| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sandybaby716
Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 3526
Location: Rhode Island
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:28 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Packerraymond wrote: | | TedThompson wrote: | | Packerraymond wrote: | | GBPackers79 wrote: | Jason Wilde @jasonjwilde
By the way, the #Packers aren't pursuing OLB Manny Lawson, and never were in the mix, according to an NFL source. |
Good, why sign Brad Jones when you have Brad Jones on the team. |
Manny Lawson is 3x as good as Brad Jones is. |
Don't see it, when Brad is healthy, he is the same type of player as Lawson, probably even a better pass rusher. Lawson is your definition of average, he's just getting hyped up cause he plays OLB and is a FA. |
Lawson is probably more like 1.25x the player of Jones. Jones is certainly a poor man's Lawson, who late in his San Fran career had become very effective. He also doesn't have the injury history of Jones, and has a more consistent history.
That said, Lawson would not be worth the price it would be to bring him in, and I've been on his wagon all off-season. Jones plays slightly worse but is probably 1/4 the cost (maybe less)
_________________
| wgbeethree wrote: | | In all fairness it is kind of rude to just lay injured at their feet while the Lions defensive players are trying to hold a completely unrelated dance party. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Packerfaninmn
Joined: 03 Jul 2007
Posts: 6800
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Dennis Dixon would look good holding Rodgers clipboard.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ugLymayNe
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 10749
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| TedThompson wrote: | | Manny Lawson is 3x as good as Brad Jones is. |
No. No he isn't. They are equally bad against the run in our scheme and both excel in coverage. In 2010 Manny rushed the QB over 200 times and came away with 3 sacks. In 2011 Jones rushed the QB 75 times and came away with 2 sacks.
According to you every FA pass rusher and safety is better than what we have I'm guessing.
_________________
@PJHotel_ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ugLymayNe
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 10749
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Sandybaby716 wrote: | Lawson is probably more like 1.25x the player of Jones. Jones is certainly a poor man's Lawson, who late in his San Fran career had become very effective. He also doesn't have the injury history of Jones, and has a more consistent history.
That said, Lawson would not be worth the price it would be to bring him in, and I've been on his wagon all off-season. Jones plays slightly worse but is probably 1/4 the cost (maybe less) |
No, he is just as bad at rushing the QB as Erik Walden.
_________________
@PJHotel_ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sandybaby716
Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 3526
Location: Rhode Island
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ugLymayNe wrote: | | Sandybaby716 wrote: | Lawson is probably more like 1.25x the player of Jones. Jones is certainly a poor man's Lawson, who late in his San Fran career had become very effective. He also doesn't have the injury history of Jones, and has a more consistent history.
That said, Lawson would not be worth the price it would be to bring him in, and I've been on his wagon all off-season. Jones plays slightly worse but is probably 1/4 the cost (maybe less) |
No, he is just as bad at rushing the QB as Erik Walden. |
Rushing isn't the only responsibility of an OLB.
_________________
| wgbeethree wrote: | | In all fairness it is kind of rude to just lay injured at their feet while the Lions defensive players are trying to hold a completely unrelated dance party. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ugLymayNe
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 10749
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Sandybaby716 wrote: | | ugLymayNe wrote: | | Sandybaby716 wrote: | Lawson is probably more like 1.25x the player of Jones. Jones is certainly a poor man's Lawson, who late in his San Fran career had become very effective. He also doesn't have the injury history of Jones, and has a more consistent history.
That said, Lawson would not be worth the price it would be to bring him in, and I've been on his wagon all off-season. Jones plays slightly worse but is probably 1/4 the cost (maybe less) |
No, he is just as bad at rushing the QB as Erik Walden. |
Rushing isn't the only responsibility of an OLB. |
If he is a worse rusher than Walden that is pretty bad, and I realize that is only a third of the "responsibilities" an OLB has...but you can't say that coverage is more important than rushing the QB. Lawson is also just as bad as Brad Jones at setting the edge.
_________________
@PJHotel_ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LftCoastPackFan
Joined: 30 Apr 2010
Posts: 553
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| CWood21 wrote: | | ChaRisMa wrote: | | I don't agree with the "let Sherrod sit be fourth on the Depth Chart" or "Let Newhouse be a Backup Guard" mentalities. If you have awesome young (aka cheap) talent, you play it. You don't pay someone to take that job at a higher price. You just play the young guy. Am I on crazy pills? |
Newhouse wasn't awesome. He was serviceable. Looked good at times and looked lost at other times. If you've got a chance to improve the position, you do it. |
I'm all for bringing Bell in, but people forget Bulaga struggled his first year as a starter; actually gave up more sacks then Newhouse in fewer games started. I could see Newhouse making a big jump 2nd year starting like Bulaga did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sandybaby716
Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 3526
Location: Rhode Island
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 2:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ugLymayNe wrote: | | Sandybaby716 wrote: | | ugLymayNe wrote: | | Sandybaby716 wrote: | Lawson is probably more like 1.25x the player of Jones. Jones is certainly a poor man's Lawson, who late in his San Fran career had become very effective. He also doesn't have the injury history of Jones, and has a more consistent history.
That said, Lawson would not be worth the price it would be to bring him in, and I've been on his wagon all off-season. Jones plays slightly worse but is probably 1/4 the cost (maybe less) |
No, he is just as bad at rushing the QB as Erik Walden. |
Rushing isn't the only responsibility of an OLB. |
If he is a worse rusher than Walden that is pretty bad, and I realize that is only a third of the "responsibilities" an OLB has...but you can't say that coverage is more important than rushing the QB. Lawson is also just as bad as Brad Jones at setting the edge. |
I am curious to your reasoning behind saying that he's a worse rusher than Walden. Lawson was never opposite someone like Clay who could take all the double teams. He started opposite Parys Haralton and Travis Laboy, whom make up some of the biggest names that were opposite him.
Saying he's worse than Walden holds no water, and is just a statement made to make people feel he's a bad player. I'll stand that Lawson would be an upgrade over anyone we have at the roster for being a 3 down OLB opposite Clay. I don't think we should sign him at this juncture, but he would be an upgrade.
_________________
| wgbeethree wrote: | | In all fairness it is kind of rude to just lay injured at their feet while the Lions defensive players are trying to hold a completely unrelated dance party. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
palmy50
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 12556
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| LftCoastPackFan wrote: | | CWood21 wrote: | | ChaRisMa wrote: | | I don't agree with the "let Sherrod sit be fourth on the Depth Chart" or "Let Newhouse be a Backup Guard" mentalities. If you have awesome young (aka cheap) talent, you play it. You don't pay someone to take that job at a higher price. You just play the young guy. Am I on crazy pills? |
Newhouse wasn't awesome. He was serviceable. Looked good at times and looked lost at other times. If you've got a chance to improve the position, you do it. |
I'm all for bringing Bell in, but people forget Bulaga struggled his first year as a starter; actually gave up more sacks then Newhouse in fewer games started. I could see Newhouse making a big jump 2nd year starting like Bulaga did. |
Hope one understands Newhouse has clear skill set flaws you can't fix. Anything but the case with a young Bulaga. Bulaga just needed to get his sets right after playing in a run heavy Iowa program.
Don't take that the wrong way. Newhouse is a very solid football player. Every team in the NFL could use a Newhouse on their roster. Just not the type I want watching my star QB's back long term. Not going to cry over it if it plays out that way. Just not a fan of pulling the bottom game day grade at LT week after week.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ugLymayNe
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 10749
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Sandybaby716 wrote: | | I am curious to your reasoning behind saying that he's a worse rusher than Walden. Lawson was never opposite someone like Clay who could take all the double teams. He started opposite Parys Haralton and Travis Laboy, whom make up some of the biggest names that were opposite him. |
That is the only argument for him. His best year was a 6.5 sack season(that is at least double the #'s he had every other year). I guess he shouldn't have said he is worse than Walden even though his last year in SF was statistically similar - but I don't see how he would have been an upgrade where he added something our defense doesn't already have.
_________________
@PJHotel_ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PackFan4Life
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Posts: 3530
Location: De Pere, WI
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ugLymayNe wrote: | | Sandybaby716 wrote: | | I am curious to your reasoning behind saying that he's a worse rusher than Walden. Lawson was never opposite someone like Clay who could take all the double teams. He started opposite Parys Haralton and Travis Laboy, whom make up some of the biggest names that were opposite him. |
That is the only argument for him. His best year was a 6.5 sack season(that is at least double the #'s he had every other year). I guess he shouldn't have said he is worse than Walden even though his last year in SF was statistically similar - but I don't see how he would have been an upgrade where he added something our defense doesn't already have. |
The problem I have with the Lawson never had Clay opposite of him argument is really the price he is still going to command. Way too many potential draft picks available (if TT should decide to use one there) this year that will be at the caliber of Lawson (because they are benefitting from Clay on the other side) at a fraction of the cost. For Lawson to be an option, his market would have to be extremely dry and coming in very cheap. I do not think that is the case if there are reportedly several teams still interested in his services. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ugLymayNe
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 10749
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| PackFan4Life wrote: | | ugLymayNe wrote: | | Sandybaby716 wrote: | | I am curious to your reasoning behind saying that he's a worse rusher than Walden. Lawson was never opposite someone like Clay who could take all the double teams. He started opposite Parys Haralton and Travis Laboy, whom make up some of the biggest names that were opposite him. |
That is the only argument for him. His best year was a 6.5 sack season(that is at least double the #'s he had every other year). I guess he shouldn't have said he is worse than Walden even though his last year in SF was statistically similar - but I don't see how he would have been an upgrade where he added something our defense doesn't already have. |
The problem I have with the Lawson never had Clay opposite of him argument is really the price he is still going to command. Way too many potential draft picks available (if TT should decide to use one there) this year that will be at the caliber of Lawson (because they are benefitting from Clay on the other side) at a fraction of the cost. For Lawson to be an option, his market would have to be extremely dry and coming in very cheap. I do not think that is the case if there are reportedly several teams still interested in his services. |
He's actually telling Cincinnati teammates that he is coming back. Glad because I don't want to see him back in a 3-4, he belongs playing SLB in a 4-3.
_________________
@PJHotel_ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sandybaby716
Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 3526
Location: Rhode Island
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well I agree he wouldn't be worth the cost of the upgrade. I just like him as a player, he's reliable and has good character, so I don't want to see him talked about like a cheap lady of the night 
I will say I think the 3-4 is his home, although maybe not as much a Capers/Lebeau one. He'd fit very well into something like what the Pats or even Jets run on defense. (well, Pats ran before they became a 4-3). I think the Ravens would be foolish not to look at him to replace Jarrett Johnson, too.
_________________
| wgbeethree wrote: | | In all fairness it is kind of rude to just lay injured at their feet while the Lions defensive players are trying to hold a completely unrelated dance party. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
