Originally Posted by patchick

I don't understand how an article can just toss out stats like those without giving you league averages, or at least comparisons to other elite QBs, to compare with. Without any context, I have absolutely no idea how to interpret those numbers.

Originally Posted by PatsFanSince74

The challenge is exacerbated by the fact that the article limits the evaluation period to a limited universe of games and includes "hits," which I don't think are formally tracked, so we have to take the word of the observer. In addition, sack stats are usually presented only for the regular season; to get reliable full season numbers we'd have to factor in the Playoffs and I just don't have the time to fire up a spreadsheet today. But, on the assumption that the observer is reliable and looking at facts we can gather, here are a few things that we can discover.

Looking just at 2007, since that's the period from which the article derives its data, we can compare Brady's sacks per attempt for the full season to the sacks on other elite QB's; this doesn't include hits. Any analysis like this has to acknowledge, of course, that the playcalling and style of play of QB's differs (see Ben below). I get this from ProFootBallReference.com.

Sacks per Attempt % (Sacks/Attempts + Sacks)

Brady: 3.5%
Brees: 2.4%
Favre: 2.7%
Payme: 3.9%
Rivers: 4.7%
Big Ben: 10.4%

This suggests that, throughout the entire season, Brady was sacked roughly 46% more often than Brees, 30% more often than Favre, 11% less often than Peyton, 27% less often than Rivers and a lot less often than Roethlisberger.

But, the article talks about the latter part of the season and the playoffs. So, if we look at the first ten games, Brady was sacked just 2.9% of the time; for the last six games (Philly on as the article argues), Brady was sacked 4.4% of the time, or more than 50% more often than in the beginning of the season. When we look at the Playoffs, he was sacked 6.8% of the time, or 230% more often than in the first six games of the season and nearly twice as often as in the entire regular season. If we look at his sack percentage for the last six games plus the playoffs, it is 5.2%.

Since the article is accurate in its arguments about sacks, barring the presentation of alternative data, I'll concede that it is likely also accurate in its stats on "hits" and will accept that its conclusion is valid, barring the presentation of contrary data. From the 11th game on of the 2007 season, Brady was sacked and hit more often than before and more often than other elite QB's, other than Roethlisberger, were sacked and hit on average over the season. This is probably not a good thing.

Originally Posted by TheComeback

Just wanted to note that QB hits actually are formally tracked (on ESPN.com). You have to look at the box scores for individual games.

Originally Posted by Box_O_Rocks

So, in the playoffs, against the best defenses in the NFL, you are more likely to get sacked?

Originally Posted by DaBruinz

How can one refute stats (hits taken by a QB) that aren't even official? They do not definie what a HIT is. The ESPN article that Maverick used to erroneously lambaste McDaniels, ignored sacks and didn't define what a hit was considered either.

While Curran and Kirwin mention the 19 sacks in those 10 games, what they don't mention is that Neal wasn't playing for in 4 of those games and in 2 more, he played less than half the game. One of the games that he played less than half was the SB and the Pats got schooled because they didn't recognize the stunts or couldn't break free to pick up the stunting DE.

Any article that hangs its hat on stats it refuses to define is not an article worth the Cyberspace its inhabiting.

In all honesty, Brady gets hit too much after he's gotten rid of the ball and the Refs let it go because he just bounces back up ususally. There really needs to be a better point of emphasis on hitting the QB late because it will cost this league QBs.

Also, it should be noted that Curran and Kirwan erroneously attribute the increase in the blitzing of Brady to Jim Johnson. What they fail to remember is that Johnson actually attributed it to Romeo Crennel and the Browns.

Originally Posted by Rob0729

I can endorse this post as a valid rebuttal.

Originally Posted by PatsFanSince74

But, the article talks about the latter part of the season and the playoffs. So, if we look at the first ten games, Brady was sacked just 2.9% of the time; for the last six games (Philly on as the article argues), Brady was sacked 4.4% of the time, or more than 50% more often than in the beginning of the season. When we look at the Playoffs, he was sacked 6.8% of the time, or 230% more often than in the first six games of the season and nearly twice as often as in the entire regular season. If we look at his sack percentage for the last six games plus the playoffs, it is 5.2%.

Originally Posted by patchick

But don't you assume that every QB will be sacked significantly more in the playoffs because they're playing, on average, significantly better defenses? So you have to compare Brady's playoff stats to other QBs' playoff stats.