Percentage of Tackles Made by Player (1 Viewer)

[RommelDAK]

I've always wondered about this, so I wasted an hour calculating it! I basically figured how many tackles a team faced and determined what percent the league's top tacklers (solo plus assist) made of their team's totals. Nothing terribly surprising:

36.7% London Fletcher WAS MLB36.7% David Harris NYJ ILB36.4% Thomas Davis CAR OLB32.3% Gerald Hayes ARI ILB31.0% Patrick Willis SF ILB29.5% Stephen Cooper SD ILB27.1% Keith Ellison BUF OLB25.8% Brandon Meriweather NE SS25.6% Gary Brackett IND MLB25.5% James Laurinaitis STL MLB25.0% Roy L. Williams CIN SS23.4% Brian Dawkins DEN FS22.6% Chike Okeafor ARI OLB22.2% Rey Maualuga CIN OLB21.8% Anthony Henry DET CB21.8% Stephen Tulloch TEN MLB21.7% Keyaron Fox PIT ILB21.6% Sabby Piscitelli TB SS21.3% D'Qwell Jackson CLE ILB21.3% D.J. Williams DEN ILB21.2% Scott Fujita NO OLB21.2% Tracy Porter NO CB21.1% Michael Johnson NYG FS21.1% Chase Blackburn NYG OLB20.8% Curtis Lofton ATL MLB20.5% E.J. Henderson MIN MLB20.5% Tyvon Branch OAK SS20.5% Thomas Howard OAK OLB20.0% Kelly Gregg BAL NT20.0% Chris Hope TEN SS20.0% Ray Lewis BAL ILB19.4% Calais Campbell ARI DE19.4% Karlos Dansby ARI ILB19.4% Mike Brown KC SS19.3% Justin Durant JAC MLB19.1% Andra Davis DEN ILB19.1% Abram Elam CLE SS18.4% Chris Horton WAS SS18.2% Roman Harper NO SS18.2% Chris Johnson OAK CB18.2% Cortland Finnegan TEN CB17.9% Antonio Johnson IND DT

I also took the above percentages and determined how many tackles this would have represented had each team made 44 tackles (the league average in week one):

16.2 London Fletcher WAS MLB16.1 David Harris NYJ ILB16.0 Thomas Davis CAR OLB14.2 Gerald Hayes ARI ILB13.6 Patrick Willis SF ILB13.0 Stephen Cooper SD ILB11.9 Keith Ellison BUF OLB11.4 Brandon Meriweather NE SS11.3 Gary Brackett IND MLB11.2 James Laurinaitis STL MLB11.0 Roy L. Williams CIN SS10.3 Brian Dawkins DEN FS9.9 Chike Okeafor ARI OLB9.8 Rey Maualuga CIN OLB9.6 Anthony Henry DET CB9.6 Stephen Tulloch TEN MLB9.6 Keyaron Fox PIT ILB9.5 Sabby Piscitelli TB SS9.4 D'Qwell Jackson CLE ILB9.4 D.J. Williams DEN ILB9.3 Scott Fujita NO OLB9.3 Tracy Porter NO CB9.3 Michael Johnson NYG FS9.3 Chase Blackburn NYG OLB9.1 Curtis Lofton ATL MLB9.0 E.J. Henderson MIN MLB9.0 Tyvon Branch OAK SS9.0 Thomas Howard OAK OLB8.8 Kelly Gregg BAL NT8.8 Chris Hope TEN SS8.8 Ray Lewis BAL ILB8.5 Calais Campbell ARI DE8.5 Karlos Dansby ARI ILB8.5 Mike Brown KC SS8.5 Justin Durant JAC MLB8.4 Andra Davis DEN ILB8.4 Abram Elam CLE SS8.1 Chris Horton WAS SS8.0 Roman Harper NO SS8.0 Chris Johnson OAK CB8.0 Cortland Finnegan TEN CB7.9 Antonio Johnson IND DT

The biggest beneficiaries of facing more plays would have been David Harris (5.1 more tackles than he actually made), Gerald Hayes (4.2 more), Brandon Merriweather( 3.4 more), Chike Okeafor (2.9 more), and Ray Lewis (2.8 more). Most hurt would have been Keith Ellison (4.1 fewer tackles), Mike Brown (3.5 fewer), Demorrio Williams (2.9 fewer), and James Laurinaitis (2.8 fewer).That doesn't necessarily mean that those who faced relatively few plays are undervalued and those who faced a lot are overvalued since there's a very good reason that Laurinaitis, for example, faced so many plays--St. Louis sucks! That trend can be expected to continue. But, it's something to consider. It bodes particularly well for David Harris (as several of the staffers here mentioned in their articles), while it puts those lofty numbers for the KC defense into a little perspective.

 

[J Giles Band]

Thanks for the time & effort Desert Fox. This promises to be especially valuable if you continue charting the tackle opportunity and percentages over the coming weeks. After a few weeks the cumulative data should be even more statistically significant.

 

[Jene Bramel]

Awesome work.

I usually do something very similar in conjunction with the tackle opportunity metric later in the season when the sample sizes become meaningful and again during the offseason. It's a great way to identify where tackle opportunity may not be telling the full story. It helps identify guys like Zac Diles and Stephen Cooper as likely to continue their strong short term production into future seasons and differentiate the true studs (Patrick Willis) from potentially false ones (D'Qwell Jackson).

When you cross-check these percentages later in the season, the top performers in this metric will end up around 13-15%, with a lot of clumping down through the 9-11% range. If you add in things like fumble plays and passes defensed, the percentages can be as high as 20% for the league's most active backers with weaker supporting casts. For a little historical flavor, there was some similar discussion in last season's W9 RTD column and this (somewhat dated) thread from the 2007-08 offseason.

I think it works best with linebackers. There's often too much context not considered with the defensive back group to draw conclusions without a lot of added interpretation.

 

[massraider]

Whoa. Nice work.

 

[Buffaloes]

Whoa. Nice work.

I agree. Thanks for posting.

 

[RommelDAK]

Thans, fellas, it was fun and really didn't take all that long.

I usually do something very similar in conjunction with the tackle opportunity metric later in the season...When you cross-check these percentages later in the season, the top performers in this metric will end up around 13-15%, with a lot of clumping down through the 9-11% range.

That's precisely what I was wondering about, Jean--what weekly percentage represents a huge game, and what seasonal average is representative of a top player. I'll try to keep this sucker going (though if you are doing it, too, I'm not sure I really need to). At the very worst, it keeps me off the streets!

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

Great Post.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

This is nice work but it's important to realize it's not an end-all. These numbers have a tremendous amount to do with the opponent and the game situation in a given week, and particularly as to whether the opponent is running or passing a lot, and with how much success. Recall that incomplete passes don't result in tackles. London Fletcher, for example while certainly a tackle machine in general won't face the run heavy Giants playing with a significant lead most weeks.

 

[RommelDAK]

This is nice work but it's important to realize it's not an end-all. These numbers have a tremendous amount to do with the opponent and the game situation in a given week, and particularly as to whether the opponent is running or passing a lot, and with how much success. Recall that incomplete passes don't result in tackles. London Fletcher, for example while certainly a tackle machine in general won't face the run heavy Giants playing with a significant lead most weeks.

Absolutely. Pointing that out was the goal of my last paragraph:

That doesn't necessarily mean that those who faced relatively few plays are undervalued and those who faced a lot are overvalued since there's a very good reason that Laurinaitis, for example, faced so many plays--St. Louis sucks! That trend can be expected to continue. But, it's something to consider. It bodes particularly well for David Harris (as several of the staffers here mentioned in their articles), while it puts those lofty numbers for the KC defense into a little perspective.

You have to bear in mind WHY someone may have faced many or few opportunities--they may continue to do so, or it may have been a fluke. And, the particular style of play of the opponent must be considered, as well (but I really couldn't do that with one week of data).

 

[Mr Capicollo]

This is nice work but it's important to realize it's not an end-all. These numbers have a tremendous amount to do with the opponent and the game situation in a given week, and particularly as to whether the opponent is running or passing a lot, and with how much success. Recall that incomplete passes don't result in tackles. London Fletcher, for example while certainly a tackle machine in general won't face the run heavy Giants playing with a significant lead most weeks.

Absolutely. Pointing that out was the goal of my last paragraph:

That doesn't necessarily mean that those who faced relatively few plays are undervalued and those who faced a lot are overvalued since there's a very good reason that Laurinaitis, for example, faced so many plays--St. Louis sucks! That trend can be expected to continue. But, it's something to consider. It bodes particularly well for David Harris (as several of the staffers here mentioned in their articles), while it puts those lofty numbers for the KC defense into a little perspective.

You have to bear in mind WHY someone may have faced many or few opportunities--they may continue to do so, or it may have been a fluke. And, the particular style of play of the opponent must be considered, as well (but I really couldn't do that with one week of data).

It's all good. My comment wasn't meant as criticism so much as a reminder that stuff like this is just one more tool for the IDP toolbox (though certainly a very good tool).

 

[RommelDAK]

No, you were quite right--it's an extremely important point and I probably didn't hit it hard enough in my first post.

Now to try to see if I can actually use this info to my advantage this week!

EDIT: Spelling error!

 

[Mr Capicollo]

No, you were quite right--it's an extremely important point and I probably didn't hit it hard enough in my first post.Now to try to see if I can actually use this info to my advantage this week!EDIT: Spelling error!

One more thing- you definitely need to keep track of guys who missed plays due to injury when you're looking at a one-week analysis. EJ Henderson missed a good number of plays with an injury IIRC, which means he had a lower-than-normal percentage. This will be even more useful after week 4 or so if there are cumulative numbers.