Carl Lawson posts cryptic tweet

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-03-2021, 11:27 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I just have the feeling that this is FIP/xFIP vs ERA/ERA+/WHIP all over again, making Carl Lawson be Homer Bailey.

Nah, it is just he is our best pass rusher on a team desperately in need of a pass rush...

(03-04-2021, 01:35 PM)Whatever Wrote: My big concern is injuries.  He had major knee and hip injuries in college.  He came in as a rookie and had no problem finishing plays and getting sacks.  He tore his other ACL in year 2 and in the two years since, he can generate pressure, but can't finish.  It begs the question as to if another major injury will make him lose another step and make him totally ineffective as a pass rusher.  

Ultimately, I think this is another case of a good player on a bad team being pumped up to be better than he actually is.

Yes, if I have a concern with Lawson it is injuries, always has been.

This might be the main reason why I would rather go out and get a couple other Ends without this concern.

Injuries are always a concern though, just a little extra with Lawson.

[fredtoast]

(03-03-2021, 11:27 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I just have the feeling that this is FIP/xFIP vs ERA/ERA+/WHIP all over again, making Carl Lawson be Homer Bailey.

The problem with Homer Bailey was not the stats they used to measure his performance.  The two seasons before the contract he threw over 400 innings and was top 25 in pretty much every stat (ERA, WHIP, Opponent batting average).  Since he was still just 28 and healthy there was no reason not to pay him like a #1 starter.

The problem with Homer Bailey was that he developed some injury issues in 2014 and fell off a cliff in production.

And, again, anyone who believes that it is impossible to put pressure on a QB and effect his production without actually sacking him does not know much about football.  These are the type of people who would judge Patrick Peterson based just on his interception numbers.

[Bilbo Saggins]

Pressures are good, they show that the DE is likely doing a good job of getting off of blocks. I think that  what's difficult for fans is that we don't have all of the pressure data in front of us. The very definition of a pressure can be subjective. We aren't sure if there were any pressures yielded by way of the OT knowing that the play was a bubble screen to the other side of the field and only blocking for a moment, for instance. We don't know the average yards per play or completion percentage(vs. neutral) on plays where Lawson is credited for a pressure. If you go back and look at those pressures and you see a bunch of interceptions or forced fumbles, but no sacks, that becomes a very compelling argument. If you see a bunch of quick dink and dunk passes where the OT just stops blocking, that too could be a compelling argument.

The problem is that we just can't see it. A sack is easy to see and it looks nice on a highlight reel. I'm sure that an NFL team could do very thorough, deep dive analysis. 

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-05-2021, 09:12 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: Pressures are good, they show that the DE is likely doing a good job of getting off of blocks. I think that  what's difficult for fans is that we don't have all of the pressure data in front of us. The very definition of a pressure can be subjective. We aren't sure if there were any pressures yielded by way of the OT knowing that the play was a bubble screen to the other side of the field and only blocking for a moment, for instance. We don't know the average yards per play or completion percentage(vs. neutral) on plays where Lawson is credited for a pressure. If you go back and look at those pressures and you see a bunch of interceptions or forced fumbles, but no sacks, that becomes a very compelling argument. If you see a bunch of quick dink and dunk passes where the OT just stops blocking, that too could be a compelling argument.

The problem is that we just can't see it. A sack is easy to see and it looks nice on a highlight reel. I'm sure that an NFL team could do very thorough, deep dive analysis. 

Well I remember at least one game where Lawson had like 3 pressures in a row when the QB was passing.

The LT just couldn't block him.

It wasn't the play calls, Lawson was just beating his man, I watched him specifically and he was just dominating.

I don't even know if he got a sack that day, but it certainly influenced the QB and Offense significantly.

[SunsetBengal]

(03-04-2021, 12:54 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: I don't believe stats are ever the know all tell all. You mention baseball stats/analytics LL and that's always been my go to example to illustrate my point. 

You look at a baseball game stat sheet and player A went 3 for 4 with 2 RBI's. Sweet he had a good game really tattooing the ball right ? But in reality the 1st hit was a swinging bunt down the 3rd base line against the shift. The 2nd hit was a routine grounder to short that the SS booted and even the announcers were surprised they gave him a hit. The 3rd was a little nubber off the top of the bat pop up that just barely made it over the 2nd basemans glove and there were two outs and the base runners took off on contact giving the 2 RBI's.

That's I believe what AU is saying ?

Am I saying Lawson is top tier and needs paid top money ? NO But if they can bring him back for reasonable money that isn't like top 3-5 range I wouldn't be upset. 

But there's the problem huh ? Some team is about always willing to overpay in free agency.

I hear what you're saying with the baseball analogy, but at the same time, the hitter was savvy enough to simply put the ball in play when he needed to.  Game IQ is as important to any sport as physical abilities are. 

What I'm saying, and how I feel it applies to a guy like Lawson is;  Much ado was made about him being told to not use all of his moves.  While he could likely utilize every tool in his box to defeat the Tackle every down, and go for a "kill shot".  However, sometimes in doing so, he leaves an outlet lane wide open.  By holding back, he can effectively rush the passer by defeating the Tackle, and still maintain his position, thus still defending his lane.

It's still a "win" because Lawson was able to defeat the Tackle, and force the QB to alter his plans, yet still maintain his positional integrity to the defensive unit.

[Whatever]

(03-05-2021, 09:12 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: Pressures are good, they show that the DE is likely doing a good job of getting off of blocks. I think that  what's difficult for fans is that we don't have all of the pressure data in front of us. The very definition of a pressure can be subjective. We aren't sure if there were any pressures yielded by way of the OT knowing that the play was a bubble screen to the other side of the field and only blocking for a moment, for instance. We don't know the average yards per play or completion percentage(vs. neutral) on plays where Lawson is credited for a pressure. If you go back and look at those pressures and you see a bunch of interceptions or forced fumbles, but no sacks, that becomes a very compelling argument. If you see a bunch of quick dink and dunk passes where the OT just stops blocking, that too could be a compelling argument.

The problem is that we just can't see it. A sack is easy to see and it looks nice on a highlight reel. I'm sure that an NFL team could do very thorough, deep dive analysis. 

The big difference between the two is a sack is a definitive loss of yardage and a waste of a down for the offense.  A Hurry/Pressure/Hit is a possible waste of a down.  The QB could always stare down the gun barrel and deliver a strike or move off his spot and complete the pass anyways.  A lot of that depends on the QB and the quality of his offensive weapons.  Some QB's fold under pressure while we've all watched Ben Roethlisberger kill us with the scramble drill for years.  

Thing with Lawson is, Spotrac credits him with an average of 1.57 Hurries/game over the last 2 years.  Profootball Reference credits him with 32 QB Hits last year, which is two per game.  So, on average, 1.5-2 throws a game he's affecting with pressure.  

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-06-2021, 07:22 PM)Whatever Wrote: The big difference between the two is a sack is a definitive loss of yardage and a waste of a down for the offense.  A Hurry/Pressure/Hit is a possible waste of a down.  The QB could always stare down the gun barrel and deliver a strike or move off his spot and complete the pass anyways.  A lot of that depends on the QB and the quality of his offensive weapons.  Some QB's fold under pressure while we've all watched Ben Roethlisberger kill us with the scramble drill for years.  

Thing with Lawson is, Spotrac credits him with an average of 1.57 Hurries/game over the last 2 years.  Profootball Reference credits him with 32 QB Hits last year, which is two per game.  So, on average, 1.5-2 throws a game he's affecting with pressure.  

Pressures also can lead to Turnovers which are much better than Sacks...

[Whatever]

(03-07-2021, 04:23 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Pressures also can lead to Turnovers which are much better than Sacks...

True, but a strip sack counts as a sack and can also lead to a turnover.  

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-07-2021, 06:16 PM)Whatever Wrote: True, but a strip sack counts as a sack and can also lead to a turnover.  

Strip sacks are what you want as a Defender no doubt.

[*pally*]

____ 2021 pic.twitter.com/2K1QkvPbPw

— carl lawson (@carllawson55) March 9, 2021

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-09-2021, 07:21 PM)pally Wrote:

____ 2021 pic.twitter.com/2K1QkvPbPw

— carl lawson (@carllawson55) March 9, 2021

Badazz.

[Bengal Dude]

I'm guessing the Bengals will let Lawson hit FA and see what he can get, then probably offer to match the offer as long as it isn't some insane deal.

[phil413]

(03-10-2021, 02:15 AM)Bengal Dude Wrote: I'm guessing the Bengals will let Lawson hit FA and see what he can get, then probably offer to umatch the offer as long as it isn't some insane deal.

If that's the case why not transition tag him rather than risk losing him?

[Bengal Dude]

(03-10-2021, 02:31 AM)phil413 Wrote: If that's the case why not transition tag him rather than risk losing him?

While poison pills are no longer allowed in contracts, teams can still structure deals to hinder the matching team. Most teams hate the transition tag for that purpose alone.

[Shake n Blake]

(03-05-2021, 09:12 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: Pressures are good, they show that the DE is likely doing a good job of getting off of blocks. I think that  what's difficult for fans is that we don't have all of the pressure data in front of us. The very definition of a pressure can be subjective. We aren't sure if there were any pressures yielded by way of the OT knowing that the play was a bubble screen to the other side of the field and only blocking for a moment, for instance. We don't know the average yards per play or completion percentage(vs. neutral) on plays where Lawson is credited for a pressure. If you go back and look at those pressures and you see a bunch of interceptions or forced fumbles, but no sacks, that becomes a very compelling argument. If you see a bunch of quick dink and dunk passes where the OT just stops blocking, that too could be a compelling argument.

The problem is that we just can't see it. A sack is easy to see and it looks nice on a highlight reel. I'm sure that an NFL team could do very thorough, deep dive analysis. 

Right on. I'm not saying I'm right on this, but my view is that our defense stunk even with those pressures, so how impactful were they, really?

We were 27th in forced turnovers...so not forcing many turnovers.
22nd in passer rating allowed.
19th in YPA allowed, so we weren't forcing quick throws to offset pressure.
Dead last in sacks, so he wasn't getting many "assist" sacks.

I know he's only one guy, and much of it can be chalked up to scheme and other players...but we aren't changing coaches and the team will be mostly the same around Lawson. So why pay him massive money if this is what we have to look forward to? Not to mention his past injuries.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-11-2021, 04:25 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Right on. I'm not saying I'm right on this, but my view is that our defense stunk even with those pressures, so how impactful were they, really?

We were tied for 18th in INT's and 25th in fumble recoveries...so not forcing many turnovers.
22nd in passer rating allowed.
19th in YPA allowed, so we weren't forcing quick throws to offset pressure.
Dead last in sacks, so he wasn't getting many "assist" sacks.

I know he's only one guy, and much of it can be chalked up to scheme and other players...but we aren't changing coaches and the team will be mostly the same around Lawson. So why pay him massive money if this is what we have to look forward to? Not to mention his past injuries.

I mean, it wasn't Lawson's fault that we were bad though either.

But yeah, I am leaning to letting Lawson go and bringing in some cheaper Ends now.

Hendrichson and Solomon Thomas would be awesome rather then tagging or paying Lawson mega bucks.

[Shake n Blake]

(03-11-2021, 04:28 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I mean, it wasn't Lawson's fault that we were bad though either.

But yeah, I am leaning to letting Lawson go and bringing in some cheaper Ends now.

Hendrichson and Solomon Thomas would be awesome rather then tagging or paying Lawson mega bucks.

I'm not saying it's his fault. I'm saying not much is going to change around Lawson, and it's been proven that he's not impactful enough to make our pass rush good enough on his own. So why pay him massive ($15+ million per) money if last year is the type of results we'll see from this defense?

So we pretty much agree on letting him walk and looking elsewhere.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-11-2021, 04:31 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I'm not saying it's his fault. I'm saying not much is going to change around Lawson, and it's been proven that he's not impactful enough to make our pass rush good enough on his own. So why pay him massive ($15+ million per) money if last year is the type of results we'll see from this defense?

So we pretty much agree on letting him walk and looking elsewhere.

Yes, as usual we agree Shake. We need to spread that money around and get multiple pass rushers and O-lineman. And we can
do it with our cap space and needing to cut Geno and company's salaries. Lawson will get paid big and maybe even overpaid for
what he brings to the table. He gets lots of pressures which is great but I would also like an End that can finish and get the sacks
too like Hendrichson. Thomas should be cheap as he has been labeled a bust by some but he is young.

[Shake n Blake]

(03-11-2021, 04:43 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Yes, as usual we agree Shake. We need to spread that money around and get multiple pass rushers and O-lineman. And we can
do it with our cap space and needing to cut Geno and company's salaries. Lawson will get paid big and maybe even overpaid for
what he brings to the table. He gets lots of pressures which is great but I would also like an End that can finish and get the sacks
too like Hendrichson. Thomas should be cheap as he has been labeled a bust by some but he is young.

It's odd to say we should let a talented young player walk, but you have to consider all factors. We should just hit the reset button and try to fix the pass rush with more draft picks and invest our money in the o-line and maybe a cheaper FA pass rusher.

Of course, this all changes depending on how much Lawson can get on the open market. If we can get him at closer to $8-10 million per, that'd be far easier to stomach.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-11-2021, 04:51 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: It's odd to say we should let a talented young player walk, but you have to consider all factors. We should just hit the reset button and try to fix the pass rush with more draft picks and invest our money in the o-line and maybe a cheaper FA pass rusher.

Of course, this all changes depending on how much Lawson can get on the open market. If we can get him at closer to $8-10 million per, that'd be far easier to stomach.

We can pay more guys and get better than just sticking with a player and only bringing in a couple. Rather than paying Lawson
and WJ3 we could pay say Sheldon Rankins, Hendrichson and Bradley Roby on D. We would still have enough money to add 
quality OL like Zeitler and Reiff. One thing to note is that this Draft is deep at OT, not with Pass Rushers. 

So getting a couple good Pass Rushers might be the way to go more so than an OT.