How did you like our new Zone vs. Gap Rushing Tool? I heard from some of you who said it was pretty cool. I agree, I think so too. This week, the data represents both Weeks 1 & 2, so we’re getting closer to removing some of the variance (sorry, geek term). Looking over the numbers, I’m starting to see some useful trends, which I’ll get into more later. For now, just know that you can view the Defensive Zone vs. Gap splits at the bottom of this article or at the link HERE and the RB Zone vs. Gap splits HERE.
If you want a short tutorial on the table, simply go back to last week’s article HERE.
Before we get to Week 3, another quick message from our sponsor:
Razzball’s Football positional rankings: QB | RB | WR | TE | DEF
Be sure to check out our other tools on Razzball.com: Slot vs. Wide PPG Allowed | WR Slot vs. Wide| DEF Targets Allowed | Home vs. Away | Wins vs. Losses | TD Tool
Want more data-driven stats and tools to help you win your fantasy league? Check out the Razzball Fantasy Football premium subscriptions for $0.00 upfront with our 3-day free trial!
Week 3 Analysis
Zone Matchups to Exploit
- Pittsburgh (vs. New England): The data suggests this is the best Zone RB matchup to exploit as the Steelers RBs gain over 56% of their designed rushing yards behind Zone blocking while the Patriots give up over 60% of their yards to that scheme. Both Jaylen Warren (52% Zone) and Kenneth Gainwell (67% Zone) look to benefit.
- Miami (vs. Buffalo): The Bills defense stopped some of the leaks we saw in Week 1, but the Jets were still able to reach the century mark. Miami is up next, where De’Vone Achane (61% Zone) will look to exploit the Bills still giving up over 58% there.
- Chicago (vs. Dallas): D’Andre Swift (72% Zone) has been running hard but hasn’t really enjoyed a banner day on the ground yet. This might be the game as he looks to exploit the Dallas D giving up over 50% to zone rushers.
Gap Matchups to Exploit
- Arizona (vs. Seattle): As a team, the Cardinals RBs of James Conner (87% Gap) and Trey Benson (82% Gap) far outpace other duos running in Gap schemes. For their part, the Seahawks come in about league average in defending against the Gap so this matchup may very well determine the outcome of the game. If volume is king, go with the volume play of James Conner.
- Green Bay (vs. Cleveland): The Packers Defense has been grabbing the headlines, but Josh Jacobs (52% Gap) still commands the backfield. Like we just discussed, the Browns D is about league average in stopping Gap rushers. If you roster Jacobs, you don’t need me to tell you to start him.
- Jacksonville (vs. Houston): If you look on the chart, you note both teams come in together. The percentages say to run Nick Chubb (68% Gap) vs. the Jags D (ranked 16th in Gap yards allowed) but I prefer Travis Etienne Jr. (40% Gap) vs the Texans D (ranked last at 61% Gap rushing allowed) just a little better – if the cats promise to play to their advantage. Will they?
Zone Matchups to Avoid
- Washington (vs. Las Vegas): The Commander’s primary Zone rusher is lost for the season. Jacory Croskey-Merritt (7% Zone) will need to start carving out that role against one of the stingiest defenses vs. Zone blocking (Raiders are ranked #3 at just 27% Zone rushing allowed).
- Kansas City (vs. New York Giants): We know the Giants have one of, if not THE, best front seven in the game. They also have a top 5 defense against Zone blocking. The Chiefs are a mess too and in need of a win to right their ship. Don’t look for the running game to play a big part in that. The Chiefs offense ranks 27th in Zone rushing, split evenly between Isiah Pacheco (53% Zone) and Kareem Hunt (54% Zone). This looks like a situation to avoid at all costs.
- Denver (vs. Los Angeles Chargers): Not many defenses give up fewer yards to Zone rushing than the Broncos and Chargers. The data shows both are top 10 defenses in limiting Zone rushing. Offensively, both are also bottom third in the league in Zone rushing. Yuck! The Broncos are vulnerable against Gap rushing (see above) but the Chargers are showing to be stingy both ways. So, I’m tempering expectations with J.K. Dobbins (43% Zone) and RJ Harvey (45% Zone).
Gap Matchups to Avoid
- Chicago (vs. Dallas): I already talked about the advantage Swift has in Zone blocking schemes. It’ll have to carry the day (see what I did there?) because his Gap rushing (24% Gap) against a top 5 defense vs Gap rushing, is not going to cut it.
- New England (vs. Pittsburgh): As a team, the Patriots gain just 29% of their designed yards per game from Gap rushing, yet their two primary backs, Rhamondre Stevenson (61% Gap) and TreVeyon Henderson (50% Gap), are given the ball in those situations. Perhaps they should change it up a little since they’re facing the #3 defense in limiting Gap rushing.
- New York Giants (vs. Kansas City): The Giants primarily employ a Zone rushing scheme, with Tyrone Tracy (53% Zone and 47% Gap) and Cam Skattebo (62% Zone and 38% Gap). It’s a good thing too because the Chiefs rank #2 in stopping Gap rushing.
That’s All Folks!
Two weeks in and this new Zone vs. Gap rushing data is filling in nicely. I hope you find it useful in your Week 3 prep. Again, if you need a quick tutorial on this new tool, just go back to last week’s article HERE. Of course, you can just ask me for help in the comments below too…but my ultimate goal is to teach you how to use the tool to your advantage.
Of course, all the RazzballNFL staff is here to help. Be sure to read our daily articles and especially join us on gameday morning for the Razzball Sunday Start/Sit show. We had a great turnout last Sunday and in hindsight, provided some excellent suggestions to your questions (you’re welcome, Troy Franklin owners).
Join us this week when the show airs LIVE on the Razzball YouTube channel this Sunday from 11:00 am EDT (8:00 PDT) right up right up to gametime. Sky – @SkyGuasco, Matt – @Stiles08, Dave – @Crewser128, Jeff – @Jefferson__21 and I will be there to answer all your fantasy football questions. Don’t miss it.
As always, look for my articles right here each week and be sure to follow me on Twitter/X @Derek_Favret. I’m also on BlueSky as well (@dfavret.bsky.social).
Until next time, my friends.
| Download Table as CSV | |||
| Note: Filters and sorting in the table below apply to the output | |||
| # | Team | Def_Designed Rush Yds/Gm | Def Zone Yds/Gm | Def Gap Yds/Gm | Def Zone% | Def Gap% | Def Undesigned Scr Yds/Gm | Next Opponent | Off Rush Yds/Gm | Off Zone% | Off Gap% | Off Scr% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARZ | 103 | 57.8 | 37.6 | 54% | 36% | 0 | LA | 118 | 43% | 52% | 3% | |
| ATL | 107 | 30.4 | 72.5 | 38% | 57% | 0 | SEA | 117 | 58% | 37% | 1% | |
| BLT | 77 | 34.1 | 39.1 | 47% | 48% | 0 | PIT | 86 | 62% | 34% | 1% | |
| BUF | 111 | 56.0 | 45.1 | 53% | 38% | 0 | CIN | 115 | 49% | 41% | 1% | |
| CAR | 142 | 85.3 | 51.2 | 61% | 36% | 0 | BYE | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| CHI | 101 | 58.6 | 35.3 | 63% | 31% | 0 | GB | 98 | 55% | 43% | 0% | |
| CIN | 139 | 77.3 | 45.7 | 59% | 33% | 0 | BUF | 137 | 51% | 44% | 1% | |
| CLV | 94 | 46.3 | 34.5 | 51% | 35% | 0 | TEN | 56 | 41% | 42% | 2% | |
| DAL | 81 | 25.0 | 47.3 | 36% | 50% | 0 | DET | 141 | 57% | 40% | 1% | |
| DEN | 78 | 32.5 | 37.2 | 43% | 46% | 0 | LV | 39 | 55% | 30% | 2% | |
| DET | 92 | 48.8 | 34.4 | 52% | 40% | 0 | DAL | 107 | 58% | 31% | 6% | |
| GB | 107 | 58.0 | 44.3 | 55% | 41% | 0 | CHI | 137 | 60% | 34% | 4% | |
| HST | 67 | 31.6 | 29.3 | 43% | 43% | 0 | KC | 90 | 65% | 24% | 4% | |
| IND | 87 | 50.1 | 28.0 | 54% | 32% | 0 | JAX | 101 | 50% | 38% | 3% | |
| JAX | 60 | 21.5 | 33.7 | 36% | 55% | 0 | IND | 119 | 41% | 50% | 3% | |
| KC | 70 | 36.0 | 28.8 | 54% | 38% | 0 | HST | 92 | 32% | 56% | 3% | |
| LV | 118 | 61.3 | 43.4 | 52% | 37% | 0 | DEN | 93 | 32% | 58% | 1% | |
| LA | 85 | 51.4 | 29.1 | 61% | 33% | 0 | ARZ | 72 | 26% | 68% | 3% | |
| LAC | 87 | 44.3 | 34.1 | 55% | 37% | 0 | PHI | 98 | 49% | 41% | 1% | |
| MIA | 84 | 45.7 | 31.6 | 57% | 36% | 0 | NYJ | 93 | 58% | 34% | 5% | |
| MIN | 112 | 63.1 | 41.9 | 58% | 37% | 0 | WAS | 90 | 40% | 50% | 8% | |
| NE | 75 | 45.2 | 26.6 | 57% | 38% | 0 | BYE | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| NO | 137 | 73.2 | 54.4 | 53% | 42% | 0 | TB | 89 | 44% | 51% | 0% | |
| NYG | 159 | 68.2 | 73.5 | 45% | 46% | 0 | BYE | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| NYJ | 110 | 59.0 | 40.9 | 51% | 41% | 0 | MIA | 137 | 49% | 44% | 2% | |
| PHI | 105 | 69.0 | 32.5 | 58% | 37% | 0 | LAC | 93 | 43% | 40% | 6% | |
| PIT | 103 | 55.3 | 40.7 | 53% | 38% | 0 | BLT | 114 | 61% | 30% | 2% | |
| SEA | 71 | 28.7 | 37.3 | 43% | 51% | 0 | ATL | 105 | 76% | 18% | 2% | |
| SF | 91 | 36.9 | 39.8 | 37% | 49% | 0 | BYE | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| TB | 91 | 41.2 | 45.7 | 44% | 48% | 0 | NO | 53 | 67% | 24% | 6% | |
| TEN | 95 | 42.6 | 35.4 | 42% | 42% | 0 | CLV | 74 | 45% | 48% | 3% | |
| WAS | 129 | 58.0 | 60.2 | 44% | 48% | 0 | MIN | 81 | 49% | 45% | 1% | |
| NFL | 99 | 49.8 | 41.0 | 50% | 41% | 0 | NFL | 98 | 51% | 41% | 3% |
