03-03-2021, 03:09 PM
(03-03-2021, 09:48 AM)Au165 Wrote: At the end of the day, no one in the NFL thinks Maxx Crosby is in the same world as Carl Lawson, why is that then? Oh right, that's because there is more to a defensive end than the 2.5% or so times they get credited with a sack on pass rush reps. The other 97.5% of their time matters too and you see generating pressures, hurries, hits, and throwaways all have value. Crosby gets brought up because his rookie year had gaudy sack numbers but outside of that, he wasn't much of a factor in the passing game. If a QB throws the ball away or throws an errant pass on 3rd down the result is almost the same as a sack. Arguing that the loss of yards matters would mean we need to value sacks differently, for instance when a guy gets tackled right at the line of scrimmage versus 10 yards back, but you aren't and we don't hence another reason just saying "sacks" doesn't frame their value.
I brought up TFL, not because of Lawson but to show again that your stats about what happens after a sack and how "important" they are is cherry-picking. TFL is the same result as a sack, a negative play, and loss of down, yet you have constantly harped on sack totals. TFL should be looked at like sacks in terms of mattering but also like sacks can be misleading. Unforced negative runs by backs don't make the defender better just because a back tried to reverse field instead of taking the 1 yard gain.
To your "win's don't produce anything" that is really the worst of all arguments. Sacks as an outcome are great, and this is where you are getting hung up. The idea of a sack is a positive thing, however, who is credited doesn't translate. I mentioned before a QB who runs out of bounds is sacked and if a DE gets a finger on him around the time he does he gets a sack. That QB should have thrown the ball away rather than go out of bounds (looking at you Derek Carr), so why do we want to give the DE who was blocked too long and never forced him out of the pocket any recognition for going over and touching a QB with one hand that happened to be the first one to get to a guy who made a bad play? The same thing goes for when a QB runs out of a clean pocket into the back of his own lineman and basically gets sacked by his own guy, why credit the defender who didn't actually win the rep? If a team rolls away from you, and you blow your guy up and chase the QB into that lineman you are the one who actually created the negative play, hence why we value winning a rep over simply looking at outcomes
We are starting to do this same thing on offense now as we have seen them evolve into these college-based offenses. A QB who does a pop pass to a WR on a jet motion gets credited with a completion. If that WR takes it 90 yards and scores a TD that QB also gets credited with 90 yards and a TD, did the QB actually add any value? The answer is no. We have to look past the box score numbers and better understand players' roles in plays and how much they actually had to do with the outcomes.
Again, this isn't even a debate as it is universally understood inside the league. No one in the NFL thinks Maxx Crosby is better than Carl Lawson, no matter the sack totals. No one in the NFL thinks sacks are all that important in evaluating players' skill, especially compared to total pressures. Relying on outcomes versus looking at how those outcomes occur is for fans, not for personal people. FA is about paying for skill, winning reps is more indicative of skill than simply being credited for a single type of play that you may or may not have had much to do with.
Great post, there is so much more to Lawson than just the sack totals and TFL's. He can constantly collapse a pocket and get
pressures. He is one of the best at this in the NFL. Bring him back is my vote, Lawson is not the reason we were last in sacks
last season. The other players were and the injuries to our DT's were devastating.
