49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
If we are beating the Vikes 17-7 into the 4th in a couple weeks I will not be lauding Brock Purdys play because they are up 10. It would show he's been average at best and clearly missed plays.

I won't, because it's within the context of a real game with Mr. Irrelevant at QB.

If our offense gets up 10 in the 4Q of a playoff game, I'm expecting the defense we spent a gazillion resources on to close, close. And you know what...so does John and Kyle. Ask Bosa.

An offense can go 3 and out over and over and not have possession.

A defense can't retain possession,...like....ever. Unlimited attempts for the opposing teams' offense will eventually yield production,...especially in the 4th quarter.

So this makes no sense at all.....like alot of stuff.

I decided to flip the perspective over to pass rush to see how TTP may affect it. Here are my results.

Our pass rush this season has an average TTP of 3.14 seconds. If you take the 8 games this season where we have a 3.14 TTP or less, we have generated 24 total sacks in those games. If you take the 8 games this season where we have a 3.15 TTP or more, we have generated 14 total sacks in those games. So in games where our pass rush was getting there in 3.14 seconds or less, we averaged 3 sacks per game. In games where our pass rush was getting there in 3.15 seconds or more, we averaged only 1.75 sacks per game.

Just to be clear there were no TTP games between 3.09 and 3.25.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
The issue that I have with pass pro grading in general is that it weighs too heavily on pressure rate and sacks. How long pass pro holds up is much more important when grading pass pro.

Of which were 2nd worst this year in TTP yet it's the best pass blocking we've seen in the Shanahan era. So maybe not.

Or just better QB play.

I thought TTP was independent of QB results?

We were told.

Wut?

Time to Pressure. A hallow stat that shows on average how long the pass protection is holding up until the QB is moved. The one you've been pushing hard to say the PP was fine and 3.73s was more then enough time for Jimmy to make a play.

Time to pressure is not a hollow stat. Everyone on here understands this stat and how its significant in judging pass pro performance. You are the only one who doesn't understand it or atleast pretends like you don't.

The "hollow" reference was a dig to your comment on pressure rate being a hallow stat. I disagree.

Pressure rate alone is a hollow stat.

If it was a hollow stat, our FO wouldn't have spent a gazillion dollars and resources trying to increase it as much as possible.

They spent a gazillion dollars and resources on getting to the QB in under 3 seconds.

On their way to this:

The 49ers defense has generated a 44% pressure rate this season

https://www.ninersnation.com/2022/10/5/23388743/49ers-pressure-rate-nfl

At least the FO gets it.

That wasn't written by the front office and the article states nothing about what the FO thinks or feels.

A pass rushers job is to get to the QB as quickly as possible and sack him. 3.7 seconds means you aren't getting there quickly enough. Hence, the rams pass rush scored 0 sacks in that game.

LMAO. You can spin it any way you'd like but it's no secret what their team building strategy was and remains today.

It's to stop the run and bring the QB pressures in waves.

"I like to joke that we like to stockpile D-linemen here, and we'll just worry about the offensive pieces and everything else later. Like, 'Are you sure we need our 18th D-lineman?' But if they're that good, yes, you do. Nothing else matters." ~ John Lynch

As to your TTP, you're not going to find one game where there aren't a handful of snaps (11/31) where the PP held up for longer stretches. You're also not going to find one game where the majority of the time the ball is out quickly and that PP is rendered moot. That's football.

If you want to get even granular and say, of the 11 snaps he had 3.7s, he had 3 opportunities for positive plays, that's great. Unfortunately, all you'll reveal in the end is a normal football game.

No matter how far you dive into it, pressure matters. And the more you create, the better the odds of winning. That's real football.

Originally posted by NCommand:
LMAO. You can spin it any way you'd like but it's no secret what their team building strategy was and remains today.

It's to stop the run and bring the QB pressures in waves.

The cliche monster needs to leave our resident posters alone.

Would any team ever say any else than they're trying to build a team around these 2 things?

e.g.,....I've never heard a broadcast talking about how a team was built to "stop the pass",.... "maybe let the run go a little here or there."....or not overdo it with QB pressure.

Lol all 32 teams are going to say their team building strategy is to accomplish these 2 things but SAYING IT and DOING IT are completely different realms.

That our team has generally been able to accomplish this in the FA era is really the thing that's "no secret."

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I decided to flip the perspective over to pass rush to see how TTP may affect it. Here are my results.

Our pass rush this season has an average TTP of 3.14 seconds. If you take the 8 games this season where we have a 3.14 TTP or less, we have generated 24 total sacks in those games. If you take the 8 games this season where we have a 3.15 TTP or more, we have generated 14 total sacks in those games. So in games where our pass rush was getting there in 3.14 seconds or less, we averaged 3 sacks per game. In games where our pass rush was getting there in 3.15 seconds or more, we averaged only 1.75 sacks per game.

Just to be clear there were no TTP games between 3.09 and 3.25.

So the goal is to create as much volume pressure as quickly as possible? No s**t. LOL

If you really want to see how our team building strategy produces, compare our QB pressure rates to the teams we've faced this year. No need for splits. And then guess which team won.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I decided to flip the perspective over to pass rush to see how TTP may affect it. Here are my results.

Our pass rush this season has an average TTP of 3.14 seconds. If you take the 8 games this season where we have a 3.14 TTP or less, we have generated 24 total sacks in those games. If you take the 8 games this season where we have a 3.15 TTP or more, we have generated 14 total sacks in those games. So in games where our pass rush was getting there in 3.14 seconds or less, we averaged 3 sacks per game. In games where our pass rush was getting there in 3.15 seconds or more, we averaged only 1.75 sacks per game.

Just to be clear there were no TTP games between 3.09 and 3.25.

So the goal is to create as much volume pressure as quickly as possible? No s**t. LOL

If you really want to see how our team building strategy produces, compare our QB pressure rates to the teams we've faced this year. No need for splits. And then guess which team won.

No. It is too generate pressure in a reasonable amount of time. The longer pass pro holds up the less likely the pass rush gets home. The FO spends a lot of money and resources generating a pass rush that can get there in under 3 seconds. Because as I just showed you, a pass rush that takes longer to get there is less efficient at getting home.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
The issue that I have with pass pro grading in general is that it weighs too heavily on pressure rate and sacks. How long pass pro holds up is much more important when grading pass pro.

Of which were 2nd worst this year in TTP yet it's the best pass blocking we've seen in the Shanahan era. So maybe not.

Or just better QB play.

I thought TTP was independent of QB results?

We were told.

Wut?

Time to Pressure. A hallow stat that shows on average how long the pass protection is holding up until the QB is moved. The one you've been pushing hard to say the PP was fine and 3.73s was more then enough time for Jimmy to make a play.

Time to pressure is not a hollow stat. Everyone on here understands this stat and how its significant in judging pass pro performance. You are the only one who doesn't understand it or atleast pretends like you don't.

The "hollow" reference was a dig to your comment on pressure rate being a hallow stat. I disagree.

Pressure rate alone is a hollow stat.

If it was a hollow stat, our FO wouldn't have spent a gazillion dollars and resources trying to increase it as much as possible.

They spent a gazillion dollars and resources on getting to the QB in under 3 seconds.

On their way to this:

The 49ers defense has generated a 44% pressure rate this season

https://www.ninersnation.com/2022/10/5/23388743/49ers-pressure-rate-nfl

At least the FO gets it.

That wasn't written by the front office and the article states nothing about what the FO thinks or feels.

A pass rushers job is to get to the QB as quickly as possible and sack him. 3.7 seconds means you aren't getting there quickly enough. Hence, the rams pass rush scored 0 sacks in that game.

LMAO. You can spin it any way you'd like but it's no secret what their team building strategy was and remains today.

It's to stop the run and bring the QB pressures in waves.

"I like to joke that we like to stockpile D-linemen here, and we'll just worry about the offensive pieces and everything else later. Like, 'Are you sure we need our 18th D-lineman?' But if they're that good, yes, you do. Nothing else matters." ~ John Lynch

As to your TTP, you're not going to find one game where there aren't a handful of snaps (11/31) where the PP held up for longer stretches. You're also not going to find one game where the majority of the time the ball is out quickly and that PP is rendered moot. That's football.

If you want to get even granular and say, of the 11 snaps he had 3.7s, he had 3 opportunities for positive plays, that's great. Unfortunately, all you'll reveal in the end is a normal football game.

No matter how far you dive into it, pressure matters. And the more you create, the better the odds of winning. That's real football.

That quote does absolutely nothing to strengthen your argument. You are arguing as if I don't believe that generating a dominant pass rush is important. I have said nothing of the sort.

You just can't get your head around or just refuse to accept that the time it takes to reach the QB means everything when it comes to generating a consistent pass rush.

What you also have failed to do is separate pass protection from every other variable on a given pass play. So your granular crap means nothing. We aren't talking about whether a QB made a positive play or not. Their are numerous other variables that determine whether a play ends in a positive result or not. But we are not discussing those. WE ARE DISCUSSING PASS PROTECTION.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
No. It is too generate pressure in a reasonable amount of time. The longer pass pro holds up the less likely the pass rush gets home. The FO spends a lot of money and resources generating a pass rush that can get there in under 3 seconds. Because as I just showed you, a pass rush that takes longer to get there is less efficient at getting home.

Why are you moving the goal post to 3s? Who cares.

THEIR goal is to stop the run and bring as much QB pressure in waves as possible hence their absolute obsession in their team building strategy.

Here's a snippet of why and this is JUST sacks:

Sacks Taken vs Win Percentage

This chart includes the win percentages split by sacks taken in a game of every quarterback to play at least 48 games between 2011 and the third week of the 2017 regular season. The line for NFL Avg clearly shows that taking sacks is bad for wins. If a team goes an entire game without their quarterback being sacked, they have almost a seven-in-ten chance of winning. A team taking only two sacks will be more likely to win than lose, while a team that takes its third sack drops to just above a four-in-ten chance of winning.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
That quote does absolutely nothing to strengthen your argument. You are arguing as if I don't believe that generating a dominant pass rush is important. I have said nothing of the sort.

You just can't get your head around or just refuse to accept that the time it takes to reach the QB means everything when it comes to generating a consistent pass rush.

What you also have failed to do is separate pass protection from every other variable on a given pass play. So your granular crap means nothing. We aren't talking about whether a QB made a positive play or not. Their are numerous other variables that determine whether a play ends in a positive result or not. But we are not discussing those. WE ARE DISCUSSING PASS PROTECTION.

Then that's your own ignorance while talking out both sides of your mouth. "High QB pressure rates are super important to wins but we're going to ignore it when it happens to our QB and expect our average QB to transcend it."

The Brady Bunch are a fun group indeed.

As to the rest, the only thing you've revealed is what happens in any normal game. Most passes are completed < 3s and there are a handful of passing situation where the PP holds up > 3s.

The only outlier is the 35.5% pressure rate. And only 50 yards rushing in a Kyle offense. Of which, good luck finding a game where Kyle won with < 50 yards rushing.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
No. It is too generate pressure in a reasonable amount of time. The longer pass pro holds up the less likely the pass rush gets home. The FO spends a lot of money and resources generating a pass rush that can get there in under 3 seconds. Because as I just showed you, a pass rush that takes longer to get there is less efficient at getting home.

Why are you moving the goal post to 3s? Who cares.

THEIR goal is to stop the run and bring as much QB pressure in waves as possible hence their absolute obsession in their team building strategy.

Here's a snippet of why and this is JUST sacks:

Sacks Taken vs Win Percentage

This chart includes the win percentages split by sacks taken in a game of every quarterback to play at least 48 games between 2011 and the third week of the 2017 regular season. The line for NFL Avg clearly shows that taking sacks is bad for wins. If a team goes an entire game without their quarterback being sacked, they have almost a seven-in-ten chance of winning. A team taking only two sacks will be more likely to win than lose, while a team that takes its third sack drops to just above a four-in-ten chance of winning.

I am not moving the goalposts. My argument this entire time has been that time is a better indicator of pass rush/pass pro success than a hollow stat like pressure rate that gives no context.

If a pass rush takes 4.5 seconds to generate a 75% pressure rate and they come up with 0 sacks, do you really believe that the pass rush was successful? Do you really believe that pass protection failed?

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
That quote does absolutely nothing to strengthen your argument. You are arguing as if I don't believe that generating a dominant pass rush is important. I have said nothing of the sort.

You just can't get your head around or just refuse to accept that the time it takes to reach the QB means everything when it comes to generating a consistent pass rush.

What you also have failed to do is separate pass protection from every other variable on a given pass play. So your granular crap means nothing. We aren't talking about whether a QB made a positive play or not. Their are numerous other variables that determine whether a play ends in a positive result or not. But we are not discussing those. WE ARE DISCUSSING PASS PROTECTION.

Then that's your own ignorance while talking out both sides of your mouth. "High QB pressure rates are super important to wins but we're going to ignore it when it happens to our QB and expect our average QB to transcend it."

The Brady Bunch are a fun group indeed.

As to the rest, the only thing you've revealed is what happens in any normal game. Most passes are completed < 3s and there are a handful of passing situation where the PP holds up > 3s.

The only outlier is the 35.5% pressure rate. And only 50 yards rushing in a Kyle offense. Of which, good luck finding a game where Kyle won with < 50 yards rushing.

I am not talking out of both sides of my mouth. You are just the only one in this thread not intelligent enough to understand my argument.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I am not talking out of both sides of my mouth. You are just the only one in this thread not intelligent enough to understand my argument.

Your 'argument' was fine listing all of the QB pressure rates for the playoffs for all the QB's. That's all we needed to know as we were 1 of 2 outliers and we went the furthest of the two outliers in the playoffs.

But that didn't pin it on Jimmy enough and more on the OL. So you needed to find an even more obscure stat that could show there were actually a handful of snaps where the PP held up more > 3s. And?

That's just a football game.

If you really want to focus on the OL and not Jimmy, you'd be far more into the obscure stats of why we couldn't run the ball that day.

We ran 20 times that day for 50 yards.

We threw 30 times that day 232 yards 2 TD's and 1 INT. This a totally normal 49er QB output. 50 yards is not.

Unlike All, you're not driven by hate. But I do think your expectations are much higher for what reality was on the field that day. Keep that high standard for the QB. But apply it to the rest of the team equally. I don't see that with you.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
No. It is too generate pressure in a reasonable amount of time. The longer pass pro holds up the less likely the pass rush gets home. The FO spends a lot of money and resources generating a pass rush that can get there in under 3 seconds. Because as I just showed you, a pass rush that takes longer to get there is less efficient at getting home.

Why are you moving the goal post to 3s? Who cares.

THEIR goal is to stop the run and bring as much QB pressure in waves as possible hence their absolute obsession in their team building strategy.

Here's a snippet of why and this is JUST sacks:

Sacks Taken vs Win Percentage

This chart includes the win percentages split by sacks taken in a game of every quarterback to play at least 48 games between 2011 and the third week of the 2017 regular season. The line for NFL Avg clearly shows that taking sacks is bad for wins. If a team goes an entire game without their quarterback being sacked, they have almost a seven-in-ten chance of winning. A team taking only two sacks will be more likely to win than lose, while a team that takes its third sack drops to just above a four-in-ten chance of winning.

I am not moving the goalposts. My argument this entire time has been that time is a better indicator of pass rush/pass pro success than a hollow stat like pressure rate that gives no context.

If a pass rush takes 4.5 seconds to generate a 75% pressure rate and they come up with 0 sacks, do you really believe that the pass rush was successful? Do you really believe that pass protection failed?

No it's not. Pressure is pressure. It affects the QB just the same. Sure it's more ideal if you can get there quicker but the pressure itself is what's most important to winning. Whether it's 1 DE winning a bull rush against a T in 3+s or all 4 DL busting through untouched immediately, pressure is pressure. Pressure simply disrupts everything and forces a QB to make split second decisions off schedule.

It's so important, it's one of the primary reasons we asked, "What are Brock's numbers under pressure?"

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
No. It is too generate pressure in a reasonable amount of time. The longer pass pro holds up the less likely the pass rush gets home. The FO spends a lot of money and resources generating a pass rush that can get there in under 3 seconds. Because as I just showed you, a pass rush that takes longer to get there is less efficient at getting home.

Why are you moving the goal post to 3s? Who cares.

THEIR goal is to stop the run and bring as much QB pressure in waves as possible hence their absolute obsession in their team building strategy.

Here's a snippet of why and this is JUST sacks:

Sacks Taken vs Win Percentage

This chart includes the win percentages split by sacks taken in a game of every quarterback to play at least 48 games between 2011 and the third week of the 2017 regular season. The line for NFL Avg clearly shows that taking sacks is bad for wins. If a team goes an entire game without their quarterback being sacked, they have almost a seven-in-ten chance of winning. A team taking only two sacks will be more likely to win than lose, while a team that takes its third sack drops to just above a four-in-ten chance of winning.

I am not moving the goalposts. My argument this entire time has been that time is a better indicator of pass rush/pass pro success than a hollow stat like pressure rate that gives no context.

If a pass rush takes 4.5 seconds to generate a 75% pressure rate and they come up with 0 sacks, do you really believe that the pass rush was successful? Do you really believe that pass protection failed?

No it's not. Pressure is pressure. It affects the QB just the same. Sure it's more ideal if you can get there quicker but the pressure itself is what's most important to winning. Whether it's 1 DE winning a bull rush against a T in 3+s or all 4 DL busting through untouched immediately, pressure is pressure. Pressure simply disrupts everything and forces a QB to make split second decisions off schedule.

It's so important, it's one of the primary reasons we asked, "What are Brock's numbers under pressure?"

I apologise for taking a shot earlier. I got a little triggered by your accusation of me moving the goalposts. I assure you that I have not. I am more calm now and ready to continue this discussion.

My whole thing has been about pass protection vs pass rush. This isn't about the QB. This is the O line thread and so the discussion should try to stay on that subject. I brought up pass rush because it goes hand and hand with pass protection. The duscission should not be about how it affects the QB. The discussion should be about the success or failure of pass protection.

I am not arguing that pressure rate doesn't have a high correlation to wins and losses. I am simply saying that not all pressures are created equal. There is such a thing as coverage sacks and pressures. I would argue that the Niners defense has 14 of those coverage sacks this season. You simply cannot place a whole lot of blame on an o line for not protecting the QB longer than 3.7 seconds. I mean Pass Rush Win Rate (PRWR) is litterally measured by how often a rusher beats their block in 2.5 seconds.

What you are arguing when it comes to pressure rate does not separate PRWR from Coverage Win Rate (CWR). So your entire argument has a very shaky foundation when it comes strictly to pass protection. What the 3.7 seconds TTP tells me is that pass protection held up and the QB/route runners did not get the job done.

If you guys are keeping the discussion about one game in particular like it seems, just watch the game again and use your eyeballs. If the QB drops back and has no time to make a hitch and throw without a rusher in his face, that's bad pass protection. If the QB completes his dropback and has time to hitch, with no rusher in his face, that's adequate pass protection.
Whether he finds a target or not is irrelevant since it's not the OL's job to run good routes, or find the correct target.