Why not bring back Manny Lawson?

[-AC-]

Trying to sell yourself or others on how Lawson might get pressure is not going to happen. CB's get sneaky surprise sacks, not LB's...

That said, I like Lawson as a situational OLB. He can cover, and he was pretty good at setting the edge to help stop the run. There are far worse candidates out there to fill the void, should Brooks leave...

Ray Mcdonald really stepped up this last season by consistantly putting pressure on the QB. This softens the argument that we absolutely need to get a peer pass rush from a FA OLB just a little bit, I think...

(not that I'm against getting a pass rusher)

 

[wartyOne]

lol

Fair enough. I still think he provides depth if nothing else. If we can't bring back Brooks than he becomes more valuable for what he can do against the rush and in coverage (not as a sack artist).

Always enjoy your posts warty. Wish there were more of them.

Thanks numone. Been pretty busy lately. Brewing activities are taking up a lot of my time these days. Hoping to open a brewery soon.

 

[Flyingiguana]

Trying to sell yourself or others on how Lawson might get pressure is not going to happen. CB's get sneaky surprise sacks, not LB's...

That said, I like Lawson as a situational OLB. He can cover, and he was pretty good at setting the edge to help stop the run. There are far worse candidates out there to fill the void, should Brooks leave...

Ray Mcdonald really stepped up this last season by consistantly putting pressure on the QB. This softens the argument that we absolutely need to get a peer pass rush from a FA OLB just a little bit, I think...

(not that I'm against getting a pass rusher)

how many pass rushers do we need? we already have 4

 

[deep9er]

how many pass rushers do we need? we already have 4

we do?

having DE's who add pressure is a bonus, they're not really "pass rushers".

when you play the top offenses in the play-offs, you can't have enough pressure from the OLB's. having one on each side allows you to mix it up.

i would take a pass rush specialist before a run stopping specialist like Lawson. i would take a pass rush specialist who doesn't depend on "surprise" blitzes.

 

[Flyingiguana]

we do?

having DE's who add pressure is a bonus, they're not really "pass rushers".

when you play the top offenses in the play-offs, you can't have enough pressure from the OLB's. having one on each side allows you to mix it up.

i would take a pass rush specialist before a run stopping specialist like Lawson. i would take a pass rush specialist who doesn't depend on "surprise" blitzes.

we use a one gap 3-4. so on pass rushing downs we're essentially using 4 linemen since that's all aldon did this year was pass rush. lawson is better in coverage than willis, and willis is a beast when he can gun for the backfield. i think lawson fits with our d much better than he did before.

 

[NinerSickness]

how many pass rushers do we need? we already have 4

You can never have too many pass rushers. See the Giants.

...And if you're including Brooks he may not be back.

 

[numone9er]

Thanks numone. Been pretty busy lately. Brewing activities are taking up a lot of my time these days. Hoping to open a brewery soon.

That's a good reason to be away. Good luck with that. Sounds like fun.

 

[deep9er]

we use a one gap 3-4. so on pass rushing downs we're essentially using 4 linemen since that's all aldon did this year was pass rush. lawson is better in coverage than willis, and willis is a beast when he can gun for the backfield. i think lawson fits with our d much better than he did before.

so when we go four down linemen, those four are good pass rushers?

lawson is better in coverage than willis? aren't talking about adding an OLB, why bring willis into the discussion?

willis is getting better at blitzing but wouldn't call him a beast? in any case, what does this have to do with adding an OLB?

obviously, you think Lawson fits better, but why? did Lawson provide as much pressure as Brooks? why would we need an OLB with more coverage skills, than pressure?

not adamant against Lawson, but it doesn't make sense? we might as well look for an OLB who's better at rushing than coverage. if theres none and Lawson is the best we can do, then fine.

 

[Flyingiguana]

so when we go four down linemen, those four are good pass rushers?

lawson is better in coverage than willis? aren't talking about adding an OLB, why bring willis into the discussion?

willis is getting better at blitzing but wouldn't call him a beast? in any case, what does this have to do with adding an OLB?

obviously, you think Lawson fits better, but why? did Lawson provide as much pressure as Brooks? why would we need an OLB with more coverage skills, than pressure?

not adamant against Lawson, but it doesn't make sense? we might as well look for an OLB who's better at rushing than coverage. if theres none and Lawson is the best we can do, then fine.

willis was in coverage a lot this year, with lawson there it would free him up.

 

[deep9er]

willis was in coverage a lot this year, with lawson there it would free him up.

we're talking about adding an OLB (Lawson or otherwise), Willis in coverage is a secondary reason for choosing an OLB. the primary reason is an OLB who does HIS job first and foremost.

since we're not talking spending on an elite OLB, we won't get all three phases - pressure, tackling, and coverage. so if we had a choice of these three, which one would we want first?

i'd choose pressure which ISN'T Lawson's strong suit. after pressure i'd take run support, followed by coverage.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

I agree Deep. Gotta bring in an OLB who is best at rushing the passer.

 

[Flyingiguana]

we're talking about adding an OLB (Lawson or otherwise), Willis in coverage is a secondary reason for choosing an OLB. the primary reason is an OLB who does HIS job first and foremost.

since we're not talking spending on an elite OLB, we won't get all three phases - pressure, tackling, and coverage. so if we had a choice of these three, which one would we want first?

i'd choose pressure which ISN'T Lawson's strong suit. after pressure i'd take run support, followed by coverage.

we usually don't send 5 pass rushers tho...

 

[-AC-]

I sure would like to pick Vic Fangio's brain on this one...

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Speaking of Vic, I wonder what he thinks of Chase Thomas.

 

[deep9er]

we usually don't send 5 pass rushers tho...

but if we add another OLB who can rush, maybe we increase the amount of times we send five? this should give the opposing QB less time and at very least, disrupt their offensive 'rythmn'. again, this rushing specialist comes in for Haralson on passing downs.

whereas if you add Lawson, you have no option to increase pressure with the other OLB. i'd rather have the option to add pressure, versus add coverage.

 

[NinerSickness]

Brooks signed: 6 years 44 Million.

So Brooks' cap number is probably going to be something like 5 this year, 7 next year & 9 the following year...

What does this tell you? Obviously the team thinks Brooks was a lot more valuable than about 95% of the people here did. I would tend to agree with them; Brooks was more valuable than Goldson & Rogers IMO.

However, I am still worried about the pass rush over the next 3 years. The DL needs some dpeth, and Brooks is a good pass rusher, but he's not a great one. Remember he's a converted ILB; he doesn't naturally get to the QB like DL tend to do.

I actually wanted Brooks to be the 3rd OLB, but that was apparently an unrealistic desire. He's a starter. So I think the team still needs a 3rd OLB; with the amount of money spent on Brooks I no longer want Manny back (unless he's sign for aroune 1.5 Million). Why? The 3rd OLB needs to be a pass rusher IMO.

The Niners need a situational pass rusher IMO. Who's out there?

Mark Anderson got 5 million last year, so he's out.
Bruce Irvin will be drafted too high.
Vinny Curry?
Brandon Lindsey?

...What about Andre Carter? Just as a situational pass rusher. He only got 2.5 Million or so last season.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Juqua Parker for the vet minimum.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Willis allowed Pettigrew to catch a TD in the redzone in the Detroit regular season game.

Willis also allowed Graham to catch the long TD over the middle in the NFC championship game.

The coverage was excellent in both of these cases but Willis got beat.

Willis is a really good coverage LB but he can be beat by the best TEs in the game, especially the ones that have a big height advantage on him.

That seems somewhat contradictory. I don't know any player in the league that can contain Graham at this point. He's too tall and too athletic. Manny has a height advantage over Patrick, but he's been burned by plenty of TEs in his day. Match him up on Pettigrew or Graham and the result would be comparable.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

we're talking about adding an OLB (Lawson or otherwise), Willis in coverage is a secondary reason for choosing an OLB. the primary reason is an OLB who does HIS job first and foremost.

since we're not talking spending on an elite OLB, we won't get all three phases - pressure, tackling, and coverage. so if we had a choice of these three, which one would we want first?

i'd choose pressure which ISN'T Lawson's strong suit. after pressure i'd take run support, followed by coverage.

The problem is, the elite guys are generally judged primarily on their pass rush abilities. The other two phases matter, but not nearly as much.

I guess this thread is largely a moot point anyway, though, at this point. Now we're just looking for depth. I'd take a look at one or two promising pass rushers in the draft. Maybe look at some undersized guys.

 

[NinerSickness]

I'd take a look at one or two promising pass rushers in the draft. Maybe look at some undersized guys.

Unfortunately there aren't very many in this draft class. It's slim pickin's after the first round IMO.