for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Giants Cut Center J.D. Walton

Eric from BBI : Admin : 3/2/2015 4:05 pm
...
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
look, another way to look at it  
nyynyg : 3/2/2015 4:59 pm : link
sometimes you gamble sometimes you lose. we gambled, we lost. can't sign stars all the time, and sometimes you don't have money to do it either. what are you going to do.
for everyone talking about Beason  
RicFlair : 3/2/2015 5:00 pm : link
IF they cut him, it wouldn't be until after june 1st.

Well now we officially need a starting G or Tackle  
PatersonPlank : 3/2/2015 5:02 pm : link
Odds of using #9 on the OL just went up.
Beason is due for a healthy season  
Rjanyg : 3/2/2015 5:03 pm : link
I pray it is this coming season.
I just want to point out  
Semipro Lineman : 3/2/2015 5:10 pm : link
that Charles Brown had nothing to do with the interior line. If Charles Brown had been healthy J.D. Walton would have still played.

It was the injuries to Snee and Schwartz as well as Mosley ineffectiveness which led to Walton starting at Center with Richburg filling in at Guard.

Charles Brown only cost veteran minimum to sign and had recently been a starting left tackle. Everywhere else, a move like this would be looked at as a solid low cost depth signing if he pans out. On BBI, some called the fact that he didn't a dramatic failure

SMH
P.S.  
Semipro Lineman : 3/2/2015 5:10 pm : link
The above statement also applies to J.D. Walton.
Brown getting cut meant one less OL piece, leaving depth all around  
Devon : 3/2/2015 5:25 pm : link
even weaker. It's why we started to see things like Schwartz forced to RT (before he got injured again), leaving the interior bunch even thinner and fewer options to replace Walton/move Richburg back to C.

And anyone who heralded his signing quite frankly knows very little about football or has their head permanently stuck up the Giants' ass. He was fucking terrible by the time the Saints benched him, "recent starter" or not. It's why he's very likely done with the NFL at this point and perhaps would have been last season if the Giants hadn't latched on (just like Walton might be now).
The Oline got 20 percent better  
Headhunter : 3/2/2015 5:25 pm : link
addition by subtraction
Is Weatherford the next cut???  
Rick in Dallas : 3/2/2015 5:29 pm : link
very possible along with Beason taking a paycut
With some health and a decent OG/RT starter brought in via FA  
Coach Mason : 3/2/2015 5:35 pm : link
And the learning curve of the new system out of the way, the line has a strong chance to be above average to very,very good.
RE: I think the FO has learned  
mrvax : 3/2/2015 5:35 pm : link
In comment 12159997 arniefez said:
Quote:
if the terrible Vet option is not cut. The coach will start him. Sorry a man lost his job but glad he's off the roster.



LOL. This is funny. Sadly, it's true sometimes.
RE: for everyone talking about Beason  
Rflairr : 3/2/2015 5:39 pm : link
In comment 12160052 RicFlair said:
Quote:
IF they cut him, it wouldn't be until after june 1st.


Not true. He's got a mill roster bonus coming in a couple weeks.
RE: Brown getting cut meant one less OL piece, leaving depth all around  
Semipro Lineman : 3/2/2015 5:51 pm : link
In comment 12160095 Devon said:
Quote:
even weaker. It's why we started to see things like Schwartz forced to RT (before he got injured again), leaving the interior bunch even thinner and fewer options to replace Walton/move Richburg back to C.

And anyone who heralded his signing quite frankly knows very little about football or has their head permanently stuck up the Giants' ass. He was fucking terrible by the time the Saints benched him, "recent starter" or not. It's why he's very likely done with the NFL at this point and perhaps would have been last season if the Giants hadn't latched on (just like Walton might be now).


Plenty of players were terrible in one location before finding their game elsewhere. Case in point, former Cowboy MLB Rolando McClain who finally performed on a decent level after multiple chances. You could say that Kevin Booth and Martellus Bennett fall into that category. Its a bit short-sighted to dismiss players who can be useful pieces because of past failures when there are so many examples of reclamation projects succeeding in the NFL
RE: RE: I was excited when they signed him  
rasbutant : 3/2/2015 6:00 pm : link
In comment 12160036 Devon said:
Quote:
In comment 12160033 rasbutant said:


Quote:


thought they got a good deal on a starter for 3mil/yr. He was very good in Denver.



So good, Denver was preparing to move on from him before he even got injured.


That's not true. But please continue like you know what you are talking about. If you would like to educate yourself I've provided a useful linked.


Link - ( New Window )
RE: Makes sense for him not to take a pay cut  
BlueLou : 3/2/2015 6:03 pm : link
In comment 12159975 BillT said:
Quote:
With Richburg he wasn't gointi


Maybe they like the CFL kid more than most here are acknowledging?
RE: Is Weatherford the next cut???  
giantgiantfan : 3/2/2015 6:09 pm : link
In comment 12160104 Rick in Dallas said:
Quote:
very possible along with Beason taking a paycut


Who do you replace Weatherford with? Matt Dodge is not far enough from my memory yet.
RE: RE: RE: I was excited when they signed him  
Devon : 3/2/2015 6:16 pm : link
In comment 12160140 rasbutant said:
Quote:
In comment 12160036 Devon said:


Quote:


In comment 12160033 rasbutant said:


Quote:


thought they got a good deal on a starter for 3mil/yr. He was very good in Denver.



So good, Denver was preparing to move on from him before he even got injured.



That's not true. But please continue like you know what you are talking about. If you would like to educate yourself I've provided a useful linked.
Link - ( New Window )


I like how you not only linked to Rotoworld and referred to it as useful for your case, but also did so while ignoring how many blurbs reference how horribly Walton was graded by PFF in Denver.

They're not absolute and are simply a tool to help in analysis, but when they're grading a guy as the worst at his position in the NFL, odds are he's probably not any good, you know?
RE: I hate  
MookGiants : 3/2/2015 6:17 pm : link
In comment 12159988 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
dead money.


I hate dead weight, and that's what he was.
It was a minor gamble that didn't work  
Ten Ton Hammer : 3/2/2015 6:24 pm : link
why are we looking so deeply into this? If Walton had played well, the front office would be lauded for having a sharp eye on an effective budget pickup.

Oh well, this is why they drafted Richburg. He still got a full year of NFL experience. No harm, no foul.
RE: The  
NYDCBlue : 3/2/2015 6:35 pm : link
In comment 12160043 Victor in CT said:
Quote:
so in this case. Walton was signed by Reese as a gamble/stopgap. He is not a Coughlin guy. He played because Schwartz was hurt, Brown sucked and was cut and neither Moseley nor Brewer showed anything resembling NFL form.


Is that fair, or true? I thought Mosley played well in the pre-season. I am aware that I just said pre-season, and somewhere Alan Iverson is warming up his vocal cords, however, he was our starter until injury did him in. I have not given up on him yet. Brewer on the other hand....
RE: Walton didn't play all season because of TC's vet preference.  
Mason : 3/2/2015 6:37 pm : link
In comment 12160031 Devon said:
Quote:
He played out the string because there were no other options, especially after Schwartz went down for good and the mighty Charles Brown was cut. He can't play G; Richburg could at least pretend to.

There are plenty of things to get on Coughlin for at this point, but if you want to come at someone for Walton, Jerry Reese is the right target.


No go on this one. Walton was the starting center. People forget that Richburg wasn't even stated to start. Snee retired and Schwartz injury all occurred after Walton took snaps with the ones.
injuries  
blue42 : 3/2/2015 6:42 pm : link
played a role as well. If everyone was healthy Richburg may have found his way to his real position at some point.
RE: RE: As bad as he played, I'm still a little surprised  
BlueLou : 3/2/2015 6:52 pm : link
In comment 12159964 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 12159961 Matt M. said:

Quote: I guess there is a cap savings, which I wasn't expecting. The good news is now there is no doubt Richburg is the starting OC. The bad news is there is no backup.
CFL all-pro Jones and Dallas Reynolds..For now


Fiddy, hasn't Herman logged snaps at OC too? So that would be 3, at least!
Jerry Reese didn't give Walton that contract without the spot at least  
Devon : 3/2/2015 6:56 pm : link
being his to lose in year one. Pretty much every team in the NFL would have gone into the pre-season with the rookie having to beat out the vet for the job and not just be handed it over him from the start on the depth chart.

Unfortunately, once the Giants hit the pre-season, Snee officially packed it in and Schwartz went down, so there was no chance for anything but what we got. There was some stupidity by TC in the middle of the season where Richburg got benched entirely for part of a game, but even that was incredibly brief because injuries and piss poor depth quality in general wouldn't allow anything but for him to playing and be stuck at guard, while Walton had to keep playing center.

There's honestly plenty of other things to get after TC for at this point in his career that aren't obvious nonsense like this.
RE: almost  
SGMen : 3/2/2015 7:06 pm : link
In comment 12159966 Mr. Nickels said:
Quote:
any other coach would have just started richburg day one. Walton was a stopgap.
I don't think the Giants realized he'd be that bad. Plus losing Schwartz hurt and changed things around for us. I still believe if we had had Schwartz & Beckham healthy for the whole season we'd have won 9 games (AZ, SF, and Dallas) maybe despite our defense and all. Richburg would have been the starting center after a few games and been an upgrade at his natural position.
And since i'm on the topic here, losing Will Hill was also a huge blow as the middle of our defensive backfield was sieve.
RE: Jerry Reese didn't give Walton that contract without the spot at least  
Mason : 3/2/2015 7:26 pm : link
In comment 12160205 Devon said:
Quote:
being his to lose in year one. Pretty much every team in the NFL would have gone into the pre-season with the rookie having to beat out the vet for the job and not just be handed it over him from the start on the depth chart.

Unfortunately, once the Giants hit the pre-season, Snee officially packed it in and Schwartz went down, so there was no chance for anything but what we got. There was some stupidity by TC in the middle of the season where Richburg got benched entirely for part of a game, but even that was incredibly brief because injuries and piss poor depth quality in general wouldn't allow anything but for him to playing and be stuck at guard, while Walton had to keep playing center.

There's honestly plenty of other things to get after TC for at this point in his career that aren't obvious nonsense like this.


So basically Walton was indeed taking snaps with ones before Snee announced his retirement and Schwartz was injured.
we were in a terrible position versus the cap last year  
Peter from NH (formerly CT) : 3/2/2015 7:32 pm : link
They had to take some risks because of the cap. Walton was one of them. It didn't work out as hoped. They are obviously making cuts to insure better quality this year. Hopefully we don't have a ridiculous run of injuries like we had the last two years.
He was ahead of him on the depth chart initially, yes.  
Devon : 3/2/2015 7:39 pm : link
Because that's what happens when you sign a vet to a deal with a $2.5M cap hit and have a rookie that clearly needs to bulk up for the NFL game (as Richburg himself admitted over and over again).

In a better situation, after that point, there's usually a competition, a chance for the rookie to over take the vet in the pre-season and, if he doesn't succeed then, over the course of the season.

In the Giants' situation, there were games where John Jerry was being swung out to RT and *DeOssie* was being told to stay alert on the sidelines because he might have to go in if anyone else were to go down. There was no realistic choice, but for Walton to play out most of the year at center with what the roster make-up was -- it's the only position he could "play", whereas Richburg could at least sort of fake it at guard.

You want to go after that for being the case, go after Reese and the FO for their terrible evaluation of Walton in the first place or just blame it all on the injury gods like others seem to do when they don't want to assign blame to either Teflon Jerry or Saint Tom.
Good riddance  
Giants4246 : 3/2/2015 8:39 pm : link
Take care
Overpaid  
spike : 3/2/2015 9:17 pm : link
thanks for playing
He had  
geemanfan : 3/2/2015 9:51 pm : link
To go. He must not have recovered from his injuries because all he did was get pushed around.
Walton  
Dragon : 3/2/2015 10:15 pm : link
Was cut saved us money easy decision since just about everyone felt he did not play well in 16 starts. Now then why is Beason not an easy decision to cut he can't stay on the field most of his injuries concern his wheels which are not getting any younger. He played in 4 games for us last year and he was not good everything says cut this guy what are they waiting for? These are the decisions which seem to leave management with egg all over their face. If a guy played for you all year but did not cut the mustard why is so hard to release a guy who did not even play for you at all with a long list of injuries.
RE: Walton  
giantgiantfan : 3/2/2015 11:27 pm : link
In comment 12160478 Dragon said:
Quote:
Was cut saved us money easy decision since just about everyone felt he did not play well in 16 starts. Now then why is Beason not an easy decision to cut he can't stay on the field most of his injuries concern his wheels which are not getting any younger. He played in 4 games for us last year and he was not good everything says cut this guy what are they waiting for? These are the decisions which seem to leave management with egg all over their face. If a guy played for you all year but did not cut the mustard why is so hard to release a guy who did not even play for you at all with a long list of injuries.


Beason has played well for us and when he did play for us last season poor play is likely related to his foot injury. Those are the facts. I honestly have no idea what the Giants should do with a guy that has huge injury concerns. He's not worth 6 million though. Needs to take a pay cut or be cut. He made 3.1 million last year being injured, dude's gotta step up and take a cut. He got his money one last time.
giantgiantfan: Beason made closer to $6MM last year.  
Big Blue Blogger : 3/3/2015 6:06 am : link
$3.1MM was his cap hit. I think both sides want to work something out, but it's not a simple situation. He still has a fair amount of leverage, because of guarantees and dead money - not to mention the bleak roster situation at LB.
I stated last year  
eli10 : 3/3/2015 7:01 am : link
the giants were making a big mistake not starting richburg at center from day one. When you draft a center early you play him at center period.Not guard.

He would have a year experience at center, but now he is starting all over again. Stupid!
I wouldn't call a $3 million contract a minor gamble...  
sb from NYT Forum : 3/3/2015 7:29 am : link
...This was a huge mistake by Reese. At $3 million the plan was for him to be a starter. If he was just signed as insurance, he would have been offered a vet minimum or slightly more with incentives.

Seriously, the guy hadn't played in years, why the hell give him that much money? Truly a bizarre signing.

Quick question: For those that say Richburg wasn't playing center because he needed to bulk up, centers are almost always the smallest players on the line. I don't think that was the issue. The issue was that the Giants had absolutely no one to play Snee's position after Snee retired, which was negligent.
sb: Not exactly.  
Big Blue Blogger : 3/3/2015 8:15 am : link
Richburg filled in at LG where - rightly or wrongly - the Giants planned to use Schwartz. The other three options to succeed Snee - Jerry, Brewer, and Mosley - simply flopped. There was no shortage of contingency plans. There was a shortage of good contingency plans.
Giants  
Coach Mason : 3/3/2015 8:34 am : link
love Beason . In theory, he is everything the Giants look for in a MLB. High character,great leader, tough,smart. Think Antonio Peirce with more athleticism.

Only problem is he can't stay healthy and Reese has a bit of tunnel vision when it comes to players with extensive injury history.

The restructure needs to be substantial. If he makes any more than 2 mill against the cap this year they would be sacrificing important cap space for too high an injury risk.
Richburg wasn't playing C because  
JonC : 3/3/2015 8:35 am : link
injuries dictated giving him a shot at LG, which he handled ok. If Schwartz were healthy, Richburg would've been on the bench learning for a season.
Coach Mason: To get Beason's cap hit down to $2MM...  
Big Blue Blogger : 3/3/2015 8:53 am : link
...you would have to reduce his salary to the minimum for his tenure ($870K), wipe out his off-season roster and workout bonuses entirely, and add at least one year to his contract. I don't think Agent Beason would think much of that deal for Player Beason. I guess you could offer him some whopping NLTBE incentives to make it more attractive. (Because he barely saw the field last year, almost any incentive will be NLTBE.)
upgrades  
area junc : 3/3/2015 9:00 am : link
this team (after a transition year) is set to experience big upgrades at many positions

C is one of them. not only was Walton overpowered, his lateral agility is gone and he missed a ton of assignments. so he wasn't big enough, quick enough and shockingly even smart enough. scary combination

Giants liked Richburg enough to draft him 43rd in a great draft.
I was impressed studying his preseason play at C: I think his best attribute is his snap to blocking. Lightning transition - he gets the snap off and he's gone. Tenacious. Can pull. Weakest part of his game is when a guy is lined up right on his nose. It's no wonder he was JAG at G.
No.....  
Doomster : 3/3/2015 9:03 am : link
Beason has played well for us and when he did play for us last season poor play is likely related to his foot injury. Those are the facts. I honestly have no idea what the Giants should do with a guy that has huge injury concerns. He's not worth 6 million though. Needs to take a pay cut or be cut. He made 3.1 million last year being injured, dude's gotta step up and take a cut. He got his money one last time.


Beason played like an average linebacker, no more, no less.....the fact that he made plays an average linebacker should have, made him look better than he actually was, and was a testament to the lack of talent the Giants were throwing out there at the linebacker position...

Beason got paid around 6M last year, for 4 useless games.....he was injured and couldn't play the position...

He is scheduled to make 5.2M this year.....there is no guarantee that he will not be on the sidelines again....so do you pay this guy 11M for two seasons, or do you renegotiate that contract?

I think he would have to be a pre June first cut, to avoid the roster bonus....if you do that, you can't split his signing bonus over two years, and have almost 3M in dead money to pay in 2015....with the 0.9M guaranteed, this would net you around 2.7M and he is off the books for 2016...the money is about the same, if you do a post June 1 cut, but Beason gets that bonus money, and you are still on the books for him in 2016 for almost 1.5M.....

So, the best move is to cut him before June 1, or if he is willing to renegotiate to some type of incentive contract, based on playing time(like Wilfork did with the Pats), then those are basically our two options....2.7M is not going to get you a MLB, but it will help pay for one, rather than see that money standing on the sidelines...
according to overthecap for beason  
RicFlair : 3/3/2015 9:05 am : link
the dead money is much higher and the cap savings much lower PRE june 1st compared to post june 1st.
After free agency and the draft last year,  
Doomster : 3/3/2015 9:12 am : link
BBI declared that the OL was fixed.....Reese made "All the right Moves".....how many of those free agent linemen we signed last year will be on the squad this season? How many of our "projects" will be on the roster? and we still don't know what Schwartz can do.....he sucked as a left guard in preseason.....

And now Reese is going to rebuild the defense this year.....in Reese we trust....
RE: RE: I hate  
Route 9 in LEH : 3/3/2015 1:59 pm : link
In comment 12160163 MookGiants said:
Quote:
In comment 12159988 Eric from BBI said:


Quote:


dead money.



I hate dead weight, and that's what he was.


I hate to sound cliche, but "this"…this puts a smile on my face as does Walton being cut.
RE: Coach Mason: To get Beason's cap hit down to $2MM...  
Coach Mason : 3/3/2015 2:27 pm : link
In comment 12160718 Big Blue Blogger said:
Quote:
...you would have to reduce his salary to the minimum for his tenure ($870K), wipe out his off-season roster and workout bonuses entirely, and add at least one year to his contract. I don't think Agent Beason would think much of that deal for Player Beason. I guess you could offer him some whopping NLTBE incentives to make it more attractive. (Because he barely saw the field last year, almost any incentive will be NLTBE.)


With his injury frequency , I just can't fathom allowing him to take up more than 2mill of cap sapce. Risk outweighs reward. Is it feasible to re-structure it that way? Sounds like you know better than I do.
Coach Mason: The math is less complicated than 'cap experts' pretend.  
Big Blue Blogger : 3/3/2015 3:36 pm : link
Start with the 2015 minimum salary for a player with Beason's level of experience. That's $870K. Then look at his unamortized signing bonus of ~$2.93MM, which is currently spread over the remaining two years of his contract at ~$1.47MM per year. Adding a year stretches the remaining bonus over three years instead of two, reducing the annual amortization to $978K, for a 2015 cap number of around $1.848MM.

That leaves room for a little restructure bonus - say $450K - which would be spread over three years at $150k per year, bringing his 2015 cap number to right around $2MM. (Or just raise his salary to $1.02MM, or pay a part of the roster bonus he has coming; but the restructure bonus is much better for the player because it's more cash in his pocket up front, while the team gets to spread that money over multiple years.) You could even guarantee his 2015 salary to seal the deal.

I still think he might laugh in your face and dare you to cut him, but it's worth a try.
RE: I wouldn't call a $3 million contract a minor gamble...  
Ten Ton Hammer : 3/3/2015 5:53 pm : link
In comment 12160631 sb from NYT Forum said:
Quote:
...This was a huge mistake by Reese.


In order for something to be a "huge mistake", there has to be some kind of lasting effect that hurts the team, at least, IMO.

They signed him, it didn't work. He's gone now, and they saved money. That is not a huge mistake.
TTH, I respect your opinion but totally disagree  
sb from NYT Forum : 3/3/2015 9:34 pm : link
...Job #1 for the 2014 offseason was to improve the line and relying on Walton to be a quality center was ridiculous. The only good thing about Walton last year is that his horrible play somehow didn't result in Eli getting injured. He was that bad.
Just amazing to me that Walton signing was, at the time, a BIG  
baadbill : 3/4/2015 6:04 am : link
deal ... a big part of the rebuilding plan ... which says quite a lot imo. Trust in Reese. Isn't that what I hear people say? And, I want to, I really do. But ...
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner