Jump to content

Lawson is the worst FA signing in recent years.


Warfish
 Share

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, oatmeal said:

Bro if he’s still hurt he shouldn’t be out there

If he is out there he deserves criticism if he sucks just like he would be praised if he was dominating.

Stop trying to always cape for someone in this organization 

SERIOUSLY?

Have you blown an Achilles tendon before?  He will never be the same.  He doesn't have to be injured to not be the same.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

But in evaluating if a pick, draft or FA, worked out, it's not about the injury being his fault or the like, it's purely "what did they provide us".

I disagree here, but I may be in the minority. I think you do your due diligence, bring in talent that you feel will best support your scheme / plan. If the circumstances change (IE - injury), I think you chalk it up to a grade of incomplete, because we don't have a view of the 'what could have been' scenario. I think someone like Tru was a terrible signing as there was too much guaranteed and he didn't appear to want to play. As far as I was aware, there was no injury, there was no changing circumstances (well, other than a huge bank account). That signing was a fail.

Quote

Lawson in year 1 game us absolutely nothing and left us in a lurch.

Again, I disagree here. He didn't 'leave us in a lurch', he was carted off the field and couldn't walk for months. I think this is a symptom of a team that was devoid of talent (other than a few exceptions). Bringing in someone to help jumpstart the Dline was the right move, but at the same time, the gap to cover was huge, and there was no risk mitigation strategy because, again, the team had no talent. A case can be made that he had some injury history, but the injury he sustained didn't align with any past ailments, so claiming 'injury prone' doesn't feel right.

The strategy to completely strip this team bare and start over is more at fault than the injury, and I think that's a very interesting debate that could be had on team building (if your team has been terrible for a decade, is it REALLY fair to the fans to ask for patience for a 4-5 year rebuild??).

If we had the opportunity for a do-over, I wouldn't sign him. If we had the opportunity for a do-over where he wouldn't have torn his achilles, I would. Either way, the contract was constructed so that we can walk away end of season, which is great, and I think that will be the right move (unless he really picks it up and gets 9 sacks in the next 14 games).

Quote

People far too often get these two mixed together, especially the "11th Commandment, Thou Shall Not Be Critical" types.

Oh, trust me, I have no issues being critical, but I also feel that criticism must be fair. I think with the current state of the team (and the duration of the 'drought' the team has had), it's tough to remain objective.

Quote

And so far in 2022, apart from being a leader in almost getting to a QB but not actually getting to him, he's been pretty average or worse as a pass rushing D-End/Edge (the two forced fumbles are nice tho). 

Completely agreed. I was expecting a lot more than 'pressures' against the Bengals, and was very disappointed in the end result. I think looking at Quinnen is another example (if you watch Luke Faulk's videos). He had a few pressures, but he was getting to the QB in less than 2.5 seconds while battling double teams. I don't think you can ask for much more from your IDL, though it only resulted in 1 sack.

Quote

This isn;t aimed at you, as it sounds like you get it (or maybe not seeing the other post above, lol), but "Pressures" is a meaningless and subjective non-stat.  I said it when we signed Lawson and that was flogged as his big thing, and I'll repeat it now.

Who or what "pressured" a QB is a subjective, not objective, evaluation.  If you're close but never had any chance to get to the QB, you can still get a "pressure" when in reality you did nothing to rush or otherwise interfere with that QB's play.

Worse, a pressure doesn't actually result in anything specific, much less anything good.  A "pressured" QB can still successfully land a 40 yard pass for a TD.  Inherantly a pressure means you got close-ish, but didn't actually sack the guy.  That's all it means.  

Yeah, I jumped in late. :) And I gave a rather... harsh, response to your response on the 'pressures' stats (I'm getting frustrated with a lot of posting on this board I guess, maybe I need a break).

A good number of 'stats' can be 'subjective' to a certain degree, as are a lot of penalties (looking at JFMs roughing the passer, which has generated a lot of talk). Touching a QB who tripped over his own feet while going through his 3 step drop is still a sack, even though there is little merit to it. Fighting a double team to pressure the QB into throwing early on a timing route isn't as spectacular, but still has a positive impact on the D.

Pressures can be disruptive and lead to ints, incompletes, etc. I'll take a pressure over a clean pocket any day, but I'll take a sack over a pressure any day as well. 
Although, to be clear, this team has too many clean pocket situations, and I'm not even sure we'd manage to touch a downed QB who had tripped without managing a roughing the passer... /sigh.

Sorry for the long post.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, jgb said:

That ones definitely goes on the Mt. Rushmore of Jets FA whiffs.

Mike Maccagnan gives a CB2 in a zone/press system (on a team with an actual pass rush) high-end CB1 money in a man-to-man system (without an organic pass rush) and yet people like @Pac still defend him to this day.

We make fun of Macc's awful, dreadful draft selections but his FA's/contracts were even worse. 

Worst GM in NFL history and it isn't close.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Zachtomims47 said:

Facts. Quinnen is a "good" player but thats about it. When has he dominated a game? #3 overall? In a re-draft he'd probably go late 1st? 2nd? Also doesn't help our coaching staff takes him out for half the game. 

I think he'd be a mid-late 1st in a re-draft.  That was a pretty bad class, and he'd probably be a nice piece for a contending team.  But he doesn't move the needle for a bad one.  

I'd go something like this for my "re-draft big board/top 32", with team needs disregarded for our purposes:

  1. QB Kyler Murray
  2. EDGE Nick Bosa
  3. WR Deebo Samuel
  4. WR A.J. Brown
  5. WR DK Metcalf
  6. LB Devin White
  7. DT Jeffery Simmons
  8. WR Marquise Brown
  9. WR Terry McLaurin
  10. WR Diontae Johnson
  11. DE Brian Burns
  12. DT Ed Oliver
  13. OT Kaleb McGary
  14. DE Montez Sweat
  15. DE Josh Allen
  16. DE Maxx Crosby
  17. LB Devin Bush
  18. OT Jawaan Taylor
  19. OT David Edwards
  20. QB Gardner Minshew
  21. QB Daniel Jones
  22. DT Christian Wilkins
  23. DT Dexter Lawrence
  24. DT Quinnen Williams
  25. C Elgton Jenkins
  26. C Garrett Bradbury
  27. OT Tytus Howard
  28. C Erik McCoy
  29. G Nate Davis
  30. RB David Montgomery
  31. RB Miles Sanders
  32. RB Josh Jacobs
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, xJayce said:

Yeah, I jumped in late. :) And I gave a rather... harsh, response to your response on the 'pressures' stats (I'm getting frustrated with a lot of posting on this board I guess, maybe I need a break).

No harm, no foul, it's all good.

9 minutes ago, xJayce said:

A good number of 'stats' can be 'subjective' to a certain degree, as are a lot of penalties (looking at JFMs roughing the passer, which has generated a lot of talk). Touching a QB who tripped over his own feet while going through his 3 step drop is still a sack, even though there is little merit to it. Fighting a double team to pressure the QB into throwing early on a timing route isn't as spectacular, but still has a positive impact on the D.

Pressures can be disruptive and lead to ints, incompletes, etc. I'll take a pressure over a clean pocket any day, but I'll take a sack over a pressure any day as well. 
Although, to be clear, this team has too many clean pocket situations, and I'm not even sure we'd manage to touch a downed QB who had tripped without managing a roughing the passer... /sigh.

I think a individual player statistic that really requires evaluation of the play of other players and a detailed context of the play result before you can judge it's value is a bad statistic. 

  • A pressures that results in a rushed, bad, off-balance desperate throw that is INT by our DB is a great pressure.
  • A pressure that results in only a slight sidestep by the QB, followed by a 40 yard bullet for a TD, is a worthless pressure.

And yes, in the advanced stat that is "Pressures", they are simply one and the same.  That's a flawed stat in my view.

No question, we want our defenders to pressure the QB, and having more pressures rather than less is generally good, but we have stats already that better tell the tale of that goal:  

Sacks first and foremost (no context required, you sacked him!).  Tackles for Loss (no context required, you tackled him!).  QB Hits (a perhaps better version of pressures, in so far as no context is required, you hit the guy, even if the rest of the play could have been good or bad).  Pass Deflections (no context, you batted the pass!).

Pressures to me is a stat designed to support poor pass rushers who don't get sacks because they're too slow, don't have good moves, or otherwise just can't complete the job Edges are there for in a "better" way, i.e. sacks, TFL, QB Hits.  It's the "Almost There" award.  I'm sure for Coaches it may be of some use over time, to gauge how often they're even getting close (an edge that rarely pressures may not be worth rostering, for example, unless he is king against the run).

In the search for advanced analytics, you will often find new stats that are of great value, and some that are less so, as every aspect of the game is put through the analytic process.  This one is just of lesser value IMO for the reasons stated, not no value, just lesser value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

That seems to be a hard thing for the fanbase to understand.  I am sure it is the same in Cleveland.

If you don't win, and continually don't win, you have to build through the draft first.  That takes a LOT longer.  Until you then start winning, nobody wants to play for you.

Yup, Hendrikson was available that same year.  What if he actually DIDN'T want to play here, and the only option (overpaid of course) is Lawson?

A lot of free agents have not worked out.  Some have.  But nobody has been given an albatross contract like Mike Mccagnan used to hand out.  We can be out from under Lawson (who might have been a good signing if he didn't blow out his Achilles), Corey Davis (decent signing, not a game changer though.....you draft those), JFM (bad extension....never lived up to its value) next year.  Most of JD's signings have been for about two years, with the other years voidable.  THAT part JD is killing.  Correctly signing guys for the right term.  But he is batting about .500 at signing the right guys.

 

Douglas is not even close to batting. 500. 

 

  • Thumb Down 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Sacks (i.e. actually getting to a QB) carry value.  TFL carries value.  Pressures don't mean sh*t on their own.

He does have 5 QB Hits (t-12th in the league) and 4 QB Knockdowns (t-8th).  I'd say that's fairly meaningful, no?

He doesn't have the agility or closing speed to rack up Sacks but he's still a useful pass rusher.  Thus I wouldn't call him the worst FA signing "in recent years" unless you're leaving Macc's signings out of the discussion.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Warfish said:

If Lawson got a "pressure" stat, and the QB still completed the pass for 40 yards and a TD, how much is that "pressure" worth.

You're clearly in the group who think this particular 'advanced stat' carries actual meaningful value on it's own.

It doesn't (IMO).  It requires context, what actually was the result of that pressure.  It's meaningless without that. 

Sacks (i.e. actually getting to a QB) carry value.  TFL carries value.  Pressures don't mean sh*t on their own.

This will be an 'agree to disagree' moment, as I do believe pressures have value. Some QBs are amazing at getting the ball out off-platform though, those guys don't seem to mind pressure too much.

But I also believe that each stat has a value. I think pressures have value, but not as much as a sack, not as much as an int. I don't have a set number in mind (ie - 1 sack = 7 pressures), but being able to disrupt a QB's rhythm, even if they get the ball out, does have a certain value. THe measuremnet of said stat may be problematic on occasion though (as you said, pressures are a bit harder to qualify, and can become more subjective).

It's like measuring the average separation of receivers when the ball is thrown to them. I think that stat has value, but overall, has no impact on the game. Is it as important as receiving yards? Hell no, but it's a great indicators for the team to determine whether they are properly game planning. Flacco through to Moore when he had on average 1 yard of separation, but didn't throw to him when he had 3-4 yards of separation. That to me speaks that Flacco is missing wide open receivers. Again, that stat doesn't change the game, but it's a performance metric none the less.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Warfish said:

No harm, no foul, it's all good.

I think a individual player statistic that really requires evaluation of the play of other players and a detailed context of the play result before you can judge it's value is a bad statistic. 

  • A pressures that results in a rushed, bad, off-balance desperate throw that is INT by our DB is a great pressure.
  • A pressure that results in only a slight sidestep by the QB, followed by a 40 yard bullet for a TD, is a worthless pressure.

And yes, in the advanced stat that is "Pressures", they are simply one and the same.  That's a flawed stat in my view.

No question, we want our defenders to pressure the QB, and having more pressures rather than less is generally good, but we have stats already that better tell the tale of that goal:  

Sacks first and foremost (no context required, you sacked him!).  Tackles for Loss (no context required, you tackled him!).  QB Hits (a perhaps better version of pressures, in so far as no context is required, you hit the guy, even if the rest of the play could have been good or bad).  Pass Deflections (no context, you batted the pass!).

Pressures to me is a stat designed to support poor pass rushers who don't get sacks because they're too slow, don't have good moves, or otherwise just can't complete the job Edges are there for in a "better" way, i.e. sacks, TFL, QB Hits.  It's the "Almost There" award.  I'm sure for Coaches it may be of some use over time, to gauge how often they're even getting close (an edge that rarely pressures may not be worth rostering, for example, unless he is king against the run).

In the search for advanced analytics, you will often find new stats that are of great value, and some that are less so, as every aspect of the game is put through the analytic process.  This one is just of lesser value IMO for the reasons stated, not no value, just lesser value.

You bring up an interesting point in regards to grading a stat based on the end result rather than the initial action (we see this for QBs all the time where a 3 yard pass at the 50 becomes a 50 yard TD due to YAC; the QB didn't really throw a TD, the WR did all the work, but the QB will still get credit). I wonder if there's an opportunity to refine the stat a bit.

Here is a video by Luke Grant (not Luke Faulk, as I mentioned in a previous post, ugh, I really am tired) showing some of Quinnen's pressures against the Bengals. I think this highlights both of our points at the same time. ;) 

These pressures led to 1 sack, and 3 incompletions. To your point, Burrow is still able to throw the ball on most of these.

  • 1st clip is a sack
  • 2nd clip is an incomplete (is that more of a QB Hit than a pressure?)
  • 3rd clip is an incomplete. To be clear, that was nearly a TD, but QW is on Burrow in less than 3 seconds, and Burrow just does an amazing job of keeping cool and getting the ball out (Flacco would have been sacked in that instance).
  • 4th clip is a pressure and Burrow has to throw off platform and misses the crossing route.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Prodigal Syndicate said:

Why would Joe Douglas backloading future contracts make me feel better about all the poor contracts he has been handing out and restructuring?

Getting around a bad contract restructure that was needed because of his poor asset management of Tackles by restructuring another future bad contract is not good cap management, nor the sign of a good GM. Which Joe Douglas is not.

It is poor decisions stacking on top of poor decisions, and writing "well we can get around it by doing even more poor decisions" is not a comfort.

It makes no difference; there are enough expiring contracts & future cuts that'll happen anyway, for veterans that are no longer needed as draftees move into those starting roles. It's not an avalanche building up snow & momentum. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/25/2022 at 4:57 PM, Prodigal Syndicate said:

Joe Douglas free agent signings in general have been absolutely atrocious since the day he took over.

 

ehhh absolutely atrocious is a little hard especially since most of his signings are low amount of years at lower costs. His misses don't hamstring us like the Trumaine contract, etc. After only 3 games recovering from an Achilles injury were writing off Carl Lawson... JD can't predict injuries. 

JD also had some good signings as well. Morgan Moses, DJ Reed, George Fant to name a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/25/2022 at 5:24 PM, jeremy2020 said:

What contracts are actually 6 years?

It may actually have been better as a 6 year deal because then you can manipulate the cap and if he ends up doing well next year.. you'd have him on a reasonable contract. If he blows up next year, he's gone or you're paying premium pass rusher prices which are high. 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/joey-bosa-and-chargers-come-to-terms-on-an-nfl-record-five-year-135-million-extension-per-report/

Guess which one represent your statement...

Janet Yellen GIF by GIPHY NewsThe Block Omg GIF by Celebrity Apprentice Australia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Embrace the Suck said:

A 5 year extension with an out at 3 years.. and likely to be extended again to bring his cap hit down in years 4 and 5...

umm, thank you for proving my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
41 minutes ago, bostonmajet said:

In honor of playing the team he got hurt practicing against - bump.

How many fans still think he was the worst signing? Leads team and is in the top of the NFL with pressures, hits, etc.

Yes, this is a silly post.  Aside from being rusty, I'm sure he was concerned about reinjuring himself, so he started out slow.  Couple of more games, and you'll see the post 'Lawson - best signing in Jets history'.  

  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...