Colts’ Week 2 QB Analysis:

Thanks to the nflFastR project, Pro Football Focus for the timely sources of data.

For those of you new to this, I will publish key QB stats each week judging how well the Colts’ QB performed. Yes, O-Line, receivers, and play-calling impact these numbers but they are primarily QB measures. I will probably modify the charts throughout the season. Commentary will be brief but feel free to let me know in the comments that stats aren’t everything. (click charts for larger view)

It’s always tough to analyze a loss, but Daniel Jones had a much better performance against the Chiefs than he did in the season opener. I feel much better about the outlook for the season than I did a week ago. Let’s break it down by the numbers.

mouseover definitions: median EPA gain in similar game situation (down, distance, etc.)”>arsr, 3 yards to gain in game-neutral situations”>edp, sg%, oz%, pr%, tip, ttt, adot, ay/c, yac, yacoe, yd/c, ac%, cpoe, aypa, drp, scr%, ta%, sck%, aa%, ny/d, ny/p, 1st%, td%, to%, 0″>qbsrepa/p, adj/p

<

• The Colts supported Jones with a strong running game and leaned toward the run on early downs (5th ARSR; 25th EDP).

• Jones wasn’t pressured much and got the ball out at a fairly normal pace suggesting the O-Line did their job. (28th PR%; 16th TIP & TTT)

• The passing game was relatively conservative in depth, with Jones doing most of his work in the shorter and intermediate areas rather than pushing the ball downfield. (24th ADOT; 18thAY/C).

• The receivers provided fairly ordinary production after the catch and actually came in a little below what was expected from their opportunities. (18th YAC; 19th YACOE & YD/C)

• Jones 75% adjusted completion rate helped his efficiency greatly, although relative to shorter passing depth that was expected (13th AC%; 21st CPOE)

• Very little of the passing game was lost to abandoned plays. There were no drops, Jones took no sacks, had only a couple of scrambles and rarely had to throw the ball away. (28th DRP%; 13th SCR%; 22nd TA%; 30th SCK%; 30th AA%)

• That ability to preserve his dropbacks helped turn fairly ordinary YPA into one of the better overall yardage performances of the week when counting all dropbacks. (18th AYPA: 10th NY/D; 9th NY/P)

• Jones consistently kept the offense moving, generating first downs at one of the better rates in the league. (8th 1st%)

• However, despite first down success, the scoring production from the pass game was modest, and the interception was the primary blemish on an otherwise efficient game. (21st TD%; 13th TO%)

• Overall, Jones combined good play-to-play consistency with strong total value, finishing comfortably in the upper half of QBs in success rate and total efficiency. (11th QBSR; 12thEPA/P)

The Colts supported Jones with a strong running game and leaned toward the run on early downs (5th ARSR; 25th EDP).

Jones wasn’t pressured much and got the ball out at a fairly normal pace suggesting the O-Line did their job. (28th PR%; 16th TIP & TTT)

The passing game was relatively conservative in depth, with Jones doing most of his work in the shorter and intermediate areas rather than pushing the ball downfield. (24th ADOT; 18thAY/C).

The receivers provided fairly ordinary production after the catch and actually came in a little below what was expected from their opportunities. (18th YAC; 19th YACOE & YD/C)

Jones 75% adjusted completion rate helped his efficiency greatly, although relative to shorter passing depth that was expected (13th AC%; 21st CPOE)

Very little of the passing game was lost to abandoned plays. There were no drops, Jones took no sacks, had only a couple of scrambles and rarely had to throw the ball away. (28th DRP%; 13th SCR%; 22nd TA%; 30th SCK%; 30th AA%)

That ability to preserve his dropbacks helped turn fairly ordinary YPA into one of the better overall yardage performances of the week when counting all dropbacks. (18th AYPA: 10th NY/D; 9th NY/P)

Jones consistently kept the offense moving, generating first downs at one of the better rates in the league. (8th 1st%)

However, despite first down success, the scoring production from the pass game was modest, and the interception was the primary blemish on an otherwise efficient game. (21st TD%; 13th TO%)

Overall, Jones combined good play-to-play consistency with strong total value, finishing comfortably in the upper half of QBs in success rate and total efficiency. (11th QBSR; 12thEPA/P)

mouseover definitions: ay<, dp%, ay/c, yac, yd/c, ac%, aypa, drp%, aypa, ta%, ypa, sck%, ny/a, scr%, ny/d, car%, ny/p, 1st%, any/p, td%, any/p, to%, any/p, epa/p, opd, adj/padj/p

<

Jones’ efficiency was built less through explosive downfield passing than through consistant positive play. His modest completed air yards and YAC left his YPA near the middle of the pack (19th YD/C), but a 75% adjusted completion rate and the absence of sacks produced a large jump in efficiency (7th NY/A). A below average TD rate and the interception dragged him down but he still finished 12th EPA/P overall for the week.

<

The play by play view shows why Jones’ final efficiency remained strong despite one enormous negative. His first-quarter interception cost -4.69 EPA, easily his worst play of the game, but there were enough consistant productive plays throughout the rest of the game including his most valuable play, the 48-yard overtime fumble completion to Laquon Treadwell. Overall, this was a game with one damaging mistake surrounded by a lot of positive production.

<

This shows the strong rebound after a poor Week 1. Jones’ QBSR and first-down rate both jumped sharply, showing a major improvement in play-to-play consistency, while EPA per play and net yards per play made similarly large gains, showing that the successful plays also generated substantial value.

<

The 2 deep pass interference calls certainly helped, but he repeatedly picked up first downs with short and intermediate completions. The 48-yard completion to Treadwell was by far the deepest attempt.

<

Jones continued to play a relatively conservative passing game in Week 2, with most of his production coming on shorter throws rather than consistently attacking downfield. That approach was considerably less aggressive than much of his passing profile last season, but he was effective within it — unlike week 1.

<

For the 2 games combined. You can see that the Colts are passing short relative to the league.

<

Downs led the way in targets, receptions and total yards.

<

Same story for the 2 games combined (Okay, Downs is tied with Warren for most receptions).

At least Pierce and Downs are in the good quadrant.

<

The bulk of the targets added higher than average value. Keenan Allen was the clear negative outlier, driven heavily by the interception thrown in his direction.

<

That is a big spread. Warren’s targets are not as valuable as I was hoping this year, but its good to see the main receivers above league average value.

<

Jones completion rate was high but realtive to his short depth of target it was just about average.

<

Jones has generally gotten the ball out quickly through the first two weeks, which fits with the relatively short passing game Indianapolis has been using. His Week 2 timing was close to what would be expected for the depth of his throws, so he is neither holding the ball long nor relying on especially quick-releases.

<

Jones did most of his damage over the middle in Week 2, particularly on intermediate and deeper throws. The left side was much less productive and included his interception.

<

Adding in week 1 makes the season totals look pretty meh, which makes sense: poor week 1 + good week 2 = OK season so far.