2009 + Chiefs = Sad SacksThere are good sacks (when the Chiefs defense gets them). There are bad sacks (when Cassel is the victim). And, there are sad sacks – like those in the picture. I suspect if not for the fact that there are other abysmal teams - Washington, Tampa Bay, St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, Oakland, etc, we would already be seeing some used Price Chopper sacks at Arrowhead. But, sad sacks are just for visual entertainment. The focus of this discussion is the good and bad.
PRO FOOTBALL REFERENCE – Jason Lisk
I want to make sure to thank Jason Lisk (who is a frequent poster on UFR and also writes for Football Reference) for some of this information. He has a very keen insight on the whole sack issue and his latest story this week is at this link. Be sure and click the link for Part 1 of his two-parter.
Briefly, Lisk did an analysis of five different stats for QBs. The question was what happened when they changed teams. The point he was attempting to make is that if Sacks (for example) remained high compared to the other categories, then Sacks (by and large) are more of a function of the QB – not the surrounding players. And, of course, that’s the question Chiefs fans are asking with respect to Cassel.
His discovery was that of the five categories – Sacks, Completion %, Average Yds per attempt, Touchdown % and Interception % that Sacks and Completion % were tied for having the highest correlation based on four different ways of measuring it.
The second part of his study was based upon what happened within the same team when QBs were replaced. Which stats remained consistent versus inconsistent. Sacks were among the least consistent – meaning they were (again) more of a function of the QB – not the team.
OFFENSIVE SACKS and CASSEL
So, there you have it. I’m not going to reinvent the wheel. QB sacks are more likely a function of the QB than other stats and Lisk’s arguments are sufficient for me.
Take a look at this table.
| QB | 2008 | 2009 |
| Thigpen | 5.8% | — |
| Cassel | 8.3% | 11.0% |
| Brady | — | 2.8% |
-
What it shows is that with essentially the same KC team from 2008 to 2009, Cassel has an 11% sack rate versus Thigpen’s 5.8%. Also, with essentially the same NE team, Cassel had an 8.3% sack rate vs Brady’s 2.8%. Despite the sample size, it appears this is primarily a function of the QB – in this case Cassel.
Before I get away from this, here are Brady’s sack rates for each year of his career. Even though Cassel appears hopelessly sackable, Brady’s first season was 9.0%. He’s at 2.8% so far in 2009.
BRADY’s CAREER SACK RATE
| 2009 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 |
| 2.8% | 3.5% | 4.8% | 4.7% | 5.2% | 5.7% | 4.9% | 9.0% |
-
Now, if the argument is Cassel has taken a lot of sacks, but protected the ball (only five interceptions), then fine. However, that’s not all it is cracked up to be.
While it is undoubtedly true that a sack is better than an interception on average, a better question is whether an interception is worth 2.2 sacks – because that’s the league average. That would take a lot more analysis and, of course, right now Cassel’s sack to interception ratio is 4.0. Since the vast majority of possessions with a sack end with a punt and most interceptions end with some positive field position exchange, the issue of how many sacks should be sacrificed for the sake of an interception is a valid one.
Even though I don’t have all that data at this point, this much I can say. Based on the league average rate for the number of passes thrown, Cassel would still have five interceptions, but only 12 sacks (instead of 23).
It’s not so much that his interceptions are few as much as his sacks are plentiful.
DEFENSIVE SACKS
While the Chiefs have a lot more per game than last season, they remain near the bottom of the NFL. Their 10 last season were three below the previous NFL record low (16-game season) and 12 below their previous franchise low. This year’s nine ranks them tied for 29th – better, but still horrible.
SACK MARGIN
I know the question you are asking. What are the worst teams in the league for differential – Sacks Allowed minus Sacks By. The Chiefs are -17 (26-9) or -2.43 per game. In 2008, they were -27 (37-10) or -1.69 per game. So, the sack margin per game is even worse than last season.
KC was the worst when I originally made this table late last week. However, Green Bay was a net -6 Sunday and they moved to the top (or bottom). Here is the list of the worst teams in 2009 by sack margin.
| Team | By | Allow | Mar/G |
| Green Bay | 12 | 31 | -2.71 |
| Kansas City | 9 | 26 | -2.43 |
| Detroit | 14 | 24 | -1.43 |
| S. Francisco | 16 | 22 | -0.86 |
| Buffalo | 17 | 23 | -0.75 |
-
FANS
I, for one, don’t blame the fans if they start wearing something over their heads. KC has lost 29 of their last 32 games – historic. Considering the number one reason (of all the reasons) might be sacks allowed and sacks by, it would be appropriate.
You're right that the Chiefs have a sack problem.
The NFL.com Game Center Play-by-Play has video clips of each time the Chiefs were sacked (except maybe 1 which was ZERO yards lost). I just watched all of the instances (except 1) of Chiefs being sacked this year and was amazed at all of the whiffing at blitz assignments, unblocked pass rushers and instant pocket collapses. The Chiefs pass protection is terrible.
Hopefully there were be some solid linemen available in the draft or FA. From 2007 to 2008, the Broncos were able to go from a not-so-good O-Line to an elite one when they added Clady and Ryan Harris came back from injury. I wouldn't expect that with the Chiefs, but with the right additions they could improve to an average-quality line in terms of pass-protection.