49ers-Cardinals Statistical Preview: Laying the Foundation

by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Nov 7, 2008 3:00 AM PST in 49ers Statistical Preview and Review

This week's 49er opponent is the Arizona Cardinals, and-news flash-these are NOT your father's St. Louis/Phoenix/Arizona Cardinals. The unimpressive history of the Cardinals franchise can be summed up in two woeful coaching statistics: Don Coryell (1973-1977) holds the franchise record for wins with a mere 42, and the Cardinals have had only one winning regular season since his tenure ended. In comparison, the 49ers have had 19 winning seasons over the past 32 years, and have had 3 separate coaches win over 42 regular season games during that time (Walsh - 92, Seifert - 98, Mariucci - 57).

New Cardinals head coach Ken Wisenhunt seems poised to make a run at Coryell. Over the past two seasons, he's led the Cardinals to a 13-11 record, and, if nothing else, has awakened the franchise out of its decades-long hibernation. Although one might argue that an influx of talent has had as much to do with the Cardinals' resurgence as has Wisenhunt, this week's 49ers-Cardinals statistical preview will prove otherwise. Why am I going to focus on coaching yet again this week? It turns out that the Cardinals' house under Wisenhunt in 2007-2008 was built upon a foundation laid by Dennis Green from 2004-2006. One coach takes over a franchise in disarray, and lays the foundation for winning; his successor actually starts winning games. Perhaps there's a lesson here for our beloved 49ers?

SCOTTY, CAN YOU HEAR ME?

Below is a graph charting the Cardinals' overall team efficiency (DVOA) rankings from 2003-2008:

After the jump, I'll tell you the hidden meaning of this graph, which provides a Cardinals-based clue about why the 49ers can't get over the hump. Also, I'll go over the relevant stats for this week's game, give you 3 bellwether game situations to focus on, and, of course, pretend I'm Nostradamus...

As is obvious in this graph, the Cardinals have shown steady overall statistical improvement for the past 5 seasons, starting during Green's tenure and continuing into the Wisenhunt era. In other words, the Cardinals' rebirth actually started when Green was hired in 2004. What's less obvious in the graph is that, while Green was in Arizona, the Cardinals' offensive and defensive units improved simultaneously only during his first season as head coach. This is shown by the trajectories of the green line and the red line. Except for when he took over the worst team in the league (2003-2004), the two lines went in opposite directions throughout Green's stay with the club. Contrast this with Wisenhunt's tenure thus far. As the graph shows, Arizona has improved each season on both offense and defense simultaneously. Perhaps these differences explain why the Cardinals under Green were the perennial "sleeper" pick that couldn't quite get over the hump, while Wisenhunt's teams seem to have gotten over said hump. This, my friends, is what it looks like when one coach lays the foundation, and his successor builds the house.

Now, let's compare this analysis to the 49ers' current situation. Actually, I don't need to present any more fancy graphs because we all know that the parallels are obvious. Nolan took over the worst team in the league in 2005, and increased its win total for two seasons thanks to a simultaneous improvement in offense and defense. Over the past two seasons, however, in which the 49ers were a popular "sleeper" pick, the offense sucked while the defense improved (2007), and the defense sucked while the offense improved (2008). Nolan was fired because his 49ers couldn't quite get over the hump, but he laid the foundation of improvement for his successor (whoever that might end up being). Hopefully, the 49ers learn the same lesson that the Cardinals did, and they hire a coach that can get the two units moving in the same direction. Scotty, can you hear me?

49ERS-CARDINALS DVOA MATCHUP

Here's how the 49ers stack up against the Cardinals in terms of DVOA:

Team	Total DVOA	Rank	Offense	Rank	Defense	Rank	Special Teams	Rank
SF	-15.5%	26	-17.3%	30	1.2%	15	3.1%	5
ARI	21.1%	4	22.6%	2	1.1%	14	-0.5%	21

On the whole, it doesn't look like a very good matchup for the 49ers. They're 36.6% less efficient overall than the 4^th-ranked Cardinals, which is slightly less than their previous disadvantages against the Giants and Eagles. We all know how those games went (By the way, you did read that right: The Arizona Cardinals are the 4^th most efficient team in the NFL). In terms of the three team units, the 49ers are better than average only when matched up against the Cardinals' special teams (+3.6%). Against the Cardinals' defense, the 49ers' offense is expected to perform 16.2% worse than an average NFL team. Against the Cardinals' offense, the 49ers' defense is expected to perform 23.8% worse than an average NFL team.

THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS

In my last statistical preview, I listed a plethora of game situations in which the 49ers and Seahawks played strength vs. weakness, strength vs. strength, or weakness vs. weakness. Looking back at it, even a stats guy like me started getting a little dizzy with all the numbers. Therefore, starting this week, I'm only going to focus your attention on the situations that involve strength (DVOA ranks 1-8) vs. weakness (DVOA ranks 25-32), which I'll call SVW for short (Hey, isn't that a Law and Order spinoff?). Aside from the matchup I already listed above (total DVOA), there are 3 SVWs to focus on during this week's 49ers-Cardinals Monday night matchup:

Situation	SF Rank	ARI Rank
SF OFFENSE vs. ARI DEFENSE DURING THE FIRST HALF	30	7
SF OFFENSE vs. ARI DEFENSE ON 2^ND AND LONG	29	7
SF DEFENSE vs. ARI OFFENSE ON 3^RD AND LONG	27	4

Again, this matchup doesn't look all that promising. The Cardinals aren't weak in any situations where the 49ers are strong. Uh oh. Well, I guess, on the flip side, there are only 3 SVWs in favor of the Cardinals. In any event, if the 49ers are going to keep this game close, they must perform better than expected in these 3 situations. Otherwise, this one might be over by halftime.

"WITH HIGH HOPE FOR THE FUTURE, NO PREDICTION IS VENTURED." - ABRAHAM LINCOLN

Given the statistical matchup between the 49ers and the Cardinals, but taking into account the fact that the 49ers will not be starting a turnover machine at quarterback, here's my prediction for this week's game:

San Francisco 49ers		17

Arizona Cardinals	31

**DVOA statistics used to produce this article were obtained from Football Outsiders.

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Um, buy low, sell high?

Great stuff, FD. I like the comparisons.

Under Dennis Green, the Cardinals were “undefeated in the offseason”, having good drafts, FA signings, and productive OTAs. Then the season rolled around and it was, well, “same ’ol Cardinals”. The defensive wanings were generally given the “finger of blame” to Clancy Pendergast for not adapting his schemes after the initial splash of success in ’04. Yet Clancy is still the DC and things have improved under Whisenhunt. Hmmmm.

You’re metaphor for one coach laying the foundation and the next to build the house is interesting, as it’s hard to know when the foundation is set. I suspect that many in the Niner Nation felt that Nolan was done with the foundation last year and it was time to build the house this season; yet Nolan was kept around and got himself stuck in the setting concrete. So a subcontractor (Singletary) is brought in to see if he can start framing or if the foundation can be repaired. Clearly, he thinks he can repair it with the benching of JTO among others. Will he muck up the work already done or can the Niners starting building the house? Sadly, not much is going to be built this season at this rate; at least the Niners are assured of getting a Top 10 carpenter in next year’s draft.

Best of luck folks, I wish your team well starting Tuesday. If you can find it in your hearts, give a hoot and cheer for the Cards the remainder of the season so that the NFC West can represent well in the second season.

We all leave footprints in the sands of time, just watch out for the discarded fish hooks!

by Hawkwind on Nov 7, 2008 6:20 AM PST reply actions

Fooch

Where’d you get the situational DVOA rankings. I’ve hunted around on Football Outsiders plenty of times but I’ve never seen DVOA broken down by situations before. Is that the premium subscriber content?

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Nov 7, 2008 9:42 AM PST reply actions

my bad, Florida Danny

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Nov 7, 2008 9:42 AM PST up reply actions

premium content

I believe it is. I have a password to that and it’s absolutely amazing. It’s $40 (I’d imagine for a year-long subscription), but it’s totally worth it. They have situational stuff and historical stuff. I’d recommend it if you can get it.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by David Fucillo on Nov 7, 2008 9:56 AM PST up reply actions

I'll have to look into that, $40 a year would be good deal

Is it as detailed as PFP, such as ranking for individual CBs?

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Nov 7, 2008 12:16 PM PST up reply actions

PFP?

Is PFP Pro Football Prospectus? The database is team-based, as opposed to looking at individual players. So it does rank teams in numerous categories, but not individual players. For example you could rank every team by their offensive (or defensive) DVOA in goal to go situations going all the way back to 1995.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by David Fucillo on Nov 7, 2008 12:47 PM PST up reply actions

no individual rankings...

…though they’re planning on adding that at some point in the future.

here’s a list of the team DVOA stats you get in addition to the total, offense, defense, and special teams stats that are available without a premium membership. their stats go back to the 1995 season. all offensive and defensive stats include a passing and rushing breakdown.

1) total, offense, defense, special teams for each game
2) total, offense, defense, special teams
3) offense, defense by down and distance
4) offense, defense by down and play type
5) offense, defense by field zone
6) offense, defense by quarter and half of game
7) offense, defense by home and road
8) offense, defense by score gap
9) offense, defense by half of season
10) head-to-head matchup breakdown (all of the above) for each game of the current season

you also get access to their game picks (straight up, against the spread, and over/under), which have been reasonably accurate.

by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Nov 7, 2008 1:03 PM PST up reply actions

very cool, thanks guys

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Nov 7, 2008 1:10 PM PST up reply actions

that #2...

…was so supposed to have “for each season” at the end of it. glad we could help.

by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Nov 7, 2008 1:29 PM PST up reply actions

yeah...

…premium content.

by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Nov 7, 2008 10:16 AM PST up reply actions

Laying the Foundation?

I don’t think you can say Mike Nolan laid the foundation for the (possible future) success of the 49ers. Anyone one who inherits one of the worst teams in football is almost certain to show some improvement over the next few years. But the improvement the 49ers showed was very, very modest. If any foundation was laid, it was one of being a consistent basement dweller.

In 2004 they were ranked 32nd in DVOA and when Nolan took over in 2005 they stayed ranked 32nd. Their overall efficiency actually went down (pretty hard for a team already the worst in the league). You can blame it on Alex Smith if you want but that doesn’t explain why their defense remained terrible (ranked 31).

In 2006 they improved, but that was mostly offensive improvement that can be attributed to Norv Turner (look at what happened after he left with the same players….and look at SD now). Their defense was ranked 30.

In 2007, again the 49ers were 32nd. Mostly this is due to the horrendous offense, but look where the defense ranks….28. Not really much of an improvement (although their actually efficiency improved more than a 2 spot jump in ranking would indicate).

This year their has been some improvement, especially to the defense. But honestly are we going to say Nolan laid the foundation for our team based on 2.5 seasons of terrible offense (with one decent season due to Turner) and 3 years of terrible defense (with a decent 1/2 season)? i don’t think Singletary is the answer, but I think we can agree that Nolan was never going to be

by fredfotch on Nov 7, 2008 12:42 PM PST reply actions

good points but...

…a major aspect of my argument here is that nolan, like green couldn’t get both units improving at the same time, and that this inability led to a team that consistently underperformed their expectations. total dvoa tends to reflect offensive dvoa than anything else, so it’s not surprising that the 32-27-32-26 total rankings have mirrored the 32-22-32-30 offensive rankings. the same is evident in the cards’ total/offensive rankings in my graph. you failed to cite that, analogous to the offensive-minded green steadily improving the cards’ offense (30-23-21), defensive-minded nolan steadily impoved the 49ers’ defense (31-28-28-15). there just wasn’t an improvement in total dvoa because it tends to follow offensive dvoa.

all i’m saying is that improving one side of the ball (at which the coach is an expert) is not enough to get over the hump. when both sides are moving in opposite directions, the team underperforms expectation. when both sides are improving simultaneously, the wins show up. that is what wisenhunt has accomplished, and that’s what i hope a new 49ers coach (singletary or otherwise) will accomplish.

obviously, my argument is based on an unbelievably small sample, and there’s definitely a measure of subjectivity in the conclusion. nevertheless, i could give you a whole host of reasons for why this opposite-direction phenomenon might lead to underachieving in the win column, but that’s another post entirely.

by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Nov 7, 2008 1:28 PM PST up reply actions

I guess we disagree on the defense

I wouldn’t say a 31-28-28-15 ranking in the defense is a steady improvement. I would call it three bad years followed by a decent 7 games. I think 7 games is not enough to show that the defense was headed in the right direction under Nolan. We agree that a team needs to improve on both sides of the ball to get over the hump. But as of right now I don’t think the 49ers are at the point where we are trying to get over the hump. I think we are more at the point where we are trying to get to the hump. Although, I have to say I think Hill is going to help the offense improve by himself because he won’t be making as many turnovers which is what has been killing the offense this season.

My sports blog

by fredfotch on Nov 7, 2008 2:05 PM PST up reply actions

yeah, i agree...

…that 31-28-28-15 doesn’t seem like steady improvement, and that 7 games isn’t a lot. i would just make the point that we kind of have to put the 2005 team that nolan/mcloughan inherited into perspective. according to football outsiders, the 49ers team dvoa for the 2004 season was -46.5, which is the 2nd-worst team dvoa ever recorded. more importantly, their defensive dvoa for 2004 was +22.9, which was the 4th-worst ever recorded. it’s true that nolan’s 2005 team was actually the worst ever (-56.6), but they basically cleaned out the roster, so a dip in total dvoa after 2004, although legendary, was expected. most relevant though is that the 2005 defense actually improved over the 2004 defense, from +22.9 to +18.0, despite the team getting worse overall. also, although nolan’s defensive rankings were 31-28-28-15, the actual defensive dvoa’s did increase every year, from +22.9 in 2004 to +18.0% in 2005 to +12.1% in 2006 to +11.5% in 2007 to +1.2% in 2008.

so my point still holds…nolan steadily improved the defense, but the offense has been all over the place. when they got better (2006), the 49ers increased their win total from 4 to 7. green had the same problem, but in the converse: steady offensive improvement, defensive erraticness.

one last thing just for kicks. the worst d of all time was the 2000 vikings. their head coach? dennis green. the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.

thanks for the lively discussion.

by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Nov 7, 2008 3:11 PM PST up reply actions

Foundation.

I can’t say this with 100% confidence or anything like that, but I do feel like he set some foundation work down for the future. First and foremost, he showed the Yorks how a front office should be run (in terms of heirarchy, and what kind of people go there). I’m not saying the people that are there right now are the people who should stay there, but he showed the Yorks that owners should strive to be hands-off in the entire process. That is a VERY important repair that he made in his time here.

Secondly, the McCloughan/Nolan era has seen the hell that was once known as the 49ers salary cap situation completely disappear. The 49ers now have extra cap money and continuously push money onto next year’s cap. That didn’t exist during the previous eras. This is important because the team is always a player in terms of free agent signings, signing top picks (hope there aren’t too many more) and most importantly, retaining your own stars.

While the on-the-field product has definitely left a lot to be desired, it can be argued that the foundation for a good team is there. There are key players at key positions (just not at all the key positions). The team also lacks key support characters, but that will come as time goes. I’m not saying Nolan was a success by any means, but he DID accomplish some good with this team as a whole and it’s wrong to say that he hadn’t.

by sfgfan on Nov 7, 2008 2:09 PM PST up reply actions