1. Hi Guest, Registrations are now open. See you on the inside.
    Dismiss Notice

Bad news for Ben haters?

Discussion in 'Steelers Talk' started by Maddog78, May 11, 2021.

  1. Maddog78

    Maddog78 Well-Known Member

    3,444
    748
    Oct 12, 2020
    Interesting stat...

     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. CK 13

    CK 13 Well-Known Member

    10,707
    2,598
    Nov 5, 2011
    Who hates Ben? Maybe his checkered past but its in the past. He is a shell of his former self on the field. That's it. Retirement tour.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. Junebug

    Junebug Well-Known Member

    537
    89
    Oct 1, 2018
    What I hate is the fact that Ben came back. Hurts the team from moving forward, imho.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Winner Winner x 2
  4. TuRnDoWnForWaTT

    TuRnDoWnForWaTT Well-Known Member

    7,705
    2,997
    Jan 1, 2018
    This is more a meaningless stat than it is an interesting one
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Remahlehs

    Remahlehs Well-Known Member

    197
    87
    Mar 20, 2018
    I like Ben, but this is a pointless stat. There's a whole season worth of sacks and INTs not counted from him missing 2019. In 2018, he threw 34 TDs. However, he threw 16 INTs and took 24 sacks. If his numbers remained the same for 2019, that's another -6 to his value.

    Also, his 2020 season was almost all timing throws. That's a huge advantage in the sack department. Sacks kill drives, but picking up 2 yards on second and 8 doesn't help the offense much either.

    Finally, look at the bottom of that list. Terrible teams that often had to throw themselves back into games. The Steelers defense has been superb the past few years. Less points to make up means less pressure for a QB to hold onto the ball or try to force plays.
     
  6. mytake

    mytake Well-Known Member

    3,321
    1,754
    Dec 26, 2016
    It would be a meaningful stat if interceptions and sacks were worth points on the scoreboard.
     
  7. MeanJoeBlue

    MeanJoeBlue Well-Known Member

    1,238
    451
    Jan 2, 2013
    I thought there was a mistake with Rodgers' negative score, since he rarely throws INTs, but I didn't know that he took 49 sacks in 2018.

    I understand wanting to keep the formula simple, but I don't think sacks should be weighted the same as INTs.
     
  8. Maddog78

    Maddog78 Well-Known Member

    3,444
    748
    Oct 12, 2020
    Those two stats are heavily correlated.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. S.T.D

    S.T.D Well-Known Member

    29,851
    7,880
    Dec 23, 2020
    What about throw aways ??
    I believe he (Rogers) leads the league a lot in them.
    Do you think that factors into W- L column??
    Just wondering??
     
  10. Seven4Steel

    Seven4Steel Well-Known Member

    1,169
    542
    Nov 28, 2020
    Passing Touchdowns + Rushing Touchdowns - INT's - Sacks + Rings - Pornstar Strikeouts - Lombardi's tossed off boats + Sandlot plays - Damaged Knees + Weight - Teammates thrown under the bus + Playing with the Bus + Being a Pittsburgh Steeler - Surgically repaired tendons + Survivals against Lewis/Suggs - @KnoxVegasSteel's avatar - Motorcycle crashes - Appendicitus

    That's a more accurate formula for success.
     
    • Hilarious Hilarious x 4
  11. Vox Ferrum

    Vox Ferrum Well-Known Member

    5,945
    2,137
    Apr 22, 2019
    I do not get the sack stat as relevant in this conversation. I do get Int's and fumbles, but would rather have a QB take a sack than play hero and throw the Int.
     
  12. biggbunch68

    biggbunch68

    12,643
    2,157
    Apr 26, 2012
    Is this supposed to be good or bad, not sure what i'm looking at..:hmm:
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Against The Rules Against The Rules x 1
  13. KnoxVegasSteel

    KnoxVegasSteel Well-Known Member

    6,037
    1,621
    Oct 21, 2011
    Would mysterious genital tears be a + or -
     
  14. Steelrules

    Steelrules Well-Known Member

    1,866
    579
    May 12, 2013
    To have sacks have the same weight as INTs pretty much invalidates this argument. There are plenty of times we all wish Ben would take a sack rather than throw a wounded duck of a throw that’s intercepted by the opponent
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. AFan

    AFan Well-Known Member

    3,589
    764
    Oct 24, 2011
    sacks were included in this ‘illuminating stat’ because itmade Ben look better. The last 3 yrs Ben has had few sacks, especially compared to rushing QBs.
     
  16. OX1947

    OX1947 Well-Known Member

    3,198
    610
    Jan 12, 2017
    More ANALytics. I have to endure this trash everyday I watch Dave Roberts attempt to manage a baseball team. Thanks for bringing this to the football thread too. Appreciate it.
     
  17. jeh1856

    jeh1856 Beer is good

    26,991
    10,034
    Oct 26, 2011
    This is beyond worthless, it’s inane.

    Anyone with a minimum of math sense would know better than create a statistic with a variable (sacks) so highly insignificant to the other three.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2021
  18. jeh1856

    jeh1856 Beer is good

    26,991
    10,034
    Oct 26, 2011
    Then don’t try to envision the post right below yours. :smiley1:
     
  19. MeanJoeBlue

    MeanJoeBlue Well-Known Member

    1,238
    451
    Jan 2, 2013
    At least with Rodgers, that doesn't seem to be true.
    His sack numbers over the last 10 years range from 20 to 50, and his INTs stayed in the single digits regardless.

    Pro-Football-Reference doesn't show that stat (or at least, I didn't find it).

    Last year, Rodgers led the league in passing completetion (70.1%).
    If he is able to do that AND do a lot of throw aways, that is mind-boggling.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  20. strummerfan

    strummerfan Well-Known Member

    15,720
    3,052
    May 9, 2012
    and doesn’t adjust for Ben missing an entire season do to injury
     
  21. mytake

    mytake Well-Known Member

    3,321
    1,754
    Dec 26, 2016
    But a better stat would be points on turnovers against and sacks on 3rd down or that takes a team out of field goal position; in other words, a sack that causes change of possession.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  22. S.T.D

    S.T.D Well-Known Member

    29,851
    7,880
    Dec 23, 2020
    Aaron Rodgers set to shatter PFF's throwaway record
    [​IMG]
    Oct 28, 2018; Los Angeles, CA, USA; Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers (12) looks to pass during the first quarter against the Los Angeles Rams at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. Mandatory Credit: Jake Roth-USA TODAY Sports

    By Ben Linsey
    Oct 31, 2018
    [​IMG]

    The most throwaways by a quarterback that we have recorded at PFF in a single season since we began charting back in 2006 came two years ago when Philip Riversnotched 46. Rivers has been the king of the throwaway since entering the league; in the past 12 years, he has led the NFL in throwaways six times and finished inside the top five in the league another four seasons.

    This season, one quarterback appears to be in a position to not only surpass Rivers’ mark of 46 throwaways in 2016, but he is on pace to absolutely shatter it. That quarterback is Aaron Rodgers.

    Rodgers has amassed 32 throwaways through his first seven games. At that pace, he is set to throw the ball away 73 times in a 16-game season. To put that in perspective, Ben Roethlisberger has thrown the ball away 73 times in the regular season since the start of 2012.

    The amount of balls that Rodgers has thrown away has undoubtedly been on an upward slope in recent seasons. After averaging roughly 19 per season from 2008 to 2014, his count the last three years has been 32, 31, and 16 in seven games last season (on pace for 37 in a 16-game season). That is nothing compared to this pace this year, however, as he already has 14 more throwaways than the next closest quarterback.

    Any time you see a player with a lead like that, it prompts a question – why are they so far ahead of everyone else? The answer that makes sense in the case of Rodgers this season is the knee sprain he suffered in the Week 1 opener against the Chicago Bears.

    Rodgers has said, “If I’m completely healed, I don’t need to wear a brace…So if it’s not on, that means I’m feeling great. And if it is, that means I’m just not quite all the way back.” The brace was on last week in their hard-fought loss to the undefeated Los Angeles Rams, so that means the Green Bay Packers’ signal caller still isn’t 100% confident in his knee.

    Seeing as how that has been the case all of this year, it makes sense that Rodgers has been more willing to get rid of the ball rather than taking a sack or attempting heroics outside the pocket. The only problem with that line of thought is that he has still been taking sacks. From 2013-2017, Rodgers was sacked on 6.0% of his dropbacks. This season, he has been sacked on 6.6% of his dropbacks, so that means the throwaways aren’t reducing the number of sacks that Rodgers is taking.

    What are they reducing? His turnover-worthy plays.

    Among quarterbacks with at least 150 dropbacks, Rodgers has the fewest turnover-worthy plays with just two on 322 dropbacks. That turnover-worthy play rate of 0.6% also leads the league by a healthy margin. Rather than force a ball into a tight window or try to make a play late and risk a fumble, Rodgers has been content to live for another down. There have been a couple of turnover-heavy areas where that mentality comes through even stronger in Rodgers’ numbers.

    One such area is long-developing plays with a time to throw of more than 3.0 seconds. Time to throw is measured from the snap until one of three things happens: the quarterback releases the ball on a pass attempt, the quarterback crosses the line of scrimmage on a scramble, or the quarterback is sacked. Rodgers currently has the third-most dropbacks where it takes more than 3.0 seconds for one of those three things to take place, coming in with 105 on the season which slots behind only Deshaun Watson and Jared Goff.


     
    Last edited: May 11, 2021
    • Informative Informative x 1
  23. S.T.D

    S.T.D Well-Known Member

    29,851
    7,880
    Dec 23, 2020
    See why I don't do this stuff LoL. I thought I figured it out. Sorry. :facepalm:
     
  24. Maddog78

    Maddog78 Well-Known Member

    3,444
    748
    Oct 12, 2020
  25. MeanJoeBlue

    MeanJoeBlue Well-Known Member

    1,238
    451
    Jan 2, 2013
    Sorry if I made it sound like I was doubting you about Rodgers doing throw-aways.
    I was being straightforward.
    I am impressed that he can maintain a decently high completion rate and yards/attempt, even including all the incompletions from throw-aways.

    That article was about 2018.
    All those throw-aways weren't helping much, as he still ate 49 sacks, quite a bit higher than the previous two years.
     

Share This Page

Welcome to the ultimate resource for Steelers fans. Sign Up Here!