I’ve been saying it for awhile, pressure rate is really the only “stat” we should be looking at when projecting edge rushers to the pros. It’s why I liked Jayson/Odafe Oweh last year, he had no sacks but one of the best pressure rates in the Big 10. Then he went out and made all-rookie and looks to have a really bright future.
And pressure is as much “production” as a sack. When you pressure a QB you force him into mistakes, you force help, you ruin the play basically. A sack is nice icing on the cake, but pressure matters. No less an expert than Bill Belichick agrees with me:
Wouldn’t you have to be rushing the passer to pressure the QB? So Travon Walker isn’t used that way. And for Thibedeaux if he tries the same stupid beat the guy wide every time to where the tackle starts laughing at him but the QB moves up just a tad and throws from a clean pocket, is that a QB pressure?
Of course. Walker’s pressure rate was calculated on snaps where he was rushing the passer, and it wasn’t great. But that’s not meant as a slight at Walker, he needs more reps to improve and Georgia didn’t give him those reps. His situation was unique. Comparing his situation to Thibodeaux’s is apples and oranges.
What the pressure rate numbers show is just how good Thibs has been as a pass rusher, and not just last year, over the course of his career. It’s bona fide, statistical production, and it’s been dominant.
You can wonder all you want about what goes into a pressure, but it’s the same as wondering what goes into a drop, or “good coverage” or a bad block. You have to judge it with your eyes. So yeah, maybe by the technical definition of the pressure, you might get +/- 5% of pressures you disagree with, but on the whole it’s a fairly consistent metric.
What’s weird is they used college PRESSURES but then used WIN RATES for the NFL guys. You can win a rep without pressuring the passer, so it seems odd to switch them. Jadaveon Clowney has never had a double digit sack season in his entire career in the NFL, but he has consistently shown up at the top of “win rate” stats.
My education continues. You caught me in a rare moment when I was teachable…
The Beast was released today and so far I’ve resisted what he’s trying to teach me about my “favorites”. As an aside, I was surprised to see so many 10 yard splits in the Beast being different from PFF, which I’ve used for combine results until now. I’m not sure why or how those would change after being certified as official. Another mystery…
Yeah I think win rate and pressure rate are two different metrics, so whoever was trying to make an apples to apples comp using them made a mistake. Win rate factors into running plays whereas pressure rate does not. There are a lot of nose tackles with good win rates but abyssmal pressure rates (obviously).
Like sacks? That’s a pretty arbitrary stat if we’re being honest. A quarterback can run out of bounds 1 inch behind the line of scrimmage on a scramble and the closest defender gets awarded a sack, which we point at as being important. But if a DE blows up a double team, gets in the QBs face, and causes him to throw a pick six… no counting stats for him. Which effects the game more right?
I think many of the “counting stats” we use are arbitrary, which is why analytics and additional statistics have becoming more and more popular. We all just have to get used to it I think (or not, but this line of thinking isnt going anywhere)
The only thing arbitrary about real sacks is when there are multiple people involved and they start giving out half sacks. Sack or sack not, there is no try. It’s a legit stat, counting stat as you say. Define to me what pressure is? Is it an almost sack? Is it making the QB step up into the pocket? Or is it completely arbitrary. Is there an official definition? If not, then it’s arbitrary.
I can even think of situations where QB pressure might not be a good thing. Like a savvy DE for example might realize that the tackle has them beat and they might peel off and try to protect against a screen. Regardless, I can’t really buy into stats that aren’t well defined. Do the hard stats tell the whole story? Of course not, that’s why there is no substitute for watching game film.