Larry O still a free agent - Fails physical

[leonardfan40]

(06-21-2022, 07:12 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: New it would happen as soon as I saw he was taking the visit. I hate that we didn't re-sign him as soon as FA started.

We got BJ cheaper than Larry’s original contract with the bears and BJ was better than Larry last season. I’ll take that any day of the week. I wanted Hill over Ogunjobi all along. Larry is solid but for every splash play he makes he gives up a big hole on another play. BJ seemed to give us just as much pass rush while being much better against the run. If I’m giving out a big contract I want it to be for a well rounded and consistent player like Hill was for us. Plus he up’d his game even more in the playoffs.

[BFritz21]

(06-21-2022, 08:18 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: We got BJ cheaper than Larry’s original contract with the bears and BJ was better than Larry last season. I’ll take that any day of the week. I wanted Hill over Ogunjobi all along. Larry is solid but for every splash play he makes he gives up a big hole on another play. BJ seemed to give us just as much pass rush while being much better against the run. If I’m giving out a big contract I want it to be for a well rounded and consistent player like Hill was for us. Plus he up’d his game even more in the playoffs.

Good call.

We have guys that play consistent on defense and just can't give up the big play, which teams will need big plays to put up enough points to beat us. Can't give up the big plays in today's NFL

Stopping the run is also big because a way to keep up with high scoring teams is to run the ball and control the clock/game.

[wanga]

Makes me want to vomit. Was hoping for Larry to come back again.

[Joelist]

I wish him well - just not against us.

[XenoMorph]

Ravens in 2023-24 season? you know to complete the tour

[fredtoast]

(06-21-2022, 08:18 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: We got BJ cheaper than Larry’s original contract with the bears and BJ was better than Larry last season. I’ll take that any day of the week. I wanted Hill over Ogunjobi all along. Larry is solid but for every splash play he makes he gives up a big hole on another play. BJ seemed to give us just as much pass rush while being much better against the run. If I’m giving out a big contract I want it to be for a well rounded and consistent player like Hill was for us. Plus he up’d his game even more in the playoffs.

Hill is not as good as Ogunjobi.  Larry is fine against the run.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(06-22-2022, 09:15 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Hill is not as good as Ogunjobi.  Larry is fine against the run.

[leonardfan40]

(06-22-2022, 09:15 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Hill is not as good as Ogunjobi.  Larry is fine against the run.

BJ played 47% (502 snaps) of our defensive snaps, Larry played 68% (724). So Larry played 44% more snaps than BJ but they had pretty similar numbers.

BJ had 5.5 sacks, 50 COMB, 29 SOLO, 6 TFL and 12 qb hits
Larry had 7 sacks, 49 comb, 29 solo, 12 TFL and 16 qb hits

If BJ’s numbers kept to that pace for 724 snaps he would have had 8 sacks, 72 comb, 42 solo, 8.6 TFL, and 17 qb hits.

PFF is far from perfect as we know but it can be useful comparing players at the same position. Larry had a score of 50.3 last year. BJ was 70.4.

It’s also worth noting how well our defense played AFTER Larry went down. To me, they looked like they played their best ball when BJ was getting more snaps after Larry went down.

I’m not trashing Larry, but BJ was better last year. Larry had some very nice splash plays but had a lot of bad ones too. I would have loved to have Larry back at a reasonable price but only if he was a rotational backup to BJ this year instead of the other way around. The bengals picked the right guy to keep.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-22-2022, 12:30 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: BJ played 47% (502 snaps) of our defensive snaps, Larry played 68% (724). So Larry played 44% more snaps than BJ but they had pretty similar numbers.

BJ had 5.5 sacks, 50 COMB, 29 SOLO, 6 TFL and 12 qb hits
Larry had 7 sacks, 49 comb, 29 solo, 12 TFL and 16 qb hits

If BJ’s numbers kept to that pace for 724 snaps he would have had 8 sacks, 72 comb, 42 solo, 8.6 TFL, and 17 qb hits.

PFF is far from perfect as we know but it can be useful comparing players at the same position. Larry had a score of 50.3 last year. BJ was 70.4.

It’s also worth noting how well our defense played AFTER Larry went down. To me, they looked like they played their best ball when BJ was getting more snaps after Larry went down.

I’m not trashing Larry, but BJ was better last year. Larry had some very nice splash plays but had a lot of bad ones too. I would have loved to have Larry back at a reasonable price but only if he was a rotational backup to BJ this year instead of the other way around. The bengals picked the right guy to keep.

Thanks for the statistical analysis.  It supports my "eyeball test" results.  

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(06-21-2022, 08:16 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Or you could look at it the other way - in that the Bengals know Ogunjobi’s weaknesses. Which Mixon should be able to exploit.

This is the way I look at it. Plus our new OL are very good run blockers and that IS Ogunjobi's weakness.

He is a very good pass rusher and makes some TFL early in games in stopping the run but he seems to get worn out as the
game goes on especially when trying to stop the run. BJ Hill is a much better run stopper and doesn't get worn out as easily.

Larry O is the better pass rusher though.

We will see how he plays with that injury. He is the enemy now so I honestly have to root against him. Just the way it goes.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(06-22-2022, 12:30 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: BJ played 47% (502 snaps) of our defensive snaps, Larry played 68% (724). So Larry played 44% more snaps than BJ but they had pretty similar numbers.

BJ had 5.5 sacks, 50 COMB, 29 SOLO, 6 TFL and 12 qb hits
Larry had 7 sacks, 49 comb, 29 solo, 12 TFL and 16 qb hits

If BJ’s numbers kept to that pace for 724 snaps he would have had 8 sacks, 72 comb, 42 solo, 8.6 TFL, and 17 qb hits.

PFF is far from perfect as we know but it can be useful comparing players at the same position. Larry had a score of 50.3 last year. BJ was 70.4.

It’s also worth noting how well our defense played AFTER Larry went down. To me, they looked like they played their best ball when BJ was getting more snaps after Larry went down.

I’m not trashing Larry, but BJ was better last year. Larry had some very nice splash plays but had a lot of bad ones too. I would have loved to have Larry back at a reasonable price but only if he was a rotational backup to BJ this year instead of the other way around. The bengals picked the right guy to keep.

Great post brother. Same things I saw from both players. I thought Ogunjobi was the better pass rusher before this but 
even that is questionable after seeing all of this.

[masonbengals fan]

Hate to see him sign with the Steelers.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-22-2022, 12:30 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: BJ played 47% (502 snaps) of our defensive snaps, Larry played 68% (724). So Larry played 44% more snaps than BJ but they had pretty similar numbers.

BJ had 5.5 sacks, 50 COMB, 29 SOLO, 6 TFL and 12 qb hits
Larry had 7 sacks, 49 comb, 29 solo, 12 TFL and 16 qb hits

If BJ’s numbers kept to that pace for 724 snaps he would have had 8 sacks, 72 comb, 42 solo, 8.6 TFL, and 17 qb hits.

PFF is far from perfect as we know but it can be useful comparing players at the same position. Larry had a score of 50.3 last year. BJ was 70.4.

It’s also worth noting how well our defense played AFTER Larry went down. To me, they looked like they played their best ball when BJ was getting more snaps after Larry went down.

I’m not trashing Larry, but BJ was better last year. Larry had some very nice splash plays but had a lot of bad ones too. I would have loved to have Larry back at a reasonable price but only if he was a rotational backup to BJ this year instead of the other way around. The bengals picked the right guy to keep.

Carl Lawson had 8.5 sacks on 477 defensive snaps as a part time player rookie. He has never reached that total again.
Carlos Dunlap had 9.5 sacks on 587 defensive snaps as a part time player rookie. He only reached that total again once in 11 years.

Wallace Gilberry had 6.5 sacks on 309 defensive snaps in 2012 and 7.5 sacks on 509 defensive snaps in 2013, both as a rotational situational pass rusher. As a full time starter in 2014 he had 1.5 sacks on 826 defensive snaps.

Trey Hendrickson had 13.5 sacks, 12 TFL, 25 QB Hits on 558 snaps in 2020 as a rotational part time starter. 
Trey Hendrickson had 14.0 sacks, 12 TFL, 27 QB Hits on 717 snaps in 2021 as a full time starter.

You can't just project guys like that. More snaps don't automatically mean you get more pass rushing stats. It means you have less rest, more wear and tear, guys get to see your moves more, you have to play the run more, you have to play in non-pass-rushing-ideal downs and situations more.

[leonardfan40]

(06-22-2022, 03:31 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Carl Lawson had 8.5 sacks on 477 defensive snaps as a part time player rookie. He has never reached that total again.
Carlos Dunlap had 9.5 sacks on 587 defensive snaps as a part time player rookie. He only reached that total again once in 11 years.

Wallace Gilberry had 6.5 sacks on 309 defensive snaps in 2012 and 7.5 sacks on 509 defensive snaps in 2013, both as a rotational situational pass rusher. As a full time starter in 2014 he had 1.5 sacks on 826 defensive snaps.

Trey Hendrickson had 13.5 sacks, 12 TFL, 25 QB Hits on 558 snaps in 2020 as a rotational part time starter. 
Trey Hendrickson had 14.0 sacks, 12 TFL, 27 QB Hits on 717 snaps in 2021 as a full time starter.

You can't just project guys like that. More snaps don't automatically mean you get more pass rushing stats. It means you have less rest, more wear and tear, guys get to see your moves more, you have to play the run more, you have to play in non-pass-rushing-ideal downs and situations more.

That’s why I said “if”, there is no guarantee he would keep that pace. There’s also no guarantee he wouldn’t perform better with more snaps and more time to learn the opposing players/plays/etc either.

That said he played very well in the playoffs. And for what it’s worth his pff rating is much higher as well. He nearly matched almost all of Larry’s stats while playing a decent amount less than him so projecting him going from 47% of snaps to 68% isn’t the same as a guy who played ~25% one year then was expected to be a 3 down guy the next season. It’s not like he was purely a spot player last year. He played almost 50% of the snaps.

[fredtoast]

(06-22-2022, 03:31 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Carl Lawson had 8.5 sacks on 477 defensive snaps as a part time player rookie. He has never reached that total again.
Carlos Dunlap had 9.5 sacks on 587 defensive snaps as a part time player rookie. He only reached that total again once in 11 years.

Wallace Gilberry had 6.5 sacks on 309 defensive snaps in 2012 and 7.5 sacks on 509 defensive snaps in 2013, both as a rotational situational pass rusher. As a full time starter in 2014 he had 1.5 sacks on 826 defensive snaps.

Trey Hendrickson had 13.5 sacks, 12 TFL, 25 QB Hits on 558 snaps in 2020 as a rotational part time starter. 
Trey Hendrickson had 14.0 sacks, 12 TFL, 27 QB Hits on 717 snaps in 2021 as a full time starter.

You can't just project guys like that. More snaps don't automatically mean you get more pass rushing stats. It means you have less rest, more wear and tear, guys get to see your moves more, you have to play the run more, you have to play in non-pass-rushing-ideal downs and situations more.

Part time players are often pass rush specialists.  So they play a lot more on passing downs.  As they become more full time players they often do not really increase the number of passing downs they play.  Most of the extra snaps they are playing are against the run.

It also works the same way with NTs that just play mostly un running downs.  D-linemen don't usually get a tackle on a pass play unless it is a sack.  So NTs that just play mostly running downs will have a higher ratio of tackles to snaps played.

PFF subscribers can tell us exactly how many of Hill's and Ogunjobi's snaps were against runs and how many against passes.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-23-2022, 12:50 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Part time players are often pass rush specialists.  So they play a lot more on passing downs.  As they become more full time players they often do not really increase the number of passing downs they play.  Most of the extra snaps they are playing are against the run.

It also works the same way with NTs that just play mostly un running downs.  D-linemen don't usually get a tackle on a pass play unless it is a sack.  So NTs that just play mostly running downs will have a higher ratio of tackles to snaps played.

PFF subscribers can tell us exactly how many of Hill's and Ogunjobi's snaps were against runs and how many against passes.

I am not positive, but I think that they can do better than that.  I think I've seen people post stats like "pass rush win rate" or some such.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(06-22-2022, 06:12 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: That’s why I said “if”, there is no guarantee he would keep that pace. There’s also no guarantee he wouldn’t perform better with more snaps and more time to learn the opposing players/plays/etc either.

That said he played very well in the playoffs. And for what it’s worth his pff rating is much higher as well. He nearly matched almost all of Larry’s stats while playing a decent amount less than him so projecting him going from 47% of snaps to 68% isn’t the same as a guy who played ~25% one year then was expected to be a 3 down guy the next season. It’s not like he was purely a spot player last year. He played almost 50% of the snaps.

BJ Hill just played better and better as the year went on. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that he blows Larry's numbers 
away. As you say, in the Playoffs he was fantastic and he is a much better run stopper than Larry even if Fred doesn't believe it.

I don't put all my stock in PFF but they certainly say BJ was the much better player as you say.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-23-2022, 01:35 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I am not positive, but I think that they can do better than that.  I think I've seen people post stats like "pass rush win rate" or some such.

I'm not so sure I care for that. You can do absolutely nothing to affect the play and still have a "win". That's how we had a lot of people in love with Carl Lawson. Same as how in another thread someone mentioned PFF WAR and I immediately didn't care. MLB's WAR is already iffy enough and that's a game where you have blatantly clear results (hit/strikeout/catch/etc) for the overwhelming majority of the plays and 162 games to actually determine a big enough sample size on a player's contribution. The thought of trying to divvy up 4-12 wins through 60+ players (with injuries) getting minute fractions of a win off subjective non-stats like win rates... eh.

Realize I ranted on a bit of a tangent there, but what I am trying to say is I think there's some PFF stats that are much more valuable for a comparison tool than others. Generally the more subjective and not based in hard statistical results, the less useful.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

Ogunjobi signed for 1yr up to $8m if incentives were hit. There's no reason the Bengals shouldn't have reached out and offered that.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(06-23-2022, 02:05 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I'm not so sure I care for that. You can do absolutely nothing to affect the play and still have a "win". That's how we had a lot of people in love with Carl Lawson. Same as how in another thread someone mentioned PFF WAR and I immediately didn't care. MLB's WAR is already iffy enough and that's a game where you have blatantly clear results (hit/strikeout/catch/etc) for the overwhelming majority of the plays and 162 games to actually determine a big enough sample size on a player's contribution. The thought of trying to divvy up 4-12 wins through 60+ players (with injuries) getting minute fractions of a win off subjective non-stats like win rates... eh.

Realize I ranted on a bit of a tangent there, but what I am trying to say is I think there's some PFF stats that are much more valuable for a comparison tool than others. Generally the more subjective and not based in hard statistical results, the less useful.

Well said. Completely agree, some PFF stats are much more valuable than others.