Leonard Williams collected just 0.5 registered sacks this past season. However, according to Pro Football Focus, the 25-year-old's success as a pass rusher was actually much better than his numbers showed.
Williams finished the year with a 11.3% pressure rate. Among the 87 interior defenders with at least 200 pass rushing snaps, this ranked 13th. The 6-foot-5, 302-pound defensive lineman also led the position with 19 quarterback hits. As PFF mentioned, if Williams would have been able to get to the quarterback just a few fractions of a second faster on some of those plays, his sack numbers would have looked a lot different.
While his sack totals were low in 2019, Williams showed the ability to get to the quarterback in his first four NFL seasons. From 2015-2018, Williams put together campaigns with sack numbers of 3.0, 7.0, 2.0 and 5.0. If he is re-signed this offseason, the Giants' interior DL group of Williams, Dexter Lawrence, Dalvin Tomlinson and B.J. Hill would be one of the deepest in the league.
I am an admitted Williams fan, felt the trade was justified and want to see him signed. I certainly see the other side of the argument, but dont agree it is a slam dunk it was a horrible move by Gettleman.
I have never bought into the idea trading for Him doesnt increase their chances to sign him. I also feel the price, a 3rd this season and 4 th next is reasonable.
This is a first round impactful player in his mid 20s, the 3 rd and 4 th pick next season were no sure thing to garner his kind of value
Oh, and by the way, why the hell wouldn't they wait until free agency...
Quote:
the issue is his new contract value. If he gets open market dollars, I really would prefer it not be from NYG.
Especially, since that money should be going to the Edge first, imo.
I'm sort of in the same spot. I didn't like the investment of trade picks, but they are sunk cost at this point.
So unless Team LW is in some magnanimous mood and takes a significant discount off the projected market value for DTs, I say let him walk and use that money to solve bigger needs.
Yep, that's where I'm at. We can certainly use LW, but at what cost ceiling. The Spotrac estimate is really interesting, I was speculating $10-12M.
And yet Williams is at $8.2M. Why do you think that is?
Just looking at the projected market for DTs- franchise tag and what other DTs have been compensated in the last two years (with similar production to LW) - I couldn't reconcile back to it.
Transition tag might actually be a decent move. It allows Team LW to test the market and then we have the rights of first refusal.
Oh, and by the way, why the hell wouldn't they wait until free agency...
Duhhhh maybe the FRANCHISE TAG? That is a lot of the reason for the trade IMO but Gettleman can't really say that. If he had gone elsewhere he may NOT have been available this year to NYG as he could have been signed or franchised. The Giants have a little leverage in that they can franchise him. They also have ensured that they did not lose control to another team.
2. A base calculated value is determined after adjusting the contracts of the players above as if signed at Williams's current age (25). A linear regression is performed, arriving at an initial value of a 5 year, $41,469,565 ($8.293 per) contract.
3. A statistical comparison is made between the above comp players and Williams's performance over the last two years. The stats included are Games Played %, Sacks, Tackles, Hurries, Stops, and Rating (I don't know how they arrive at Rating).
4. After applying the % change between those four players and Williams into the base calculated value (step 2), two values are achieved. The average of those two values becomes the calculated market value for Williams ($8.262M).
Basically, this tool measures the bang for the buck on each player. Spotrac has Williams listed as a DE, not a DT, which you would expect to help his value given that DE is a more expensive position and Williams only cost about $4.6 in 2019. You can see that the top of the list is dominated by young players: Arik Armstead, Joey Bosa, Yannick Ngakoue, Myles Garrett. So it should be an advantage for Williams that he is both in his rookie contract and being valuated as a DE.
So where did Williams rank as a DE value? 42nd in the NFL.
So if he's the 42nd best value at DE at $4.6M, what type of value is he going to be at $18M?
Do Spotrac's contract estimate and Value Ranking comprise a good case against signing him, or does Spotrac just join the long list of bad actors with an anti-Giants agenda?
Link - ( New Window )
None of these things are established yet. Opinions already formed about acquiring him are pretty much diarrhea of the mouth to this point.
I don't think that SportsTrac takes into consideration the most important element to buying and selling - the market.
Just more false premises for discussion as is par for the course above
Just looking at the projected market for DTs- franchise tag and what other DTs have been compensated in the last two years (with similar production to LW) - I couldn't reconcile back to it.
Transition tag might actually be a decent move. It allows Team LW to test the market and then we have the rights of first refusal.
Just more false premises for discussion as is par for the course above
How do you know what the market is for Williams? Further, how can the Giants objectively assess it when they've already spent draft picks to get him in the building?
You should hold off on calling people naive. Maybe start with something a little more simple...like not putting words in other people's mouths like you've done with me a couple times already on this thread.
How do you know what the market is for Williams? Further, how can the Giants objectively assess it when they've already spent draft picks to get him in the building?
You should hold off on calling people naive. Maybe start with something a little more simple...like not putting words in other people's mouths like you've done with me a couple times already on this thread.
I haven't put any words into your mouth -- i've used exactly what you've said, and others have said to make my comments. If you want to withdraw what you said - well alrighty then -- so far all I've read from you is a bunch of flawed malarky
Just more false premises for discussion as is par for the course above
The market doesn't really determine the value of a player, it determines what the player gets paid. Production determines the value of a player. If the Giants end up paying a 3rd, a 4th, and $18M annually in cap hit to Williams, it doesn't mean he's worth that. It's just what the Giants ended up paying for him.
Did the market determine what Solder was worth? IMO, it would be hard to make a case he's worth what he's being paid.
Maybe I missed it in this thread but has anyone yet made an argument that Williams is going to give the Giants a discount in free agency or is going to sign before the FA period starts?
Would everyone agree that if Williams doesn't sign with the Giants before free agency starts, talks to other teams, and doesn't give the Giants a discount that giving up a 3rd and a 4th was a poor use of assets by the GM?
Just more false premises for discussion as is par for the course above
There's "fair value" and there's "market value". I think we all assume Leonard Williams is going to get more on the open market than his Spotrac value assessment - that's the entire point of the argument.
Put simply, he's not worth what he's ultimately going to cost. If you told me they could sign him for $8-10 million, while I disagreed with the trade I could live with that. I think that's extremely unlikely.
Fantastic. So when Williams is signed for $17M, we'll get daily cracks about Gettleman and his computer guys not be able to add.
I'm waiting with baited breath.
Quote:
using a Sport track guide printed guide to determine what the value of of a player is -- the market determines the value of a player -- to suggest otherwise is the height of naivety and is just a flawed premise to base a discussion about this on.
Just more false premises for discussion as is par for the course above
There's "fair value" and there's "market value". I think we all assume Leonard Williams is going to get more on the open market than his Spotrac value assessment - that's the entire point of the argument.
Put simply, he's not worth what he's ultimately going to cost. If you told me they could sign him for $8-10 million, while I disagreed with the trade I could live with that. I think that's extremely unlikely.
Good post.
Some people don't seem to be grasping that you can like the player Williams, want to keep him here (the picks are a sunk cost) but still think it's malpractice by the GM to give up picks like that for a rental.
I don't want to beat the dead-horse on this, but OP (who made a nice post) mentioned the picks, so it's fair-game to discuss them here IMO.
Made up.
Made up.
Both times you put words in my mouth. I never suggested resigning Golden or Remmers. I've said the opposite...they were good cheap signings for 2019, and we should pursue similar signings in the 2020 free agent market.
It isn't complicated...but then again neither is understanding that paying Williams $18M is foolish, and you're struggling with that too.
There's "fair value" and there's "market value". I think we all assume Leonard Williams is going to get more on the open market than his Spotrac value assessment - that's the entire point of the argument.
Put simply, he's not worth what he's ultimately going to cost. If you told me they could sign him for $8-10 million, while I disagreed with the trade I could live with that. I think that's extremely unlikely.
maybe read Bill2's assessment above of how to determine what the value of this year's contract dollars are for Leonard WIlliams -- he's the only one above to make a sound market analysis -- everything else is based on knee jerk reactions to flawed presumptions - or Go Terp's continuing dialogue on how to destroy the Giants by looking backward to determine how to stay fluid and acquire bargain talent onto the team.
I get that everyone wants a bargain -- but it's all relative. Williams is a valuable commodity. He is not just a has been that you are taking a gamble on. He's got all the ideal qualities you want on the team and he's just stepping into his prime.
Made up.
Saying "those signings made sense last year, and are the types of signings we should pursue this offseason" is endorsing the signings of Remmers and Golden
Made up.
Both times you put words in my mouth. I never suggested resigning Golden or Remmers. I've said the opposite...they were good cheap signings for 2019, and we should pursue similar signings in the 2020 free agent market.
It isn't complicated...but then again neither is understanding that paying Williams $18M is foolish, and you're struggling with that too.
Really semantics Go Terps -- what's the difference between saying they were good signings and we should make the same types again - and saying that you are endorsing those signings? There's no difference dude.
Signing Golden and Remmers made good sense last year. They were cheap and we got a lot out of them relative to their cost. Those are the types of signings we should be pursuing again in 2020. What aren't you understanding?
That made my day. I needed a good laugh.
Imagine if he even tried? After a few minutes of thinking, it would be like the tryptophan kicked in after eating Chinese food and he'd have to close his door to take a nap...
And what Spotrac has attempted to do is put a number on that value based on Williams's level of play. You don't like that number, so your response is to tell us it's all relative. Relative to what? So if some other DL-hungry team is desperate and offers Williams $18/per, that makes it a good move? Didn't we just see the Giants make that exact mistake with Solder?
It is NEVER a good idea to overpay based on what the market says (or you think it says). Unless the player is special, there is always someone else you can get to fill the role at a lower cost. What the hell did we draft BJ Hill, RJ McIntosh, and Chris Slayton for if not for that?
Williams is not a special player. Let him go get paid somewhere else...we can still give up 3 TDs to Boston Scott without him.
Quote:
See, that's how ridiculous the trade was - it put the Giants in a lose-lose situation. Now we're just stuck hoping for the less shitty option.
No - the lose lose situation is bringing back Remmers and Golden -- which is what you have proposed -- as they are two players that can't hold Leonard Williams boot straps let alone equal his value to the team.
and I for one can't believe that there are proposals above suggesting that paying Golden $18 million is a better use of the Giants resources than retaining LW.
Hold on the guy with double digit sacks is less valuable than a run stuffing DT?
Water carrier.
The press release when/if LW doesn't sign...
DG made the move with JB's system in mind. Now that he's no longer the DC - we couldn't overpay for a player that just doesn't fit the new system that Graham is going to run.
And there ya go - the Jints spin to get out of the sunken cost.
Quote:
There's "fair value" and there's "market value". I think we all assume Leonard Williams is going to get more on the open market than his Spotrac value assessment - that's the entire point of the argument.
Put simply, he's not worth what he's ultimately going to cost. If you told me they could sign him for $8-10 million, while I disagreed with the trade I could live with that. I think that's extremely unlikely.
maybe read Bill2's assessment above of how to determine what the value of this year's contract dollars are for Leonard WIlliams -- he's the only one above to make a sound market analysis -- everything else is based on knee jerk reactions to flawed presumptions - or Go Terp's continuing dialogue on how to destroy the Giants by looking backward to determine how to stay fluid and acquire bargain talent onto the team.
I get that everyone wants a bargain -- but it's all relative. Williams is a valuable commodity. He is not just a has been that you are taking a gamble on. He's got all the ideal qualities you want on the team and he's just stepping into his prime.
The words "valuable commodity" have no meaning without criteria and methodology in place to make some determinations about his value. I read somewhere that Spotrac does something like that, can't remember where though.
Leonard Williams does have value. Minimizing the gap between that value and his cost is what's at issue. At this point the draft picks are sunk cost, if the market dictates an egregious overpay for Williams, they should be willing to let him walk away.
Quote:
Saw that. Would like to know how they derived that number.
Just looking at the projected market for DTs- franchise tag and what other DTs have been compensated in the last two years (with similar production to LW) - I couldn't reconcile back to it.
Transition tag might actually be a decent move. It allows Team LW to test the market and then we have the rights of first refusal.
That is a good point. If we do the transition tag(depending on the number) I would take back some of my objections to the move.
It's shaping up as the safest strategy. In fact, I wouldn't negotiate with Team LW until I heard what the rest of the market thinks.
So instead of just defaulting to the franchise tag, because I think it's just too high based on LW's performance to date, we apply the transition tag and essentially avoid negotiating against ourselves.
If team X offers something > that the franchise tag, assume that's the max we'd be willing to go, we bow out and save some face because we weren't willing to pay above a certain threshold.
Now, personally I would just let LW walk, don't look back on the picks we traded, and reset to use that money for other needs. But going this way at least provides an escape hatch...
Williams is not a special player. Let him go get paid somewhere else...we can still give up 3 TDs to Boston Scott without him.
And here is the core of disagreement -- Williams is a special player -- he fits all the requirement of the Giants with a new all team coach and all team attitude and an above average and impactful skill set for the position he plays
Hold on the guy with double digit sacks is less valuable than a run stuffing DT?
Water carrier.
Yeah the guy with double digit sacks who make costly penalties at critical points of games
Quote:
add a pass rusher to front 7 and hell have an even bigger impact.
LW played the last 8 games for us. I listed the teams yesterday. I keep hearing this big impact he had on the rush defense. Well, of those 8 teams we played, 6 were in the bottom half of the league already in yards/game, 5 of those 6 were in the bottom third, and 3 of those 6 were in the bottom 5 overall.
Only Philly, who we played twice, was basically in the top ten at #11. Their league average was 121 yards per game. In game 1 against us, they got 118 yards. In game 2, they rushed for 121. In other words, we really didnt do much to stop them. Especially the Boston Scott, who they pulled off the street because they were decimated with injuries...
So which is it? Is he special or does he have an above average and impactful skill set?
And I don't know what "all team coach" and "all team attitude" means. If you read my posts above about the two Spotrac tools, those are clearly defined and have a clear methodology. You're basically countering that with "all team coach" and "all team attitude".
These are the kinds of mental gymnastics Giants have been doing for years to justify their poor decisions. Aren't we done with the rationalizing yet?
Quote:
In comment 14780659 bw in dc said:
Quote:
Saw that. Would like to know how they derived that number.
Just looking at the projected market for DTs- franchise tag and what other DTs have been compensated in the last two years (with similar production to LW) - I couldn't reconcile back to it.
Transition tag might actually be a decent move. It allows Team LW to test the market and then we have the rights of first refusal.
That is a good point. If we do the transition tag(depending on the number) I would take back some of my objections to the move.
It's shaping up as the safest strategy. In fact, I wouldn't negotiate with Team LW until I heard what the rest of the market thinks.
So instead of just defaulting to the franchise tag, because I think it's just too high based on LW's performance to date, we apply the transition tag and essentially avoid negotiating against ourselves.
If team X offers something > that the franchise tag, assume that's the max we'd be willing to go, we bow out and save some face because we weren't willing to pay above a certain threshold.
Now, personally I would just let LW walk, don't look back on the picks we traded, and reset to use that money for other needs. But going this way at least provides an escape hatch...
Nothing points to him being special. The Jets, whose coaches were on the spot to start winning immediately, were willing to deal him. The market for him wasn't particularly strong. His stats to date are entirely underwhelming, and he's never been part of a defense known for being stout up the middle.
The only special part of Williams is what he expects to get paid - and right now, the two leading arguments in this thread that support that, IMO - are that there will be a lot of teams with money to spend in FO and that there aren't a lot of big men available in FA.
It really does sound like Defensive Nate Solder, with the added bonus of the cost of two draft picks to retain him. I think he's better that Solder, but not much better than average, and the Giants are lining up to pay him significantly more than that simply because they can.
He played 367 snaps. 125 at DE. 242 at DT.
So team X signs LW to a 4yr/$72M contract, say $40 guaranteed, and that's too high for the brain trust (which it should me), we simply don't match it and wish LW good luck.
Applying the franchise tag, as you know, locks you into the market rate of the current top five salaries at that position, or 120% of the player's current salary, whichever is >.
Nothing points to him being special. The Jets, whose coaches were on the spot to start winning immediately, were willing to deal him. The market for him wasn't particularly strong. His stats to date are entirely underwhelming, and he's never been part of a defense known for being stout up the middle.
The only special part of Williams is what he expects to get paid - and right now, the two leading arguments in this thread that support that, IMO - are that there will be a lot of teams with money to spend in FO and that there aren't a lot of big men available in FA.
It really does sound like Defensive Nate Solder, with the added bonus of the cost of two draft picks to retain him. I think he's better that Solder, but not much better than average, and the Giants are lining up to pay him significantly more than that simply because they can.
Man, I dislike the Leonard Williams deal on its merits, but now that you brought Nate Solder into it we should run for the hills...
And I don't know what "all team coach" and "all team attitude" means. If you read my posts above about the two Spotrac tools, those are clearly defined and have a clear methodology. You're basically countering that with "all team coach" and "all team attitude".
These are the kinds of mental gymnastics Giants have been doing for years to justify their poor decisions. Aren't we done with the rationalizing yet?
Yes I see the mental gymnastics you are advancing and appreciate the lengths of exercise it takes to make the arguments you are making; ie. using completely arbitrary tools like Sport-trac and simplistic concepts like continue making short term investments in inferior players vs investing in strategic quality players in an a few areas of prioritized need, continuing to draft and recruit for depth, taking a few flyers to fill areas where necessary to enable the team to draft the best picks available and stock the team with team oriented players as is advocated by the new regime.
Fans make too big a deal of this.
It's a combination of situation, timing, synergy , need?
It's not really helpful to complain someone 'made too much' without context. So what?
I'd sign him up.
Quote:
Williams is not a special player. Let him go get paid somewhere else...we can still give up 3 TDs to Boston Scott without him.
And here is the core of disagreement -- Williams is a special player -- he fits all the requirement of the Giants with a new all team coach and all team attitude and an above average and impactful skill set for the position he plays
https://www.northjersey.com/story/sports/nfl/jets/2018/12/23/ny-jets-leonard-williams-ejected-against-packers-throwing-punch/2402289002/
______
In comment 14780873 gidiefor said:
Quote:
Hold on the guy with double digit sacks is less valuable than a run stuffing DT?
Water carrier.
Yeah the guy with double digit sacks who make costly penalties at critical points of games
https://mobile.twitter.com/jclarknbcs/status/1204239096761257984?lang=en
🧐
Leonard Williams #99 elbows Carson Wentz #11 - ( New Window )
I'd be willing to bet on it.
He's not a top 10 player at his position. He's most definitely a group below that.
He's a good player. But is he better than Tomlinson even?
While spotrac may not be an absolute bastion here, it's not off base to point out $17-18M per season is a huge financial gamble for NYG on LW. Not to mention the fact we have invested in exactly zero edge talent.
I admit that I think the trade was a reasonable risk. I still do. It is clear watching what little tape I see that Williams is very quick, very strong and very active. He stands out vs the other Giants lineman - he is much more active. What we don't see is true production. I think a very good line coach can make him for efficient. When I watch I can see "it" is there, now they need to get "it" out of him.
LW is not a "DE" in the sense of a 4-3 DE. He would be a DT in a 4-3. A 3-4 DE is still really a DT, the OLB are the DEs now called ERs. So LW is a DT.
I don't think he will be signed for $8.2 mill, but I also do not think he gets anywhere near $18 mill, because on paper he has not produced.
As for DG getting an "out" by hiring the new staff who might have a different vision for the DLine. DG is not looking for an out. He traded for LW to sign him. If Graham and his staff and JJ decide that LW does not fit the Giants scheme on defense, he will not be resigned. That is not an "out." That is reality. We already have seen DG jettison non-performing FAs and draft picks.
Markus Golden - an enigma to me. Yes he was clearly their best ER player. Yes he had 10 sacks and good #s for TFLs. But he also had several inopportune penalties, too many. He did bust his butt through the season. Definitely a player playing for a contract. But as much as I liked him, I just don't get the "wow" factor when I watch him. Would I like him back. Yes. But at what cost and how long? He is clearly not top echelon. 5 yrs $60-$65? Too little? Too much? IDK
I think that we have no clue what Graham has planned on defense. We do not know what type of players he wants. Therefore we do not have a clue as to how to value Williams or Golden.