Impact Tackles among LBs

[AllYouNeedIsLovie 377]

http://www.thefootballeducator.com/impact-tackling-need-comprehensive-statistics-nfl/#ixzz37VRtGh7T

 

Pretty good read and goes to show that tackles alone is not a good indicator of how good a LB really is.

 

I knew Navarro Bowman was really good, but jesus christ, I didn't realize he was that spectacular.

[KempBolt 498]

That was a good read. It highlighted what I was getting at the other day in regards to Derrick Johnson and Vontaze Burfict.

[AllYouNeedIsLovie 377]

That was a good read. It highlighted what I was getting at the other day in regards to Derrick Johnson and Vontaze Burfict.

 

Also, highlights my point of Kuechly being a good LB, but not an elite one like the media makes him out to be.

 

I have to say I'm pretty surprised to see the amount of impact plays Bobby Wagner has made. There were some damn good LB's that came out of that 2012 draft.

[KempBolt 498]

 

Also, highlights my point of Kuechly being a good LB, but not an elite one like the media makes him out to be.

 

I have to say I'm pretty surprised to see the amount of impact plays Bobby Wagner has made. There were some damn good LB's that came out of that 2012 draft.

Yeah it would seem I've been overlooking him too. Easy for a guy to get lost on that defense.

[KempBolt 498]

But it should be noted that cover skills need to be factored into the equation, and that article doesn't deal with them at all.

[Cherry 1,302]

I can understand giving Burfict a few too many tackles, but the definition of an "impact tackle" IMO is bullshit. Is being the last man to beat 30 yards down the field and making a TD saving tackle not an "impact tackle"? The definition of it is all biased, and not recordable or measurable. You can put a scale on it, sure, but the scale can be numbered a billion different ways. A tackle is a tackle. If the ball carrier gets 4 yards forward and Burfict comes up from coverage to make the tackle, is it not "impactful"? If he assists in making one, is it not "impactful" that he was in there to take down the ball carrier? Every tackle has an impact. Every single one of them.

Edited July 16, 2014 by Chernobyl426

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

This is kinda random but Bobby Wagner was brought up so...

 

Seahawks middle linebacker Bobby Wagner believes the Denver Broncos were intimidated by his team's defense from the start of their 43-8 Super Bowl XLVIII loss to Seattle.

 

"You're not wrong," Wagner said. "They looked scared out there. Nobody wanted to catch the ball. Nobody wanted to come up the middle."

Wagner thought the intimidation factor started early in the game with Seattle strong safety Kam Chancellor's bruising hit on Denver receiverDemaryius Thomas on a short crossing route in the first quarter.

 

[KempBolt 498]

I can understand giving Burfict a few too many tackles, but the definition of an "impact tackle" IMO is bullshit. Is being the last man to beat 30 yards down the field and making a TD saving tackle not an "impact tackle"? The definition of it is all biased, and not recordable or measurable. You can put a scale on it, sure, but the scale can be numbered a billion different ways. A tackle is a tackle. If the ball carrier gets 4 yards forward and Burfict comes up from coverage to make the tackle, is it not "impactful"? If he assists in making one, is it not "impactful" that he was in there to take down the ball carrier? Every tackle has an impact. Every single one of them.

So you don't see how a tackle for a loss has more impact than a tackle for a gain? Or how a tackle that prevents a 1DN conversion has more impact than one that occurs after the first down marker is reached?

 

Heck, the first place you went in defense of Burfict was a FF, which is part of his criteria. Every single tackle has some impact on the game, sure. But the guy whose tackles are preventing conversions or forcing fumbles deserves more credit for making an impact than the one bringing guys down after they've earned their teams another set of downs. The tackles of the former are much more impactful.

 

I mean, based on your take here Paul Posluszny should be the #2 linebacker in the game. Because he had the 2nd most tackles and they all have an impact right? Every single one? Forget Bowman and Kuechly... it's all about Burfict and Posz because more is better?

[KempBolt 498]

PFF does something similar with their "Run Stop Percentage." Here's their explanation:

 

 

You finished with 120 tackles this year? That’s great, but where did you make them? If a defender is racking up tackles but not keeping the offense from getting what they were after, how meaningful are they? For our Run Stop Percentage Signature Stat, we’ve combined our tackle totals (built from viewing games retrospectively and with the aid of a rewind button, so consider their accuracy a step beyond the inconsistent numbers you’ll find in the unofficial ‘official’ stats), our run defense snap counts, and defensive Stops to produce this worthy look at individual run D production.

Stops are what we judge to be tackles that prevent an offensive success (defined as gaining 40% of required yardage on first down, 60% on second down, and the entire required yardage on third or fourth) and making more of them per run defense snap will bump you on this list. Note: for safeties, these numbers are also shown in splits for when they’ve lined up within 8 yards of the line of scrimmage.

 

And here are their top 10 results from last year:

 

[Thanatos 2,847]

Also, highlights my point of Kuechly being a good LB, but not an elite one like the media makes him out to be.

 

I'm not really sure how you get that Kuechly isnt an elite LB out of this article, lol. He is. The article says it itself.

 

You can't simply be like "Rank LBs in order of who made the most impact plays."

[AllYouNeedIsLovie 377]

 

I'm not really sure how you get that Kuechly isnt an elite LB out of this article, lol. He is. The article says it itself.

 

You can't simply be like "Rank LBs in order of who made the most impact plays."

The elite ones are making more impact plays than Kuechly. Impact tackles/plays are a much better way to judge LB's than just going off tackles and has been something I've been talking about for a while. There just isn't a stat for it, like the article states.

 

Also, the article says:

 

 

 

Kuechley is without a doubt a Top-10 LB, but it can be argued that he may not even be in the Top-5 most effective players at his own position, let alone the best defensive player the NFL has to offer.

 

If you're borderline top 5 at your position, you're really good, but probably not elite.

Edited July 16, 2014 by AllYouNeedIsLovie

[KempBolt 498]

I'd say that Kuechly is definitely still top 5 when you couple findings like these with how good he is in coverage.

[Cherry 1,302]

My point about making a play 30 yards down the field for instance is that the tackle still has an impact. A linebacker trips up a WR after a big play. Is that not as good as a LB coming up and making a stop under 3 yards? There is no TRUE scale to rank an impact tackle. We just have a scale that we can number any way we like. Tackles IS important. Maybe some come in bigger moments than others but trying to set a criteria for those moments is silly.

Edited July 17, 2014 by Chernobyl426

[KempBolt 498]

My point about making a play 30 yards down the field for instance is that the tackle still has an impact. A linebacker trips up a WR after a big play. Is that not as good as a LB coming up and making a stop under 3 yards? There is no TRUE scale to rank an impact tackle. We just have a scale that we can number any way we like. Tackles IS important. Maybe some come in bigger moments than others but trying to set a criteria for those moments is silly.

No it's not as good. In the one case, the offense gained 3 yards. In the other they gained 30.

[Cherry 1,302]

But the real question is which did the PLAYER make a bigger impact on? A gang tackle for 2 yards or a stop in open space by themselves? Your "impact" tackle idea is flawed because what pass is under 3 yards, isn't past the first down marker on 3rd or 4th down, a tackle for a loss (Run plays!), a sack (Not something a MLB or standing outside LB does too often) or a forced fumble (Not common).

 

By this logic Von Miller and other pass rushing LBs are going to be INSANELY high on the "impact tackle" list. An impact tackle is not based on the gain of an offense, but how the player reacts on said play. If Vontaze gets burnt and gives up a TD, it's the same as a corner getting burnt and giving up a TD. It doesn't judge the actual player, it judges the defense as a whole. The advanced stats game beats the stats game, but is far from a true idea of a players' impact.

[Thanatos 2,847]

The elite ones are making more impact plays than Kuechly. Impact tackles/plays are a much better way to judge LB's than just going off tackles and has been something I've been talking about for a while. There just isn't a stat for it, like the article states.

 

Also, the article says:

 

 

 

 

If you're borderline top 5 at your position, you're really good, but probably not elite.

 

A) The article says it can be argued that he "may" not even be in the top-5 players at his position in efficiency, which confuses two things. 1. All LBs do not play the same position. And 2. This only takes one single aspect of play into account, and is not a basis for saying he is "borderline top-5" at his position overall. As Kemp pointed out, for example, ranking purely based on impact plays does not take into effect coverage.

 

B) LB is friggin stacked. But again, LBs do not play the same position. Luke is an ILB, and he is top-3 at that position.

Edited July 17, 2014 by Thanatos19

[KempBolt 498]

But the real question is which did the PLAYER make a bigger impact on? A gang tackle for 2 yards or a stop in open space by themselves? Your "impact" tackle idea is flawed because what pass is under 3 yards, isn't past the first down marker on 3rd or 4th down, a tackle for a loss (Run plays!), a sack (Not something a MLB or standing outside LB does too often) or a forced fumble (Not common).

 

By this logic Von Miller and other pass rushing LBs are going to be INSANELY high on the "impact tackle" list. An impact tackle is not based on the gain of an offense, but how the player reacts on said play. If Vontaze gets burnt and gives up a TD, it's the same as a corner getting burnt and giving up a TD. It doesn't judge the actual player, it judges the defense as a whole. The advanced stats game beats the stats game, but is far from a true idea of a players' impact.

The player made a bigger impact on the 2 yard gain.

 

And note that the author compares Burfict to other linebackers who fill similar roles. Not pass rushers like Miller.

Edited July 17, 2014 by KempBolt

[Cherry 1,302]

The team made a bigger impact on the 2 yard gain.

 

FTFY

[KempBolt 498]

FTFY

So you've decided that any tackle for less than 3 yards is a gang tackle and therefore irrelevant? How can you seriously be making arguments like this while criticizing the author's process?

[Cherry 1,302]

Not saying EVERY one is, but the player more often has help than being on an island past 10 yards. You're shooting extremes out like I said all short plays are gang tackles. Impact tackles come in many forms, but the authors process of selecting them is flawed.

[KempBolt 498]

Not saying EVERY one is, but the player more often has help than being on an island past 10 yards. You're shooting extremes out like I said all short plays are gang tackles. Impact tackles come in many forms, but the authors process of selecting them is flawed.

I'd say it's pretty good. Because while linebacker roles differ, making tackles to prevent big gains and conversions is almost a universal expectation. Plus the stat in no way penalizes guys for making solo tackles downfield. It just recognizes that those tackles aren't as beneficial as tackles that prevent offensive success.

 

And really you haven't given any reason for why his definition is flawed beyond that you think a tackle 30 yards down the field is just an impactful (it isn't) and because short tackles are sometimes gang tackles (so?).

[Cherry 1,302]

Tackles that HAVE to be made to prevent big plays are impactful.

 

 

Put him rushing the LoS and give him 3 guys with him and it become less about him and more about the team preventing large gains.

 

Not to say he isn't making impact plays for losses or short gains, but often times it's group effort.

Edited July 17, 2014 by Chernobyl426

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

Bet Paul Posluszny looks super average to slightly above average at best when looking at it like this.

 

I harp on Pos, it's not that I don't like him or that I think he sucks. I think he's really solid and he's a great dude to have in the locker room. I just can't stand how much money he's making being what you get out of him. He's the 4th highest paid LB in the league, THE LEAGUE. Higher than some pass rushing OLBs. Good god Gene Smith was terrible.

[KempBolt 498]

Tackles that HAVE to be made to prevent big plays are impactful.

 

 

Put him rushing the LoS and give him 3 guys with him and it become less about him and more about the team preventing large gains.

 

Not to say he isn't making impact plays for losses or short gains, but often times it's group effort.

Tackles for 3 yards prevent big plays more than a touchdown saving tackle 30 yards downfield.

 

In the second case, the offense got 30 yards and no TD. In the first case, the offense for 3 yards and no TD. Bigger impact.

 

And you're arguing against his definition from the exception of the occasional gang tackle. It's like if I tried to argue that Burfict is a bad tackler because every so often he misses. In other words, it's invalid.

Edited July 17, 2014 by KempBolt

[AL_Royalty 489]

 

If you're borderline top 5 at your position, you're really good, but probably not elite.

Ummm, of course he is. Haven't you heard? Everyone's elite.