A Tough Schedule to Sack
by John Morgan on Sep 7, 2010 6:30 PM PDT
Email
PrintA while back, I mentioned that Seattle should intercept more passes this season because they face a run of quarterbacks that are more interception prone. This is an interesting twist and perhaps even a leap of logic, but the Pro Football Reference blog tracked what stats stay most consistent when a quarterback changes teams, and the most consistent stat was sack percentage (the least consistent stat: interception percentage). The insinuation is probably that quarterbacks are more responsible for sacks while the entire team, including the defense should it allow the team to fall behind, probably more responsible for interceptions.
Here's another crack at the idea of improved perceived performance through weakened competition.
Seattle had 28 sacks total last season. Quite bad. If we look at the quarterbacks Seattle faced, we can create a baseline for expected sacks. It's not precise and it doesn't factor in game situation, but it does give us a frame of reference for how Seattle performed compared to average.
Average sack total: 33.5 sacks
Actual: 28
I removed the 18 attempts by Tarvaris Jackson, Luke McCown, Matt Flynn, Morgan Spurlock and Matt Leinart, because screw those guys. None of their attempts resulted in a sack.
Assuming Seattle faces nothing but starters, which won't happen, but nevertheless, how many sacks should Seattle expect in 2010?
Average sack total: 30
It's actually a tougher schedule this season.
We will have to look back at this total once we know how many attempts we can assign each quarterback. We also need some sense as to how those quarterbacks and the offense on the whole perform this season, but on paper Seattle is facing another run of quarterbacks that are stingy at allowing sacks. The average sack percentage for all quarterbacks in 2009 was 6.1%. The average 2009 sack percentage of the quarterbacks Seattle will face in 2010 was 5.2%.
Last season, Seattle faced five quarterbacks with below average sack percentages, Shaun Hill, David Garrard, Kyle Boller, Josh Freeman and Aaron Rodgers. This season, Seattle faces Freeman again, Jason Campbell, Matt Cassel, and, averaging the sack percentage of last year's first round rookie starters, Sam Bradford twice. Only Cassel is a sack magnet though, with an 8.2% sack percentage. Campbell, Freeman and projected Bradford are all about average (6.2%, 6.5% and 6.4% respectively). Seattle faced three quarterbacks last season that were sacked more often than Cassel: Hill (10.4%), Boller (8.8%) and Rodgers (8.5%). Garrard (7.5%) was sacked more often than anyone but Cassel. Those four accounted for 13 of Seattle's 28 sacks.
So, nothing on the face exciting to report, but we can take some comfort that if Seattle doesn't light the world on fire with its pass rush (as measured by sacks), part of it may be because of the quality of competition rather than an inherent weakness. More than 30, and I'm a happy camper.
60 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I can't wait for this team to make you gay John.
by Scruffy Lefty on Sep 7, 2010 7:08 PM PDT reply actions 4 recs
Let's welcome Bradford to the NFL
with who?? Chris Clemons?? Yes!
Honestly, I am not too worried about the pass rush, and I'm going to tell you why...
The Leo Package. Mora’s 4-3 over scheme was boring and predictable, which regular offenses face for about 10+ games. Carroll’s Leo package may or may not be a game breaker, but this position is hyped to add a new dimension to the defense like the wildcat to the offense. Plays, IMO, are designed to confuse the O-Line by bringing in 4-5 different Lineman/Backers to the LOS and plug up the holes. Will this have a influence on our pass rush and blitzing? Maybe, maybe not, but one thing’s for sure, we might be the first team to utilize such a scheme.
Add in a healthy Trufant and a overall better secondary will take pressure off the D-Line to sack and create pressure. I believe we have the potential to reach 40 sacks this year.
I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus
The lack of any type of creative blitz was so frustrating last year.
I’m excited to see what the new coaching stuff does now that the games start.
by Scruffy Lefty on Sep 7, 2010 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions
you mean
last 3 years maybe?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
Well, I think we were hoping that Gus Bradley was going to liven up the D
which never happened. Considering he’s still hanging around, I hope he’s learned from his mistakes.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
Here's hoping this is the offseason that Craig Terrill is finally released.
by Wayward Llama on Sep 8, 2010 3:52 AM PDT up reply actions
Last season we thought we'd see more zone blitzes.
We were wrong.
We could be wrong now. I’m hoping for more and better blitzes, but there is no guarantee that happens.
Love this stuff.
How about hits and/or hurries? Is there enough data available to get a gauge of ‘pass-rush’ other than just sacks?
Red Bryant: surprise us!
Nice information...
John: Have you noticed any correlation between sack rate and win percentage?
It would seem relevant in that getting to, and protecting, the QB is a primary concern on both sides of the ball, but I just don’t know if expected wins can vaguely be extrapolated from an expected sack total. Any thoughts?
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
PS: Screen name isn't what you think it means.
I do not think you can extrapolate expected wins from sacks.
I am sure there is some correlation between sacks and wins but that doesn’t mean a team must sack to win.
It would probably see a lot of noise from teams that fall behind and have to pass a bunch.
Kind of the opposite of the “when a team’s leading rusher gets 100 yards/25 carries they win x% of their games” fallacy.
I wouldn't have expected as much...
Just wondering if in the course of putting in the leg work anything jumped out.
It is interesting though, that getting to the QB, and protecting your own QB, are two of the more prominent goals of any team. You would think that there might be some sort of metric that shows a connection between the relative successes of these goals.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
PS: Screen name isn't what you think it means.
Any one ever wonder if Julian Peterson might have succeeded as a Leo?
Well, even if he could be successful at it, no way of telling that he wouldn’t have been traded or cut.
Golden!
I think he's a little light
right? He’s a great pass rusher, but wouldn’t he be a liability as an end?
Also here’s a thought. The powers that be chose not to draft the “Leo” (this most likely has been brought up before) but went with a vet. I know DE’s take time to peak, or develop so perhaps ol’ Carroll wanted a player with experience to better demonstrate the effectiveness of the Leo position
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
by jubelthebear on Sep 7, 2010 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions
He's lined up as an end in quite a few instances for the Seahawks.
Julian Peterson is generally around 245-250. Chris Clemons, by comparison is 254’ish.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 7, 2010 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions
it's been so long...
What was the defensive scheme when he was on the line? What formation was the offense lined up in? I’m just curious because if it was a we’re-definitely-gonna-pass down & formation then they probably wanted him as a rusher.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
by jubelthebear on Sep 7, 2010 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions
I forget the details, but there have been a couple of instances where he lined up at DE, and I'm only going off of memory. I remember once that he did this in a 3-3 formation
Usually, though, he rushed from the OLB spot.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 7, 2010 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions
He got many of them from the pass rush specialist DE role in nickle and dime.
One of John’s favorite defenses back then. I always wanted to see Leroy Hill fill that role some too and cause more confusion, but he’s not the same level of pass rusher that Peterson was.
Thank you.
Now that you mention it, I actually remember some of those formations with him at DE.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 7, 2010 11:09 PM PDT up reply actions
man I kinda miss him
we kinda got like the Mr. Hyde version of Peterson in Aaron Curry
Carl you bring up a good point though. Peterson, Mebane, Bryant would be a nice 3 down. I question his run stopability as a starting Leo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
by jubelthebear on Sep 7, 2010 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions
He played on quite a few pass rushing downs and DE
And was pretty good at it. He went downhill in coverage and assignments as the years went on i think, so he may have actually been a perfect leo type player.
by B.B.Finnegan on Sep 7, 2010 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Speaking of LEO liability at end
If I had a nickle for every time I saw Foley or Reed turned and crushed into the pile in the center of the line while the RB turned the corner untouched around the end during the preseason, I’d still be broke, but would have enough money for a Dicks Deluxe.
I am hoping it was a reflection of the talent and not a continuous trend we will see during the season with the 1st stringers (although arguably Foley/Reed faced 2nd and 3rd stringers as well). In my short football career at end, it was always drilled into my head: YOU MUST FORCE THE PLAY INSIDE
I wonder about the strength/weight of our LEOs and their ability to contain an outside rush…
This is off topic
but are we gonna get a Charlie Whitehurst 2010 preseason retrospective or something. I saw some things I liked and some things I didn’t like from him but I’m struggling to really understand what that means.
What it means is that while Whitehurst is much improved from his Chargers days, he's still nervous in the pocket and not fully disciplined as a QB
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 7, 2010 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, he throws a pretty deep ball.
But I’m one of the few people, though, who doesn’t care for the deep ball much. I want sound, swift, and confident decision-making (I’ll allow for a modicum of hesitation, but confidence and soundness of decision comes standard for me), accuracy, and calmness in the pocket (poise, if you will).
In summation, I want a Sam Bradford.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 7, 2010 10:46 PM PDT up reply actions
A high-velocity deep ball is a bonus.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 7, 2010 10:46 PM PDT up reply actions
It's going to be interesting to see how close SF plays to the line in disrespect of Matt's shortcomings.
Red Bryant: surprise us!
Interesting?
I dread it. Though, to be fair, Matt showed some mustard on his passes this past preseason
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 7, 2010 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Ugh, what else is new.
Eight in the box to kill the running game, jam the WR’s.
Though jamming BMW might be a bad idea.
yeah
cause he’ll eat it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
by jubelthebear on Sep 7, 2010 11:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, that has been hard to watch over the past few years
CBs continually jumping slants, outs, and RB dump-offs, never fearing getting beat deep. We did get a couple nice gains on an occasional pump fake sideline pass, but it was apparent the other teams schemed for the dink-dunk game and knew Hass couldn’t overcome his noodle arm.
To be fair, the time to throw afforded by the line played a role as well
Seemed like sometimes even a 3-step drop was a risk given the turnstile-like-protection Matt often had. It is pretty hard to complete mid-range and deep passes with your QB lying broken under a couple 300 pound monsters.
This is a really good article.
Do they do a time allowed per sack stat? Meaning can we judge sack potential if sacks are quickly destroyed blockers vs a good coverage sack?
by Joshua Kasparek on Sep 8, 2010 12:18 AM PDT reply actions
That would be awesome
Not available. We would need to classify it for drop-back length, but it still would give us some more relevant information.
Here's a random thought I had
During the Seahawks 2005 swarm and smash 50 sack season. I think it’s safe to assume that several of those sacks were “coverage” sacks in the sense that they took a while to develop but were not because our DBs covered so well all the time. Let me explain.
When you look at 2005’s team a lot of QBs they faced had to several times reestablish their position in the pocket because of pressure in the middle. During this period of resetting themselves they would lose eye contact with their receivers or be filtered toward the outside pressure, one particular play was a 3 man line against St. Louis where Marcus Tubbs forces Marc Bulger into Rocky Bernard by pushing the center back denying him the ability to step into his throw. Had that not occured Kelly Herndon had failed to take the proper coverage depth and he had Issac Bruce against Michael Boulware.
Pressure from the middle can hide a broken coverage for a time or even make a good coverage last a bit longer than it should. How many QBs have had to reconsider their position in the pocket since Marcus Tubbs got injured and Rocky Bernard declined? I can’t really remember even Josh Freeman looking panicked against the middle rush last season.
by Joshua Kasparek on Sep 8, 2010 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, in 2005 I started coming across people who really knew nothing of the Seahawks, saying Rocky Bernard was a beast.
I always really liked Rocky, from the beginning, but I still had to concede to them, coverage sacks. You can’t be replacement level or anything, and rack up 8 sacks as a tackle because your offense and secondary are good, Rocky was good, but so many of the team’s sacks were pretty late developing.
by jacobstevens on Sep 9, 2010 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Isn't Morgan Spurlock...
…the guy who made Super Size Me? Or am I missing a joke here?
Yeah he did. He also had a reality show where he tried other stuff for 30 days.
Mo Johnston is what John Schneider could be in 4 years.
I'm very concerned about this pass rush
Even with the sitting ducks we’ll face (Bradford, Orton, Freeman). I’m predicting around 20-25 sacks, which would probably be near the bottom of the league.
I hope Bradley calls more corner blitzes because I can’t trust this Front Four to create significant pressure.
Mo Johnston is what John Schneider could be in 4 years.
Sorry... WAY off topic, but it's so slow in here today... but how in hell did KC get a Monday night game?
I don’t understand.
Oakland had one last year.
Ever since SNF became the “game of the week” MNF gets a clunker every now and then.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Radio Row Video: Marcell Dareus of the Buffalo Bills
- Not to be outdone, Tecmo Bowl also predicts a Giants win
- Shutdown Corner previews and predicts Super Bowl XLVI
- With help from a police escort, Giants get their hometown pizza in Indianapolis
- ‘Why Is This News’ podcast: Doug Farrar on Super Bowl XLVI
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
