Without a Franchise QB - The window is Closing for the Colts
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
-
-
Thread of the Week
-
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
They were never going to pick Lamar in 2018 Karl Joseph is a bench player and Fitzpatrick is much better than him anyways Not sure what this post is getting after -
They are likely kicking the can down the road, and the negative consequence is higher cap numbers for those players in future seasons, and greater cap penalties to move on from those players in future seasons. The thing is there's no much else they can do. they're set to be nearly $70m over the cap in 2021, and other than these restructures, they would not be able to get under the cap by the start of the new league year. They would have to cut or trade all of their highly paid players. -
I feel the hype about Carl Lawson is from a combination of people who haven't really watched him play, and who overrate "pressures" by assuming that all pressures are equally disruptive. Lawson is a tough, physical, high effort guy, he tackles well, plays the run reasonably well, he has decent size, and he would fit nicely as a DE for us. He's not a dynamic pass rusher, and I don't think he ever would be a dynamic pass rusher. He has some quickness and speed, good speed to power, but he's not the kind of explosive pass rusher that blows up the other team's blocking schemes. He has below average bend and closing speed, and he takes a lot of steps, which explains his tragically poor three cone. He also has below average length, and gets neutralized by good blockers. This is all obvious on his tape, it was obvious on his college tape, and it's why he went in the 4th round. TomDiggs mentioned Lawson's knockdowns/hits and hurries. PFF recorded six edge rushers with at least QB 15 hits; despite the fact that Lawson had 24 hits, he only had five sacks, which is the least sacks among those six players. In fact, there were ten edges with fewer than 15 QB hits, but with at least ten sacks. PFF has 24 edges with at least 30 pressures; Lawson had 34 hurries, but was tied for fifth fewest sacks among those 24 players. In fact, there were five edges with fewer hurries than Lawson, but at least ten sacks. My point is that QB hits and pressures only show a player that manages to get near the QB at some point during the play. Without context, they don't necessarily show a player that makes a definite impact on the play. That's why I value PFF's pass rush productivity (PRP) stat, because sacks are weighted more heavily than hits and pressures. And that makes sense because a sack ends the play. A QB can be pressured, even hit, and still make a positive play. Recognizing a sack as nearly always a negative play for the offense, PRP shows the difference between a guy who gets near the QB, and a pass rusher who makes plays for the defense. Sometimes the overlap is not as great as you might think. Lawson's PRP was 8.5, tied for #18, well separated from guys like Bosa (10.6) and Watt (9.7). In general, a player with a bunch of total pressures, but low sack numbers, like Lawson, is a guy who gets a bunch of pass rush snaps but doesn't have the length, bend and closing speed to get home often enough. This is why guys like Trey Hendrickson and Leonard Floyd can have a third fewer total pressures, but twice as many sacks as Lawson (Hendrickson also had 80 fewer pass rush snaps). And Lawson gets a ton of pass rush snaps because he plays for a bad team with no other good edge rushers, so as long as he's healthy he'll have a lot of pressures, but he'll probably never be a big sack guy. He's Trey Flowers. Better 40, same agility, not as long, mid level edge rusher who is well rounded and a good guy to have on your team, but not a dominant pass rusher. I can't see offering him $14m/year to not sack the QB. Any projection that has him as a big time sack guy is unrealistic, IMO.
-
It's nice to see Pittman, Smith and Okereke get some love. -
By NewColtsFan · Posted
Did I misread your post? Did you not say you were in favor of moving Nelson to LT? That if we’re going to pay him top dollar, it would be better to do it with him as our LT instead of at LG? That wasn’t you? I’m sorry, I thought that’s what I responded to....
-
-
Members
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now