09-28-2023, 07:21 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-28-2023, 07:04 PM by lemonoppy. Edited 1 time in total.)
Well, I guess it is once again time for an article where I complain about voting haha. I guess it is slightly my style to do so. Obviously I know I have been relatively lucky with awards in my time, but I will be honest, I definitely expected slightly more this season. No Pro Bowl, no nomination for DPOY, it was definitely slightly surprising to me.
I will point out that while of course I want to win awards or be nominated, this really is more about just writing an interesting, thought provoking article on forced fumbles and to earn some money. I am not angry or upset or such and obviously the two players (and users) deserve lots of credit!
And when I first looked at the other players taken, I guess I could see their appeal broadly. Here are the stat lines to compare:
Maxwell Jacob Friedman: 141 tackles, 11 tackles for loss, 16 sacks, 3 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 1 interception, 6 PDs
Akaki Akayre: 138 tackles, 13 tackles for loss, 17 sacks, 6 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 2 interceptions, 6 PDs
Cruella de Ville: 109 tackles, 11 tackles for loss, 19 sacks, 6 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 2 interceptions, 9 PDs
Like I said, it is easy to see the appeal, especially in Akayre. Pretty much same number of tackles, more tackles for loss, one sack more, 3 fumbles forced more, an int more. For de Ville, I think the comparison becomes harder. 32 tackles less seems like a big difference. Same tackles for loss, 3 sacks more, 3 fumbles forced more and one int more. The turnovers seem to be the big difference here, with 3 extra fumbles forced and an extra INT. And 3 sacks extra as well I guess, but also 32 tackles less. But I understand, tackles are not as flashy as a turnover.
Even I can understand that I was never gonna win over Akayre but de Ville surprised me a bit more I guess.
All of this made me think about forced fumbles a bit and what they really mean. Inherently, I think the belief is usually that obviously the higher the number, the more value is added. For voters and for award committee members I am sure it makes a difference whether someone has 3 or 6 of them. But how much do forced fumbles really add in the grand scheme of things?
What I mainly am referring to is what is the value of a forced fumble if one does not recover them? Obviously, if one assumes that you recover a fumble half the time, it still implies that the more fumbles you force, the better it will be. But a fumble forced alone often does not add any value to that moment if you do not recover it.
In fact, in the last season, defenses didn't recover a fumble half the time, even. Defenses recovered just 46% of all fumbles.
And what about the three players above? In how many of their fumbles forced, did the defense actually recover the ball?
For Akayre, 3 of their 6 fumbles got recovered by the defense. For both de Ville and Friedman it was 2.
What I found interesting while going through this was also that several of the fumbles forced by these three players actually resulted in a first down for the offense, so they literally added less value than say a tackle for loss or even a tackle that ends a drive.
If we adjust the stats above to only count fumbles that actually got recovered by the defense, we end up with:
Maxwell Jacob Friedman: 141 tackles, 11 tackles for loss, 16 sacks, 2 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 1 interception, 6 PDs
Akaki Akayre: 138 tackles, 13 tackles for loss, 17 sacks, 3 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 2 interceptions, 6 PDs
Cruella de Ville: 109 tackles, 11 tackles for loss, 19 sacks, 2 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 2 interceptions, 9 PDs
I personally don't see how 3 sacks, 3 PDs and 1 INT extra makes up for 32 less tackles personally.
But I also understand that maybe other people will feel differently.
That being said, I looked at the Pro Bowl formula and our points. With our stats, Akayre has 1700 points, de Ville 1635 and me 1555. Clearly Pro Bowl values different stuff more.
And the moral of the story is that even if my arbitrary way of looking at FFs is different and I adjust to only count those that were recovered by the defense, de Ville still ends with 5 more points than me.
Still, I do think that it is WILD that Pro Bowl thinks FF is worth more points than an FR. I could not disagree more with that stance but interestingly different people have already disagreed with me on that in the HON locker room. I personally think it is insane to count a FF as worth more than an FR. An FR means you actually got a turnover, while as I stated above, an FF means half the time (or more) nothing even happens, so they seem half pointless to me.
I will point out that while of course I want to win awards or be nominated, this really is more about just writing an interesting, thought provoking article on forced fumbles and to earn some money. I am not angry or upset or such and obviously the two players (and users) deserve lots of credit!
And when I first looked at the other players taken, I guess I could see their appeal broadly. Here are the stat lines to compare:
Maxwell Jacob Friedman: 141 tackles, 11 tackles for loss, 16 sacks, 3 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 1 interception, 6 PDs
Akaki Akayre: 138 tackles, 13 tackles for loss, 17 sacks, 6 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 2 interceptions, 6 PDs
Cruella de Ville: 109 tackles, 11 tackles for loss, 19 sacks, 6 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 2 interceptions, 9 PDs
Like I said, it is easy to see the appeal, especially in Akayre. Pretty much same number of tackles, more tackles for loss, one sack more, 3 fumbles forced more, an int more. For de Ville, I think the comparison becomes harder. 32 tackles less seems like a big difference. Same tackles for loss, 3 sacks more, 3 fumbles forced more and one int more. The turnovers seem to be the big difference here, with 3 extra fumbles forced and an extra INT. And 3 sacks extra as well I guess, but also 32 tackles less. But I understand, tackles are not as flashy as a turnover.
Even I can understand that I was never gonna win over Akayre but de Ville surprised me a bit more I guess.
All of this made me think about forced fumbles a bit and what they really mean. Inherently, I think the belief is usually that obviously the higher the number, the more value is added. For voters and for award committee members I am sure it makes a difference whether someone has 3 or 6 of them. But how much do forced fumbles really add in the grand scheme of things?
What I mainly am referring to is what is the value of a forced fumble if one does not recover them? Obviously, if one assumes that you recover a fumble half the time, it still implies that the more fumbles you force, the better it will be. But a fumble forced alone often does not add any value to that moment if you do not recover it.
In fact, in the last season, defenses didn't recover a fumble half the time, even. Defenses recovered just 46% of all fumbles.
And what about the three players above? In how many of their fumbles forced, did the defense actually recover the ball?
For Akayre, 3 of their 6 fumbles got recovered by the defense. For both de Ville and Friedman it was 2.
What I found interesting while going through this was also that several of the fumbles forced by these three players actually resulted in a first down for the offense, so they literally added less value than say a tackle for loss or even a tackle that ends a drive.
If we adjust the stats above to only count fumbles that actually got recovered by the defense, we end up with:
Maxwell Jacob Friedman: 141 tackles, 11 tackles for loss, 16 sacks, 2 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 1 interception, 6 PDs
Akaki Akayre: 138 tackles, 13 tackles for loss, 17 sacks, 3 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 2 interceptions, 6 PDs
Cruella de Ville: 109 tackles, 11 tackles for loss, 19 sacks, 2 fumbles forced, 1 fumble recovered, 2 interceptions, 9 PDs
I personally don't see how 3 sacks, 3 PDs and 1 INT extra makes up for 32 less tackles personally.
But I also understand that maybe other people will feel differently.
That being said, I looked at the Pro Bowl formula and our points. With our stats, Akayre has 1700 points, de Ville 1635 and me 1555. Clearly Pro Bowl values different stuff more.
And the moral of the story is that even if my arbitrary way of looking at FFs is different and I adjust to only count those that were recovered by the defense, de Ville still ends with 5 more points than me.
Still, I do think that it is WILD that Pro Bowl thinks FF is worth more points than an FR. I could not disagree more with that stance but interestingly different people have already disagreed with me on that in the HON locker room. I personally think it is insane to count a FF as worth more than an FR. An FR means you actually got a turnover, while as I stated above, an FF means half the time (or more) nothing even happens, so they seem half pointless to me.