3 of the 5 worst decisions a coach made in Week 2 were Zims

[psjordan]

Wrestled with posting this since part of it comes from "premium" content, but the meat of it is available (free) at the link below. And no, I've never heard of "Edjsports" before you ask.

From https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/ ... -big-issue:

Zimmer actively hurt the Vikings with his decision-making on Sunday. Edjsports (https://edjsports.com/posts/3f73b70a-5e ... d3666b0ccf) tracks coaching decisions using its win expectancy model and found that three of the five worst decisions a coach made in Week 2 were Zimmer calls to punt, including the top two.

1) Facing a fourth-and-6 on his own 29-yard line with 2:52 to go and three timeouts while trailing by one point, Zimmer punted. This cost the Vikings 12.4 percentage points of win expectancy, more than twice as many as any other decision from Week 2 [my emphasis].

2) In the third quarter, again trailing by one point, he punted on fourth-and-1 from his own 40-yard line.

3) In the second quarter, facing a fourth-and-1 from his own 34-yard line while up by six points, he had the Vikings punt.

They cut slack on the last one since Cook was hurt the play prior. I'm also not sure how ballsy other coaches would be with a 2nd quarter own-34-yard-line-up-by-6 4th-and-1 attempt, but there you have it. They go for it and miss THAT attempt and all heck breaks loose acrosse the Purple Universe. I mighta gone for the other two.

On the other hand our punter has been very good, so maybe that influenced his thinking. Dunno.

They also ripped Zim for not trusting his "highest paid players" to make a play and get more yards before the final (missed) kick.

Not sure what metrics are acceptable to use for "percentage points of win expectancy", but it's thrown around a lot nowadays, particularly during "game trackers", so I assume it's a recursive model that self-corrects over time.

[StumpHunter]

Wrestled with posting this since part of it comes from "premium" content, but the meat of it is available (free) at the link below. And no, I've never heard of "Edjsports" before you ask.

From https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/ ... -big-issue:

Zimmer actively hurt the Vikings with his decision-making on Sunday. Edjsports (https://edjsports.com/posts/3f73b70a-5e ... d3666b0ccf) tracks coaching decisions using its win expectancy model and found that three of the five worst decisions a coach made in Week 2 were Zimmer calls to punt, including the top two.

1) Facing a fourth-and-6 on his own 29-yard line with 2:52 to go and three timeouts while trailing by one point, Zimmer punted. This cost the Vikings 12.4 percentage points of win expectancy, more than twice as many as any other decision from Week 2 [my emphasis].

2) In the third quarter, again trailing by one point, he punted on fourth-and-1 from his own 40-yard line.

3) In the second quarter, facing a fourth-and-1 from his own 34-yard line while up by six points, he had the Vikings punt.

They cut slack on the last one since Cook was hurt the play prior. I'm also not sure how ballsy other coaches would be with a 2nd quarter own-34-yard-line-up-by-6 4th-and-1 attempt, but there you have it. They go for it and miss THAT attempt and all heck breaks loose acrosse the Purple Universe. I mighta gone for the other two.

On the other hand our punter has been very good, so maybe that influenced his thinking. Dunno.

They also ripped Zim for not trusting his "highest paid players" to make a play and get more yards before the final (missed) kick.

Not sure what metrics are acceptable to use for "percentage points of win expectancy", but it's thrown around a lot nowadays, particularly during "game trackers", so I assume it's a recursive model that self-corrects over time.

1) From 1994 to 2021, any team, in the regular season, in the fourth quarter, between 3:00 and 2:00 remaining, between Team 28 and Team 30, on 4th down, between 5 and 6 yards to go, scoring margin is between -3 and 0 there has only been 1 play to ever happen and it was that play they were talking about above

So they are basing their win expectancy on something that has never happened before.

Expanding the search criteria

From 1994 to 2021, any team, in the regular season, in the fourth quarter, between 4:00 and 2:00 remaining, between Team 26 and Team 32, on 4th down, between 4 and 7 yards to go, scoring margin is between -3 and 0

There have been 10 plays since 1994. 2 teams passed in that situation, 8 punted. The 1 team that got a 1st down in that situation was 1 of 6 teams that lost the game. So did the other team that passed and didn't get the 1st obviously.

In other words Zimmer did the thing that gave him a 50% chance of winning based on similar situations, while not doing the thing that has never lead to a win. Terrible decision.

2) The second one teams punted 19 times and rushed it twice in losses. Picking up a 1st down both times.

In the 6 wins, every single team punted in that situation.

So Zimmer did what every team that won in that spot did and is knocked for it?

3) This one there has only been 1 team since 1994 that did anything but punt in that situation and they lost the game.

So Zimmer did what 99% of coaches do in his situation and the thing that historically has given the team the best chance to win, and he made a bad decision?

Interesting.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Wrestled with posting this since part of it comes from "premium" content, but the meat of it is available (free) at the link below. And no, I've never heard of "Edjsports" before you ask.

From https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/ ... -big-issue:

Zimmer actively hurt the Vikings with his decision-making on Sunday. Edjsports (https://edjsports.com/posts/3f73b70a-5e ... d3666b0ccf) tracks coaching decisions using its win expectancy model and found that three of the five worst decisions a coach made in Week 2 were Zimmer calls to punt, including the top two.

1) Facing a fourth-and-6 on his own 29-yard line with 2:52 to go and three timeouts while trailing by one point, Zimmer punted. This cost the Vikings 12.4 percentage points of win expectancy, more than twice as many as any other decision from Week 2 [my emphasis].

2) In the third quarter, again trailing by one point, he punted on fourth-and-1 from his own 40-yard line.

3) In the second quarter, facing a fourth-and-1 from his own 34-yard line while up by six points, he had the Vikings punt.

They cut slack on the last one since Cook was hurt the play prior. I'm also not sure how ballsy other coaches would be with a 2nd quarter own-34-yard-line-up-by-6 4th-and-1 attempt, but there you have it. They go for it and miss THAT attempt and all heck breaks loose acrosse the Purple Universe. I mighta gone for the other two.

On the other hand our punter has been very good, so maybe that influenced his thinking. Dunno.

They also ripped Zim for not trusting his "highest paid players" to make a play and get more yards before the final (missed) kick.

Not sure what metrics are acceptable to use for "percentage points of win expectancy", but it's thrown around a lot nowadays, particularly during "game trackers", so I assume it's a recursive model that self-corrects over time.

1) From 1994 to 2021, any team, in the regular season, in the fourth quarter, between 3:00 and 2:00 remaining, between Team 28 and Team 30, on 4th down, between 5 and 6 yards to go, scoring margin is between -3 and 0 there has only been 1 play to ever happen and it was that play they were talking about above

So they are basing their win expectancy on something that has never happened before.

Expanding the search criteria

From 1994 to 2021, any team, in the regular season, in the fourth quarter, between 4:00 and 2:00 remaining, between Team 26 and Team 32, on 4th down, between 4 and 7 yards to go, scoring margin is between -3 and 0

There have been 10 plays since 1994. 2 teams passed in that situation, 8 punted. The 1 team that got a 1st down in that situation was 1 of 6 teams that lost the game. So did the other team that passed and didn't get the 1st obviously.

In other words Zimmer did the thing that gave him a 50% chance of winning based on similar situations, while not doing the thing that has never lead to a win. Terrible decision.

2) The second one teams punted 19 times and rushed it twice in losses. Picking up a 1st down both times.

In the 6 wins, every single team punted in that situation.

So Zimmer did what every team that won in that spot did and is knocked for it?

3) This one there has only been 1 team since 1994 that did anything but punt in that situation and they lost the game.

So Zimmer did what 99% of coaches do in his situation and the thing that historically has given the team the best chance to win, and he made a bad decision?

Interesting.

Your defending of Zim is honestly quite mind boggling but regardless, you're going back to 1994. The coaching styles and overall strategies back in 1994 are so beyond different than 2021 it's not even funny. But I guess that further proves my point regarding Zim which is you have to go all the way back to 1994 to find coaches that made the same decisions he did in 2021. That's because he's coaching like it's still 1994. Zero aggressiveness, very little creativity and wrinkles. Watch the Rams playcalling for a game start to finish. That's the definition of a coach thats aggressive, takes chances and keeps teams on their heels.

And there's not a soul on earth that can tell me that if Sean McVay was coaching this team and we had Arizona's defense on their heels, with 41 seconds to go, 1 timeout and on the 18 yard line, he wouldnt be pushing for more yards. You know it and I know that he would've kept pushing and not settle. Mike Zimmer did exactly what a conservative 1994 coach would do. That's why you have to go back to 1994 to find coaches that made these types of decisions.

[StumpHunter]

1) From 1994 to 2021, any team, in the regular season, in the fourth quarter, between 3:00 and 2:00 remaining, between Team 28 and Team 30, on 4th down, between 5 and 6 yards to go, scoring margin is between -3 and 0 there has only been 1 play to ever happen and it was that play they were talking about above

So they are basing their win expectancy on something that has never happened before.

Expanding the search criteria

From 1994 to 2021, any team, in the regular season, in the fourth quarter, between 4:00 and 2:00 remaining, between Team 26 and Team 32, on 4th down, between 4 and 7 yards to go, scoring margin is between -3 and 0

There have been 10 plays since 1994. 2 teams passed in that situation, 8 punted. The 1 team that got a 1st down in that situation was 1 of 6 teams that lost the game. So did the other team that passed and didn't get the 1st obviously.

In other words Zimmer did the thing that gave him a 50% chance of winning based on similar situations, while not doing the thing that has never lead to a win. Terrible decision.

2) The second one teams punted 19 times and rushed it twice in losses. Picking up a 1st down both times.

In the 6 wins, every single team punted in that situation.

So Zimmer did what every team that won in that spot did and is knocked for it?

3) This one there has only been 1 team since 1994 that did anything but punt in that situation and they lost the game.

So Zimmer did what 99% of coaches do in his situation and the thing that historically has given the team the best chance to win, and he made a bad decision?

Interesting.

Your defending of Zim is honestly quite mind boggling but regardless, you're going back to 1994. The coaching styles and overall strategies back in 1994 are so beyond different than 2021 it's not even funny. But I guess that further proves my point regarding Zim which is you have to go all the way back to 1994 to find coaches that made the same decisions he did in 2021. That's because he's coaching like it's still 1994. Zero aggressiveness, very little creativity and wrinkles. Watch the Rams playcalling for a game start to finish. That's the definition of a coach thats aggressive, takes chances and keeps teams on their heels.

Let me check 2010 on...yep, no examples of a team winning by doing something different in those spots. You know, since they were already included in the results I posted above and there were no examples.

And there's not a soul on earth that can tell me that if Sean McVay was coaching this team and we had Arizona's defense on their heels, with 41 seconds to go, 1 timeout and on the 18 yard line, he wouldnt be pushing for more yards. You know it and I know that he would've kept pushing and not settle. Mike Zimmer did exactly what a conservative 1994 coach would do. That's why you have to go back to 1994 to find coaches that made these types of decisions.

That wasn't one of the plays in the OP...

For that scenario, there isn't a single coach who has called a passing play on 1st, 2nd or 3rd down since 2010 and only 1 team passed in that spot since 1994 and that was to spike the ball.

Every team either ran the ball to kill the clock, took a knee, or kicked a FG. Every. Single. One.

[808vikingsfan]

no issues with any of these decisions

[VikingLord]

Me neither.

I honestly thought the article was a joke at first.

I mean, what coach in his right mind is going to go for it on his side of the 50 on 4th down in a close road game?

The Bengals tried it against the Vikings at home and paid for it. They're lucky the Vikings didn't win that game as a result.

Going for it late in a half on 4th down in opposing territory might make sense, but on your side of the 50 if you fail you're basically handing your opponent points.

I don't care what the stats might say - that's a combination of desperate and dumb.

[J. Kapp 11]

I am far more concerned with the fact that our defense has given up 24 points in the last two minutes of the first half of the first two games than I am about a coach punting on 4th and 1 in minus territory.

It could easily be said that the biggest reason we’re not 2-0 is that we can’t seem to stop anybody late in the first half. THAT failure falls squarely on Zimmer. But I’m not going to rip the guy for doing exactly what I would have done decision-wise.

[StumpHunter]

I am far more concerned with the fact that our defense has given up 24 points in the last two minutes of the first half of the first two games than I am about a coach punting on 4th and 1 in minus territory.

This.

The Vikings' defense is way more of a concern for me with Zimmer. It needs to get better fast or Zimmer should be done as a Vikings head coach.

[VikingLord]

I am far more concerned with the fact that our defense has given up 24 points in the last two minutes of the first half of the first two games than I am about a coach punting on 4th and 1 in minus territory.

It could easily be said that the biggest reason we’re not 2-0 is that we can’t seem to stop anybody late in the first half. THAT failure falls squarely on Zimmer. But I’m not going to rip the guy for doing exactly what I would have done decision-wise.

It kind of falls on Zimmer but it also falls on the DBs themselves. One thing I like about Patrick Peterson was his statement after the Cardinals game both blaming himself for losing track of Hopkins when Murray scrambled and found him for the TD, but also for calling out his fellow DBs for losing track of their responsibilities on that late Cardinals TD near the end of the 1st half. Zimmer can call the defensive plays and alignments. He can put certain players on the field and prep them for their opponent. But Zimmer can't make them play disciplined and with awareness. He can't make them execute.

Maybe he shouldn't have sent the blitz against the Bengals that allowed Breeland to get singled up. Then again, maybe Breeland shouldn't have allowed his guy to run right by him straight to the endzone. If Breeland was prepared he should have known the speed of the guy he was facing and any tells on the route he might run, especially in that situation. I admire Zim for calling out his piece of responsibility there, but Breeland blew the coverage.

And on the late TD by the Cards, Zimmer probably was the closest Viking to the receiver on that play. Whoever had the deep responsibility there, as well as on that duck that Murray tossed up late near the end of the game, blew their coverage responsibilities as well.

It comes down to preparation and discipline. Just like the OL deserved the blame for their lack of prep against the Bengals (which they corrected against the Cardinals to their credit), the defensive secondary deserves most of the blame for those 24 points. Further, they failed to correct what they did wrong against the Cardinals, and now one of the premier duck-tossers in NFL history is coming to town to test them in those situations yet again.

We'll see if they learned their collective lesson and come prepared. The DL and LBs need to be ready for Wilson's escape antics, and the DBs simply must keep track of their assignments no matter how much Wilson runs around. Do NOT let him find those deep guys uncontested. If Wilson can hit well-covered deep targets my hat is off to him and the Seahawks. But if he's hitting deep targets who aren't contested because the Vikings DBs are leaving guys wide open, I'll criticize Zimmer more for leaving those DBs on the field than his defensive gameplan going into the game or defensive playcalling during the game.

The Vikings defensive guys have to step up. This is two weeks in a row they've been the weak link.

[J. Kapp 11]

I am far more concerned with the fact that our defense has given up 24 points in the last two minutes of the first half of the first two games than I am about a coach punting on 4th and 1 in minus territory.

It could easily be said that the biggest reason we’re not 2-0 is that we can’t seem to stop anybody late in the first half. THAT failure falls squarely on Zimmer. But I’m not going to rip the guy for doing exactly what I would have done decision-wise.

It kind of falls on Zimmer but it also falls on the DBs themselves. One thing I like about Patrick Peterson was his statement after the Cardinals game both blaming himself for losing track of Hopkins when Murray scrambled and found him for the TD, but also for calling out his fellow DBs for losing track of their responsibilities on that late Cardinals TD near the end of the 1st half. Zimmer can call the defensive plays and alignments. He can put certain players on the field and prep them for their opponent. But Zimmer can't make them play disciplined and with awareness. He can't make them execute.

Maybe he shouldn't have sent the blitz against the Bengals that allowed Breeland to get singled up. Then again, maybe Breeland shouldn't have allowed his guy to run right by him straight to the endzone. If Breeland was prepared he should have known the speed of the guy he was facing and any tells on the route he might run, especially in that situation. I admire Zim for calling out his piece of responsibility there, but Breeland blew the coverage.

And on the late TD by the Cards, Zimmer probably was the closest Viking to the receiver on that play. Whoever had the deep responsibility there, as well as on that duck that Murray tossed up late near the end of the game, blew their coverage responsibilities as well.

It comes down to preparation and discipline. Just like the OL deserved the blame for their lack of prep against the Bengals (which they corrected against the Cardinals to their credit), the defensive secondary deserves most of the blame for those 24 points. Further, they failed to correct what they did wrong against the Cardinals, and now one of the premier duck-tossers in NFL history is coming to town to test them in those situations yet again.

We'll see if they learned their collective lesson and come prepared. The DL and LBs need to be ready for Wilson's escape antics, and the DBs simply must keep track of their assignments no matter how much Wilson runs around. Do NOT let him find those deep guys uncontested. If Wilson can hit well-covered deep targets my hat is off to him and the Seahawks. But if he's hitting deep targets who aren't contested because the Vikings DBs are leaving guys wide open, I'll criticize Zimmer more for leaving those DBs on the field than his defensive gameplan going into the game or defensive playcalling during the game.

The Vikings defensive guys have to step up. This is two weeks in a row they've been the weak link.

Peterson was the Viking at fault for that long play late in the first half. Aqib Talib explained it well.

Peterson was in zone, and Talib said he should have followed the deep receiver. Instead, he dropped back and then “manned” up on the guy running to the sideline. Since the Vikings were blitzing, Peterson had no help over the top. The receiver was 20 yards behind Peterson.

In that situation, the guy going to the sideline wasn’t going to hurt the Vikings. Peterson should have defended deep-to-shallow.

These are the kinds of mental mistakes the you don’t expect future Hall of Fame to make.

[VikingLord]

It kind of falls on Zimmer but it also falls on the DBs themselves. One thing I like about Patrick Peterson was his statement after the Cardinals game both blaming himself for losing track of Hopkins when Murray scrambled and found him for the TD, but also for calling out his fellow DBs for losing track of their responsibilities on that late Cardinals TD near the end of the 1st half. Zimmer can call the defensive plays and alignments. He can put certain players on the field and prep them for their opponent. But Zimmer can't make them play disciplined and with awareness. He can't make them execute.

Maybe he shouldn't have sent the blitz against the Bengals that allowed Breeland to get singled up. Then again, maybe Breeland shouldn't have allowed his guy to run right by him straight to the endzone. If Breeland was prepared he should have known the speed of the guy he was facing and any tells on the route he might run, especially in that situation. I admire Zim for calling out his piece of responsibility there, but Breeland blew the coverage.

And on the late TD by the Cards, Zimmer probably was the closest Viking to the receiver on that play. Whoever had the deep responsibility there, as well as on that duck that Murray tossed up late near the end of the game, blew their coverage responsibilities as well.

It comes down to preparation and discipline. Just like the OL deserved the blame for their lack of prep against the Bengals (which they corrected against the Cardinals to their credit), the defensive secondary deserves most of the blame for those 24 points. Further, they failed to correct what they did wrong against the Cardinals, and now one of the premier duck-tossers in NFL history is coming to town to test them in those situations yet again.

We'll see if they learned their collective lesson and come prepared. The DL and LBs need to be ready for Wilson's escape antics, and the DBs simply must keep track of their assignments no matter how much Wilson runs around. Do NOT let him find those deep guys uncontested. If Wilson can hit well-covered deep targets my hat is off to him and the Seahawks. But if he's hitting deep targets who aren't contested because the Vikings DBs are leaving guys wide open, I'll criticize Zimmer more for leaving those DBs on the field than his defensive gameplan going into the game or defensive playcalling during the game.

The Vikings defensive guys have to step up. This is two weeks in a row they've been the weak link.

Peterson was the Viking at fault for that long play late in the first half. Aqib Talib explained it well.

Peterson was in zone, and Talib said he should have followed the deep receiver. Instead, he dropped back and then “manned” up on the guy running to the sideline. Since the Vikings were blitzing, Peterson had no help over the top. The receiver was 20 yards behind Peterson.

In that situation, the guy going to the sideline wasn’t going to hurt the Vikings. Peterson should have defended deep-to-shallow.

These are the kinds of mental mistakes the you don’t expect future Hall of Fame to make.

I agree, and I'm also glad to see he's taking responsibility for it.

Here's hoping the defense starts rising to the challenge going forward.

[ERIK the PURPLE]

Aqib Talib explained it well? Hahahaha. I don’t think Aqib could explain his way out of a paper bag. Worst color commentary I’ve ever had the misfortune of listening to for three hours.

[808vikingsfan]

I am far more concerned with the fact that our defense has given up 24 points in the last two minutes of the first half of the first two games than I am about a coach punting on 4th and 1 in minus territory.

This.

The Vikings' defense is way more of a concern for me with Zimmer. It needs to get better fast or Zimmer should be done as a Vikings head coach.

I think it's fair to say the concern is both the offense and defense. I think the D did their job in the 2nd half of both games while the offense has been erratic, struggling in the 1st half in wk1 and the 2nd half in week 2

[StumpHunter]

This.

The Vikings' defense is way more of a concern for me with Zimmer. It needs to get better fast or Zimmer should be done as a Vikings head coach.

I think it's fair to say the concern is both the offense and defense. I think the D did their job in the 2nd half of both games while the offense has been erratic, struggling in the 1st half in wk1 and the 2nd half in week 2

Disclosure: What I am writing below is not a slam on Cousins, but a comment on the offensive scheme as a whole.

Cousins through 2 games has the 5th lowest depth of target of any QB. QBs below him in order: Mac Jones, Jimmy G, Matt Ryan and Andy Dalton. Last year his depth of target was 14th highest, and about 2.5 yards higher at 8.7 YPA.

His TTT has also shrunk considerably, going from 16th fastest to 3rd fastest and dropping about .5 seconds per attempt.

Cousins is also 20th in total number of deep attempts and 27th in deep throws per attempt. Last year he was 12th in both of those categories, and his rate of throwing deep has been cut nearly in half from 2020.

Generally, when a QB has a average depth of target under 7.5, the team is trying to hide something and Cousins is at 6.2 this year. A crazy low number considering how often the team has been behind and trying to catch up. Since I doubt Cousins has turned into a completely different QB than he was in 2020, I think the team is trying to hide flaws on the Oline by emphasizing short throws over trying to take the top off.

To the Vikings' coaching staffs credit, it did what they wanted it to do. The previously much maligned Oline is now being talked about like it is a bright spot for the team. Unfortunately that type of offense only works for so long before defenses adjust and you are looking at a bunch of drives that end in FGs or at the 50. So to your point, they adjusted to this quick hitting passing attack at the half against the Bengals after the Oline struggled in the first half, and had success. They then continued it into the AZ game and had success early until the defense adjusted, Cook stopped running for 10 yards a clip, and the O just slowed.

Unless the D turns things around, the Vikings will now be faced with a choice: continue this conservative approach to the offense that people claimed Zimmer has been doing all along (but wasn't), or open things up again and watch the Oline start to struggle once again.

I think they do open things up this week and the Oline takes a step back while we start to see some bigger plays downfield. It is a home game and they don't want people booing as the Vikings pick up 4 on 3rd and 8 when down 10.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Your defending of Zim is honestly quite mind boggling but regardless, you're going back to 1994. The coaching styles and overall strategies back in 1994 are so beyond different than 2021 it's not even funny. But I guess that further proves my point regarding Zim which is you have to go all the way back to 1994 to find coaches that made the same decisions he did in 2021. That's because he's coaching like it's still 1994. Zero aggressiveness, very little creativity and wrinkles. Watch the Rams playcalling for a game start to finish. That's the definition of a coach thats aggressive, takes chances and keeps teams on their heels.

Let me check 2010 on...yep, no examples of a team winning by doing something different in those spots. You know, since they were already included in the results I posted above and there were no examples.

And there's not a soul on earth that can tell me that if Sean McVay was coaching this team and we had Arizona's defense on their heels, with 41 seconds to go, 1 timeout and on the 18 yard line, he wouldnt be pushing for more yards. You know it and I know that he would've kept pushing and not settle. Mike Zimmer did exactly what a conservative 1994 coach would do. That's why you have to go back to 1994 to find coaches that made these types of decisions.

That wasn't one of the plays in the OP...

For that scenario, there isn't a single coach who has called a passing play on 1st, 2nd or 3rd down since 2010 and only 1 team passed in that spot since 1994 and that was to spike the ball.

Every team either ran the ball to kill the clock, took a knee, or kicked a FG. Every. Single. One.

I'd love to see your source and the parameters of how you're going about finding this. Because I honestly dont know how one could find a statistic like this in this exact scenario so please provide.