Would You Take a Drafted Upgrade Over Bart Scott?

[LWC611]

I like Scott, but he's overrated. I think we could easily draft an even more consistent tackler to put next to Harris. In other words I'd like another Harris type player, one who leads by example and talks on the field. I know that all the "Bart is the qb of the defense" guys will pop up now on this thread, but I always think about what we could've had if Vilma and Harris were our two beasts in the middle. Bart's not a bad player, I just think he's Rex's buddy and attitude on the field. I'm always thinking of ways to better our defense, and honestly, if we had a younger tackling machine out there ala Harris wow we'd be even better. Yes I know Scott had 100 tckls last year and blah blah whatever...He just makes too many bone headed plays when his mouth gets in his way come playoff time.

I can appreciate the point, but wouldn't this have made for a better discussion if posted before the draft. At this point even if you are right, (I do not think I agree with you because Scott is a really good player in the Jets scheme) we are not able to draft anyone to replace him. So let's support the players on the squad....

[ZachEY]

Vilma actually led the team in tackles in his last year with the Jets, which was in a 3-4 defense......So I am not sure how you are defining good.....

Why would having the most tackles be a consideration for a good player?

[bitonti]

Either way, I dont see how this addresses my point. Scott is only 31, he takes unbelievable care of his body and no injury is significant if you can play through it and never miss time. Its not like he's had major surgeries, just some bumps and bruises that every NFL player endures.

My point was adressing Bit who was acting like he's wearing down because of age when he had his best season ever last year. Bart Scott, has plenty of Football left in him because players play further into their 30's then ever before, he takes great care of his body and he's really only played 5/6 season in the NFL.

And you both used taking on Guards as some type of barometer to measure how long someone can last in the NFL....dont see how that matters at all. JT takes on tackles and is playing into his late 30's, Trevor Pryce takes on both, Vrabel, Ellis...that doesnt mean anything, especially considering that Oline is a position that you can play late into your 30's as well.

If i had to guess I'd say Bart Scott has probably 2 good years left. He's gonna go over a hill at some point and it's gonna be a steep decline. It's not fair to compare Bart Scott to an OL or DL because he gives up 70 pounds to OL in every collision. the NFL body is like a tube of toothpaste, and the toothpaste is the damage you can take, eventually it will be empty. and you can't get the paste back in the tube. Guys like Farrior and Ray Lewis (besides being rare athletes, worthy of 1st round picks) tend to run around blocks, Bart Scott runs through them and there's a difference in terms of longevity. If Bart Scott is still playing NFL football when he's 35 I'd be shocked.

and let me put it another way an OL or DL might play well into their thirties, they also don't start when they are rookies (rarely). it's a grown man's position. RB and LB can often fly right out of the gate and even tho Bart Scott wasn't a starter he was dealing big hits on ST for a while. It's not fair to compare Wayne Hunter who hasn't even had a starting gig until now and he's 30 to Bart Scott type of ILB.

[Klecko73isGod]

Vilma actually led the team in tackles in his last year with the Jets, which was in a 3-4 defense......So I am not sure how you are defining good.....

Vilma only played 7 games his last year with the Jets and only recorded 43 tackles and looked lost in the 3-4. That same year, David Harris replaced him as starter and recorded 127 tackles to lead the team.

[LWC611]

Vilma only played 7 games his last year with the Jets and only recorded 43 tackles and looked lost in the 3-4. That same year, David Harris replaced him as starter and recorded 127 tackles to lead the team.

Then I believe it was the year before. Thanks for the correction.

[Klecko73isGod]

Then I believe it was the year before. Thanks for the correction.

Sure, he led the team in tackles in '06 but the vast majority of them were 6-8 yards past the line of scrimmage. He wasn't exactly impressive.

[JiFtheOracle]

I don't think that Scott is going to fall off a cliff, but in the NFL whenever a player gets into his 30s you have to start looking into replacement. I do think there is a huge difference between what Scott does and what Jason Taylor does. Scott is taking on pulling guards and FBs. Guys that have a head of steam and it makes for a huge collision. A speed rusher going around the edge or a DE taking on their man at the LOS need more strength, but the blast isn't quite the same. The closest might be trying to set the edge, but I don't think it's quite the same shot. Think of it this way, why do you remember more bit hits by safeties than Dlineman?

No its not, but JT has twice as much wear and tear and for as many T as he runs around, he bangs with them too. Hell, he aint running around anyone anymore....been that way for a while...and he's still playing.

Just dont think it matters as much as you guys are making it out. The flip side of this - why do FB's last forever? Big impact at full speed.

If i had to guess I'd say Bart Scott has probably 2 good years left. He's gonna go over a hill at some point and it's gonna be a steep decline. It's not fair to compare Bart Scott to an OL or DL because he gives up 70 pounds to OL in every collision. the NFL body is like a tube of toothpaste, and the toothpaste is the damage you can take, eventually it will be empty. and you can't get the paste back in the tube. Guys like Farrior and Ray Lewis (besides being rare athletes, worthy of 1st round picks) tend to run around blocks, Bart Scott runs through them and there's a difference in terms of longevity. If Bart Scott is still playing NFL football when he's 35 I'd be shocked.

and let me put it another way an OL or DL might play well into their thirties, they also don't start when they are rookies (rarely). it's a grown man's position. RB and LB can often fly right out of the gate and even tho Bart Scott wasn't a starter he was dealing big hits on ST for a while. It's not fair to compare Wayne Hunter who hasn't even had a starting gig until now and he's 30 to Bart Scott type of ILB.

Scott has only 5/6 year under his belt. He doesnt have the wear and tear as most players his age. Plus he keep his body in great shape. I think its totally realistic for him to play till he's 35 baring a serious injury.

[Jets Voice of Reason]

No its not, but JT has twice as much wear and tear and for as many T as he runs around, he bangs with them too. Hell, he aint running around anyone anymore....been that way for a while...and he's still playing.

Just dont think it matters as much as you guys are making it out. The flip side of this - why do FB's last forever? Big impact at full speed.

Scott has only 5/6 year under his belt. He doesnt have the wear and tear as most players his age. Plus he keep his body in great shape. I think its totally realistic for him to play till he's 35 baring a serious injury.

Barring injury, I don't see why he wouldn't give us the same caliber of production for the next two-three years at least. By then, we could just cut him if we really needed to. He's got four years left on his deal and I don't think there'd be a ton of dead money by the end to cut him.

[#27TheDominator]

No its not, but JT has twice as much wear and tear and for as many T as he runs around, he bangs with them too. Hell, he aint running around anyone anymore....been that way for a while...and he's still playing.

Just dont think it matters as much as you guys are making it out. The flip side of this - why do FB's last forever? Big impact at full speed.

Scott has only 5/6 year under his belt. He doesnt have the wear and tear as most players his age. Plus he keep his body in great shape. I think its totally realistic for him to play till he's 35 baring a serious injury.

Yeah, I was just thinking that FBs do a similar job and they do last forever. Richardson and Neal lasted forever. I honestly don't think Taylor took anywhere near that kind of direct impact though I certainly agree he was more worn out. When you get old just running can be painful. Maybe it's just the mental outlook that it takes to run full speed into people. Either you can keep it up or you can't.

[Sperm Edwards]

Why would having the most tackles be a consideration for a good player?

Technically if more of those tackles were made before the first down marker he would have had fewer tackles.

But to help illustrate your point, Marvin Jones had 115 tackles in 2003. As a UFA in 2004 no one signed him. Vilma's "great" year was in 2005 and we must have given up 1500 yards just going up the gut. We couldn't get off the field.

When a defender doesn't get the same credit (statistically) for getting dragged 5 yards before eventually bring his man down, as a defender who sticks his man and drives him backwards, then I'll start to get impressed by the stat.

He's a MLB on a 4-3 defense that can't stop the run (and whose offense can't or doesn't run up the score). So the other team just keeps running it and running it for the sure first down after first down. Of course he's going to have over 100 tackles by the end of the season.

[JiFtheOracle]

Barring injury, I don't see why he wouldn't give us the same caliber of production for the next two-three years at least. By then, we could just cut him if we really needed to. He's got four years left on his deal and I don't think there'd be a ton of dead money by the end to cut him.

Exactly. I expect him to play at a high level for the rest of his contract.

Yeah, I was just thinking that FBs do a similar job and they do last forever. Richardson and Neal lasted forever. I honestly don't think Taylor took anywhere near that kind of direct impact though I certainly agree he was more worn out. When you get old just running can be painful. Maybe it's just the mental outlook that it takes to run full speed into people. Either you can keep it up or you can't.

Thats pretty much it and there's nothing showing me he cant.

[slats]

Yeah, I was just thinking that FBs do a similar job and they do last forever. Richardson and Neal lasted forever. I honestly don't think Taylor took anywhere near that kind of direct impact though I certainly agree he was more worn out. When you get old just running can be painful. Maybe it's just the mental outlook that it takes to run full speed into people. Either you can keep it up or you can't.

I think you have to consider initiating the contact vs. being on the receiving end of contact when comparing durability. A FB is going to protect himself. The recipient of John Connor hits always comes out worse than John Conner.

I would think that taking on blockers would eventually take more out of a player than delivering hits. Same reason a RB career is so short, because they're always on the receiving end.

[#27TheDominator]

I think you have to consider initiating the contact vs. being on the receiving end of contact when comparing durability. A FB is going to protect himself. The recipient of John Connor hits always comes out worse than John Conner.

I would think that taking on blockers would eventually take more out of a player than delivering hits. Same reason a RB career is so short, because they're always on the receiving end.

There might be some truth to that, but I don't think it's anything like a RB or WR. Scott has plenty of time to deliver the hit. He's not just absorbing the hit. He and the FB or OG are fighting for the same ground and each is trying to blow the other up. The FB/OG to open the lane and the ILB to close it. A RB or WR is trying to avoid contact and is often hit by somebody that he can't even see. Funny thing is that the running backs that "deliver the blow" usually get used up quickest, but that's obviously because of the higher volume of contact.

[Aten]

If i had to guess I'd say Bart Scott has probably 2 good years left.

Really? You finally find somebody to be bearish about, and it's Bart Scott?

[RutgersJetFan]

Really? You finally find somebody to be bearish about, and it's Bart Scott?

Tread carefully, he may stake his record on that one.

[ZachEY]

Technically if more of those tackles were made before the first down marker he would have had fewer tackles.

But to help illustrate your point, Marvin Jones had 115 tackles in 2003. As a UFA in 2004 no one signed him. Vilma's "great" year was in 2005 and we must have given up 1500 yards just going up the gut. We couldn't get off the field.

When a defender doesn't get the same credit (statistically) for getting dragged 5 yards before eventually bring his man down, as a defender who sticks his man and drives him backwards, then I'll start to get impressed by the stat.

He's a MLB on a 4-3 defense that can't stop the run (and whose offense can't or doesn't run up the score). So the other team just keeps running it and running it for the sure first down after first down. Of course he's going to have over 100 tackles by the end of the season.

Made a similar point a few years ago in the Vilma conversations. If the defense got off the field ever, he'd have had less tackles. Ideally, your team makes 3 tackles and then receives a punt.

[bitonti]

Really? You finally find somebody to be bearish about, and it's Bart Scott?

2 more years gets Bart Scott to 11 years in the league and 33 years old.

not many LBs make it further than that

[Bleedin Green]

Made a similar point a few years ago in the Vilma conversations. If the defense got off the field ever, he'd have had less tackles. Ideally, your team makes 3 tackles and then receives a punt.

Are you saying Vilma is the Chad Pennington of linebackers? While Chad used to bring up his completion % with 3 yard passes on 3rd and 7, Vilma is increasing his tackle #s with ones 8 yards downfield on those same plays.

[slats]

2 more years gets Bart Scott to 11 years in the league and 33 years old.

not many LBs make it further than that

Bit takes a lot of hits here, and I'm definitely a fan of Bart Scott, but it's tough to argue with this assessment. I'm confident it came into play when they extended Harris with his huge deal.

[JetsFanInDenver]

Really? You finally find somebody to be bearish about, and it's Bart Scott?

Which means Bart Scott is as good as gold!!!

[Klecko73isGod]

Bit takes a lot of hits here, and I'm definitely a fan of Bart Scott, but it's tough to argue with this assessment. I'm confident it came into play when they extended Harris with his huge deal.

Not so much. Remember Bart was a UDFA and didn't become a full time starter until his fourth season so he's got less mileage than most LBs his age.

[JiFtheOracle]

2 more years gets Bart Scott to 11 years in the league and 33 years old.

not many LBs make it further than that

Bit takes a lot of hits here, and I'm definitely a fan of Bart Scott, but it's tough to argue with this assessment. I'm confident it came into play when they extended Harris with his huge deal.

Huh? Its easy to argue. Scott's only actually played 5/6 seasons in the NFL. He's got very little mileage on him and he had his best season last season. He keeps unbelievable shape of his body, never gets seriously injured and has showed no signs of slowing down.

[Klecko73isGod]

Huh? Its easy to argue. Scott's only actually played 5/6 seasons in the NFL. He's got very little mileage on him and he had his best season last season. He keeps unbelievable shape of his body, never gets seriously injured and has showed no signs of slowing down.

Not to mention that the guy is just a great, great story - a college walk on who played himself into a scholarship at Northern Illinois and then a UDFA who played himself into a starting role and Pro-Bowl on the best defense in the NFL and a blockbuster FA contract to be the cornerstone of the best defense in the NFL and the world's greatest trash talker.

You couldn't invent Bart Scott if you tried.

[Barcs]

Silly thread title. That's like asking, "Would you take an upgrade over Mangold (Sanchez, Holmes, Keller, Cromartie, etc etc etc)?" Well duh, any upgrade is a good thing, regardless. But as far as drafting someone to replace him, I don't think it's necessary, yet but we should always have our young guys building on the 2nd team. Bart Scott is still solid.

[Jetsfan80]

Football Outsiders actually thinks Bart Scott is the better ILB than Harris based on advanced metrics. Imagine that!

VS. RUN

Stop Rate

Scott

2008 - 79 %

2009 - 71 %

2010 - 70 %

Harris

2008 - 61 %

2009 - 60 %

2010 - 67 %

Yards/Play allowed

Scott

2008 - 2.7

2009 - 3.2

2010 - 2.5

Harris

2008 - 3.9

2009 - 3.9

2010 - 3.7

VS. PASS

Stop Rate

Scott

2008 - 48 %

2009 - 70 %

2010 - 47 %

Harris

2008 - 43 %

2009 - 54 %

2010 - 44 %

Yards/Play allowed

Scott

2008 - 5.3

2009 - 4.4

2010 - 3.9

Harris

2008 - 7.3

2009 - 5.8

2010 - 5.0

The only reason we just handed Harris a big extension is because he is younger. We gave Bart Scott good money to sign with us here, and for good reason.

[RutgersJetFan]

Know who's also had great plays/stops and plays/defeats ratios since Rex took over? Bryan Thomas.

[Jetsfan80]

Know who's also had great plays/stops and plays/defeats ratios since Rex took over? Bryan Thomas.

Hell yes. Him and Pouha are definitely two guys you can say whose careers Rex turned around.

[TNJet]

Hey, did anyone else see Bart's horrid miss tackles on Bradshaw last night? I counted 3 that HARRIS WOULDVE MADE IN HIS SLEEP, and ofcourse Bart had his every game overrun and reach flop, looking soft against Jacobs. Just pay attention, the dude always Barks more than he bites, and that is what irks me about him. Just talk on the field, like Harris. But oh thats right, Harris only gets paid more because he's younger and so on (right) it has nothing to do with him being an absolute wall that no one gets by, the bonecrushing blows he deals out, or even the intereceptions he has like against Brady in the playoffs, or even last night against Eli.

[#27TheDominator]

Hey, did anyone else see Bart's horrid miss tackles on Bradshaw last night? I counted 3 that HARRIS WOULDVE MADE IN HIS SLEEP, and ofcourse Bart had his every game overrun and reach flop, looking soft against Jacobs. Just pay attention, the dude always Barks more than he bites, and that is what irks me about him. Just talk on the field, like Harris. But oh thats right, Harris only gets paid more because he's younger and so on (right) it has nothing to do with him being an absolute wall that no one gets by, the bonecrushing blows he deals out, or even the intereceptions he has like against Brady in the playoffs, or even last night against Eli.

Joke post?

Scott had a much better game than Harris last night.

Harris had at best the third best game among Jets ILBs and Scott and Bellore would have been top candidates for Player of the Game if it weren't awarded by Giants broadcasters to a guy 5 yards rushing on 3 carries and a few passing yards

[TNJet]

Joke post?

Scott had a much better game than Harris last night.

Harris had at best the third best game among Jets ILBs and Scott and Bellore would have been top candidates for Player of the Game if it weren't awarded by Giants broadcasters to a guy 5 yards rushing on 3 carries and a few passing yards

I agree Bellore also looked better than Scott. That kid is going to help us alot at ILB.

[#27TheDominator]

I agree Bellore also looked better than Scott. That kid is going to help us alot at ILB.

Even playing along as you troll away... then why would we want/need "a drafted upgrade"?

[TNJet]

Even playing along as you troll away... then why would we want/need "a drafted upgrade"?

I'm far from a Troll man and you know it. I'm not going to sit here though and act like Scott is the best LB we have, when he's really just pretty good. I try to call it like I see it. Thats true we may not need to draft a replacement, Mauga and Bellore may be the ones that step up eventually to replace him. Remember I never said Scott was a bad player, just overrated and the love he receives on this board I will never understand. He's my least favorite jet now that Taylor and probably Brunell even are history. People bash BT all the time when he's been one of our most consistent defensive players since 2002 and if he wasnt a good player, he wouldnt have lasted so long on this team, he's our longest tenured jet and I like him for that. Everyone though says let BT go, lets upgrade etc. but noo not Scott he's just such a beast even tho he's worse than BT at tackling or stopping the run.

[Jetsfan80]

I'm far from a Troll man and you know it. I'm not going to sit here though and act like Scott is the best LB we have, when he's really just pretty good. I try to call it like I see it. Thats true we may not need to draft a replacement, Mauga and Bellore may be the ones that step up eventually to replace him. Remember I never said Scott was a bad player, just overrated and the love he receives on this board I will never understand. He's my least favorite jet now that Taylor and probably Brunell even are history. People bash BT all the time when he's been one of our most consistent defensive players since 2002 and if he wasnt a good player, he wouldnt have lasted so long on this team, he's our longest tenured jet and I like him for that. Everyone though says let BT go, lets upgrade etc. but noo not Scott he's just such a beast even tho he's worse than BT at tackling or stopping the run.

Actually, Scott and Pace are our best linebackers, and Harris isn't really close to them yet. See: Advanced metrics, any NFL scout's analysis. Both of those guys do SO much more than what shows up in the box score or what is apparent to the untrained eye. They are both well worth the money we shelled out to bring them in as free agents.

Also, Bryan Thomas has been excellent, especially since Rex arrived.

[#27TheDominator]

I'm far from a Troll man and you know it. I'm not going to sit here though and act like Scott is the best LB we have, when he's really just pretty good. I try to call it like I see it. Thats true we may not need to draft a replacement, Mauga and Bellore may be the ones that step up eventually to replace him. Remember I never said Scott was a bad player, just overrated and the love he receives on this board I will never understand. He's my least favorite jet now that Taylor and probably Brunell even are history. People bash BT all the time when he's been one of our most consistent defensive players since 2002 and if he wasnt a good player, he wouldnt have lasted so long on this team, he's our longest tenured jet and I like him for that. Everyone though says let BT go, lets upgrade etc. but noo not Scott he's just such a beast even tho he's worse than BT at tackling or stopping the run.

You didn't watch the game if you think Harris would have done any better than Scott. If he were going to he should have. Scott blew up about 5 or 6 plays and blew one. You counted three which is more plays that I saw Harris making. The best hit Harris had all night was blasting Leonhard who was holding some Giant up. You either didn't watch the game or are so ridiculously biased it's not worth discussing.

[TNJet]

Actually, Scott is our best linebacker, and its not really close. See: Advanced metrics, any NFL scout's analysis.

Does it list all the miss tackles as well? Harris is better in every way.