Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Next Gen Stats - Seahawks Third best Pass-Rushing Unit

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
  • Eagles #1 (291 pressures), Redskins #2 (269 pressures)


    Image SEAHAWKS #3

    total pressures: 261.

    Top pass rusher: Michael Bennett (59 pressures).

    Injuries began to pluck well-known faces from the Seattle defense as the season wore on. However, the unit still boasted one of the top pass rushes in the NFL. Bennett was once again a force, finishing tied for sixth in the NFL with 59 pressures. Third-year defensive end Frank Clark ranked second on the team behind Bennett with 42 pressures -- and he has 19 sacks over the last two seasons combined. The Seahawks will face several decisions this offseason on players who have long been a part of their core. If there is turnover, watch for Dion Jordan as a sleeper, should the team renew his contract. Pete Carroll raved about Jordan in his postseason press conference -- the reclamation project recorded a pressure on 15.8 percent of his pass-rush attempts in 2017.

    http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... hing-units

    Would be crazy to cut Bennett like some are suggesting, unless coaches/players think he's a cancer in the locker room.
    Last edited by massari on Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
    massari
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1255
    Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:58 am


  • I wonder how this stat compares to previous years, particularly 2013 and 2014.
    User avatar
    Mindsink
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 345
    Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:29 am


  • I call BS on this one. The team gave up so many 3rd and longs they had a major pass rush problem last season. QB’s had all day to throw every game and they had all day to throw on 3rd and long.

    Whatever number they used for this “next-gen” stat is flawed.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1957
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • sdog1981 wrote:I call BS on this one. The team gave up so many 3rd and longs they had a major pass rush problem last season. QB’s had all day to throw every game and they had all day to throw on 3rd and long.

    Whatever number they used for this “next-gen” stat is flawed.


    The ranking is purely by number of qb pressures.
    Our problem last year was that we pressured the qb loads but they still managed to escape being sacked and complete passes. That comes down to the secondary not covering guys close enough, or leaving guys free.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3329
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • Jason La Canfora thinks there should be a few guys Franchised this year. Le'Veon Bell, Demarcus Lawrence, Ziggy Ansah and Sheldon Richardson.

    Seahawks: Sheldon Richardson, DT (franchise)

    Seattle gave up a decent haul to land him, to say the least. I want to do more than just rent him for one season – a season in which my team missed the playoffs, to boot. I'm shedding Kam Chancellor and Richard Sherman and Cliff Avril and some older players on defense, and I am keeping Richardson, at age 27, for at least one more year. He can be too much of an impact player – able to push the pocket inside or outside – to let him leave now. I would flirt with transitioning him at $11.7 million, but with his talent (and yeah, he has major warts off field and I have trepidation about a long-term deal) spend the other few million and get to $14.5 million to keep him. They'll have enough space once the purge begins and this kid in their scheme could be dominant. I have to keep someone over there.


    https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/five ... hise-tags/

    If they're able to get Bennett, Richardson, McDowell, Jordan back and draft a guy like Marcus Davenport or Arden Key, they'll probably be #1.
    Last edited by massari on Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:09 am, edited 2 times in total.
    massari
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1255
    Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:58 am


  • sdog1981 wrote:I call BS on this one. The team gave up so many 3rd and longs they had a major pass rush problem last season. QB’s had all day to throw every game and they had all day to throw on 3rd and long.

    Whatever number they used for this “next-gen” stat is flawed.


    Take a moment to read this back to yourself and ask how paring out 1st and 2nd down is a truer reflection of pressure.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2745
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • mrt144 wrote:
    sdog1981 wrote:I call BS on this one. The team gave up so many 3rd and longs they had a major pass rush problem last season. QB’s had all day to throw every game and they had all day to throw on 3rd and long.

    Whatever number they used for this “next-gen” stat is flawed.


    Take a moment to read this back to yourself and ask how paring out 1st and 2nd down is a truer reflection of pressure.



    Who cares what they do on 1st and 2nd down if they give up 3rd and long it is pointless.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1957
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • I have a dream that someday, someone will say at least one positive thing about the Hawks here :lol:
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9318
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • sdog1981 wrote:
    mrt144 wrote:
    sdog1981 wrote:I call BS on this one. The team gave up so many 3rd and longs they had a major pass rush problem last season. QB’s had all day to throw every game and they had all day to throw on 3rd and long.

    Whatever number they used for this “next-gen” stat is flawed.


    Take a moment to read this back to yourself and ask how paring out 1st and 2nd down is a truer reflection of pressure.



    Who cares what they do on 1st and 2nd down if they give up 3rd and long it is pointless.


    So clearly the problem is you, the interpreter who puts a greater weight on 3rd down than anything else. If you want to complain about rawish data being inaccurate, account for what you're truly after before complaining.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2745
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:I have a dream that someday, someone will say at least one positive thing about the Hawks here :lol:

    :roll: BWAHAHAHAHAHA
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6397
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • :lol: Like what I'm saying is way out of line. The negative is strong. You would think this was the Cleveland Browns we have here in Seattle. Oh well, makes for some great reading. We all look at it our own way :irishdrinkers:
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9318
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • With our cap space, injuries, coaching turnover and needed roster churn we could look like the Browns next season, everything except Pete is a unknown right now and were at that rebuild, retool, point. Did they bring in the right coaches, are they going to keep the right players, are they going to hit in the draft or F.A.. Nothing is known, nothing has shown any indication of what direction this team is going to go come next year. We could very well be a resurgence team as well and surprise a lot of teams with a more aggressive offense and a more attacking defense as well.

    Hard to speculate where we will be, we don't know the track were on, what were driving and whether we can afford the gas for the whole race.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 23943
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Safe to say the team is gonna' look a lot different in 2018. This draft and free agency period is massively important. Though they are unlikely to do much in free agency, as it would take away some of their comp picks. Clayton talks about it. As far as the pass rush goes, we are likely looking at no Avril or Bennett, so I wouldn't be shocked at all if they draft a D lineman early. Sucks that Malik can't be counted on, because he would have a great opportunity to get a lot of playing time in 2018.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9318
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • mrt144 wrote:
    So clearly the problem is you, the interpreter who puts a greater weight on 3rd down than anything else. If you want to complain about rawish data being inaccurate, account for what you're truly after before complaining.



    3rd downs are the most important down in football. If the debate is creating a stat or stat tracking that goes beyond the NFL yardage based statistics then the stat has failed to show something new or insightful.

    Check out this next gen stat: Seahawks were 9-0 in games they scored more points than their opponents.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1957
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • Kee-ryst. You could tell some people that two and two is four and they'd just argue about how it feels like five.

    I'm really beginning to hate this board.
    User avatar
    WindCityHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 4:51 pm


  • sdog1981 wrote:
    mrt144 wrote:
    So clearly the problem is you, the interpreter who puts a greater weight on 3rd down than anything else. If you want to complain about rawish data being inaccurate, account for what you're truly after before complaining.



    3rd downs are the most important down in football. If the debate is creating a stat or stat tracking that goes beyond the NFL yardage based statistics then the stat has failed to show something new or insightful.

    Check out this next gen stat: Seahawks were 9-0 in games they scored more points than their opponents.


    Okay, so please tell me where we can find pressure stats on PFR. Next generation in this instance implies that this is not something that is normally tracked by tradional means which it clearly isn't. Maybe you take next generation to imply something more like derivative stats of other stats or something but then we get into the murky water of your semantic reconciliation.

    Again, you want a smoking gun stat to confirm what you already believe and this isn't it because it is inclusive of all downs. Thusly you're saying the data is worthless because it DOESNT conform to your expectations and observations. Instead of recursively asjuting your hypothesis you've now doubled down and said, only 3rd downs matter and that's where we failed.

    3rd downs acounted for 21% of all defensive snaps. 1st and 2nd down accounted for 78%. But sure, lets just focus on the thing that happens with a 3rd of regularity and throw out the overwhelmingly larger number.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2745
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • There are a number of reasons that 3rd downs for the opposing team converted as they did.

    I suspect a large # of those reasons are not the pass rush.

    It is also possible that teams are content to take risks on 3rd down that they would not on 1st or 2nd. So tactics that worked earlier in the cycle do not.

    What it does show is that our pass rush is likely not the culprit.

    As for the resolution?

    Well we lost our DC so we have no idea what our defense will look like next year anyway.

    It does show that our perception of the ineffectiveness of the defense might need to be re-evaluated by some people.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2898
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


  • Soft zones are a factor, Hurt Sherman and Kam out are a factor, we had pressures but our bend don't break gave up a lot.

    What is the overall conversion rate of third downs against us, then what is the rate of those being a pass. That should tell you something. Add the amount of pressure percentage and you should be able to see we had pressure but they converted anyway. Playing off to much or not impeding the receivers on the line from getting off clean would be a big factor.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 23943
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • chris98251 wrote:Soft zones are a factor, Hurt Sherman and Kam out are a factor, we had pressures but our bend don't break gave up a lot.

    What is the overall conversion rate of third downs against us, then what is the rate of those being a pass. That should tell you something. Add the amount of pressure percentage and you should be able to see we had pressure but they converted anyway. Playing off to much or not impeding the receivers on the line from getting off clean would be a big factor.


    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... splits.htm

    39% of passing attempts on 3rd down led to first down.
    6% of passing attempts led to a sack.

    43% of rushing attempts on 3rd down led to a first down.

    The overall 3rd down conversion rate was middle of the pack relative to the NFL.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2745
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • mrt144 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Soft zones are a factor, Hurt Sherman and Kam out are a factor, we had pressures but our bend don't break gave up a lot.

    What is the overall conversion rate of third downs against us, then what is the rate of those being a pass. That should tell you something. Add the amount of pressure percentage and you should be able to see we had pressure but they converted anyway. Playing off to much or not impeding the receivers on the line from getting off clean would be a big factor.


    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... splits.htm

    39% of passing attempts on 3rd down led to first down.
    6% of passing attempts led to a sack.

    43% of rushing attempts on 3rd down led to a first down.

    The overall 3rd down conversion rate was middle of the pack relative to the NFL.


    Further on passing 3rd downs.

    You'll see that the shorter the distance to down, the higher the conversion rate. As much as we might be gutted by those 3rd and 10+s those rang in at a 24% conversion rate opposed to 66% for 1-3 yards, 84% for 4-7, 26% 7-10 yards.

    To me, it seems kind of obvious when looking at the splits, the lack of ability to get sacks or pressure on 3rd and long were not the smoking gun in our 3rd down foibles - it was 3rd and under 7 that the hawks were terrible.

    so sdog, you going to come off your soapbox and do even a cursory exploration of attendant data or are you gonna triple down?
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2745
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:I have a dream that someday, someone will say at least one positive thing about the Hawks here :lol:


    Image
    User avatar
    hawknation2018
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1477
    Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:04 pm


  • I like
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9318
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Chris makes a hell of a point. No way this team could be the same minus Sherm, Kam and Avril on defense. That's just way too much to ask.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9318
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • mrt144 wrote:
    39% of passing attempts on 3rd down led to first down.
    6% of passing attempts led to a sack.

    43% of rushing attempts on 3rd down led to a first down.

    The overall 3rd down conversion rate was middle of the pack relative to the NFL.


    Further on passing 3rd downs.

    You'll see that the shorter the distance to down, the higher the conversion rate. As much as we might be gutted by those 3rd and 10+s those rang in at a 24% conversion rate opposed to 66% for 1-3 yards, 84% for 4-7, 26% 7-10 yards.

    To me, it seems kind of obvious when looking at the splits, the lack of ability to get sacks or pressure on 3rd and long were not the smoking gun in our 3rd down foibles - it was 3rd and under 7 that the hawks were terrible.

    so sdog, you going to come off your soapbox and do even a cursory exploration of attendant data or are you gonna triple down?[/quote]


    What am I going to triple down on? You just posted new information that is well laid out. Based on the new information I have to come up with a new idea and opinion.

    So what the hell is going on with 3rd down pass rush. It shows that only 6% of 3rd downs resulted in a sack how much pressure including sacks was generated.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1957
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • If it makes you feel any better, Minny had an 11% sack rate on passing 3rd downs and Philly had a 6% rate as well. Washington came in with a 9% sack rate.

    This is a related tangent - https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/2/13/17 ... issic-lacy - where John P Gilbert did a survey beforehand of fan expectations on run stuffs and fans were way more optimistic about what is a realistic stuff rate. Voters in that poll thought at 10-15% stuff rate was acceptable when historically that is AMAZING.

    I'd say that the sack % isn't inherently meaningful when those in the high pressure cohort at most are 500 basis points above our own rate. It literally is the difference between 2 or 3 sacks to the overall passing attempts.

    Linking pressures to sacks would involve film study to reconcile, something these next gen stats by the nfl attempt to do without the need for eyeballs to some degree. They're just missing linking the two together fully.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2745
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • mrt144 wrote:If it makes you feel any better, Minny had an 11% sack rate on passing 3rd downs and Philly had a 6% rate as well. Washington came in with a 9% sack rate.

    This is a related tangent - https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/2/13/17 ... issic-lacy - where John P Gilbert did a survey beforehand of fan expectations on run stuffs and fans were way more optimistic about what is a realistic stuff rate. Voters in that poll thought at 10-15% stuff rate was acceptable when historically that is AMAZING.

    I'd say that the sack % isn't inherently meaningful when those in the high pressure cohort at most are 500 basis points above our own rate. It literally is the difference between 2 or 3 sacks to the overall passing attempts.

    Linking pressures to sacks would involve film study to reconcile, something these next gen stats by the nfl attempt to do without the need for eyeballs to some degree. They're just missing linking the two together fully.



    That makes sense.

    One thing I remember about the 2012-2014 teams was they were constantly collapsing the pocket and would force bad throws. Not getting home every time.

    2012 18th in sacks
    2013 8th
    2014 20th

    So I don't know if it is a pass rush issue or a coverage or both.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1957
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • sdog1981 wrote:
    mrt144 wrote:If it makes you feel any better, Minny had an 11% sack rate on passing 3rd downs and Philly had a 6% rate as well. Washington came in with a 9% sack rate.

    This is a related tangent - https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/2/13/17 ... issic-lacy - where John P Gilbert did a survey beforehand of fan expectations on run stuffs and fans were way more optimistic about what is a realistic stuff rate. Voters in that poll thought at 10-15% stuff rate was acceptable when historically that is AMAZING.

    I'd say that the sack % isn't inherently meaningful when those in the high pressure cohort at most are 500 basis points above our own rate. It literally is the difference between 2 or 3 sacks to the overall passing attempts.

    Linking pressures to sacks would involve film study to reconcile, something these next gen stats by the nfl attempt to do without the need for eyeballs to some degree. They're just missing linking the two together fully.



    That makes sense.

    One thing I remember about the 2012-2014 teams was they were constantly collapsing the pocket and would force bad throws. Not getting home every time.

    2012 18th in sacks
    2013 8th
    2014 20th

    So I don't know if it is a pass rush issue or a coverage or both.


    I thinks its probably a few factors overlapping.

    The character of pressures changed with more outside than inside. Would need to verify either by numbers or film.

    Tons of film on our defense and their tendencies. Speculative meta argument that posits other NFL teams are at least trying.

    Schematic choices to prevent explosive plays in coverage leading to a higher than expected short passing down conversion rate. Sadly would need to do exhaustive film study to get a sense of the changes over time and it would be very mundane eyeball measures of relative position of back 7 to their prior selves while trying to account for down and distance and/or specific deviations from status quo (like playing cover 2 in a specific situation rather than 3 deep zone)
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2745
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • Just for comps to other teams from the top 3

    3rd down passing 1st down conversion rate:

    1-4 yards to go: PHI - 37% | WAS - 26% | SEA - 67%
    4-6 yards to go: PHI - 47% | WAS - 42% | SEA - 46% (I made a typo above - that should be 46% not 84% - looked at the completions rather than attempts, this is why its always important to check yourself with each go around)
    7-9 yards to go: PHI - 25% | WAS - 32% | SEA - 26%
    10+ yards to go: PHI - 16.9% | WAS - 20% | SEA - 24%

    As you can see in the above, the 1-4 to go was the biggest aberration from the other two, with 3rd and 10+ being slightly worse than the other two.

    Rams: 59%-40%-43%-21%
    Jags - 55%-45%-21%-18%

    i really wish I had some good graphing software to illustrate the various conversion curves by distance according to team.
    Last edited by mrt144 on Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2745
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • "next gen stats" my ass.. nothing behind this ranking but a number.
    User avatar
    brimsalabim
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4054
    Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:50 am


  • brimsalabim wrote:"next gen stats" my ass.. nothing behind this ranking but a number.


    Again with the semantic argument. Next Gen Stats refers to the capture method and availability of the data.

    Here we will use the unique Next Gen Stats tracking data provided by the microchips in every player's shoulder pads to measure the best pass-rushing teams from the 2017 regular season. Overall sack totals are one way to measure a pass rush's effectiveness, but these often paint an incomplete picture of just how much a defense disrupts opposing passing games. Tracking pressures can help reveal the true productivity of a defensive front. These rankings were compiled using total pressures recorded by each team this past season.

    NOTE: Next Gen Stats defines a "pressure" as a pass-rushing play in which a defender gets within 2 yards of the opposing quarterback at the time of the throw or sack. Other outlets collect pressures using different methods, and these have value. What is and is not a pressure will always carry some level of debate, but NGS provides us a unique advantage in that the numbers rely not on the subjective eye test, but rather on objective results that are consistent across all plays.


    Like, try your best to decouple a brand name for bespoke NFL captured stats from what you consider next gen in a colloquial sense meaning, derivative 2nd order or higher stats.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2745
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • WindCityHawk wrote:Kee-ryst. You could tell some people that two and two is four and they'd just argue about how it feels like five.

    I'm really beginning to hate this board.


    Agreed. On both accounts.
    User avatar
    Chapow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2548
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:38 pm


  • sdog1981 wrote:
    mrt144 wrote:If it makes you feel any better, Minny had an 11% sack rate on passing 3rd downs and Philly had a 6% rate as well. Washington came in with a 9% sack rate.

    This is a related tangent - https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/2/13/17 ... issic-lacy - where John P Gilbert did a survey beforehand of fan expectations on run stuffs and fans were way more optimistic about what is a realistic stuff rate. Voters in that poll thought at 10-15% stuff rate was acceptable when historically that is AMAZING.

    I'd say that the sack % isn't inherently meaningful when those in the high pressure cohort at most are 500 basis points above our own rate. It literally is the difference between 2 or 3 sacks to the overall passing attempts.

    Linking pressures to sacks would involve film study to reconcile, something these next gen stats by the nfl attempt to do without the need for eyeballs to some degree. They're just missing linking the two together fully.



    That makes sense.

    One thing I remember about the 2012-2014 teams was they were constantly collapsing the pocket and would force bad throws. Not getting home every time.

    2012 18th in sacks
    2013 8th
    2014 20th

    So I don't know if it is a pass rush issue or a coverage or both.


    Or it might simply be good quarterbacks making great plays even under pressure. There IS another team playing against our defense, after all.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 15561
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • brimsalabim wrote:"next gen stats" my ass.. nothing behind this ranking but a number.


    So, what then? You think they just pulled numbers out of a hat and randomly assigned those numbers to each NFL team?

    Would it really be all that horrible for some of you guys to acknowledge that there were actually some things the Seahawks did well?
    User avatar
    Chapow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2548
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:38 pm


  • The Seahawks defensive line has been good at generating pressure (even without Cliff Avril and a hobbled Michael Bennett). But they weren't very good at finishing those pressures with sacks.

    Sheldon Richardson epitomizes this fact, in that he had a large number of pressures (36) but just one sack. It was great to finally have some interior pressure via Richardson/Reed/Jones, but we didn't have a super fast guy to finish those plays.

    Even if they do re-sign Richardson, it will be important to draft a true LEO pass rusher. It would great to add one of those SEC outside rushers: LSU's Arden Key, Auburn's Jeff Holland, Georgia's Lorenzo Carter, etc.
    User avatar
    hawknation2018
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1477
    Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:04 pm


  • Hmm this is interesting. I'd actually like to question the value of these pressures. What's the conversion rate into sacks? I'm glad to see Bennett was doing better than we thought, but did our pass rush pass the eye test? To me it didn't. I can think of at least three occasions where Bennett got past his lineman but got outrun by Drew Stanton or Dak, who made big plays out of it.

    Also, the distribution of pressures matters a lot. If we had a ton of pressures in the Washington game (which we still lost) and then close to zero pressures in the Titans and Jags games, that's a huge problem. Other games where it didn't seem like we were getting any pressure were the second Rams game, the Falcons game, and the home Cardinals game. The type of pressure also matters. Is it slow pressure due to coverage, or is it instant pressure like the kind Russ often faces. I can't think of more than three instances of our DL creating instant pressure that either resulted in a sack or a bad throw.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2415
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR




It is currently Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:16 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], jmahon316, Majestic-12 [Bot], SilNWest, Yahoo [Bot] and 122 guests