Are Sacks overrated?

[TheKillerNacho]

Just now, frenchie said:

So you're more impressed with the guy who almost gets the sack, rather than the guy who actually gets the sack?

I think the notion is that a QB pressure and sack are almost as valuable as eachother (personally I'd value an actual sack slightly higher). So if a pressure is worth, say 0.8 sacks, then yes, the guy with 70 pressures and 5 sacks (61) is worth far more than a guy with 14 sack sand 25 pressures (34).

I'd hope no one is arguing sacks are bad. Merely that sacks aren't the only metric in determining DE effectiveness. Which is true... sacks are usually statistical anomalies after achieving a pressure and are thus subject to having a low sample size. Players with the most sacks aren't necessarily the best pass rushers - merely the ones who were fortunate enough to have their pressure turned into a sack.

[megatechpc]

Sacks are the most important stat for a pass rusher.  I don't care how many times you come close, I care how many times you actually get the sack.  Its like saying rushing yards are overrated when judging a RB.

[JAF-N72EX]

8 minutes ago, megatechpc said:

Sacks are the most important stat for a pass rusher.  I don't care how many times you come close, I care how many times you actually get the sack.  Its like saying rushing yards are overrated when judging a RB.

They can be and often do. If a RB rushes 18 times all game and only gains 65 yards. Then suddenly breaks one that goes for 40+ in the last 4 minutes....it may look good on a stat sheet but in reality they were ineffective all game. Context matters.

[CrashMan510]

They can be when judging an individual player. Pressures, qb hits, play vs run, and double teams commanded are all equally/more important than individual sacks.

 

[jrry32]

Yes.

[CrashMan510]

Khalil mack only had 4 sacks his rookie year but he was still every bit as dominant as he was the year he got 15 sacks.

 

[megatechpc]

I dunno fellas, I'll take a guy that gets 20 sacks in a season regardless of WHATEVER his other stats are...

[Danger]

5 hours ago, DingoLadd said:

This, you need the full roulette of stats to judge a pass rusher. If a dude has 14 sacks but 25 pressures that's pretty blegh, whereas a dude with 70 pressures and 5 sacks is a much better pass rusher. 

Yup Brandon Graham is a great example of this. Gets a ton of pressure, but not too many sacks. That said, no sacks aren't overrated.

[CrashMan510]

iirc jason babin had like 16 sacks a couple of years ago and dude was complete *** vs the run. But yeah context is everything

[FalconFan13]

6 hours ago, DutchFalcon said:

Are you Mike Smith?*
 

 

 

*if you are just send me a pm, I'll never betray you.

LOLOL inside joke for the Falcon fans here that was pretty good.  I still can't believe he said that lord knows 92.9 the game and mike bell blast him still to this day about that.

[DontTazeMeBro]

I used to think that. But NFL QBs are too good. If you get the pressure but don’t get them on the ground you can get torched 

[JAF-N72EX]

5 minutes ago, FalconFan13 said:

LOLOL inside joke for the Falcon fans here that was pretty good.  I still can't believe he said that lord knows 92.9 the game and mike bell blast him still to this day about that.

Smith used to be a good DC (in fact, I'm still convinced that he is the ONLY reason Del-Rio has been around and why he obtained his legacy as a "defensive-minded coach"). But he may be becoming yet another one those coaches who can't adapt to recent times. 

[VigilantZombie]

Sacks are definitely not overrated. Sacks = opposition failure which is exactly what you want. Sacks also can lead to QBs and OL trying to hurry to avoid them and result in false starts, bad/rushed throws, or turnovers.

[3rivers]

they are a part of the puzzle. If a team gets a lot of sacks with strictly 4 players rushing, it is a good stat. Blitzing is risky so that might not be worth it vs good  QB's, so the end result is what matters most. 

I would rather have a conservative D that allowed the fewest points than the team with most sacks that allowed twice as many points. 

3 hours ago, frenchie said:

So you're more impressed with the guy who almost gets the sack, rather than the guy who actually gets the sack?

his point is that the less flashy stat player will have more overall influence and possibly could be drawing more attention and freeing up other players and allow more flexibility for the DC. If pressures are directly related to more INT's then it's good.  Then consider run D f these players,  that can't be forgotten either. In the end, numbers give an idea, the video replay should explain it a bit better. Of course, most of the stats are influenced by who they played. 

An outsider, even broadcasters , might not know what some of the more dedicated fans do about their team. TV says so and so had 7 sacks and is ready to break out in season 4.  Fans of the team so and so is on knows he got most of those sacks after 5 seconds ala garbage  and vs bad teams and stiffs.  PFF has their own way of grading players, but it has critics as well. 

There have been lots of defences that had more sacks than the 2000 Ravens, but not many were as good or better, just for an example .  Different times, but you get the idea. 

[3rivers]

1 hour ago, megatechpc said:

I dunno fellas, I'll take a guy that gets 20 sacks in a season regardless of WHATEVER his other stats are...

what if he doesn't care about run D? There was a player like that and his own teammates didn't like that he had no regard for run D.