Q1 2012 Brewers Review

2012 Packers Draft Recap

The Packers 2012 draft successfully blended a variety of strategies that seemingly perfectly fit the Packers needs for this season, even before a single draft pick takes the field wearing green and gold this year. What do I mean? They traded quantity for quality, took high ceiling players, addressed team needs and still filled in the rest of the draft with plenty of what I'd call "they did their homework" picks.

1.) Let's start with the trades. The Packers had 12 picks going into this draft, ranking 8th highest in the NFL in terms of overall pick value.  However, last year the Packers fielded the NFL's 2nd youngest team. Finding a home for 12 rookies on a very young 53-man roster that went 15-1 the previous year would be understandably difficult. So the Packers defied their usual conventions and traded up...several times.

The Packers shipped the 59th (2nd) and 123rd pick (their tradeable 4th) for the 51st pick to select Jerel Worthy. According to our draft pick value chart, they received 390 points in pick value for 359, (+31).

Later, they traded the 90th pick (3rd) and 163rd (5th) for the 62nd pick (2nd) to select Casey Hayward. There, they received 284 points in pick value while trading away 167.2 (+116.8).

On day 3, they traded the 197th (6th) and two tradeable 7ths (224 & 235) for the 163rd pick (5th) to select Terrell Manning. They received 27.2 points while giving up 18.5 points (+8.7).

According to my math, they gained 156.5 points in pick value, the equivalent of a later 3rd round pick. The Journal Sentinel estimate was very similar, although the Bub sent a different link that seemed to suggest the value was closer to even.

It's important not treat those values as gospel, but the Packers management deserves kudos for both trading quantity for quality based on obvious roster limitations AND deriving better pick value in the process.

2.) The Packers first two selections were high risk, high ceiling defensive players at positions of great need. And why not? The only way the defense could have performed any worse last season would have been to produce fewer turnovers. Thompson has displayed a knack for grabbing replacement level players from the bargain bin to play linebacker opposite of Matthews. The defensive line depth behind Pick and Raji isn't much different.

Here are the depth charts for each:

OLB:
Erik Walden (6th)
Brad Jones (7th)
Frank Zombo (UDFA)
Vic So'oto (UDFA)
Jamari Lattimore (UDFA)

DLine:
Anthony Hargrove (3rd)
Mike Neal (2nd)
CJ Wilson (7th)
Jarius Wynn (6th)
Lawrence Guy (7th)
Daniel Muir (UDFA)

Note the trash heap that started opposite of Matthews last year. Swinging for the fences with a pure athlete like Nick Perry makes sense because they already have enough young, mediocre bodies making the league minimum to provide depth. The same goes for the defensive line. Mike Neal is the only player not making the league minimum on that list, so trading up to select a player with the explosiveness Worthy displayed is certainly worth the risk, knowing they already have plenty of low risk replacements with experience in the system below him.

3.) Whether they'll admit it or not, the Packers deliberately sought to improve their defense in this draft.  There was no selecting the best player on the board this year, yet another departure from previous drafts.  The defense is in need of help now and in the long term.  The offense will return all but two starters (Clifton and Wells) from opening day last year after producing quite possibly the best offensive season in franchise history.

Selecting six defensive players with their first six picks was critical for the Packers this year. Why? Every defensive starter not named Tramon Williams, Charles Woodson, AJ Hawk or Desmond Bishop is a free agent in two years (2014).  Thompson took 2012's draft and simply reloaded the defensive depth chart and has the potential to provide at least two opening day starters. They'll now have two years to develop rookies and evaluate the defense before making better-informed decisions on who to start.  They'll also have time to decide whether to sign or release guys like Pickett, Raji or Matthews when their contracts expire.  Between that and the offense compensating for many of the defense's shortcomings, I'd say this is a great situation for the team.

4.) The Packers still did not sway from a few, previously successful tendencies: 1. drafting high effort players (Mike Daniels, Terrell Manning), 2. smart, high character players (Mike Daniels) and 3. potentially overlooked, high value players in later rounds (McMillan, Manning, Datko, Coleman). These are the guys that had warts but can be made into good football players.

Ultimately, the success of this draft comes down to the coaching staff. Kevin Greene, Mike Trgovac and Darren Perry will have their hands full fitting these OLBs, DTs and DBs respectively into the Packers' defensive plans.  Conversely, one could argue these picks represent confidence in the strength of that coaching staff and the locker room to turn these high potential picks in to successful players.

And now here's a bunch of words on the record about each player.  Feel free to make fun of me, 2014 blog reader.

1. Nick Perry OLB, USC - Perry never played standing up at USC. He said at the combine he wanted to play 4-3 end and has the whole hot/cold motor issue. This was a need-based pick for the Packers. Credit Ted Thompson for getting inside of the Bears' heads with his draft success in recent years because they reached on McClellin and will put him into a system that doesn't best suit him in an attempt to outsmart the Packers.  Good luck getting the ball to Brandon Marshall and Alshon Jeffrey with Cutler on his back (or hurt) again this year, shitheads.  The Bears are going to lament the fact they could have instead taken Riley Reiff to protect Culter and will now have to try to find a way around him twice a year against the Lions.

I digress.  Perry's a freak.  He benched 225 LBs 35 times at the combine.  Only six defensive players put up better bench numbers, and that includes DTs.  He then ran a 4.64 at the combine and a 4.58 at his pro day, so let's call it a 4.62 at 6'3", 270 lbs.  He's faster, bigger and stronger than Matthews, but doesn't have the same agility. They'll ask him to stand up and probably ask him to lose weight.  He'll likely struggle to adjust to standing up as an OLB but won't have much of an issue losing ten pounds.

I'm not in love with the pick, but you can't ignore the upside, especially with Kevin Greene in his ear. It's reassuring to know he lined up against the best left tackle in the draft every day in practice at USC and showed the ability to dominate the first round talent on Stanford's offensive line. It might take him a year or two to learn the OLB position, but if anything, he'll be a better distraction for offensive lines than any other linebacker that has started opposite Matthews. He's a 3rd down pass rush luxury pick at worst or a stud opposite at Matthews at best.

2. Jerel Worthy, DT, MSU.  I fucking love this pick.  He has first round value that slid all the way to the middle of the second round and was obtained in a trade that sent better pick value to the Packers.  We're off to a good start.  Yes, he too has the hot/cold motor issue, but luckily when you're the Packers, you can rely on your solid coaching staff and fantastic locker room to help bring along guys like this as they mature.

As for his play, how can you ignore this kind of explosiveness?



The Big 10 is known for it's offensive line prowess, and in the first highlight, you see him blow by Kevin Zeitler (Pick #27) and Peter Konz (Pick #55) to record a safety against the Big 10's leading rusher last year. Oh yeah, and that little shove of Ball at the end of the play is the epitome of swag. He also dominated the Georgia o-line (Cordy Glenn went 41 overall) in their bowl game.

With the Packers, he'll be a big body that swallows up blocks as a DE. Consider this attempt #2 to replace Cullen Jenkins. His jump is incredible, he has great hips and can wiggle into the backfield exceptionally well.  He's 6'3", runs a 5 second 40 at 305 lbs. The Bub described some of the plays where he sacks the QB before he's able to hand the ball off as "shit that only happens in videogames." He doesn't need to be THE guy in the defense to provide pass rush, he just needs to swallow up blocks and be disruptive.  The highlight reel above shows he's more than capable of doing that, the coaches just need to bring it out of him more consistently.  There's not a single offensive line in the NFC North that could handle a 4-man rush from Pick, Raji, Matthews and highlight reel Worthy.

My personal favorite highlight from above? At the 2:18 mark he completely decks a blocking RB en route to sacking the QB.  I don't care what fucking school they're playing, that's a grown ass man he completely levels before recording a sack. He's a motherfucking menace when he wants to be.

2.5 Casey Hayward CB, Vanderbilt. He could have started for the Packers last year and improved the secondary. Depth at corner is going to be needed in this pass-happy era of the NFL and Hawyward is a very safe pick. The Packers already have a star in Williams, a versatile ball hawk in Woodson and a burner in Shields, Hayward simply adds capable cover ability to the secondary. He's not a fast (4.52), but he ran the best short shuttle at the combine, displaying a fantastic ability to cut and change direction. Thompson and crew seem to favor agility over speed when it comes to the secondary. It's hard to argue with their success thus far.

Hayward's a former QB with a nose for the ball and started three years at Vanderbilt.  He was selected before guys with much higher upsides, but he's an instant nickel starter for the defense. After making a pair of riskier picks, I like the safer pick in the secondary.

4. Mike Daniels, DT, Iowa. This is a typical Ted Thompson draft pick.  People judge him for his short stature, but he's big and quick with a great motor.  He's a smart guy and he's fast (4.82 at 292 LBs) and recorded nine sacks last year playing DT.  He'll need some time to develop, but he'll probably get a shot at DE. There's plenty of risk here, but it's a decent selection at a position of need.

4.5 Jerron McMillan, S, Maine. Your guess is as good as mine. He's an athlete and his pro day 40 (4.36) likely got him drafted this high, while his 3 cone agility performance was the best of all safeties at the combine.  He's an athletic wild card that was ignored coming from a small school.  He plays a position of need for the Packers and has all of the physical tools to succeed at the position, so I guess we'll all see what happens with him at the next level.

5. Terrell Manning, OLB, NC State. This is a great value pick. He was high on a lot of boards going into the season and injuries probably hurt his draft status. He came out a year early, so he still needs some development, but he's very versatile. There's probably little instant impact here, but he has all the ability to develop into a great player with time. He runs a 4.75 40 at 236 lbs and showed he can cover (5 INTs), tackle (192 tackles) and rush the passer (10 sacks) in 26 games as a starter. His instincts and motor are fantastic, it'll just take time. He could be similar to Desmond Bishop, a 6th Rd pick who broke out into reliable starter in his 3rd year.

7. Andrew Datko, OT, FSU.  Shoulder injuries hampered his draft status.  He's a 4 year starter with potential, he just needs to stay healthy. It's a risky pick, but worth a try in the 7th round.  Plus there's that whole move him to guard where the team has little depth option.

7.5 BJ Coleman. QB, Tennessee Chattanooga. This is another "the brass did their homework" pick. He represents good value here, he left Tennessee when Lane Kiffin did. He's a hard worker and a film studier, seems like the ideal backup QB.

I'll close my draft comments with this: when I hear a football analyst talking about a guy not fitting into the Packers defensive "scheme," I immediately change the channel.

The Packers have quite possibly the most versatile defense in the NFL.  Formations with one down lineman, operating primarily out of a two down lineman formation or winning the NFC Championship by dropping a 340 lb nose tackle into straight up fucking pass coverage ought to indicate there's not much of a "scheme" the Packers try to run on defense.  They'll find positions and situations that best suit the players they just selected and play them accordingly.

Count Ted Draftula

A lot has been made recently of the Packers' "splash" in free agency and how it's unusual for a Thompson team that has signed 3 UFAs since 2007, and merely 10 total since he;s taken over as GM in 2005, to be so "active" this offseason.  So let's do some analysis and follow that up with some Ted quotes for reassurance. 

Why Jeff Saturday? Easy, they needed a center and Wells was too old by their standards and too expensive, especially given contracts that are due for renewal soon:  

2013 UFAs:

Greg Jennings - Currently averages 6.75M/year, projects $10-12M if extended

TJ Lang - Currently $1.3M, projects $4-5M/year if extended.

2014 UFAs:

Ryan Pickett - Currently $5.4M

Nick Collins - Currently glad to not be paralyzed, $4.3M

BJ Raji - Currently $4M

James Jones - Currently $3M

Jermichael Finley - Currently $7M

Clay Matthews - Currently $2M

2015 UFAs:

Aaron Rodgers - Currently only the 8th highest paid QB in the league

That's basically the team's core, and all of those players not named Pickett are only in their mid to late 20s.  I'm not saying they'll all be re-signed, but they're all worth a look to extend long-term.

But back to Jeff Saturday. Wells (31) signed for $24M/4 years, Saturday (36) signed for $7.75M/2 years.  If they hadn't replaced Wells with a free agent, they'd have netted likely another 4th RD compensatory pick -- they received one each for Colledge and Jenkins' departure last year, both signing very similar deals to Wells' -- and would rely on Evan Dietrich-Smith or a draft pick to fill Wells' place. In signing Saturday, they'll probably just get a 7th RD (if anything) compensatory pick for Wells, given the discrepancy between their contracts.  

What Thompson is trying to avoid in signing Saturday is having to rely on the draft to fill their obvious need at center.  Below is an image of Todd McShay's breakdown of where players at each position are projected to be drafted by round.

click to enlarge

That's 1 center projected to be drafted in the first 3 rounds. By signing Saturday, they no longer have to risk spending their one first round pick on the only center worth drafting on the first two days of the draft and can spend one of their 9 picks between rounds 4 and 7 to select and develop their next center under Saturday.  Hell, they can even draft two if they really want.

There has also been plenty of talk about several defensive linemen that have met with the Packers and how those meetings/signings might affect their early round selections.  Here's the depth chart on the d-line:

BJ Raji

Ryan Pickett

Mike Neal

CJ Wilson

Jarius Wynn

Mike Neal

Lawrence Guy (remember him?)

Howie Green is a UFA this year.  Raji and Pickett played 80%+ of last year's snaps, mainly in the 2-4-5 defense.  Neal is suspended for 4 games because of steroids and is probably in the process of injuring himself as I write this post.  Also, who expects him to be better at football (and staying healthy) when he starts pissing clean again? 

Jaruis Wynn is entering his 4th year as a pro and Wilson his 3rd, both were 6th and 7th round picks, respectively.  Lawrence Guy was a 7th round pick last year they immediately placed on IR after sustaining a concussion to free up roster space.  Wynn and Wilson are simply running out of opportunities, and later in this post, you'll see how many similar draft picks the Packers have this year to replace them.

With Raji and Pickett under contract for two more years each and taking into consideration their backups' incredibly underwhelming performance to date, it's no wonder Ted signed DL Daniel Muir and is talking to Anthony Hargrove, Manny Lawson and Dave Tollefson. The cupboard is soon to be bare at DL. Opposite Matthews, we know it's not much better at OLB. Looking at how defenders at each position project by draft round: 

click to enlarge

we see 7 projected DEs, 4 DTs, 4 CBs and 1 SS in the first round. That's half the projected first round draft picks playing positions of need for the Packers.  Knowing that, I'd expect Ted to round out his depth chart with another minimal free agent signing or two and then take advantage of having the luxury to select the best defensive player on the board that falls to him at pick #28.

After that? He has 11 more draft picks to select more players or trade up.  Below is a list of the Packers' 2012 draft picks by round, overall pick and draft value assigned to that pick.  Bolded ones are compensatory picks they are unable to trade.

1st (28) 660

2nd (59) 310

3rd (90) 140

4th (123) 49

4th (132) 40

4th (133) 39.5

5th (163) 27.2

6th (197) 13.6

7th (224) 3

7th (235) 1.9

7th (241) 1.3

7th (243) 1.1

Two untradeable 7ths, in addition to two more 7ths, means Ted's not terribly likely to trade down to grab guys he'd otherwise sign as undrafted FAs.  Remember, he's filling depth on a team that went 15-1 last year. At some point, he has to be looking for quality, not quantity. Two back to back, untradeable 4ths makes the tradeable 4th round selection simply nine picks before those seem much more liquid.  It's also important to note only 7 teams have double-digit draft pick totals this year, and only the Browns (13) have more draft picks than the Packers' (12).

So what does this all mean?  Welp, Ted's left you more than enough quotes in the past few days to figure out how he'll approach this year's draft:

1.) "It's an opportunity," GM Ted Thompson said. "It's incumbent on us to do a good job with the extra picks. It's another opportunity."

2.) "We lost a number of free agents last year," Thompson said. "It's one of the byproducts of it. It's not the end-all to-be-all, but it's nice to have extra picks."

3.) Asked if the added picks gave him more flexibility, Thompson said, "More is always better."

4.) … Sometimes the market runs away from you, and you keep your hands in your pocket."

5.) I do think in free agency you're able to target more specific things as opposed to the draft, when we try to take the best player."

6.) Yes, Thompson admitted that he wasn't at Lambeau Field when Saturday arrived last week for his recruiting visit. He was at Iowa's pro day instead. He called Saturday to make sure there would be no hard feelings about his absence

That's just Ted being Ted, if you ask me.  I think it's safe to say they won't select a TE/WR/ILB in the first three rounds, but everything else figures to be business as usual for Count Ted Draftula one month from today.

What If?

Prince Fielder Will Join This Guy and His Dad in Detroit in 2012

Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Monday, April 3, 2006. Prince Fielder begins his first full season in the major leagues against the Pittsburgh Pirates, going 0-4 with 4 strikeouts. The golden sombrero. While Fielder would go on to post 6 of the finest seasons in Brewers franchise history, this inauspicious start to his 2006 season has been forgotten. So, too, was his 0-5 with three strikeouts the next game. But I find myself thinking of this over and over. What if these games never happened? And what if Fielder was allowed to have 6.75 of the best seasons in franchise history? Why did Prince Fielder start the 2006 season in Milwaukee rather than Nashville?

Let’s start by asking, “was Fielder ready for the majors?” I would say most certainly so, but he also wasn’t so ready for the majors that he couldn’t have spent 2 more months in Nashville. He had a .957 OPS in 378 ABs in Nashville and a .764 OPS in 59 cup-of-coffee ABs in Milwaukee in 2005. But two major defects existed in his game: strikeouts and defense. He had 93 K’s in Nashville and a worrisome 2:17 BB:K in Milwaukee. While the strikeout numbers were not horrible for a power hitter like Fielder, they did signal that he was likely not going to be a superstar in his first season in the majors, especially considering his poor defense. In 2006, all around, Fielder was about an average first baseman in the majors. Staying in Nashville until June would likely not have developed Fielder, who needed to make the transition to the majors, but it certainly would have been a justifiable move for the Brewers to make at the time.

The next question is, “did the Brewers have any other options at first base?” This answer is a resounding, “yes.” Lyle Overbay completed the 2005 season with a .816 OPS, and he could have been kept for another season (not that trading him wasn’t smart). Russell Branyan was allowed to walk away from the Brewers after the 2005 season. At this point in history, Branyan was a better hitter than Fielder. And, during this time, the Brewers were employing Carlos Lee in left field, a position Lee was not equipped to play. Moving Lee to first base would have created several issues of its own, but the fact is that the Brewers could have filled first base without calling Fielder up.

The last question is, “did the Brewers need the extra win or two that Fielder could provide in 2006?” This answer is an obvious and resounding, “no!” While the 2005 team finished 81-81 and gave immense hope for the future, the future was not 2006. The 2006 team finished with 75 wins, a lucky total for a team that surrendered over 100 runs more than they scored. Though the NL Central Division was horrible in 2006, the Brewers were not a legitimate contender. Their third starter was Dave Bush. Their second best reliever was…Rick Helling?! This is the bullpen that was so thin it employed Derrick Turnbow (6.87 ERA) at closer for two-thirds of a season, as well as Chris Mabeus, Joe Winkelsas, and Chris Spurling. I could go on, but you get the point. Having now witnessed a division-winning team in Milwaukee, looking back at this pitching staff it was obvious, or at least it should have been, that the Brewers were not going to win anything in 2006.

Yet, Doug Melvin brought Fielder up to the majors in April instead of June (or July, whatever was necessary given Fielder’s 2005 call-up and the other rookie call-ups of the time). The Brewers maybe won one more game than they otherwise would have in a season that was utterly meaningless. What if Melvin had been patient? Fielder may have been pissed, sure, but that wouldn’t really matter. It wouldn’t affect his play. All I can say is it is a damn shame.

The Brewers enter 2012 trying to defend their 2011 divisional crown, and they do it having lost perhaps their most important player. The cards are now stacked against the Brewers this year, in what will likely be the last year the Brewers have any legitimate shot at competing for the postseason until 2017 at the earliest. And every time I say or I hear someone else say, “if we only had Fielder for one more season,” I think of that opening day performance in 2006 and shake my head. What if Doug Melvin had just been a little more patient?

The Dagger Thrown and the Yardage Surrendered

The video below has the audio of this post being read by Steve Czaban on Milwaukee morning radio. Thanks to 102.9 The Hog for the audio and obviously Steve for the mention.

6,585 yards (32^nd) and 359 points (19^th) were surrendered by the Green Bay Packers’ defense in the 2011 season.  Dead last in yards allowed, an NFL record 4,796 passing yards allowed and a below average points against total is an atrocious showing for any defensive unit, much less one that won a Super Bowl a year ago and finished the most recent season 15-1.  Yes, the Packers defense tied for a league-high 38 turnovers forced (31 INTs, 7 fumbles) and the defense/special teams accounted for 5 touchdowns (tied for 4^th overall), but the yards surrendered shouldn’t be any less alarming. Or should they?

After an absolute routing of Oakland at home, fans started to write off the yardage surrendered as the team basically giving up in the fourth quarter.  Who could blame them? Returning 9 defensive starters from the previous season, one could hardly fault the snake-bitten Packers for wanting to avoid the injured reserve list previously occupied by 10 defensive players (7 of whom saw significant playing time) last season, especially when games were well in hand.

Football stat gurus Football Outsiders took a league-wide look at their DVOA figures, removing team performance in the 4^th quarter of games after the week 14 game against Oakland.  Those results showed the Packers as having the 4^th highest drop in DVOA performance in the 4^th quarter of games in 2011. That result is nothing astounding, but significant nonetheless.

That said, those calculations were a quick, broad attempt in determining which teams tend to ease off the gas pedal in the 4th quarter. Packer fans should be understandably skeptical after witnessing their team breeze through a 15-1 season where their offense gained fewer yards than their defense allowed (6.482 vs. 6,585), and rightfully so. Aaron Rodgers was so brutally efficient this year that 11% of his 502 passing attempts went for touchdowns, and the Packers posted a +201 point differential that would have topped the league were the Packers as concerned as the Saints about their QB winning the MVP.

Driving home listening to the radio during that Oakland game, I came to a revelation that sparked the research for this piece. In the 3^rd and 4^th quarter, Wayne Larravee and Larry McCarren referred to all of Oakland’s yards/points as “garbage” and Mike McCarthy was quoted after the game as saying, “It’s not often in this league that you can say you won a game by halftime, but that happened today.”  How do we account for situations wherein a team is so efficient, they’ve won the game before the start of the fourth quarter?  And does that affect their performance?

If you’re wondering whether good teams truly ease up when they feel the game is at hand, look no further than this year’s Patriots Colts game. The AFC’s best Patriots surrendered 21 points to a winless Colts team in the fourth quarter, under the mentality of resting starters in the hopes of winning both the battle and the season-long war. The Patriots have the highest winning percentage and three championships in the last decade. I’d consider this clever gamesmanship, not an indictment of the quality of their defense.

Using advancednflstats.com’s win probably numbers combined with admittedly subjectively designated scoring plays, I’ve produced a game by game analysis of when the proverbial “dagger” was delivered and the “garbage”  yardage and points that were surrendered beyond that point. The two general dagger-defining criteria used will be a +.95 WP and a Packer’s point total at the time that exceeds their opponent’s final point total, erring on the later points in the game where both criteria are met. At the end, I’ll tally those post-dagger yards/points, discuss omissions and explain what it all means.

Week 1 vs the Saints. Dagger: John Kuhn TD with 11:52 remaining in the 4^th quarter to put the Packers up 42-27. On the ensuing possession, the Saints get the ball back but produce a 3 and out. At 5:35 in the 4^th quarter, the Saints get the ball back again with a .01WP, still down 15 and start their first scoring drive and so we start the first “garbage” yardage/points tally: 

Drive 1: 76 yards, 7 points.
Drive 2: 79 yards, 0 points. Mark Ingram stopped on the goaline on 4^th down, Packers up 42-34.
Ballgame

Week 2 vs Panthers. Dagger: 84 yard TD pass to Jordy Nelson with 2:26 remaining in the 4^th quarter. Packers are up by 14 (30-16) with a .99WP. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: 83 yards, 7 points.
Ballgame

Week 3 vs. Bears. Dagger: Rodgers 10 yard TD to Finley, Packers up 27-10 with 12:49 to go in the 4th quarter.  On the ensuing drive, Cutler throws a pick to Morgan Burnett, Packers .99WP. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: 32 yards, 7 points.
Drive 2: 4 yards
Drive 3: 20 yards
Drive 4: 16 yards
Ballgame

Week 4 vs. Broncos. Dagger: Rodgers 8 yard TD scramble, Packers up 35-17 with 8:26 left in the 3^rd quarter, .98WP.  Yes, an early 3^rd quarter dagger.  The Packers score twice more after this and Denver has several possessions, but they finish the game with 23 points. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: 50 yards
Packers go up 42-17
Drive 2: -4 yards
Drive 3: 0 yards, INT
Packers go up 49-17
Drive 4: 78 yards, 7 points.
Drive 5: 7 yards
Ballgame

Week 5 vs. Falcons. Dagger: Rodgers 29 yard TD to Jennings, Packers up 22-14, after a few possessions, .99WP for Packers after Crosby field goal.  The WP graph plays a big part in determining the dagger here: the touchdown to go up 22-14 only gives the packers a .86WP, it’s not until enough clock is killed that the chart spikes to .99 and stays there.  Atlanta gets the ball with 1:10 left in the 4^th quarter. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: 57 yards.
Bush INT, Ballgame.

Week 6 vs. Rams. Dagger: Rodgers 7 yard TD to Driver with 1:51 left in 2^nd quarter, Packers up 24-0, .96WP. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: 62 yards, 3 points.
Drive 2: 32 yards
Drive 3: 70 yards
INT Sam Shields
Drive 4: 60 yards
Drive 5: 17 yards
Drive 6: 15 yards
Ballgame

Week 7 vs. Vikings. Dagger: Mason Crosby field goal after INT, Packers up 30-17, .97WP with 3:18 left in the 3^rd quarter. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: 50 yards
INT Charles Woodson, Packers Field goal, up 33-17.
Drive 2: 52 yards, 3 points
Drive 3: 77 yards, 7 points
Drive 4: 34 yards, Vikings punt, never get it back.
Ballgame

Week 9 vs Chargers. Dagger: Rodgers 4 yard TD to Jennings, Packers up 45-24, .99WP with 10:27 left in the 4^th quarter. The Packers hit .97WP when they score 38 points, but because San Diego ultimately puts up 38 points of their own, the touchdown to get to 45 points is the true dagger.  Yes, this was a close shootout, but I’d call a 21 point lead with 10 minutes left to play a done deal. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: 80 yards, 7 points.
Recovered onside kick
Drive 2: 55 yards, 7 points.
Drive 3: 10 yards, punt.
Drive 4: 30 yards, INT Charlie Peprah.
Ballgame

Week 10 vs Vikings. Dagger: Rodgers 17 yard TD to Jordy Nelson, Packers up 24-0, .97WP with 9:10 left in the 3^rd quarter. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: Cobb fumbled punt, 17 yards, 7 points.
Packers TD to Kuhn
Drive 2: 32 yards
Packers TD to Nelson
Drive 3: 0 yards
Matt Flynn TD
Drive 4: 40 yards
Ballgame

Week 11 vs Buccaneers. Dagger: John Kuhn 2 yard TD run, Packers up 28-19, .95WP with 7:42 left in 4^th quarter. Garbage tally: 

Drive 1: 7 yards
Rodgers throws INT
Drive 2: 50 yards, 7 points
Nelson TD
Williams INT
Packers Missed field goal
Drive 3: 23 yards
Ballgame

Week 12 vs Lions. Dagger: Rodgers 65 yard TD to James Jones, Packers up 21-0, .98WP with 5:25 left in 3^rd quarter. Suh was ejected on the touchdown drive before this when the Packers went up 14-0 and Detroit unraveled. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: 5 yards
Charles Woodson INT
Packers field goal, up 24-0
Drive 2: 72 yards, 8 points
Drive 3: 1 yard
Packers field goal, up 27-8
Drive 4: 79 yards, 7 points
Ballgame

Week 13 vs Giants. No dagger, Packers win 38-35 on the last play of the game.

Week 14 vs Raiders. Dagger: This game’s dagger is entirely subjective. Oakland’s first score happens with around 8 minutes left in the 3^rd quarter, down 34-7. Looking at the WP graph, I’ve designated the dagger after the Packers go up 31-0 in the 2^nd quarter on a Ryan Grant TD run, 7:06 left in the 2^nd quarter, .95WP. Oakland is then held to a four and out and the Packers drive the ball to Oakland’s 4 yard line before Finley drops a ball that’s intercepted in the endzone. Below are garbage tallies for the remaining Oakland drives after the assigned dagger above (omitting the 4 and out).

Drive 1: 66 yards
INT Rob Francois
Packers field goal, up 34-0
Drive 2: 80 yards, 7 points
Packers field goal, up 37-7
Drive 3: Fumble recovered for Walden touchdown, Packers up 43-7
Drive 4: 3 yards
Packers field goal, up 46-7.
Drive 5: 17 yards
Drive 6: 77 yards, 7 points
Drive 7: 22 yards
Ballgame

Week 15 vs Chiefs. No victory, no dagger.

Week 16 vs. Bears. Dagger: Rodgers 7 yard TD to James Jones, Packers up 28-10, with 1:54 left in the 3^rd quarter and .97WP. Garbage tally:

Drive 1: INT Charlie Peprah
Nelson TD, Packers up 35-10, Bears season over.
Drive 2: 67 yards, 8 points
Drive 3: 95 yards, 3 points
Ballgame

Week 17 vs Lions. Game came down to the last play with several lead changes, no dagger.

Omitted from the tallies were opponent’s drives that resulted in no first down or yardage less than ten yards.  In a competitive game situation, those are desired outcomes and therefore those unsuccessful drives are not relevant here.

The totals are 1,862 yards and 109 points allowed in garbage time. Subtract those numbers from season totals above and you get 4,723 yards and 250 points surrendered, good for 4^th and 3^rd overall in the league, respectively and similar to last year's totals of 4,945 and 240 (5th and 2nd).

If you take half those totals (931 yards, 54.5 points), assuming opponents are going to gain some yardage in that time, and subtract those from the season totals, the defense would rank 18^th in yards allowed and 5^th in points surrendered.

I also compiled total interceptions and fumbles recovered in this “garbage” time. 9 passes were intercepted when the game was in hand and 2 fumbles were recovered.  It’s also important to note that five games (Bears 1, Vikings 1, Lions, Raiders, and Bears 2) had interceptions that occurred right around the dagger.  Those show the defense’s contribution in putting those games out of reach.

However, subtracting 11 “garbage” turnovers of players simply ball-hawking would give the team 27 total turnovers, good for 8th in the league.  Astoundingly, they’d still be tied for 2nd in the league with 22 INTs. Last year, they recorded 32 turnovers with 24 INTs and 8 fumbles.

Meanwhile, the Packers put up 73 points in garbage time, approximately 13% of the 560 they produced all season. Above, I made a derogatory remark about the Saints blowing teams away and inflating stats. A quick look at late game WPs in a few memorable games showed the Saints produced 76 garbage points of their season total 547 in just 4 games, most notably scoring 31 in the second half against the Colts.

All of this information is most useful in context. The 1,862 post-dagger yards allowed are 28.7% of all yards allowed by the Packers over the course of the season, while the 109 points are 30.4% of the total points allowed on the year. Now, if these totals were achieved in roughly 30% of the opposition’s time holding the ball, this entire exercise would be meaningless as the garbage time touchdowns would be no more or less informative than normal scores. However, opponents held the ball for a total of 472 minutes and 16 seconds (to Green Bay’s 487:44), of which 105:18 were considered to be post-dagger, totaling just 22.2% of the total TOP for Packer opponents. In 22% of possession time, opponents gained almost 29% of their yards and scored over 30% of their points. That, my friends, is statistically significant

If we normalize the post-dagger yardage and points to pre-dagger totals, the defense would have allowed 6,074 yards and 322 points the Packers are 29th in yards and 9th in points. Further, if you normalize the Detroit offensive outburst, which was itself played entirely post-dagger, we’re looking at 5,775 yards and 291 points, good for 23rd and 5th, respectively.

23rd and 5th. The yardage makes sense because most teams aren’t going be able to run the ball enough to keep up with Rodgers and his henchmen, so they need to employ long-yardage pass plays. 5th is more in line with last year’s team that finished 2nd in points allowed.

Sure, this type of analysis could be done for every team, but an offensive juggernaut that puts teams away early and wins 15 of its 16 games affords its team the fortunate situation where the maximum effort is not always required of its defense. Taking into consideration the mathematical analysis above and remembering that 21/22 opening day starters (Nick Collins) are expected to play in Sunday's Divisional Playoff game (compared to the 10 would-be starters on IR last year), the coaches and defense are deserving of praise for a job well done.

Now it’s time to determine whether maximum effort can be expended when the stakes have been raised.

(Credit due to BrewCityBub for TOP and normalization calculations and contributions)