In the Reese free agent thread posted on the forum, it was said that maybe Reese is letting Beason test the FA waters because the organization has targeted LJ as the #1 Giants' FA to re-sign. I believe strongly, as do many on BBI, that you need to control the LOS first and foremost.
However, we had LJ and no Beason, and the defense wasn't that good. Then we added Beason and there was a noticeable improvement in the defense's attitude and performance. Maybe it was the combination of the two that made the defense better? I don't know.
So which player should really be the #1 priority to re-sign in the off-season - LJ or Beason?
Obviously, financial impact weighs in, but putting it aside and looking at just the defensive impact. I think most on BBI came back with Joseph first, with Beason coming in second.
however, beason is a player as well.
keep em both.
Will Hill also helped defense tremendously
Will Hill also helped defense tremendously
My opinion as well. I do think Beason is important to this team. He brings a toughness and leadership to go along with his ability to tackle and make plays. I think Beason is important if we want a smashmouth, tough defense. I think Joseph is a guy that has a long successful career ahead of him. Tough to say who is more important to the 2014 team. If you twisted my arm, I'd say Joseph, but it's very close.
I actually go with Linval. And, trust me, I am a huge supporter of Beason and often ridicule the recent NY Giant theory that LBs are less important. But I just think LJ's age and durability give him the nod.
I do cringe at the thought of losing Beason though, so hopefully we can keep both.
Take Joseph off of the team and the DT position is a huge weakness.
(sarcasm)
Finally, the Giants have DTs that can hold down the middle in Hankins, Jenkins, Kuhn and Patterson.
I'd love both back but if it's a matter of priority? That's a no brainer for me...Beason.
If need be he couldn't help himself but to pick somebody good at 12. Mosely?
This is a team with a lot of holes and age. It's time we begin to use the draft and FA to get out of our current cap situation.
Of course we then we will be drafting another DT in the second round in 2015...Joseph, Austin, Hankins,...., after all the Giants are so strong they can keep drafting DT's...
We aren't that close...and there not many areas of stength in this roster, DT could be one.
Good pt, it probably had nothing to do with facing a plethora of dogshit qbs the rest of the season.
Pete Damilatisþ@PFF_Pete
I know most Giant fans will disagree, but Jon Beason is not a "must" sign.
Pete Damilatisþ@PFF_Pete·
Leadership aside, Jon Beason's -16.0 coverage grade this season was the worst of any NFL LB. Giants should tread lightly.
Pete Damilatisþ@PFF_Pete
Given his injury history and coverage issues, I'm not comfortable with the Giants offering Beason anything more than 2 yrs, $5M.
Pete Damilatisþ@PFF_Pete·
Considering that the Vikings signed Erin Henderson last year for 2 yrs/$4M, hard to justify giving Beason much more
Reese playing it smart? I guess, let him go and see what the market brings, and then hopefully he is willing to come back and see if the Giants will match it, the downside to that is that when a team really wants a player they dont want him to leave the building without signing a deal. Like someone else said, Beason IS looking to get back to his previous pay-grade, he may like the Giants and appreciate his spot in their defense, and he may feel gratitude for their belief in him, but that only goes so far.
It is harder to replace young, healthy, productive DT.
Good MLB/ILB still need DT up front to occupy blockers.
It is harder to replace young, healthy, productive DT.
Good MLB/ILB still need DT up front to occupy blockers.
I agree, but look at all of the great MLBs the Giants have passed on in the third to later rounds in the past few years (Lee, Bowman, Washington) and who the Giants have taken-Phillip Dillard?
I think the Giants can take a 2nd round DT, especially at #12 who has a very high chance of being better than LJ within 2 years. LJ is a good player, but I dont see him being so good that the Giants need to stress their already tight cap situation by giving him a contract that would be better than what he is likely to see on the market.
Quote:
The defense sucked donkey balls until the Beason trade. That right there tells you who is more valuable.
Good pt, it probably had nothing to do with facing a plethora of dogshit qbs the rest of the season.
Is that why the running backs suddenly couldn't run against this defense?
Lets not act like the giants wouldn't have stopped, for instance, Adrian Peterson if matt cassel or Christian ponder were starting in that minny game. That's just a silly way of thinking.
The fact they will not extend manning is telling. It says they are waiting to see if he can picj up his game or if he is indeed on the inevitable downside of his casreer. they are not hamstringing themselves for the future.
As far as TC goes the one year extension means nothing , nothing at all.If they bomb, they may replace him, if he does well, and still wants to coach, they may let him, with another one year extension.mayeb they season Mcadoo for a coupel of years. Maybe eli takes a shit, they let his conbtract run out,m then in 2 years, not one, TC retires and they hire a new head coach. The fact is I do not believe the Giants saw anyone out there as an improvement over TC. Next offseason may be different. Or not.I think they would like to leave the team in a position in a year or two to be able to hire a new long term coach, with out having all their cap money tied up, and an option for said new coach to go with a new QB if the current one doesnt improve.The giants looking to create this option doesnt mean TC is done, , like I said if he and manning pick it up then maybe they stick around.
I'd sday the gianst don't like change just for the sake of it, but I am hesitant to do so after listening to TC say, pointedly, that performance had nothing to do with Ope and ingram getting canned.Maybe they wanted change, maybe they didn't see eye to eye with what TC wants to do moving forward with Mcadoo.,maybe it wasn't performance as much as a sense of stagnation and a need for change and growth.
TC is very stubborn, but also very astute, and has shown the ability to adapt, albeit slowly, when his , or the teams survival depends on it.I see a pattern with him, he tries to force his way on the team, and when the collectively rebel, and present sound reasoning for said rebellion, he relents and changes his approach.This, more than anythign else is why he endures, that and his fundamentally sound regimen for preparation.He depends on that regimen, and doesn't change it lightly, but will change it once he sees it bears little or no fruit. Loyalty or not, he does shed ineffective coaches and has done so over the years. reluctantly, but still he does it.I think he knows their needs to be change. I think he also knows his QB is fundamentally a gunslinger who makes his money of the long ball. I expect them to pay greater attention to developing an effective short yardage game, moreso than in the past, but the home run strikes will still be deep balls down the field, because that's what they have at QB.I don't care what anyone says, I have never thought Eli is among the leagues best in a short yardage attack.lots osf short passes he flubs other W+QBs make. I expect that will get cleaned up, along with more passes to the RBs and TEs next year, and wouldnt suprise me to see him hit the FBs as well.I think we will go back to seeing manning hit 8-9 receivers a game like he did in the middle of his carreer. those numbers have dropped the last 2 years. as teasm have to cover more possible outlets it will open the long ball for Manning, I think that's what Mcadoo will do for us, Gilbride was committed to swinging for the fences. I think MCAdoo will look to take what is given, then expoloit when it is timely, which is what Manning is good at, once he gets into a game and starts detecting defensive tendencies.
The running game will be incorporated to the extent it is succesful.If it works they will lean on it, if it doesn't, McAdoo will find a way to nickel and dime the ball forward with a short passing game that accomplishes the same basic goal of keeping the chains moving while they try and develop the opportunities for the deep strikes. I thin
k that's why they hired him, 1)to be adaptive to the available means,and make best use of them and 2)to keep the chains moving.They expect him to be inventive in doing so. I thijk he is a good hire, and a few season s under TC, if he works out, then who knows where he goes from there.
Back to beason and Joseph, they will make fair market offers, and they will either take them or they won't. If they don't then the Giants will move on from there, but I don't sense the loss of any single player is going to cause them to panic.
This year, more than any other, is where we truly find out just how good a GM Reese really is.he has the opportunity to wreck the franchise, or right the ship.Obviously I'm rooting for him, But I have my reservations. Very interesting to see what we do this year.
P.S. don't be suprised to see Baas or Snee Back, if nothing more than depth.I say draft a LT, put Beatty at LG, Pugh stays at right, Boothe cordle at baas fight it out for center, and the pick up a FA for right guard, snee as backup at RG.they pick up a second FA as a backup, and draft another guy in later round, and keep brewer as the 10th man. I don't see them going with more than 4 new faces.
Snee thinks he can play.If he's right they'll let him come to camp.Beatty we are married to for now, and somewhere during the year he will work his way back into the lineup somwhere.They wont cut Basas tuill after june 1st, and by that time they will have seen what he looks like in OTAs. If he looks good he may stay with restructure . if not he goes after june 1st, but either way, they are going to get a look at him first and see where he is at.same thing goes for Snee I think, unless he is bullshitting about his recovery.
Bottom line is I think decisaions on Snee, Baas and Beatyy come later in the spring rather than earlier, and it's too early to tell. They may all be gone. They may all stay, if they can play.I thijmk the Giants are going to play this very smart and not cut off their noses to spite their face.
It's one thing to cut ties with a guy like Nicks who dogged it. It's another thing for guys who played hard till they got limited by injuries. Tye will assess where they are medically before making final decisions, it's just the smart thing to do.
Beason = 6 votes
LJ = 9 votes
Some really good points presented on the thread. Regarding injury history of LJ, remember Canty had no injuries prior to signing with the Giants and then he started to get banged-up a little bit. So I don't take LJ's injury history into account too much; it's nice that he hasn't been injured though. If he had been injured, then I would use that against him.
I agree, I think Beason is the more impact player over LJ. I think LJ is a good DT, but he isn't on the level of Suh, like was already pointed out.
Over the last few years, we have experimented with average MLB play. I think the last year we kept the MLB's 'clean' and they still didn't produce. We certainly kept the MLB 'clean' early-on this year and it didn't matter. I stand by my opinion that, in a 4-3 defense, the MLB is just as important as the DE's. I've said this before on BBI, the 4-3 defense was designed by Tom Landry to allow (keep clean) Sam Huff to make plays (ie, tackle Jim Brown). You don't need say ... Patrick Willis to play MLB; but you need someone very capable.
One post above that I thought was very interesting was how many more DTs go earlier in the draft versus LBs. The large differential was fairly surprising and telling as to where the NFL puts value between the two spots.
I would think the saving grace if LJ walked would be that Hankins would have a great opportunity to step up which is why he is here.
On the hand, if Beason walked then we have to start again at MLB because no one we have can do an adequate job.
I typically would say MLB is easier to replace; however the Giants have shown to be inept at drafting/developing this talent.
LJ can be replaced, but really only for one year as jenkins/patterson would be basically done and we would only have Hankins (with only 1.5 years under his belt)
It is harder to replace young, healthy, productive DT.
I don't think the statistic of drafting 42 DT's in the 1st two rounds over the last 6 years necessarily tells us the position is more important. Playing in the trenches puts a lot of stress on the defensive linemen's bodies. So you have to replenish that position more often than LB. You also need a good rotation, which is not an issue at LB.