(07-22-2018, 07:13 PM)Jags02 Wrote:

(07-22-2018, 03:06 PM)Upper Wrote: Pressures predict future sacks way better than sacks predict future sacks. Fowler had a measly 20 pressures to get his 8 sacks for an absurd and exceedingly unlikely to be sustainable 2.5 pressures per sack. The normal ratio for elite pass rushers is 6-7 pressures per sack.

Remember that article that got bandied around when Vic Beasley led the league in sacks and people were saying it was a fluke cause he only averaged 4.5 pressures per sack? Well, they were right...and we should expect a similar if not steeper drop off for Fowler if we're being honest.

Our elite secondary plus the fact that he'll always be getting less attention than the rest of our dline might help him keep a better than expected ratio, but not nearly what it was.

That's actually an incredibly good stat to get so many sacks on so few pressures. I think guys in here are quickly forgetting how few snaps Fowler had. It wasn't like he started. What you really want to look at is both sacks and pressures per number of snaps. In Beasley's case, the diss was that despite his impressive sack count, he had very few pressures for a starter. The "for a starter" part is a key difference.

We're talking rates so the overall number of starter vs backup snaps doesn't mean anything. It means that Fowler had an extraordinarily fluky pressure to sack ratio season. Some of that is attributable to having the best secondary in the league giving him an extra second. Some of it is attributable to having a stacked dline that sometimes leaves him as a forgotten man. But none of it adds up to a sustainable sack rate that is more than double the other elite pass rushers in the game.

Also, looking at total snap totals is awfully misleading...especially in today's specialized NFL. A lot of the snaps Fowler missed were run plays that he isn't on the field for. If we were comparing number of pass rushes Fowler would still have somewhat less than other rushers, but it would be far closer.

---