Josh Jones at ILB?

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,279
Reaction score
2,395
Location
PENDING
Well u can argue place on the list if you want. You could drop him to 10 without getting a huge argument from me but I'd simply rate him at 5 based on a combination of help he receives around him, production, what he's asked to do in the scheme and overall impact. With those things in mind. Based on your list of players only 4 would I rank higher.

You can argue other guys over him sure. 16 more though? I don't agree with that at all
He is certainly in the conversation. For what it's worth he is in the top 100 at no 84. Not sure how many DTs are ahead of him, but usually QBs, CBs, WRs, and RBs get over represented.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
JJ Watt
Aaron Donald
Leonard Williams
Muhammad Wilkerson
Jurrell Casey
Sheldon Richardson
C. Campbell
Malik Jackson
Damon Harrison
Cameron Jordan
Derek Wolfe
Brandon Williams
Linval Joseph
Geno Atkins
Kawaan Short
Fletcher Cox
N. Suh
Gerald McCoy

Didn't quite get to 20, but I was tired of racking my brain. Some are obviously better, but I think a case for all of these guys could be made as far as being just as good or superior to Daniels.

FWIW Pro Football Focus graded him as the ninth best interior defender in 2016 and according to them he has performed on that same level over the last four seasons.

Worthy needed motivation. He immediately slacked off and started enjoying the good life. Perhaps a better coach could have understood him and somehow brought it out of him.

I'm not convinced about that as Belichick wasn't able to coach up Worthy either.
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,279
Reaction score
2,395
Location
PENDING
I'm not convinced about that as Belichick wasn't able to coach up Worthy either.
My personal belief is that everyone can be motivated by something. Belicheck is good, but is not perfect. I dont think he has a big bag of personaes to use as tactics to motivate. Finding the right style, the right key could have motivated him. Anger, buddy up, public humiliation, common foe, prostitutes, fear, threaten his mom, I dont know, but there could have been something.
 

Patriotplayer90

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 2, 2015
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
130
FWIW Pro Football Focus graded him as the ninth best interior defender in 2016 and according to them he has performed on that same level over the last four seasons.



I'm not convinced about that as Belichick wasn't able to coach up Worthy either.
PFF really seems to value pressures and effort plays which don't end up with the other guy on the ground. They want us to believe that Olivier Vernon is in the same company as Von Miller and Khalil Mack despite less production, when it's clear that his impact during a game isn't close to theirs.

QBs are now mobile and capable of escaping pressure and making plays, so I'd prefer someone who can finish. I know if I were an opponent, I'd want Rodgers on the ground instead of simply being "pressured".

FWIW, PFF gave Jonathan Cyprien the same or higher score than Eric Berry, so while I take their ratings into account, I believe that you have to look deeper than just their overall score of a player. I'd have to give the nod to players like Casey or Williams who are slightly below Daniels on their rankings , but more productive and noticeable during an actual game.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
PFF really seems to value pressures and effort plays which don't end up with the other guy on the ground. They want us to believe that Olivier Vernon is in the same company as Von Miller and Khalil Mack despite less production, when it's clear that his impact during a game isn't close to theirs.

QBs are now mobile and capable of escaping pressure and making plays, so I'd prefer someone who can finish. I know if I were an opponent, I'd want Rodgers on the ground instead of simply being "pressured".

FWIW, PFF gave Jonathan Cyprien the same or higher score than Eric Berry, so while I take their ratings into account, I believe that you have to look deeper than just their overall score of a player. I'd have to give the nod to players like Casey or Williams who are slightly below Daniels on their rankings , but more productive and noticeable during an actual game.

Just to clarify, PFF rated Vernon elite for only a single season while Miller and Mack reached that status in every single year so far in their careers.

In addition you have to take a closer look at why PFF rated Cyprien ahead of Berry. While Berry made more splash plays in pass defense Cyprien performed at an outstanding level defending the run.

While I agree that it's more important to get sacks the average QB rating drops by more than 30 points just when being pressured.
 

Patriotplayer90

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 2, 2015
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
130
Just to clarify, PFF rated Vernon elite for only a single season while Miller and Mack reached that status in every single year so far in their careers.

In addition you have to take a closer look at why PFF rated Cyprien ahead of Berry. While Berry made more splash plays in pass defense Cyprien performed at an outstanding level defending the run.

While I agree that it's more important to get sacks the average QB rating drops by more than 30 points just when being pressured.
That's fair enough. I think Watt is in his own league, then Donald and a few other guys below him, followed by a logjam of athletic, disruptive linemen such as Daniels. I'm definitely not trying to discount Daniels, but I can't say for certain that he's better than the guys that I've listed.

I think Jones will need a year, at least. They need a plan for him, as he needs some time to develop mentally. The missed tackles in college are a serious issue, and he needs to play to his size and be tougher in the box. But he's a good cover guy, and sideline to sideline chaser, which should make him an ideal 3rd down nickel LB.
 
OP
OP
brandon2348

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
I think Jones will need a year, at least. They need a plan for him, as he needs some time to develop mentally. The missed tackles in college are a serious issue, and he needs to play to his size and be tougher in the box. But he's a good cover guy, and sideline to sideline chaser, which should make him an ideal 3rd down nickel LB.

I think he will have an immediate positive impact for this defense. If you go back and watch Deone Bucannon's tape in college he had similar issues as Jones and he ultimately transitioned very well into the NFL. Jones is a bigger and faster Deone Bucannon and I believe he has better cover skills then Bucannon as well.

TT hit a grand slam with this pick and he even has kinda made me forget about not getting Joe Mixon. I'm sure Jones will make some rookie mistakes but the upside here is pretty big. I am expecting big things "this year" from Josh Jones.
 

n4t

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
51
Reaction score
9
Location
La Crosse, WI
Yes. Worthy needed motivation. He immediately slacked off and started enjoying the good life. Perhaps a better coach could have understood him and somehow brought it out of him.

Harrell needed no motivation and was an absolute beast. He was a huge gamble that didnt pay off. His demise was due to a back tweek that severely limited his power and caused a lot of pain. The operation to fix it failed and made it worse. Your bringing him up shows your ignorance.

Khyri. Bad pick. Just a bad pick.

Guy. A 7th round pick on an incredible physical athlete who was raw and not very bright. A big gamble.

Not sure how you cite these examples as proof a coach doesnt need to motivate. I think they support it. Many a HOF speech has segments in there honoring a coach along the way who really inspired and motivated them.


Think man, think! I know you can do it!

Hmmmm. Good players leave and are not replaced by good players. Well, ask why there arent good players? He doesnt develop them!!!!!!!! Did the GM that drafted them suddenly get stupid? what of the non starting roster of developing players already there? Did the GM inducing incompetence that Capers apparently emits preceed him to the team he took over 2 or three years ahead of him?

Takes both, talent and coaching. A very simplistic view is to see a poor performance and immediately blame the GM/player for lack of talent. Or oppositely seeing a successful team and attributing it to just talent. Funny how the best coach in the NFL, Belicheck loses players and they tend to not perform as well for their new team.

Truth is there is not much talent difference between a good player and an average player. Hard work and coaching makes a big.difference.

Not really sure where your logic is coming from that Dom needs to motivate these grown men to do what they've been doing for most of their lives. This is a fallacy and foolishness. If you are going to subscribe to that kind of silliness then there is nothing to discuss, except maybe that someday you'll realize that you are wrong.

Your attempt to argue my points without using any actual facts is intriguing. How does that work for you IRL?
Yes. Worthy needed motivation. He immediately slacked off and started enjoying the good life. Perhaps a better coach could have understood him and somehow brought it out of him.

Harrell needed no motivation and was an absolute beast. He was a huge gamble that didnt pay off. His demise was due to a back tweek that severely limited his power and caused a lot of pain. The operation to fix it failed and made it worse. Your bringing him up shows your ignorance.

Khyri. Bad pick. Just a bad pick.

Guy. A 7th round pick on an incredible physical athlete who was raw and not very bright. A big gamble.

Not sure how you cite these examples as proof a coach doesnt need to motivate. I think they support it. Many a HOF speech has segments in there honoring a coach along the way who really inspired and motivated them.


Think man, think! I know you can do it!

Hmmmm. Good players leave and are not replaced by good players. Well, ask why there arent good players? He doesnt develop them!!!!!!!! Did the GM that drafted them suddenly get stupid? what of the non starting roster of developing players already there? Did the GM inducing incompetence that Capers apparently emits preceed him to the team he took over 2 or three years ahead of him?

Takes both, talent and coaching. A very simplistic view is to see a poor performance and immediately blame the GM/player for lack of talent. Or oppositely seeing a successful team and attributing it to just talent. Funny how the best coach in the NFL, Belicheck loses players and they tend to not perform as well for their new team.

Truth is there is not much talent difference between a good player and an average player. Hard work and coaching makes a big.difference.

You seem to have a hard time grasping the point.

The defensive side of the ball does not have the talent for Dom to field a good or great defense. Simple enough.

You want to whine that they are stars-in-the-rough and that Dom isn't 'motivating' them, well that is very foolish - BUT lack of talent due to personal motivation issues is still lack of talent. The fact that you think a DC could motivate someone like Jerel Worthy out of being a piece of @#$% pretty much makes this the last response I have for you. You don't get it.
 

Patriotplayer90

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 2, 2015
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
130
I think he will have an immediate positive impact for this defense. If you go back and watch Deone Bucannon's tape in college he had similar issues as Jones and he ultimately transitioned very well into the NFL. Jones is a bigger and faster Deone Bucannon and I believe he has better cover skills then Bucannon as well.

TT hit a grand slam with this pick and he even has kinda made me forget about not getting Joe Mixon. I'm sure Jones will make some rookie mistakes but the upside here is pretty big. I am expecting big things "this year" from Josh Jones.
Keanu Neal also struggled in a number of similar ways in college, and was a very good safety as a rookie, so that's possible. Safeties are given many different tasks and assignments in college, so they likely don't get the same opportunity to improve in any one area as other positions do. They've also been quick to grasp the position in the pros in recent years, so I hope the same becomes of Jones. His burst to the ball and speed are the real deal, and when his hits do connect, guys go down fast and hard.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Not really sure where your logic is coming from that Dom needs to motivate these grown men to do what they've been doing for most of their lives. This is a fallacy and foolishness. If you are going to subscribe to that kind of silliness then there is nothing to discuss, except maybe that someday you'll realize that you are wrong.

Your attempt to argue my points without using any actual facts is intriguing. How does that work for you IRL?


You seem to have a hard time grasping the point.

The defensive side of the ball does not have the talent for Dom to field a good or great defense. Simple enough.

You want to whine that they are stars-in-the-rough and that Dom isn't 'motivating' them, well that is very foolish - BUT lack of talent due to personal motivation issues is still lack of talent. The fact that you think a DC could motivate someone like Jerel Worthy out of being a piece of @#$% pretty much makes this the last response I have for you. You don't get it.

It's ludicrous to suggest a coach isn't at least partly responsible for motivating players.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
PFF really seems to value pressures and effort plays which don't end up with the other guy on the ground.
PFF weights pressures as follows:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/signature-stats-pass-rushing-productivity/

Sack: 1.00
Hit: 0.75
Hurry: 0.75

- In what universe is a hit worth 75% of a sack?

- In what universe is a hurry of equal value to a hit? That makes zero sense and has a politically correct tinge to it. It's as though they don't want to admit that shaking up or ringing the bell of a QB has no value. Ask Cam Newton about this one. Even if you want to be absolutely politically correct, the hit should get more weight for the increased odds of an errant throw and an interception.

- In fact, there should be a 4th. category: "drill", below "sack" and above "hit". It's one thing to shove the QB as he throws. It's a whole other thing to take him to the ground.

- A hurry being worth 75% of a sack? That's the most ludicrous of all. Teams get 10 or 12 possessions per game. After turnovers, sacks are the leading possession killers.

- To your point about "effort plays", not all sacks are created equal. A guy blowing off the edge and drilling the QB for an 8 yard loss is the way we envision sacks in the abstract. There are also coverage sacks where the QB scrambles and gets caught for a 1 or 2 yard loss, not exactly a possession killer, on a defensive hustle play (or maybe without that much hustle), where the defender was initially blocked out of the play. The sack is more properly credited to the secondary.

As to this last point, for guys who claim to grade every player on every play, you'd think they'd put a quality-of-play adjustment on each of those pressures. At the very least, there should be 5th. category, the most valuable of all pass rush plays: the "strip sack". Some guys have a knack for it, others do not.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
PFF weights pressures as follows:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/signature-stats-pass-rushing-productivity/

Sack: 1.00
Hit: 0.75
Hurry: 0.75

- In what universe is a hit worth 75% of a sack?

- In what universe is a hurry of equal value to a hit? That makes zero sense and has a politically correct tinge to it. It's as though they don't want to admit that shaking up or ringing the bell of a QB has no value. Ask Cam Newton about this one. Even if you want to be absolutely politically correct, the hit should get more weight for the increased odds of an errant throw and an interception.

- In fact, there should be a 4th. category: "drill", below "sack" and above "hit". It's one thing to shove the QB as he throws. It's a whole other thing to take him to the ground.

- A hurry being worth 75% of a sack? That's the most ludicrous of all. Teams get 10 or 12 possessions per game. After turnovers, sacks are the leading possession killers.

- To your point about "effort plays", not all sacks are created equal. A guy blowing off the edge and drilling the QB for an 8 yard loss is the way we envision sacks in the abstract. There are also coverage sacks where the QB scrambles and gets caught for a 1 or 2 yard loss, not exactly a possession killer, on a defensive hustle play (or maybe without that much hustle), where the defender was initially blocked out of the play. The sack is more properly credited to the secondary.

As to this last point, for guys who claim to grade every player on every play, you'd think they'd put a quality-of-play adjustment on each of those pressures. At the very least, there should be 5th. category, the most valuable of all pass rush plays: "strip sack". Some guys have a knack for it, others do not.

I'm not arguing that PFF is correct about the metric they're using to calculate pass rushing efficiency but what they have found out over the past few years is that the rating drops by more than 30 points solely by applying pressure on quarterbacks.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I'm not arguing that PFF is correct about the metric they're using to calculate pass rushing efficiency but what they have found out over the past few years is that the rating drops by more than 30 points solely by applying pressure on quarterbacks.
"Pressure" encompasses a lot of things. The QB rating drops to zero for sacks, that much we know. I'd be curious to know the aggregate QB ratings for the other categories of pressure, hits vs. hurries, and the rating for no pressure at all.

I don't there's a statistic that could convince me that a hurry is worth 3/4 of a sack.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RRyder

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
183
"Pressure" encompasses a lot of things. The QB rating drops to zero for sacks, that much we know. I be curious to know the aggregate QB ratings for the other other categories of pressure, hits vs. hurries, and the rating for no pressure at all.

I don't there's a statistic that could convince me that a hurry is worth 3/4 of a sack.

3/4 seems high. I can see 1/2. They still should hold a fair amount of weight as hurries lead to interceptions quite a bit
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,279
Reaction score
2,395
Location
PENDING
Not really sure where your logic is coming from that Dom needs to motivate these grown men to do what they've been doing for most of their lives. This is a fallacy and foolishness. If you are going to subscribe to that kind of silliness then there is nothing to discuss, except maybe that someday you'll realize that you are wrong.

Your attempt to argue my points without using any actual facts is intriguing. How does that work for you IRL?


You seem to have a hard time grasping the point.

The defensive side of the ball does not have the talent for Dom to field a good or great defense. Simple enough.

You want to whine that they are stars-in-the-rough and that Dom isn't 'motivating' them, well that is very foolish - BUT lack of talent due to personal motivation issues is still lack of talent. The fact that you think a DC could motivate someone like Jerel Worthy out of being a piece of @#$% pretty much makes this the last response I have for you. You don't get it.
Now look what you did. I actually had to agree with something CaptWimm posted!

:)

Not sure what you are thinking. Not sure how you see things the way you do, but so be it. Think you are just posting silliness to get a rise out of me.

You did not support your position with any facts. This is a subjective issue. Your "facts" can be completely explained with my theory.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
"Pressure" encompasses a lot of things. The QB rating drops to zero for sacks, that much we know. I be curious to know the aggregate QB ratings for the other other categories of pressure, hits vs. hurries, and the rating for no pressure at all.

NFL quarterbacks combined for only a 64.5 rating when being pressured last season. Unfortunately I don't have any information about the numbers divided into different categories.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
3/4 seems high. I can see 1/2. They still should hold a fair amount of weight as hurries lead to interceptions quite a bit
I wouldn't say "quite a bit". 15 picks on 500 throws sounds like a pretty typical NFL number. 3% of throws. Many of those are unhurried...tipped balls, air mailed balls, misfired deep shots, jumped routes, or just plain misreading the defense. A guy might be toward the top of the league with 40 hurries and contribute to maybe 1 or no picks.
 

RRyder

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
183
I wouldn't say "quite a bit". 15 picks on 500 throws sounds like a pretty typical NFL number. 3% of throws. Many of those are unhurried...tipped balls, air mailed balls, misfired deep shots, jumped routes, or just plain misreading the defense. A guy might be toward the top of the league with 40 hurries and contribute to maybe 1 or no picks.

Considering the average rating for a QB drops to 64.5, as noted by Captain, when he's under pressure I'd say you're under selling their impact
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Considering the average rating for a QB drops to 64.5, as noted by Captain, when he's under pressure I'd say you're under selling their impact

In addition I think Packers fans are spoiled when evaluating quarterback play under pressure as Rodgers is extremely efficient dealing with it, leading the league in QB rating at 93.8 by more than six points in that category last season. We don't watch it as closely how many other QBs struggle in those situations though.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Considering the average rating for a QB drops to 64.5, as noted by Captain, when he's under pressure I'd say you're under selling their impact

In addition I think Packers fans are spoiled when evaluating quarterback play under pressure as Rodgers is extremely efficient dealing with it, leading the league in QB rating at 93.8 by more than six points in that category last season. We don't watch it as closely how many other QBs struggle in those situations though.

You guys missed the point. "Pressure" = sacks + hits + hurries. I took issue with PFF's relative value to the defense of those three kinds of plays.

I stated before that sacks by definition equal a zero passer rating. That's not technically correct since with a sack the QB did not throw the ball so those plays do not enter into the passer rating at all, but more on that in a minute. Because sacks are not factored into passer rating, there is a false equivalency between pass rusher ratings based on "pressures" and QB ratings under "pressure". One includes sacks, the other does not. But I digress.

From a practical standpoint, sacks by themselves actually generate the equivalent of a negative passer rating even if the passer rating formulas do not allow for a negative number, which they should if anybody cared about passer rating for QBs with a tiny number of throws. I don't, but there you have it.

If, for example, a QB goes 0-10 with no INTs and obviously no TDs, the numerator in the 4 formulas that go into passer rating are all zero, yielding a zero passer rating. The down is lost, yardage is not. With a sack there is the loss of down and loss of yardage, ergo a sack creates what might be the equivalent of something better than a zero passer rating from the defensive perspective.

So, the sack component yields the equivalent of a zero-to-negative passer rating but is not actually in the passer rating. So how should that negative or zero passer rating equivalent for sacks be weighted against a 64.5% passer rating for "pressures" which by definition includes only hits and hurries and excludes sacks?

And without seeing the passer rating differences between hits and hurries, we're left with the counter intuitive PFF formula saying they are of equal value.

First, a hit before the throw is released clearly affects the throwing mechanics more than a mere hurry.

Second, I'd like to see the passer rating and sack percentages for plays immediately following hits vs. hurries if that subsequent play happens to be a pass. Certainly some hits knock a QB a bit foggy even if the concussion protocol is not introduced, or maybe it just has him looking over his shoulder. Either way, the subsequent pass play is more likely to be influenced by a hit than a hurry.

I mentioned Cam Newton earlier. He got the holy hell beat out of him in a couple of early games. Flags were not being thrown, but that's neither here nor there except for the deterrent affect. The "holy hell" is what matters in Cam closing out the year saying he's not having fun anymore. Cam had a bad year chiefly because he was getting the crap and fun beat out of him. Hurries do not do that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
522
Location
Madison, WI
If, for example, a QB goes 0-10 with no INTs and obviously no TDs, the numerator in the 4 formulas that go into passer rating are all zero, yielding a zero passer rating.

Except that is not how passer rating works. At all. 0/10, 0, 0, 0 = 39.58 Rating.

The only way you can get below a 39 passer rating is by throwing picks.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Except that is not how passer rating works. At all. 0/10, 0, 0, 0 = 39.58 Rating.

The only way you can get below a 39 passer rating is by throwing picks.

I stand corrected. You'd need one INT in an 0-10 to get to a zero passer rating. In fact, without a pick you could go 0-for-infinity (if math allowed that calculation) and still get the 40 passer rating if you did not throw a pick.

So the point then becomes that a sack is worth something more than a 40 passer rating what with loss of yards, and if it happens to be a strip sack, which I earlier proposed be a yet more valuable play, then the value of the play can go to a zero passer rating equivalency with a turnover.

The point remains, if not quite as extreme as in my erroneous calculation: how do you justify the following relative valuations?:

sack: 1.0
hit: 0.75
hurry: 0.75

Just because PFF says so when it seems so counter intuitive?

Sacks have a higher relative value than that. Let's also see passer ratings for hits vs. hurries and lets see the hits vs. hurries numbers on the subsequent pass.

It stands to reason that a hit = hurry + contact. How does no value accrue to whacking the QB vs. not?

And as noted earlier, how does PFF justify not weighting a strip sack in pass rush ratings? Clearly some players have a better knack for it than others. That begs another question: when they grade other defensive plays, do they add points for forcing a fumble? They should. And if they do, they should add points for a strip sack.

Something I didn't mention before but is worth considering: should extra points be awarded to a pass rusher if he knocks the QB out of the game on a sack? Very politically incorrect, I know. Surely LTs don't get paid what they get paid to limit "hurries". They get paid to keep the QB upright, to limit hits as well as sacks. That alone should tell you something.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
522
Location
Madison, WI
The point remains, if not quite as extreme as in my erroneous calculation: how do you justify the following relative valuations?:

sack: 1.0
hit: 0.75
hurry: 0.75

Just because PFF says so when it seems so counter intuitive?


It stands to reason that a hit = hurry + contact. How does no value accrue to whacking the QB vs. not?

Honestly, I'm not sure. I don't really have a dog in this fight.

Just to float an idea: Are you perhaps undervaluing a hurry?

A sack is obviously good: Loss of down, nothing positive happened, and you hit the QB.

A hit is obviously good, but not without some trade off. A hit means the ball got out. If you get 5 hits on a quarterback, but each one follows a touchdown pass, you haven't really accomplished much. Hopefully, you've given the QB something to think about.

A hurry impacts the offense as a whole. The ball got out, but did it go to the right guy? Did it come out like a wounded duck? Did that duck go right a defender? Did it prevent a 40 yard TD to a wide open receiver because the QB couldn't set his feet? And you've still given him something to think about.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Honestly, I'm not sure. I don't really have a dog in this fight.

Just to float an idea: Are you perhaps undervaluing a hurry?

A sack is obviously good: Loss of down, nothing positive happened, and you hit the QB.

A hit is obviously good, but not without some trade off. A hit means the ball got out. If you get 5 hits on a quarterback, but each one follows a touchdown pass, you haven't really accomplished much. Hopefully, you've given the QB something to think about.

A hurry impacts the offense as a whole. The ball got out, but did it go to the right guy? Did it come out like a wounded duck? Did that duck go right a defender? Did it prevent a 40 yard TD to a wide open receiver because the QB couldn't set his feet? And you've still given him something to think about.
A sack also entails loss of yards which you did not mention. That's critical.

And when you get down to it, a hit is a hurry + QB contact. There's an obvious value add, right? Or maybe the QB didn't see you coming, holds his spot, and wasn't hurried at all. All the better. You're more likely to get wounded duck if you hit the guy than if you merely "hurry" him.

I'd like to see "hit" vs. "hurry" stats to know if what seems intuitively obvious is borne out in numbers. Also, I'm more interested in what a QB does immediately after a hit rather than before.

We also have to ask the question, "what the hell constitutes a "hurry" in the first place?" I'd like to see clips of 10 borderline calls, 5 that counted as hurries and 5 that didn't, to even know what they are counting.

Hits and hurries might generate INTs; sacks also might generate fumbles. Stats are needed to reverse what would be intuitive.

I see a lot of counter intuitive scoring and a black box.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
522
Location
Madison, WI
A sack also entails loss of yards which you did not mention. That's critical.

No argument from me. Sacks are near universally bad for the offense.

And when you get down to it, a hit is a hurry + QB contact. There's an obvious value add, right? Or maybe the QB didn't see you coming, holds his spot, and wasn't hurried at all. All the better. You're more likely to get wounded duck if you hit the guy than if you merely "hurry" him.

I'm not sure the two are the same. Again though, I'm not for or against their scoring model. Merely trying to understand.

For example: if a qb stands tall in the pocket, takes a hit, but is not impacted at all, what good was that hit really? Maybe you're in his head eventually. Maybe not at all.

Hits and hurries might generate INTs; sacks also might generate fumbles. Stats are needed to reverse what would be intuitive.

Sure, but another interesting point: fumbles must still be recovered. Iirc, that's why fumble turnovers tend to fluctuate year over year, but forced fumbles tend or to. Similarly with interceptions.

You can coach up swatting the ball. You can scheme up settings for interceptions, but that damn ball bounces funny and actually recovering them is looking luck.
 

Staff online

Members online

Latest posts

Top