PDA

View Full Version : THE NEXT LT=JPP!



gradstang
12-25-2011, 07:45 AM
Giant fans new and old i believe we are watching the g mens LT of this current time of Giants football in JPP> that dude is an absolute terror blocking kicks terrorizing qbs covering rbs! so when every gm is out looking for the next LT is was Reese who found the next LT and that dude is now being referred to as JPP!

Firenugget
12-25-2011, 07:49 AM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.

Evo'Ed
12-25-2011, 07:49 AM
Slow down.......

We all recognize JPP's amazing talent and play so far, but no need to make the kid a hall of famer yet.


I like your thinking though, but let's not jinx the kid.


I never thought JPP would be this good so fast.

SweetZombieJesus
12-25-2011, 09:54 AM
JPP will have to win league MVP ad be a 10 time pro bowler -- and change the way the game is played -- to be in the conversation the way LT is.

He may possibly do that. But there will never be a "next LT" -- only a "first JPP" and let's enjoy what he will blossom into.

It's like in basketball they are always looking for the next Michael Jordan and there will NEVER be one.

Spizi
12-25-2011, 03:22 PM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.


He has the potential to be better than strahan, he's bigger, faster, and more athletic. Can't believe we have him for another 7 seasons before he hits 30!

TroyArcher
12-25-2011, 03:26 PM
Giant fans new and old i believe we are watching the g mens LT of this current time of Giants football in JPP> that dude is an absolute terror blocking kicks terrorizing qbs covering rbs! so when every gm is out looking for the next LT is was Reese who found the next LT and that dude is now being referred to as JPP!

There will never be another LT. JPP looks like he can be one of the best Giant DE's ever if he stays healthy. LT is is the best LB ever and changed the game.

M0rbid
12-25-2011, 03:27 PM
No way.

If JPP is a generational player. LT was a once in a lifetime player. It's like comparing Peter Forsberg to Wayne Gretzky.

Roswell777
12-25-2011, 03:32 PM
Not even close.

Happy holidays.

deekay7685
12-25-2011, 03:34 PM
more like he IS another Julius Peppers

M0rbid
12-25-2011, 03:37 PM
more like he IS another Julius Peppers

Potentially better.

RobCarpenter
12-25-2011, 04:19 PM
JPP is a stud and I'm a huge JPP fan....<U>but</U> LT wasthe GREATEST Defensive player in NFL history. He changed the way that Offenses prepare and play and the way the LB position is both played and judged. </P>


Let's all really appreciate JPP....but let's leave LT out of the discussion for now. </P>

blueomaha
12-25-2011, 04:23 PM
that's pushing it...ya think??....

gradstang
12-25-2011, 04:44 PM
LT was the greatest but to think that us as giant fans to potentially have what could be the closest type of player that lt was in jpp we just might be looking at complete dominance from jpp just like we had in LT. and yes i know lt LT played lb and jpp is a de but jpp is making plays like LT use to make. the giants are lucky to have him!

Spizi
12-25-2011, 09:48 PM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYING

TheEnigma
12-25-2011, 09:55 PM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

Spizi
12-25-2011, 09:58 PM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

TheEnigma
12-25-2011, 10:08 PM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :PNot really confused at all. Simply saying that pass rushers like LT, Reggie White, and others would benefit immensely with today's league. Their stats would be even better considering offense pass more often throughout a game. This is why we have so many pass rushers this year over 15 sacks.

And if we had LT on the Giants today, you can bet they'd switch to a 3-4 to harness his abilities. Or so you'd hope...

Raptor22
12-25-2011, 10:13 PM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

Don't just think about the game. The way players study, prepare, and train have all improved. LT would be THAT much better.

DeMarcus Ware or Clay Matthews would be like a fart in a hurricane by comparison.

Its like comparing Pujols to Babe Ruth. Just how good would Ruth be with modern training, nutrition, practice, etc. and NOT eating a dozen hot dogs and drinking a 6 pack of beer over the course of a game?


JPP has the potential, and is on track to be a great, but there's only 1 LT.

Spizi
12-25-2011, 11:07 PM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :PNot really confused at all. Simply saying that pass rushers like LT, Reggie White, and others would benefit immensely with today's league. Their stats would be even better considering offense pass more often throughout a game. This is why we have so many pass rushers this year over 15 sacks.

And if we had LT on the Giants today, you can bet they'd switch to a 3-4 to harness his abilities. Or so you'd hope...

I love how everyone says the NFL is SO MUCH more of a passing league today than it was back then. Oh yeah?!?!? Then tell me how the average attempts per game in 2011 is 33.9 per game and in 1986 it was 32.2 attempts per game. That's a 1.7 attempts per game difference. hmmmmmmmm.......

Defcon4
12-25-2011, 11:40 PM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.


uhh NO! JPP will be JPP. He won't be the next LT nor will he be the next Strahan. He can be great. But Strahan was the greatest ever after Reggie White. Rushing the quarterback was his second best skill. Strahan's run defense was his #1 skill. It's what puts him in the Reggie White category and it's why he's not just another sack artist.

He has the potential to be better than strahan, he's bigger, faster, and more athletic. Can't believe we have him for another 7 seasons before he hits 30!

Spizi
12-25-2011, 11:44 PM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.


uhh NO! JPP will be JPP. He won't be the next LT nor will he be the next Strahan. He can be great. But Strahan was the greatest ever after Reggie White. Rushing the quarterback was his second best skill. Strahan's run defense was his #1 skill. It's what puts him in the Reggie White category and it's why he's not just another sack artist.

He has the potential to be better than strahan, he's bigger, faster, and more athletic. Can't believe we have him for another 7 seasons before he hits 30!

you failed so hard at quoting that haha

and tell me why he can't be better than strahan?

Defcon4
12-25-2011, 11:50 PM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.


uhh NO! JPP will be JPP. He won't be the next LT nor will he be the next Strahan. He can be great. But Strahan was the greatest ever after Reggie White. Rushing the quarterback was his second best skill. Strahan's run defense was his #1 skill. It's what puts him in the Reggie White category and it's why he's not just another sack artist.

He has the potential to be better than strahan, he's bigger, faster, and more athletic. Can't believe we have him for another 7 seasons before he hits 30!

you failed so hard at quoting that haha

and tell me why he can't be better than strahan?

If I have to tell you why then you fail at being a Giants fan. LOL!

Defcon4
12-25-2011, 11:50 PM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.


uhh NO! JPP will be JPP. He won't be the next LT nor will he be the next Strahan. He can be great. But Strahan was the greatest ever after Reggie White. Rushing the quarterback was his second best skill. Strahan's run defense was his #1 skill. It's what puts him in the Reggie White category and it's why he's not just another sack artist.

He has the potential to be better than strahan, he's bigger, faster, and more athletic. Can't believe we have him for another 7 seasons before he hits 30!

you failed so hard at quoting that haha

and tell me why he can't be better than strahan?

If I have to tell you why then you fail at being a Giants fan. LOL!

Spizi
12-25-2011, 11:55 PM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.


uhh NO! JPP will be JPP. He won't be the next LT nor will he be the next Strahan. He can be great. But Strahan was the greatest ever after Reggie White. Rushing the quarterback was his second best skill. Strahan's run defense was his #1 skill. It's what puts him in the Reggie White category and it's why he's not just another sack artist.

He has the potential to be better than strahan, he's bigger, faster, and more athletic. Can't believe we have him for another 7 seasons before he hits 30!

you failed so hard at quoting that haha

and tell me why he can't be better than strahan?

If I have to tell you why then you fail at being a Giants fan. LOL!

and you double post after that good one lol

How do I fail at being a Giants fan? Give me one good reason why JPP can't be better than Strahan because as of right now he has more sacks in his first 2 years than strahan did in his first 4. It also took strahan until his ninth year to have more single season sacks than jpp.

NOW I AM NOT SAYING IN ANY WAY THAT JPP IS BETTER BECAUSE OF THIS ALL I AM SAYING IS THAT HE IS OFF TO A GOOD START.

YATittle1962
12-26-2011, 12:24 AM
slooooooooooow yr roll big dog

lawl
12-26-2011, 01:11 AM
LT was much more violent than the guys playing today

giantman8493
12-26-2011, 01:34 AM
This guy can be better than LT. He has literally unlimited talent. AND has an outstanding motor. I can not believe the way he never gives up on a play and makes tackles 50 yards down field. He can be the best all time.

jhamburg
12-26-2011, 02:08 AM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

Don't just think about the game. The way players study, prepare, and train have all improved. LT would be THAT much better.

DeMarcus Ware or Clay Matthews would be like a fart in a hurricane by comparison.

Its like comparing Pujols to Babe Ruth. Just how good would Ruth be with modern training, nutrition, practice, etc. and NOT eating a dozen hot dogs and drinking a 6 pack of beer over the course of a game?


JPP has the potential, and is on track to be a great, but there's only 1 LT.


Babe Ruth was also up against probably 70-85 MPH fastballs. We have no frame of reference for how well he would hit against modern major league pitching, even with conditioning and all of that.

I'm not saying JPP has earned the right to be compared to LT yet, but sometimes you guys have arguments that boil down to "Nobody can ever be as good as (great player from past era) no matter how good they are"

jhamburg
12-26-2011, 02:27 AM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.


uhh NO! JPP will be JPP. He won't be the next LT nor will he be the next Strahan. He can be great. But Strahan was the greatest ever after Reggie White. Rushing the quarterback was his second best skill. Strahan's run defense was his #1 skill. It's what puts him in the Reggie White category and it's why he's not just another sack artist.

He has the potential to be better than strahan, he's bigger, faster, and more athletic. Can't believe we have him for another 7 seasons before he hits 30!

you failed so hard at quoting that haha

and tell me why he can't be better than strahan?

If I have to tell you why then you fail at being a Giants fan. LOL!

Sacks aren't everything- But JPP already has more in his first two season than Strahan had in his first four combined.

It also took Strahan 9 seasons to surpass the single season sack total that JPP has in week 16 of his 2nd season.

Keep in mind JPP had about as little football experience as any pass rusher out there, and was considered to be extremely "raw" and a "project" coming out of the draft. In fact coaches still talk about how he still has so much to learn now. I think nobody completely believes that, because it's so ridiculous to even comprehend.

G4L
12-26-2011, 04:27 PM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.

He has the potential to be better than strahan, he's bigger, faster, and more athletic. Can't believe we have him for another 7 seasons before he hits 30!

We actually only have him for another 3 years. Front office better get the salary cap under control and be ready to pay this kid before that contract expires.

simms56
12-26-2011, 04:54 PM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

Don't just think about the game. The way players study, prepare, and train have all improved. LT would be THAT much better.

DeMarcus Ware or Clay Matthews would be like a fart in a hurricane by comparison.

Its like comparing Pujols to Babe Ruth. Just how good would Ruth be with modern training, nutrition, practice, etc. and NOT eating a dozen hot dogs and drinking a 6 pack of beer over the course of a game?


JPP has the potential, and is on track to be a great, but there's only 1 LT.


Babe Ruth was also up against probably 70-85 MPH fastballs. We have no frame of reference for how well he would hit against modern major league pitching, even with conditioning and all of that.

I'm not saying JPP has earned the right to be compared to LT yet, but sometimes you guys have arguments that boil down to "Nobody can ever be as good as (great player from past era) no matter how good they are"

That is absurd. The fastballs in Babe Ruth's time were not that radically slower than they are now, the science of throwing a baseball from a human body only allows a certain maximum velocity. There are more players throwing high 90's than then but Walter Johnson and others threw as hard as anyone today. Ruth also had to face the spitball, emery ball, grease balls, etc. I'm not saying the pitching was better, but it wasn't that much worse. Yes, no blacks or Latin players but also no expansion, steroids in the batting box or as much talent being diverted to other sports.


As far as JPP goes, I do agree that he is maybe not getting as much credit as he deserves for his potential. There are some serious young players right now (Smith, Miller, Ware, etc.) that could go down as Hall of Fame players. The problem is that LT is BY FAR the greatest defensive player ever in my opinion. He forced the game to start counting sacks, invented the pass rush from LB, started the swat the ball technique that EVERY defensive player uses now, and was a beast unlike any I have ever witnessed. It is probably hard for younger fans to imagine the level he was on versus anyone he played with or that came before. It was breathtaking to watch. JPP could get to a level close, but it would be hard for anyone to revolutionize the defensive side of the ball greater than LT with the current lame rules of Arena Football.

RedskinHater
12-26-2011, 05:13 PM
Calling J2P the next LT is the flip side dumb
Of calling Prince a bust . Give them both time
Before labeling either one .
As good as J2P is LT was on a whole
Other level . There have been only a handful
Or two of TRUE game changers .

shotcalla39
12-26-2011, 05:17 PM
Calling J2P the next LT is the flip side dumb
Of calling Prince a bust . Give them both time
Before labeling either one .
As good as J2P is LT was on a whole
Other level . There have been only a handful
Or two of TRUE game changers .

The game JPP had Gainer Dallas was a LT type performance on every level... If he can do it consistently for the next 10+ years look out

RedskinHater
12-26-2011, 05:40 PM
Calling J2P the next LT is the flip side dumb
Of calling Prince a bust . Give them both time
Before labeling either one .
As good as J2P is LT was on a whole
Other level . There have been only a handful
Or two of TRUE game changers .

The game JPP had Gainer Dallas was a LT type performance on every level... If he can do it consistently for the next 10+ years look out
He does have a high ceiling ; let's see what
Transpires over the next decade ! Again LT changed the
Entire sport - hand swipes , counting sacks in addition to
Top most leadership !

jhamburg
12-27-2011, 12:46 AM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

Don't just think about the game. The way players study, prepare, and train have all improved. LT would be THAT much better.

DeMarcus Ware or Clay Matthews would be like a fart in a hurricane by comparison.

Its like comparing Pujols to Babe Ruth. Just how good would Ruth be with modern training, nutrition, practice, etc. and NOT eating a dozen hot dogs and drinking a 6 pack of beer over the course of a game?


JPP has the potential, and is on track to be a great, but there's only 1 LT.


Babe Ruth was also up against probably 70-85 MPH fastballs. We have no frame of reference for how well he would hit against modern major league pitching, even with conditioning and all of that.

I'm not saying JPP has earned the right to be compared to LT yet, but sometimes you guys have arguments that boil down to "Nobody can ever be as good as (great player from past era) no matter how good they are"

That is absurd.* The fastballs in Babe Ruth's time were not that radically slower than they are now, the science of throwing a baseball from a human body only allows a certain maximum velocity.* There are more players throwing high 90's than then but Walter Johnson and others threw as hard as anyone today.* Ruth also had to face the spitball, emery ball, grease balls, etc.* I'm not saying the pitching was better, but it wasn't that much worse.* Yes, no blacks or Latin players but also no expansion, steroids in the batting box or as much talent being diverted to other sports

Talent was still diverted to other professions, if not other sports. The average player made the equivalent of $50,000 a year, it didn't really make financial sense to go for the pros if you had any other options open in life. And the population of the US as a whole was much smaller. And like you said, you didn't have black players, venezuela, dr, japan, etc.

Also consider that there weren't modern day rotations, pitchers regularly threw on short rest and would pitch complete games even if they were giving up runs. Obviously you can't maintain your best stuff under those conditions. Imagine a star player of today going up against a starter who gave up 6-7 runs on 140 pitches? That type of scenario happened all the time in Ruth's day.

fansince69
12-27-2011, 09:39 AM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

Don't just think about the game. The way players study, prepare, and train have all improved. LT would be THAT much better.

DeMarcus Ware or Clay Matthews would be like a fart in a hurricane by comparison.

Its like comparing Pujols to Babe Ruth. Just how good would Ruth be with modern training, nutrition, practice, etc. and NOT eating a dozen hot dogs and drinking a 6 pack of beer over the course of a game?


JPP has the potential, and is on track to be a great, but there's only 1 LT.


Babe Ruth was also up against probably 70-85 MPH fastballs. We have no frame of reference for how well he would hit against modern major league pitching, even with conditioning and all of that.

I'm not saying JPP has earned the right to be compared to LT yet, but sometimes you guys have arguments that boil down to "Nobody can ever be as good as (great player from past era) no matter how good they are"

That is absurd. The fastballs in Babe Ruth's time were not that radically slower than they are now, the science of throwing a baseball from a human body only allows a certain maximum velocity. There are more players throwing high 90's than then but Walter Johnson and others threw as hard as anyone today. Ruth also had to face the spitball, emery ball, grease balls, etc. I'm not saying the pitching was better, but it wasn't that much worse. Yes, no blacks or Latin players but also no expansion, steroids in the batting box or as much talent being diverted to other sports

Talent was still diverted to other professions, if not other sports. The average player made the equivalent of $50,000 a year, it didn't really make financial sense to go for the pros if you had any other options open in life. And the population of the US as a whole was much smaller. And like you said, you didn't have black players, venezuela, dr, japan, etc.

Also consider that there weren't modern day rotations, pitchers regularly threw on short rest and would pitch complete games even if they were giving up runs. Obviously you can't maintain your best stuff under those conditions. Imagine a star player of today going up against a starter who gave up 6-7 runs on 140 pitches? That type of scenario happened all the time in Ruth's day.

I have a couple of problems with some of these comparisons

First I do not believe you can compare players of different times to each other...you have to compare them to their contemporary's.....The games,the rules and too many other variables....The true way to measure is who was most superior to the competition at the time he played......I understand this concept will probably go over many people's head.

If the pitching was so bad when Ruth played then why wasn't EVERYONE hitting 50 hrs /yr?
Entire teams couldn't match his production.To say he couldn't or could do that in today's game is a dumb point cause no one really does know....the fact remains he did it better than anyone has ever done it compared to the people he played against.

Another fact you people are leaving out is the "dead" ball Ruth played with as opposed to live ball of today's game.

Getting back to the original topic...As great as I think JPP is and can be...He has to do it for a very long time..stay injury free and revolutionize the game to even be compared to LT....Not saying he can't....just saying it is unlikely

I am guessing that most people that are just quoting stats did not actually see what the game was before LT and what it was after LT.

To be honest I am very tired of having some of these conversations with people trying to compare 2 players when they actually only saw one of them play.Stats do not always tell the whole story.

If you did not watch LT play and are trying to claim JPP is better or even the equivalent please stay out of the conversation.

burier
12-27-2011, 11:46 AM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

Don't just think about the game. The way players study, prepare, and train have all improved. LT would be THAT much better.

DeMarcus Ware or Clay Matthews would be like a fart in a hurricane by comparison.

Its like comparing Pujols to Babe Ruth. Just how good would Ruth be with modern training, nutrition, practice, etc. and NOT eating a dozen hot dogs and drinking a 6 pack of beer over the course of a game?


JPP has the potential, and is on track to be a great, but there's only 1 LT.


Babe Ruth was also up against probably 70-85 MPH fastballs. We have no frame of reference for how well he would hit against modern major league pitching, even with conditioning and all of that.

I'm not saying JPP has earned the right to be compared to LT yet, but sometimes you guys have arguments that boil down to "Nobody can ever be as good as (great player from past era) no matter how good they are"

That is absurd.* The fastballs in Babe Ruth's time were not that radically slower than they are now, the science of throwing a baseball from a human body only allows a certain maximum velocity.* There are more players throwing high 90's than then but Walter Johnson and others threw as hard as anyone today.* Ruth also had to face the spitball, emery ball, grease balls, etc.* I'm not saying the pitching was better, but it wasn't that much worse.* Yes, no blacks or Latin players but also no expansion, steroids in the batting box or as much talent being diverted to other sports

Talent was still diverted to other professions, if not other sports. The average player made the equivalent of $50,000 a year, it didn't really make financial sense to go for the pros if you had any other options open in life. And the population of the US as a whole was much smaller. And like you said, you didn't have black players, venezuela, dr, japan, etc.

Also consider that there weren't modern day rotations, pitchers regularly threw on short rest and would pitch complete games even if they were giving up runs. Obviously you can't maintain your best stuff under those conditions. Imagine a star player of today going up against a starter who gave up 6-7 runs on 140 pitches? That type of scenario happened all the time in Ruth's day.

I have a couple of problems with some of these comparisons

First I do not believe you can compare players of different times to each other...you have to compare them to their contemporary's.....The games,the rules and too many other variables....The true way to measure is who was most superior to the competition at the time he played......I understand this concept will probably go over many people's head.

If the pitching was so bad when Ruth played then why wasn't EVERYONE hitting 50 hrs /yr?
Entire teams couldn't match his production.To say he couldn't or could do that in today's game is a dumb point cause no one really does know....the fact remains he did it better than anyone has ever done it compared to the people he played against.

Another fact you people are leaving out is the "dead" ball Ruth played with as opposed to live ball of today's game.

Getting back to the original topic...As great as I think JPP is and can be...He has to do it for a very long time..stay injury free and revolutionize the game to even be compared to LT....Not saying he can't....just saying it is unlikely

I am guessing that most people that are just quoting stats did not actually see what the game was before LT and what it was after LT.

To be honest I am very tired of having some of these conversations with people trying to compare 2 players when they actually only saw one of them play.Stats do not always tell the whole story.

If you did not watch LT play and are trying to claim JPP is better or even the equivalent* please stay out of the conversation.


basically this.

I'll just add that as good as JPP is and as good as he could become LT looked like he was playing in the Matrix. I mean guys just couldn't do anything about him. It really seemed like he was video game character and someone had entered a bunch of cheat codes. (Infinate turbo, Infinate stamina, 99 strength, 99 speed you name it)

The Psychological toll LT would take on offenses I don't think will be matched by anyone in any of our lifetimes. Imagine you're the QB and you go to the sideline and one of the trainers meets you and starts pulling all of the soil out of your face mask and your looking at your coach hoping he's got some sort of plan of action about what to do about 56 and all you get in return is a blank stare.

jhamburg
12-27-2011, 01:27 PM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

Don't just think about the game. The way players study, prepare, and train have all improved. LT would be THAT much better.

DeMarcus Ware or Clay Matthews would be like a fart in a hurricane by comparison.

Its like comparing Pujols to Babe Ruth. Just how good would Ruth be with modern training, nutrition, practice, etc. and NOT eating a dozen hot dogs and drinking a 6 pack of beer over the course of a game?


JPP has the potential, and is on track to be a great, but there's only 1 LT.


Babe Ruth was also up against probably 70-85 MPH fastballs. We have no frame of reference for how well he would hit against modern major league pitching, even with conditioning and all of that.

I'm not saying JPP has earned the right to be compared to LT yet, but sometimes you guys have arguments that boil down to "Nobody can ever be as good as (great player from past era) no matter how good they are"

That is absurd.* The fastballs in Babe Ruth's time were not that radically slower than they are now, the science of throwing a baseball from a human body only allows a certain maximum velocity.* There are more players throwing high 90's than then but Walter Johnson and others threw as hard as anyone today.* Ruth also had to face the spitball, emery ball, grease balls, etc.* I'm not saying the pitching was better, but it wasn't that much worse.* Yes, no blacks or Latin players but also no expansion, steroids in the batting box or as much talent being diverted to other sports

Talent was still diverted to other professions, if not other sports. The average player made the equivalent of $50,000 a year, it didn't really make financial sense to go for the pros if you had any other options open in life. And the population of the US as a whole was much smaller. And like you said, you didn't have black players, venezuela, dr, japan, etc.

Also consider that there weren't modern day rotations, pitchers regularly threw on short rest and would pitch complete games even if they were giving up runs. Obviously you can't maintain your best stuff under those conditions. Imagine a star player of today going up against a starter who gave up 6-7 runs on 140 pitches? That type of scenario happened all the time in Ruth's day.

I have a couple of problems with some of these comparisons

First I do not believe you can compare players of different times to each other...you have to compare them to their contemporary's.....The games,the rules and too many other variables....The true way to measure is who was most superior to the competition at the time he played......I understand this concept will probably go over many people's head.

If the pitching was so bad when Ruth played then why wasn't EVERYONE hitting 50 hrs /yr?
Entire teams couldn't match his production.To say he couldn't or could do that in today's game is a dumb point cause no one really does know....the fact remains he did it better than anyone has ever done it compared to the people he played against.

Another fact you people are leaving out is the "dead" ball Ruth played with as opposed to live ball of today's game.

Everyone wasn't hitting 50 hrs because the overall talent pool was smaller, conditioning was MUCH worse, coaching was worse, etc...Like I said, Babe Ruth was up against pitchers with worse stuff throwing long outings on short rest, and he still struck out a ton. Put him in today's MLB and he's a fat Adam Dunn without the steroids.

fansince69
12-27-2011, 01:40 PM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

Don't just think about the game. The way players study, prepare, and train have all improved. LT would be THAT much better.

DeMarcus Ware or Clay Matthews would be like a fart in a hurricane by comparison.

Its like comparing Pujols to Babe Ruth. Just how good would Ruth be with modern training, nutrition, practice, etc. and NOT eating a dozen hot dogs and drinking a 6 pack of beer over the course of a game?


JPP has the potential, and is on track to be a great, but there's only 1 LT.


Babe Ruth was also up against probably 70-85 MPH fastballs. We have no frame of reference for how well he would hit against modern major league pitching, even with conditioning and all of that.

I'm not saying JPP has earned the right to be compared to LT yet, but sometimes you guys have arguments that boil down to "Nobody can ever be as good as (great player from past era) no matter how good they are"

That is absurd. The fastballs in Babe Ruth's time were not that radically slower than they are now, the science of throwing a baseball from a human body only allows a certain maximum velocity. There are more players throwing high 90's than then but Walter Johnson and others threw as hard as anyone today. Ruth also had to face the spitball, emery ball, grease balls, etc. I'm not saying the pitching was better, but it wasn't that much worse. Yes, no blacks or Latin players but also no expansion, steroids in the batting box or as much talent being diverted to other sports

Talent was still diverted to other professions, if not other sports. The average player made the equivalent of $50,000 a year, it didn't really make financial sense to go for the pros if you had any other options open in life. And the population of the US as a whole was much smaller. And like you said, you didn't have black players, venezuela, dr, japan, etc.

Also consider that there weren't modern day rotations, pitchers regularly threw on short rest and would pitch complete games even if they were giving up runs. Obviously you can't maintain your best stuff under those conditions. Imagine a star player of today going up against a starter who gave up 6-7 runs on 140 pitches? That type of scenario happened all the time in Ruth's day.

I have a couple of problems with some of these comparisons

First I do not believe you can compare players of different times to each other...you have to compare them to their contemporary's.....The games,the rules and too many other variables....The true way to measure is who was most superior to the competition at the time he played......I understand this concept will probably go over many people's head.

If the pitching was so bad when Ruth played then why wasn't EVERYONE hitting 50 hrs /yr?
Entire teams couldn't match his production.To say he couldn't or could do that in today's game is a dumb point cause no one really does know....the fact remains he did it better than anyone has ever done it compared to the people he played against.

Another fact you people are leaving out is the "dead" ball Ruth played with as opposed to live ball of today's game.

Everyone wasn't hitting 50 hrs because the overall talent pool was smaller, conditioning was MUCH worse, coaching was worse, etc...Like I said, Babe Ruth was up against pitchers with worse stuff throwing long outings on short rest, and he still struck out a ton. Put him in today's MLB and he's a fat Adam Dunn without the steroids.

You obviously did NOT read what I said about comparing players from different eras...Or are you one of the ones I referred to as it going over their head?...Trying to imagine what one player from the past would do in the present is impossible... period ....so please hold your speculations...He was MORE dominating in his era than ANY other player....Most players that hit alot of home runs strike out alot...so that is not a very good measure at all.

Defcon4
12-27-2011, 02:41 PM
<font color="#FF0000">Is JPP playing LB now?</font>

I think the next Strahan would be more appropriate. A complete DE that doesn't stop until the whistle. A DE who runs down backs from the opposite side of the play.

I'll call him LT when he starts doing coke and underage hookers.


uhh NO! JPP will be JPP. He won't be the next LT nor will he be the next Strahan. He can be great. But Strahan was the greatest ever after Reggie White. Rushing the quarterback was his second best skill. Strahan's run defense was his #1 skill. It's what puts him in the Reggie White category and it's why he's not just another sack artist.

He has the potential to be better than strahan, he's bigger, faster, and more athletic. Can't believe we have him for another 7 seasons before he hits 30!

you failed so hard at quoting that haha

and tell me why he can't be better than strahan?

If I have to tell you why then you fail at being a Giants fan. LOL!

and you double post after that good one lol

How do I fail at being a Giants fan? Give me one good reason why JPP can't be better than Strahan because as of right now he has more sacks in his first 2 years than strahan did in his first 4. It also took strahan until his ninth year to have more single season sacks than jpp.

NOW I AM NOT SAYING IN ANY WAY THAT JPP IS BETTER BECAUSE OF THIS ALL I AM SAYING IS THAT HE IS OFF TO A GOOD START.

I've got computer isSues.

Sacks are only half of the battle. I think its too much to say that a good young player will be the next so-and-so. JPP will be good in his own right.

He could potentially be better at getting to the QB, but I haven't seen proof that outside of the numbers. The guy is a beast no question, but it's way too early to compare him to a HOFer or even worse say he will be better than a HOFer.

It's all a matter of opinion. I weight run defense heavily for DEs. They double-teamed Strahan and left a RB to chip block on him on pass plays and they ran away from him on run plays. JPP has displays tremendous potential, but beyond the numbers I haven't seen anything that says he'll be BETTER than Strahan.

They are two different players. Strahan was drafted as a run-stuffer that developed into a pass rusher, while JPP is a pass rusher that will have to work on his run defense. I do agree he's off to a phenomenal start.

Roswell777
12-27-2011, 02:53 PM
I've seen a lot of crazy stuff written on these boards but comparing Babe Ruth to a fat Adam Dunn without the 'roids has to take the cake.

Happy new year.

jhamburg
12-27-2011, 04:31 PM
I've seen a lot of crazy stuff written on these boards but comparing Babe Ruth to a fat Adam Dunn without the 'roids has to take the cake.

Happy new year.

In 1920, the fastest human being in the face of the earth ran 100 meters in 10.6 seconds. He would not even be in the frame until half a second after Usain Bolt crossed the finish line. Athletes are miles ahead of their early 20th century counterparts in every measurable way. I know baseball skill is a lot more than straight up athleticism, but to me its naive to think players today aren't MUCH better than players from that era. That isn't to say Babe Ruth can't still be considered the greatest of all time, but to say that he's better than Pujols in an apples-to-apples comparison is crazy.

fansince69
12-27-2011, 05:25 PM
I've seen a lot of crazy stuff written on these boards but comparing Babe Ruth to a fat Adam Dunn without the 'roids has to take the cake.

Happy new year.

In 1920, the fastest human being in the face of the earth ran 100 meters in 10.6 seconds. He would not even be in the frame until half a second after Usain Bolt crossed the finish line. Athletes are miles ahead of their early 20th century counterparts in every measurable way. I know baseball skill is a lot more than straight up athleticism, but to me its naive to think players today aren't MUCH better than players from that era. That isn't to say Babe Ruth can't still be considered the greatest of all time, but to say that he's better than Pujols in an apples-to-apples comparison is crazy.

I really do not know how to explain this to you....you obviously are NOT following my point so I will stop after one more attempt...

In no way did I ever claim that Ruth or any other player from any sport was better than any of todays athletes....what I claimed is there is NO way to know if he is or isn't....The only way to truly measure athletes from different eras is to measure them against who they played against.

How much better were they than the people they competed against...period...

Ruth and his records were miles ahead of anyone he played against....is there a clear cut best player right now?If you talk to ten experts you might get 10 different responses.....Is there anyone in the game today hitting more homeruns than any other team? NO... and doing it with a lifetime average of 343?Bigger stadiums dead ball and all.

The original point here still is you can not compare Ruth to anyone since because there is no way for you to KNOW for sure what he might have done.So unless you build a time machine and bring Ruth or whoever to present day...your argument does not hold any proof..

..I do however like your analogy of 100 meter times...It does say that some men do run faster now than they did.....do they run faster because the tracks are in better shape,the sneakers are much improved and because from kids they were better fed?Did they start lifting weights at age 10 which wasn't possible back then?...Again no way to know how an athlete from a different time period would do in present day.

Firenugget
12-27-2011, 05:53 PM
..I'm just disappointed that nobody bit on the coke and underage hooker comment... [&lt;:o)]

Spizi
12-27-2011, 06:09 PM
Sacks are only half of the battle. I think its too much to say that a good young player will be the next so-and-so. JPP will be good in his own right.

jpp leads all defensive linemen with 81 tackles



He could potentially be better at getting to the QB, but I haven't seen proof that outside of the numbers. The guy is a beast no question, but it's way too early to compare him to a HOFer or even worse say he will be better than a HOFer.

It's all a matter of opinion. I weight run defense heavily for DEs. They double-teamed Strahan and left a RB to chip block on him on pass plays and they ran away from him on run plays. JPP has displays tremendous potential, but beyond the numbers I haven't seen anything that says he'll be BETTER than Strahan.

what other proof is there?!? lol he has 15.5 sacks in his first year as a starter, 20 sacks in his first 2 seasons, and is constantly double teamed.

Considering how raw everyone says he still is, imagine how good he will be 2 years from now with 4 years of experience under his belt! Multiple 20+ sack seasons? I can only hope.

Defcon4
12-27-2011, 07:15 PM
Sacks are only half of the battle. I think its too much to say that a good young player will be the next so-and-so. JPP will be good in his own right.

jpp leads all defensive linemen with 81 tackles



He could potentially be better at getting to the QB, but I haven't seen proof that outside of the numbers. The guy is a beast no question, but it's way too early to compare him to a HOFer or even worse say he will be better than a HOFer.

It's all a matter of opinion. I weight run defense heavily for DEs. They double-teamed Strahan and left a RB to chip block on him on pass plays and they ran away from him on run plays. JPP has displays tremendous potential, but beyond the numbers I haven't seen anything that says he'll be BETTER than Strahan.

what other proof is there?!? lol he has 15.5 sacks in his first year as a starter, 20 sacks in his first 2 seasons, and is constantly double teamed.

Considering how raw everyone says he still is, imagine how good he will be 2 years from now with 4 years of experience under his belt! Multiple 20+ sack seasons? I can only hope.

I usually see him get one on one coverage. How he plays the run at the point of attack does not compare to Strahan. You can't just look at stats when assessing a player, especially if your going to compare him to Strahan. Strahan played with a better LB core so he's not going to have as high tackle numbers. The kids good. He could be great. Until I see how he plays when teams start game planning for JPP as they did Strahan, I won't even mention him in the same breath as Strahan. Its not an insult. If he's not as good as Strahan, IMO he can still be the 3rd best DE of all-time. Think about it.

Roswell777
12-27-2011, 11:46 PM
..I'm just disappointed that nobody bit on the coke and underage hooker comment... [<:o)]


I thought it was hilarious but the whole Babe Ruth is just Adam Dunn without the steroids post has to be considered the post of 2011.

That's one of those lines that is funny if it was meant as a joke and hilarious if it wasn't.

JMGGIANTS
12-28-2011, 12:08 AM
LT's first 2 seasons= 17 sacks
JPP's first 2 seasons= 20+ sacks

JUST SAYINGIt's way more of a passing game across all the teams now. I'm confident that LT in this era would be past 20+ sacks in 2 seasons.

I'm confident that now since they changed the game because of his 1980s self that his 1980s self in todays game wouldn't be past 20+ sacks. did i confuse you? lol

and he wouldn't be playing DE for the 2011 giants so definitely wouldn't be getting 20 sacks :P

Don't just think about the game. The way players study, prepare, and train have all improved. LT would be THAT much better.

DeMarcus Ware or Clay Matthews would be like a fart in a hurricane by comparison.

Its like comparing Pujols to Babe Ruth. Just how good would Ruth be with modern training, nutrition, practice, etc. and NOT eating a dozen hot dogs and drinking a 6 pack of beer over the course of a game?


JPP has the potential, and is on track to be a great, but there's only 1 LT.


Babe Ruth was also up against probably 70-85 MPH fastballs. We have no frame of reference for how well he would hit against modern major league pitching, even with conditioning and all of that.

I'm not saying JPP has earned the right to be compared to LT yet, but sometimes you guys have arguments that boil down to "Nobody can ever be as good as (great player from past era) no matter how good they are"

That is absurd.* The fastballs in Babe Ruth's time were not that radically slower than they are now, the science of throwing a baseball from a human body only allows a certain maximum velocity.* There are more players throwing high 90's than then but Walter Johnson and others threw as hard as anyone today.* Ruth also had to face the spitball, emery ball, grease balls, etc.* I'm not saying the pitching was better, but it wasn't that much worse.* Yes, no blacks or Latin players but also no expansion, steroids in the batting box or as much talent being diverted to other sports.


As far as JPP goes, I do agree that he is maybe not getting as much credit as he deserves for his potential.* There are some serious young players right now (Smith, Miller, Ware, etc.) that could go down as Hall of Fame players.* The problem is that LT is BY FAR the greatest defensive player ever in my opinion.* He forced the game to start counting sacks, invented the pass rush from LB, started the swat the ball technique that EVERY defensive player uses now, and was a beast unlike any I have ever witnessed.* It is probably hard for younger fans to imagine the level he was on versus anyone he played with or that came before.* It was breathtaking to watch.* JPP could get to a level close, but it would be hard for anyone to revolutionize the defensive side of the ball greater than LT with the current lame rules of Arena Football.

Glad I read this so I don't have to reply about the 70-85 mph fastballs. That is so untrue. As you say there were many hard throwers back then and some of the hardest throwers ever.

No doubt JPP looks like he is going to be a great player but LT was truly a revolutionary defensive player and JPP does not deserve to be compared to LT or spoken in the same sentence with LT until further notice.