(06-09-2021, 01:19 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: lawl, comparing the #1 overall pick a consensus best DE in the league, along with a guy who plays in a system perfectly-suited to his strengths (and he's a Watt), to someone picked in the 3rd round and while not as good as them, is solid as F.

It seems like you hate OSU (or Hubbard specifically) or you think that a borderline generational player in Garrett, can be had at any time.

Delusions.

He is a good player that is all.  Not an impact player.  Just pointing out the holes in Fred's logic as to his low sack totals.  Pay him like a good player, not an impact one because he isn't one.  He's just a guy 

(06-09-2021, 01:29 PM)Big_Ern Wrote: great, he averages 5.5 a year.  He is a good player.  Wouldn't pay him more than 3-6 a year.  

Throw last year out the window and he averages 7.25 sacks a year and this is in his first 2 years in the NFL.

Yes he is a good player and he should be paid like a good player, hell of a lot more than 3 a year lol

(06-09-2021, 01:37 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Throw last year out the window and he averages 7.25 sacks a year and this is in his first 2 years in the NFL.

Yes he is a good player and he should be paid like a good player, hell of a lot more than 3 a year lol

why would we throw out last year when evaluating him?  the whole league is based on what have you done for me lately.  

(06-09-2021, 01:31 PM)Big_Ern Wrote: He is a good player that is all.  Not an impact player.  Just pointing out the holes in Fred's logic as to his low sack totals.  Pay him like a good player, not an impact one because he isn't one.  He's just a guy 

Every team is made up of players like him.  Not everyone can be a star.  And if he's "just a guy" than 80% of the league is just a guy.

I don't think anyone is calling for him to paid big time money (14+ mil).  And if you lock him up now you'll see a discount for 2 main reasons:  1.) You're signing him early, when he has no leverage that free agency offers, and it gives him security, and 2.) You're signing him coming off of a down year.

You get a deal now, say for 7 or 8 mil per, there's a pretty good chance that you're getting a bargain.  If goes out this year and gets double digit sacks I would imagine that production and his age would warrant him 10+ easily.  And worst case scenario, you just paid market price for decent starter.

Just my 2 cents.

(06-09-2021, 03:05 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Every team is made up of players like him.  Not everyone can be a star.  And if he's "just a guy" than 80% of the league is just a guy.

I don't think anyone is calling for him to paid big time money (14+ mil).  And if you lock him up now you'll see a discount for 2 main reasons:  1.) You're signing him early, when he has no leverage that free agency offers, and it gives him security, and 2.) You're signing him coming off of a down year.

You get a deal now, say for 7 or 8 mil per, there's a pretty good chance that you're getting a bargain.  If goes out this year and gets double digit sacks I would imagine that production and his age would warrant him 10+ easily.  And worst case scenario, you just paid market price for decent starter.

Just my 2 cents.

agree with all of this.  Id prefer that number is 6 tops but can live with that. You have to fill out your team with guys, rookie deals and pay 3-5 impact players.  

I like Bates, but this team traditionally hasn't paid interior o-linemen and...safeties.

I'd bet on him walking, unless this regime can convince the FO that safety is an integral part of their plans.

(06-09-2021, 02:59 PM)Big_Ern Wrote: why would we throw out last year when evaluating him?  the whole league is based on what have you done for me lately.  

He was hurt with rotational DT's playing next to him at best. Lawson only had 5.5 sacks and 2 or 3 of them were in 1 game
and he was our top sack guy. Bad year even for him and he got paid monster money and is not near the complete player 
that Hubbard is who was the best run stopping edge in the league last year. Pay Hubbard now before he has that breakout 
season is all I am saying. If you don't see the potential with him that is your problem Big Ern.

(06-09-2021, 03:05 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Every team is made up of players like him.  Not everyone can be a star.  And if he's "just a guy" than 80% of the league is just a guy.

I don't think anyone is calling for him to paid big time money (14+ mil).  And if you lock him up now you'll see a discount for 2 main reasons:  1.) You're signing him early, when he has no leverage that free agency offers, and it gives him security, and 2.) You're signing him coming off of a down year.

You get a deal now, say for 7 or 8 mil per, there's a pretty good chance that you're getting a bargain.  If goes out this year and gets double digit sacks I would imagine that production and his age would warrant him 10+ easily.  And worst case scenario, you just paid market price for decent starter.

Just my 2 cents.

Agree with your 2 cents Wes, now would be the time to extend Sam.

(06-09-2021, 03:05 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote:  you lock him up now you'll see a discount for 2 main reasons:  1.) You're signing him early, when he has no leverage that free agency offers, and it gives him security, and 2.) You're signing him coming off of a down year.

This.


Michael Johnson had one double digit sack season his entire career.  It came in his fourth season when he was playing for a contract.  Just like Hubbard is doing this year.

After that 11.5 sack season Johnson never had more than 5 in one year.

(06-09-2021, 05:42 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: He was hurt with rotational DT's playing next to him at best. Lawson only had 5.5 sacks and 2 or 3 of them were in 1 game
and he was our top sack guy. Bad year even for him and he got paid monster money and is not near the complete player 
that Hubbard is who was the best run stopping edge in the league last year. Pay Hubbard now before he has that breakout 
season is all I am saying. If you don't see the potential with him that is your problem Big Ern.


Agree with your 2 cents Wes, now would be the time to extend Sam.

Lawson had very high pressure and win rate stats, the league will pay a premium for pass rush.  Not so much for run-stuffing DE's.  I mean if that mattered our D wouldn't have been terrible against the run last year. 

(06-09-2021, 06:59 PM)Big_Ern Wrote: Lawson had very high pressure and win rate stats, the league will pay a premium for pass rush.  Not so much for run-stuffing DE's.  I mean if that mattered our D wouldn't have been terrible against the run last year. 

True about Lawson but he also has an injury history. Us getting Hendrickson was an upgrade and we will see how we stop the
run with actual starting DT's playing on the team to go along with a top run stopping Edge in Hubbard.

(06-09-2021, 06:59 PM)Big_Ern Wrote: Lawson had very high pressure and win rate stats, the league will pay a premium for pass rush.  Not so much for run-stuffing DE's.  I mean if that mattered our D wouldn't have been terrible against the run last year. 

This is not how it works.

Based on your logic Myles Garrett's 12 sacks didn't matter because the Browns pass defense was still bad (#22).

(06-09-2021, 07:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is not how it works.

Based on your logic Myles Garrett's 12 sacks didn't matter because the Browns pass defense was still bad (#22).

the league will pay an absolute premium for sacks.  Always has, always will.  look at Hendrickson and Myle's contracts.  A sack artist DE will command a way higher salary than a run stopping DE

Also, didn't you say in an earlier post that Hubbard couldn't get many sacks because our DB's were no good? You or someone else did, well that must not apply to Myle's.

(06-09-2021, 06:59 PM)Big_Ern Wrote: Lawson had very high pressure and win rate stats, the league will pay a premium for pass rush.  Not so much for run-stuffing DE's.  I mean if that mattered our D wouldn't have been terrible against the run last year. 

"All those wins" only resulted in 5.5 sacks, (his career high) yet Lawson got $16M.  Seems like the Jets may have overpaid for fool's gold.  

By your logic, Lawson should have been signed for around $5M...

(06-09-2021, 07:38 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: "All those wins" only resulted in 5.5 sacks, (his career high) yet Lawson got $16M.  Seems like the Jets may have overpaid for fool's gold.  

By your logic, Lawson should have been signed for around $5M...

Plus a lot of those wins are not accounting for discipline and if the player is overpursuing and giving up running lanes which both
Dunlap and Lawson did a lot which isn't a good thing. What I like about both Hubbard and Hendrickson is they are disciplined Ends.

Would like to see Hubbard get more pressures though and more Sacks, believe he will with decent play at DT and across from him 
at End. Just need to finish Sam, Trey is the perfect End to watch last year finishing well with disipline.

(06-09-2021, 07:38 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: "All those wins" only resulted in 5.5 sacks, (his career high) yet Lawson got $16M.  Seems like the Jets may have overpaid for fool's gold.  

By your logic, Lawson should have been signed for around $5M...

Yeah, that is what about I would pay a guy that is talented but has issues staying on the field.  I'm much more comfortable with that money going to Hendrickson

(06-09-2021, 07:43 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Plus a lot of those wins are not accounting for discipline and if the player is overpursuing and giving up running lanes which both
Dunlap and Lawson did a lot which isn't a good thing. What I like about both Hubbard and Hendrickson is they are disciplined Ends.

Would like to see Hubbard get more pressures though and more Sacks, believe he will with decent play at DT and across from him 
at End. Just need to finish Sam, Trey is the perfect End to watch last year finishing well with disipline.

I hope you're right.  I think something else worth considering is Lou's system might have hampered the ends a lot.  There is an article today about how Hendrickson is learning the system, and reading between the lines has me thinking he is going to be thinking too much and not able to play to his strengths.  

(06-09-2021, 08:20 PM)Big_Ern Wrote: I hope you're right.  I think something else worth considering is Lou's system might have hampered the ends a lot.  There is an article today about how Hendrickson is learning the system, and reading between the lines has me thinking he is going to be thinking too much and not able to play to his strengths.  

Yes, love the players we brought in, don't care for Lou at all.

(06-10-2021, 01:07 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Yes, love the players we brought in, don't care for Lou at all.

I haven't cared much for Lou thus far, either.  However, what he want's to present on the field is drastically different that what the players he took over were used to playing.  Fast forward to now, he has the players in place that fit the roles he wants to present in a defensive front.  I am now expecting significant improvement on defense this season.  Call me crazy, but I like the philosophy of building strong up the middle.  We need the LBs to take a big step forward in order to make strong up the middle complete, but it can happen.  If we don't see at least a 10-12 team jump in overall defensive rankings this season, it's time to end the Lou Anarumo experiment.

(06-10-2021, 07:47 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I haven't cared much for Lou thus far, either.  However, what he want's to present on the field is drastically different that what the players he took over were used to playing.  Fast forward to now, he has the players in place that fit the roles he wants to present in a defensive front.  I am now expecting significant improvement on defense this season.  Call me crazy, but I like the philosophy of building strong up the middle.  We need the LBs to take a big step forward in order to make strong up the middle complete, but it can happen.  If we don't see at least a 10-12 team jump in overall defensive rankings this season, it's time to end the Lou Anarumo experiment.

No question the players brought in are great building pieces. Hope this rebuild leads to something special, could happen.

I just remember early last season when we were relatively healthy on Defense and we still sucked. That is what makes me leary 
about Lou the most. Cannot fault him as much when we have guys off the street playing the middle of our Defense.

You aren't crazy at all, you build your Defense from the middle out. I love the approach.

(06-11-2021, 12:53 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: No question the players brought in are great building pieces. Hope this rebuild leads to something special, could happen.

I just remember early last season when we were relatively healthy on Defense and we still sucked. That is what makes me leary 
about Lou the most. Cannot fault him as much when we have guys off the street playing the middle of our Defense.

You aren't crazy at all, you build your Defense from the middle out. I love the approach.

What has Lou proven to this point?  Nothing.  If you can't adapt as a coach to talent given to you then you have no business being a defensive coordinator.  Lou's been in over his head for 2 years so far.  If this team is still ranked in the 20-25 range by Game 6 of this season his ass needs fired and elevate Hobby or Golden DC until 2022.   The responsibility for that side of the ball still falls on Zac's shoulders so if Lou's fired then Zac should be gone at seasons end.  It's put up or shut up time for both those coaches.