A case for the value Williams brings

No problem with the trade. It allowed the Giants a first crack at re-signing him after watching him perform on a losing team. He�s a young solid player who fortifies what could become a terrific DL.

I agree.

The hoopla over this move makes little sense to me. The GM stated he wants beef up front on both sides. Resources were dedicated to bring more to the defensive front so the Giants were not steamrolled on the ground week in and week out.

Also, we run a 3 - 4 now as a base, the d lineman are not the primary pass rushers in this type setup, so focusing on total sack numbers for Williams seems silly.

but pressure is more important as it changes the timing of the play. The continuing focus on sacks alone is a bit lazy. The question from that position is if you disrupt the play - which seems to statistically true. He is not just a run stuffer, although he is quite accomplished at that as well.

The defense is fill with 1st and 2nd years guys.

More then likely and well deserved, the defense senior members, Bethea and Ogeltree will be cut, so lack of leadership.

Adding talent is a must...

Makes Williams a no brainer

here's their grading scale - Williams ranks a 70.6:

Quote:

The Player Grading Scale: 100-90 Elite 89-85 Pro Bowler 84-70 Starter 69-60 Backup 59-0 Replaceable

He's a 70.6 - barely above 'backup'.

The Giants gave up a high 3rd and 4th rounder to pay him upwards of $15M a year.

And then some people are surprised they stink.

That's why Reese had to go. That's why Gettleman has done a bad job. These players might not amount to HoFers, but they're at least supposed to provide solid roster depth with the occasional starter. Saying 'what guarantees do you get in the 3rd round' is plain stupidity.

Even if you decide you want to light 3rd and 4th round picks on fire - they can easily be used to move up in the 1st or 2nd rounds to get better players.

A dumb move that just gets worse any time someone tries to support it.

In comment 14779812 rocco8112 said:

Quote:

I agree. The hoopla over this move makes little sense to me. The GM stated he wants beef up front on both sides. Resources were dedicated to bring more to the defensive front so the Giants were not steamrolled on the ground week in and week out. Also, we run a 3 - 4 now as a base, the d lineman are not the primary pass rushers in this type setup, so focusing on total sack numbers for Williams seems silly.

Most of BBI only knows how to look at number to evaluate talent sadly, they don�t watch games. He helped tremendously in the run game and would be a great fit to return. Just not at $20M a year.

Then everyone else on the d line looks great
Get two edge rushers and you have a top 5 defense
Plus a great front makes your secondary look even better

Moral of story. Get the edge rushers

Williams has warning track power. Hits the ball deep but it usually gets caught for an out.

So he gets real, real close to the QB...but can�t get the sack.

And what jcn said.

In comment 14779820 jcn56 said:

Quote:

That's why Reese had to go. That's why Gettleman has done a bad job. These players might not amount to HoFers, but they're at least supposed to provide solid roster depth with the occasional starter. Saying 'what guarantees do you get in the 3rd round' is plain stupidity. Even if you decide you want to light 3rd and 4th round picks on fire - they can easily be used to move up in the 1st or 2nd rounds to get better players. I get your point. But the difference is you seem to believe your opinion is fact, or at least that s how it is presented. You might be right in the end, but right now, I repeat: mocking this move, as has been done by many, as if there is no other positive side to consider, seems a bit myopic. A dumb move that just gets worse any time someone tries to support it.

add a pass rusher to front 7 and he�ll have an even bigger impact.

In comment 14779829 joeinpa said:

Quote:

In comment 14779820 jcn56 said: Quote: That's why Reese had to go. That's why Gettleman has done a bad job. These players might not amount to HoFers, but they're at least supposed to provide solid roster depth with the occasional starter. Saying 'what guarantees do you get in the 3rd round' is plain stupidity. Even if you decide you want to light 3rd and 4th round picks on fire - they can easily be used to move up in the 1st or 2nd rounds to get better players. I get your point. But the difference is you seem to believe your opinion is fact, or at least that s how it is presented. You might be right in the end, but right now, I repeat: mocking this move, as has been done by many, as if there is no other positive side to consider, seems a bit myopic. A dumb move that just gets worse any time someone tries to support it.

Fair enough - that is obviously my opinion that it's a dumb move.

What I'd suggest though, in the future - if you quote a source to support your position, pick one that doesn't believe Williams hasn't amounted to much more than a high end backup.

I don't think he's as bad as PFF does - but I don't think he's much better. Neither did the Jets, or the rest of the market - where another team with playoff aspirations that needed someone presumably as disruptive as you think Williams is could have traded a 2nd rounder (probably less than 10 picks away from the Giants) in an attempt to fuel a playoff run.

Williams hangs his hat on his draft status, which to this date has been proven unwarranted. The Giants repeated their classic FA blunder of overpaying someone who doesn't have the production to justify it, in the process hoping they'll outperform moving forward.

for self labeling opinion as opinion.

Site needs more of that.

In comment 14779839 Bill2 said:

Quote:

for self labeling opinion as opinion. Site needs more of that.

👍

In comment 14779835 jcn56 said:

Quote:

In comment 14779829 joeinpa said: Quote: In comment 14779820 jcn56 said: Quote: That's why Reese had to go. That's why Gettleman has done a bad job. These players might not amount to HoFers, but they're at least supposed to provide solid roster depth with the occasional starter. Saying 'what guarantees do you get in the 3rd round' is plain stupidity. Even if you decide you want to light 3rd and 4th round picks on fire - they can easily be used to move up in the 1st or 2nd rounds to get better players. I get your point. But the difference is you seem to believe your opinion is fact, or at least that s how it is presented. You might be right in the end, but right now, I repeat: mocking this move, as has been done by many, as if there is no other positive side to consider, seems a bit myopic. A dumb move that just gets worse any time someone tries to support it. Fair enough - that is obviously my opinion that it's a dumb move. What I'd suggest though, in the future - if you quote a source to support your position, pick one that doesn't believe Williams hasn't amounted to much more than a high end backup. I don't think he's as bad as PFF does - but I don't think he's much better. Neither did the Jets, or the rest of the market - where another team with playoff aspirations that needed someone presumably as disruptive as you think Williams is could have traded a 2nd rounder (probably less than 10 picks away from the Giants) in an attempt to fuel a playoff run. Williams hangs his hat on his draft status, which to this date has been proven unwarranted. The Giants repeated their classic FA blunder of overpaying someone who doesn't have the production to justify it, in the process hoping they'll outperform moving forward.

Jcn I don�t really know much about PFF, and didn�t intend to use them as a source to support my opinion. I was just quoting the numbers, which I believe are facts, to support my belief of Williams value.

I try always to consider other opinions on most issues, helps me to evaluate my own beliefs, But as stated I wouldn�t use PFF s opinion to support my own, I don�t know much about what they do.

In comment 14779819 jcn56 said:

Quote:

here's their grading scale - Williams ranks a 70.6: Quote: The Player Grading Scale: 100-90 Elite 89-85 Pro Bowler 84-70 Starter 69-60 Backup 59-0 Replaceable He's a 70.6 - barely above 'backup'. The Giants gave up a high 3rd and 4th rounder to pay him upwards of $15M a year. And then some people are surprised they stink.

Why are you talking about PFF ratings here? That's what people debate.

joeinpa wasn't referencing PFF ratings he was referencing their quantitative data on pressures. That's the area that PFF actually brings value - in their data compilation on snap counts by total and by position, their formation and personnel grouping % breakdown, and stats on pressures, defended passes, and other items.

I don't know many people who like PFF - but it sure would be damn nice to see an understanding of what's being shown. Quoting their ratings means nothing.

and concerted effort to bring one (or two) home via FA and/or the draft. Championship defenses oft times have a strong interior from which much can evolve. That we have talent at such young ages, gives me comfort as a fan as we continue to build towards being competitive

In comment 14779820 jcn56 said:

Quote:

That's why Reese had to go. That's why Gettleman has done a bad job. These players might not amount to HoFers, but they're at least supposed to provide solid roster depth with the occasional starter. Saying 'what guarantees do you get in the 3rd round' is plain stupidity. Even if you decide you want to light 3rd and 4th round picks on fire - they can easily be used to move up in the 1st or 2nd rounds to get better players. A dumb move that just gets worse any time someone tries to support it.

Thank you. This team has burned through 3s and 4s for years and now look at the roster. Those picks fortify the backend of your roster.

In comment 14779830 UberAlias said:

Quote:

add a pass rusher to front 7 and he�ll 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 didn�t do much to stop them. Especially the Boston Scott, who they pulled off the street because they were decimated with injuries...

In comment 14779846 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

In comment 14779819 jcn56 said: Quote: here's their grading scale - Williams ranks a 70.6: Quote: The Player Grading Scale: 100-90 Elite 89-85 Pro Bowler 84-70 Starter 69-60 Backup 59-0 Replaceable He's a 70.6 - barely above 'backup'. The Giants gave up a high 3rd and 4th rounder to pay him upwards of $15M a year. And then some people are surprised they stink. Why are you talking about PFF ratings here? That's what people debate. joeinpa wasn't referencing PFF ratings he was referencing their quantitative data on pressures. That's the area that PFF actually brings value - in their data compilation on snap counts by total and by position, their formation and personnel grouping % breakdown, and stats on pressures, defended passes, and other items. I don't know many people who like PFF - but it sure would be damn nice to see an understanding of what's being shown. Quoting their ratings means nothing.

Because it wasn't just the quantitative data:

Quote:

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.

It also referenced the 'pressure rate' which is also subjective. These are the so called 'next gen' stats, which get blended together to create the highly contested overall ratings.

I fully expect DG to pay LW big money and let Markus Golden go. Probably can't afford both. I don't understand the Williams fan boys. Did you watch the games ? Giants allowed way too many rushing TD's to call our DL run stuffers. They are all DT's that provide no rush and can't stuff the run in the red zone. To say or DL is a strength is laughable. We need DE's and ER's . We don't need to pay Williams big money to provide what Lawrence already provides on his rookie deal.

I feel slighted.

Quote:

Ya know who likes Leonard Williams? PFF, that's who! Klaatu : 1/14/2020 8:19 pm : link : reply The misleading sack numbers of the 2020 free agents Quote: UNDERVALUED DI Leonard Williams, New York Giants No player had a bigger deference between his pressure rate rank and sack rate rank than Williams, who split the year between the Giants and the New York Jets prior to his trade. Among 87 interior defenders with 200 or more pass-rushing snaps, Williams ranked 13th in pressure rate at 11.3% but his one sack in 424 pass-rushing snaps put him near the bottom of the list in sack rate. On the other hand, Williams led the position with 19 quarterback hits. A few fractions of a second faster on several of those plays and that sack total looks a whole lot more respectable. Considering the draft capital that the Giants gave up acquiring Williams, it seems likely that they�ll retain him moving forward. He�s always been a better run defender than a pass-rusher, but he�s certainly better in the passing game than the one sack he was able to produce in 2019. Now the Giants just need to figure out how to balance all the young talent they have at interior defensive line if they re-sign Williams. Link - ( New Window )

When DG makes an offer and Williams accepts it or rejects it, then you can argue your points. Right now, what is done is done. And DG doesn�t give a hoot what you think anyway.

Personally, I liked the trade and what he has shown. I just want to see how it plays out.

Our run defense improved greatly since he was added.

I am for bringing Williams back but I really thin we need to add an Edge rusher. If we can do both then all the better.

Gettlemen knows we need a pass rusher. He may go after Ngokoue.

Without considering what his contract will be, he's the best defensive lineman on the Giants and a solid starter. I'd be in favor of bringing him back.

However, at what price?

A contract of $12m a year would be a great deal. A contract of $15m a year is probably more realistic and, in my opinion, would still be a good contract because teams need to overpay for FAs. A contract of $18m+ a year would be paying him like he's an elite interior defensive player, that'd be bad.

doesn't use next gen stats in their Player ratings.

Quote:

On every play, a PFF analyst will grade each player on a scale of -2 to +2 according to what he did on the play. At one end of the scale you have a catastrophic game-ending interception or pick-six from a quarterback, and at the other a perfect deep bomb into a tight window in a critical game situation, with the middle of that scale being 0-graded, or �expected� plays that are neither positive nor negative. Each game is also graded by a second PFF analyst independent of the first, and those grades are compared by a third, Senior Analyst, who rules on any differences between the two. These grades are verified by the Pro Coach Network, a group of former and current NFL coaches with over 700 combined years of NFL coaching experience, to get them as accurate as they can be.

We don't have to re-hash it, but that "Pro Coach Network" reviews less than 1% of the grades.

In comment 14779826 bw in dc said:

Quote:

Williams has warning track power. Hits the ball deep but it usually gets caught for an out. So he gets real, real close to the QB...but can�t get the sack. And what jcn said.

There's also nothing wrong with a guy that hits a lot of doubles. They can be very productive players in an offense that's well rounded. :)

The sack total vastly underrate him. My issue is giving up a 3 and a 4 to trade for him when we could've just signed him as an FA. It's not like he's going to give us a discount because we traded for him.

Poor asset management IMO.

given what DG did to acquire him.

BW has been on this since the start.

LW is going to be looking to get paid and Grady Jarrett's contact will be the STARTING point for contract negotiations.

It's possible that Graham's hire was first since Jints central is faced with the issue of how much to pay LW.

Graham's new system will be the reason for why they either "over pay" him or let him go. Either way - DG will be seemingly off the hook.

In comment 14779982 Dnew15 said:

Quote:

given what DG did to acquire him. BW has been on this since the start. LW is going to be looking to get paid and Grady Jarrett's contact will be the STARTING point for contract negotiations. It's possible that Graham's hire was first since Jints central is faced with the issue of how much to pay LW. Graham's new system will be the reason for why they either "over pay" him or let him go. Either way - DG will be seemingly off the hook.

Yeah, it will be interesting. If I'm Leonard Williams' agent, I know my fallback option is the Giants' will franchise tag Leonard Williams, which will be ~$16.5m a year. There's no way they let him walk. Therefore, if I'm his agent, I'm probably asking for ~$20m a year and be willing to negotiate down to $17m a year.

Long story short, Williams' will almost certainly be the 2nd highest paid interior defensive lineman in the league with his new contract.

forcing the QB up in the pocket. Those close hits would become sacks with outside pressure. Remember Lawrence did a good job early in the season also and he is a rookie. He plays the run very good also.

it was absolutely a bizarre move for a losing team, but I find my own opinion in line with yours. He is a good player, who may be even better in the right scheme, so I'd have no issue if they deem him viable long term at FMV. Good young DL are hard to find and players who stay healthy and produce are hard to find.

I don't love that we had to give up a high 3rd for him but the people who think the Giants org can do nothing right act like the compensation was on the level of the Tunsil trade or something. While also acting like the Giants don't have the options of tagging him/trading him/letting him walk next year for what could result in similar compensation. While also acting like LW isn't already probably our best player on defense.

Not to oversimplify but if we want a better defense we needed better coaches and players. Williams is a better player than we had so if we can get him for FMV great. If not there are ways we can move on and recap similar draft picks.

I am curious to see how Graham/Judge feel about him since they've presumably seen a bit of him as opponents in the AFC East over the past 4-5 years.

1) How the contract is structured will be important

2) Given how much money is chasing FA this year...the market for Dl after this FA period is the key comparison instead of the rear view mirror comparison.

$1.5B chasing FA is bound to make all comparisons to the past for some positions anachronisms. Like bemoaning how much a recently injured non closer like Betances ($10.5M) got paid compared to Trevor Hoffman at his peak ( $7.5M in salary). Yes they both are relief pitchers who played within ten years of each other but in different pay for performance eras.

The real tell tale sign would be how few top end FA the Giants can sign in the future with DJ and perhaps SB coming up soon enough.

The mess this years FA bonanza will make on going forward NFL position values is a story unto itself

This was a bad move. We traded a 3rd and a 4th or a 5th to win a total of 4 games for the year. Honestly, it would have been better to lose just 1 more game, no? We could have signed him the off season anyway. I do not think the people applauding the move understand what it means to think critically. We needed to scout him? You think he will sign for less because we traded for him? What did we get? I don't see anything. We just lost things.

everyone who reads this site has to know that correct?

3rd & 4th round draft picks are where a good team gets a huge ROI compared to their veteran players.

Productive 3rd and 4th round picks allow good teams to pay their star players and still have money for the good players too.

I like Williams and at this point after the draft picks have been spent I vote to keep him knowing that the Giants will have to pay him about 20 times what they'd pay those picks.

That's why the trade was idiotic. So was the trade for Ogletree. The Giants have been as bad in the front offense as they've been on the field. They're suckers for other teams.

They've been get right games for opposing QBs and get right cap space and draft capital for opposing GMs.

The Giant have the worst record in the NFL since 2017 on merit. Joe Judge has a monumental task trying to overcome the Mara/Gettleman player evaluation and acquisition machine.

ideally to a reasonable extension since they have the early extension leverage like they did with Shepard last year. The new staff's familiarity with DT should be helpful making that decision too.

Then re: Williams you have him on a 1 year deal with a small amount of leverage to negotiate a long term deal. Or the option to just let him walk next year when we may be in a better situation to receive a good comp pick. And have a better idea of how good our depth is behind him (Hill, Mcintosh, Slayton).

While I agree with many that the tag is a non-ideal tool, this is a situation where it makes sense for 2 key reasons.
1. LW isn't a known quantity who has been in the org for 4 or 5 years like the vast majority of those who get tagged.
2. The coaching staff and schemes will both be new as well.

Everyone loves to bring up Gettleman's history removing the tag from Josh Norman, but forget that 1 year after that he still tagged Kawan Short and then used that leverage to sign him long term.

The only risk of not signing LW now is that the price will likely only go up long term if we decide we want to keep him. To me that's an acceptable risk since waiting gives us a much better chance of getting that decision right.

There�s no guarantee of that, of course. We can disagree on the trade terms, but what you�re getting is a FIRST HAND glimpse of what you MIGHT be signing long term. 8 games of watching and reviewing upclose and personal, is far better than making assessments from film, imv.

Plus, we have the franchise tag at our disposal should we opt to use it, which allows another year of assessment and contract discussions under a NEW coaching staff.

Too, he�s a ridiculously young complement to the other DTs we have. If we are able to sign a solid ER through FA and/or draft one, that will bring out his talent even moreso, imo

On his own, it doesn't look like he adds that much value. But what he does do is make those around him better. I actually expect that our line will become a top unit in relatively short order (if we are able to get a premium edge player).

I view him as a "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts" type of addition.

is it better to have overpaid and kept the picks or a more reasonable contract and no picks? If either was a guaranteed outcome it would be easier to say, but since neither is it would seem "wait and see" is probably the best approach. They certainly rolled the dice but it's also not out of the question that Williams is a player worthy of rolling the dice on.

I'll guess the Giants pay Williams 13 million a year for 4 years with about 35 million guaranteed. Of course it could be more.

The two draft picks will make about a million each for four years.

So Williams costs 35 million and the two draft picks over 3 years cost 6 million.

about 6 times not 20 times for both about 12 times for each.

I don't care what he does on the field, how much does he cost? We have a history of paying players far more than they are worth and getting a terrible ROI, which is why we've sucked so much over the recent years. How much will Williams cost? Don't tell me what he does, we see the games, how much is what he does worth on the football field as opposed to his replacement cost?

Are all those pressures and .5 sacks worth 15M a year? 12? 10? What's the cost?

In comment 14780144 Eric on Li said:

Quote:

is it better to have overpaid and kept the picks or a more reasonable contract and no picks? If either was a guaranteed outcome it would be easier to say, but since neither is it would seem "wait and see" is probably the best approach. They certainly rolled the dice but it's also not out of the question that Williams is a player worthy of rolling the dice on.

What evidence do you possess that says we will sign him for less because we traded for him? I can point to quote of William's that says no discount. What is your supporting evidence to your claim?

Id be careful to assert others cant think critically.

For example, the risk adjusted likelihood of an equivalent contribution from a new 3rd rounder in 2020 is what exactly?

That's just one ingredient into the calculus.

The going forward prices for FA is another. This may be the lowest cost scheme variable decent interior lineman available for awhile ( I don't know that...presumably they do)

The preference JJ may ( may have) have to spend on several mid tier FA and teach and develop them is another.

Dropping LW likely means we are likely going to over pay Tomlinson or use a high draft pick on someone who maybe a good DT. Or may not be.

Lots of factors play into the decision

One of the reasons its debated for so long on BBI is that there are a lot of factors to consider.

Id submit anyone with dismissive certainty either way on this is in fact not a critical thinker nor self aware.

For me, Im ok with however it goes. Either decision to keep or walk away still leaves a path to future success.

The 3rd pick is a sunk cost/risk/opportunity imo. On DG's record but a pointless factor going forward.

If the guy is worried about injury while franchised ...then its leverage. He gets tagged and injured he has gotz in a career with only 4 more earning years. If not, its not leverage. Some families want certainty and trade possible advantage for it. Some don't. We don't know the internal calculus of LW.

We don't know if Mara said let it go to Dg or JJ said a very important foundation is a very good interior DL rotation that has players that are not scheme specific.

We don't know a lot. So im not sure where self appointed certainty is earned.

Agree Eric

Agree Mike

is the idea that because we have Lawrence, Williams isn't necessary.

If you are able to assemble a top position group, that's not a negative.

In comment 14780155 Thegratefulhead said:

Quote:

In comment 14780144 Eric on Li said: Quote: is it better to have overpaid and kept the picks or a more reasonable contract and no picks? If either was a guaranteed outcome it would be easier to say, but since neither is it would seem "wait and see" is probably the best approach. They certainly rolled the dice but it's also not out of the question that Williams is a player worthy of rolling the dice on. What evidence do you possess that says we will sign him for less because we traded for him? I can point to quote of William's that says no discount. What is your supporting evidence to your claim?

I have no idea what we will sign him for, but I can all but guarantee a 1 year tag will be less years and less total guarantee than whatever he or any other comparable FA will receive on open market - which is why that's been my preferred option since the day the trade happened. What % of UFA contracts end up with dead money at some point? 99.9%?

The nature of UFA is that anyone in demand gets close to the top dollar for their position on a 4-6 year deal even if they aren't an elite player (as Solder and Vernon both did).

That may still be what the extension price for Williams is long term, but by tagging him we can get him on the field without necessarily being the team to give him that. I doubt we do this but if we wanted to I believe we could tag him both this year and next, getting him on 2 low risk short term deals, and then let him walk via UFA and probably get back a comp pick on top of the 2.5 years on the field (and ZERO dead money).

Trading for him increased the chances of signing him -- the trade will look incredibly foolish if they don't, so they have a lot of incentive.

I don't think trading for him will lower the price we will have to pay, however.

was some perennial All Pro or frequent Pro Bowler.

To date - the best you can say about him is he's been better than his stats.

To suggest that they traded picks to *improve* the chances of landing him - as if he were somehow the prize of FA in 2020 - is probably the most disappointing part of all.

In comment 14780166 Bill2 said:

Quote:

anyone with dismissive certainty either way on this is in fact not a critical thinker nor self aware. Either decision to keep or walk away still leaves a path to future success.

obviously it's 100% fair game to debate the merits of which paths are best of all the options going forward, but there's way to much certainty that this move was a disaster when the range of outcomes is so broad.

In comment 14780124 arniefez said:

Quote:

everyone who reads this site has to know that correct? 3rd & 4th round draft picks are where a good team gets a huge ROI compared to their veteran players. Productive 3rd and 4th round picks allow good teams to pay their star players and still have money for the good players too. I like Williams and at this point after the draft picks have been spent I vote to keep him knowing that the Giants will have to pay him about 20 times what they'd pay those picks. That's why the trade was idiotic. So was the trade for Ogletree. The Giants have been as bad in the front offense as they've been on the field. They're suckers for other teams. They've been get right games for opposing QBs and get right cap space and draft capital for opposing GMs. The Giant have the worst record in the NFL since 2017 on merit. Joe Judge has a monumental task trying to overcome the Mara/Gettleman player evaluation and acquisition machine.

This is actually the best argue against the Williams trade