Grice cut dl to be added soon

[Steve]

Sorry, but your post is total horse manure.

Phillips has spent a career getting vulture sacks when others couldn't. There is a knack to it. If anyone could do it they would. But the point is that they can't.

There is nothing flukish about Phillips' sack numbers last year. They are right in line with what he has done over the course of his whole career. The dude is very consistent with all seasons but one in his last 9 seasons producing between 7.0 and 11.5 sacks and an average (not counting the one injury riddled season) of 9.0 sacks per season.

Also, Phillips led the Broncos in sacks with 10.0. The 3 next best Broncos had 6.0, 5.5 and 5.0 sacks, respectively. So Phillips nearly doubled the next best other players in terms of sacks. So your view is that anyone could have gotten those sacks, yet Phillips did so at nearly twice the rate of anyone else, finishing with nearly identical numbers as he finished with the year before when with a completely different team. To say the least, your theory is incredibly unpersuasive.

There is a reason why the Titans gave him a raise and a two year deal to play for them as a 33-year-old. They could see that he was not done by his above average performance last year. Anyone trying to be objective could see that. Obviously, Phillips was much better than any LB that we had last year, including Johnson, who missed considerable time with injury and was not as effective against the run as he had been previously when he played as evidenced by our getting run all over last year. None of our pass rushers did anything, so Phillips was way better than any of them.

You are so full of it. How does him finishing the play mean that the other players didn't cause the important part? Again, go back and watch the plays, and it is incredibly obvious what happened.

[sandiego17]

I am not even a Philips fan at all, but I am capable of being objective when it comes to discussing Phillips unlike many on this forum.

It is totally ridiculous that you think Freeney was playing "every bit as well as Phillips" before getting hurt. Based upon what?! He had all of .5 sacks on the season before going down against Dallas. Freeney contributes virtually nothing else to a team outside of his pass rush--he's a one trick pony. The guy is a pure pass rusher who failed to provide an effective pass rush. You don't just get to make up crap about Freeney playing well and somehow it counts as being true. There is nothing to support your utterly absurd assertion.

I said Ingram was not as effective when he played. I did not say why. I agree that Ingram's knee did not help him when he returned later in the season, but I've got news for you, Ingram has no history of being a top end pass rusher like Phillips. You can't assume he would have been better than or even as good as Phillips if healthy and I take it from your comment that you are conceding that he was not as good as Phillips contrary to your earlier post.

My earlier point was that Phillips produced better sack numbers than Freeney and Ingram combined on a per game basis. Naturally, I only needed to establish that Phillips was better than both individually on a per game basis, but your assertion was so absurd as neither Freeney nor Ingram did much of anything as a pass rusher last year and Phillips was a top 20 sack artist with 10 sacks. There's nothing else in any of their games last year that is going to offset that disparity.

Ya, I completely disagree, even with what you said you said
(You called Ingram 'healthy' now backtrack). SACKS! Freeney couldn't have been playing well, right? I mean, sacks! Clary PFF grade matters, Freeneys doesn't, as consistent as expected.

[Stinky Wizzleteats+]

140 words or less and your tap dancing, back peddling, or spinning.

[homeless simpson]

this thread reeks of a container full of spilled milk.

[Yubaking]

Ya, I completely disagree, even with what you said you said
(You called Ingram 'healthy' now backtrack). SACKS! Freeney couldn't have been playing well, right? I mean, sacks! Clary PFF grade matters, Freeneys doesn't, as consistent as expected.

First, anyone should be able to tell from the context of what I wrote that when I used the term "healthy", I meant simply that Freeney and Ingram played in a total of 8 games, which is correct.

Second, when you brought up that Ingram was returning from his knee injury, I acknowledged that he would still have been limited by that.

Third, the fact that Ingram may have been still recovering while playing is totally irrelevant to the discussion. I did not fully recover from my blown Achilles' tendon and I would not have gotten 10 sacks in the NFL last year either. Ingram's chances for 10 sacks were barely, if at all, better than mine and I am not even an NFL player. That was never going to happen last year. Ingram has done nothing so far in his career to suggest that that is going to happen this year. Next you will be arguing that Keenan Allen's knee injury prevented him from running a 4.3 40. Just mind numbingly absurd stuff.

Fourth, Freeney is a pass rusher. His primary job is to get sacks. While he was playing, the team had no turnovers and we were yielding a 70% completion percentage against even though he was credited with getting "pressures". But the problem is that that term is defined to include any instance in which the QB resets his feet (and then completes the pass anyway). His so-called "pressures" were largely irrelevant. So, no, he does not get much credit for them in my view. Getting close and getting the job done are two different things. He does get credit for the .5 sacks he registered.

Fifth, your failure to follow my use of PFF's grading system is, while to be expected, sadly even after multiple explanations of it, disappointing. In my view, Steve has raised a legitimate concern about how PFF scores plays, so I think that PFF's grading system is mostly unreliable and have stopped relying on it as my primary source of statistical support for an argument with one minor exception. That exception is when a player is graded heavily in either a positive or negative direction. With extreme grades in either direction, I do think there is a greater chance that PFF's grade is at least correct as an indication of the direction of the grade (either positive or negative).

Clary had a hugely negative grade, especially in run blocking, so that seems more reliable in terms of it being correct as to him being a positive or negative player in general because for it to be wrong as to its general direction (in this case negative), PFF would have had to have amassed a very large net error. It's not impossible, but it is also not likely.

For those that put more stock in PFF's analysis than I do, I would note that it is my recollection that almost all of Freeney's net positive rating came from one game. Without that one game, his rating is very close to zero, which comes close to capturing his actual game impact--very close to zero. Of course, consistent with my approach to PFF's grades, I find Freeney's overall rating not to be extreme enough to have confidence in relying on it.

Again, I do not see what is so complicated about my general distrust in PFF's grading system except for extreme cases. Sorry that you were apparently not able to follow the concept.

[Yubaking]

You are so full of it. How does him finishing the play mean that the other players didn't cause the important part? Again, go back and watch the plays, and it is incredibly obvious what happened.

The crux of our disagreement is that you think "anyone" could have made the sacks that Phillips made. I disagree. I think Phillips has an innate ability to sense where to be on certain plays that is superior to that of many players that he plays with/against. I think that has always been a comparative strength of his and that he never was the most physically talented player. Again, if other players could do it, they would. The fact that they don't suggests that they can't.

I disagree with your notion that Phillips' sacks were nothing more than happenstance. Phillips has been a consistent sack producer over his career and that belies your assertion that his sacks were happenstance, especially when combined with the fact that Phillips got a disproportionately large share of the Broncos sacks last year. 8 of 9 seasons with sacks between 7.0 and 11.5 shows remarkable consistency as does his finishing 21st in sacks with us in 2012 and then 20th in sacks in 2013 with Denver. It seems like the thing that is consistent in this equation is Phillips and his performance over the years.

[Zot]

I would call this thread officially hijacked.

[Yubaking]

Ingram was going to play every down. Not sure why you think he wasn't. 1st round picks are every down players, particularly ones that can handle the run (like Ingram).

English and JJ were slotted to handle the SAM as a pair. We had a 6th rounder as the 4th OLB.

Not great depth, but there would have been no real issues if Ingram doesn't tear his ACL.

When that happened, everything went to shit. Your beloved Philips and Barnes were signed elsewhere. Barnes got a starting gig in NYJ where he proceeded to go on IR. Philips got the a backup spot with Denver. Both players got better jobs in terms of expected playtime than they would have gotten with the Chargers AT THE TIME THEY SIGNED with those clubs.

So why would either player sign with the Chargers to be 4th on the depth chart? Barnes was 4th the previous year and got 15% of the snaps with everyone healthy. That's what Philips had in store for him as well if Ingram would have remained healthy.

Again, your bullshit argument holds no fucking water for the penultimate time. Stop living in a fantasy world and come back to reality where a team doesn't just snap it's fingers and all the players it wants are signed automatically.

Prior to Ingram's injury it just wasn't a priority to bring back either of those players, nor was it in their best interests to return to the team.

Freeney was a completely reactionary signing that happened out of necessity. I do agree it was a risk that TT took in not having great depth at OLB, but given the state of the roster he took over, it was an understandable risk. A risk he didn't have to take this offseason.

Your argument is better as to Barnes. Phillips was signed to be a reserve in Denver versus being a starter for us after we failed to show him any interest for months, which is what he should have been had we not erred by failing to re-sign him. That doesn't mean that we could not have given snaps to Ingram either. (Some have argued this "failure to develop younger players" nonsense as having precluded us from re-signing players like Phillips while ignoring just how it should work between younger and older talented players as we are about to see with the gradual shifting of the roles of Gates and Green this year.)

As to Barnes, we could have offered him more money to offset the difference in role being offered--part of the money that we seemed to find when we signed Freeney. That may or may not have worked and that's a legitimate point for you to raise.

I am not sure why you think Ingram was going to play every down for us. Very few players play every down, especially among the defensive front 7.

Yes, it was a very bad and unjustified risk that Telesco took. It should have surprised nobody when it failed to work out for very well for us. The bad news is that Telesco seems to want to take a similar risk this year at NT, having apparently not learned all that much from last year's OLB experience. If Mathews is the real deal, though, I will reconsider this view. Unfortunately, most castoffs from other teams are not.

[thelightningwill]

I am not the one that brought it up in this thread.

But you can be the one who ends it. You were right. In hindsight, we should have kept Phillips last year.

[thelightningwill]

Except the only reason he played better than those guys is because those guys were hurt, and I don't care about his sack numbers. Ingram got hurt, shit happens. That does not mean Phillips should have been brought back. He does nothing for this team.




JJ. Guys like Phillips who are on their third team in three seasons are compensated like the non impact, non difference makers that they are. Question for you (not Yuba, I've heard his answer and disagree), why do you think both the chargers and broncos didn't make any effort to bring him back? We already know it isn't salary.



You're initial thought was correct. Yuba isn't even in the same area code as right.

Why do I think the Chargers and Broncos got rid of Phillips? I assume it was because the teams thought they had better players. Or maybe they didn't like his attitude. Or maybe, at least in the Chargers' case, it was like fans on this site said - the Chargers were rebuilding and wanted to try some younger players. I don't know. The reason why doesn't matter. As a fan, I'm not knowledgeable enough to determine why things happen. I just know they happen.

I don't understand your arguments. So, unlike Yubaking and all the anti-Yubakings, I won't continue with this year-old debate. (Well, I've said that twice before, but this time I mean it, I think.)

[thelightningwill]

All of the players you listed except Williams was better then Phillips, although in the case of JJ it was because he is a better run defender. Again, ANYONE could have gotten those sacks. And if it was a choice of Williams vs Phillips, I still would have kept Williams by virtue of his not being on his last legs.

People are suggesting that Phillips is a better player based on better production, but that is flat out WRONG. The production was a fact he was on a better team and on the field more. But anyoen who played DE for the Broncos in Phillips place would probably have had similar produiction. Again, it was the other DL and LB for the Donks that flushed the QB to Phillips.

Thanks.

[thelightningwill]

Speaking of area codes, this is the Grice thread... Keep your garbage in the right thread guys!

Sorry Stinky.
Sorry Grice.
I'm glad we got a new lineman - I hope he's good. Backup linemen are more important than 5th-string runningbacks.