How Can We Better Evaluate ILB/MLB From a Statistical Perspective?

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

I'm bringing this up because of 2 things:

1. I want another thread where I can tell everyone how bad Bobby Wagner was this year, despite leading the NFL in tackles.
2. I'm actually curious if there's other metrics out there to evaluate ILB play

So, as I stated above, Bobby Wagner was the NFL's leading "total tackler" this season with 183. He was 4th in solo tackles (96), and also #1 in assisted tackles (87).  source

Despite these stats, which historically would lead someone to believe that this player is playing at a high level, I believe Bobby Wagner's 2023 season is a great example of how misleading tackle stats can be for an ILB.

This year, Bobby Wagner was not only a liability in pass coverage for the Seahawks, where he was routinely exposed in space, but the Seahawks rush defense was 31st in the NFL with 138.4 rushing yards/game allowed, and a whopping 4.7 YPC on the ground, and Wagner is the MLB and anchor of this defense.

I could spend a lot more time, and there was an article from I think mid-October or November highlighting a bunch of plays throughout the year where Wagner just gets lost in space or blows his assignment but makes a tackle 10 yards down the field, but I can't find it right now...

So overall - how can we better evaluate ILB play? Is there a stat where it takes into account someone's average tackle depth, so a guy who averages making a tackle 10 yards down the field vs. a guy who makes one 3 yards down the field? 

Edited January 9 by AFlaccoSeagulls

[MaddHatter]

Some LB'ers benefit from defensive linemen eating up blockers with the intention of keeping the LB'ers clean to make tackles.  So looking at those guys in a margin of 2-3yards from the LOS and their Tackles for Loss and Run Stuffs would be a start.  Other guys have penetrating DLmen and are often required to shed their own blocker to get to a defender, in which case looking at their success rate defeating a blocker and making the tackle would be ideal.  Then you have the coverage aspect, where I feel like looking at them like a DB is relative and how often they're giving up catches that aren't behind the line dump offs to RB's.  Again, passes defended isn't the best metric, but rather the opposing QB's comp % against them perhaps?  

Edited January 9 by MaddHatter

[Jakuvious]

To add to this, tackles themselves still aren't an officially counted stat. They're counted by the team on game day, but not verified afterwards, leading to sometimes pretty large discrepancies in tallying, and a lot of subjectivity on what counts as an assist especially. Solo tackles are also a terribly misleading way to describe what it actually is, because it doesn't truly mean a solo tackle, but a tackle where that player was the primary tackler on the play. So if, say, Wagner stands up a RB and then Jamal Adams comes in to finish it off, Wagner gets a solo tackle, Adams gets an assist. Which is not what they sound like intuitively. It's a little better than it used to be, back like 20 years ago some teams would count like 30 assists per game, while some were counting less than 10. Like, Wagner had more assists this year than the 2006 Rams.

It's honestly just a terrible stat all around.

[AkronsWitness]

Just to be sure, by ILB/MLB you just mean actual LBs correct and not DEs pretending to be listed at LB because EDGE still isn't a accounted for position in the NFL?

Tackles aint it. Prime example being Alex Singleton was 3rd in the NFL in tackles and 5th in assists. Most people would say he is a below avg LB who needs to be replaced. This backs up your point about Bobby Wagners hollow tackle numbers.

I would say depth of tackle matters, though I dont think even PFF tracks that specific. A LB chasing a RB and making a tackle 7 yards past the LOS isnt a good thing. I guess you can measure TFLs to show 'impact' tackles:

• Jeremiah Owusu-Koramah- 20
• Lavonte David- 17
• Quincy Williams- 15

In todays age coverage ability almost matters more since traditional MLBs are becoming more extinct in place of rangy sideline to sideline LBs. In that case Pass Breakups is still a good stat to measure coverage ability.

• Fred Warner- 11
• Logan Wilson- 9
• Andrew Van Ginkle- 8

Edited January 9 by AkronsWitness

[scar988]

4 pieces should go into evaluating linebackers.

1) Impact plays: PDs, FFs, FRs, INTs, sacks, QB Hits.

2) Run stop %: Tackles at or behind the line compared to total tackles and Missed tackle %

3) Coverage: Passer rating allowed

4) Pass rush win rate. Sacks/Pressure per pass rush snaps

[Soko]

I don’t think there’s a single stat or advanced metric that can/will encapsulate all it takes to play LBer. 

And that kind of goes for every position - there’s not one stat that’ll tell you how good or bad someone is - but it’s even more so for LBers. Your two gappers up front can’t hold their gaps and force you to eat linemen all day? You take awful angles and shoot the wrong gap? Your coordinator is forcing you against heavy fronts vs nickel because they’re afraid of the pass? Your big guys are undersized and specialize as pass rush specialists, thus giving you no space? You make tackles but they’re down field? They’re the closest thing to “QB of the defense” and are used in so many different that it becomes super hard to quantify their value. 

[BetterCallSaul]

Linebackers are so different. They need to be evaluated on film.

[scar988]

28 minutes ago, BetterCallSaul said:

Linebackers are so different. They need to be evaluated on film.

Agreed, but people who are good in all 4 spots of my 4 things I listed out tend to pop heavily on film as great linebackers. Think Prime Wagner or current Warner.

[Soko]

2 hours ago, scar988 said:

Agreed, but people who are good in all 4 spots of my 4 things I listed out tend to pop heavily on film as great linebackers. Think Prime Wagner or current Warner.

Bobby Wagner’s passer rating allow in his last three All-Pro seasons were 80.3, 108.2, and 88.9. 

Passer rating for a LBer is so flunky because how they get used will drastically change things. Like, a LBer misused enough is going to line up over slot receivers sometimes. Playing man on TEs. Taking the RB on the wheel or angle route. Versus a guy who primarily just sits in the middle of the field and reads the QB. 

Better numbers is usually a good thing, but the lack thereof (meeting some sort of minimum threshold, for things like tackles, I guess) really doesn’t imply all that much. When I see Fred Warner giving up a 100+ passer rating, it doesn’t register with me at all. You watch the guy, you know he’s elite in coverage.

Edited January 9 by Soko

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

18 minutes ago, Soko said:

Bobby Wagner’s passer rating allow in his last three All-Pro seasons were 80.3, 108.2, and 88.9. 

Passer rating for a LBer is so flunky because how they get used will drastically that. Like, a LBer misused enough is going to line up over slot receivers sometimes. Playing man on TEs. Taking the RB on the wheel or angle route. Versus a guy who primarily just sits in the middle of the field and reads the QB. 

Better numbers is usually a good thing, but the lack thereof (meeting some sort of minimum threshold, for things like tackles, I guess) really doesn’t imply all that much. When I see Fred Warner giving up a 100+ passer rating, it doesn’t register with me at all. You watch the guy, you know he’s elite in coverage.

Moreover, because coverages are so hard to define, passer rating when targeted often doesn't account for blown coverages.

For example, Tariq Woolen has two very distinct plays this year where HE blew a coverage, yet it wasn't credited as him being targeted.

The first is here:

https://www.49ers.com/video/george-kittle-touchdown-49ers-san-francisco-seattle-seahawks-week-14

Watch 27 at the top of the screen. He's in a deep third responsibility (Carroll confirmed this in the post-game presser from this game and the All-22 confirmed as well), but he bites on the PA fake (because he sucks) and then Kittle is wide open and Julian Love has to try to recover for him. He was not credited as being targeted on this play because he blew the coverage and was nowhere to be found.

Another is here:

https://x.com/mattyfbrown/status/1742305868807377093?s=20

Woolen again doesn't play the right coverage and leaves a WR wide open, again not credited as being targeted because he blew the coverage.

All of this to say....sometimes stats suck lol

EDIT: As a bonus, that 2nd link contains some awful clips of Bobby Wagner!

Edited January 9 by AFlaccoSeagulls