Greg Rousseau 5th year option, extension candidate?

[Alphadawg7]

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Ya’ll keep saying it “clearly would” when the only evidence is speculation.

 

There’s loads of player who played more snaps and had worse sack totals. 
 

Especially in a guy who hasn’t proven much as a reliable pass rusher.

 

Again, that logic doesn't hold water.  That is like saying because Floyd had more sacks with less snaps then Greg should play less snaps to get more sacks.  

 

Sacks are going to vary year to year regardless of exact same snaps, less snaps, more snaps.  The only statement that is 100% factual and true is when you play more snaps you get more opportunities.  So its 100% factual to say the odds he would increase his stat totals are HIGHER with more snaps.

 

But Sacks are a TERRIBLE barometer for this discussion anyway.  Its a single play.  You are talking about a single play happening a couple more times over a 17 game span or not happening a couple times less.  I mean that can be the difference of less than 1 second total of time on whether he got 2 more sacks or gets 2 less sacks as some of these plays come within a fraction of a second of being a sack or not being a sack.  

 

This isn't like a WR say having 400 more yards or not if he was a starter vs role player.  

[BBFL]

15 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Ya’ll keep saying it “clearly would” when the only evidence is speculation.

 

There’s loads of player who played more snaps and had worse sack totals. 
 

Especially in a guy who hasn’t proven much as a reliable pass rusher.

Again, I understand your thinking. I get it and it’s not wholly disagreeable.

 

I see a guy who’s put up reasonable stats on nearly half the possible snaps he could have played over the course of 3 seasons. Is 23 years old. Solid against the run. Reasonable against the pass yet is still relatively raw to the game of football and the nuances that come with it. 
 

Repetition is the only way to get better. If he sees the field 75% of the snaps these next two years I firmly believe he is capable of 10 sacks…

 

And to circle back to the original point and comparison, if an average player like Brian Burns is getting a deal of $150m it is reasonable to suggest a guy that is on less playing time with just as good stat lines to get a sizable contract given to him at 25 y/o. 
 

 

Edited March 13 by BBFL

[FireChans]

14 minutes ago, BBFL said:

Again, I understand your thinking. I get it and it’s not wholly disagreeable.

 

I see a guy who’s put up reasonable stats on nearly half the possible snaps he could have played over the course of 3 seasons. Is 23 years old. Solid against the run. Reasonable against the pass yet is still relatively raw to the game of football and the nuances that come with it. 
 

Repetition is the only way to get better. If he sees the field 75% of the snaps these next two years I firmly believe he is capable of 10 sacks…

 

And to circle back to the original point and comparison, if an average player like Brian Burns is getting a deal of $150m it is reasonable to suggest a guy that is on less playing time with just as good stat lines to get a sizable contract given to him at 25 y/o. 
 

 

Fair enough.

 

I guess I’m not as high on Rousseau’s pass rush potential as y’all are. Imo, I could easily see Rousseau playing 70+% of snaps and still be a 6 or 7 sack guy. 
 

Sometimes the edge rush light never comes on for these guys. 

[PBF81]

3 hours ago, mannc said:

The 5th year option is a slam dunk.  We're talking about a three-down defensive end who can stuff the run and has a ton of upside as a pass rusher.  Remember, Rousseau is only 23-years old...younger than some guys in this year's draft.   

 

He'll be 24 on draft day, most draftees will be 22 or 23.  You raise a great point however, if You're going to draft younger than average players, it has risks.  

 

Rousseau isn't even sniffing his prime yet.  He definitely has a higher ceiling.  If he doesn't reach it, maybe people should be asking why not.  

 

 

[Fan in Chicago]

If picking up the option costs $13mm, I am in favor of doing it. He had a down year but he has potential, plays steadily and is still young. His best may be in front of him 

[DCofNC]

On 3/13/2024 at 9:25 AM, Matt_In_NH said:

The bolded is a weird position to take, would you also never franchise tag a guy, even a Josh Allen, ever?  Like never ever?   Signing the 5th year option for Edmunds worked out cause it was not that much, it also worked out with Oliver IMO.   But I do understand your argument about leverage...especially in this case where it is a highly paid position like DE.

No it failed miserably with Edmunds, his market value was less than they paid for the 5th year option and worse, he outperformed it and then cost 35% more, so much so they had to let him walk.   Either you extend or you franchise, you don’t lock yourself into a high risk low reward situation of the 5th year, it’s stupid.

[Matt_In_NH]

10 hours ago, DCofNC said:

No it failed miserably with Edmunds, his market value was less than they paid for the 5th year option and worse, he outperformed it and then cost 35% more, so much so they had to let him walk.   Either you extend or you franchise, you don’t lock yourself into a high risk low reward situation of the 5th year, it’s stupid.

 

So you think it was stupid for the Bills to pick up the 5th year on Josh correct?  Just want to understand your position clearly.  That was stupid correct?  I do get you give the player leverage by picking up the option but for the right player it can absolutely make sense but you also pick up some leverage.   The players hate it which is probably means it's good for the teams.   

 

I will also just point out that with Edmunds it is simply your opinion he was not worth the $12M, one year later he got $18M and he did not change in any significant way.   It is also just your opinion he outperformed the $12M so much in year 5 that his market was now 35% higher.  I agree his 5th year was his best year but he did not blow years 1-4 out of the water so much that he went from 35% below a $12M AAV to 35% above that.  The Bills probably tried extending him and could not agree on the price so they lived with the 5th year option, it was not some terrible value.  See Knox and Miller if you want to see bad values.  Edmunds has always been a polarizing player for Bills fans and has never had as many impact plays as people expect of him, not in years1-4, 5 or last year with Chicago.  

[Shortchaz]

(Gut feeling)

 

I don’t think we can afford him. He’s going to demand a huge contract and we can’t afford to have that much capital invested in good players rather than hall of fame/elite. I only see him as a bad value resigning. He’s good but I’d rather use the resources elsewhere.

 

(I’m open to the possibility that I’m completely wrong) 

[LABILLBACKER]

1 hour ago, Shortchaz said:

(Gut feeling)

 

I don’t think we can afford him. He’s going to demand a huge contract and we can’t afford to have that much capital invested in good players rather than hall of fame/elite. I only see him as a bad value resigning. He’s good but I’d rather use the resources elsewhere.

 

(I’m open to the possibility that I’m completely wrong) 

Yeah if I'm paying 18-20M/ yr for a pass rusher, he sure as hell better be a 10-15 sack game wrecker. Not a good player averaging 5.5 sacks a yr in his career.  Personally I think we're even overpaying for AJE.

[SoonerBillsFan]

Nope. Injuries the last couple years and inconsistent 

[BarleyNY]

On 3/13/2024 at 5:40 PM, Fan in Chicago said:

If picking up the option costs $13mm, I am in favor of doing it. He had a down year but he has potential, plays steadily and is still young. His best may be in front of him 

Yup. OTC has it at about $13.4M. I am fine with the Bills picking that up and then either signing him to a reasonable extension or letting him walk. And I’m okay with them not picking it up. It depends on what they want out of the LDE spot. If they want a DE to play the run and contain the QB, then GR is fine. If they want something more out of that spot in the way of pass rush, then they should decline the option and use the money for a replacement that can.

[billsbackto81]

On 3/13/2024 at 8:37 AM, strive_for_five_guy said:

Man, $19M seems steep for what we’re getting from Rousseau.  I know we have a bunch of needs entering the draft, seems like EDGE is right up there with WR and DT.  More reason to land a stopgap FS in FA, so we can focus on these positions in the first 4 rounds of the draft.

This^^^^

 

 

[BarleyNY]

On 3/13/2024 at 5:38 PM, PBF81 said:

 

He'll be 24 on draft day, most draftees will be 22 or 23.  You raise a great point however, if You're going to draft younger than average players, it has risks.  

 

Rousseau isn't even sniffing his prime yet.  He definitely has a higher ceiling.  If he doesn't reach it, maybe people should be asking why not.  

 

 

 

Dunno about that. I don’t think GR has the athletic traits to become a particularly good pass rusher. His lack of bend and flexibility really limits him. He can be a good compliment to a player like Von was expected to be here, but he’s not ever going to be a guy who puts quick pressure on QBs. Not with any consistency at least. 

[FireChans]

On 3/13/2024 at 12:33 PM, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Again, that logic doesn't hold water.  That is like saying because Floyd had more sacks with less snaps then Greg should play less snaps to get more sacks.  

 

Sacks are going to vary year to year regardless of exact same snaps, less snaps, more snaps.  The only statement that is 100% factual and true is when you play more snaps you get more opportunities.  So its 100% factual to say the odds he would increase his stat totals are HIGHER with more snaps.

 

But Sacks are a TERRIBLE barometer for this discussion anyway.  Its a single play.  You are talking about a single play happening a couple more times over a 17 game span or not happening a couple times less.  I mean that can be the difference of less than 1 second total of time on whether he got 2 more sacks or gets 2 less sacks as some of these plays come within a fraction of a second of being a sack or not being a sack.  

 

This isn't like a WR say having 400 more yards or not if he was a starter vs role player.  

I’m arguing the correlation between snaps and sacks is not that strong, not that it’s an inverse relationship lol.

[PBF81]

4 hours ago, BarleyNY said:

 

Dunno about that. I don’t think GR has the athletic traits to become a particularly good pass rusher. His lack of bend and flexibility really limits him. He can be a good compliment to a player like Von was expected to be here, but he’s not ever going to be a guy who puts quick pressure on QBs. Not with any consistency at least. 

 

No disagreement, but he should still improve.  To what extent remains to be seen.  

 

At Miami (U) he was in somewhat of a unique role that he's not in in the NFL nor will be.