Barnett is far from a bust.

[Godfather]

Barnett is good

[NOTW]

3 hours ago, brkmsn said:

No. I just decided to stop living my life like a miserable negadelphian. I'd rather be chastised by my peers for positive posts ...  maybe some hope ... maybe some optimism, than to feel I have to cater to the constant, unbridled finger-pointing, over-reactionary crybaby crowd just to get people to "like" my posts. 

Hey ... don't let me interrupt the "cool-kids scene." Keep tearing this team down. We all know the grass is always greener. FACT!!!111!!!111!!!

True, there are negadelphians never happy with anything. The team sucks right now. There are some bright spots but the team is not good. Fans are going to be upset. If things continue they could be one of the worst teams in the league. So naturally people are upset especially fresh off a loss.

[Runtherock]

Bust, no. Disappointment, yes. You’d like more productivity from the 14th player taken in the draft. Cox was the 12th overall pick, stud player. McDougle was the 15th overall pick, had three career sacks, clearly a bust. Barnett is no McDougle but he’s no Cox, either. Contract year so maybe he’ll squeeze out 8 or 9 sacks. Would be nice if he’d seal the edge occasionally. 

[UK_EaglesFan89]

1 hour ago, Runtherock said:

Bust, no. Disappointment, yes. You’d like more productivity from the 14th player taken in the draft. Cox was the 12th overall pick, stud player. McDougle was the 15th overall pick, had three career sacks, clearly a bust. Barnett is no McDougle but he’s no Cox, either. Contract year so maybe he’ll squeeze out 8 or 9 sacks. Would be nice if he’d seal the edge occasionally. 

But if we ignore where he was drafted, because at this point in his career it is largely irrelevant, I think he would be a good player to keep around long term. But only for the right contract that works for the team. He’s a good DE #2 and such should be paid as one rather than as a #1.

[IrishEagle61]

3 hours ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

But if we ignore where he was drafted, because at this point in his career it is largely irrelevant, I think he would be a good player to keep around long term. But only for the right contract that works for the team. He’s a good DE #2 and such should be paid as one rather than as a #1.

I think he gets a contract extension this offseason. We need to reduce his cap hit next year and if we let him go there just becomes too many holes to fill in 1 offseason.

[UK_EaglesFan89]

Just now, IrishEagle61 said:

I think he gets a contract extension this offseason. We need to reduce his cap hit next year and if we let him go there just becomes too many holes to fill in 1 offseason.

I think if they can strike the right deal then they should give him the extension. I think he's a good solid player who can be a part of the future for this team. He just shouldn't get a huge deal. 

[IrishEagle61]

4 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I think if they can strike the right deal then they should give him the extension. I think he's a good solid player who can be a part of the future for this team. He just shouldn't get a huge deal. 

I don't think he gets a huge deal but the perception will be that we overpay. Just think it is a necessary evil this offseason given the current state of the roster and the cap hell we are in.

[nipples]

Barnett this season: 2.5 sacks, 12 tackles

Clowney (who some here wanted to bring in for $13M): 7 tackles, 0 sacks

[wtfcares]

8 hours ago, nipples said:

Barnett this season: 2.5 sacks, 12 tackles

Clowney (who some here wanted to bring in for $13M): 7 tackles, 0 sacks

People think that every first round pick should be Cox level. That simply isn’t the case. Cox and Donald are the exception not the rule. That’s why they’re the best at their position. 
 

Barnett’s level of production has been in line if not above an average 1st round DE. His issue has IMO has been availability not performance. 

[UK_EaglesFan89]

20 hours ago, wtfcares said:

Barnett’s level of production has been in line if not above an average 1st round DE. His issue has IMO has been availability not performance. 

I'd be interested to see the stats behind that bud. 

[wtfcares]

50 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I'd be interested to see the stats behind that bud. 

No problem let’s compare. Here are the stats for D-Line players drafted around where Barnett was drafted(picks 8-19) for the last 5 years. 
 

As you can see out of the 10 players selected, only 2 of them have a higher sack/game total and just marginally. Meanwhile the other 7 players have a much lower sack/game ratio.

 

Are there D-Line players drafted in the top 5 that have done much better? Of course. But as I’m sure you know top 5 to 14 is not a fair comparison as that’s a pretty big jump in draft point values. Barnett has produced better than average relative to his draft position in the mid first round.

 

2015 Draft

Beasley - Pick 8

Games Played - 80

Sacks - 37.5

Sacks/Game - 0.469

Shelton - Pick 12

Games Played - 79

Sacks - 4.5

Sacks/Game - 0.057

 

Armstead - Pick 17

Games Played - 67

Sacks - 20.5

Sacks/Game - 0.306

 

2016 Draft

Rankins - Pick 12

Games Played - 56

Sacks - 17.0

Sacks/Game - 0.304

Lawson - Pick 19

Games Played - 54

Sacks - 17.5

Sacks/Game - 0.324

 

2017 Draft

Barnett - Pick 14

Games Played - 39

Sacks - 16.5

Sacks/Game - 0.423

Allen - Pick 17

Games Played - 41

Sacks - 16.5

Sacks/Game - 0.402

 

2018 Draft

Davenport - Pick 14

Games Played - 27

Sacks - 10.5

Sacks/Game - 0.389

 

2019 Draft

Wilkins - Pick 13

Games Played - 21

Sacks - 2.0

Sacks/Game - 0.095

Burns - Pick 21

Games Played - 9.5

Sacks - 9.5

Sacks/Game - 0.4523

 

 

 

[UK_EaglesFan89]

39 minutes ago, wtfcares said:

Are there D-Line players drafted in the top 5 that have done much better? Of course. But as I’m sure you know top 5 to 14 is not a fair comparison as that’s a pretty big jump in draft point values. Barnett has produced better than average relative to his draft position in the mid first round.

Great work there bud. I think when you put it down on paper like that it does give a rather different perspective. 

I still maintain, Barnett is a good DE #2 and if we had a young guy opposite him to replace BG and Sweat as DE #3 then that's a pretty good group. But keeping Barnett at the right price is key. 

[wtfcares]

35 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Great work there bud. I think when you put it down on paper like that it does give a rather different perspective. 

I still maintain, Barnett is a good DE #2 and if we had a young guy opposite him to replace BG and Sweat as DE #3 then that's a pretty good group. But keeping Barnett at the right price is key. 

Agreed 100%

[nipples]

Barnett’s biggest issues have been injuries, and dumb penalties. If he can clean up the penalties and stay healthy, he is capable of being a double digit sack guy, who is also generally solid against the run. 

[Ace Nova]

On 10/13/2020 at 1:09 AM, Runtherock said:

Bust, no. Disappointment, yes. You’d like more productivity from the 14th player taken in the draft. Cox was the 12th overall pick, stud player. McDougle was the 15th overall pick, had three career sacks, clearly a bust. Barnett is no McDougle but he’s no Cox, either. Contract year so maybe he’ll squeeze out 8 or 9 sacks. Would be nice if he’d seal the edge occasionally. 

It's also unrealistic to think that every 1st round pick will become a "pro-bowl" level player. 

From my understanding, upwards of 40%+ of 1st round picks aren't even in the NFL after 5 years and only around 20%-25% or so actually become "studs/pro-bowlers" etc.

[QBhunter58]

8 hours ago, Ace Nova said:

It's also unrealistic to think that every 1st round pick will become a "pro-bowl" level player. 

From my understanding, upwards of 40%+ of 1st round picks aren't even in the NFL after 5 years and only around 20%-25% or so actually become "studs/pro-bowlers" etc.

sounds about right