03-16-2021, 12:06 PM
(03-16-2021, 12:00 PM)C0de_M0nkey Wrote: How many of Carl Lawson's sacks were the result of him beating his man? I'm pretty sure it's less than 6.5 since he only had 5.5 sacks to begin with. It doesn't matter if we spent $15 million on 6-8 sack Henderson instead of 6-8 sack Lawson. I'm glad the franchise strategically attempted to save money on Lawson instead of blindly throwing $15 million at him. It was a low risk, high reward move since we had a backup plan anyways.
Of course it matters, when you're throwing that much money at someone.
You can't call it low risk, high reward when the pieces won't be in place for him to produce the same here. That's exactly where context and study come into play. A raw stat isn't always indicative of a players ability.
If you're fine just throwing money at a guy and then waiting to see how he plays, fine. I'm not. I want the team to be smarter than that.
Just don't complain when he has a Sam Hubbard type of year next season.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
