Dline and pressure - kicking a dead horse.

[2006Coltsbestever]

19 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, I do the same, and IMO, that's casual viewing. Neither of us does it for every player, on every play of every game. But so as not to make a big deal out of that term, what I mean is that the way we view games is casual compared to PFF's much more rigorous and triple-validated process.

That is fair. Your point is, I really don't know how much certain people study the game. I don't, so I agree. I just think I have great knowledge too, I think you do too, so does @NewColtsFan, and so do a few others in here. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

22 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I go by PFF a lot, but I recognize there's a lot personal opinion in their grading from different "PFF nerds" tallying up metrics in slightly different ways to weight of various numbers in calculated grades (run blocking vs pass blocking in an overall blocking grade for instance)...

 

But, these guys watch so much film and have a methological and standardized approach to how they do these gradings. It's just beyond any single persons eye test in my opinion.

 

That said, I do value their statistical numbers more than their grades.

It is not that I devalue it, I just don't think it is the best way to judge a player on greatness. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

26 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, how about acknowledging how dismissive it is to say "PFF nerds" in the first place, instead of acting like the problem is with people calling you out about it.

 

The only reason it's offensive is because it's flagrantly wrong, like NCF pointed out above. You've been watching football since '77, so you're a football junkie. They watch more film than you do, but they're nerds? Why? Because they write down results and try to validate those results before publishing them? What do you think happens in NFL facilities? They watch film, note their observations, and compare notes with each other. It's the same thing, except PFF collectively watches more film and produces more grades than any single NFL team, which is why NFL teams pay PFF for access to their information.

 

It's just dead wrong, which is why I took exception with it. It shows an arrogance on your part to label an operation like PFF as "nerds" while claiming that your eye test has more merit. 

OK I am a football nerd 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I never said it didn't have value to me, once again I did post it has strengths, but eye test is a hell of a thing lol. PFF and analytics doesn't factor in things like clutch factor like Joe had or a RB having the best field vision like Emmitt had.

Im sorry I ever said the word value.  Because that’s the word you chose to focus on.   And completely ignored the vast majority of the post,  which was your comment about nerds.

 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

26 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Im sorry I ever said the word value.  Because that’s the word you chose to focus on.   And completely ignored the vast majority of the post,  which was your comment about nerds.

 

 

I am sorry you focused on the word "nerds" when I was trying to be funny. My fault. 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

That is fair. Your point is, I really don't know how much certain people study the game. I don't, so I agree. I just think I have great knowledge too, I think you do too, so does @NewColtsFan, and so do a few others in here. 

 

Yeah, and I don't mean to downplay the knowledge of anyone in this community. But I'm not watching every player on every play of every game, and keeping track of how each player perform. So I generally don't compare my level of analysis with the rigorous work that outlets like PFF are producing. It's a completely different ball game.

 

That said, I have no problem with someone saying 'I think PFF is wrong about this grade, and here's why.' But it usually goes much further than that, with people acting like PFF doesn't know what they're doing or talking about. And to be clear, I'm not a big fan of their grades, but that's mostly because people tend to be extreme either way in their view of PFF grades, not because I think their grading is fundamentally flawed or insufficient.

 

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

OK I am a football nerd 

 

Your words, not mine.

[2006Coltsbestever]

10 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, and I don't mean to downplay the knowledge of anyone in this community. But I'm not watching every player on every play of every game, and keeping track of how each player perform. So I generally don't compare my level of analysis with the rigorous work that outlets like PFF are producing. It's a completely different ball game.

 

That said, I have no problem with someone saying 'I think PFF is wrong about this grade, and here's why.' But it usually goes much further than that, with people acting like PFF doesn't know what they're doing or talking about. And to be clear, I'm not a big fan of their grades, but that's mostly because people tend to be extreme either way in their view of PFF grades, not because I think their grading is fundamentally flawed or insufficient.

 

 

Your words, not mine.

I get it, for the most part I agree with this post. 

[Superman]

To continue kicking the dead horse of sacks/pressures...

 

I decided to compile some numbers from PFR, to investigate whether the Colts sack/pressure ratio on defense in 2023 is an outlier, and unsustainable. The Colts were 5th in total sacks, but 24th in pressures. I think that's an anomaly, so let me share the numbers that support my case.

 

In 2023, the Colts defense had 51 sacks on 127 pressures, converting 40% of their pressures into sacks. (From this point forward, I'll use the term "sack rate" in reference to this ratio.) This is the second highest sack rate in 2023, and the fourth highest sack rate of any team in the last five years (42% twice, 45% once). It's my opinion that this high sack rate is an unsustainable outlier.

 

From 2019 to 2023, the league-wide sack rate was 27% (6,362 sacks, on 23,204 pressures).

• In 2019, 28% (1,276 sacks, 4,585 pressures).
• 2020, 24% (1,135 sacks, 4,739 pressures). (Lowest sack rate and number of sacks)
• 2021, 25% (1,244 sacks, 5,056 pressures). (Highest total pressures)
• 2022, 30% (1,297 sacks, 4,325 pressures). (Lowest total pressures)
• 2023, 31% (1,410 sacks, 4,449 pressures). (Highest sack rate and number of sacks)

It's only a five year sample, so I wouldn't say for sure that there's a trend in either direction. It's interesting that the two highest sack total and sack rate years were 2022 and 2023, so maybe there's a trend forming; but I think understanding how many QBs have been injured lately would help to explain the recent increase.

• In 2019, the lowest sack rate was 20% (Bears), and the highest was 34% (Panthers).
• 2020, the lowest was 14% (Raiders; this is also the lowest sack rate for all five years), highest was 36% (Rams).
• 2021, the lowest was 17% (Falcons), highest was 39% (Bears).
• 2022, the lowest was 21% (Jaguars), highest was 45% (Saints; this is also the highest sack rate for all five years).
• 2023, the lowest was 22% (Lions), and the highest was 42% (Ravens; Colts were second, at 40%). 

And for comparison:

• The Colts sack rate for the last five years: 31.6% (209 sacks, 661 pressures)
• 2019, 31% (3 points above league average)
• 2020, 27% (3 points above league average)
• 2021, 28% (3 points above league average)
• 2022, 33% (3 points above league average)
• 2023, 40% (9 points above league average)

So that’s a lot of info. It’s not comprehensive, it’s actually a really small sample. I’m also not analyzing the quality of the defenses, because pass rush is just one element of a successful defense.

 

The questions I set out to answer were 1) Whether the Colts 40% pressure to sack rate is an outlier, and I think it’s obvious that it is an outlier. Out of 160 results (32 teams x five seasons), it’s the fourth highest sack rate of any team defense since 2019, and it’s 13 points higher than the average sack rate during those five years. Compared to the Colts own performance, the 2023 sack rate is 7 points higher than 2022 (Bradley’s first year), and it’s more than 8 points higher than their five year average. So I think it’s clearly an outlier result.

 

And 2) Whether that sack rate is sustainable, I think this is less conclusive, but the sample indicates that it’s not sustainable. From 2019 to 2022, the Colts have a history of outperforming the league average sack rate, by 3 points each year. But in 2023, that tripled to 9 points above league average. And it’s by far the highest sack rate the Colts posted in the five year sample. So I think calling it unsustainable is accurate. (It's more likely that the Colts will be closer to 3 points above league average in 2024; with a similar number of total pressures, that would cost the defense about 10 total sacks.)

 

Just to further support the idea that it’s not sustainable, I looked at the Ravens sack rate over the last five years, simply because they led the league in sack rate in 2023. They went 42%, 38%, 22%, 22%, 26%, and over the five years, they averaged a 29% sack rate. So they've been well above the league average the last two seasons, but below league average the previous three seasons, and only 2 points higher than league average overall. 

 

That’s a lot, so what’s my point? To be clear, I'm not saying that having a high sack rate is a bad thing, or that pressures are more important than sacks. 

 

What I'm saying is a team converting 40% of their pressures into sacks is a statistical outlier, and it would be a mistake for the Colts to rely on converting pressures to sacks at such a high rate moving forward. That's not reliable output, based on recent history and trends. Even converting 30% of pressures to sacks is above typical league average, but at least that seems reasonable for the Colts' defense.

 

So if the Colts want to reach that 50+ sack threshold again in 2024, 127 total pressures (7.5/game) won't get it done. We need to count on having a sack rate closer to 30% than 40%, and that means we need to be closer to pressuring the QB 170 times total (10/game) next season. 

[John Hammonds]

21 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Thanks….  But I don’t know what any of that means?   You might as well be speaking another language.   Just being honest.  Plenty of next-gen stats go right over my head.  

The site created their own way of trying to compare the value of a any player, regardless of position.  Over time, they call it the "weighted average value" or "wAV".  I don't know how well it works out, but at least they tried!

 

If you want to read through their exhaustive methodology, here's the link for it.

https://www.sports-reference.com/blog/approximate-value-methodology/

 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

To continue kicking the dead horse of sacks/pressures...

 

I decided to compile some numbers from PFR, to investigate whether the Colts sack/pressure ratio on defense in 2023 is an outlier, and unsustainable. The Colts were 5th in total sacks, but 24th in pressures. I think that's an anomaly, so let me share the numbers that support my case.

 

In 2023, the Colts defense had 51 sacks on 127 pressures, converting 40% of their pressures into sacks. (From this point forward, I'll use the term "sack rate" in reference to this ratio.) This is the second highest sack rate in 2023, and the fourth highest sack rate of any team in the last five years (42% twice, 45% once). It's my opinion that this high sack rate is an unsustainable outlier.

 

From 2019 to 2023, the league-wide sack rate was 27% (6,362 sacks, on 23,204 pressures).

• In 2019, 28% (1,276 sacks, 4,585 pressures).
• 2020, 24% (1,135 sacks, 4,739 pressures). (Lowest sack rate and number of sacks)
• 2021, 25% (1,244 sacks, 5,056 pressures). (Highest total pressures)
• 2022, 30% (1,297 sacks, 4,325 pressures). (Lowest total pressures)
• 2023, 31% (1,410 sacks, 4,449 pressures). (Highest sack rate and number of sacks)

It's only a five year sample, so I wouldn't say for sure that there's a trend in either direction. It's interesting that the two highest sack total and sack rate years were 2022 and 2023, so maybe there's a trend forming; but I think understanding how many QBs have been injured lately would help to explain the recent increase.

• In 2019, the lowest sack rate was 20% (Bears), and the highest was 34% (Panthers).
• 2020, the lowest was 14% (Raiders; this is also the lowest sack rate for all five years), highest was 36% (Rams).
• 2021, the lowest was 17% (Falcons), highest was 39% (Bears).
• 2022, the lowest was 21% (Jaguars), highest was 45% (Saints; this is also the highest sack rate for all five years).
• 2023, the lowest was 22% (Lions), and the highest was 42% (Ravens; Colts were second, at 40%). 

And for comparison:

• The Colts sack rate for the last five years: 31.6% (209 sacks, 661 pressures)
• 2019, 31% (3 points above league average)
• 2020, 27% (3 points above league average)
• 2021, 28% (3 points above league average)
• 2022, 33% (3 points above league average)
• 2023, 40% (9 points above league average)

So that’s a lot of info. It’s not comprehensive, it’s actually a really small sample. I’m also not analyzing the quality of the defenses, because pass rush is just one element of a successful defense.

 

The questions I set out to answer were 1) Whether the Colts 40% pressure to sack rate is an outlier, and I think it’s obvious that it is an outlier. Out of 160 results (32 teams x five seasons), it’s the fourth highest sack rate of any team defense since 2019, and it’s 13 points higher than the average sack rate during those five years. Compared to the Colts own performance, the 2023 sack rate is 7 points higher than 2022 (Bradley’s first year), and it’s more than 8 points higher than their five year average. So I think it’s clearly an outlier result.

 

And 2) Whether that sack rate is sustainable, I think this is less conclusive, but the sample indicates that it’s not sustainable. From 2019 to 2022, the Colts have a history of outperforming the league average sack rate, by 3 points each year. But in 2023, that tripled to 9 points above league average. And it’s by far the highest sack rate the Colts posted in the five year sample. So I think calling it unsustainable is accurate. (It's more likely that the Colts will be closer to 3 points above league average in 2024; with a similar number of total pressures, that would cost the defense about 10 total sacks.)

 

Just to further support the idea that it’s not sustainable, I looked at the Ravens sack rate over the last five years, simply because they led the league in sack rate in 2023. They went 42%, 38%, 22%, 22%, 26%, and over the five years, they averaged a 29% sack rate. So they've been well above the league average the last two seasons, but below league average the previous three seasons, and only 2 points higher than league average overall. 

 

That’s a lot, so what’s my point? To be clear, I'm not saying that having a high sack rate is a bad thing, or that pressures are more important than sacks. 

 

What I'm saying is a team converting 40% of their pressures into sacks is a statistical outlier, and it would be a mistake for the Colts to rely on converting pressures to sacks at such a high rate moving forward. That's not reliable output, based on recent history and trends. Even converting 30% of pressures to sacks is above typical league average, but at least that seems reasonable for the Colts' defense.

 

So if the Colts want to reach that 50+ sack threshold again in 2024, 127 total pressures (7.5/game) won't get it done. We need to count on having a sack rate closer to 30% than 40%, and that means we need to be closer to pressuring the QB 170 times total (10/game) next season. 

Please allow me to respond with a few swings at my own dead horse.   
 

1.  Chris Ballard likely agrees with you.  
 

2.  Signed Charlie Partridge. 
 

3.   Drafted Laiatu.  
 

He sees what you see and took big steps to try and address those issues.  
 

 

[Solid84]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

To continue kicking the dead horse of sacks/pressures...

 

I decided to compile some numbers from PFR, to investigate whether the Colts sack/pressure ratio on defense in 2023 is an outlier, and unsustainable. The Colts were 5th in total sacks, but 24th in pressures. I think that's an anomaly, so let me share the numbers that support my case.

 

In 2023, the Colts defense had 51 sacks on 127 pressures, converting 40% of their pressures into sacks. (From this point forward, I'll use the term "sack rate" in reference to this ratio.) This is the second highest sack rate in 2023, and the fourth highest sack rate of any team in the last five years (42% twice, 45% once). It's my opinion that this high sack rate is an unsustainable outlier.

 

From 2019 to 2023, the league-wide sack rate was 27% (6,362 sacks, on 23,204 pressures).

• In 2019, 28% (1,276 sacks, 4,585 pressures).
• 2020, 24% (1,135 sacks, 4,739 pressures). (Lowest sack rate and number of sacks)
• 2021, 25% (1,244 sacks, 5,056 pressures). (Highest total pressures)
• 2022, 30% (1,297 sacks, 4,325 pressures). (Lowest total pressures)
• 2023, 31% (1,410 sacks, 4,449 pressures). (Highest sack rate and number of sacks)

It's only a five year sample, so I wouldn't say for sure that there's a trend in either direction. It's interesting that the two highest sack total and sack rate years were 2022 and 2023, so maybe there's a trend forming; but I think understanding how many QBs have been injured lately would help to explain the recent increase.

• In 2019, the lowest sack rate was 20% (Bears), and the highest was 34% (Panthers).
• 2020, the lowest was 14% (Raiders; this is also the lowest sack rate for all five years), highest was 36% (Rams).
• 2021, the lowest was 17% (Falcons), highest was 39% (Bears).
• 2022, the lowest was 21% (Jaguars), highest was 45% (Saints; this is also the highest sack rate for all five years).
• 2023, the lowest was 22% (Lions), and the highest was 42% (Ravens; Colts were second, at 40%). 

And for comparison:

• The Colts sack rate for the last five years: 31.6% (209 sacks, 661 pressures)
• 2019, 31% (3 points above league average)
• 2020, 27% (3 points above league average)
• 2021, 28% (3 points above league average)
• 2022, 33% (3 points above league average)
• 2023, 40% (9 points above league average)

So that’s a lot of info. It’s not comprehensive, it’s actually a really small sample. I’m also not analyzing the quality of the defenses, because pass rush is just one element of a successful defense.

 

The questions I set out to answer were 1) Whether the Colts 40% pressure to sack rate is an outlier, and I think it’s obvious that it is an outlier. Out of 160 results (32 teams x five seasons), it’s the fourth highest sack rate of any team defense since 2019, and it’s 13 points higher than the average sack rate during those five years. Compared to the Colts own performance, the 2023 sack rate is 7 points higher than 2022 (Bradley’s first year), and it’s more than 8 points higher than their five year average. So I think it’s clearly an outlier result.

 

And 2) Whether that sack rate is sustainable, I think this is less conclusive, but the sample indicates that it’s not sustainable. From 2019 to 2022, the Colts have a history of outperforming the league average sack rate, by 3 points each year. But in 2023, that tripled to 9 points above league average. And it’s by far the highest sack rate the Colts posted in the five year sample. So I think calling it unsustainable is accurate. (It's more likely that the Colts will be closer to 3 points above league average in 2024; with a similar number of total pressures, that would cost the defense about 10 total sacks.)

 

Just to further support the idea that it’s not sustainable, I looked at the Ravens sack rate over the last five years, simply because they led the league in sack rate in 2023. They went 42%, 38%, 22%, 22%, 26%, and over the five years, they averaged a 29% sack rate. So they've been well above the league average the last two seasons, but below league average the previous three seasons, and only 2 points higher than league average overall. 

 

That’s a lot, so what’s my point? To be clear, I'm not saying that having a high sack rate is a bad thing, or that pressures are more important than sacks. 

 

What I'm saying is a team converting 40% of their pressures into sacks is a statistical outlier, and it would be a mistake for the Colts to rely on converting pressures to sacks at such a high rate moving forward. That's not reliable output, based on recent history and trends. Even converting 30% of pressures to sacks is above typical league average, but at least that seems reasonable for the Colts' defense.

 

So if the Colts want to reach that 50+ sack threshold again in 2024, 127 total pressures (7.5/game) won't get it done. We need to count on having a sack rate closer to 30% than 40%, and that means we need to be closer to pressuring the QB 170 times total (10/game) next season. 

Excellent write up and I agree 100%.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

To continue kicking the dead horse of sacks/pressures...

 

I decided to compile some numbers from PFR, to investigate whether the Colts sack/pressure ratio on defense in 2023 is an outlier, and unsustainable. The Colts were 5th in total sacks, but 24th in pressures. I think that's an anomaly, so let me share the numbers that support my case.

 

In 2023, the Colts defense had 51 sacks on 127 pressures, converting 40% of their pressures into sacks. (From this point forward, I'll use the term "sack rate" in reference to this ratio.) This is the second highest sack rate in 2023, and the fourth highest sack rate of any team in the last five years (42% twice, 45% once). It's my opinion that this high sack rate is an unsustainable outlier.

 

From 2019 to 2023, the league-wide sack rate was 27% (6,362 sacks, on 23,204 pressures).

• In 2019, 28% (1,276 sacks, 4,585 pressures).
• 2020, 24% (1,135 sacks, 4,739 pressures). (Lowest sack rate and number of sacks)
• 2021, 25% (1,244 sacks, 5,056 pressures). (Highest total pressures)
• 2022, 30% (1,297 sacks, 4,325 pressures). (Lowest total pressures)
• 2023, 31% (1,410 sacks, 4,449 pressures). (Highest sack rate and number of sacks)

It's only a five year sample, so I wouldn't say for sure that there's a trend in either direction. It's interesting that the two highest sack total and sack rate years were 2022 and 2023, so maybe there's a trend forming; but I think understanding how many QBs have been injured lately would help to explain the recent increase.

• In 2019, the lowest sack rate was 20% (Bears), and the highest was 34% (Panthers).
• 2020, the lowest was 14% (Raiders; this is also the lowest sack rate for all five years), highest was 36% (Rams).
• 2021, the lowest was 17% (Falcons), highest was 39% (Bears).
• 2022, the lowest was 21% (Jaguars), highest was 45% (Saints; this is also the highest sack rate for all five years).
• 2023, the lowest was 22% (Lions), and the highest was 42% (Ravens; Colts were second, at 40%). 

And for comparison:

• The Colts sack rate for the last five years: 31.6% (209 sacks, 661 pressures)
• 2019, 31% (3 points above league average)
• 2020, 27% (3 points above league average)
• 2021, 28% (3 points above league average)
• 2022, 33% (3 points above league average)
• 2023, 40% (9 points above league average)

So that’s a lot of info. It’s not comprehensive, it’s actually a really small sample. I’m also not analyzing the quality of the defenses, because pass rush is just one element of a successful defense.

 

The questions I set out to answer were 1) Whether the Colts 40% pressure to sack rate is an outlier, and I think it’s obvious that it is an outlier. Out of 160 results (32 teams x five seasons), it’s the fourth highest sack rate of any team defense since 2019, and it’s 13 points higher than the average sack rate during those five years. Compared to the Colts own performance, the 2023 sack rate is 7 points higher than 2022 (Bradley’s first year), and it’s more than 8 points higher than their five year average. So I think it’s clearly an outlier result.

 

And 2) Whether that sack rate is sustainable, I think this is less conclusive, but the sample indicates that it’s not sustainable. From 2019 to 2022, the Colts have a history of outperforming the league average sack rate, by 3 points each year. But in 2023, that tripled to 9 points above league average. And it’s by far the highest sack rate the Colts posted in the five year sample. So I think calling it unsustainable is accurate. (It's more likely that the Colts will be closer to 3 points above league average in 2024; with a similar number of total pressures, that would cost the defense about 10 total sacks.)

 

Just to further support the idea that it’s not sustainable, I looked at the Ravens sack rate over the last five years, simply because they led the league in sack rate in 2023. They went 42%, 38%, 22%, 22%, 26%, and over the five years, they averaged a 29% sack rate. So they've been well above the league average the last two seasons, but below league average the previous three seasons, and only 2 points higher than league average overall. 

 

That’s a lot, so what’s my point? To be clear, I'm not saying that having a high sack rate is a bad thing, or that pressures are more important than sacks. 

 

What I'm saying is a team converting 40% of their pressures into sacks is a statistical outlier, and it would be a mistake for the Colts to rely on converting pressures to sacks at such a high rate moving forward. That's not reliable output, based on recent history and trends. Even converting 30% of pressures to sacks is above typical league average, but at least that seems reasonable for the Colts' defense.

 

So if the Colts want to reach that 50+ sack threshold again in 2024, 127 total pressures (7.5/game) won't get it done. We need to count on having a sack rate closer to 30% than 40%, and that means we need to be closer to pressuring the QB 170 times total (10/game) next season. 

That is a great post! Wow. Great info.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

Excellent write up and I agree 100%.

His post was impressive, that is great stuff. That is Superman though . Might be the best post I have seen in months. 

[BeanDiasucci]

22 hours ago, AwesomeAustin said:

The colts have invested two 2nds and 3rd on starting CBs and S. I believe they will drop some money and/or more draft capital on these positions. Just will be when the right player is available. I felt the Colts were going to draft a CB in round one when they couldn’t trade up for an offensive piece but Liatu fell in their laps. 

Good point. Hope that pays off.

[Superman]

17 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Please allow me to respond with a few swings at my own dead horse.   
 

1.  Chris Ballard likely agrees with you.  
 

2.  Signed Charlie Partridge. 
 

3.   Drafted Laiatu.  
 

He sees what you see and took big steps to try and address those issues.  

 

I guess we both have problems with dead horses, LOL.

 

We're on the same page on those three. It wasn't my intent to say the Colts need to make a dramatic change to address this. I think some adjustments to the way Bradley calls the defense would be nice -- let the corners be more aggressive at the LOS, and use the blitz more often, just to give two examples. But you're right, the main things they've done is changed the DL coach and drafted a highly rated edge rusher who has traits/skills that none of our other pass rushers possess. 

 

Really, my point was just to counter the idea that the Colts set a franchise record in sacks, so the pass rush must be pretty good. I've been saying the pass rush isn't as good as 51 sacks would indicate, so I wanted to analyze that statistically. 

[stitches]

I wonder if there is some correlation between blitz rate and whether teams overperform their pressure % with their sacks. @Superman had a really great post in here. I wonder if other teams that have low blitz% overperform their pressure rates too? I.e. maybe there is something inherently more valuable to this type of pressures and they result in more sacks? No idea if this is actually the case, but it is something that came to my mind reading the stats that Superman posted.

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, stitches said:

I wonder if there is some correlation between blitz rate and whether teams overperform their pressure % with their sacks. @Superman had a really great post in here. I wonder if other teams that have low blitz% overperform their pressure rates too? I.e. maybe there is something inherently more valuable to this type of pressures and they result in more sacks? No idea if this is actually the case, but it is something that came to my mind reading the stats that Superman posted.

 

Should we see if teams that blitz below league average tend to have a higher than average sack rate? I might be able to put that together.

[stitches]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Should we see if teams that blitz below league average tend to have a higher than average sack rate? I might be able to put that together.

Yeah... that was my way of saying - @Superman, why don't you satisfy my curiosity since I'm lazy to do it myself  

 

Just do a few of the teams with superlow blitz rate like the Colts, If that's the case we should probably see similar trend with them.

[Superman]

13 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yeah... that was my way of saying - @Superman, why don't you satisfy my curiosity since I'm lazy to do it myself  

 

Just do a few of the teams with superlow blitz rate like the Colts, If that's the case we should probably see similar trend with them.

 

I already have the data exported, I just have to sort it and run some averages. I don't see a trend right away, but let me play with it and see if there's anything to discover.

[Superman]

I don't see evidence that a lower blitz rate correlates with a higher sack rate.

• 2023, League average blitz rate was 29%, average sack rate was 28%
  • There were 4 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 34.7%
  • There were 9 teams with a blitz rate of 30% of more; they averaged a sack rate of 30.9%
  • The remaining 19 teams averaged a sack rate of 31.2%
• 2022, League average blitz rate was 24%, average sack rate was 30% 
  • There were 11 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 29.5%
  • There were 8 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 29%
  • The remaining 13 teams averaged a sack rate of 31.2%
• 2021, League average blitz rate was 27%, average sack rate was 25% 
  • There were 4 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 23.3%
  • There were 9 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 23.8%
  • The remaining 19 teams averaged a sack rate of 25.4%
• 2020, League average blitz rate was 30%, average sack rate was 24% 
  • There were 2 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 23%
  • There were 16 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 23.7%
  • The remaining 14 teams averaged a sack rate of 23.7%
• 2019, League average blitz rate was 29%, average sack rate was 28%
  • There were 3 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 24.6%
  • There were 12 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 27.7%
  • The remaining 17 teams averaged a sack rate of 28.3%

(The Colts had a blitz rate at or below 20% in four of these five seasons. 2019 is the lone exception, and the Colts blitzed 22.9% that year, so not too far outside the parameter, but still far below league average.)

 

Only once in the last five seasons (2023) have the teams with an extremely low blitz rate averaged a higher sack rate than the teams with a fairly aggressive blitz rate. At the same time, only once (2019) have the teams with an aggressive blitz rate averaged a significantly higher sack rate than the teams with a low blitz rate, and it's only 3.1 points higher. And there's no obvious donut hole of efficiency between the two extremes, as you can see from the teams that blitzed between 20% and 30%; the only years where the middle teams outperformed the league average were 2022 (1.2 points), and 2023 (3.2 points).

 

Another takeway: With the exception of 2022, blitzing more often is more common among NFL teams than blitzing conservatively. On average, 5 teams/year have a blitz rate of 20% or less, while 11 teams/year have a blitz rate of 30% or more.

 

My conclusion: Since there's little variance in sack rate on the basis of blitz percentage, I don't think blitzing or not blitzing is a deciding factor in the quality of the pass rush. It's likely much more circumstantial, and probably difficult to pin down -- timing of blitzes, down and distance, quality of opponent (OL, QB, play caller), quality of pass rushers (for example, the Rams leading the league in sack rate in a year in which Aaron Donald won DPOY), etc. 

 

Any thoughts?

 

Edit: As it relates to the Colts, it seems like their historic ability to outperform league average sack rate while being one of the most conservative blitzing teams is also an outlier. I still think 2023 is unsustainable, but being 3 points higher than average in sack rate definitely seems repeatable.

[Zoltan]

I’m mainly making a post because I’m bored and can’t wait for training camp to start. I think one aspect that could be affecting our high pressure to sack ratio was that we gave away the quick pass a lot last year because of our young secondary which decreases our pressures per play. So when we force longer developing plays our rushers had more time to attack. I’m not sold on this argument but could help explain an outlier. 

[CoachLite]

22 hours ago, Superman said:

To continue kicking the dead horse of sacks/pressures...

 

I decided to compile some numbers from PFR, to investigate whether the Colts sack/pressure ratio on defense in 2023 is an outlier, and unsustainable. The Colts were 5th in total sacks, but 24th in pressures. I think that's an anomaly, so let me share the numbers that support my case.

 

In 2023, the Colts defense had 51 sacks on 127 pressures, converting 40% of their pressures into sacks. (From this point forward, I'll use the term "sack rate" in reference to this ratio.) This is the second highest sack rate in 2023, and the fourth highest sack rate of any team in the last five years (42% twice, 45% once). It's my opinion that this high sack rate is an unsustainable outlier.

 

From 2019 to 2023, the league-wide sack rate was 27% (6,362 sacks, on 23,204 pressures).

• In 2019, 28% (1,276 sacks, 4,585 pressures).
• 2020, 24% (1,135 sacks, 4,739 pressures). (Lowest sack rate and number of sacks)
• 2021, 25% (1,244 sacks, 5,056 pressures). (Highest total pressures)
• 2022, 30% (1,297 sacks, 4,325 pressures). (Lowest total pressures)
• 2023, 31% (1,410 sacks, 4,449 pressures). (Highest sack rate and number of sacks)

It's only a five year sample, so I wouldn't say for sure that there's a trend in either direction. It's interesting that the two highest sack total and sack rate years were 2022 and 2023, so maybe there's a trend forming; but I think understanding how many QBs have been injured lately would help to explain the recent increase.

• In 2019, the lowest sack rate was 20% (Bears), and the highest was 34% (Panthers).
• 2020, the lowest was 14% (Raiders; this is also the lowest sack rate for all five years), highest was 36% (Rams).
• 2021, the lowest was 17% (Falcons), highest was 39% (Bears).
• 2022, the lowest was 21% (Jaguars), highest was 45% (Saints; this is also the highest sack rate for all five years).
• 2023, the lowest was 22% (Lions), and the highest was 42% (Ravens; Colts were second, at 40%). 

And for comparison:

• The Colts sack rate for the last five years: 31.6% (209 sacks, 661 pressures)
• 2019, 31% (3 points above league average)
• 2020, 27% (3 points above league average)
• 2021, 28% (3 points above league average)
• 2022, 33% (3 points above league average)
• 2023, 40% (9 points above league average)

So that’s a lot of info. It’s not comprehensive, it’s actually a really small sample. I’m also not analyzing the quality of the defenses, because pass rush is just one element of a successful defense.

 

The questions I set out to answer were 1) Whether the Colts 40% pressure to sack rate is an outlier, and I think it’s obvious that it is an outlier. Out of 160 results (32 teams x five seasons), it’s the fourth highest sack rate of any team defense since 2019, and it’s 13 points higher than the average sack rate during those five years. Compared to the Colts own performance, the 2023 sack rate is 7 points higher than 2022 (Bradley’s first year), and it’s more than 8 points higher than their five year average. So I think it’s clearly an outlier result.

 

And 2) Whether that sack rate is sustainable, I think this is less conclusive, but the sample indicates that it’s not sustainable. From 2019 to 2022, the Colts have a history of outperforming the league average sack rate, by 3 points each year. But in 2023, that tripled to 9 points above league average. And it’s by far the highest sack rate the Colts posted in the five year sample. So I think calling it unsustainable is accurate. (It's more likely that the Colts will be closer to 3 points above league average in 2024; with a similar number of total pressures, that would cost the defense about 10 total sacks.)

 

Just to further support the idea that it’s not sustainable, I looked at the Ravens sack rate over the last five years, simply because they led the league in sack rate in 2023. They went 42%, 38%, 22%, 22%, 26%, and over the five years, they averaged a 29% sack rate. So they've been well above the league average the last two seasons, but below league average the previous three seasons, and only 2 points higher than league average overall. 

 

That’s a lot, so what’s my point? To be clear, I'm not saying that having a high sack rate is a bad thing, or that pressures are more important than sacks. 

 

What I'm saying is a team converting 40% of their pressures into sacks is a statistical outlier, and it would be a mistake for the Colts to rely on converting pressures to sacks at such a high rate moving forward. That's not reliable output, based on recent history and trends. Even converting 30% of pressures to sacks is above typical league average, but at least that seems reasonable for the Colts' defense.

 

So if the Colts want to reach that 50+ sack threshold again in 2024, 127 total pressures (7.5/game) won't get it done. We need to count on having a sack rate closer to 30% than 40%, and that means we need to be closer to pressuring the QB 170 times total (10/game) next season. 

You have illustrated one of the major challenges with data analysis - here are the statistics, what do they mean, what was the reason for them and why did they happen? Exposing the hidden patterns behind the statistics means that you have to dig deeper (then, deeper still) if you want to know the answers. The statistics themselves merely give you hints on where to look.

[stitches]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

I don't see evidence that a lower blitz rate correlates with a higher sack rate.

• 2023, League average blitz rate was 29%, average sack rate was 28%
  • There were 4 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 34.7%
  • There were 9 teams with a blitz rate of 30% of more; they averaged a sack rate of 30.9%
  • The remaining 19 teams averaged a sack rate of 31.2%
• 2022, League average blitz rate was 24%, average sack rate was 30% 
  • There were 11 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 29.5%
  • There were 8 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 29%
  • The remaining 13 teams averaged a sack rate of 31.2%
• 2021, League average blitz rate was 27%, average sack rate was 25% 
  • There were 4 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 23.3%
  • There were 9 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 23.8%
  • The remaining 19 teams averaged a sack rate of 25.4%
• 2020, League average blitz rate was 30%, average sack rate was 24% 
  • There were 2 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 23%
  • There were 16 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 23.7%
  • The remaining 14 teams averaged a sack rate of 23.7%
• 2019, League average blitz rate was 29%, average sack rate was 28%
  • There were 3 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 24.6%
  • There were 12 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 27.7%
  • The remaining 17 teams averaged a sack rate of 28.3%

(The Colts had a blitz rate at or below 20% in four of these five seasons. 2019 is the lone exception, and the Colts blitzed 22.9% that year, so not too far outside the parameter, but still far below league average.)

 

Only once in the last five seasons (2023) have the teams with an extremely low blitz rate averaged a higher sack rate than the teams with a fairly aggressive blitz rate. At the same time, only once (2019) have the teams with an aggressive blitz rate averaged a significantly higher sack rate than the teams with a low blitz rate, and it's only 3.1 points higher. And there's no obvious donut hole of efficiency between the two extremes, as you can see from the teams that blitzed between 20% and 30%; the only years where the middle teams outperformed the league average were 2022 (1.2 points), and 2023 (3.2 points).

 

Another takeway: With the exception of 2022, blitzing more often is more common among NFL teams than blitzing conservatively. On average, 5 teams/year have a blitz rate of 20% or less, while 11 teams/year have a blitz rate of 30% or more.

 

My conclusion: Since there's little variance in sack rate on the basis of blitz percentage, I don't think blitzing or not blitzing is a deciding factor in the quality of the pass rush. It's likely much more circumstantial, and probably difficult to pin down -- timing of blitzes, down and distance, quality of opponent (OL, QB, play caller), quality of pass rushers (for example, the Rams leading the league in sack rate in a year in which Aaron Donald won DPOY), etc. 

 

Any thoughts?

 

Edit: As it relates to the Colts, it seems like their historic ability to outperform league average sack rate while being one of the most conservative blitzing teams is also an outlier. I still think 2023 is unsustainable, but being 3 points higher than average in sack rate definitely seems repeatable.

Yeah. Thanks for the work you did here. It seems like noise. I don't think there is any particular pattern to see here. The reason I wanted to check this is because in one of your previous posts you showed that the Colts have overachieved(sacks-wise) based on pressure rates pretty much every year, But yeah... it's probably just happenstance and random. 

 

Agree with you on the sustainability(or lackthereof) of our sack production. The way I would put it - those stats are descriptive about what happened last year, but they are not predictive about what we can expect in the future. If we want similar sack production, it very likely will need to be accompanied by higher pressure rates. And if we don't get higher pressure rates, we will very likely regress to the mean over the long run(i.e. we will get fewer sacks wish similar pressure rates). 

[Solid84]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

I don't see evidence that a lower blitz rate correlates with a higher sack rate.

• 2023, League average blitz rate was 29%, average sack rate was 28%
  • There were 4 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 34.7%
  • There were 9 teams with a blitz rate of 30% of more; they averaged a sack rate of 30.9%
  • The remaining 19 teams averaged a sack rate of 31.2%
• 2022, League average blitz rate was 24%, average sack rate was 30% 
  • There were 11 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 29.5%
  • There were 8 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 29%
  • The remaining 13 teams averaged a sack rate of 31.2%
• 2021, League average blitz rate was 27%, average sack rate was 25% 
  • There were 4 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 23.3%
  • There were 9 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 23.8%
  • The remaining 19 teams averaged a sack rate of 25.4%
• 2020, League average blitz rate was 30%, average sack rate was 24% 
  • There were 2 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 23%
  • There were 16 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 23.7%
  • The remaining 14 teams averaged a sack rate of 23.7%
• 2019, League average blitz rate was 29%, average sack rate was 28%
  • There were 3 teams with a blitz rate of 20% or less; they averaged a sack rate of 24.6%
  • There were 12 teams with a blitz rate of 30% or more; they averaged a sack rate of 27.7%
  • The remaining 17 teams averaged a sack rate of 28.3%

(The Colts had a blitz rate at or below 20% in four of these five seasons. 2019 is the lone exception, and the Colts blitzed 22.9% that year, so not too far outside the parameter, but still far below league average.)

 

Only once in the last five seasons (2023) have the teams with an extremely low blitz rate averaged a higher sack rate than the teams with a fairly aggressive blitz rate. At the same time, only once (2019) have the teams with an aggressive blitz rate averaged a significantly higher sack rate than the teams with a low blitz rate, and it's only 3.1 points higher. And there's no obvious donut hole of efficiency between the two extremes, as you can see from the teams that blitzed between 20% and 30%; the only years where the middle teams outperformed the league average were 2022 (1.2 points), and 2023 (3.2 points).

 

Another takeway: With the exception of 2022, blitzing more often is more common among NFL teams than blitzing conservatively. On average, 5 teams/year have a blitz rate of 20% or less, while 11 teams/year have a blitz rate of 30% or more.

 

My conclusion: Since there's little variance in sack rate on the basis of blitz percentage, I don't think blitzing or not blitzing is a deciding factor in the quality of the pass rush. It's likely much more circumstantial, and probably difficult to pin down -- timing of blitzes, down and distance, quality of opponent (OL, QB, play caller), quality of pass rushers (for example, the Rams leading the league in sack rate in a year in which Aaron Donald won DPOY), etc. 

 

Any thoughts?

 

Edit: As it relates to the Colts, it seems like their historic ability to outperform league average sack rate while being one of the most conservative blitzing teams is also an outlier. I still think 2023 is unsustainable, but being 3 points higher than average in sack rate definitely seems repeatable.

So, blitzing more doesn’t create a significantly higher sack rate?

 

Interesting. I guess the ultimate goal for a pass rush unit would be to get the sack and end the play. However, creating pressure and affecting the opponent’s QB and the play negatively is a win in itself. 
 

I assume teams who blitz more generally get more overall pressures (if you look at the raw numbers) they just don’t achieve a significantly higher sack rate with those pressures?

 

If that’s the case that feels like a big loss for blitzing then? You’re leaving your LBs, CBs and/or Ss vulnerable by taking players away from their usual assignments whilst not really achieving significantly more sacks. Is that right?

 

Again, a pressure is often also a win, but if you blitz you REALLY want that sack to end the play. 

[Superman]

44 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

So, blitzing more doesn’t create a significantly higher sack rate?

 

Interesting. I guess the ultimate goal for a pass rush unit would be to get the sack and end the play. However, creating pressure and affecting the opponent’s QB and the play negatively is a win in itself. 
 

I assume teams who blitz more generally get more overall pressures (if you look at the raw numbers) they just don’t achieve a significantly higher sack rate with those pressures?

 

If that’s the case that feels like a big loss for blitzing then? You’re leaving your LBs, CBs and/or Ss vulnerable by taking players away from their usual assignments whilst not really achieving significantly more sacks. Is that right?

 

Again, a pressure is often also a win, but if you blitz you REALLY want that sack to end the play. 

 

At a glance, it looks like teams that blitz more probably average more pressures, so they're getting something from it. But if you're playing a good QB that knows how to beat the blitz, then the pressure might not be resulting in good plays for the defense. That's hard to figure from these numbers, though. 

 

My theory would be that several teams that blitz aggressively do so because they know they aren't good at getting pressure with only four. Maybe teams that use base 3 man fronts, for example. 

[throwing BBZ]

On 7/17/2024 at 3:29 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I am sorry you focused on the word "nerds" when I was trying to be funny. My fault. 

 

  I believe "nerd" was very accurate. 

 Countless hours while not being bothered, watching video of a game, recording every minutiae of every action, and creating a measureable score. 

 That's a football junkie going total nerd about it.

 Since the invention of vhs wireless remote I have been watching/rewatching games on taped video, in stop, slo-mo, and in digital frame by frame advance. 

 There are so many commercials plus halftime that there is plenty of time to slow it all down and get a much better look at the play. I love seeing the line play this way. It isn't all-22, but i see so much more, establish more truth to what I thought I saw. Seeing the game this way has FUN for me. Very Nerdy.

 I don't do whole games anymore. But still a lot of the difference making plays, good and bad.

 

 Our Colts grade every play, every player. I'm sure our coaching staff tracks the process. This is the Only grade that matters to our roster.

 

  

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

23 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  I believe "nerd" was very accurate. 

 Countless hours while not being bothered, watching video of a game, recording every minutiae of every action, and creating a measureable score. 

 That's a football junkie going total nerd about it.

 Since the invention of vhs wireless remote I have been watching/rewatching games on taped video, in stop, slo-mo, and in digital frame by frame advance. 

 There are so many commercials plus halftime that there is plenty of time to slow it all down and get a much better look at the play. I love seeing the line play this way. It isn't all-22, but i see so much more, establish more truth to what I thought I saw. Seeing the game this way has FUN for me. Very Nerdy.

 I don't do whole games anymore. But still a lot of the difference making plays, good and bad.

 

 Our Colts grade every play, every player. I'm sure our coaching staff tracks the process. This is the Only grade that matters to our roster.

 

  

 

I have 0 problem calling myself a nerd with my lists and Homer Simpson stuff. I was just trying to be funny actually. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 hours ago, stitches said:

Yeah. Thanks for the work you did here. It seems like noise. I don't think there is any particular pattern to see here. The reason I wanted to check this is because in one of your previous posts you showed that the Colts have overachieved(sacks-wise) based on pressure rates pretty much every year, But yeah... it's probably just happenstance and random. 

 

Agree with you on the sustainability(or lackthereof) of our sack production. The way I would put it - those stats are descriptive about what happened last year, but they are not predictive about what we can expect in the future. If we want similar sack production, it very likely will need to be accompanied by higher pressure rates. And if we don't get higher pressure rates, we will very likely regress to the mean over the long run(i.e. we will get fewer sacks wish similar pressure rates). 

Off topic but your guy is going to the SB this season as an early prediction. "All you need is Love, Love, all you need". 

[AwesomeAustin]

https://www.nfl.com/news/next-gen-stats-how-defensive-pressure-defined-the-2023-nfl-season
 

Found this article with a graph showing Colts ranked #8 in total pressure rate. Looked at another website and it shows the Colts beer the bottom 1/4 in the league

[smittywerb]

42 minutes ago, AwesomeAustin said:

https://www.nfl.com/news/next-gen-stats-how-defensive-pressure-defined-the-2023-nfl-season
 

Found this article with a graph showing Colts ranked #8 in total pressure rate. Looked at another website and it shows the Colts beer the bottom 1/4 in the league

I think this quote from that article will explain why:

 

”Pressure can come from a pass rusher beating the blocker across from him cleanly, from a quarterback bailing out of a clean pocket or from a quarterback holding onto the ball too long due to coverage and lack of receiver separation, among other reasons.”

 

And that’s honestly the colts pass rush in a nutshell:  meh.  It’s not bad, it’s not good.  It’s just ok.  Regarding the quote above, I believe both cases.  There were times someone got to the qb in a hurry.  And due to the qbs we played, there were also self-induced pressures.

[Zoltan]

20 hours ago, Solid84 said:

So, blitzing more doesn’t create a significantly higher sack rate?

 

Interesting. I guess the ultimate goal for a pass rush unit would be to get the sack and end the play. However, creating pressure and affecting the opponent’s QB and the play negatively is a win in itself. 
 

I assume teams who blitz more generally get more overall pressures (if you look at the raw numbers) they just don’t achieve a significantly higher sack rate with those pressures?

 

If that’s the case that feels like a big loss for blitzing then? You’re leaving your LBs, CBs and/or Ss vulnerable by taking players away from their usual assignments whilst not really achieving significantly more sacks. Is that right?

 

Again, a pressure is often also a win, but if you blitz you REALLY want that sack to end the play. 

I almost created another I hate Gus Bradley’s system tangent post with his lack of blitzing but caught myself  

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, smittywerb said:

I think this quote from that article will explain why:

 

”Pressure can come from a pass rusher beating the blocker across from him cleanly, from a quarterback bailing out of a clean pocket or from a quarterback holding onto the ball too long due to coverage and lack of receiver separation, among other reasons.”

 

And that’s honestly the colts pass rush in a nutshell:  meh.  It’s not bad, it’s not good.  It’s just ok.  Regarding the quote above, I believe both cases.  There were times someone got to the qb in a hurry.  And due to the qbs we played, there were also self-induced pressures.

 

 So if this was the chart shown here earliest, how would it have affected the dialog from our "knowledgeable" Colts fans?

 Asking:

 How good is Gus and staff at designing highly effective blitz packages?

 How good are our players as blitzers. 

 To point out:

  Our 4 man rush was asked to protect the edges and run lanes at a high level. I believe they graded very well at it. You give up a little pass rush doing this on none passing downs.

 We have watched Gus's back seven allow backups to shred us many times.

Hopefully, our talent/experience together brings improvement this season.

 And we definitely need to blitz more.

[CoachLite]

3 hours ago, Zoltan said:

I almost created another I hate Gus Bradley’s system tangent post with his lack of blitzing but caught myself  

Why bother? Gus will be Gus. Either he adapts to football reality, or he'll be somewhere else.

[jvan1973]

On 7/18/2024 at 4:10 PM, CoachLite said:

You have illustrated one of the major challenges with data analysis - here are the statistics, what do they mean, what was the reason for them and why did they happen? Exposing the hidden patterns behind the statistics means that you have to dig deeper (then, deeper still) if you want to know the answers. The statistics themselves merely give you hints on where to look.

So explain it to us.  You post vague statistics things and then never go into it.   Read the  post I'm quoting.  There is no information in the post at all

[CoachLite]

31 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

So explain it to us.  You post vague statistics things and then never go into it.   Read the  post I'm quoting.  There is no information in the post at all

There's no money in it for me. If you want, you can read The Statistical Sleuth - A Course in Methods of Data Analysis (free from Academia.com). If you suffer from insomnia, it will solve your problem.

[AwesomeAustin]

8 hours ago, smittywerb said:

I think this quote from that article will explain why:

 

”Pressure can come from a pass rusher beating the blocker across from him cleanly, from a quarterback bailing out of a clean pocket or from a quarterback holding onto the ball too long due to coverage and lack of receiver separation, among other reasons.”

 

And that’s honestly the colts pass rush in a nutshell:  meh.  It’s not bad, it’s not good.  It’s just ok.  Regarding the quote above, I believe both cases.  There were times someone got to the qb in a hurry.  And due to the qbs we played, there were also self-induced pressures.

Still not getting why they have us ranked #8 in the league in pressure but everyone is saying the line is meh and needs more pressure. 

[smittywerb]

2 hours ago, AwesomeAustin said:

Still not getting why they have us ranked #8 in the league in pressure but everyone is saying the line is meh and needs more pressure. 

 

Because other sites have us ranked lower and that website also has teams like the chiefs ranked lower than us (ex:  PFF has us 23rd in pressure).  Also, the article says that pressure can be due to multiple reasons.  

 

So with that said, me personally the pass rush is average.  Maybe above average.  And that is due to multiple reasons:

 

- scheme:  we don’t blitz enough.  We depend on our front four to get pressure. Also, kind of hard to get pressure when corners are playing off the receivers so far

 

- opposing QBS:  we actually had it pretty easy when it came to opposing QBs last year.  The article mentioned that pressure could also come from a qb holding the ball too long.  As said above, that is possible with the qbs we played.  
 

- talent:  we don’t have that bonafide player we know that can go out and get sacks and pressures.  Maybe that’s tyquan seeing as he had the highest pressure rate for us on multiple sites.  Or Ebukam who ranked in the top 32 on PFF for edge rushers .  Or maybe we have a by committee type thing going on.  But still, a certified player is needed in a scheme that doesn’t utilize the blitz.  Maybe that’s Latu.

 

So in a nutshell, this is what leads me to believe we’re solid.  We’re ok.  But in this scheme, ok is not good enough.  Maybe for another scheme, but not this one.

 

Cant speak for everyone, but this is why I think we’re meh.  Not bad, not good.  Solid.

[CoachLite]

On 7/19/2024 at 7:52 PM, AwesomeAustin said:

Still not getting why they have us ranked #8 in the league in pressure but everyone is saying the line is meh and needs more pressure. 

Underperformance may indicate a coaching problem - for example, a scheme mismatch with the players.

[BeanDiasucci]

On 7/19/2024 at 9:52 PM, AwesomeAustin said:

Still not getting why they have us ranked #8 in the league in pressure but everyone is saying the line is meh and needs more pressure. 

What I've seen is that the Colts were #8 in sacks last season, but # 22 in pressure rate. https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2024/04/08/more-consistent-pressure-needed-by-colts-defense-in-2024/

[Superman]

On 7/19/2024 at 6:52 PM, AwesomeAustin said:

Still not getting why they have us ranked #8 in the league in pressure but everyone is saying the line is meh and needs more pressure. 

 

What does it mean for this site to list the Colts defense as #8 in pressure rate? The chart looks like it says the Colts pressure rate is 38-39%, and I would think that means we pressure the QB on 38-39% of dropbacks (intended pass plays, including scrambles). I don't think that's right, do you? I don't think the Colts got pressure anywhere near that frequently in 2023.

 

PFR says the Colts got 127 total pressures on 648 dropbacks. That's 19.6%, and would be #22 in the NFL. Unlike the chart in the article you linked, PFR lists and explains their stat, so we know what it means. I'm not sure what the stat in this article is measuring. I looked at their glossary and didn't see an explanation.