2021 - Prove It
- May 15, 2002
- Reaction score
Because turnovers/sacks are random outcome events. In order to gain a fumble recovery you have to be randomly near a football that is fumbled, and then happen to recover it. In order to get a sack, you have to be in a position to pressure a QB, and then just take him to the ground. That is why pressure rate is a better indicator of pass rush production than just sacks. In order to gain an int, you have to be targeted or in the path of a pass, have a QB make a mistake while being pressured, and then catch the ball. So much of this is dependent on the scheme, how you are asked to play, and then if you are even targeted.Here is a major crux of our debate. How can you say that Budda played above average without doing these things?
If Budda is playing deep S, and is only blitzed 14 times the entire season, why would anyone expect sack totals? If Budda is playing deep S, and is only targeted 30 times in a season on a team that doesn't generate pressure, why would anyone expect ints totals?
So, in Budda's 3 seasons where he recorded his highest number of sacks, two of those were also with the highest numbers of blitzes. More opportunities generally lead to more results.
In Budda's 3 seasons with 2+ ints, he also had three seasons of under 9.0 yards per target. He was being played closer to the LOS, amongst more traffic, and was able to jump more routes.
That is why it is better to look at more controllable outcomes.
Amongst S's with 10+ starts Budda was
16th in comp %
11th in yards per target
35th in passer rating
13th in YAC allowed
14th in missed tackle %
Absolutely not the best...but also not average or bad by any means. He had a good year. Not a great year. And if these are the numbers the Cardinals are looking for out of a S in their scheme, you probably could find those at a much cheaper cost but that isn't the argument. Budda can only play the role that he is asked to play within the scheme.