I don’t have a big overarching theme to discuss this week, or concept that’s gnawing at me, other than what I wrote about last week. Last night, I tweeted about Ezekiel Elliott looking bad in a game where he was posting a very productive box score, and it got more of a negative response than anything I’ve tweeted in a while. Several people were quick to inform me his stats last night were, in fact, good, and the most common response I got was some version of “Why would you criticize him on this night?” which if you read last week’s intros, you’ll recognize the humor in that.
There is a very strong pull to never comment against the most recent results, which as I wrote last week are a huge driver in determining the current narrative on any player. And the response I got was a great exercise in these narratives and why groupthink exists. If I had to think of other times I’ve evoked similarly emotional responses, it would probably be the opposite, where I passionately defend a player who wasn’t performing, like a Kyle Pitts or D.J. Moore this year. Of course it makes sense conceptually that “productive player good, unproductive player bad” isn’t the extent of it, but once you apply specific names to it, it gets complicated. My opinion of those players is biased, and yet I’ve had several similarly biased opinions shift in the direction I expected and then we just move on, because I’m not going to sit here and make a huge deal of it.
So what are situations where we can comment against the box score? I would argue Zeke last night was a pretty perfect application of this. I can absolutely acknowledge Zeke looked better than he usually does, and even brings stuff to the table! But I genuinely think a lot of his production last night was what was there, or was a result of him being a physical, straight-line runner at this stage of his career. My point was not that Tony Pollard should be getting those inside carries; it was simply that the skill set Zeke offers at this point is pretty replaceable by other guys, including ones on practice squads and even in free agency. Even his 14-yard touchdown run, when watched back this morning, was well blocked and saw at least one defensive back clearly overpursue, with possibly as many as three depending on your biases. Zeke did make a nice cut and outran the DBs to the pylon, but the amount of lateral movement on the play is, again, the point. That’s not how prime Zeke finished that run, and yet trying to argue the margins are thinner and that’s probably going to manifest over a larger sample of rushes is just not going to play with a lot of people.
Inevitably, it’s simply arguing against the box score that will evoke the strongest reactions. That’s definitely not how it should be — stuff changing is basically the only thing we can be sure of, and trying to identify that stuff in advance is the whole game. Commenting on what we saw is far less useful than commenting on what we might not have seen but could see next. But as with anything, there’s only so much you can do in the face of human nature. At least those who understand the farce of social media would consider my experience last night a win since it was great engagement for my Twitter profile, so I got that going for me.
Also want to real quick send another thank you to you guys about the Mariners. It’s pretty silly, but is really was awesome to get so many comments about that experience. They’re done now, which is a bummer, but getting to attend their 18-inning final game was an experience I’ll remember forever. They played tough — they lost the three games by a combined four runs and led for more of the series than the Astros, which seems like an extremely rare feat for a team that got swept — but also were probably shown to be the inferior team, not having the same depth of impact bats which was a major factor in key moments for Houston early in the series, and then also not having quite the same depth of impact arms which was probably the story of the 18-inning game where the Mariners did pitch incredible, but Houston was able to outlast them in a low-scoring environment, too. The Astros have this bullpen where they used seven relievers and basically all of them were guys who had great seasons this year.
I’m optimistic the Mariners can continue to build around a very good, young core, and can add some length to their lineup and depth to their pitching staff. At the same time, Seattle fans are well aware that isn’t to be taken for granted — the start of their 21-year postseason drought came literally the very next year after their record-tying 116-win season, which ended with a bitter ALCS loss but also an expectation we’d be back. Here’s hoping they keep improving, though, and you guys have to deal with me being distracted again next October.
Let’s get to Week 6. As we get deeper into the season, I’m not going to comment on every player or situation for every team, particularly when nothing’s changed. I keep saying I want to shorten this; the only way is to make it less comprehensive.
Data is typically courtesy of NFL fastR via the awesome Sam Hoppen, but I also pull from RotoViz apps, Pro Football Reference, PFF, RotoGrinders, Add More Funds, and I get my PROE numbers from the great Michael Leone of Establish The Run. Part 1 of Week 1 included a glossary of important statistics to know for Stealing Signals.
Keep an eye out for the audio version of Stealing Signals, found in the Substack Reader app.
Commanders 12, Bears 7
RB Snap Notes: Brian Robinson: 47% (+18 vs. Week 5 debut), J.D. McKissic: 30% (-10 vs. season low), Antonio Gibson: 26% (-6 vs. W5 low), David Montgomery: 78% (+6 vs. W5 return), Khalil Herbert: 22% (+2 vs. low)
TE Snap Notes: Cole Turner: 93% (+42 vs. W5 debut)
Key Stat: Commanders — (-12.0%) PROE (third lowest in Week 6, through Sunday)
Last week, we started Part 1 breaking down a Thursday night game with a 12-9 final score. This week, it was 12-7. The Commanders held off the Bears in yet another run-heavy game on both sides of the ball, which seems to be the case every time the Bears lace ‘em up. Chicago’s -7.3% PROE was actually a season high — meaning the closest they’ve been to neutral — but Washington’s -12.0% was a season low, and just their second game in the negative.
Brian Robinson (17-60-1) got the start and most of the early-down work, but was out there for just a few passing snaps. He did get both green zone touches. Antonio Gibson (5-35, 4-3-18) operated as something of a change-of-pace back, and ran routes on 27% of dropbacks. J.D. McKissic (2-20, no targets) was in his typical role, but ran routes on just 39% of dropbacks in a closer game that didn’t have as many obvious passing situations. It’s the three-back committee we talked about last week, and the HVTs will tell that story best each week. This week, Gibson had three, Robinson two, and McKissic none, but McKissic will certainly factor into that through his receiving profile in future weeks. We don’t want to target committees in bad offenses, and the production here is going to be highly volatile to game script.
Carson Wentz threw for just 99 yards, though he had a potential 40-yard TD strike go through the hands of Curtis Samuel (5-2-6) on a play Samuel should have made. Terry McLaurin (4-3-41) was the most productive WR, while rookie TE Cole Turner (2-2-23) saw his role expand to 89% routes and could have some usability until Logan Thomas returns.
Justin Fields threw a season-high 27 times, and ran well, including a really nice 39-yard play down to the 5-yard line late. The Bears would fail to score on four straight plays from there, with Darnell Mooney (12-7-68) bobbling what was something of a jump ball on fourth down. The ball hit him in the hands as he was in the air and across the goal line, but he didn’t control it until he was back outside the end zone, and it was ruled a catch down to the 1-yard line that was a game-ending turnover on downs. It was a tough play certainly, and Mooney’s 1.01 WOPR in this game gave him four straight games as the clear lead in receiving volume. The problem remains trusting the Bears to have enough overall passing volume for that to consistently matter.
Dante Pettis (7-4-84-1) hit for a 40-yard touchdown and posted the best receiving day of the group, but it’s not like his role has expanded at all — he ran routes on 71% of dropbacks, but has been in the 55%-75% three other times already this year. Cole Kmet (3-1-15) continued to run a lot of unproductive routes.
David Montgomery (15-67, 1-1-13) dominated the snaps, notably running routes on 71% of dropbacks, while Khalil Herbert (7-75) hit for the big play on a really impressive 64-yard run. Chicago got down to the 1-yard line, but was eventually stuffed on downs there as well, with Herbert getting two green zone tries from the 3 and 1. Montgomery also got a green zone touch in this one on a drive that ended with an interception inside the 10 — Chicago came up empty on three separate drives that reached the green zone, but maybe their season-high 392 yards of offense will be evidence enough that throwing more was a useful concept.
Signal: Commanders — three-back committee that will be highly volatile to game script; Cole Turner — big jump to 89% routes
Noise: Khalil Herbert — two green zone touches (came after his big run, probably just riding him on that series, while David Montgomery got the other green zone touch and his overall role expanded relative to his Week 5 return)