Quote:
Originally Posted by Bl00dyBizkitz
I've always found this interesting. Do defensive stats even matter of the Chiefs can roll into the postseason with a "statistically below average" defense and perform at an elite level?
|
The problem with stats is that each one only tells a specific part of the whole, but fans will latch onto one or two of them and hold them up as the entire story.
2018 was a classic example of that. Sutton's defense had the highest season sack total as well as the best 3rd down conversion %. What got lost or was ignored, was that Houston and Ford became invisible against better than average OTs, I mean they fell off a cliff, and that 3rd down conversion rate was entirely dependent on their ability to sack the QB, and when teams ran, they were worse than average.
NE took advantage of that because they watched the tape and analyzed how KC did defending the run on 3rd down/normal passing situations. To be clear; they outschemed Sutton, who couldn't/wouldn't adjust. Guess who else wouldn't adjust, and called about as passive a game as possible? PHI's DC Gannon. Another coach that relied far too much on metrix and not enough seeing what was actually going on.
In short, people were trying to use those stats as a way to make blanket statements about the defense, effectively ignoring any other information.
Bottom line, it's problematic to just look at one or two stats and then declare much of anything with any reliability.
And in the time Spags has been with the Chiefs he keeps teaching us that season sack totals alone or season rush yards allowed are bogus stats. They don't tell you anything really useful about how they'll play in a certain game,
or how they're trending.
Stats are great if we can analyze as many relevant statlines as possible, and pretty useless when we use just the one or two we want to use.