Q&A with Richard Sherman - ESPN Insider

[iowajerms]

Part 1 of 2

Quizzing Richard Sherman on his career stats - NFL
By Mike Sando

RENTON, Wash. -- It's all about the ball. Pete Carroll preached that mantra from the beginning of his tenure as the Seattle Seahawks' coach. Cornerback Richard Sherman listened. His 26 interceptions over the past four seasons (and playoffs) are 10 more than any other NFL player has in that time.

Is it really all about the ball? What other metrics matter at the position? After we kicked off our Data Dialogues series in the NFL with Matt Ryan earlier this month, Sherman takes center stage for a look at where the numbers intersect with what he thinks really matters.

Mike Sando: Pro Football Focus had you as the No. 5 corner in its 2014 rankings (fifth in coverage, second against the run). Football Outsiders had you fifth in adjusted success rate. Stats LLC has something it calls burn rate. How much attention do you pay to some of these advanced metrics for measuring cornerback play?

Richard Sherman: Not much. Turnovers, picks, fumbles and touchdowns are the most valuable things on our side of the ball. That is what changes ballgames. That is really the only thing that matters.

MS: Those things play into the various grading criteria, of course. When it comes to picking off passes, no one has come close to your totals since your 2011 rookie season. You've had more than one pick against five quarterbacks. Can you name the five?

RS: Eli, Carson, Kaep' --

MS: Four against Colin Kaepernick, two against Eli Manning, two against Carson Palmer. You've collected four against someone else.

RS: Yes, Arizona -- No. 19.

MS: John Skelton! And then you've got two more against someone else of the NFC West.

RS: Sam Bradford?

MS: Correct. Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers are in your one-pick club. So, it's all about the picks?

RS: In some respects, yes. In others, I guess not. Some people get garbage-time picks against a bad quarterback.

MS: One-third of all NFL picks since you entered the league (652 of 2,005) have come when the score differential was greater than 10 points one way or the other. You had a pick against Skelton in a game you were leading by 31. You had another against Josh McCown when you were up by 24, another against Ryan Lindley when the lead was 22. But there have been game-changers, as well, including a memorable pick-six against the Texans' Matt Schaub that swung win probability by 38 percent, the most for any pick of your career.

RS: I think consistency and how it changes the game all matter. Are they taking points off the board, or is it a lobbed-up interception on a Hail Mary at the end of the game? Not having interceptions does not mean corners are not making an impact. If you had 30 pass breakups and no interceptions, it is not that they are not throwing at you. It is you not making plays on the ball, not capitalizing.

MS: Do you follow pass breakups?

RS: Not closely.

MS: ESPN Stats & Information has you with 37 of them since entering the league. That ranks 24th and is well behind the league-leading 63 from Joe Haden. Tramon Williams has 58 in that span. What do you make of that?

RS: Nothing. I go for the ball; I go for the catch. If I can't catch it and he can't catch it, usually nobody is making a play. They are putting it out of range for either one of us to make a play. And that is fine. That is not charted as a pass breakup. It is still an incompletion, so I don't make too much of it. I go for the ball.

 

[iowajerms]

Part 2 of 2

MS: We also track something called disrupted dropbacks. This one adds sacks, passes defensed, interceptions and batted balls. You have 64 disrupted dropbacks since entering the league, tied with Haden for most in the NFL in that time (J.J. Watt, Justin Houston and Jared Allen are 1-2-3 overall). But you were only 69th overall last season with 10, and your regular-season total was eight, which ranked tied for 57th and was 10 off the league lead.

RS: Are you charting targets and how many times they are going after you? If I am getting targeted 100 times in a season, I'm sure I'd have a few more opportunities than if I am only getting targeted 40-50 times a year. It makes sense I would have a lower number of pass breakups, but I am taking advantage of them.

MS: The Football Outsiders data showed you with a number of targets in line with what other No. 1 corners faced last season. But we have certainly seen top quarterbacks avoid throwing your way. Rodgers in the 2014 regular-season opener comes to mind. That was the game when Rodgers attempted 33 passes but only one of them outside the numbers on your side of the field (a 2-yarder to tight end Andrew Quarless). The pass chart for Jordy Nelson was pretty comical in that game, as every one of his targets was toward the defensive right side, away from you. The first time Rodgers tested you in the NFC Championship Game, you picked off the pass.

RS: Everybody plays us different. We are a unique opponent to a lot of teams and the way we play. They will condense their formations. They'll have the receivers closer to the line and nasty splits and things of that nature because they can't get off the press. They will run quick game a lot more; they will dump it down a lot more; they won't take as many risks.

MS: Is there a cornerback stat you'd like to see that currently isn't available?

RS: Not really. Interceptions and touchdowns allowed are pretty indicative. Pass breakups would fall in there somewhere. Forced fumbles. But really, how many times they score against you -- that is how you impact a game.

MS: There must be a short list of touchdowns you've allowed. Can you name them?

RS: I want to say there are like 10. They are usually on plays where there was a coverage bust more than anything. This year, they counted the one that DeSean Jackson had in the Washington game. We were running this stupid coverage that we put in that week, an inverted 2. Kam Chancellor was playing corner, and I was playing deep safety, and they of course run all-gos on that play, so it was a late-developing play and I had the tight end running down the seam and he had D-Jack running down the sideline. So the quarterback looked down the middle of the field. I went to the tight end and squeezed on him, and he threw it to D-Jack.

MS: Touchdown allowed, No. 25, Richard Sherman! Seriously, though, that's another reminder that stats, although helpful, are best served with context.

RS: Yeah, it's wishy-washy. It is not like I was in man coverage, he outran me or he ran a great route.

MS: And I'm sure there are times when the scheme has saved you on a play you could have played better. One thing I wanted to ask you was whether you see any corners out there who deserve more recognition than they've gotten. Maybe it's a younger guy or someone who has been in a tougher situation and hasn't put up the stats for whatever reason.

RS: Definitely. He might have had a couple bad games at the end of the season, but Brent Grimes does a lot more than he gets his due for. I also like the kid from the Vikings.

MS: Xavier Rhodes? I saw him make an outstanding play during their official team activities recently. We actually had him with 18 disrupted dropbacks last season. No corner had more.

RS: Yes, Rhodes. I did not really watch him early on, and then I saw him a couple times against good teams, against Green Bay and Detroit. It takes courage to stand up there every play and play man and go against these dudes. He played good ball. I think if he were on a better team, he would have gotten more accolades. He is one to watch. The other corners that get a lot of recognition are in the playoffs. Chris Harris was underrated last year. People started to notice him this year and give him his respect. He deserved it, but he was also in the playoffs. Darrelle Revis was in the playoffs. I was in the playoffs. The corners in the playoffs -- that is where you get your recognition.

 

[TP76]

Rogers and Brady didn't really test him... Rogers totally avoided him week 1 and paid dearly for it in the Championship game (Int in the Endzone). Brady only went at him once in the Superbowl for 6 yards. Stats be damned, when he commands that kind of respect from two of the best QBs playing today, that says something. Stats never tell the whole story.


Like Belichick says, "stats are for losers"

 

[cdumler7]

I will give it to Sherman he is a very intelligent and well spoken player (other than his rant of course). I'm actually very impressed with this interview. He is actually starting to win me over as a guy that I can maybe cheer for (when he isn't playing the Broncos of course).

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I will give it to Sherman he is a very intelligent and well spoken player (other than his rant of course). I'm actually very impressed with this interview. He is actually starting to win me over as a guy that I can maybe cheer for (when he isn't playing the Broncos of course).

Man I must say it's nice to see fans beyond Seahawks fans recognize that he's got some smarts. Things are a changing.

 

[Southieinnc]

Man I must say it's nice to see fans beyond Seahawks fans recognize that he's got some smarts. Things are a changing.

Stanford grad. He certainly is smarter than most of the Seahawks fans.
That is what you meant, isn't it?

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Stanford grad. He certainly is smarter than most of the Seahawks fans.
That is what you meant, isn't it?

Yeah sure...that's what I was getting at.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

Man I must say it's nice to see fans beyond Seahawks fans recognize that he's got some smarts. Things are a changing.

Give it time, there were no national TV cameras around. Not saying he's not smart.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

"Up next, why Richard Sherman is actually the #7 ranked CB! That's right, according to ESPN's newest stat, the CBR, Sherman is actually not as good as everyone thinks!"



Only worthwhile 'news' going to ESPN these days is scores. ESPN IMO has turned into the new bleacherreport.

 

[tducey]

I'm no fan of his but he's better than #7 on the NFL Cornerback list.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Uh, for anyone that didn't notice, that was sarcasm. Thought it was obvious with 'CBR' but maybe the quotes misled lol.

 

[Southieinnc]

Uh, for anyone that didn't notice, that was sarcasm. Thought it was obvious with 'CBR' but maybe the quotes misled lol.

I thought it was pretty clear. Some don't get sarcasm.
Sherman is the best CB in football - Revis used to be.....

 

[Tgann69]

Rogers and Brady didn't really test him... Rogers totally avoided him week 1 and paid dearly for it in the Championship game (Int in the Endzone). Brady only went at him once in the Superbowl for 6 yards. Stats be damned, when he commands that kind of respect from two of the best QBs playing today, that says something. Stats never tell the whole story.


Like Belichick says, "stats are for losers"

Stats are for loser as BB says... Only thing that matters is winning, right?

 

[NWPATSFAN]

Stats are for loser as BB says... Only thing that matters is winning, right?

Can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with Tgann on this one.

 

[flyerhawk]

Stats are a guide. A limited guide in football but they can help especially with positions that fans aren't always able to follow as closely due to what the camera follows.

You can't make too much of them though.

 

[TxHeat]

"Up next, why Richard Sherman is actually the #7 ranked CB! That's right, according to ESPN's newest stat, the CBR, Sherman is actually not as good as everyone thinks!"



Only worthwhile 'news' going to ESPN these days is scores. ESPN IMO has turned into the new bleacherreport.

As usual, ESPN does rankings by picking names out of a hat.

 

[flyerhawk]

I don't get why people love to hate on ESPN so much.

Their job is to get viewers. Writing dry analytical pieces has limited value to them. Which is why they pay football outsiders and pff to provide that content when needed.

Mike Sando is a pretty good writer. He provoked a good interview with Sherman. Who cares what the stat ranking is?