(03-09-2021, 08:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So what about the 13 defenses that were worse against the pass than the Bengals.  Are you saying pressure on the passer had no effect against them either?

You keep trying to make an argument with nothing to prove it.  You use team stats to attack Lawson as an individual and then you don't even look at the team stats.  Instead you say that pressure did not effect opposing QBs because we ranked 19th in pass defense.  That makes no sense at all.  You act like it is impossible for our pass defense to be any worse yet 13 teams were worse than us.  There is no logic to back up your position.

Are we talking about Lawson still? You've attempted to spin me in circles. Although I can always regain course. I've never mentioned team stats. I don't think. 

I've mentioned opposing qb's not being bothered by his tap on the shoulder after the ball is released. Or even a knockdown on a 50 yard bomb every QB loves for a good highlight.

(03-09-2021, 08:22 PM)jj22 Wrote: Well that was anticlimactic as he didn't end with "pressure or hurries". 

Total pressures =sack+hurries+QB hits. This isn’t complicated.

(03-09-2021, 08:18 PM)Au165 Wrote: The NFL looks at pressures no matter what the fans think. It’s said constantly by coaches but here is a recent excerpt from a PFT article where Mike Smith talked about it.

As explained by Packers outside linebackers coach Mike Smith, what really measures a pass rusher’s worth is how many pressures he gets over the course of a season. Sacks represent such a small number of plays over the course of a year (about 7 percent of all dropbacks resulted in sacks last season) that they simply can’t measure everything a pass rusher does.

“I don’t know what happened. A long time ago somebody — probably when they started recording sacks — fans, coaches, whoever, defined a great pass rusher, or an effective pass rusher, off of sacks. That’s one of the stupidest things I’ve ever seen. You define a great pass-rusher by consistency,” Smith said.

All the analytics back up this take. PFF and football outsiders have done countless articles explaining the game theory behind it all. People who simply say “we saw it with our eyes” are ignorant to the totality that goes into playing defense.

Rep.

They have even shown that the guy who gets the sack is often no the first player to pressure the QB.  Often times the best pass rusher forces the QB to step up in the pocket or run from the pocket where he is eventually sacked by another player who did not get the initial pressure.

(03-09-2021, 08:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Rep.

They have even shown that the guy who gets the sack is often no the first player to pressure the QB.  Often times the best pass rusher forces the QB to step up in the pocket or run from the pocket where he is eventually sacked by another player who did not get the initial pressure.

For example, Bud Dupree got MOST of his sacks when the QB held the ball longer than 2.5 seconds meaning he benefited from the back end coverage more than his own skill.

(03-09-2021, 08:24 PM)jj22 Wrote:  I've never mentioned team stats. I don't think. 

You have never mentioned the Bengals pass defense in this discussion?

What are you willing to bet on that?

(03-09-2021, 08:24 PM)Au165 Wrote: Probably going to get 14-16 a year annual value and had 20 less pressures. Not a bad replacement but not the savings I think people around here are expecting.

Are we gaining sacks for 20 less completions? 

Not to dispute you Au, as this is a good point if we are looking to save, but that is my argument. 

(03-09-2021, 08:27 PM)Au165 Wrote: For example, Bud Dupree got MOST of his sacks when the QB held the ball longer than 2.5 seconds meaning he benefited from the back end coverage more than his own skill.

Bud Dupree never had more than 5.5 sacks in a season over his first four years.

Therefore he has no value as a pass rusher.

(03-09-2021, 08:25 PM)Au165 Wrote: Total pressures =sack+hurries+QB hits. This isn’t complicated.

His close mentioned none of that.

Anti-climatic given the debate. 

His big close. Consistency. Well thanks. I get more from people on this board, but they don't have the name recognition. So they don't get quoted as experts used to end debates.

(03-09-2021, 08:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You have never mentioned the Bengals pass defense in this discussion?

What are you willing to bet on that?

I've mentioned our opposing QB's not being effected by hurries. And pointed to yards, chunk plays, and passer ratings. But all dealing with Lawson and how much weight people put on his "hurries". 

We can talk pass defense if you want. Just not here. 

(03-09-2021, 08:28 PM)jj22 Wrote: Are we gaining sacks for 20 less completions? 

Not to dispute you Au, as this is a good point if we are looking to save, but that is my argument. 

As I’ve explained sacks are not indicative of that persons skill anymore than a QB getting credit for a 90 yard pop pass on a Jet Sweep for a TD. Simply being the last person to touch the QB when the play ends doesn’t mean it’s replica-table, hence why win rate is more indicative of skill.

All sacks aren’t the same is a one yard sack on 1st down more valuable than a pressure on 3rd and 10 that results in a throw away? The answer is no not really but one people here are arguing it does, but the game theory says no.

(03-09-2021, 08:29 PM)jj22 Wrote:  I get more from people on this board, but they don't have the name recognition. So they don't get quoted as experts used to end debates.

Steve Smith is an NFL coach.

The more I read these responses the more I agree with not franchising the two.

If you want to lock them both up long term if the money makes sense....im for it. But a one year franchise tag is really pointless. Like so many others have said, the defense last year sucked with these guys. They need more pieces. Bringing either one of these guys back next year isn't going to be some kind of key to putting this defense over the top.

(03-09-2021, 08:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Steve Smith is an NFL coach.

Mike Smith.

(03-09-2021, 08:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Bud Dupree never had more than 5.5 sacks in a season over his first four years.

Therefore he has no value as a pass rusher.

He had 6 in year 3

(03-09-2021, 08:31 PM)jj22 Wrote: I've mentioned our opposing QB's not being effected by hurries. And pointed to yards, chunk plays, and passer ratings.

And pointing to passer rating will show that opposing QBs are effected by pressure.

Every time you mention opposing QBs you claim that the were unstoppable against us.  That NOTHING effected their efficiency.  So if our defense never stopped any opposing QB why were we ranked ahead of almost half of the league (13 teams) teams in pass efficiency defense?

(03-09-2021, 07:51 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: 11.5 Sacks in 2012

3.5 sacks in 2013 with 5 TFLs

(03-09-2021, 08:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He had 6 in year 3

Well since I round up Lawson also had a season with 6 sacks.

I'm cool with not ponying up cash for Lawson. We can likely find a replacement value much cheaper.

Lets spend money on this o-line and worry about the defense next season.

I don't understand how this thread has devolved into a sacks vs. pressures debate.

The coversation intially centered around if Lawson was worth the tag amount or not (17 mil).

Show of hands, whether you like sacks, whether you like pressures, or whether you like something cool that maybe I don't even know about yet: Do you think Carl Lawson is worth 17 million dollars a year?

Ok, now we're on to the next question:

If you're one of those that don't think he's worth 17 million, but you do think that we have to keep him: How much is the maximum you'd be willing to pay to keep him? 15 mil max? 14, 13, 12, 11? (Set your own top end market value for him)

Fwiw, I don't think I've even seen anyone say they're opposed to keeping him, they just think he caps out at a certain price. I'd personally have no problem keeping him at something like: 3 years, 26 million dollars, with 10 mil or so guaranteed.

To each their own, but as much as you want to value pressures over sacks (perfectly reasonable), you still have to have an opinion on what you think we should be willing to pay him to stay.

(03-09-2021, 06:29 PM)J24 Wrote: For the billionth Time Sacks are an outdated way to judge pass rushers. 
Carl Lawson was top 10 in pressures last season, top 10 in sacks created per ESPN, 2nd in QB hits, and is the second rated edge in this free agency according to PFF. 
Carl Lawson was easily worth the franchise tag.

If sacks is an outdated way to judge then--and maybe they already do--someone needs to come up with a stat that tracks what pressures lead to incompletions or turnovers. What good is a ton of pressures if they just lead to a completion or touchdown later in the play? At least we know a sack means the down is over, lost yards and the next down.