Safety Coverage Statistics - Targets, Passes Allowed, and Yards Allowed

[theogt]

theOWNED

:laugh2:

You really should wait a while before you post these.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

:laugh2:

You really should wait a while before you post these.

whatever

the MYTHS of Ken Hamlin

 

[theogt]

whatever

the MYTHS of Ken Hamlin

Kinda hard to be myths when they're verifiable statistics.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Kinda hard to be myths when they're verifiable statistics.

and this proves that Ken doesn't do anything

he plays an area that nobody throws to, which is way the heck back there

he does NOTHING

 

[theogt]

and this proves that Ken doesn't do anything

he plays an area that nobody throws to

he does NOTHING

Most people call that good coverage.

 

[jterrell]

Okay...fixed so that all tables show up correct.

Like I said, same results.

rofl... that is seriously comical.

you want to ignore every real indicator such as yards allowed, completion percentage, TDs allowed and QB rating to note what exactly??? Hamlin isn't involved in many passing plays???

you aren't demonstrating a single thing.

Hamlin was rated 60th last year in QB rating allowed and 74 this year. That is incredible success by QBs throwing at him.

Hamlin was 2 missed tackles this year and 7 stops to his credit. Sensabaugh has 0 missed tackles and 6 stops to his.

You are generally a logical guy Theo but this Hamlin is better than Sensabaugh stuff is simply goofy and about as inaccurate as can be.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Most people call that good coverage.

no, because he's not covering anything

he's just roaming around, way back in the secondary

and teams are just completing everything in front of him

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Kinda hard to be myths when they're verifiable statistics.

Which you do a poor job of qualifying.

1) Hamlin has a much smaller sample size.
2) Hamlin is rarely if ever put in man to man in coverage which makes the statistical comparison apples to oranges.
3) The statisitcs do nothing to address Hamlin's primary issue: tackling. Jenkins is a better tackler than he is.

Sorry but him playing over the top and being late getting over only to see the corner take the statistical hit posits nothing.

 

[theogt]

rofl... that is seriously comical.

you want to ignore every real indicator such as yards allowed, completion percentage, TDs allowed and QB rating to note what exactly??? Hamlin isn't involved in many passing plays???

you aren't demonstrating a single thing.

Hamlin was rated 60th last year in QB rating allowed and 74 this year. That is incredible success by QBs throwing at him.

Hamlin was 2 missed tackles this year and 7 stops to his credit. Sensabaugh has 0 missed tackles and 6 stops to his.

You are generally a logical guy Theo but this Hamlin is better than Sensabaugh stuff is simply goofy and about as inaccurate as can be.

I am one of the biggest proponents of looking at QB rating for both QBs and defensive backs.

But there is one huge exception that. When a defensive back does not get targeted often (e.g., Hamlin has only been targeted 8 times this season), you cannot look at QB rating because of (1) the small sample size and (2) the low amount of attempts is a better indicator.

The first point is obvious. The second point is true in the sense that I would rather have a DB who is only targeted 10 times all year (despite playing the majority of snaps) and has a very high QB rating given up, than a DB who is targeted 70 times all year and gives up a better QB rating. This is why I look at the stats on a PER SNAP basis.

 

[Frozen700]

Hamlin is much better in coverage than Sensabaugh. But that only makes sense considering he's a strong safety and Hamlin is a free safety.

you are joking right?

Eduncan is that you?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I am one of the biggest proponents of looking at QB rating for both QBs and defensive backs.

But there is one huge exception that. When a defensive back does not get targeted often (e.g., Hamlin has only been targeted 8 times this season), you cannot look at QB rating because of (1) the small sample size and (2) the low amount of attempts is a better indicator.

The first point is obvious. The second point is true in the sense that I would rather have a DB who is only targeted 10 times all year (despite playing the majority of snaps) and has a very high QB rating given up, than a DB who is targeted 70 times all year and gives up a better QB rating. This is why I look at the stats on a PER SNAP basis.

Small sample size invalidates all statistics. Not just the ones you want to throw out.

 

[theogt]

no, because he's not covering anything

he's just roaming around, way back in the secondary

and teams are just completing everything in front of him

Yes, Hamlin is running around out there for 1455 snaps over two seasons not covering anyone.

Fantastic observation.

Which you do a poor job of qualifying.

1) Hamlin has a much smaller sample size.
2) Hamlin is rarely if ever put in man to man in coverage which makes the statistical comparison apples to oranges.
3) The statisitcs do nothing to address Hamlin's primary issue: tackling. Jenkins is a better tackler than he is.

Sorry but him playing over the top and being late getting over only to see the corner take the statistical hit posits nothing.

1. Actually, the sample size is massive -- 1455 snaps is a lot.
2. Every free safety in the league plays zone coverage for the vast majority of their plays. It's a virtue of playing free safety.
3. Really? A thread about "Safety Coverage Statistics" has nothing to do with tackling? Whodathunkit?

 

[jterrell]

There is no faulty math. Look at the charts in the OP again. If you're at all familiar with Excel, the columns with yards, snaps, targets, and passes were formulas. The other columns were absolute numbers. For various reasons, the formulas did not sort properly (i.e., they re-calculated based on whatever their variables were assigned to). I fixed that and now the proper numbers are included in the OP. Sensabaugh is targeted more and he gives up more passes. Part of that is that he's in man to man coverage more often.

Sensabaugh plays man coverage because he's our strong safety and that's what strong safeties do. They often have to play man coverage against the TE. Roy Williams did it when he was here. Keith Davis did it when he was here. Hamlin had done it when he plays strong safety in certain packages in the past. It's just part of playing strong safety rather than free safety.

RFOL, Sensabaugh was targeted more NOT because we has the free safety but because you used his 2008 stats where he was playing nickel covering WRs man on man.

And he still had less yards per catch allowed and allowed fewer TDs.

Again you are not even using stats that exist for profootball focus but literally making up the formal and stats themselves.

It's pretty easy to use the profootballfocus tables and sort there....


highest QB rating allowed by a safety with over 50% of the teams snaps played... Hamlin is 5th worst coverage safety in league by that metric.

http://profootballfocus.com/by_posi...e=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=50&numgames=1

Best success rate per attempt by safety with over 50% of snaps played. Sensabaugh is tied for 11th but Hamlin comes in at 30th.

http://profootballfocus.com/by_posi...e=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=50&numgames=1

 

[theogt]

Small sample size invalidates all statistics. Not just the ones you want to throw out.

The small sample size applies only to QB rating because QB rating is derived only from times targeted, etc. The times targeted statistic is NOT subject to a small sample size itself because that statistic is derived from 1455 snaps.

Over 1000+ snaps, any fluctuations due to small sample size should even out.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

whatever theo, if you think it's fine for Ken to stay back, and do nothing other than be a safety valve for the big play

then more power to you

 

[Frozen700]

Look there is no way Hamlin is better than Sensabaugh ....Gerald plays SS because hes a better tackler, and easier to put him over the TE...which is why he is better coverage wise

plus hes more athletic than Ken

 

[theogt]

RFOL, Sensabaugh was targeted more NOT because we has the free safety but because you used his 2008 stats where he was playing nickel covering WRs man on man.

And he still had less yards per catch allowed and allowed fewer TDs.

Again you are not even using stats that exist for profootball focus but literally making up the formal and stats themselves.

It's pretty easy to use the profootballfocus tables and sort there....


highest QB rating allowed by a safety with over 50% of the teams snaps played... Hamlin is 5th worst coverage safety in league by that metric.

http://profootballfocus.com/by_posi...e=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=50&numgames=1

Best success rate per attempt by safety with over 50% of snaps played. Sensabaugh is tied for 11th but Hamlin comes in at 30th.

http://profootballfocus.com/by_posi...e=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=50&numgames=1

I'm not using this as a Hamlin vs. Sensabaugh argument. I think both are very very good. I like Sensabaugh and want us to sign him long-term.

And I realize that there is a deficiency in the statistics in that some safeties play more man coverage than others (the strong safeties in particular). But the free safeties play a similar amount of zone coverage and this is a comparison against all safeties. Very clearly there will be some outliers who play more of a particular type of coverage than others which distorts their statistics.

But the entire point of this thread is not to make a perfect comparison of Hamlin to every other safety in the league. The point of this thread is to show that Hamlin (1) gets targeted very little compared to his peers, (2) gives up few passes compared to his peers, and (3) gives up little yardage compared to his peers. Those three goals are the primary goes of a free safety and he's at the top of the league in comparison to his peers in achieving those goals.

 

[theogt]

Look there is no way Hamlin is better than Sensabaugh ....Gerald plays SS because hes a better tackler, and easier to put him over the TE...which is why he is better coverage wise

plus hes more athletic than Ken

Can we get past this being a Sensy vs. Hamlin thread?

Thanks.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes, Hamlin is running around out there for 1455 snaps over two seasons not covering anyone.

Fantastic observation.

1. Actually, the sample size is massive -- 1455 snaps is a lot.
2. Every free safety in the league plays zone coverage for the vast majority of their plays. It's a virtue of playing free safety.
3. Really? A thread about "Safety Coverage Statistics" has nothing to do with tackling? Whodathunkit?

1) You still suck at stat analysis I see. Its not the sample size for comparison it is the individuals sample size. You grant that the sample size is too small.

2) Thanks for making my argument for me. We both agree that they play mostly zone. As such individual coverage is rarely taken into account while taking data.

3) Oh I know what you posted. The issue here though is you are trying to cherry pick a facet of their games and ignoring the biggestr flaws. Hamlin's timing and tackling are atrocious.

 

[jterrell]

I am one of the biggest proponents of looking at QB rating for both QBs and defensive backs.

But there is one huge exception that. When a defensive back does not get targeted often (e.g., Hamlin has only been targeted 8 times this season), you cannot look at QB rating because of (1) the small sample size and (2) the low amount of attempts is a better indicator.

The first point is obvious. The second point is true in the sense that I would rather have a DB who is only targeted 10 times all year (despite playing the majority of snaps) and has a very high QB rating given up, than a DB who is targeted 70 times all year and gives up a better QB rating. This is why I look at the stats on a PER SNAP basis.

But you are still not adding correctly. Sensabaugh played more snaps and gave up less yards. That is a per snap number edge you give to Hamlin which is absolutely false.

Hamlin gives up more yards per year both in 2008 and 2009 and he gives up more TDs in both years.

You want to note he is hardly targeted but when he is it goes for a higher success rate, more yardage and a much higher rate of TD than Sensabaugh.

I could argue Ratliff is a better coverage guy than Hamlin based on attempts. That is seriously delusional logic.

Because Hamlin plays 20 yards off the ball as a second defender using attempts is just silly.

Beyond all that a 9 year old can watch both guys play understand who covers better.

Newman has been targeted over 50 times and Jenkins 40 times. By your argument both are far worse in coverage then Hamlin.