When ranking defenses in most fantasy scoring systems, we tend to be particularly interested in teams that record a lot of sacks. Not only because of the fantasy points from sacks, but under the belief that teams that rack up a lot of sacks tend to also do well in another key defensive scoring component, takeaways. That's the theory anyway. But is it true?
To evaluate the theory, I took a look at the numbers from the last five years. Both year by year numbers, and overall. And though it's not as convincing as you might expect, I think it's fair to say that following sacks does tend to help you also find teams that generate more turnovers.
The first table below shows five-year totals, sorted by total sacks. First column shows sacks, second column takeaways, third column rank in takeaways. (Columns sorted by sacks, so we don't need a ranking column for that.)
TOTAL SACKS AND TAKEAWAYS, 2010-2014 | |||
---|---|---|---|
Team | Sack | Take | TkRk |
St. Louis | 227 | 119 | 19 |
NY Giants | 208 | 160 | 3 |
Green Bay | 208 | 142 | 6 |
Minnesota | 207 | 109 | 27 |
Philadelphia | 205 | 130 | 13 |
Buffalo | 203 | 134 | 10 |
Miami | 203 | 103 | 31 |
New England | 201 | 167 | 1 |
Carolina | 201 | 132 | 12 |
Baltimore | 201 | 124 | 17 |
Denver | 198 | 111 | 24 |
Arizona | 195 | 137 | 8 |
Detroit | 194 | 129 | 14 |
NY Jets | 191 | 112 | 22 |
San Francisco | 190 | 144 | 5 |
Houston | 188 | 119 | 19 |
Kansas City | 188 | 112 | 22 |
Seattle | 187 | 147 | 4 |
Pittsburgh | 187 | 111 | 24 |
Cincinnati | 186 | 135 | 9 |
Tennessee | 182 | 113 | 21 |
New Orleans | 179 | 103 | 31 |
Chicago | 178 | 162 | 2 |
San Diego | 178 | 106 | 28 |
Washington | 175 | 124 | 17 |
Indianapolis | 174 | 106 | 28 |
Dallas | 173 | 129 | 14 |
Oakland | 171 | 105 | 30 |
Cleveland | 170 | 127 | 16 |
Jacksonville | 153 | 110 | 26 |
Atlanta | 147 | 140 | 7 |
Tampa Bay | 147 | 134 | 10 |
Nine of the top 15 teams in terms of sacks over that five-year period also ranked in the top 15 in terms of takeaways (60 percent). Of the other 17 pass rushes, only six (35 percent) ranked in the top 15 in takeaways. In rough terms, if you can identify an above-average pass rush, you've got about a two out of three chance of also landing an above-average team in takeaways.
The year-by-year numbers are little more erratic. They're shown in the five tables below, again sorted by sacks (and showing takeaway rank in the final column). In the interests of brevity I cropped the tables after 15 teams, rather than showing all 32 in each of the five years.
In 2014, 12 teams had more than 40 sacks. Only half of them ranked in the top dozen in terms of takeaways. Four of the top 5 teams in terms of takeaways were below-average in terms of sacks (Houston, Dallas, San Francisco and Cleveland). Those teams generated healthy number of fumbles or interceptions despite being nothing special getting after the quarterback.
In 2013, eight of the top 10 teams in takeaways also finished in the top 10 in sacks. In 2012, similar story: nine of the top 15 pass rushes finished 14th or better in takeaways. But 2011 looks more like 2014: 14 teams had 40-plus sacks, but only six of them were above-average in takeaways. In 2010, six of 10 top pass rushes were 11th or better in takeaways.
Bottom line: with some year-to-year variance, it looks like about 60 percent odds that an above-average pass rush will yield a defense that's also above-average in takeaways. Enough to make you target those defenses in fantasy drafts, but not enough to break the bank for them.
SACKS AND TAKEAWAYS, 2010-2014 | |||
---|---|---|---|
2014 Team | '14 Sk | '14 Tk | TkRk |
Buffalo | 54 | 30 | 3 |
Philadelphia | 49 | 28 | 6 |
Baltimore | 49 | 22 | 22 |
NY Giants | 47 | 26 | 10 |
Kansas City | 46 | 14 | 30 |
Jacksonville | 45 | 20 | 24 |
NY Jets | 45 | 13 | 32 |
Detroit | 42 | 27 | 8 |
Indianapolis | 41 | 26 | 10 |
Denver | 41 | 25 | 14 |
Green Bay | 41 | 27 | 8 |
Minnesota | 41 | 19 | 25 |
Carolina | 40 | 26 | 10 |
St. Louis | 40 | 25 | 14 |
New England | 40 | 25 | 14 |
2013 Team | '13 Sk | '13 Tk | TkRk |
---|---|---|---|
Carolina | 60 | 30 | 6 |
Buffalo | 57 | 30 | 6 |
St. Louis | 53 | 29 | 10 |
New Orleans | 49 | 19 | 29 |
New England | 48 | 29 | 10 |
Kansas City | 47 | 36 | 2 |
Arizona | 47 | 30 | 6 |
Seattle | 44 | 39 | 1 |
Green Bay | 44 | 22 | 21 |
Cincinnati | 43 | 31 | 3 |
Indianapolis | 42 | 27 | 15 |
Miami | 42 | 24 | 19 |
Denver | 41 | 26 | 16 |
Minnesota | 41 | 20 | 27 |
NY Jets | 41 | 15 | 31 |
2012 Team | '12 Sk | '12 Tk | TkRk |
---|---|---|---|
Denver | 52 | 24 | 16 |
St. Louis | 52 | 21 | 23 |
Cincinnati | 51 | 30 | 8 |
Green Bay | 47 | 23 | 18 |
Houston | 44 | 29 | 9 |
Minnesota | 44 | 22 | 22 |
Miami | 42 | 16 | 28 |
Chicago | 41 | 44 | 1 |
Tennessee | 39 | 24 | 16 |
Carolina | 39 | 23 | 18 |
Arizona | 38 | 33 | 4 |
Cleveland | 38 | 29 | 9 |
San Diego | 38 | 28 | 11 |
San Francisco | 38 | 25 | 14 |
New England | 37 | 41 | 2 |
2011 Team | '11 Sk | '11Tk | TkRk |
---|---|---|---|
Philadelphia | 50 | 24 | 16 |
Minnesota | 50 | 23 | 20 |
NY Giants | 48 | 31 | 5 |
Baltimore | 48 | 26 | 13 |
Cincinnati | 45 | 22 | 22 |
Houston | 44 | 27 | 12 |
San Francisco | 42 | 38 | 1 |
Dallas | 42 | 24 | 16 |
Arizona | 42 | 19 | 26 |
Detroit | 41 | 34 | 3 |
Washington | 41 | 21 | 23 |
Miami | 41 | 19 | 26 |
Denver | 41 | 18 | 28 |
New England | 40 | 34 | 3 |
Oakland | 39 | 26 | 13 |
2010 Team | '10 Sk | '10 Tk | TkRk |
---|---|---|---|
Pittsburgh | 48 | 35 | 3 |
Green Bay | 47 | 32 | 6 |
Oakland | 47 | 24 | 22 |
San Diego | 47 | 22 | 24 |
NY Giants | 46 | 39 | 1 |
Detroit | 44 | 29 | 11 |
St. Louis | 43 | 26 | 17 |
NY Jets | 40 | 30 | 8 |
Tennessee | 40 | 25 | 19 |
Philadelphia | 39 | 34 | 5 |
Kansas City | 39 | 23 | 23 |
Miami | 39 | 19 | 29 |
Seattle | 37 | 22 | 24 |
New England | 36 | 38 | 2 |
San Francisco | 36 | 22 | 24 |
--Andy Richardson