Jump to content

Jim Leonard/Bart Scott


hoping4ASuperBowl

Recommended Posts

Jets beat writer Dave Hutchinson believes that the team will make a "strong bid" to acquire free agent Jim Leonhard.

Leonhard knows new coach Rex Ryan's scheme from their Baltimore days, and the Jets have long been searching for a starting safety to pair with Kerry Rhodes. His addition would likely allow Rhodes to move to strong safety.

Source: Newark Star-Ledger

Jets beat writer Dave Hutchinson calls Bart Scott a more likely target for New York in free agency than Ray Lewis.

Scott isn't the leader Lewis is, but he is a superior blitzer and five years younger. The Jets are needy at the inside linebacker spot next to David Harris, where free agent Eric Barton is unlikely to be retained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott would be a great pickup for you guys.

I'm not sold on Leonhard. I think people forget that he spent 3 lackluster seasons in Buffalo before having a decent, to pretty good, year last season.

I don't like Leonhard either lol.

He's a member of the "cool because he's a short white guy in the NFL who made some plays" club.

They're nice to have, but not high priority. If we were to go the short safety who can cover route, I'd rather draft Rashad Johnson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott would be a great pickup for you guys.

I'm not sold on Leonhard. I think people forget that he spent 3 lackluster seasons in Buffalo before having a decent, to pretty good, year last season.

+ 1

Bart Scott seems like a cant miss to me. I cant say the same for Leonhard...he's is really scary in my eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great news about Leonhard. We have been lacking even a MEDICORE player next to Kerry since he came into the league. Leonhard is better than that. Would love to have him come abroad and he is the likliest of all Raven Free Agent's to land here due to our money situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great news about Leonhard. We have been lacking even a MEDICORE player next to Kerry since he came into the league. Leonhard is better than that. Would love to have him come abroad and he is the likliest of all Raven Free Agent's to land here due to our money situation.

Do you really want a guy who is 5' 8" patrolling the defensive backfield? He made most of his plays on blitzes and had some scrub named Ed Reed playing next to him.

He is pretty good on special teams. Maybe he can be your Larry Izzo :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you really want a guy who is 5' 8" patrolling the defensive backfield? He made most of his plays on blitzes and had some scrub named Ed Reed playing next to him.

He is pretty good on special teams. Maybe he can be your Larry Izzo :P

Kerry Rhodes is good, not great like Reed, and will help Leonhard. He also knows the defense. So what about his size? Players don't have to be tall to succeed in the NFL.

Jim Leonhard is the current best white safety in the NFL as well, and thats always fun to have on your team. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bart Scott is the kind of "mean" player this defense needs. He'll punch you in the mouth and then punch you again just as you're getting up.

We have no one like that on our defense now.

+1

Scott is a vicious SOB.

Think of Scott as a younger version of the Bryan Cox that we got in '98. A hit machine who loves to blitz and would be the perfect compliment to David Harris on the inside.

Coming to the Jets can be very attractive to Scott. He knows the system and he can easily be sold that he's been overshadowed for years in Baltimore, making him one of the most underrated players in the NFL (and we're talking JiF underrated.) Coming to NY can make him a superstar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bart Scott has one season of 9.5 sacks and nothing else. He had 1 sack in 16 games two years ago and 1.5 sacks in 16 games this year.

There is no reason, outside of him being on a VASTLY superior defense to say he is any better than Eric Barton.

Since becoming a starter 7 years ago, Eric Barton has 5 seasons of 100+ tackles including 119 just last year. 5 of 7.

Bart Scott has just one 100 tackle season since becoming a full time starter two years ago. 1 of 4.

Past 2 seasons average:

Barton - 96 tackles, 1.75 sacks (while missing one game)

Scott - 87.5 tackles, 1.25 sacks (not missing a single game)

Scott has had a TON MORE blitzing opportunities in Baltimore than Barton has had here with NY. The fact that Scott only has 2.5 sacks the past two seasons COMBINED doesn't raise any red flags with anyone?

By all means give me Ray Lewis or Terrell Suggs. I'll dance a freaking jig if we get one of them. Bart Scott to me is just a guy who looks and gets overrated getting to play on a dominant Baltimore defense (like Leonhard).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at these stats http://www.nfl.com/players/jimleonhard/profile?id=LEO708542. Leonhard a better season in 2007 with the Bills but I don't recall anybody talking about him back then.

I hear ya. I dont think I would be upset with the move, it still just seems scary.

If we can only have one, I want the man below...

+1

Scott is a vicious SOB.

Think of Scott as a younger version of the Bryan Cox that we got in '98. A hit machine who loves to blitz and would be the perfect compliment to David Harris on the inside.

Coming to the Jets can be very attractive to Scott. He knows the system and he can easily be sold that he's been overshadowed for years in Baltimore, making him one of the most underrated players in the NFL (and we're talking JiF underrated.) Coming to NY can make him a superstar.

:sign0102:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bart Scott is the next Edgerton Hartwell. Actually, he couldn't hold Hartwell's jock compared to what they both did in Baltimore.

Any ILB on the Ravens defense, playing alongside Ray Lewis, and in Baltimore's ridiculous attack style defense is going to look good.

Check Hartwell's stats in his 3 years starting alongside Lewis in B'more. He signed a huge money free agent contract with ATL in 2005 and was out of the NFL 2 seasons later:

2002 - 142 tackles, 3 sacks

2003 - 93 tackles, 3 sacks

2004 - 96 tackles, 0 sacks

In his 4 years as a starter in Baltimore, Bart Scott only has ONE season better than Hartwell's worst season above.

Take him out of B'more and Scott will be a bum. I have nothing personal against him at all, but he is not going to be a savior of ANY TYPE for our defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bart Scott has one season of 9.5 sacks and nothing else. He had 1 sack in 16 games two years ago and 1.5 sacks in 16 games this year.

There is no reason, outside of him being on a VASTLY superior defense to say he is any better than Eric Barton.

Since becoming a starter 7 years ago, Eric Barton has 5 seasons of 100+ tackles including 119 just last year. 5 of 7.

Bart Scott has just one 100 tackle season since becoming a full time starter two years ago. 1 of 4.

Past 2 seasons average:

Barton - 96 tackles, 1.75 sacks (while missing one game)

Scott - 87.5 tackles, 1.25 sacks (not missing a single game)

Scott has had a TON MORE blitzing opportunities in Baltimore than Barton has had here with NY. The fact that Scott only has 2.5 sacks the past two seasons COMBINED doesn't raise any red flags with anyone?

By all means give me Ray Lewis or Terrell Suggs. I'll dance a freaking jig if we get one of them. Bart Scott to me is just a guy who looks and gets overrated getting to play on a dominant Baltimore defense (like Leonhard).

Jets fans hate on Barton because he's a moron and dont see that he has been by far our most consistent LB the past 3 years. His only bad season was the year he got hurt.

That being said, our LBers are not that good. Bart Scott doesnt need to get as many tackles as Barton. When you have a defense where everyone can tackle and make plays. Then its not neccessary to rack up a ton of tackles. There arent enough to go around. The Jets are not in that situation. Barton has had to carry the load with injuries to Vilma and Harris.

Plus Bart Scott is younger and just a better athlete. Harris/Scott >>>> Harris/Barton. Isnt that all that matters?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jets fans hate on Barton because he's a moron and dont see that he has been by far our most consistent LB the past 3 years. His only bad season was the year he got hurt.

That being said, our LBers are not that good. Bart Scott doesnt need to get as many tackles as Barton. When you have a defense where everyone can tackle and make plays. Then its not neccessary to rack up a ton of tackles. There arent enough to go around. The Jets are not in that situation. Barton has had to carry the load with injuries to Vilma and Harris.

Plus Bart Scott is younger and just a better athlete. Harris/Scott >>>> Harris/Barton. Isnt that all that matters?

Totally agree with the first bold.

As for the 2nd bold, for the money this guy will be seeking, no. He is not worth it. I posted their past 2 seasons above. Over the past 2 years, Barton has both MORE tackles, and MORE sacks than Scott. Are we supposed to think that Scott is going to come over here and rack up huge sack numbers when he only managed 2.5 sacks COMBINED the past 2 seasons in Baltimore?

Again, Barton's past 2 seasons > Scott's past 2 seasons. And since they both become full time NFL starters, here are their averages over their careers:

Barton per 16 games = 108.5 tackles, 2.6 sacks

Scott per 16 games = 92.5 tackles, 4 sacks

Their career averages are virtually identical with one having slightly more tackles and the other having slightly more sacks. Based on who has been doing more of late, that is Barton. Not Scott.

For the money Barton will be seeking vs. the money Scott will be seeking, and due to having never seen Scott play when not operating on a defense with guys like Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Terrell Suggs, Haloti Ngata, Chris McAllister, and on, and on, and on ....

Barton > Scott.

If they were seeking the same money, or this was Major League Baseball with no salary caps, I can see rolling the dice on Scott. Since it isn't, and since we've never seen him out of Baltimore, and because even when in Baltimore he was being outperformed by Barton here ..... give me Barton 10 out of 10 times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree with the first bold.

As for the 2nd bold, for the money this guy will be seeking, no. He is not worth it. I posted their past 2 seasons above. Over the past 2 years, Barton has both MORE tackles, and MORE sacks than Scott. Are we supposed to think that Scott is going to come over here and rack up huge sack numbers when he only managed 2.5 sacks COMBINED the past 2 seasons in Baltimore?

Again, Barton's past 2 seasons > Scott's past 2 seasons. And since they both become full time NFL starters, here are their averages over their careers:

Barton per 16 games = 108.5 tackles, 2.6 sacks

Scott per 16 games = 92.5 tackles, 4 sacks

Their career averages are virtually identical with one having slightly more tackles and the other having slightly more sacks. Based on who has been doing more of late, that is Barton. Not Scott.

For the money Barton will be seeking vs. the money Scott will be seeking, and due to having never seen Scott play when not operating on a defense with guys like Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Terrell Suggs, Haloti Ngata, Chris McAllister, and on, and on, and on ....

Barton > Scott.

I disagree. I think if you would swap them you would see the same results. Everyone talks about how its so easy to play next to these guys, well its also hard to take tackles from them as well. Scott would have shined in this D.

Bart Scott is a better player and athlete. He knows the system, he is better in coverage and hits like a monster.

Either way, what is Barton going to cost at 33 next season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but there is simply no way you can argue Eric Barton to be a better player for the Jets in 2009 over Bart Scott.

Scott is younger, a MUCH better athlete and familiar with Ryans defense. Stats really do not tell the true story here. Scott is as good as he's made out to be, you only have to watch the guy play to see he's a top player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The free agency dollars for Scott are going to be large but to say Barton is better than him is ridiculous.

I never offered my opinion on Barton vs. Scott. All I did was provide cold hard statistics to show that Barton has been more productive both the past two seasons and over the life of their careers when compared to Scott.

From there I said when you factor that with the fact Barton will cost a fraction of what Scott will cost to sign, I said I'd prefer Barton everytime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never offered my opinion on Barton vs. Scott. All I did was provide cold hard statistics to show that Barton has been more productive both the past two seasons and over the life of their careers when compared to Scott.

From there I said when you factor that with the fact Barton will cost a fraction of what Scott will cost to sign, I said I'd prefer Barton everytime.

You said Barton > Scott and that you would take Barton 100% of the time. I would call that an opinion.

Does tackling a guy 15 yards down the field count? That is what Barton does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. You said Barton > Scott and that you would take Barton 100% of the time. I would call that an opinion.

2. Does tackling a guy 15 yards down the field count? That is what Barton does.

1. When I said Barton > Scott it was in the same context as everything else I said in this thread (100 times now by the way).

2. Duh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...