• work4work4work4work4@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    The part that fucks this analysis as far as I can tell is there is no real controlling for ADOT, which is one of the biggest factors on interceptions impact. Getting picked on a 3rd and Bears deep shot can be effectively a punt, while getting picked on underneath and behind the line of scrimmage stuff usually goes house, and the teams play calling can have a massive impact on what’s more likely.

  • whatever12347@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Among other reasons, this is why TD/INT ratio is becoming a near useless statistic.

    TD:INT ratio has always been a useless stat. Why present it as a ratio when they aren’t equally important? Touchdowns help a team more than interceptions hurt them.

    • RobotDevil222x3@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Not only that aspect, but a team that runs it in from the 1 is going to, on average, have a qb with a worse ratio than one who’s scheme has them throwing it at the 1. Lotta quick, easy TDs can be racked up by qbs and inflate their stats when in both cases the team scored a TD.

  • porkbellies37@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    The article is from 2020 which is why it’s about the 2019 season. But it’s true- a sack is almost always as bad or worse than a pick. And if your HC is so turnover conscious that he scares the QB out of pulling the trigger, he’s contributing to more losses than wins and should be fired.

    1. Fumbles- If you look up the players that fumble the most it is almost exclusively QBs at the top of the list. And those are primarily strip sacks.

    2. While not every fumble is a fumble lost, a fumble lost is almost always worse than a pick because it’s behind the line of scrimmage.

    3. Sacks are obviously worse than incompletions because they are behind the line of scrimmage.

    4. Injuries- Want to lose a lot of games, start your back up QB for most of the season or play your dinged up starter. How do QBs get injured, usually on sacks.

    5. Also goes without saying, but negative plays are how punters get more playing time.

    I’m a supporter of Fields, but the rate he takes sacks at softens the support A LOT. He needs to be more decisive and that is an area that HAS to improve. I do suspect that since the “T” in HITS used to be for “turnovers/ takeaways” before it became “the ball” that Eberflus emphasizes not throwing the ball if there is an iota of a chance it can be intercepted which probably doesn’t help.

    I’ve been pounding the table about throwing the ball 35+ times per game in order to get a concrete evaluation on our QB situation. Every sack is a pass attempt that could have happened.

    • troofinesse@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      A sack is not as bad as a pick (duh). Teams get sacked more than they throw picks. The article is claiming that in 2019, all the sacks in total hurt teams more than all the picks.

      However, I do think a fair bit of fans don’t realize how bad sacks are. Since they very often lead to increased punter playing time

      • porkbellies37@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        We can quibble a bit on this, but let’s just say a sack is worse than a risky throw.

        I’m not sure if this is a collected stat, but the ratios of fumbles per sack or fumbles lost per sack would likely underscore this. And a fumble behind the line of scrimmage is almost always worse than a pick.

        • troofinesse@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Honestly, whatever. Risky pass thing is an interesting and generally more correct way to look at it. And I can’t agree more that the Bears should let young QBs sink or swim with a ton of passes a game

    • Oo00Oo0Oo00@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m sure it fits vaguely somewhere in the fields drama. But I honestly don’t even get what point it’s trying to make because Fields takes too many sacks and turns the ball over too frequently.

      • porkbellies37@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Not sure why this is downvoted. I am a Fields supporter but this is 100% true and important. If he can’t be more decisive then he’s just too limited to continue with.

        I do want to add though, this is also a big data point for coaching and player acquisition/development… not just QB.

        If Mr HITS Principle is preaching not to put the ball in harms way at any cost, he may be contributing to the problem. If the GM isn’t getting the linemen who can protect adequately or WRs who can separate, that could contribute as well. I think with the latter there has been A LOT of improvement since last year. I have suspicions about how Flus is coaching to this though.