Justin Smith vs Charles Grant (1 Viewer)

[pyite76]

Trying to decide between these two guys....

1 pt tackle, 0.5 asst., 3 sack, 2 FF, 4 FR, 4 INT

Smith = 27 9-30-1979

Grant = 28 9-3-1978

any thoughts would be appreciated!

ive had Smith for a while and thought at first it would be an upgrade to grant, but now im not so sure.

 

[bcr8f]

Trying to decide between these two guys....1 pt tackle, 0.5 asst., 3 sack, 2 FF, 4 FR, 4 INTSmith = 27 9-30-1979Grant = 28 9-3-1978any thoughts would be appreciated!ive had Smith for a while and thought at first it would be an upgrade to grant, but now im not so sure.

Grant just got a new contract and is somewhat inconsistent but still have him in 2 leagues.

 

[J Andersson]

Good question - I would consider them rather equal but let's dig a bit here:

If this is for a re-draft league this has to be considered:

Since 2001 Smith has had 41-50 solo tackles, 13-31 assists and 5-9 sacks (or actually 7-9 sacks if you leave out 2003). He is the model of consistency and you can expect around 45 solo tackles, 25 assists and 7 sacks the uypcoming season.

Grant is also rather consistent but not nearly as consistent as Smith. He's recorded 30-65 solo tackles (30 during his rookie season), 7-18 assists and 3-11 sacks. His sack numbers have gone down considerably the last two years (3 and 6). In all Grant is the riskier pick but he also has higher upside, especially in leagues that reward sacks.

So I guess for re-draft the answer to these questions will help you decide whom to choose: What do you need, consistency or more upside? Is the scoring system generally made up to reward tackles or sacks?

If this is for a dynasty league contract issues also come into play:

The last I heard on the franchise tagged Smith was that the Bengals weren't close to signing a contract extension with DE Justin Smith. His agent wasn't "overly optimistic" that a long-term deal would be struck by the July 15 deadline, but did say that "no doors have been closed."

Grant on the other hand has a seven-year deal could be worth up to $63 million. It includes $24 million for the first three seasons and nearly $35 million in the first five years. $20 million is guaranteed, nearly the entire first three years of the contract. If Grant doesn't play at a Pro Bowl level the Saints will probably want to revisit the deal after those first three years.

In a dynasty format I would choose Grant at this point since we know little about Justin Smith's future at this point. I think it's safer to count on grant being a Saint for at least three more years.

Hope that'll help...

Now I deserve a

 

[lions327]

Justin Smiths consistency and huge tackle numbers are the difference to me.

EDITED...disregard the above. I went back and double checked and obviously wasn't looking at Grant the first time I looked at the stats. They are pretty even.

 

[Jene Bramel]

So I guess for re-draft the answer to these questions will help you decide whom to choose: What do you need, consistency or more upside? Is the scoring system generally made up to reward tackles or sacks?

This is the salient point, redraft or not. Neither one of these linebackers has shown enough stud consistency to be counted on a more than a DL2 for the short or long term. Justin Smith may or may not be in a better place than he is now -- but he is what he is, a very good run stopping DE with questionable pass rush skills. Charles Grant has the ability to be the best all-around end in the league but injuries, conditioning and motivation have been issues. And now he's got a big contract.So...As J Andersson says, do you want the risk of Grant's double digit sack upside or not. Both are safe bets to approach 50 solos. My feeling would be to chase the upside of a guy who's had top five seasons and has the talent to do so again. But there's no fault in taking the guy who's a relatively safer bet to finish as a very good DL2 (12-20 range).BTW, Grant, injuries, conditioning and perceived poor play aside has exactly one less solo tackle than Smith. The key is that the Cincinnati home stat crews like to give out assisted tackles (as do Baltimore and Cleveland) so Smith is going to rack up some assists that Grant will not. If that is relevant in your scoring system, then that's worth accounting for as well.

 

[Sidewinder]

If you throw out the 2005 debacle, Grant's numbers become a great deal more consistent. Given the total disarray of that year, I think one would be perfectly justified if they considered Grant's (or any Saint player's) 2005 season simply an aberration, and ignored it when evaluating him in terms of consistency of play.

 

[5Rings]

If you throw out the 2005 debacle, Grant's numbers become a great deal more consistent. Given the total disarray of that year, I think one would be perfectly justified if they considered Grant's (or any Saint player's) 2005 season simply an aberration, and ignored it when evaluating him in terms of consistency of play.

Grant can be a top 5 DL. Smith's ceiling is a solid DL2 guy...which is where both currently sit.I roll the dice on Grant.

 

[Zoomanji]

The last I heard on the franchise tagged Smith was that the Bengals weren't close to signing a contract extension with DE Justin Smith. His agent wasn't "overly optimistic" that a long-term deal would be struck by the July 15 deadline, but did say that "no doors have been closed."Grant on the other hand has a seven-year deal could be worth up to $63 million. It includes $24 million for the first three seasons and nearly $35 million in the first five years. $20 million is guaranteed, nearly the entire first three years of the contract. If Grant doesn't play at a Pro Bowl level the Saints will probably want to revisit the deal after those first three years.In a dynasty format I would choose Grant at this point since we know little about Justin Smith's future at this point. I think it's safer to count on grant being a Saint for at least three more years.

This actually supports my argument for Smith. Grant has a big fat 7 year deal with little finacial motivation. Smith wants a big fat deal like Grant's. Advantage- SmithI actually like Smith more as a motivated player in general.And FWIW, I have Smith in one league and Grant in another

 

[pyite76]

sorry for any confusion. this is for a Dynasty league. I have that in the title but should have been more clear in the initial post. my bad.

I have it down to a choice between wanting to gamble on what could be a monster year for Grant, or a quasi-Smith-like "average" year. (45 solo, 20 asst, 7-9 sacks).

While the upside of Grant is seemingly larger at first, I also believe Smith could be a successful 4-3 DE, if he were to walk in free agency (which, I believe, is a strong possibility). I have always been a fan of Smith's motor, and consistency. He is easy to take for granted.

 

[5Rings]

sorry for any confusion. this is for a Dynasty league. I have that in the title but should have been more clear in the initial post. my bad.

I have it down to a choice between wanting to gamble on what could be a monster year for Grant, or a quasi-Smith-like "average" year. (45 solo, 20 asst, 7-9 sacks).

While the upside of Grant is seemingly larger at first, I also believe Smith could be a successful 4-3 DE, if he were to walk in free agency (which, I believe, is a strong possibility). I have always been a fan of Smith's motor, and consistency. He is easy to take for granted.

Simple then, go with your gut and the guy you like.

 

[Warpig]

So I guess for re-draft the answer to these questions will help you decide whom to choose: What do you need, consistency or more upside? Is the scoring system generally made up to reward tackles or sacks?

This is the salient point, redraft or not. Neither one of these linebackers has shown enough stud consistency to be counted on a more than a DL2 for the short or long term. Justin Smith may or may not be in a better place than he is now -- but he is what he is, a very good run stopping DE with questionable pass rush skills. Charles Grant has the ability to be the best all-around end in the league but injuries, conditioning and motivation have been issues. And now he's got a big contract.So...

As J Andersson says, do you want the risk of Grant's double digit sack upside or not. Both are safe bets to approach 50 solos. My feeling would be to chase the upside of a guy who's had top five seasons and has the talent to do so again. But there's no fault in taking the guy who's a relatively safer bet to finish as a very good DL2 (12-20 range).

BTW, Grant, injuries, conditioning and perceived poor play aside has exactly one less solo tackle than Smith. The key is that the Cincinnati home stat crews like to give out assisted tackles (as do Baltimore and Cleveland) so Smith is going to rack up some assists that Grant will not. If that is relevant in your scoring system, then that's worth accounting for as well.

How in the hell do you get info like that?!?!

 

[Jene Bramel]

So I guess for re-draft the answer to these questions will help you decide whom to choose: What do you need, consistency or more upside? Is the scoring system generally made up to reward tackles or sacks?

This is the salient point, redraft or not. Neither one of these linebackers has shown enough stud consistency to be counted on a more than a DL2 for the short or long term. Justin Smith may or may not be in a better place than he is now -- but he is what he is, a very good run stopping DE with questionable pass rush skills. Charles Grant has the ability to be the best all-around end in the league but injuries, conditioning and motivation have been issues. And now he's got a big contract.So...

As J Andersson says, do you want the risk of Grant's double digit sack upside or not. Both are safe bets to approach 50 solos. My feeling would be to chase the upside of a guy who's had top five seasons and has the talent to do so again. But there's no fault in taking the guy who's a relatively safer bet to finish as a very good DL2 (12-20 range).

BTW, Grant, injuries, conditioning and perceived poor play aside has exactly one less solo tackle than Smith. The key is that the Cincinnati home stat crews like to give out assisted tackles (as do Baltimore and Cleveland) so Smith is going to rack up some assists that Grant will not. If that is relevant in your scoring system, then that's worth accounting for as well.

How in the hell do you get info like that?!?!

For my part, it's mostly observational from studying trends among teams and noticing things while doing projections.Norton looks at total team stats very closely when doing his full season and week-to-week projections. He can rattle off nearly every team that gets consistently high assist counts and those that don't. He did just that when we discussed stat discrepancies on the IDP 301 episode of the Audible last night.

And Rudnicki has been working on a stat database for most of three seasons now. Not to speak for him, but I think he's hoping to have enough data to draw reliable conclusions for an article on assisted tackles and passes defended differences among teams this year.

There are a couple of threads somewhere around here (I'm not sure what I'd search for unfortunately) that had some useful lists in the past.

I'd bet Aaron will hop into the thread JaxBill started about this topic earlier today.

 

[pyite76]

Simple then, go with your gut and the guy you like.

ironically, this is the stance I took. I held onto Smith and acquired Grant also.

 

[Afro Samurai]

Also realize that Grant was playing on a bad foot in 05. I think he's gotten a bad rap from that season when it wasn't really fair to judge anyone on the team, much less someone who played while injured.

I thought he played very well this past season, much more disciplined and steady. He's always going to get a lot of tackles. Sack numbers are never going to be outstanding because he's a stack end and often plays inside on 3rd downs, but you can probably expect 6 or 7 every year.