Using Defensive Snap Count to Measure Pressure Efficiency

[plasticman]

Looks to me either your information it's missing data points or if you are accurate I it's pretty crazy that the Texans should've used this formula to not pay $50 million to Will Anderson Very good player but doesn't look like he's in the top of any of those categories... Those four didn't they pay Daniel Hunter like one year 40 million or something like that I mean I'm looking at that list they're on it but they're not jumping off it like they should have been paid that kind of money seems like they overreacted in which always ironic to me is the same players probably are not getting better in their careers they're probably gonna stay the same or start getting worse so you paid all these defenders that much money just to do the same thing they did last year and as good as that defense was they didn't get very far...


So yeah I mean I'm just kind of skimming right now I'll look into it deeper later but something is Askew when you look at now add in salaries and James Houston jumps way out there because if you take all the salaries away he might be sliding towards the top with Clowney meaning we should bring him back and just run it back because I think that our team is better with Parker's scheme and all these players will be a lot better in a by committee role to get pressures and sacks..

Very similar to what Seattle did with their defense don't make it top heavy make it deep..

Um...actually Will Anderson is on every list except the last one because he isn't a DT......

 

[stilltheguru]

There are many factors that can’t be really accounted for but over an entire 17 games these seem pretty respectable stats

Respectable but not enough.

 

[Chasing6]

Which player is more efficient?

Player A has 10 sacks in 600 snap.

Player B has 6 sacks in 200 snaps

Now, of course, the circumstances are completely different. One is the starter and will participate in expected running plays. A starter may also have a tendency to wear down more, whereas the other is obviously a rotational piece inserted specifically for a pass rush.

However, the purpose of this evaluation is to determine pressure efficiency with regard only to the circumstance of participation.

What I mean by "pressure efficiency" is the ability of a defender to harass the opponent behind the line of scrimmage thus creating negative offensive plays.

Traditionally, we go by raw numbers when it comes to sacks, quarterback hits and tackles behind the line of scrimmage. However, this does not consider the amount of opportunity given to each player to create these results.

I am using some stats that measure the average number of snap counts that it takes for a player to achieve one of the above results. Obviously, the lower the number the more frequently they are making this happen.

I am using a minimum of three sacks for these rankings. Unfortunately, as expected, this eliminates the majority of Cowboys D-line and LBers. Only five qualified and three of them are no longer with the team.

There were a total of 159 players that recorded three or more sacks in 2025 so if they are ranked above #40 then they are in the top quarter for that particular category.

This is the list of top 20 defenders when it comes to "snaps per sack". That is, what is the average amount of snaps they took in 2025 before they got a sack.

Rank Player
1 Myles Garrett
2 Al-Quadin Muhammad
3 Dorance Armstrong Jr.
4 Jadeveon Clowney
5 Josh Sweat
6 Von Miller
7 Danielle Hunter
8 Nik Bonitto
9 Brian Burns
10 Zach Harrison
11 Elijah Ponder
12 LaCale London
13 Chase Young
14 Brandon Dorlus
15 James Houston
16 Cameron Jordan
17 James Pearce
18 Tuli Tuipulotu
19 Micah Parsons
20 Will Anderson

You may want to note that at least four of these top players are unsigned veterans, including Clowney

Yes, that is Dorance Armstrong and I am not finished with him yet. Good to see James Houston in there. More about him too.

Here is the list for "snaps per tackle for a loss"

1 Myles Garrett
2 Jadeveon Clowney
3 Maxx Crosby
4 Dorance Armstrong Jr.
5 Will Anderson
6 Tuli Tuipulotu
7 LaCale London
8 Alex Wright
9 Brian Burns
10 Cameron Jordan
11 Josh Sweat
12 Alex Highsmith
13 Brandon Dorlus
14 Derek Barnett
15 Jeffery Simmons
16 Nick Herbig
17 Zach Harrison
18 Danielle Hunter
19 Nik Bonitto
20 Chase Young

Clowney makes another top appearance. He apparently made very good use of his snaps. So did Armstrong. Garrett was #1 in both categories. No one can say he only got his numbers because he was always in the game. He was the most efficient "pressure defender" in the NFL by a wide margin.

The next stat is snaps per QB hit:

1 Zach Allen
2 Myles Garrett
3 Al-Quadin Muhammad
4 James Houston
5 Nik Bonitto
6 Micah Parsons
7 Gregory Rousseau
8 Brian Burns
9 Von Miller
10 Odafe Oweh
11 Aidan Hutchinson
12 Jalyx Hunt
13 Byron Young
14 Osa Odighizuwa
15 Will Anderson
16 Josh Hines-Allen
17 Chris Jones
18 DeMarcus Lawrence
19 Jared Verse
20 Josh Sweat

The number of ex-Cowboys on this list is disconcerting. However, to see Houston on two of the three lists suggests that perhaps he should be given more snaps.

How could someone measure the overall effect of pressure using these three measurements? I've attempted to do so by using a formula that weighs each measurement. I decided to go 60% snaps per sack, 20% snaps per TFL and 20% snaps per QBhits.

So using this criteria I have attempted to identify the top most efficient defenders when it comes to pressuring the QB on a pass play. It is absolutely unofficial. Nonetheless, I think it paints a good picture of these player's contributions based on the frequency of their participation.

Top 20 Pressure Defenders in 2025.

1 Myles Garrett
2 Al-Quadin Muhammad
3 Dorance Armstrong Jr.
4 Brian Burns
5 Josh Sweat
6 Nik Bonitto
7 Jadeveon Clowney
8 Danielle Hunter
9 James Houston
10 Will Anderson
11 Tuli Tuipulotu
12 Von Miller
13 Micah Parsons
14 Chase Young
15 Alex Highsmith
16 Cameron Jordan
17 Odafe Oweh
18 Brandon Dorlus
19 Zach Harrison
20 Elijah Ponder

In addition, I realize that there are much different expectations for DTs and so I have a separate, complete list of all ranked DTs in this particular category. Again, three sacks to qualify. I've included their overall rank within the 159 players:

18 Brandon Dorlus
23 Jeffery Simmons
31 Maliek Collins
49 Chris Jones
60 DeForest Buckner
61 Jer'Zhan Newton
70 Milton Williams
74 Leonard Williams
85 Malcolm Roach
86 Arik Armstead
87 Byron Murphy
88 Darius Alexander
95 Jowon Briggs
98 Moro Ojomo
104 Zach Sieler
105 Osa Odighizuwa
106 Keeanu Benton
107 DaQuan Jones
108 Neville Gallimore
111 D.J. Jones
113 Adetomiwa Adebawore
115 Jordan Davis
118 Jaelan Phillips
121 Daron Payne
123 B.J. Hill
124 Derrick Brown
129 Jonah Laulu
130 Jalen Carter
131 Derrick Harmon
133 Sheldon Rankins
134 Ruke Orhorhoro
136 Tedarrell Slaton
137 Cameron Heyward
138 Nathan Shepherd
143 Kenny Clark

Where is Generational Parsons at???

 

[pansophy]

I like the premise of this. I’d rather see these stats for passing situations specifically.

 

[plasticman]

For the combined seasons of 2021 to 2025, exactly 200 players had 10 or more sacks.

James Houston is ranked #1 in least snaps per sack. Micah Parsons is ranked #10.

Here are the top 6 defenders in least snaps per forced fumble for the combined 2021-2025 seasons:

1 Nick Herbig
2 Joey Bosa
3 T.J. Watt
4 Randy Gregory
5 Chandler Jones
6 DeMarcus Lawrence

Top ten snaps per QB hit over the past 5 combined seasons:

1 Nick Bosa
2 James Houston
3 Trey Hendrickson
4 Myles Garrett
5 Zach Allen
6 Micah Parsons
7 Will Anderson
8 T.J. Watt
9 Rashan Gary
10 Nik Bonitto

Snaps per tackle for a loss during that same 5-year period:

1 Myles Garrett
2 Will Anderson
3 Nick Bosa
4 James Houston
5 Maxx Crosby
6 Jonathan Greenard
7 J.J. Watt
8 Brian Burns
9 T.J. Watt
10 Nik Bonitto
11 Von Miller
12 Danielle Hunter
13 Nick Herbig
14 Micah Parsons
15 YaYa Diaby
16 Calijah Kancey
17 Brandon Graham
18 Aaron Donald
19 Gregory Rousseau
20 Dante Fowler

Without a doubt, the one player that seems to have maximized his presence on the field to the best of his ability has been James Houston. Over the past five seasons he has been a true pass rush specialist.

 

[diamonddelts]

Stats and losers are birds of a feather which flock together.

 

[Bigrandrn]

Not enough information given to answer the question.

Not by a long shot, like less then the lessest cliff notes.

 

[Bigrandrn]

Stats and losers are birds of a feather which flock together.

Sometimes, sometimes not.

 

[blueblood70]

Um...actually Will Anderson is on every list except the last one because he isn't a DT......

High on the list, that doesn’t look like a $50 million guy. You know who does? One pass rusher in this league who not only works out and keeps his body in shape like Derrick Henry, ensuring longevity, Miles Garrett.

He’s the only one I see there worth quarterback money. Garrett is truly generational.

The rest are great, but there’s not a huge gap between many of them, and they definitely shouldn’t be making what Parsons makes. They don’t impact the playoffs the way you think, they can be neutralized.

Yes, they’re good, but if a strong offense wants to take them out of the game and attack elsewhere, that’s exactly what happens. Just look at the playoff records of T.J. Watt, even Garrett, Parsons, Joey Bosa, and Max Crosby. We judge quarterbacks by playoff records because they make so much money and touch the ball every play, so why not hold the same standard for the defensive stars who are supposed to stop them?

The salary doesn’t match the impact. Yes, he’s on the list, but if he’s getting top pay for his position, he should be number one. The market shouldn’t be set for everyone, and I’ve been saying that for a long time. That’s why the last three or four running backs, even the good ones, even a Super Bowl MVP like Walker, didn’t get close to 19 or 20 million. Barkley and Christian McCaffrey were overpaid, just like many say Prescott should have never made 60. Jerry outbid himself, he could have offered 55 or 56 and still landed him; it’s not that big a difference.

That’s my issue with this process: paying a bunch of guys way more than they made as rookies. They’re not going to be any better for your team, and while they should be paid well, making $50 million without having a game-changing impact, where you can say Will Anderson won that game by himself, isn’t worth it.

If it wasn’t for Will Anderson, they wouldn’t have won that game.

The Texans’ defense is solid, but they should take a page from teams like Seattle and New England, who succeeded with a group of players capable of getting sacks without paying anyone $50 million or needing a guy with 15-plus sacks. In fact, none of their players even hit double digits in sacks, yet they were the ones playing in the Super Bowl.

This is why I agree with the Cowboys moving on from Parsons when he decided 40 wasn’t enough. He chose money over the team, and the Cowboys are getting more out of the assets from trading him and the money saved than they would have from him in a playoff game. We’ve seen that story before, when it came to big games, Parsons never stepped up and single-handedly won them.

Yes, that’s my final point. This is what we expect from quarterbacks, they’re constantly criticized because they make so much money, and when they’re not impacting the game single-handedly like Superman, we come down on them.

I’m criticizing the amount of money Will Anderson makes compared to what he’s done in his career so far, aside from putting up great regular season numbers.

I think the Cowboys were smart enough to see this, and even though they were pushed into it, it worked out.

I love Micah Parsons and even have his jersey, but he wasn’t worth what he got. Then look at what happened when he got injured, if one player making that kind of money is your single point of failure, that’s not how teams should be built. Spread it out.

We should rely more on positions by committee rather than overpaying one guy. Take Christian McCaffrey or even Saquon Barkley, yes, they needed to get paid, but what did they do the very next year? What have they actually accomplished since getting paid?

My point is that, in my opinion, you can follow the approach of teams like Seattle and New England.

If you have players coming up for massive contracts, say $50 million, just trade them. Other teams have done it with great players like Khalil Mack, realizing that one player alone might not make enough of an impact to justify that kind of money. Instead, take the draft picks and get two or three players who can contribute. I understand there needs to be some balance, but that’s how I see it.


.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Bro, you’re bringing up basic math that half the message board thinks is a tool of the devil.

 

[conner01]

Respectable but not enough.

All stats are affected by many things.

 

[plasticman]

High on the list, that doesn’t look like a $50 million guy. You know who does? One pass rusher in this league who not only works out and keeps his body in shape like Derrick Henry, ensuring longevity, Miles Garrett.

He’s the only one I see there worth quarterback money. Garrett is truly generational.

The rest are great, but there’s not a huge gap between many of them, and they definitely shouldn’t be making what Parsons makes. They don’t impact the playoffs the way you think, they can be neutralized.

Yes, they’re good, but if a strong offense wants to take them out of the game and attack elsewhere, that’s exactly what happens. Just look at the playoff records of T.J. Watt, even Garrett, Parsons, Joey Bosa, and Max Crosby. We judge quarterbacks by playoff records because they make so much money and touch the ball every play, so why not hold the same standard for the defensive stars who are supposed to stop them?

The salary doesn’t match the impact. Yes, he’s on the list, but if he’s getting top pay for his position, he should be number one. The market shouldn’t be set for everyone, and I’ve been saying that for a long time. That’s why the last three or four running backs, even the good ones, even a Super Bowl MVP like Walker, didn’t get close to 19 or 20 million. Barkley and Christian McCaffrey were overpaid, just like many say Prescott should have never made 60. Jerry outbid himself, he could have offered 55 or 56 and still landed him; it’s not that big a difference.

That’s my issue with this process: paying a bunch of guys way more than they made as rookies. They’re not going to be any better for your team, and while they should be paid well, making $50 million without having a game-changing impact, where you can say Will Anderson won that game by himself, isn’t worth it.

If it wasn’t for Will Anderson, they wouldn’t have won that game.

The Texans’ defense is solid, but they should take a page from teams like Seattle and New England, who succeeded with a group of players capable of getting sacks without paying anyone $50 million or needing a guy with 15-plus sacks. In fact, none of their players even hit double digits in sacks, yet they were the ones playing in the Super Bowl.

This is why I agree with the Cowboys moving on from Parsons when he decided 40 wasn’t enough. He chose money over the team, and the Cowboys are getting more out of the assets from trading him and the money saved than they would have from him in a playoff game. We’ve seen that story before, when it came to big games, Parsons never stepped up and single-handedly won them.

Yes, that’s my final point. This is what we expect from quarterbacks, they’re constantly criticized because they make so much money, and when they’re not impacting the game single-handedly like Superman, we come down on them.

I’m criticizing the amount of money Will Anderson makes compared to what he’s done in his career so far, aside from putting up great regular season numbers.

I think the Cowboys were smart enough to see this, and even though they were pushed into it, it worked out.

I love Micah Parsons and even have his jersey, but he wasn’t worth what he got. Then look at what happened when he got injured, if one player making that kind of money is your single point of failure, that’s not how teams should be built. Spread it out.

We should rely more on positions by committee rather than overpaying one guy. Take Christian McCaffrey or even Saquon Barkley, yes, they needed to get paid, but what did they do the very next year? What have they actually accomplished since getting paid?

My point is that, in my opinion, you can follow the approach of teams like Seattle and New England.

If you have players coming up for massive contracts, say $50 million, just trade them. Other teams have done it with great players like Khalil Mack, realizing that one player alone might not make enough of an impact to justify that kind of money. Instead, take the draft picks and get two or three players who can contribute. I understand there needs to be some balance, but that’s how I see it.


.

Garrett is The Dude.

 

[conner01]

I came to realize that regular statistics are rather uneven, perhaps even unfair.

Efficiency cannot be measured by raw numbers because every player's opportunity is different. When I talk about "efficiency", I ask the question, "Which is more valuable, the productivity measured over a game, or the productivity measured while that player was on the field?"

In other words, did this player maximize his opportunities on the field?

In order to make the evaluation more "even", I used "snap counts", in this case, the number of plays in which a particular player was on defense.

So now, if I use the example at the top of my original post:

Player A had 10 sacks in 600 snaps or one sack for every 60 plays he was on the field.

Player B had 6 sacks in 200 snaps or one sack for every 33.3 plays he was on the field.

Player B, when he is on the field, has almost double the frequency of sacks than Player A, when he is on the field.

Now, I also noted that the difference in roles for each player is a significant part of the reason. Most likely, player A is a "three downs" starter and Player B is a pass rush specialist that comes in on 3rd and long, etc.

However, the point still focused on efficiency, what they do on the field when they are on the field and not how many times over the span of a game. Using the span of one play, or number of plays for a particular outcome, makes it even for all players.

No, you won't actually find this stat presented anywhere in the media but I wouldn't be surprised if it is one of a many several reports that coaches and GMs see exclusively.

Some form of this measurement is probably used assign the number of plays to each player. It might detect issues such as fatigue.

I mean, these guys hire top statistical analysts, computer programmers, etc, in order to find whatever advantage they can strategize that will improve the chances of winning.

I love it. Really respect the work that you put into it. Kinda what I was pointing out about Houston in a post last week. His 5.5 sacks and 19 pressure were in very limited number of snaps. Now no stat tells the whole story or means all snaps equal but efficiency is impirtant. I would bet coaches do look at some form of efficiency stats. They have lots more data than we can find. They can break them down in all different sets like 4 wide or heavy. Great job

 

[blueblood70]

yYes

Garrett is The Dude.

Yes I agree but they're using his money as a new market setting price and that's why Willie Anderson got paid but that's not how team should be looking at this He's a great player but he is not Garrett therefore he should not get Garrett money that's how you would get this salary cap era and how you distribute money throughout your team under control is make sure they understand that they are not up in due for more money than the best in the league..


Realize that's not how it works but that's my problem that's what I'm discussing here... This whole thing started five to 67 years ago whenever it was about they needed to be the next highest non quarterback money and set these new market rates and it's gotten things out of control at certain positions..

Prefer to spread that money out throughout the whole team and be deeper and not have that one point of failure that just tanks your whole playoffs or your whole season that's what happens when you start paying guys like Will Anderson too much money He's great he deserves a big contract but not to be paid $10 million more than Miles Garrett..

Yeah one might be a Ferrari and you pay a lot more than a Ferrari than you do a corvette and Will Anderson might be a top of the line customized Corvette but he is not the Ferrari that Garrett is he might be close but no one's given Ferrari money to buy a Corvette..

I know the analogy strange but that's how I look at it a market is the market I know you can drive a price up during bidding but at some point teams need to say no and that's why I'm glad the Cowboys moved on from Parsons not because he wasn't great because he thought he was better than Miles Garrett even though he heard him say he wasn't we heard him say he would take less than 40 and he lied and now he's gone and I think the Cowboys made the right choice..

 

[thunderpimp91]

yYes

Yes I agree but they're using his money as a new market setting price and that's why Willie Anderson got paid but that's not how team should be looking at this He's a great player but he is not Garrett therefore he should not get Garrett money that's how you would get this salary cap era and how you distribute money throughout your team under control is make sure they understand that they are not up in due for more money than the best in the league..


Realize that's not how it works but that's my problem that's what I'm discussing here... This whole thing started five to 67 years ago whenever it was about they needed to be the next highest non quarterback money and set these new market rates and it's gotten things out of control at certain positions..

Prefer to spread that money out throughout the whole team and be deeper and not have that one point of failure that just tanks your whole playoffs or your whole season that's what happens when you start paying guys like Will Anderson too much money He's great he deserves a big contract but not to be paid $10 million more than Miles Garrett..

Yeah one might be a Ferrari and you pay a lot more than a Ferrari than you do a corvette and Will Anderson might be a top of the line customized Corvette but he is not the Ferrari that Garrett is he might be close but no one's given Ferrari money to buy a Corvette..

I know the analogy strange but that's how I look at it a market is the market I know you can drive a price up during bidding but at some point teams need to say no and that's why I'm glad the Cowboys moved on from Parsons not because he wasn't great because he thought he was better than Miles Garrett even though he heard him say he wasn't we heard him say he would take less than 40 and he lied and now he's gone and I think the Cowboys made the right choice..

This is why we need to stop paying attention to just the annual value IMO

Anderson extension is technically $10m per year more than Garrett per the extension but for the life of their deals Garrett will make $220 over the next 5 years ($44m average). Anderson will make $187 over the same 5 years ($37.5 average).

Anderson still has two years of his rookie deal so his extension technically doesn’t kick in until 2028 so they are likely going off of future values in that $50m number that will see a couple more jumps in the overall cap number.

 

[Kingofholland]

Good breakdown! I do think some of these guys have better numbers because they're forgotten about as the 3rd or 4th guy on the team and there's less preparation, and probably less double teams that go into it too. However, it is clear to me that Houston deserves more opportunities and hope they give that to him. It feels like a big miss if you're giving guys like Houston and Clowney only 25% to 33% of the snaps while other guys that are less efficient with the snaps are getting more, but perhaps that is part of the defensive failure the last couple of years..

Curious how play time is broken out this season and where everyone fits.