harris that cost them a fantastic shot at a win.
Yes, and if the Dolphins had Russell Wilson I'd be concerned in that spot. But they don't.I don't consider being up by a point with over 2 minutes left and the other team getting the ball "great, great" shape, but YMMV. It's such a passing league that teams can score without timeouts with like half that amount of time. Hell the Seahawks went 75 yards for a touchdown in 30 seconds in SB49.
note the difference between how White (i think it was him) reacted when ref was signaling incomplete pass to a loose ball when Mac went braindead and threw it at his feet... versus Rham who didn't even try to go after the ball after it got ripped out. I really think the non-chalant "ball's out no big deal I was down" did more to hurt him than anything. He then followed it up with the less than stellar passblocking that got his QB tackled at his knees as noted.Stevenson.
He is dead to me. Fumble (which I dont think was a fumble but i guess it was close) AND an absolute dog shit Blitz pickup on the next play ended his day.
.....
Dead to me until he recovers and never fumbles again for the rest of the year while racking up 500+ yards.
But Man he needs to learn to block.
Patriots were 70% favorites prior to the Harros fumble.Almost immediately before the Harris fumble, I was thinking to myself how impressed I was with him. The dude was running HARD and making extra yards on every single run. That last drive was methodical and excellent. It's really too bad how much the narrative shifted due to the fumble.
It would have been interesting to see how the game played out if the Pats ended up kicking a FG on that drive. I'm not sure I could honestly say I'd peg their chances of winning at much better than 50-50. But would have liked to see the D get a chance knowing Tua had to pass.
Who are we talking about here?Coaching. If you have a dominant downfield threat virtually unstoppable at the point of attack, you should probably find a way to get him the ball.
Harry's agent says it's true.Who are we talking about here?
Mac Jones playing WR in the wildcat, of course.Who are we talking about here?