DLaw looking for 6 years, $140 mil with $85 garuanteed

Swagger

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,000
Reaction score
7,735
I agree that I think most people underrate Tank, but I find it very interesting (and maybe concerning?) that out of the totals you just quoted, only 8 sacks and 9 TFLs have come after Week 8 in each season...it's a bit challenging to unpack - is he hurt? Is he commanding more double teams after people realize in the first half of the season he's the real deal? I don't know, but it's strange that he puts up less than 33% of his production in the last 50% of the season

I agree it's interesting and it could be any number of reasons.

If we judged Aaron Donald just on the Superbowl then he would be a JAG. Obviously there were any number of variables why he didn't influence that game as he did others last season. The first being Bill Belichick.

Obviously there are different defensive schemes, different coaches, different looks etc but the take is that over the past two seasons Tank has matched the production of Mack and Miller.
 

Nightman

Capologist
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
24,038
Bro idk what you're responding to...at literally zero point in my post did I say anything about re-signing him, let alone indicate I think we should overpay him...I was solely pointing out his poor production in the second half of the season
Was agreeing with you...I guess that doesn't happen much

His production doesn't match his demands
 

BigD49

Well-Known Member
Messages
318
Reaction score
371
I agree it's interesting and it could be any number of reasons.

If we judged Aaron Donald just on the Superbowl then he would be a JAG. Obviously there were any number of variables why he didn't influence that game as he did others last season. The first being Bill Belichick.

Obviously there are different defensive schemes, different coaches, different looks etc but the take is that over the past two seasons Tank has matched the production of Mack and Miller.

That's fair, but I generally get concerned about the lumpiness of his production and whether his production could be considered "looter in a riot"-esque. As an example, last year he had 3 sacks and 3 TFLs in the Lions game alone (both of those totals are 33% of his entire year's production for those categories). For the money we're talking about, I want a guy that game-in-game-out produces, regardless of the man across from him or the scheme. Yes, there will be a bad game here or there, but the man literally got 5.5 of his 10.5 sacks and 8 of his 15 TFLs in the first 4 games and really flattened out after that (4 games with no TFLs or sacks, two games with 1 assisted tackle as his only recorded stat)
 

Swagger

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,000
Reaction score
7,735
Aaron Donald didn't have a sack in the Play Offs last season and had 4 sacks in his last 7 games including the post season. Most people consider Aaron Donald to be the best defender in football (as I do).

If you are an opposing defensive coordinator then you are going to double team the best defender in the trenches - it doesn't take Einstein to work out that teams will have tried to take Lawrence out of games.

Lawrence is a much better footballer than some on here are making out.

I would be concerned about his injury history so I would look to take some meat off the bone for that reason alone when it comes to his contract but I don't doubt his actual quality.
 

BigD49

Well-Known Member
Messages
318
Reaction score
371
Aaron Donald didn't have a sack in the Play Offs last season and had 4 sacks in his last 7 games including the post season. Most people consider Aaron Donald to be the best defender in football (as I do).

If you are an opposing defensive coordinator then you are going to double team the best defender in the trenches - it doesn't take Einstein to work out that teams will have tried to take Lawrence out of games.

Lawrence is a much better footballer than some on here are making out.

I would be concerned about his injury history so I would look to take some meat off the bone for that reason alone when it comes to his contract but I don't doubt his actual quality.
AD is a DT and still rushes the passer better...
 

Swagger

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,000
Reaction score
7,735
AD is a DT and still rushes the passer better...

The point being that AD had 16.5 sacks in his other 12 games then 4 sacks in his final 7 games.

His production later in the season didn't match his earlier season performances.

I judge players over the entirety of a season not just taking out a chunk here and there to pick holes in their performance.

e.g. we don't know if a guy played injured during those quiet games.
 

Bowdown27

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,428
Reaction score
7,677
If these numbers are true it’s a bit much for the team. Can we pull off a Mack type deal. 2 firsts ?
 

BigD49

Well-Known Member
Messages
318
Reaction score
371
The point being that AD had 16.5 sacks in his other 12 games then 4 sacks in his final 7 games.

His production later in the season didn't match his earlier season performances.

I judge players over the entirety of a season not just taking out a chunk here and there to pick holes in their performance.

e.g. we don't know if a guy played injured during those quiet games.
Got it - that's a fair point, but 4 sacks in 7 games is still good production haha coming back down to earth from historic sack #s to above average sack #s is palatable...we're talking about going from a great pace to well below average (for top EDGE players)
 

PA Cowboy Fan

Well-Known Member
Messages
24,784
Reaction score
50,189
He can’t pkay that Bell game with the Cowboys because they are cheap and have no problem going into the season without him. Cowboys aren’t nearly as desperate as his team thinks.
Of course not because all the Cowboys care about is being relevant. Can do that with or without him.
 

Swagger

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,000
Reaction score
7,735
Got it - that's a fair point, but 4 sacks in 7 games is still good production haha coming back down to earth from historic sack #s to above average sack #s is palatable...we're talking about going from a great pace to well below average (for top EDGE players)

True I agree but you get the point.

I don't think Lawrence is worth the numbers he has reportedly been asking for how many players actually are these days?

I just think we could sign everyone we want if we just went down the route of drafting a rookie QB high every 3-4 years and let them play out their rookie contract then restart the cycle.

That's not a dig at Prescott as he has provided us with fantastic value but rather than jacking up his salary to around $30 million over the next 5 years, we could arguably draft a player to provide similar production for a max of $8 million (most likely a lot less).
 

SlammedZero

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,799
Reaction score
40,791
CMi79nb.gif
:laugh: I love that movie.
 

BigD49

Well-Known Member
Messages
318
Reaction score
371
True I agree but you get the point.

I don't think Lawrence is worth the numbers he has reportedly been asking for how many players actually are these days?

I just think we could sign everyone we want if we just went down the route of drafting a rookie QB high every 3-4 years and let them play out their rookie contract then restart the cycle.

That's not a dig at Prescott as he has provided us with fantastic value but rather than jacking up his salary to around $30 million over the next 5 years, we could arguably draft a player to provide similar production for a max of $8 million (most likely a lot less).
I'm a big fan of that "moneyball" approach - think we should be throwing a mid to late round pick at a QB every year (and occasionally a high one, should the right opportunity arise) and hope something sticks...such an advantage when your QB comes cheap. There are obviously exceptions to the rule that you don't let go (Brady, Brees, Manning), but I don't think Dakota is remotely close to being that tier

*ducks*
 

Swagger

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,000
Reaction score
7,735
I'm a big fan of that "moneyball" approach - think we should be throwing a mid to late round pick at a QB every year (and occasionally a high one, should the right opportunity arise) and hope something sticks...such an advantage when your QB comes cheap. There are obviously exceptions to the rule that you don't let go (Brady, Brees, Manning), but I don't think Dakota is remotely close to being that tier

*ducks*

I completely agree
 

Ranched

"We Are Penn State"
Messages
34,885
Reaction score
84,323
Tanks tanked. First he asked for $20 Million a year, and now $140 Million in 6 years. That comes out to $23 Million a year. Whose your agent Tank?
Bozo the clown?! :lmao2:
 

DallasEast

Cowboys 24/7/365
Staff member
Messages
58,858
Reaction score
56,791
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
I'm a big fan of that "moneyball" approach - think we should be throwing a mid to late round pick at a QB every year (and occasionally a high one, should the right opportunity arise) and hope something sticks...such an advantage when your QB comes cheap. There are obviously exceptions to the rule that you don't let go (Brady, Brees, Manning), but I don't think Dakota is remotely close to being that tier

*ducks*
 

RamziD

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
2,863
That’s 22.5M AAV which is lower than the 24M AAV that was previously reported. I’m sure the cowboys want 5 years with less guaranteed money. 6/$125M with $75M guaranteed $75M guaranteed sounds right
 
Top