More Than Sacks
CLICK TO
REACT 
In 2007, Kansas City Chiefs defensive end Jared Allen led the NFL in sacks with 15.5. Behind him were Seattle's Patrick Kerney with 14.5, Houston's Mario Williams and DeMarcus Ware of the Cowboys with 14.0, and Osi Umenyiora of the Giants with 13.0.
Were these players the five best pass rushers in the NFL last year? It depends on how you define pass rush. One of the things we've been doing at Football Outsiders is dealing with three different stats relating to quarterback pressure:
1. Sacks -- the old faithful quarterback takedown, as recorded by the NFL, and as adjusted for the league's retroactive statistical changes.
2. Hits -- a stat that the NFL started recording in 2006. To qualify for a hit, a defender must knock the quarterback to the ground in the act of throwing, or after he has thrown the ball. Hits that result in roughing the passer penalties are included.
3. Hurries -- recorded by Football Outsiders' own game charters; not an official NFL stat. To qualify for a hurry, a defender must pressure the quarterback into throwing too soon, flush the quarterback out of the pocket, or draw a holding penalty in the act of hurrying.
The problem with using sacks alone as the rating system for pass rushers is that it's incomplete, and can be radically slanted based on opponent. A sack of a quarterback like Drew Brees of Brett Favre, who have proven that they'll gamble and throw picks under pressure, may be a lot tougher than taking down Ben Roethlisberger, who will extend a play as long as he possibly can, even with defenders hanging all over him. Some quarterbacks are affected more than others in the face of pressure; others have learned to adjust.
Taking sacks, hits and hurries together, here were the premier pass rushers of 2007:
(Note: All numbers are adjusted for official scorer and game-charter tendencies.)
The most interesting thing here, of course, is that only one of the top five sackmasters are in the top five in overall pass pressure (Ware). Williams, with his four hits and 11 hurries, didn't even make the list. Kampman, under the terms of these numbers, was the most disruptive defensive element against enemy quarterbacks. Vanden Bosch and Odom are great players, but also beneficiaries of a phenomenon known as "Everyone has to double-team Albert Haynesworth." Abraham's ability to disrupt was impressive last year, given the disaster the Falcons toted out every week, and his three sacks of John Kitna on Sunday shows that he hasn't lost a thing.
Kerney and Allen are the more traditional speed-rushers; their greatness is reflected in their ability to get consistent pressure even without a sack, and that's what these stats are all about. Umenyiora was a key part of the NFL's best front four -- it remains to be seen how they'll do week-to-week without him. Ogunleye and Burgess were bright spots on disappointing teams.
Taking the quarterback down is the best way to go, but the ability to upset and affect the passing game in a consistent fashion has value as well. That's why sacks aren't the only way to measure pressure anymore.
By
Doug Farrar
|
September 8, 2008; 6:55 PM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Year-to-Year Penalty Consistency |
Next: Lito Sheppard, Sabermetrics Martyr
Posted by: dumb | September 12, 2008 10:40 AM
Their adjustments are made by comparing the scores of teams during home games and away games. For instance, if throughout the season Team X gets 17 sacks at home and 18 sacks at away games, you could assume that the pass rush is not very much affected by the home crowd (obviously, Team X is not Seattle). But if the scorer is granting them 47 hits at home, and they've only got 28 hits at away games, the scorer is obviously being very liberal when recording hits. So you might reduce the home numbers by about 30-40% to account for the discrepancy, and get more accurate numbers. This is a rough explanation of how they're able to estimate adjustments for tendencies.
Posted by: David C | September 9, 2008 4:47 PM
I don't think that adjusting for scorers and and charters is wise. Scorers work every one of their team's home games, which means when you're adjusting for scorers, you're half-adjusting for team defense, team offense, QB performance, etc. You would never want to control for those variables.
For example, if the Giants had a lot of sacks, hits, and hurries, the Giants' home scorer and charters will appear to be liberal in crediting those stats. But in reality, they're legitimately counting lots of hits, hurries, and sacks. By adjusting for their 'tendencies,' you're short-changing the Giants' pass rushers.
I imagine your volunteer charters work their local teams in the same way, so you wouldn't want to control for them either.
Why would you even control for scorers anyway? A sack is a sack and not up for subjective review. And scorers do not record hits and hurries. So why control for their 'tendencies?'
Posted by: Brian | September 9, 2008 12:03 PM
Kliuch,
I think you misunderstand what Farrar is trying to do. This is not a ranking of pass-rushing value contributed, in which case sacks are more important. This is a ranking of pass-rushing ability, where the difference between a sack and a hurry often depends on context (did the lineman hold, who was the QB, etc). Similarly, a hit becomes a sack if the QB can't get rid of the ball, and vice-versa.
Farrar's claim is that sacks, hurries, and hits all represent the same skills, and by adding them together we get a clearer picture of who the best pass-rushers really are.
Posted by: SJM | September 9, 2008 11:38 AM
While generally it is a very useful analysis, I don't think that sacks, hits and hurries should be valued equally.
While hits and hurries are undoubtedly useful as they may (only may!) lead to a loss of a down via incompletion, a sack, in addition to the loss of a down on offense, always results in substantial loss of yardage, which is very important in terms of stopping the drive.
Thus I think that number of sacks should be multiplied by 2, and the adjusted total figure will be truly indicative not only of agressiveness of a pass rusher, but also of his effectiveness at the job.
Posted by: Kliuch | September 9, 2008 8:09 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
This article is pointless. Either you nailed the prom queen. Or you didn't. Masturbating to her doesn't count. Farrar constantly promises stats that matter. But in all his articles its just conjecture. If I want guesses and speculation I'll go read a blog by someone that has a clue.