|
|
|
| Quote: |
| "That tells you the level of value the league saw him as," Harris' co-agent Chad Speck said during a telephone interview with NJ Advance Media. "The Giants, they played against him twice a year the last four years. They know exactly what he is and they're getting a great football player. "And the Giants weren't the only team involved in the numbers that Dwayne ultimately signed for." |
I am slightly less qualified than the Giants FO at evaluating talent (ok, that's a joke), but he never stuck out to me as "oh crap, they have Harris back there" or "oh crap Harris is lined up as a wide out".
I never thought he was anything more than average.
And that's why the Giants have professionals doing this, not fans like me. I would not have signed him, nor would I have paid him that kind of money.
They're probably right, and I'm probably wrong.
Exactly. I have no problem signing him, but I think they could have gotten him, or someone like him, for far less of a guarantee. With all of our needs, spending that much on a PR is mind-boggling.
Not according to Coughlin.
like I said I don't see the allure or even if he's solid in the return game, I don't see the money.
Stats aren't everything and they don't always tell a complete story. I saw him ignite Dallas' sideline more than once last year.
As for the agent's remarks, would you rather he said, "Either I'm the world's smartest agent or Jerry Reese is the world's dumbest GM. Maybe both. $7MM guaranteed for Dwayne Harris? Are you kidding me?"
We have not had a strong gunner in a long time.
Quote:
news at 11.
Exactly. I have no problem signing him, but I think they could have gotten him, or someone like him, for far less of a guarantee. With all of our needs, spending that much on a PR is mind-boggling.
That's kind of the point. There aren't many (any?) other guys that are above average returners and punt/kick coverage guys. So it's likely they would've had to sign 2 guys to replace him (and use 2 game day roster spots).
It's also interesting that despite only getting ~11 offensive snaps/game last year, he still played 450 snaps, which is almost as many as DT Dan Williams played. Again, it's not your typical KR/PR that is out there for 5-6 snaps a game.
I mean come on.. these are the guys you win with.. maybe not sexy.. but you need these guys...
They did not pay that $$ for a returner but for their options/needs in using him.
Can't wait 'til he has his first big play of the year that no one expects. Then people will realize he is worth it.
Harris is 3rd among active players in avg yds per punt return
He is among a handful of the best returners - you absolutely can not find guys just as good
He also covers kicks and punts,
As others said - he gets OBJ off punt return duty.
Curious who they think who was cheaper and younger, and that was actually available.
I know there's a generation of Giants fans still walking around with PTSD over the Jason Sehorn injury, but I think they need to get better on returns by getting better guys on returns.
We have not had a strong gunner in a long time.
That is a great point. His kick coverage should really help our ST's. See, I feel better about it already!
You can't, however, just come on BBI and clamor that the Giants could have gotten someone equivalent at a cheaper price. It's just such back-seat driving.
State your opinions, but don't scoff at a FA move in March when you have no idea about a player's market, the coaches intentions or the front offices plan for the rest of the offseason.
Let's give the professionals a chance to do their job before ripping them for not knowing how to do their job.
People here were screaming for us to sign Suh for Christ sake's.
That's where a guy like Dwayne Harris helps you and what makes him valuable.
Good player to have. He'll make a positive difference even if it doesn't jump out at you.
And if you don't understand why signing a player for more money is worse than signing the same player for less money then my question is answered for me and it has become rhetorical.
People here were screaming for us to sign Suh for Christ sake's.
As if what they sign for is going to hamstring us moving forward or thwart us from signing other FAs if we care to
And if you don't understand why signing a player for more money is worse than signing the same player for less money then my question is answered for me and it has become rhetorical.
Who is the same player for less money? Please, tell me.
Quote:
is the only issue some people have with the signing.
And if you don't understand why signing a player for more money is worse than signing the same player for less money then my question is answered for me and it has become rhetorical.
Who is the same player for less money? Please, tell me.
I don't think you understand what I wrote.
Lets be honest we have missed on a shit load of these "under the radar" type signings lately. And even with the 7 mil and everyone talking about the contract this is still an under the radar signing. We need to hit on a few of these and fast. This off-season may pale in comparison to last but we need these 2015 signings to contribute every bit as much as last year's big three of DRC, Schwartz and Jennings.
Quote:
It's a 5 year deal. You aren't paying for it.
People here were screaming for us to sign Suh for Christ sake's.
As if what they sign for is going to hamstring us moving forward or thwart us from signing other FAs if we care to
I hear you...But do you really think that is the case? Or is it typically BBI "I would have offered X" horseshit?
You also used average return yard to suggest he's not an upgrade from Preston Parker to validate why we spent too much on Harris.
I am saying, you're evaluation of Harris' abilities is the issue here. Having a 14-team market on the opening day of FA indicates that a whole host of people far more connected than you think he is a very valuable commodity. The article above says that no one in the NFL is as versatile in his craft as Harris is.
The Giants are paying him more because he does more things and he does them better than most who he's compared against. Why does that not validate a higher contract?
11MM a year for a safety, who still might have turned down the offer?
I'm not a fan of the deal, but I'm 100% under control, no ire, no venom about it, no freaking out, not obsessing, just think it's too much money for this particular player.
And i don't think Harris is that great. I think he's a decent returner at best, not a difference maker at all. I think he's a slightly better Devin Thomas (maybe) who returns punts.
I hope it works out, and people can ridicule me for not thinking it was a great allocation of resources.
And none of us have the slightest idea if paying 7.1M guaranteed to Harris had an impact on other signings.
Maybe it meant they had to shave a million or two off the offer to McCourty. Maybe it meant they had to shave a million or two of an extension to JPP or maybe it means nothing and any player on the planet the Giants want they have room for.
Most of the time the Giants can do what they want to with the cap, but I don't think that's a 100% iron clad fact. Sometimes they can't.
My issue was with people casually acting like there is another, comparable guy that we could have for less money and make the same impact. Harris is a complete STer and a capable 4th receiver.
If you want to give a suggestion as to who you thought would be an equivalent player for less than fine, but just making a blanket statement that we could get the same guy for less elsewhere is nonsense.
I know this exercise is impossible, but if we pretend the Giants never signed Harris, but the Redskins did for 5 years 17.5M with 7.1M guaranteed, what do you think the reaction would be here?
LOLRedskins...is my guess.
There's at least one significant disadvantage to this approach: it makes your mistakes more costly. More subtly, it reduces the benefits of being right. In Reese's view, the trade-off is worth it. At any rate, he's consistent.