Erik Walden vs Dwight Freeney (By the numbers)

[Dustin]

You can't compare different schemes and personnel across that many different years in a Freeney/Walden/Mathis relevant conversation.  The only quasi real comparison is 2012 to 2013, and I'm not sure that is very supportive of the point you are trying to make.

 

I was just comparing the run defense. You honestly think this run defense is any better than what we've seen this past decade?

[Dustin]

The problem in run defense overall has been a moving target year to year, but the specific problem on display in KC last year is very relevant to the conversation we are having in this thread.  Edge play.  As for what we've been watching this year, the #1 issue in my book has been inconsistent ILB play, and the occassional blown assignment by crashing Mathis (or combination of the two).  We've been pretty sound as a DLine, they are good run stoppers.

 

I hear ya. I really wasn't talking about any specific players, more as the until as a whole. The shift to a defense that's able to (in theory) take away the run ins't really worth what you lose in the ability to stop the pass. Which, I feel, is more important.

[ztboiler]

I was just comparing the run defense. You honestly think this run defense is any better than what we've seen this past decade?

Yes, it is better situationally the than the average run D over that period, but that isn't really the point.  The comparison stemmed from the conversation about results with Freeney on our D last year and Walden this year.  The performance delta there is relevant.

[Dustin]

Yes, it is better situationally the than the average run D over that period, but that isn't really the point.  The comparison stemmed from the conversation about results with Freeney on our D last year and Walden this year.  The performance delta there is relevant.

 

No, it was about the defense with Walden this year vs the defenses with Freeney over the past decade. 

[ztboiler]

I hear ya. I really wasn't talking about any specific players, more as the until as a whole. The shift to a defense that's able to (in theory) take away the run ins't really worth what you lose in the ability to stop the pass. Which, I feel, is more important.

I don't have any stats other than that Mathis/Walden at 19.5 sacks combined are much greater that Freeney/Mathis at 14 combined.  However, I feel like we are getting comparable pressure on the QB through scheme and a great year by Mathis compared to our average years of Freeney and Mathis in their prime, while being much better situationally against the run and have a foundation to build on with better ILB play in the future to be a top 10 run D.

[Dustin]

I don't have any stats other than that Mathis/Walden at 19.5 sacks combined are much greater that Freeney/Mathis at 14 combined.  However, I feel like we are getting comparable pressure on the QB through scheme and a great year by Mathis compared to our average years of Freeney and Mathis in their prime, while being much better situationally against the run and have a foundation to build on with better ILB play in the future to be a top 10 run D.

 

Not even close. If Mathis gets shutdown it's pretty much over. See: The Bengals game. 

 

You can pretty much double team Mathis and leave any decent TE to block Walden half of the time and the defense has no answer. Unless of course we play bad QBs like Fitzmagic and Keenum. 

[ztboiler]

No, it was about the defense with Walden this year vs the defenses with Freeney over the past decade. 

Fair enough.  It's your point to make.

[Superman]

I picked the simplest one. How about DVOA?

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2009

 

Regardless, the run defense is about on par to what we've had over the past 10 years. 

 

No, not DVOA, either. (By the way, DVOA has the Colts run defense ranked better this year than last.) DVOA is completely subjective when it comes to separating QB carries from RB carries, or traditional runs from option runs.

 

I don't completely dismiss these advanced metrics, but I don't think any stat tells the full story. Our run defense is better this year than last year, and Walden and Mathis at OLB is better than Mathis and Freeney. We still need more pass rush, and we need to be a little more stout in the middle against the run, but our defensive front is much more capable of handling a traditional rushing attack than it was in years past. We've been susceptible to scrambling QBs and option runs, but that's a different story.

[ztboiler]

Not even close. If Mathis gets shutdown it's pretty much over. See: The Bengals game. 

 

You can pretty much double team Mathis and leave any decent TE to block Walden half of the time and the defense has no answer. Unless of course we play bad QBs like Fitzmagic and Keenum. 

It was always similar to that with Freeney and Mathis in their prime. There was the feeling of pressure through reputation, but those guys got pushed wide for whole games sometimes and disappeared - QB stepped up in the pocket and picked apart our soft zone.  We are setting on 34 sacks right now with 2 games to play.  We seldom eclipsed 40 with Freeney and Mathis.

[Jason_]

The problem in run defense overall has been a moving target year to year, but the specific problem on display in KC last year is very relevant to the conversation we are having in this thread.  Edge play.  As for what we've been watching this year, the #1 issue in my book has been inconsistent ILB play, and the occassional blown assignment by crashing Mathis (or combination of the two).  We've been pretty sound as a DLine, they are good run stoppers.

 

Exactly...great post.  I don't even think Mathis has blown any assignments by crashing down...that seems to be the plan and they've been doing it all season.  I even had a post I was working on pretty much saying the same thing but I got called away from my desk and didn't get a chance to finish it.  But when Mathis crashes, it's the ILB on that side that's supposed to cover anyone attempting to go to the edge on that side.  They've been doing this all season.  The reason we gave up so many yards rushing against the Raiders is that the ILB's and safeties were not fast enough to keep Pryor from getting the edge.  

 

I was just comparing the run defense. You honestly think this run defense is any better than what we've seen this past decade?

 

Yes, absolutely so and it will get significantly better after an upgrade or 2 at ILB.

[Dustin]

No, not DVOA, either. (By the way, DVOA has the Colts run defense ranked better this year than last.) DVOA is completely subjective when it comes to separating QB carries from RB carries, or traditional runs from option runs.

 

I don't completely dismiss these advanced metrics, but I don't think any stat tells the full story. Our run defense is better this year than last year, and Walden and Mathis at OLB is better than Mathis and Freeney. We still need more pass rush, and we need to be a little more stout in the middle against the run, but our defensive front is much more capable of handling a traditional rushing attack than it was in years past. We've been susceptible to scrambling QBs and option runs, but that's a different story.

 

Right, but Im not talking about just last year. Im comparing this year to the defenses over the past decade. 

 

My main point was that I don't think that the slight difference between the run defense this year vs the run defense of the past 10 years is big enough to warrant the big drop in the ability to rush the passer.

[Superman]

Exactly...great post.  I don't even think Mathis has blown any assignments by crashing down...that seems to be the plan and they've been doing it all season.  I even had a post I was working on pretty much saying the same thing but I got called away from my desk and didn't get a chance to finish it.  But when Mathis crashes, it's the ILB on that side that's supposed to cover anyone attempting to go to the edge on that side.  They've been doing this all season.  The reason we gave up so many yards rushing against the Raiders is that the ILB's and safeties were not fast enough to keep Pryor from getting the edge.

 

 

Yes, absolutely so and it will get significantly better after an upgrade or 2 at ILB.

 

I don't know. I think we installed that scrape/exchange after the Raiders game. Before that, it was mostly contain with a slow read, and we were crashing too hard on the back. We did well with both techniques against the Niners, and had mixed results against the Seahawks.

 

Overall, I agree with your post.

[Dustin]

It was always similar to that with Freeney and Mathis in their prime. There was the feeling of pressure through reputation, but those guys got pushed wide for whole games sometimes and disappeared - QB stepped up in the pocket and picked apart our soft zone.  We are setting on 34 sacks right now with 2 games to play.  We seldom eclipsed 40 with Freeney and Mathis.

 

Nope. Both players were always top 15 (excluding 2011) in pass rush productivity all the way back to 2008 (i don' have data past then).

 

Both top 5 in 2008.

 

#1 and #2 overall in 2009. 

 

#8 and #10 in 2010. 

 

#15 and #17 in 2011

 

#9 and #12 in 2012. 

[Superman]

Right, but Im not talking about just last year. Im comparing this year to the defenses over the past decade. 

 

My main point was that I don't think that the slight difference between the run defense this year vs the run defense of the past 10 years is big enough to warrant the big drop in the ability to rush the passer.

 

I think you're making a clunky comparison. I see your point, but I disagree with it in many ways.

 

I think we all agree we need another pass rusher, and that we could do better getting interior penetration. And I think most of us feel that the run defense will improve as we continue upgrading up the middle of the defensive front. But I definitely prefer the way we try to contain the run now to the way we used to play the run.

[Jason_]

Not even close. If Mathis gets shutdown it's pretty much over. See: The Bengals game. 

 

You can pretty much double team Mathis and leave any decent TE to block Walden half of the time and the defense has no answer. Unless of course we play bad QBs like Fitzmagic and Keenum. 

 

Try comparing the Colts player's sacks to the Ravens player's sacks.  The numbers are very similar.  One or two guys with the majority of the sacks and several other guys with less than a handful. 

 

As has been mentioned, the Colts have 34 sacks (with 2 games to play) which puts the Colts tied at 17th in the NFL.  In previous years:

 

2013: 34 sacks, T-17th (with 2 games to play)

2012: 32 sacks, T-23rd

2011: 29 sacks, T-27th

2010: 30 sacks, T-23rd

2009: 34 sacks, T-16th

2008: 30 sacks, T-16th

2007: 28 sacks, T-26th

2006: 25 sacks, T-30th

 

you'd have to go back to 2005 to find a year when the Colts had more sacks for the entire season than they do already this year:

 

2005: 46 sacks, 5th

2004: 45 sacks, T-3rd

2003: 31 sacks, 23rd

2002: 36 sacks, T-16th

2001: 40 sacks, T-16th

2000: 42 sacks, T-12th

[ztboiler]

Nope. Both players were always top 15 (excluding 2011) in pass rush productivity all the way back to 2008 (i don' have data past then).

 

Both top 5 in 2008.

 

#1 and #2 overall in 2009. 

 

#8 and #10 in 2010. 

 

#15 and #17 in 2011

 

#9 and #12 in 2012. 

You are picking and choosing your stats.  Compare teams if you want to compare teams and compare players in similar roles if you want to compare players.

[Dustin]

Try comparing the Colts player's sacks to the Ravens player's sacks.  The numbers are very similar.  One or two guys with the majority of the sacks and several other guys with less than a handful. 

 

As has been mentioned, the Colts have 34 sacks (with 2 games to play) which puts the Colts tied at 17th in the NFL.  In previous years:

 

2013: 34 sacks, T-17th (with 2 games to play)

2012: 32 sacks, T-23rd

2011: 29 sacks, T-27th

2010: 30 sacks, T-23rd

2009: 34 sacks, T-16th

2008: 30 sacks, T-16th

2007: 28 sacks, T-26th

2006: 25 sacks, T-30th

 

you'd have to go back to 2005 to find a year when the Colts had more sacks for the entire season than they do already this year:

 

2005: 46 sacks, 5th

2004: 45 sacks, T-3rd

2003: 31 sacks, 23rd

2002: 36 sacks, T-16th

2001: 40 sacks, T-16th

2000: 42 sacks, T-12th

 

The problem is that sacks aren't a very good indicator of how good your D-line is at getting pressure on the QB. Look at the numbers I posted above about Mathis and Freeney's pressure numbers. Both are always in the top 12 (excluding 2008). 

 

PFF has our pass rush grade as the 2nd lowest we've had over the past 5 years, only behind 2011. 

[Dustin]

You are picking and choosing your stats.  Compare teams if you want to compare teams and compare players in similar roles if you want to compare players.

 

No I'm not. The comment you quoted has nothing to do with anything other than the part of your comment other than the part I bolded which said:

 

 It was always similar to that with Freeney and Mathis in their prime. There was the feeling of pressure through reputation,.

 

 

 

Mathis and Freeney got a ton of pressure over the years. 

[ztboiler]

No I'm not. The comment you quoted has nothing to do with anything other than the part of your comment other than the part I bolded which said:

 

 

Mathis and Freeney got a ton of pressure over the years. 

C'mon man, nobody is arguing whether or not Mathis and Freeney got a ton of pressure - all time greats.....compare individuals or compare teams but don't mix and match

[Dustin]

C'mon man, nobody is arguing whether or not Mathis and Freeney got a ton of pressure - all time greats.....compare individuals or compare teams but don't mix and match

 

Again, I don't know what you mean by this. I wasn't debating anything other than the part of your argument I bolded. 

[Balzer40]

 

 

 

Mathis and Freeney got a ton of pressure over the years. 

 

 

...and what did it do for us??? The Colts were always one of the worst and softest defense's yr. in and yr. out. Whoopty do, we got pressure on the QB. They still didn't create many turnovers, they still got continually burned against the run, and with the exception of 2 yrs., they fell woefully short of expectations. All I'm saying is, that pressure don't mean anything if you still can't cover and you still can't stop the run.

[Superman]

...and what did it do for us??? The Colts were always one of the worst and softest defense's yr. in and yr. out. Whoopty do, we got pressure on the QB. They still didn't create many turnovers, they still got continually burned against the run, and with the exception of 2 yrs., they fell woefully short of expectations. All I'm saying is, that pressure don't mean anything if you still can't cover and you still can't stop the run.

 

And it got worse as time went on. Both were top five in PRP in 2008, but the pass defense and the run defense sucked that year (and that's something that doesn't show up so well in the raw stats, but it's absolutely true).

 

At least with Freeney and Mathis, we had the tendency to come up with big sacks/pressures at the end of the game.

[Dustin]

...and what did it do for us??? The Colts were always one of the worst and softest defense's yr. in and yr. out. Whoopty do, we got pressure on the QB. They still didn't create many turnovers, they still got continually burned against the run, and with the exception of 2 yrs., they fell woefully short of expectations. All I'm saying is, that pressure don't mean anything if you still can't cover and you still can't stop the run.

 

This last decade we couldn't stop the run, but we could get pressure on the QB. Now, they can't do either. I don't see how you can blame not being able to cover on Freeney and Mathis.

 

We're still getting burned against the run and still can't create turnovers consistently. 

[Superman]

This last decade we couldn't stop the run, but we could get pressure on the QB. Now, they can't do either. I don't see how you can blame not being able to cover on Freeney and Mathis.

 

We're still getting burned against the run and still can't create turnovers consistently. 

 

That's the major source of my disagreement. I think we're significantly better against the run, and have the potential to continue to get better. I think the outliers are a couple of bad games overall (Cincinnati, Seattle, maybe San Diego), and a couple games where QBs have picked up yards on us. 

 

And I think our pass rushing this season has suffered for multiple reasons, but I also think that's easily fixable. I don't think you have to surrender sound run defense in order to be more effective rushing the passer. We should be striving to improve both, not pining for a time past when we could do one better than the other.

[Balzer40]

This last decade we couldn't stop the run, but we could get pressure on the QB. Now, they can't do either. I don't see how you can blame not being able to cover on Freeney and Mathis.

 

We're still getting burned against the run and still can't create turnovers consistently. 

 

 

 

Well, our opinions differ on that still, but thats ok. I think were much improved against the run than in yrs. past despite what the stats you posted earlier says. I also think were well on the plus side of turnovers this yr. as opposed to yrs. past. I also look at it as this is the 2nd yr. of this defense and IMO the 1st real yr. of a major overhaul of personnel for the 3-4. Give this defense another yr. or 2 and I think were well on our way to a top defense. We couldn't rebuild everything in 1 offseason and I'm surprised that so many thought we should be able too. 10+ yrs. of the God awful undersized defenses we had with Dungy and Caldwell and it continually got worse and never better. I think we owe it to this defense to give it more than 2 yrs. and only one with some of the right personnel.

[Dustin]

That's the major source of my disagreement. I think we're significantly better against the run, and have the potential to continue to get better. I think the outliers are a couple of bad games overall (Cincinnati, Seattle, maybe San Diego), and a couple games where QBs have picked up yards on us. 

 

And I think our pass rushing this season has suffered for multiple reasons, but I also think that's easily fixable. I don't think you have to surrender sound run defense in order to be more effective rushing the passer. We should be striving to improve both, not pining for a time past when we could do one better than the other.

 

Exactly. Like I said, ideally you'd want a player who can do both. But If i was forced to choose between a guy like Freeney in his prime vs a guy like Walden in his prime? I'm picking Freeney every time.

 

Just seems like a philosophical difference. I don't think anyone is going to change anyone elses mind here. 

[Superman]

Exactly. Like I said, ideally you'd want a player who can do both. But If i was forced to choose between a guy like Freeney in his prime vs a guy like Walden in his prime? I'm picking Freeney every time.

 

Just seems like a philosophical difference. I don't think anyone is going to change anyone elses mind here. 

 

Duh. No one wants Walden when you can have Freeney. But I think we could have used Freeney better overall, and especially last year (when he was hurt). And I think, at this point, there's no question Walden is better for our run defense. AAAANDDD, I think we can improve our pass rush with Walden. We must, in fact. But that's a different topic.

[AntonMcG]

They play different positions... why is this being discussed?

[jvan1973]

ill try to put it while relating to indiana. you're a goat one day and a prized pig the next

says the guy whose never been to Indiana

[GoColts8818]

It's telling when a guy who wasn't brought here to be a Freeney clone has only slightly worse pass rushing numbers than Freeney had. 

 

He's done what he was brought here to do.  Play the run and be able to give you a little pass rush now and then.