Quote
Blue and Gold
Quote
zn
[
www.profootballfocus.com]
In games that Donald played this year, the Rams got pressure on 39.2 percent of their opponents dropbacks, the fourth-best rate in the league, and they also ranked fourth among defensive units with a 7.5 sack percentage. In the two games that Donald missed this season, the Rams pressure percentage dropped all the way down to 32.2 percent while their sack percentage dipped to 6.8 percent. The Rams also had to work harder to get the pressure when Donald was absent, blitzing on 40.7 percent of their opponents passing plays without Donald in the lineup compared to just 36.2 percent of the time when he was in there.
When Donald played, they were able to drop more defenders in coverage all while creating more pressure, the impact of which can’t be overstated. He elevates his entire defense in a way that few other defenders even come close to.
I don't hate them, they do some good things in terms of counting the number of this and the number of that. I do not rely on their grades.
But look at what they wrote in the above and what the derived.
39.2% "all the way down" to 32.2%
7.5% down to 6.8%
40.7% down to 36.2%
differences
7%
less than 1%
5.5%
In terms of football that is not that much, not enough to make the sweeping judgment at the end. The differences could be made up in the types of plays the opponent called when Donald not in lineup. In fact, in theory, teams could have tried riskier passes when Donald not in game, and therefore easier to get pressure and the REAL difference was greater than the 7% difference, the 1% and 5.5%.
Or the differences could be, in real terms, less than the difference due to mitigating football factors.
In short, things lass than 10% or 15% are really hard to make definitive judgments on because football has so many moving parts.
First off the difference between pressure on 39% v. 32% of plays is as substantial. On their numbers, In the 2 games in question its a difference of 4 plays. I think any coach, if told that they could increase pressures by 7% by doing this or that, would not simply scoff at it. Or for that matter, to use a different number, if the Rams were told if you do x you would increase scoring by 7%, that would mean they would go from 28.9 points a game to just under 31 points a game, which would surpass the Eagles, who were first with 29. So yes it;s a substantial number in context.
But that's not that important.
I presented it as one among many such claims. That is, the claim being that Donald's play had a clear impact on the defense as a whole. The simplest response is to ask if that's correct--not the exact PFF numbers, but the fact. Does the Rams pressure increase with Donald playing v. not. Anyone who watched a lot of games ought to be prepared to answer that with a simple yes or no, whether they agree with PFF numbers or not...since the issue isn't PFF, it's Donald. So is it yes or no? I think the obvious answer is yes. Which is why Wade;s praise for Donald is not just empty hyperbole.
....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/25/2018 02:51PM by zn.
