(01-24-2018, 10:58 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I have already proven you are wrong with your claim that the Ravens game was the "only chance he had".  I have also shown that MJ was more productive on a "per-snap" basis than Willis.

If you want to re-establish your credibility then the burden is on you.  I have no reason to do any more analysis.

What color is the sky in your world?  You proved me wrong on a per-snap basis where one person had more than double the snaps played over the other and you completely ignored when those snaps occurred.  It DOES matter because the Bengals virtually never blitz on first down, or second for that matter.   There were simply not the pass-rushing opportunities for Willis.  Take Lawson for example.  When he came in, it wasn't to stuff the run.  Odd, you would leave his impact per-snap out of you calculations.  Because the same situation exists involving him:  MJ was useless at RDE in pass rushing situations but was trotted out there despite better options (Willis, Smith, and Lawson) existing.

Combine that with the fact that MJ is 30 and costs a lot of money that could be spent elsewhere.  He is a really good guy, but he is a below average RDE and in a 4-3 alignment, your RDE should be your best pass rusher.  He isn't close to Dunlap or Geno.  

Do you want to win or have a stable of nice, but ineffective guys.  If you want to win, you move on from MJ.  

(01-24-2018, 11:46 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: You proved me wrong on a per-snap basis where one person had more than double the snaps played over the other

Your right.  I should have mentioned that.  The fact that Willis played so many fewer snaps means he should have had fresher legs.  This makes MJ better production even more impressive

(01-24-2018, 11:46 AM)SHRacerX Wrote:   and you completely ignored when those snaps occurred.  It DOES matter because the Bengals virtually never blitz on first down, or second for that matter.   There were simply not the pass-rushing opportunities for Willis. 

That is why I included both "tackles" and "tackles for loss" in addition to sacks.  If Willis played on more running downs then that makes MJ's better per snap production in BOTH of those categories even more impressive.

(01-24-2018, 11:46 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: If you want to win, you move on from MJ.  

If you want to win you play the best, most productive players instead of fan favorites.

It might be time for MJ to be more of a back up going forward, but in 2017 he was a better, more productive  player than Willis.

(01-23-2018, 08:22 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: They have the last couple of years; his sack of Austin Davis was definitely off the blindside; I could have sworn that I've seen the highlight but can't find it anywhere

We sucked so bad last year i only got to see like 2 and a half games. But last year i got to watch a lot.

I don't know if i have ever seen Dunlap lined up on the QB's blindside...

Would like to see a highlight that shows different.

(01-24-2018, 01:40 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: We sucked so bad last year i only got to see like 2 and a half games. But last year i got to watch a lot.

I don't know if i have ever seen Dunlap lined up on the QB's blindside...

Would like to see a highlight that shows different.

My apologies, Nate; it was from the second Browns game in 2015!

I believe BengalsChris has the aftermath of that sack as his avatar.

(01-24-2018, 12:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Your right.  I should have mentioned that.  The fact that Willis played so many fewer snaps means he should have had fresher legs.  This makes MJ better production even more impressive



That is why I included both "tackles" and "tackles for loss" in addition to sacks.  If Willis played on more running downs then that makes MJ's better per snap production in BOTH of those categories even more impressive.




If you want to win you play the best, most productive players instead of fan favorites.

It might be time for MJ to be more of a back up going forward, but in 2017 he was a better, more productive  player than Willis.

I disagree with most of this. MJ plays too high and has no bend. He is a walking tree out there and for Willis to only be a
rookie and still even be in this conversation says a lot to me. MJ's best snaps last year were as a DT on passing downs
cause he was too quick for inside blockers.

Lawson and Willis are the future and i bet we see a huge jump especially from Willis in his sophomore year.

While i would not be against bringing MJ back as a backup, especially as a DT on passing downs he is not as good as
either Lawson, Willis or Chris Smith off the edge. Your numbers do not tell the whole story as usual.

Michael Johnson played very well this season and was even able to pressure the QB even though he was pulled in obvious passing situations. Chris Smith and Carl Lawson struggled against the run and while Willis looked better than those two he also had his ups and downs.

(01-24-2018, 01:44 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: My apologies, Nate; it was from the second Browns game in 2015!

I believe BengalsChris has the aftermath of that sack as his avatar.

Ahhh no wonder i missed it. Never see the Browns games hardly.

Was that when Manziel was QB for them? I actually might of seen that one.

Still cannot remember a blindside Dunlap sack. Remember Gilberry got atleast one on Manziel.

(01-24-2018, 01:51 PM)Synric Wrote: Michael Johnson played very well this season and was even able to pressure the QB even though he was pulled in obvious passing situations. Chris Smith and Carl Lawson struggled against the run and while Willis looked better than those two he also had his ups and downs.

Very well? If this is our definition of very well we are in trouble...

True about Chris Smith and Lawson struggling against the run though. This was always my concern with both of them.

Willis was a solid run stopper in college.

Dunlap has lined up on the left side or strongside about 99.9999 of the time since he has been a bengal. I don't ever recall him playing anywhere else. Mj unfortunately usually lines up at RE where he does absolutely nothing. Which is why the Bucs cut him after one year. Unlike the Bengals who will keep him until the very end of his contract. He did get a few sacks lined up inside on stunts which gave Fred enough ammo to announce him the next Reggie white

(01-24-2018, 01:54 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Ahhh no wonder i missed it. Never see the Browns games hardly.

Was that when Manziel was QB for them? I actually might of seen that one.

Still cannot remember a blindside Dunlap sack. Remember Gilberry got atleast one on Manziel.

It was a HUGE sack, where he beat Thomas/TE/Whomever was blocking him, came around and just engulfed Davis from behind and landed on him like he smothered him. Just awesome to see.

And yes, the first game against them that year, was the Thursday night game against Manziel. Another deliciously satisfying game.

(01-24-2018, 03:03 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: It was a HUGE sack, where he beat Thomas/TE/Whomever was blocking him, came around and just engulfed Davis from behind and landed on him like he smothered him. Just awesome to see.

And yes, the first game against them that year, was the Thursday night game against Manziel. Another deliciously satisfying game.

Sure would like to see more of that with Dunlap and all our Ends where they could thrive moving around.

Willis can rush from either side. MJ like has been mentioned was pretty good last year rushing from the inside on passing downs.

Lawson of course is a great pass rusher, just has to work on stopping the run and in coverage.

Man, the Browns are just terribly ran lol

Austin Davis actually looked good against us, then they benched him for Manziel who just got beaten down.

I bet if they just stuck with Kizer they might win a few games, but of course they won't.

(01-24-2018, 12:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Your right.  I should have mentioned that.  The fact that Willis played so many fewer snaps means he should have had fresher legs.  This makes MJ better production even more impressive

You lost me as soon as you used the work impressive to describe MJ.  He gets little to no pressure from RDE and you call him impressive.  Production in terms of a couple measures at RDE (which you still weren't able separate) on a per-snap basis where you don't factor in hurries or QB hits.  I also know Willis had a sack taken away from a penalty.  That one sack would change your ridiculous per-snap measure.  How does PFF rank MJ?  I bet near the bottom or 4-3 DEs...

We will just have to agree to disagree....and you wouldn't even probably understand the concept of getting your young guys opportunities.  Just let them sit and rot behind a zero talent, higher dollar player.  

(01-24-2018, 08:40 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: You lost me as soon as you used the work impressive to describe MJ.  He gets little to no pressure from RDE and you call him impressive.  Production in terms of a couple measures at RDE (which you still weren't able separate) on a per-snap basis where you don't factor in hurries or QB hits.  I also know Willis had a sack taken away from a penalty.  That one sack would change your ridiculous per-snap measure.  How does PFF rank MJ?  I bet near the bottom or 4-3 DEs...

We will just have to agree to disagree....and you wouldn't even probably understand the concept of getting your young guys opportunities.  Just let them sit and rot behind a zero talent, higher dollar player.  

Bottom line is MJ doesn't play up to the amount he gets paid.

I actually like MJ at DT.....I think he can prolong his career there, TBH.

Fred, do your numbers include his snaps at DT, or just DE?  If they include his reps at DT, that would certainly make a difference.

(01-25-2018, 02:47 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Bottom line is MJ doesn't play up to the amount he gets paid

No that is not the "bottom line".

Bottom line is I want us to play the guy who is most productive.  I don't care if he is overpaid because we still had plenty of cap room.

(01-25-2018, 04:41 PM)Wyche Wrote: I actually like MJ at DT.....I think he can prolong his career there, TBH.

Fred, do your numbers include his snaps at DT, or just DE?  If they include his reps at DT, that would certainly make a difference.

All snaps he played at any position on defense.  Does not include special teams.

(01-25-2018, 04:50 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No that is not the "bottom line".

Bottom line is I want us to play the guy who is most productive.  I don't care if he is overpaid because we still had plenty of cap room.

I want that too, you will see who is the most productive this year and it will not be MJ.

(01-25-2018, 04:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: All snaps he played at any position on defense.  Does not include special teams.

Gotcha.....from watching the games, it looked to me like MJ was more productive from the DT spot.  He had one real nice game there where he played quite a few snaps inside.....I think the Bears game, maybe?  It would be interesting to be able to breakdown the numbers from each position.

(01-25-2018, 05:16 PM)Wyche Wrote: Gotcha.....from watching the games, it looked to me like MJ was more productive from the DT spot.  He had one real nice game there where he played quite a few snaps inside.....I think the Bears game, maybe?  It would be interesting to be able to breakdown the numbers from each position.

Sure did look like that to me and pretty much everyone else as well about MJ at DT on passing downs.

This is where he looked good.

Thought they should of used him more in this way and more of Lawson, Willis or Chris Smith on the edge on passing downs.

And yes, that would be interesting to break down those numbers...