Who Are the Best Remaining Pass Rushers on Day 2 of FA?

[Thurman#1]

On 3/16/2021 at 9:41 PM, MAJBobby said:

Draft one. 
 

Notice Ravens are one of the most if not the most Analytical Football team in the NFL and they would not pay either of their pass rushers. 
 

offenses today make paying Huge money to DEs the wrong move. 

 

 

You claim to have made your point about this. You haven't.

 

KC won the Super Bowl only after they went out and got very expensive DE Frank Clark. Clark is still the 5th highest paid DE by average salary. And KC is the most successful team recently, by far. The best team last year was the Bucs, and they also are paying megabucks to an edge guy.

 

The year before, the Super Bowl was Chief - Niners. The Niners have paid.

 

That's just the opposite of your point. The smartest best teams are doing it.

 

That doesn't mean that we should go out necessarily and grab the highest-paid DE in FA. But should we pay our own guy a ton if we draft a guy and he turns out well, or if we trade for somebody and he does well? Yeah. Paying your own DE FAs when it's time, even if they're really expensive, is smart.

 

 

 

Not that I would have any problem with drafting one if the right guy is there. If we have a shot at a guy we believe in at DE in the draft, we should take it.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 18, 2021 by Thurman#1

[MAJBobby]

1 hour ago, BuffaloBillsGospel said:

 

You can repeat this over and over and I will show you a million different scenarios.... Both SB NYG Vs. Pats, Tampa bay SB with Sapp, Simieon Rice, Derrik Brooks etc., Ravens 2000 defense. It's not just a fad, it's a necessity to have a pass rush. Why would you argue that? Not really understanding the argument that you are clearly losing.

Sure same argument for years you can win a SB without a QB. Oooo also you need an elite RB. Oooo I can go on and on with the little football cliches. 
 

also you talk Frank Clark. Fine 

 

6 sacks 29 tackles 20M. 
 

3.33M a sack.  is that great value in your Mind. I remember Aaron Schobel would get RIPPED for worse production. 
 

Hell Murphy got RIPPED for his 4 sacks in lesser games and 1/3rd the cost. 
 

people Rip Hughes saying he isn’t value anymore and was 1.5 sacks less than Frank Clark. 

Edited March 18, 2021 by MAJBobby

[Boxcar]

29 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

Sure same argument for years you can win a SB without a QB. Oooo also you need an elite RB. Oooo I can go on and on with the little football cliches. 
 

also you talk Frank Clark. Fine 

 

6 sacks 29 tackles 20M. 
 

3.33M a sack.  is that great value in your Mind. I remember Aaron Schobel would get RIPPED for worse production. 
 

Hell Murphy got RIPPED for his 4 sacks in lesser games and 1/3rd the cost. 
 

people Rip Hughes saying he isn’t value anymore and was 1.5 sacks less than Frank Clark. 

Are sacks the only important stat? Are you saying that Clark is not an impact player?

[MAJBobby]

11 minutes ago, Boxcar said:

Are sacks the only important stat? Are you saying that Clark is not an impact player?

If you read my additional post. Yea this is all about pressure on the QB. 
 

I am saying 3.3M per sack is not great value. 

[Boxcar]

21 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

If you read my additional post. Yea this is all about pressure on the QB. 
 

I am saying 3.3M per sack is not great value. 

Yeah, you brought up the most analytically inclined team in the Ravens, who are currently employing a RB as their QB.

 

Well, if you think Frank Clark isn't anything special, you're free to hold that opinion. Have fun finding anyone on Earth who agrees.

[MAJBobby]

Just now, Boxcar said:

Yeah, you brought up the most analytically inclined team in the Ravens, who are currently employing a RB as their QB.

 

Well, if you think Frank Clark isn't anything special, you're free to hold that opinion. Have fun finding anyone on Earth who agrees.

Cool good to know you will pay 20M for 6 sacks. 
 

hope you didn’t bash Trent Murphy at all, almost same production at 1/3rd price 

[Boxcar]

Just now, MAJBobby said:

Cool good to know you will pay 20M for 6 sacks. 
 

hope you didn’t bash Trent Murphy at all, almost same production at 1/3rd price 

This is like evaluating a baseball player solely based on how many home runs he hits.

[MAJBobby]

5 minutes ago, Boxcar said:

This is like evaluating a baseball player solely based on how many home runs he hits.

Premise of the post. Hence why I talked time to throw and everything. 

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, MAJBobby said:

Sure same argument for years you can win a SB without a QB. Oooo also you need an elite RB. Oooo I can go on and on with the little football cliches. 
 

also you talk Frank Clark. Fine 

 

6 sacks 29 tackles 20M. 
 

3.33M a sack.  is that great value in your Mind. I remember Aaron Schobel would get RIPPED for worse production. 
 

Hell Murphy got RIPPED for his 4 sacks in lesser games and 1/3rd the cost. 
 

people Rip Hughes saying he isn’t value anymore and was 1.5 sacks less than Frank Clark. 

 

 

The RB thing is nonsense, obvious nonsense, and an absolute straw man besides. We're talking DEs. You wanna talk RBs, start another thread.

 

Chiefs. Smart team. Paid a ton for a DE. Made the Super Bowl. Twice. It happened.

 

More, you're doing what guys losing arguments generally do, you're moving the goal posts. You didn't say that paying a lot of money to a DE won't necessarily get you great stats from that DE every year. If you'd said that, not as many people would have argued.  Here's what you said:

 

On 3/16/2021 at 9:41 PM, MAJBobby said:

offenses today make paying Huge money to DEs the wrong move. 

 

 

That's what you said, and it doesn't make sense. They went from:

 

2018 without Clark:  24th in points allowed and 31st in yards allowed, to ...

 

2019 with Clark:  7th in points allowed and 17th in yards allowed.

 

That was absolutely huge. And no, Clark was not responsible for all of that change but he absolutely made them harder to play. Clark has never been a sacks-only guy. He's got a really good all-around game. He gets sacks but not a ton. He gets pressures, he's good against the run and holding the edge, he's a tough son of a gun. He absolutely made major contributions and their defense absolutely got a lot better.

 

The smarter teams do this, as you can see from looking at Super Bowls. You have to get the right guy, no question. Not every shiny object will be a good get. And nobody would say that an expensive DE is all you need, once you have that you're OK. Nobody. It's not true about any position, even QB.

 

But if you get the right DE, paying him a ton of money can be an excellent investment.

 

 

48 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

If you read my additional post. Yea this is all about pressure on the QB. 
 

I am saying 3.3M per sack is not great value. 

 

 

Moving the target again.

 

You didn't say that you need to get great value in terms of value per sack. If you had, you'd have gotten different answers. And frankly, that argument is so poor you'd have gotten even more negative replies.

 

You said that "paying huge money to DEs is the wrong move. "

 

And the improvement that defense experienced with Frank Clark and the difference that made to the whole team says you're dead wrong.

Edited March 18, 2021 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

28 minutes ago, Boxcar said:

Yeah, you brought up the most analytically inclined team in the Ravens, who are currently employing a RB as their QB.

 

Well, if you think Frank Clark isn't anything special, you're free to hold that opinion. Have fun finding anyone on Earth who agrees.

 

 

Yup. Pro Bowl starter in 2019 and reserve in 2020. He's excellent.

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

21 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

Sure same argument for years you can win a SB without a QB. Oooo also you need an elite RB. Oooo I can go on and on with the little football cliches. 
 

also you talk Frank Clark. Fine 

 

6 sacks 29 tackles 20M. 
 

3.33M a sack.  is that great value in your Mind. I remember Aaron Schobel would get RIPPED for worse production. 
 

Hell Murphy got RIPPED for his 4 sacks in lesser games and 1/3rd the cost. 
 

people Rip Hughes saying he isn’t value anymore and was 1.5 sacks less than Frank Clark. 

 

Is this dude for real? 

[machine gun kelly]

Not really understanding the debate on if an edge rusher is valuable.  The answer is simple.  YES.  Interior pressure is also extremely valuable (see Aaron Darnold).  I was disappointed we didn’t secure Ngakoue, but when I heard it was only $13 mil./yr., I was furious.  I know there better all around DE’s, but he is a great pressure guy.  He and Epenesa would’ve been an excellent rotation.

 

I don’t know who is left at this point, nor what we have left.  Maybe we can at least add depth at TE with Rudolph.  I haven’t heard he was snagged yet.  I know a DE thread so I got it.

[Rc2catch]

7 minutes ago, machine gun kelly said:

Not really understanding the debate on if an edge rusher is valuable.  The answer is simple.  YES.  Interior pressure is also extremely valuable (see Aaron Darnold).  I was disappointed we didn’t secure Ngakoue, but when I heard it was only $13 mil./yr., I was furious.  I know there better all around DE’s, but he is a great pressure guy.  He and Epenesa would’ve been an excellent rotation.

 

I don’t know who is left at this point, nor what we have left.  Maybe we can at least add depth at TE with Rudolph.  I haven’t heard he was snagged yet.  I know a DE thread so I got it.

Rudolph signed with the giants at pretty big money I think for 2 years 

[machine gun kelly]

Thanks Rc.  Didn’t see that one so appreciated.  

[NewEra]

22 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

If you read my additional post. Yea this is all about pressure on the QB. 
 

I am saying 3.3M per sack is not great value. 

 

22 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

Cool good to know you will pay 20M for 6 sacks. 
 

hope you didn’t bash Trent Murphy at all, almost same production at 1/3rd price 

You’re putting entirely too much emphasis on one stat.  Sacks.  Frank Clark gets pressure. He gets pressure in big games. He’s 💯 worth the money.....and the 1st rd draft pick they gave up.  
 

I

[Locomark]

22 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

The RB thing is nonsense, obvious nonsense, and an absolute straw man besides. We're talking DEs. You wanna talk RBs, start another thread.

 

Chiefs. Smart team. Paid a ton for a DE. Made the Super Bowl. Twice. It happened.

 

More, you're doing what guys losing arguments generally do, you're moving the goal posts. You didn't say that paying a lot of money to a DE won't necessarily get you great stats from that DE every year. If you'd said that, not as many people would have argued.  Here's what you said:

 

 

That's what you said, and it doesn't make sense. They went from:

 

2018 without Clark:  24th in points allowed and 31st in yards allowed, to ...

 

2019 with Clark:  7th in points allowed and 17th in yards allowed.

 

That was absolutely huge. And no, Clark was not responsible for all of that change but he absolutely made them harder to play. Clark has never been a sacks-only guy. He's got a really good all-around game. He gets sacks but not a ton. He gets pressures, he's good against the run and holding the edge, he's a tough son of a gun. He absolutely made major contributions and their defense absolutely got a lot better.

 

The smarter teams do this, as you can see from looking at Super Bowls. You have to get the right guy, no question. Not every shiny object will be a good get. And nobody would say that an expensive DE is all you need, once you have that you're OK. Nobody. It's not true about any position, even QB.

 

But if you get the right DE, paying him a ton of money can be an excellent investment.

 

 

 

 

Moving the target again.

 

You didn't say that you need to get great value in terms of value per sack. If you had, you'd have gotten different answers. And frankly, that argument is so poor you'd have gotten even more negative replies.

 

You said that "paying huge money to DEs is the wrong move. "

 

And the improvement that defense experienced with Frank Clark and the difference that made to the whole team says you're dead wrong.

You forget they have an all pro in Chris Jones on the inside as a DT also. We don’t. That’s a big difference. You need 2 big time pass rushers to kill teams. In the 90s we had Bruce and Bennett. We absolutely need someone other than Jerry and we would be a totally different team. Oliver was supposed to be it but he just doesn’t ever look like he will be dominant. 

Edited March 19, 2021 by Locomark