49ers QB Shaun Hill: 4th quarter rules, 3rd quarter drools!
by Fooch on Sep 24, 2009 11:00 AM PDT
in News
59 comments
Yesterday Florida Danny introduced (or re-introduced) folks to some of Football Outsiders advanced statistical metrics. He'll have some more later today as well. However, I wanted to address an issue we've all discussed, but I'll be using some basic statistics.
I'm here to maybe get some insight into Shaun Hill's notorious 3rd quarter struggles. I don't know if the advanced metrics would show this, but just looking at basic stuff, here are some of Shaun Hill's career statistics by quarter:
| Qtr | QB Rating | Comp. % | Yards | Yards/Att | TD/Int |
| 1st | 100.7 | 71.4 | 642 | 8.3 | 1/0 |
| 2nd | 85.5 | 57.4 | 703 | 7.0 | 7/4 |
| 3rd | 67.2 | 59.6 | 471 | 5.3 | 2/3 |
| 4th | 100.9 | 67.5 | 1084 | 6.9 | 9/2 |
So what is up with this? If you look by season the numbers aren't exactly the same, but the general pattern is consistent across last year and this year. This post is more meant to discuss his 3rd quarter struggles, but I suppose we could also contrast that with his success in other quarters. I could understand the boost in 4th quarter yards if the team is constantly trying to come back. However, as this shows, he's also more accurate in the 4th quarter.
This is probably something we could break down in much more detail, but let's work with what we've got for now. Any thoughts as to the disparity in performance? After all, it's great to see the 49ers playing well overall, but it's kind of depressing to go into a given quarter almost assured of a relatively poor performance from your QB.
0 recs |
59 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
All what matters is the 4th quarter. That’s why I’m a Shaun Hill believer.
I still believe in Ryan Garko...........
by 49er16 on Sep 24, 2009 11:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The other three quarters are kind of important, too.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 24, 2009 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Combined, I’ll bet they’re about three times as important.
GROUGTHINK ALERT
The first Chester Arthur fanboy ever.
by groug on Sep 24, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Synergistically speaking, that’s a bad bet.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 24, 2009 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Halftime adjustments...
…by the defense would be my guess. By the fourth quarter, we’ve adjusted to their adjustments.
by Bigmouth on Sep 24, 2009 11:14 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Halftime adjustments
are largely a myth in the NFL.
Phil Simms, in his book, says that in all his years playing, they had maybe two.
Dirk Koetter, the OC in Jacksonville, recently said the same thing.
Said that in the NFL you have to adjust after each posession. Halftime is only 12 minutes long. Barely enough time to get a drink of water.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe that adjustments are made throughout the game on a rolling basis, but I don’t believe that halftime is somehow exempt from that period.
The adjustment process might not be any different at halftime as it is mid-quarter, but it’s still essentially “between possessions” and changes, however minor, are being made.
So I wouldn’t say it’s a myth. I would say that it’s vastly overstated.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 24, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Halftime is longer...
…so more adjustments should logically be possible.
by Bigmouth on Sep 24, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's a nice quote...
…from Jeff Tedford that makes the point well:
“To get the whole defensive staff together and draw it up and talk it through is more conducive to do it at halftime. I know some of the guys (defensive line coach Ken Delgado and linebackers coach Justin Wilcox) were on the sidelines trying to communicate with (defensive coordinator Bob Gregory) about what needed to be done. It really just solidified it to take 10 minutes in the locker room at halftime and talk it through. I’m sure that the players understood it all coming from one voice. Once that happened, we were much more efficient at defending the option.”
by Bigmouth on Sep 24, 2009 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tedford is a college coach.
Koetter used to be a college coach.
Now that he’s in the NFL, he made that statement in last weeks Arizona Republic (about barely having time to get a drink of water).
Again, perhaps you know more.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Koetter's Quote in last week's AZ. Republic
He’s enjoying the NFL and the battle of wits between coaches and players. In college, Koetter said, it might take until halftime for a defense to adjust. In the NFL, things change from possession to possession. Forget waiting until halftime, because it lasts only 12 minutes anyway.
“You barely have time to get a drink of water,” Koetter said.
NOTICE how he makes a distinction between the college game and the NFL.
http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/articles/2009/09/17/20090917spt-cardskoetter.html
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You seem to take disagreement...
…very personally. In fairness, I did ask : " Do you have some reason to think college coaches make more adjustments at halftime? If so, why?"
by Bigmouth on Sep 24, 2009 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just telling you what a Pro Bowl QB
who’s been in the game as a player and broadcaster for a quarter century and an NFL OC said last week.
Do with it what you will.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, overstated
Strategy is continually evolving throughout the game. Halftime is probably the best time for attitude adjustments, so to speak.
by barleyfreak on Sep 24, 2009 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting that...
…both of your examples are offensive when I’m talking about defense. Regardless, a simple google search confirms your claim is exaggerated. My guess is that Simms and Koetter were being deliberately hyperbolic, and you were foolish enough to take them literally.
PS: I noticed you qualified what you said with “in the NFL.” Do you have some reason to think college coaches make more adjustments at halftime? If so, why?
by Bigmouth on Sep 24, 2009 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL (Google search)?
How’s this. READ Simms’s book (Sunday Morning Quarterback).
He wasn’t being ‘hyperbolic.’ He was being serious.
But YOU know more, right? I mean, you’ve spent almost as mjuch time in NFL locker rooms as Simms, right?
Hysterical.
(Some of you people KILL me). Really.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You really don’t have to use such an insulting tone all the time. People would probably give you less of a hard time and discuss things with you more seriously if you wouldn’t be so unbelievably condescending so often.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 24, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
It's insulting to ME
when I post comments from ex-players and current coaches . . . and people come out of the woodwork to challenge it.
I mean, I clearly said that it wasn’t MY opinion, but that of Simms and Koetter.
See HTS, there was no DISCUSSION. Just people who really don’t know what they are talking about challenging NFL guys like Simms and Koetter.
Too funny.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Regarding the Simms book
An in-depth and surprising look at the game, Sunday Morning Quarterback will dramatically change the way you watch football.
You’ve heard all the football clichés: “Their offense is too predictable,” or “They’ve got to win the turnover battle,” or “They didn’t make any halftime adjustments.” Perhaps you’ve heard them so often that you’ve come to see them as obvious truths. Phil Simms, after an illustrious career as a Super Bowl–winning quarterback and a broadcaster, is here to tell you that these — and many other blanket statements taken as gospel — are all myths, and whoever says them has no idea of what they’re talking about.
Notice this: They didn’t make any halftime adjustments" are all myths, and whoever says them has no idea of what they’re talking about.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The thing is that you said, in your own words “halftime adjustments are largely a myth in the NFL.” That is your stated opinion. You then used Simms and Koetler as evidence to support your claim. You’re trying to distance yourself now from the claim itself, saying that you only stated the opinions of others, but there’s really no distance to be gained.
And again, your tone comes off as arrogant and condescending, which makes it difficult for anybody to respond calmly and / or rationally to you.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 24, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
That's your usual response HTS
Bogus as USUAL!
When I said (in my first post): Halftime adjustments are largely a myth in the NFL
I WASN’T speaking from PERSONAL experience. Is that what you thought I meant? (LOL). I mean, I admit. I’ve NEVER been in an NFL locker room at halftime. Have youuuuuuuu?
That wasn’t MY opinion. That was the OPINION of guys like Simms and Koetter.
I kinda figured that that would be self evident. Sheesh!
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's what I read...
…from Simms in a piece from USA Today:
During his 15-year career with the Giants, the one-time Super Bowl MVP says he can’t remember two halftime adjustments. It baffles him that such analysis is prominent.
“I’m sure we made some,” Simms wrote. “All teams make some. But they’re just never as significant as everyone paints them out to be on TV, such as blocking changes or pass-pattern changes or something drastic that’s going to happen in the second half.”
The “adjustments,” Simms noted, generally constituted tossing out plays that were not working and trying other plays that were already in the game plan. In some cases, a subtle switch might have come in running a play to the right side of the line as opposed to the left.
“I just cannot recall making all those major changes whenever we played better in the second half,” Simms wrote. “Either that or maybe I got hit too many times in the head to remember.”
I haven’t read the book, but I get the clear sense he’s joking about literally making “two” adjustments at halftime his whole career. I also note that what he says is perfectly consistent with my explanation of fooch’s thesis. Teams have a little more time to adjust to Hill during halftime, so his third quarter numbers dip. BUT THINGS RETURN TO NORMAL IN THE FOURTH QUARTER, meaning there’s no decisive shift in the second half overall. Whatever success defenses have against Hill is eventually neutralized by OUR OWN adjustments on the fly.
by Bigmouth on Sep 24, 2009 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For some reason...
…the block quote function didn’t work correctly in my last post.
by Bigmouth on Sep 24, 2009 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Notice how Simms admits...
…"I’m sure we made some," Simms wrote. "All teams make some. But they’re just never as significant as everyone paints them out to be on TV, such as blocking changes or pass-pattern changes or something drastic that’s going to happen in the second half."
Again, completely consistent with the data suggesting a temporary dip in the third quarter, but with no “drastic” effect on the second half overall.
by Bigmouth on Sep 24, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody said NONE were made
Some is a far cry from (again) people that think it’s a major part of the game.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reading the two statements
the Bigmouth quote reads like Simms’ statement and is different than the original quote which reads like book jacket copy which is written by the publisher.
by Salty on Sep 24, 2009 7:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's an IDEA
Read the book! Learn something.
Beyond everything else, Simms tells a great story about when Walsh worked him out twice at Morehead.
About how Walsh told him to do something that NO coach ever told him before (or since).
Read. Listen. LEARN!
People KILL me. Nobody here (including myself) has EVER been in an NFL locker room at halftime.
And yet we all repeat the same thing about halftime adjustments. And here’s a starting QB (who incidentally holds the SB record for completition percentage – 88%). It’s not like he’s a back-up or something.
If there were all these ‘halftime adjustments’ I’m pretty sure he’d be the first to know. And yet, he says they almost never happen.
Dirk Koetter says pretty much the same thing.
But you guys want to argue it.
Too funny.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 7:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure not arguing with anyone
So far there have been two versions of Simms opinion and they aren’t all that similar. It sounded to me like one might be the publisher’s copy.
When players and coaches, who have been in NFL lockerrooms, talk about halftime adjustments do you think they’re lying?
by Salty on Sep 24, 2009 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's just it.
I don’t think that comes from ‘players and coaches.’
I think it’s just what he says it is: A cliche. Something that’s taken on a life of it’s own.
Again, nobody is saying that they never happen. It’s just this ‘common’ perception (that teams retreat at halftime to make all these adjustments) is largely false, if you go by a former starting QB and current broadcaster, and a current NFL OC.
Go to the library and check out the book. It’s free and very revealing.
See, the only way we really know what’s going on is by the players and coaches (who actually know what’s going on).
An example: Last week, Calais Campbell of the Cardinals blocked a FG that Antrel Rolle returned for a TD in Jacksonville.
Great call by the special teams coach? Not exactly. Every Monday morning, special teams coach Kevin Spencer does a radio interview.
Who did he credit for the play? D-Lineman Gabe Watson. He said Watson made a suggestion on the sideline before the play happened that made it happen.
Campbell made a great play. Rolle made a great play. According to the coach, however, the guy that made it all happen was Gabe Watson.
NOBODY, sitting at home or in the stands, would know that without Spencer laying it out.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 7:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Read this from the Viking site:
There have been occasions in the past when fans have ripped Brad Childress for not seeming to make smart adjustments at halftime.
They will not be able to level that criticism against Chilly today, however, after the Vikings recovered from a sluggish first half to torch the Browns, ultimately beating them 34-20.
Of course, it’s impossible for any of us to say whether the awesome second half was the result of gameplan tweaking, or just better execution.
See what happens here? More than likely, when an offense starts moving the ball batter in the second half, everybody rushes out to say ‘halftime adjustment.’
Maybe not. Maybe they’re just executing better.
Again, nobody is saying that they NEVER happen.
You just have two people (who would know) saying (Koetter) that there really isn’t time and furthermore, if you wait until halftime you’re dead, and the other (Simms) saying that in his 15 year career:
the one-time Super Bowl MVP says he can’t remember two halftime adjustments. It baffles him that such analysis is prominent
I’m sure we made some," Simms wrote. "All teams make some. But they’re just never as significant as everyone paints them out to be on TV, such as blocking changes or pass-pattern changes or something drastic that’s going to happen in the second half."
See the words PROMINENT and SIGNIFICANT?
Those are the key words here.
The casual fan has been led to believe in the prominence and significance of the halftime adjustment.
Simms is saying almost the exact opposite. While admitting that they sometimes happen, he clearly syayes that they are NOWHERE near as prominent and significant as fans are led to believe.
That’s all. Pretty simple.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I could parse the different version
and support my agrument. Clearly adjustments are made at half time as Simms admitted. You’d think the variance in the two statements would soften your bluster.
by Salty on Sep 24, 2009 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two, twelve, twenty . . .
the key phrase is this:
But they’re just never as significant as everyone paints them out to be on TV, such as blocking changes or pass-pattern changes or something drastic that’s going to happen in the second half."
coupled with Koetter’s comments and it’s self evident that all these people that think that this great strategy session is going on at halftime are mistaken.
by GeoMak on Sep 24, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again...
…no one is suggesting these adjustments are decisive, just that they might explain a temporary 3rd-quarter dip in Hill’s production. This whole argument started because you cited Simm’s number of “maybe two” adjustments during his career. Obviously, that was hyperbole, which you mistook for literal truth. Just man up and admit your mistake.
by Bigmouth on Sep 25, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since they are career stats
His first playing time the past two season came when entered in the second half of losses (Minnesota in ’07, Seattle in ’08) and racked up good numbers vs softer defenses. That could partially explain the high 4th quarter numbers. But he also had excellent 4th Qs in wins over the Jets, Rams and Redskins last year and AZ this season.
Perhaps he really does get better with more reps. This would make sense for a guy that still only has 12 career starts. By the end of a game he has a rhythm and understanding of the defense. His good 1st Q stats could be partially due to scripted plays that have been practiced and thus having a better grasp of what to expect. I’d still like to see the 2nd Q improve (i.e. two minute drills before the half) and 3rd Q (set the tone for the half so we don’t need a come from behind 4th).
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Sep 24, 2009 11:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
that sounds reasonable
it would be interesting to have the stats separated into quarters while ahead and behind. It could be that the game situation affected his play.
by Salty on Sep 24, 2009 7:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely
I did notice his highest quarters for TDs were the 2nd and 4th, two quarters that are likely to have more pass plays called (if trailing in the 4th; in the 2nd you likely have a two minute drill and after trying to establish the run go more with the passing plays).
If possible, I’d like to see his 2009 stats at the bye week compared to his combined play the past two seasons. Different coordinators and philosophies but the averages may still be comparable.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Sep 25, 2009 12:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rythm....
I think the flow of the game has more to do with it. I’d like to know the average scores in each quarter as well? Maybe we weren’t letting Hill get into a rythm. Throwing a onesy twosey pass here and there vs letting him throw 15 times like in our AZ comeback. Just a thought. does Hill get better the more he throws or worse? Are we passing more in first and 4th qtr vs 2nd and 3rd?
by hudd07 on Sep 24, 2009 12:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
he doesnt write the playbook
maybe the pattern of play-calling in 3rd quarters isn’t his strongest point. The niners have spent a majority of 3rd quarters in recent years trying to catch up. This makes it easier for the defense to que in on what kind of plays they might be calling. Until Hill really plays consistently for about 3 years, you can’t really blame this stat on his ability. I think its a result of the halftime score determining what has to be done in the 3rd, and an urgency to get the ball to the endzone faster to play catch-up. I hope to see the NIners with alot of 2nd half leads this year, which could mean a 3rd quarter of Frank Gore running it down team’s throats. GO NINERS!!
by w J on Sep 24, 2009 12:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It would be interesting to see
how other QBs compare to Hill in this regard. Is this just a Shaun Hill thing, or is this maybe just a general QB pattern that isn’t well known.
by Sebaz49 on Sep 24, 2009 12:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Statistical Pool
is way too shallow. Need to look at a QB with some significant games under his belt before it is even worthwhile to discuss. Or take his winning percentage; .75%. Only Brady is better lifetime. Guess we need to hold off some of our salary cap for the new big contract…
by dartdart on Sep 24, 2009 2:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Winning Percentage
75%, not .75%… Brady is 77%, Montana is 71%, Staubach is 74%. Shaun Hill is not these guys (shower him with good luck this sunday regardless).
by dartdart on Sep 24, 2009 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A fair point...
…regarding sample size but a QB has more control over his own performance than that of the team, no?
by Bigmouth on Sep 24, 2009 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lasagna
I always thought that Hill looks like he needed a nap 3rd quarter, like he just ate a bunch of lasagna or something and was all tired. However, he’s pretty good at pulling a 4th quarter comeback out of his magic sack, and that makes for some damn entertaining (and heart stopping) football.
by Chumley223 on Sep 24, 2009 2:46 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
God, I love lasagna.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 24, 2009 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, not me specifically. I like it, sure. It’s tasty. I’m actually making fun of Tommy Lasorda. Can’t post the picture though because language.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 24, 2009 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
take these numbers w/ a grain of salt
it’s tough to have ‘baseball-like’ statistical analysis in football. sample sizes are frequently too small. and many statistics depend greatly on the performance of other players (on his team, as well as, the other team)
this has probably already been said…too lazy to read everything
by swerv on Sep 24, 2009 5:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
it's because Hill is a GAMER!
If he wasn’t his third quarter and fourth quarter stats would flip-flop and flip-flopping leads to swiftboating and swiftboating is a fast ticket to obscurity.
Or to put it another way Mike Krukow must love him some Hill.
Pablo's not fat. He's just got body.
by LeMasterBlaster on Sep 24, 2009 6:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Actually the numbers were even worse
1)They displayed this graphic during a broadcast of a game late in the year. It was a much bigger disparity.
2)Therefore, it seems Hill has already overcome this hurdle.
3)Don’t forget Martz
by goatfather on Sep 24, 2009 6:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think what the stats suggest is that Hill is a lesser talented QB who in the 3rd quarter struggles as lesser quality QB’s do. However Hill is a winner and in the 4th quarter he & the team find a way.
I have played many sports at many levels (usually with a fair degree of ineptitude – I am sure a lot of us have), I have watched a lot of sports at a lot of levels too (ditto) and do you not think there is something in – a team plays to the level of the opposition and a winning teams finds a way to get it done.
Personally I see this wonderful sport as the greatest viewing of this thing, the fourth quarter ability to come back or hold out for the win.
I am not saying Hill is clutch but in his small set of stats, he and the 9ers win. Strong 4th quarter stats show he’s getting it done, I mean what are the stats for the other QB’s who have played with this team while Hill has sat?
by DaveintheUK on Sep 25, 2009 1:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think it is a function of play calling
In the first two games this year, when the game has gotten to a point where we NEED him to pass, the offense has responded. I’m excited to watch the game this Sunday, I think the offense is going to take another step forward.
They're called RUNS for a reason.
by connie mack on Sep 25, 2009 1:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
All I can say is that, even though Hill’s proved he can do it in the 4th quarter, I always think each game that we’re not going to convert those 3rd and 7s or 3rd and 8s that we constantly get over and over again.
But somehow, I always seem to remember Hill systemically getting what we need each 3rd down – at least he’s much better at it in the 4th quarter than he is in the 3rd quarter.
I think it’s a conspiracy to get the maximum allocation of stress/suspense during any given game.
"Those boos really motivate me to make something happen." - Bonds
by Persiflage on Sep 26, 2009 10:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Niners Nation
Related FanShots on Niners Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
