Bryce Huff Retired

Originally posted by krizay:
Talk about trying hard to "win" an argument and failing. The fact you guys keep saying "SACK for someone else" says all you need to know.

Ginkel had 49 pressures to TJ Watts 53. So is Ginkel effecting the game almost as much as TJ?

And again TJ Watt with 53 pressures easily one of the best pass rushers in the game is only averaging 3 pressures a game.

3 pressures on what 60 plays.

Yes consistent combo pressure from multiple DL could be a huge plus. Singular player pressure isn't as big as you guys are making it out to be. IMO

Your train of thought.. player A gets the pressure that helped lead to player B getting a sack…you give player B the credit for said play. I mean if a QB falls down behind the LOS and is touched that's a sack. If a defensive player forces a QB to run out of bounds behind the LOS, that's a sack.

A ton of Ginkel's sacks were scheme related with blitzes and free rushes. Go look at his sack vs SF.

Vic Beasley lead the league in sacks, go ask Hero how meaningful those sacks were. a ton of free rushers and coverage sacks. That didn't make he some amazing pass rusher imo.

IMO all you can do as a singular player is create consistent pressure, win those one on one opportunities. If you get beat all game, but get a "free opportunity" to get a sack that game, everyone is gonna think you played well. It can be a misleading stat on who affects the game on a down to down basis. I think that's what some folks are getting at…not that the ultimate goal isn't to sack the QB.

FWIW I jumped in the argument when someone wrote something to the effect of pressures could tell a better story about a player than sack or something to that effect.

My argument is sacks are better than pressures.

I'm going to use 2 players you brought into the conversation. Looking strictly at sacks and pressures since that's te argument. Nothing more Nothing less.

Would you rather Jared Verse 4.5 sacks 77 pressures or Van Ginkles 11.5 sacks 49 pressures?

Originally posted by krizay:
FWIW I jumped in the argument when someone wrote something to the effect of pressures could tell a better story about a player than sack or something to that effect.

My argument is sacks are better than pressures.

I'm going to use 2 players you brought into the conversation. Looking strictly at sacks and pressures since that's te argument. Nothing more Nothing less.

Would you rather Jared Verse 4.5 sacks 77 pressures or Van Ginkles 11.5 sacks 49 pressures?

What defines the pressure rate metric?

Sacks are demoralizing, typically a loss of yards and a momentum change in a football game so overall a bigger impact.

Originally posted by krizay:
FWIW I jumped in the argument when someone wrote something to the effect of pressures could tell a better story about a player than sack or something to that effect.

My argument is sacks are better than pressures.

I'm going to use 2 players you brought into the conversation. Looking strictly at sacks and pressures since that's te argument. Nothing more Nothing less.

Would you rather Jared Verse 4.5 sacks 77 pressures or Van Ginkles 11.5 sacks 49 pressures?

Verse who actually won DROY with "just 4.5 sacks"

Like I said a good portion of Ginkles sacks were based off Flores blitz scheme compared to just flat out beating OTs all game. That's not me saying he's a bad player or anything. I don't think he's some amazing pass rusher.

Originally posted by TD49ers:
What defines the pressure rate metric?

Sacks are demoralizing, typically a loss of yards and a momentum change in a football game so overall a bigger impact.

They can also be the result of a blown play, good scheme call or coverage and not directly related to the DE having some amazing rep.

I think sacks are an overblown stat…but agree the ultimate goal of a DL is to put the QB at their butt.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
They can also be the result of a blown play, good scheme call or coverage and not directly related to the DE having some amazing rep.

I think sacks are an overblown stat…but agree the ultimate goal of a DL is to put the QB at their butt.

Here we go again only using one hypothetical. Is it not possible for a pressure to be from a blown play, scheme call or coverage and not directly related to the DE having some amazing rep?

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Verse who actually won DROY with "just 4.5 sacks"

Like I said a good portion of Ginkles sacks were based off Flores blitz scheme compared to just flat out beating OTs all game. That's not me saying he's a bad player or anything. I don't think he's some amazing pass rusher.

In my best Dan Lebatard voice "PUT IT ON A POLL"

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Verse who actually won DROY with "just 4.5 sacks"

Like I said a good portion of Ginkles sacks were based off Flores blitz scheme compared to just flat out beating OTs all game. That's not me saying he's a bad player or anything. I don't think he's some amazing pass rusher.

In my best Dan Lebatard voice "PUT IT ON A POLL"

Works for me lol
FWIW as pure pass rushers go

pass rush rank…
Ginkle 84th overall
Verse 9th overall

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Works for me lol
FWIW as pure pass rushers go

pass rush rank…
Ginkle 84th overall
Verse 9th overall

The argument was pressures and sacks. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Originally posted by krizay:
The argument was pressures and sacks. Nothing more. Nothing less.

both being cumulative, pressures easily win.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Works for me lol
FWIW as pure pass rushers go

pass rush rank…
Ginkle 84th overall
Verse 9th overall

The argument was pressures and sacks. Nothing more. Nothing less.

The pressure rate metric seems vague. The QB can be pressured and still complete the pàss. I dont think that is excluded.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Works for me lol
FWIW as pure pass rushers go

pass rush rank…
Ginkle 84th overall
Verse 9th overall

The argument was pressures and sacks. Nothing more. Nothing less.

I mean it's data showing that sacks aren't the ultimate marker of a good pass rusher. How can verse have that much of a better PR grade with 4.5 sacks vs Ginkle's 11.5

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Works for me lol
FWIW as pure pass rushers go

pass rush rank…
Ginkle 84th overall
Verse 9th overall

The argument was pressures and sacks. Nothing more. Nothing less.

The original argument is that pressures are a better indicator of pass rush performance than sacks are.

No one here is arguing that a pressure is better than a sack on any given play. A pressure could be better on a given play if the result is a pick-6 or whatever. But generally speaking, sacks are better results than mere pressures.

But that doesn't negate the point that pressures tell us who is winning more often against their opponent. That's why guys like Bosa get paid the way he does, and guys like Leonard Floyd bounce around (69 pressures VS 44).

This whole argument is beyond stupid. But man, if I don't see Krizay and Since07 engaged in stupid arguments often.

Originally posted by Chance:
The original argument is that pressures are a better indicator of pass rush performance than sacks are.

No one here is arguing that a pressure is better than a sack on any given play. A pressure could be better on a given play if the result is a pick-6 or whatever. But generally speaking, sacks are better results than mere pressures.

But that doesn't negate the point that pressures tell us who is winning more often against their opponent. That's why guys like Bosa get paid the way he does, and guys like Leonard Floyd bounce around (69 pressures VS 44).

This whole argument is beyond stupid. But man, if I don't see Krizay and Since07 engaged in stupid arguments often.

I disagree. If Floyd was good against the run while still providing what he provides as a pass rusher he wouldn't bounce around. That is the true difference between the top guys and the guys that bounce around. It's the everything else. Not just the sacks/pressures.

Originally posted by Chance:
The original argument is that pressures are a better indicator of pass rush performance than sacks are.

No one here is arguing that a pressure is better than a sack on any given play. A pressure could be better on a given play if the result is a pick-6 or whatever. But generally speaking, sacks are better results than mere pressures.

But that doesn't negate the point that pressures tell us who is winning more often against their opponent. That's why guys like Bosa get paid the way he does, and guys like Leonard Floyd bounce around (69 pressures VS 44).

This whole argument is beyond stupid. But man, if I don't see Krizay and Since07 engaged in stupid arguments often.

This and yes the argument overall is stupid. It's June lol