What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

TE - Blocking Statistics (1 Viewer)

I was in the pool

Footballguy
There has been some discussion about tight ends that aren't the best blockers or that don't block very often when they are on the field recently here in the shark pool.

Part of my very large spreadsheet on each position has statistics about how tight ends are used. One stat I like is Routes/Snap, basically does the player run a route or block on a particular play. Here are some highlights at the tight end position in that category (for reference sake, not all the tight ends in the NFL are used in terms of ranking a particular statistic, mainly just the fantasy-relevant ones in a deep league, so tight ends go about 30 deep in general):

Routes/Snap (the reverse would be blocking %) of TEs in 2010:

#1-Winslow - 71%

#2-Tamme

#3-Keller

#4-Gates

#5-Hernandez - 62%

In the top 5 I was surprised that Gates was that high (especially above Hernandez, who is thought of as a non-blocker in the shark pool from what I can gather).

Another interesting note: Tamme was 2nd at 67%, but Clark, whom he replaced, is all the way at 13th, 52%.

Gronkowski is all the way down at 27th, 34%. If anything, I think it says that he is a glorified 6th O-lineman that can catch on occasion. He is below guys like Pettigrew (another glorified O-lineman) and Heath Miller by wide margins (almost 20% each).

I think it's easier to think that a receiving talent at TE can find ways to be effective blocking (crack-backs, 2nd level blocks, etc.) than a blocking guy can turn into a big-time receiving threat on a consistent basis on 3rd downs, etc.

One other stat I like in terms of tight ends is Gold Zone (inside the 10) target%. Basically what percent of the team's total receiving targets that player gets. Not many TEs break long catch/runs for scores, so the meat and potatoes of their chances are inside the 10. It also shows what the pecking order is for them in terms of other GZ targets on the team.

Here are a few highlights:

#1 - Gresham - 40%

#2 - V.Davis

#3 - Keller

#4 - T.Gonzalez

#5 - M.Lewis

Gronkowski - thought of as a huge GZ guy is 16th at 20%. Hernandez (thought of as little GZ value because of Gronkowski's GZ prowess), not far behind at 15%. A difference of 1 total GZ target on the entire season.

Also, you have to think that Gresham's # falls with AJ "jump out of the stadium" Green in the mix in CIN. If Braylon leaves, Keller could actually rise. Gonzalez could be hurt with Jones. Lewis has no other threats on the roster at this time in the GZ.

 
How were you able to accumulate data on all the TEs' # of snaps, and whether they ran a route or stayed and blocked?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
They have a variety of packages. Fantasy football is my hobby. Some spend money on booze on a friday night, I invest money in my hobby that turns a profit each season.

 
fcdtrumpet, could you separate TE's snaps into 3 categories: routes, pass-blocking, and run-blocking? If a TE has a lot of run-blocking snaps I see that as a good thing - it means that he's on the field in running situations/formations, which means that he'll be on the field when they pass in those situations. You have to be on the field to get the ball. If a TE has a lot of pass-blocking snaps I see that as a bad thing - it means that they're using him as an extra blocker instead of sending him out on routes, and you have to go out on a route to get the ball.

If Gronkowski has a low route per snap because the Patriots are keeping him in to block on a lot of their passing plays then that is something to worry about. But if he mostly goes out on routes when they pass, but is also on the field for a lot of running plays, then that's not so worrying.

 
I think I could, but I also don't know about how much disclosing of stats from PFF is allowed. I will check on how far the stats are broken down tomorrow when I get a chance because I would be curious about what you suggested as well.

 
yes, they have ratings based on ability as well. I will say this...Aaron Hernandez had a higher rating for run blocking and a lot of guys...for example, Pettigrew, Dallas Clark, Celek, Boss, V.Davis, Gates - the list goes on. Best runblocking TE in 2010? Jason Witten. Gronk was #6, Hernandez #11.

 
People need to take a second to absorb this information.

I think this information is pretty deluded since it only takes into account two factors, completely ignoring volume which is just as important.

1. It makes sense that Gates would be up there, surprised to see him that high, he isnt a bad blocking TE at all its just overshadowed by him being a dominating athelete, anyway the point I havent gotten to yet. Until he got injured he was virtually the only TE in San Diego as far as snaps, on top of that he is in virtually every play, every running play he will be blocking, close to half of the passing plays he will be blocking.

2. Gronkowski. New Englands offense isnt typical, that being said he is in virtually double the snaps Hernandez has been in, with a smaller sample size Hernandez's numbers will be skewed 62% of 400 (I think this is around A. Hernandez snap count) is significantly smaller than 62% of almost 800 (which is close to Gronkowskis snap count), take into account that Hernandez is a boom bust route runner on top of half as many snaps as Gronkowski in an already incredibly spread out offense and you end up with a lot more blocking plays.

Im very curious as to where I would get this information for RBs? Im curious what utility RBs (Bush, Sproles, Woodhead, etc) blocking numbers look like compared to how many snaps they took.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
All you need to do (which I already did in my excel file) is take their rating on PFF (which is the sum of their positive and negative play quality) and divide that by the number of snaps/plays they had in that area, giving you how efficient they were in that area in relation to their peers at the position. Not all that complicated.

My point is that people throw out the notion that Hernandez can't block - well, the people at PFF that spend hours watching a single game to grade each player on each play - disagree. Hernandez was an above-average run blocker in 2010 compared to the other TEs in the NFL.

 
All you need to do (which I already did in my excel file) is take their rating on PFF (which is the sum of their positive and negative play quality) and divide that by the number of snaps/plays they had in that area, giving you how efficient they were in that area in relation to their peers at the position. Not all that complicated.

My point is that people throw out the notion that Hernandez can't block - well, the people at PFF that spend hours watching a single game to grade each player on each play - disagree. Hernandez was an above-average run blocker in 2010 compared to the other TEs in the NFL.
Im not disagreeing with your numbers, im saying they dont take into account volume. Also, the bolded section, im curious what constitutes a positive or negative play quality? Just above or below the average?
 
There are paragraphs of info. on PFF site about how they grade and what they grade on different types of plays. I would read that first. Also, accounting for what they scored in a particular category (by the way, there is quite a separate even in the top 10 of a position typically) by dividing by the number of plays of that type gives you the "score" you are looking for I believe.

 
Actually Gates is pretty pathetic at blocking for his size. Its widely known he isnt used much as a blocker. I'm surprised he isnt at the top of the list. I guess they have to protect Winslow's knee. Winslow is a good blocker but has to play sparingly. The Colts are a uniquely talented passing no huddle team with maybe the greatest QB ever and they've had too many receiver injuries. So its understandable how often they've used Clarke and Tamme as wideouts. Nothing surprising here IMO.

 
People need to take a second to absorb this information.I think this information is pretty deluded since it only takes into account two factors, completely ignoring volume which is just as important.1. It makes sense that Gates would be up there, surprised to see him that high, he isnt a bad blocking TE at all its just overshadowed by him being a dominating athelete, anyway the point I havent gotten to yet. Until he got injured he was virtually the only TE in San Diego as far as snaps, on top of that he is in virtually every play, every running play he will be blocking, close to half of the passing plays he will be blocking.2. Gronkowski. New Englands offense isnt typical, that being said he is in virtually double the snaps Hernandez has been in, with a smaller sample size Hernandez's numbers will be skewed 62% of 400 (I think this is around A. Hernandez snap count) is significantly smaller than 62% of almost 800 (which is close to Gronkowskis snap count), take into account that Hernandez is a boom bust route runner on top of half as many snaps as Gronkowski in an already incredibly spread out offense and you end up with a lot more blocking plays.Im very curious as to where I would get this information for RBs? Im curious what utility RBs (Bush, Sproles, Woodhead, etc) blocking numbers look like compared to how many snaps they took.
Your snap count numbers are way off:Patriots TE Snap Count
Rob Gronkowski led Patriots tight ends with 756 snaps in 2010. Aaron Hernandez played 486 snaps while veteran Alge Crumpler was at 540. Although the two rookies alternated big games through the first half of the season, Gronkowski established himself as the better all-around option as the season wore on. in the final eight games of the regular season, he caught 28 passes for 398 yards with seven touchdowns. Gronkowski projects to play even more snaps in 2011. Jan 31, 11:20 AM
Gronkowski didn't have virtually double the snaps that Hernandez had, it was 55.55% more snaps, but Gronkowski also started 11 of 16 games while Hernandez only started in 7 of 14 games.Gronk is a better blocker and is asked to play almost like a sixth offensive lineman at times, taking on defensive ends and tackles. Hernandez isn't used as the same type of blocker, he is utilized more as a blocker in open space. Hernandez isn't a bad blocker when he is utilized in the right schemes, and trust me, the Patriots know how to utilize each of these players. Hernandez also doesn't need to be a punishing blocker in the same way that Gronk is for him to be effective and for him to be fantasy football relevant. I actually prefer my fantasy football TEs to be great receiving options and adequate blockers, as I don't get points for my TEs laying great blocks in my league and if they are too good at blocking, then it is a role that they will be called upon, especially if the offensive line is weak or has injury issues.
 
I'm not seeing a link in the OP

I was looking for the stats without percentages

percents skew the numbers too much. If TE A caught 20 passes on 20 routes and never blocked....how are we looking at that?

Geesh only 20?

woohoo 100%?

Wait does the D-coordinator realize it's so obviously a passing play to him now?

There have always been some burly sorta less athletic TEs and FBs that defense's are almost shocked that they got a pass thrown their way and those types probably have awesome percentages.

TEs have always been the easiest position to predict in FF for a full season. I almost want to discredit this for being useful on draft day. I mean there simply isn't much to sway you on TEs. They either have it or don't.

However, if this is a DB, please let me know. If it's a spreadsheet...grrr. See, this might be quite useful week to week in a WDIS frame of mind. I mean no one was a genius for predicting Tony G would do well for a zillion years or Gates or...BUT week to week, we all have probably become upset with a coach for keeping a TE in so often and/or feared as such when we noticed a T injury.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top