Are Sacks overrated?

[ET80]

2 hours ago, bucsfan333 said:

939 out of 1,118 sacks (83.99%) last year resulted in a drive being killed. Conversely, just 179 out of 1,118 sacks (16.01%) resulted in the offense being able to bounce back and sustain their drive, even if just for one more set of downs. The difference is staggering. Defenses are almost 70% more likely to kill a drive after getting a sack than they are to surrender another set of downs.

Well, I've heard enough. 

Seriously, stop talking @bucsfan333.

[bucsfan333]

20 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Well, I've heard enough. 

Seriously, stop talking @bucsfan333.

?

[NFLExpert49]

Sacks are so highly correlated with pressures that it's hardly worth differentiating between the two.

If a guy gets 20 sacks, you can be pretty sure he's also among the leaders in hurries. 

[FalconFan13]

21 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

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. 

I still love Smitty and think he done well for the Falcons he turned us from a joke of a franchise into a contender and our 1st back to back winning seasons.  He will always have respect from me and also as a Jags fan as well as Falcons fan i think the world of him as a DC when he was with the jags.  But it's possible the way the game is played now might have been to much for him to change up his schemes to match it well. 

[Forge]

6 hours ago, NFLExpert49 said:

Sacks are so highly correlated with pressures that it's hardly worth differentiating between the two.

If a guy gets 20 sacks, you can be pretty sure he's also among the leaders in hurries. 

Vic Beasley laughs at this (yes, I realize this is an exception and not the rule...) 

[El Ramster]

18 minutes ago, Forge said:

Vic Beasley laughs at this (yes, I realize this is an exception and not the rule...) 

Dude was cheeks today.. No moves. The rate he finished his sacks that year was just pure insanity and something we’ll likely never see again. It was like something out of Space.. 

[JAF-N72EX]

16 minutes ago, Forge said:

Vic Beasley laughs at this (yes, I realize this is an exception and not the rule...) 

So does Adrian Clayborn. 

IMo, sacks are not overrated in the least but they can be when they're used in the wrong way without context.

I think @FourThreeMafia has summed it up perfectly.

 

BTW, Forge, I'm not following, I swear lol.

 

 

[JaguarCrazy2832]

On 9/5/2018 at 7:49 PM, 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. 

What defines a pressure exactly? Its a stat we all love even though it isn't a sack but isn't it pretty tough to know the difference between what is and isn't

[Stevein2012]

Sacks aren't overrated for the impact they have but as an individual stat I think they are.  Really what makes a great pass rusher is how often and easily they can beat the guy across from them and sacks are a really narrow picture of whether that's happening.  A player can get completely stonewalled while the other pass rusher beats his man and pressures the QB into him and he gets a sack, which player had the most impact on the play.  There aren't really any reliable well defined stats for pressure or overall pass rushing impact though so it's either sacks or eye test. 

I have always gotten a kick out of how worshiped sack stats are though while TFLs are essentially brushed off as nothing and rarely discussed.

[whitehops]

the impact a sack has on a drive is huge, i don't think that is overrated. sacks as a predictive stat for production or sacks alone as a measure of a player's ability is overrated. 

[DingoLadd]

On 9/5/2018 at 11:31 PM, 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'm more impressed with the guy who doesn't just have like 4-6 good games and that's it vs. the guy who consistently gets QB pressure. 

Like Brandon Graham or Aaron Donald, both are very good players but the sacks don't tell the full story of how disruptive they are.

[DingoLadd]

6 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

What defines a pressure exactly? Its a stat we all love even though it isn't a sack but isn't it pretty tough to know the difference between what is and isn't

Everyone has a different defintion but it's basically forcing the QB to move more quickly than if he had normal protection, thus a pressure.

QB Hits are also a big indicator. 

[theJ]

7 minutes ago, DingoLadd said:

6 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

What defines a pressure exactly? Its a stat we all love even though it isn't a sack but isn't it pretty tough to know the difference between what is and isn't

Everyone has a different defintion but it's basically forcing the QB to move more quickly than if he had normal protection, thus a pressure.

QB Hits are also a big indicator. 

And some pressures are more disruptive than others.  For example, edge pressure is relatively easy for a QB to escape if the pocket is otherwise clean.  He can step up and make a throw, or step up and roll out if other options aren't open.  Interior pressure is usually very tough to escape because the only real option is try to roll out - very hard to do when your feet are set to move forward and you need to go backward/sideways, and a 325 lb bully is crashing down on you.

I like the pressure stat too, but it doesn't tell a complete picture since it's somewhat qualitative still.

[NFLExpert49]

On 9/7/2018 at 12:44 AM, JustAnotherFan said:

So does Adrian Clayborn. 

IMo, sacks are not overrated in the least but they can be when they're used in the wrong way without context.

I think @FourThreeMafia has summed it up perfectly.

 

BTW, Forge, I'm not following, I swear lol.

 

 

Clayborn did it all in the same game, though. That's a separate matter.

 

[43M]

Yesterday was another example of how sacks CAN BE overrated...

TJ Watt technically had 4 sacks.     Dont get me wrong, TJ was flying around everywhere like an animal, but 2 of his 4 sacks were incredibly cheap sacks that he didnt earn...and another one was when he was being blocked by a TE.   There will be many that didnt watch the game that simply look at his stats and see 4 sacks and get the wrong impression.   Some Steelers beat writers back in the late 90s used to call these types of sacks "Gildong's"  because most of Jason Gildon's sacks came when he was either not being blocked, blocked by a TE or RB, coverage sacks or some other cheap way.

Actually, something similar happened last year with Anthony Chickillo in the opener vs the Browns.    Chickillo had 2 extremely cheap sacks, and he basically did nothing the rest of the season.  

Ive seen countless examples of these types of sacks over the years THROUGHOUT the NFL.    

So again, yes, without context, sacks are absolutely overrated.