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

Archived Thread

Assuming very hood years, Hankins or JPP?

chopperhatch : 7/23/2016 11:26 pm
Im assuming the Giants can only offer one of these guys a big contract if they both perform really well this year. Especially with Pugh and Richburg going into contract years. Assuming DRC doesnt accept a contract restructure or an out right pay cut, which would you prefer to keep.

This is assuming they both put up comparable numbers for their positions. Lets say JPP comes in at 12 sacks, 65 tackles with 16 for a loss. Hankins with 8 sacks, 95 tackles and 15 for a loss. Who do you keep?

Im legit curious to how you think. Both have high priced partners, both are young, both have unproven players backing them up.
Hopefully no hood years!  
Vin R : 7/23/2016 11:35 pm : link
.
I think your numbers for Hankins  
adamg : 7/23/2016 11:40 pm : link
are way too high. He's never gotten 50 tackles let alone close to 100.

But, taking your question as it is, I'd still say JPP over Hankins. Even though he'd cost more, having him as a top DE and a leader on the defense with his super bowl experience as well, I think JPP has more value.

So, based on
1. position value
2. leadership value
and 3. leadership value

JPP would be worth more.

Also, JPP would still be only 28 next offseason.
They could franchise either of them though  
adamg : 7/23/2016 11:41 pm : link
couldn't they?
Neither...  
Goin Deep : 7/23/2016 11:50 pm : link
If they both have those kind of years, they will follow the big money. Especially JPP. Giants will not spend big bucks at DE after OV.s 85 mil contract. They may go hard for Hankins and he may resign, but some team will offer him more.
DL might become a priorty next year unless ODI steps up big.
RE: They could franchise either of them though  
chopperhatch : 7/23/2016 11:51 pm : link
In comment 13043118 adamg said:
Quote:
couldn't they?


Agreed 95 tackles was high for Hank....was kinda stupid. But I was trying to quantify dominance for a 3 tech. You franchise, youre giving 16 mill to JPP and not much less to Hank. Plus, I would think JPp expects a contract of some length after this season.
Also depends on how Odi and Bromley play this season.  
j_rud : 7/24/2016 12:00 am : link
If either has a breakout year I think that would influence who they let walk. In any scenario I think they're more inclined to resign JPP. Getting to the QB is still prioritized, and if Odighizuwa does come on strong that would give them a solid 3 DE rotation that the team 1) hasn't had in awhile and 2) has thrived with in the past.
RE: Neither...  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 12:08 am : link
In comment 13043122 Goin Deep said:
Quote:
If they both have those kind of years, they will follow the big money. Especially JPP. Giants will not spend big bucks at DE after OV.s 85 mil contract. They may go hard for Hankins and he may resign, but some team will offer him more.
DL might become a priority next year unless ODI steps up big.
I agree, if both have stud seasons we may not be able to keep either. We have Snacks and Vernon getting big money for the DL already. We have Pugh as a UFA and protecting Eli is a priority.

We could end up with two 3rd round comp picks for them. I mean, we could actually tag DT Hankins but that would be a big payday. Depends on how good he looked.

Also, we need to know how good OWA is at DE this year. It would be less of a blow if he was super solid.

Hood years?  
BestFeature : 7/24/2016 12:47 am : link
That's racist!
RE: RE: Neither...  
chopperhatch : 7/24/2016 1:04 am : link
In comment 13043129 SGMen said:
Quote:
In comment 13043122 Goin Deep said:


Quote:


If they both have those kind of years, they will follow the big money. Especially JPP. Giants will not spend big bucks at DE after OV.s 85 mil contract. They may go hard for Hankins and he may resign, but some team will offer him more.
DL might become a priority next year unless ODI steps up big.

I agree, if both have stud seasons we may not be able to keep either. We have Snacks and Vernon getting big money for the DL already. We have Pugh as a UFA and protecting Eli is a priority.

We could end up with two 3rd round comp picks for them. I mean, we could actually tag DT Hankins but that would be a big payday. Depends on how good he looked.

Also, we need to know how good OWA is at DE this year. It would be less of a blow if he was super solid.


We would be able to keep at least one of them. And I dont feel like franchising is the way to go. I think Owa, as j_rud said, is the key. If he has a very good season, we could go either way. If he doesnt and Bromley does, I think the obvious choice is keeping JPP.
I'm sorry, but your numbers for Hankins...  
Milton : 7/24/2016 1:10 am : link
...make the question more like a fantasy than a hypothetical.

I'm hopeful that JPP will find a way to be an impact player again and that the Giants will find a way to sign him to a long term deal. I'm not as hopeful when it comes to Hankins. The addition of Harrison really makes Hankins's role a question mark. How often will Hankins even see the field? If everyone is healthy, it's hard to imagine him being in on more than 50% of the defensive snaps.
RE: I'm sorry, but your numbers for Hankins...  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 1:15 am : link
In comment 13043141 Milton said:
Quote:
...make the question more like a fantasy than a hypothetical.

I'm hopeful that JPP will find a way to be an impact player again and that the Giants will find a way to sign him to a long term deal. I'm not as hopeful when it comes to Hankins. The addition of Harrison really makes Hankins's role a question mark. How often will Hankins even see the field? If everyone is healthy, it's hard to imagine him being in on more than 50% of the defensive snaps.
Hankins is a 4 down player and will be on the field 90% of the time. DT Harrison has a different role. Apples and Oranges. The question is how much do you invest on the DL?
I don't see Hankins as a 3-technique  
Milton : 7/24/2016 1:19 am : link
He's a run defender who is athletic enough to pick up the occasional sack. That's what they drafted him to be and he looked like he could be exactly that in 2014, but bringing in Harrison makes you wonder what the plan for Hankins is at this point. If Hankins is starting alongside Harrison, it will be a different kind of defense than we're used to seeing (not your typical Nose Tackle and 3-technique pairing). I suspect that at this point they are hoping for Bromley to win the starting job next to Harrison.
RE: RE: I'm sorry, but your numbers for Hankins...  
Milton : 7/24/2016 1:39 am : link
In comment 13043142 SGMen said:
Quote:
Hankins is a 4 down player and will be on the field 90% of the time. DT Harrison has a different role. Apples and Oranges.
I don't think they're apples and oranges at all. Hankins may have more pass-rush to his game than Harrison does, but run-defense is what they're here for. The sacks that Hankins picked up in 2014 were considered gravy. A defense that featured both of them as starters would be more reminiscent of the 2000 Ravens with Sam Adams and Tony Siragusa or the 2002 Jaguars with Marcus Stroud and John Henderson.

But for how many downs do you keep both of them on the field when you have a D-Coordinator who made his name with the Four Aces? Do you really think Hankins is going to see the field more than Harrison? If they thought that much of Hankins, why pay Harrison $9M/year? In my mind, the contract they gave Harrison was an indictment on their plans for Hankins.
RE: RE: RE: I'm sorry, but your numbers for Hankins...  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 2:06 am : link
In comment 13043146 Milton said:
Quote:
In comment 13043142 SGMen said:


Quote:


Hankins is a 4 down player and will be on the field 90% of the time. DT Harrison has a different role. Apples and Oranges.

I don't think they're apples and oranges at all. Hankins may have more pass-rush to his game than Harrison does, but run-defense is what they're here for. The sacks that Hankins picked up in 2014 were considered gravy. A defense that featured both of them as starters would be more reminiscent of the 2000 Ravens with Sam Adams and Tony Siragusa or the 2002 Jaguars with Marcus Stroud and John Henderson.

But for how many downs do you keep both of them on the field when you have a D-Coordinator who made his name with the Four Aces? Do you really think Hankins is going to see the field more than Harrison? If they thought that much of Hankins, why pay Harrison $9M/year? In my mind, the contract they gave Harrison was an indictment on their plans for Hankins.
I disagree. Both are run stuffers, sure, but Hankins has shown the ability to push the pocket. Harrison was signed because he is the BEST at stopping the run. And its cool to disagree, that is what discussions are about, making points and so forth. I could certainly be wrong.
RE: I'm sorry, but your numbers for Hankins...  
chopperhatch : 7/24/2016 2:15 am : link
In comment 13043141 Milton said:
Quote:
...make the question more like a fantasy than a hypothetical.

I'm hopeful that JPP will find a way to be an impact player again and that the Giants will find a way to sign him to a long term deal. I'm not as hopeful when it comes to Hankins. The addition of Harrison really makes Hankins's role a question mark. How often will Hankins even see the field? If everyone is healthy, it's hard to imagine him being in on more than 50% of the defensive snaps.


Dude, youre totally wrong on this. Harrison= first and second down player. Hankins is a 3 down DT.

AND my numbers were thrown out there. I was saying if Hankins had a monster season and JPP did as well, yada yada. Hankins played like a 3 tech the season before last. And while Bromley may supplant some of his snaps, Hankins will be the starter.
Looked back at what was said when Hankins was picked in the 2013 draft  
Milton : 7/24/2016 2:26 am : link
Jerry Reese...
Quote:
Big Hank is just a powerful inside presence...when he gets going, he’s a tremendous inside big thick young player against the run game and against the pass. I wouldn’t call him a pass rusher but he gets some pressure up the middle. He can push the pocket up the middle. He can snap some heads back with his initial contact so he can push that pocket back.

Marc Ross....
Quote:
Johnathan is a big, wide-bodied space-eater on his side...He is not a glamorous type of guy inside but he does the dirty work that you need in there to occupy people – hold the point. He is a powerful upper body – snatch blocker for a 320-pound guy...his skill set was real easy to identify. You watch him play and that is what he does. He just shuts people down when they try to run the ball. Whether it is taking on one block, two blocks – he just bangs inside and he holds the point...and with the types of defensive tackles that are coming out. You see more of the athletic, quick edge, movement-type of guys. So this guy is kind of a rarity nowadays where just somebody that does that dirty work in a big body inside....You would like a defensive tackle that is big and athletic and fast and can do everything. But that is just not the reality nowadays. A guy is either one or the other. And so this is a big, wide-bodied presence inside...He has to develop his pass rush. That wasn’t his strength as a pass rusher. Right now we would throw him in there as a two-down run stopper and develop his pass rush.

Tom Coughlin...
Quote:
Run stopper in Hankins, a young kid...primarily a defensive tackle that has outstanding first and second-down run-stopping ability.

So you can see that while there was hope that he could develop his pass rush game (and he did have some success with it in 2014, but not repeated in 2015), he was drafted because of his run-defense. That's his bread and butter. So you can see why I look at the money they gave Harrison (unprecedented for a two-down run-defense DT) as a reflection on their plans for Hankins.
chopper  
adamg : 7/24/2016 2:32 am : link
Changing your question a bit, let's say Hankins gets a number of sacks that is comparable to JPPs.

So,
JPP - 11.5 sacks
Hankins - 8.5 sacks

In that case, it would be easier to say that it's well worth it to take Hankins and do a long term thing. Hankins is three years younger than JPP, so if he could be that interior rusher (Donald-esque), he could be worth a lot to this team. If OO shows too that would make it all the easier.
RE: chopper  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 2:47 am : link
In comment 13043162 adamg said:
Quote:
Changing your question a bit, let's say Hankins gets a number of sacks that is comparable to JPPs.

So,
JPP - 11.5 sacks
Hankins - 8.5 sacks

In that case, it would be easier to say that it's well worth it to take Hankins and do a long term thing. Hankins is three years younger than JPP, so if he could be that interior rusher (Donald-esque), he could be worth a lot to this team. If OO shows too that would make it all the easier.
If OWA has a great part-time season and shows he can clearly be a starter at DE, I don't see the Giants keeping JPP to a big money deal. Hankins would likely get the money. I like Bromely but don't think he is going to be nearly as good as Hankins can be, assuming he returns to form and stays healthy.
Chopper you are way out of whack with your projected stats.  
BlueLou : 7/24/2016 5:03 am : link
Too much for Hankins, too little for JPP.

Try looking at their stats history, assume JPP gets back to his best #s and Hankins back to his best +15%, which is optimistic for both. Probably more optimistic for Hankins even.

Do that and then try again.

JPP at his best is easily the preference if even affordable.

Look at how the Giants treated Robbins and Cofield 1 year after knee surgeries. Given what they paid Harrison they are letting Hankins walk, as Milton noted.
With the adversity that JPP has gone through,  
Diver_Down : 7/24/2016 8:05 am : link
should also be considered when committing long-term. JPP just isn't looking for a big contract. He wants to be great. He has overcome a great adversity and has shown a humbling attitude change along with maturity. Performance being equal at their respective positions, I wouldn't hesitate to make JPP a Giant for Life.

Also, your argument is framed by the conclusion that we'll have to extend Pugh. I'm not 100% that he's earned the second contract. He has filled in admirably at various positions on the line. But based on the shit-show of a line that we have trotted out lately, it doesn't take much effort to excel. I don't think his play has been dominant. I don't consider his performance irreplaceable. With his headache issue and wondering if you can count on him, I'm more inclined to kick the can as long as possible and not give him long-term dollars until a replacement can be found.
Hank...  
Bluesbreaker : 7/24/2016 8:31 am : link
Could see him with 6-9 sacks with 45-65 tackles say a
dozen or more for a loss . With Snacks by his side he may
benefit on early downs when teams decide to pass first .
I think DRC and a few other Vets will come off the Books
and we could keep Hank the odd man out might be JPP
much depends on his Tackle numbers .
He has to show he can take people down consistently he will
get more than his fair share of Hurries but the Old
JPP made a lot of tackles many the one handed variety
A ten sack season without high tackle numbers won't
guarantee a big pay day ..I would bet dollars to donuts
they will let him walk this year scoop up the comp pick
and replace him . Owa will factor in as his replacement
Fingers Crossed he shows the promise this year .
I want to have two above average DT's to solidify
the run D .
Chopper - did you fall down and hit your head?  
Jimmy Googs : 7/24/2016 8:54 am : link
You are describing elite years below...

"This is assuming they both put up comparable numbers for their positions. Lets say JPP comes in at 12 sacks, 65 tackles with 16 for a loss. Hankins with 8 sacks, 95 tackles and 15 for a loss."
RE: Also depends on how Odi and Bromley play this season.  
Jimmy Googs : 7/24/2016 8:57 am : link
In comment 13043128 j_rud said:
Quote:
If either has a breakout year I think that would influence who they let walk. In any scenario I think they're more inclined to resign JPP. Getting to the QB is still prioritized, and if Odighizuwa does come on strong that would give them a solid 3 DE rotation that the team 1) hasn't had in awhile and 2) has thrived with in the past.


I don't know what is more fantasy...Chopper's stat assumptions in his OP or the idea that Odi and Bromley could have break-out years...
Hankins for 100 tackles  
Giants2012 : 7/24/2016 9:05 am : link
and Eli for 7,0000 yards seems more realistic

Who is in  
XBRONX : 7/24/2016 9:11 am : link
the hood?
Is Hankins as good at his position  
Doomster : 7/24/2016 9:25 am : link
as JPP is at his? Really depends on that hand....

Hankins is solid, in the middle of the line.....he is not an enforcer who controls the line of scrimmage and you have to put two guys on him.....

Last season, it was hard to judge him while he was in there, because of who was playing to the left and right of him....but he knew, he had to step up his game, because he was the best DLman on the team, and he just couldn't, because he is not that kind of player.....

So as bad as he was last year, partially because of who he played with, conversely this year, his numbers could be inflated, because he is surrounded by more talent....he may look better than he actually is.....and there certainly is nothing wrong with that.....just makes him more costlier at the end of the season....

A lot of people look at stats, like sacks for example......in baseball, a guy can hit a bleeder through two infielders for a hit.....the next guy can hit a shot for a base hit....but they count the same.....

The same with sacks.......a guy can get a sack, because no one blocked him(JPP's only sack last year).....or a guy who is pressuring the qb, can chase him into the arms of a guy just standing there, who will get credit for the sack for being in the right place at the right time.......or it can be a broken play....they all count the same, statistically....

And then there are guys that just overpower the guy they are going against, and make the sack.....Hankins had 7 sacks, but he is not a bull rusher that is going to overpower his guy, he is a policeman, more or less, controlling his area, and if the DE's force that qb to step up, his opportunities for a sack increase....

I think JPP is more valuable at his position than Hankins, and will cost a lot more.....unfortunately, every time we lose a DT to free agency, we had already drafted his replacement.....Reese hasn't this time....
RE: With the adversity that JPP has gone through,  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 9:32 am : link
In comment 13043190 Diver_Down said:
Quote:
should also be considered when committing long-term. JPP just isn't looking for a big contract. He wants to be great. He has overcome a great adversity and has shown a humbling attitude change along with maturity. Performance being equal at their respective positions, I wouldn't hesitate to make JPP a Giant for Life.

Also, your argument is framed by the conclusion that we'll have to extend Pugh. I'm not 100% that he's earned the second contract. He has filled in admirably at various positions on the line. But based on the shit-show of a line that we have trotted out lately, it doesn't take much effort to excel. I don't think his play has been dominant. I don't consider his performance irreplaceable. With his headache issue and wondering if you can count on him, I'm more inclined to kick the can as long as possible and not give him long-term dollars until a replacement can be found.
Many are predicting probowl for Pugh at LG, his most natural position. Due to his versatility and young age; due to the fact Eli must be protected; due to the issue of maintaining continuity for the OL; and, Jerry and Newhouse are both UFA's, well, you have to believe he will be re-signed or at least pursued hotly.

Pugh was superb last year, especially during the 2nd half of the season. I suspect the Flowers-Pugh-Richburg left to middle will be about as good as it gets in the NFL. I mean that, especially if Flowers takes as big of a leap technique wise as I believe he will be taking.
RE: Who is in  
Big Al : 7/24/2016 9:37 am : link
In comment 13043216 XBRONX said:
Quote:
the hood?
The Boyz.
JPP's best year was 2011 when at 22 years old and rotating  
BlueLou : 7/24/2016 9:59 am : link
with Osi and Tuck at DE while starting 12 games he had 16.5 sacks, 7 passes defended, 2 forced fumbles, 1 safety, 72 tackles, 21 assists, and a HUGE blocked FG. At 22 years old and a minimal football background. He still was very raw insofar as technique. I and plenty of others thought he could become the next LT, almost
Certainly way better than Strahan was his 2nd year in the league - way, way better. He never equaled that again, not even close, although he had good years and possibly some excuses like a back issue that required surgery. Not no knee injuries that I recall.

Hankins's best year in 2014 (also his sophomore season at 22 years old) he started all 26 games and defended 3 passes, had 1 FF, 7 sacks, 30 tackles, and 21 assists.

To match Aaron Donald's output Hankins would need to be about 50% more productive, and in the time he did play during his 3rd year he regressed, if anything.

Just saying this is not a well conceived thread.
RE: Is Hankins as good at his position  
Klaatu : 7/24/2016 10:06 am : link
In comment 13043222 Doomster said:
Quote:
.....unfortunately, every time we lose a DT to free agency, we had already drafted his replacement.....Reese hasn't this time....


Except that you don't know that, Doomster. Okay, nobody likes Bromley. Fine. But keep an eye on UDFA Melvin Lewis. A JUCO transfer, he had an impressive junior year at Kentucky and was on his way to an equally impressive senior season before suffering a broken leg. He was not able to work out at the Combine, nor was he 100% for his Pro Day. It's no surprise that he went undrafted, but the Giants may have struck gold with this kid.
Klaatu, or as Milton noted the Giants didn't draft his replacement  
BlueLou : 7/24/2016 10:10 am : link
because they already signed his replacement, Snacks Harrison.
Bottom line...Hankins and JPP are two guys that  
Jimmy Googs : 7/24/2016 10:25 am : link
have enough abilities to be very good football players, but not great. They also, for different reasons, have shown they may only ever be very average from here on out.

JPP's early success (elite-level by the way) has faded for numerous reasons, the latest being a personal injury that has a good chance of holding him back from reaching "very good" again. His production going forward may now come from an inner desire to prove himself worthy and reaching maturity, and less from raw natural talent.

Hankins feels to me to be the one that I would put my money on to be the better investment going forward because I don't think he has yet reached his ceiling in terms of production and is also a few years younger than JPP. That defense last year was a joke in so many ways, so its too blurry to grade Hankins for that failure. He seems to be the keeper-type though.
I thought the Giants committed to JPP  
AP in Halfmoon : 7/24/2016 10:31 am : link
There would be no franchise tag after the 1 year deal
The Giants have traditionally put a premium on re-signing their DEs.  
Klaatu : 7/24/2016 10:37 am : link
Not so with their DTs. I don't expect that to change going forward.
RE: RE: With the adversity that JPP has gone through,  
Diver_Down : 7/24/2016 10:41 am : link
In comment 13043228 SGMen said:
Quote:
In comment 13043190 Diver_Down said:


Quote:


should also be considered when committing long-term. JPP just isn't looking for a big contract. He wants to be great. He has overcome a great adversity and has shown a humbling attitude change along with maturity. Performance being equal at their respective positions, I wouldn't hesitate to make JPP a Giant for Life.

Also, your argument is framed by the conclusion that we'll have to extend Pugh. I'm not 100% that he's earned the second contract. He has filled in admirably at various positions on the line. But based on the shit-show of a line that we have trotted out lately, it doesn't take much effort to excel. I don't think his play has been dominant. I don't consider his performance irreplaceable. With his headache issue and wondering if you can count on him, I'm more inclined to kick the can as long as possible and not give him long-term dollars until a replacement can be found.

Many are predicting probowl for Pugh at LG, his most natural position. Due to his versatility and young age; due to the fact Eli must be protected; due to the issue of maintaining continuity for the OL; and, Jerry and Newhouse are both UFA's, well, you have to believe he will be re-signed or at least pursued hotly.

Pugh was superb last year, especially during the 2nd half of the season. I suspect the Flowers-Pugh-Richburg left to middle will be about as good as it gets in the NFL. I mean that, especially if Flowers takes as big of a leap technique wise as I believe he will be taking.


I would want nothing more than for Pugh to earn Pro-Bowl recognition. It will make our decision on him easier. That being said, he is good at what he does, but I'm a bit more critical of his play and wouldn't consider him "superb". If John Jerry out performs Pugh, I wouldn't be surprised to Jerry extended (at a cheaper cost than Pugh's 1st round pedigree). I know it's popular to lament Jerry as a starter on BBI, but he has been busting his ass improving his technique. Hopefully, it translates to a marked improvement especially his run blocking.
RE: RE: RE: With the adversity that JPP has gone through,  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 10:49 am : link
In comment 13043268 Diver_Down said:
Quote:
In comment 13043228 SGMen said:


Quote:


In comment 13043190 Diver_Down said:


Quote:


should also be considered when committing long-term. JPP just isn't looking for a big contract. He wants to be great. He has overcome a great adversity and has shown a humbling attitude change along with maturity. Performance being equal at their respective positions, I wouldn't hesitate to make JPP a Giant for Life.

Also, your argument is framed by the conclusion that we'll have to extend Pugh. I'm not 100% that he's earned the second contract. He has filled in admirably at various positions on the line. But based on the shit-show of a line that we have trotted out lately, it doesn't take much effort to excel. I don't think his play has been dominant. I don't consider his performance irreplaceable. With his headache issue and wondering if you can count on him, I'm more inclined to kick the can as long as possible and not give him long-term dollars until a replacement can be found.

Many are predicting probowl for Pugh at LG, his most natural position. Due to his versatility and young age; due to the fact Eli must be protected; due to the issue of maintaining continuity for the OL; and, Jerry and Newhouse are both UFA's, well, you have to believe he will be re-signed or at least pursued hotly.

Pugh was superb last year, especially during the 2nd half of the season. I suspect the Flowers-Pugh-Richburg left to middle will be about as good as it gets in the NFL. I mean that, especially if Flowers takes as big of a leap technique wise as I believe he will be taking.



I would want nothing more than for Pugh to earn Pro-Bowl recognition. It will make our decision on him easier. That being said, he is good at what he does, but I'm a bit more critical of his play and wouldn't consider him "superb". If John Jerry out performs Pugh, I wouldn't be surprised to Jerry extended (at a cheaper cost than Pugh's 1st round pedigree). I know it's popular to lament Jerry as a starter on BBI, but he has been busting his ass improving his technique. Hopefully, it translates to a marked improvement especially his run blocking.
I'm actually predicting RG J. Jerry to have his best season ever because he did in fact work his ass off this off-season and that usually translates during a season into improved play. I'm counting on it and believe he will in fact be a Giant again in 2017-2020 with a new contract.

I'm also counting on Pugh to come up big. It isn't just about him being superb (or super solid if you prefer) at LG, his natural position. It is about his versatility. The NFL has injuries. It is a brutal sport. The more versatile your players the better off you are and Pugh can play 4 postions on the OL - center being the one he has never played.

If Pugh plays extremely well, and he will barring injury, you pay the man and protect Eli. This off-season, assuming both Pugh and Jerry perform above expectations, both will be re-signed and we'll be going after a RT in UFA and / or the draft.
but what if Hankins has 125 tackles  
chris r : 7/24/2016 10:53 am : link
??
Seriously?  
Doomster : 7/24/2016 10:57 am : link
RE: Is Hankins as good at his position
Klaatu : 10:06 am : link : reply
In comment 13043222 Doomster said:
Quote:
.....unfortunately, every time we lose a DT to free agency, we had already drafted his replacement.....Reese hasn't this time....


Except that you don't know that, Doomster. Okay, nobody likes Bromley. Fine. But keep an eye on UDFA Melvin Lewis. A JUCO transfer, he had an impressive junior year at Kentucky and was on his way to an equally impressive senior season before suffering a broken leg. He was not able to work out at the Combine, nor was he 100% for his Pro Day. It's no surprise that he went undrafted, but the Giants may have struck gold with this kid.


Coming out of college, who would you have rated higher, Melvin Lewis or Marvin Austin, truthfully? Yes, it is wishful thinking, but shouldn't we be avoiding players like this, like the plague? We have been burned too often....
RE: Seriously?  
gidiefor : Mod : 7/24/2016 11:07 am : link
In comment 13043277 Doomster said:
Quote:

Coming out of college, who would you have rated higher, Melvin Lewis or Marvin Austin, truthfully? Yes, it is wishful thinking, but shouldn't we be avoiding players like this, like the plague? We have been burned too often....


Doomie -- except that Austin was a second-round pick and Lewis was an UDFA -- I don't think anyone would have had a problem with Austin as an UDFA -- I don't think you are starting a plague by drafting players as UDFA they are easily cut and everyone is pleasantly surprised if they work hard and make the team
I didn't know this about UDFA Melvin Lewis  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 11:07 am : link
I believe DT Damon "snacks" Harrison was a UDFA and look how he panned out. If we strike gold with this Lewis kid we are on our way. But how do you get him on the 53 man roster given you have veterans like DT Bromley and DT Nix who I believe are locks. We shall see, maybe he ends up IR'd with some ridiculous injury at the end of camp.

But seriously, if Lewis does show well in camp and Nix seems like a 4th DT talent at best, well, McAdoo and Spags may decide the future is more important and keep Lewis over Nix. I don't discount that possibility at all.

Then there is always the chance of camp injury to Bromely or Nix that could land him a roster spot. So much can happen so I'm looking forward to camp and the reports.
I don't want any injuries  
Doomster : 7/24/2016 11:10 am : link
in camp!
RE: RE: Seriously?  
Klaatu : 7/24/2016 11:11 am : link
In comment 13043284 gidiefor said:
Quote:
In comment 13043277 Doomster said:


Quote:



Coming out of college, who would you have rated higher, Melvin Lewis or Marvin Austin, truthfully? Yes, it is wishful thinking, but shouldn't we be avoiding players like this, like the plague? We have been burned too often....



Doomie -- except that Austin was a second-round pick and Lewis was an UDFA -- I don't think anyone would have had a problem with Austin as an UDFA -- I don't think you are starting a plague by drafting players as UDFA they are easily cut and everyone is pleasantly surprised if they work hard and make the team


Thank you.
RE: RE: RE: RE: With the adversity that JPP has gone through,  
Diver_Down : 7/24/2016 11:11 am : link
In comment 13043273 SGMen said:
Quote:
In comment 13043268 Diver_Down said:


Quote:


In comment 13043228 SGMen said:


Quote:


In comment 13043190 Diver_Down said:


Quote:


should also be considered when committing long-term. JPP just isn't looking for a big contract. He wants to be great. He has overcome a great adversity and has shown a humbling attitude change along with maturity. Performance being equal at their respective positions, I wouldn't hesitate to make JPP a Giant for Life.

Also, your argument is framed by the conclusion that we'll have to extend Pugh. I'm not 100% that he's earned the second contract. He has filled in admirably at various positions on the line. But based on the shit-show of a line that we have trotted out lately, it doesn't take much effort to excel. I don't think his play has been dominant. I don't consider his performance irreplaceable. With his headache issue and wondering if you can count on him, I'm more inclined to kick the can as long as possible and not give him long-term dollars until a replacement can be found.

Many are predicting probowl for Pugh at LG, his most natural position. Due to his versatility and young age; due to the fact Eli must be protected; due to the issue of maintaining continuity for the OL; and, Jerry and Newhouse are both UFA's, well, you have to believe he will be re-signed or at least pursued hotly.

Pugh was superb last year, especially during the 2nd half of the season. I suspect the Flowers-Pugh-Richburg left to middle will be about as good as it gets in the NFL. I mean that, especially if Flowers takes as big of a leap technique wise as I believe he will be taking.



I would want nothing more than for Pugh to earn Pro-Bowl recognition. It will make our decision on him easier. That being said, he is good at what he does, but I'm a bit more critical of his play and wouldn't consider him "superb". If John Jerry out performs Pugh, I wouldn't be surprised to Jerry extended (at a cheaper cost than Pugh's 1st round pedigree). I know it's popular to lament Jerry as a starter on BBI, but he has been busting his ass improving his technique. Hopefully, it translates to a marked improvement especially his run blocking.

I'm actually predicting RG J. Jerry to have his best season ever because he did in fact work his ass off this off-season and that usually translates during a season into improved play. I'm counting on it and believe he will in fact be a Giant again in 2017-2020 with a new contract.

I'm also counting on Pugh to come up big. It isn't just about him being superb (or super solid if you prefer) at LG, his natural position. It is about his versatility. The NFL has injuries. It is a brutal sport. The more versatile your players the better off you are and Pugh can play 4 postions on the OL - center being the one he has never played.

If Pugh plays extremely well, and he will barring injury, you pay the man and protect Eli. This off-season, assuming both Pugh and Jerry perform above expectations, both will be re-signed and we'll be going after a RT in UFA and / or the draft.


I agree with your thinking especially about Pugh's versatility. And your last paragraph reinforces my thinking as well. But the two qualifiers - plays extremely well and barring injury - are what I'm not confident in. I hope I'm proven wrong. If his headache issues are behind him and he doesn't miss time and he elevates his game play (not just above-average, but extremely well Pro-Bowl caliber), then by all means pay him. I just think that with above average play and a 1st round pedigree, he will over value his worth.
RE: I don't see Hankins as a 3-technique  
SwirlingEddie : 7/24/2016 11:19 am : link
In comment 13043144 Milton said:
Quote:
He's a run defender who is athletic enough to pick up the occasional sack. That's what they drafted him to be and he looked like he could be exactly that in 2014, but bringing in Harrison makes you wonder what the plan for Hankins is at this point. If Hankins is starting alongside Harrison, it will be a different kind of defense than we're used to seeing (not your typical Nose Tackle and 3-technique pairing). I suspect that at this point they are hoping for Bromley to win the starting job next to Harrison.


It's a very good question whether Hankins can play the 3 in a 4-3 Under (the Giants traditional base). It will be quite interesting to see how the team handles this.
Positional value  
mrvax : 7/24/2016 11:53 am : link
if both do a great job and we can only keep one, I'd go with the DE.

It would suck if the Giants had to lose a real good Hankins. Really suck!
Just because they are black you call them hood years?  
Patrick77 : 7/24/2016 11:55 am : link
Racist.

Oh and JPP. They have drafted and signed guys to hopefully replace Hankins. Behind JPP is Odi?
So if Hankins has a better year than Suh's best year?  
Giants2012 : 7/24/2016 12:03 pm : link
That's the question?
I agree Hankins is a 3 down player  
Matt M. : 7/24/2016 12:20 pm : link
But, 95 tackles is ridiculous for a DL.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: With the adversity that JPP has gone through,  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 12:52 pm : link
In comment 13043291 Diver_Down said:
Quote:
In comment 13043273 SGMen said:


Quote:


In comment 13043268 Diver_Down said:


Quote:


In comment 13043228 SGMen said:


Quote:


In comment 13043190 Diver_Down said:


Quote:


should also be considered when committing long-term. JPP just isn't looking for a big contract. He wants to be great. He has overcome a great adversity and has shown a humbling attitude change along with maturity. Performance being equal at their respective positions, I wouldn't hesitate to make JPP a Giant for Life.

Also, your argument is framed by the conclusion that we'll have to extend Pugh. I'm not 100% that he's earned the second contract. He has filled in admirably at various positions on the line. But based on the shit-show of a line that we have trotted out lately, it doesn't take much effort to excel. I don't think his play has been dominant. I don't consider his performance irreplaceable. With his headache issue and wondering if you can count on him, I'm more inclined to kick the can as long as possible and not give him long-term dollars until a replacement can be found.

Many are predicting probowl for Pugh at LG, his most natural position. Due to his versatility and young age; due to the fact Eli must be protected; due to the issue of maintaining continuity for the OL; and, Jerry and Newhouse are both UFA's, well, you have to believe he will be re-signed or at least pursued hotly.

Pugh was superb last year, especially during the 2nd half of the season. I suspect the Flowers-Pugh-Richburg left to middle will be about as good as it gets in the NFL. I mean that, especially if Flowers takes as big of a leap technique wise as I believe he will be taking.



I would want nothing more than for Pugh to earn Pro-Bowl recognition. It will make our decision on him easier. That being said, he is good at what he does, but I'm a bit more critical of his play and wouldn't consider him "superb". If John Jerry out performs Pugh, I wouldn't be surprised to Jerry extended (at a cheaper cost than Pugh's 1st round pedigree). I know it's popular to lament Jerry as a starter on BBI, but he has been busting his ass improving his technique. Hopefully, it translates to a marked improvement especially his run blocking.

I'm actually predicting RG J. Jerry to have his best season ever because he did in fact work his ass off this off-season and that usually translates during a season into improved play. I'm counting on it and believe he will in fact be a Giant again in 2017-2020 with a new contract.

I'm also counting on Pugh to come up big. It isn't just about him being superb (or super solid if you prefer) at LG, his natural position. It is about his versatility. The NFL has injuries. It is a brutal sport. The more versatile your players the better off you are and Pugh can play 4 postions on the OL - center being the one he has never played.

If Pugh plays extremely well, and he will barring injury, you pay the man and protect Eli. This off-season, assuming both Pugh and Jerry perform above expectations, both will be re-signed and we'll be going after a RT in UFA and / or the draft.



I agree with your thinking especially about Pugh's versatility. And your last paragraph reinforces my thinking as well. But the two qualifiers - plays extremely well and barring injury - are what I'm not confident in. I hope I'm proven wrong. If his headache issues are behind him and he doesn't miss time and he elevates his game play (not just above-average, but extremely well Pro-Bowl caliber), then by all means pay him. I just think that with above average play and a 1st round pedigree, he will over value his worth.
Maybe so. I'll go out on a limb and say that it is even possible we could lose DT Hankins, DE JPP and OG Pugh should they all have standout seasons. We may not want to overpay IF we truly believe that a guy like DT Bromley; DE OWA; and maybe OC / OG Hart can step in with of course some dropoff but not drastic enough of a dropoff to warrant the huge contracts these guys can get.

This is the NFL, a brutal business. Every player is an injury away from being pedestrian or unwanted. Having said all this, I doubt we lose all 3 of our top free agents. I think we lose 1 of the DL's to free agency and it depends upon how much JPP and / or Hankins are looking for at season's end.
JPP  
area junc : 7/24/2016 1:09 pm : link
Im surprised at the Pugh love too....lots of strange evaluations of players here.....throw the draft position out, he is not a top level G in this league. Hes a David Diehl-type. Keep him around if he wants to stay, pay him a solid wage but u dont overpay him....we've seen top level G play very recently in Snee + Seubert. How about Martin and La'el on the cowboys - those are dominant Gs

Hopefully the arrow is still pointed up, but right now u cannot mention Pugh with the top Gs in the league, theres another level
I'm not a huge Pugh fan  
chris r : 7/24/2016 1:25 pm : link
but he's much more athletic than Deihl. He's playing his natural position and will be a very good if not great LG for years, health permitting.
Pugh's natural position  
mrvax : 7/24/2016 1:32 pm : link
is LT where he played it all 4 years in college. Guard is a new position for him to master.

The guy is not only good, he's versatile and a hard worker. I'd keep him if there is any way possible.
Chris r  
area junc : 7/24/2016 1:38 pm : link
I agree hes more athletic but diehl was bigger and stronger. My point was they are overall about the same level of effectiveness + should b compensated accordingly
I agree with u vax  
area junc : 7/24/2016 1:39 pm : link
And if it was up to me pugh would be at LT with Flowers at right
RE: I agree with u vax  
mrvax : 7/24/2016 1:54 pm : link
In comment 13043382 area junc said:
Quote:
And if it was up to me pugh would be at LT with Flowers at right


That's how I'd do it also. Even last year when Pugh stepped in for Flowers, he seemed to do a fine job on short notice.
RE: Pugh's natural position  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 2:34 pm : link
In comment 13043380 mrvax said:
Quote:
is LT where he played it all 4 years in college. Guard is a new position for him to master.

The guy is not only good, he's versatile and a hard worker. I'd keep him if there is any way possible.
I am no expert but my understanding is that due to his short arms, at the NFL level, he'd likely struggle to be consistent in pass protection as a LT. That is why he started as a RT where he was serviceable but also not great.

He can play four OL spots and that versatility makes him valuable in my eyes. Imagine Flowers and Newhouse were both down for a game, in game injuries even. What do you do but move Pugh to LT and say Hart to RT and live with it. Versatility is important in the NFL.
RE: I agree with u vax  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 2:53 pm : link
In comment 13043382 area junc said:
Quote:
And if it was up to me pugh would be at LT with Flowers at right
Truthfully, I'd have preferred LT Beatty had stayed healthy last year and played up to his level while Flowers played RT. We'd have been a better team as the season wore on.

Flowers is going to be a dominant run blocker at LT this year but he'd be an even more dominant one at RT maybe for us given Newhouse isn't a consistent run blocker or drive his man back type by any means.

I believe coach Solari knows what he is doing and if they left Flowers, Pugh, Jerry and Newhouse where they are it is because they believe that lineup is their best one right now. Reese tried to get a RT upgrade but nothing worked out. Reese didn't overpay for anyone for the OL.

He did overpay for the DL with Vernon and Harrison BUT he had no choice really. Now we have a DL where each and every man is above average against the run. And DT Harrison may just be the best interior run defender in the league. We are going to keep teams from controlling the clock with their run game. We'll have better 3rd downs in terms of distance. The run defense will have a synergistic effect on the whole as I think our improved corner play and safety play will lead to more turnovers.

Simply put, if this defense stays healthy it will be very good. Not Top 10 good but certainly in the 12 to 16 range I think.
RE: I don't see Hankins as a 3-technique  
Gatorade Dunk : 7/24/2016 5:54 pm : link
In comment 13043144 Milton said:
Quote:
He's a run defender who is athletic enough to pick up the occasional sack. That's what they drafted him to be and he looked like he could be exactly that in 2014, but bringing in Harrison makes you wonder what the plan for Hankins is at this point. If Hankins is starting alongside Harrison, it will be a different kind of defense than we're used to seeing (not your typical Nose Tackle and 3-technique pairing). I suspect that at this point they are hoping for Bromley to win the starting job next to Harrison.

Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't true. Hankins will be the primary 3T DT, and may very well play more snaps than any other DT on the team (barring injury).
RE: RE: I don't see Hankins as a 3-technique  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 6:34 pm : link
In comment 13043545 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 13043144 Milton said:


Quote:


He's a run defender who is athletic enough to pick up the occasional sack. That's what they drafted him to be and he looked like he could be exactly that in 2014, but bringing in Harrison makes you wonder what the plan for Hankins is at this point. If Hankins is starting alongside Harrison, it will be a different kind of defense than we're used to seeing (not your typical Nose Tackle and 3-technique pairing). I suspect that at this point they are hoping for Bromley to win the starting job next to Harrison.


Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't true. Hankins will be the primary 3T DT, and may very well play more snaps than any other DT on the team (barring injury).
DT Hankins is definitely going to get the most snaps unless he is hurt and/or DT Harrison is actually staying in on clear cut pass downs (3rd/4th downs). DT Hankins plays 4 downs, game in and game out, except for breathers or times he's knicked during a game.
SGMen  
Milton : 7/24/2016 8:19 pm : link
If the Giants thought Hankins was everything you think he is, they would never have signed Harrison to such an outrageous contract. I seriously doubt Hankins has suddenly transformed himself in their eyes from being a run-stuffing DT to being a pass-rushing DT. If everyone is healthy, he won't be on the field for more than 50% of the defensive snaps and that's assuming he beats out the competition to be the starter next to Harrison. Granted, the competition appears weak, but Hankins is just not the ideal complement to Harrison unless they are planning on using them like Tony Siragusa and Sam Adams circa 2000 (who combined for 2 whole sacks during the year) or John Henderson and Marcus Stroud circa 2002-2007 (both were 1st round picks for Tom Coughlin).
RE: SGMen  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 9:13 pm : link
In comment 13043625 Milton said:
Quote:
If the Giants thought Hankins was everything you think he is, they would never have signed Harrison to such an outrageous contract. I seriously doubt Hankins has suddenly transformed himself in their eyes from being a run-stuffing DT to being a pass-rushing DT. If everyone is healthy, he won't be on the field for more than 50% of the defensive snaps and that's assuming he beats out the competition to be the starter next to Harrison. Granted, the competition appears weak, but Hankins is just not the ideal complement to Harrison unless they are planning on using them like Tony Siragusa and Sam Adams circa 2000 (who combined for 2 whole sacks during the year) or John Henderson and Marcus Stroud circa 2002-2007 (both were 1st round picks for Tom Coughlin).
So on 3rd and pass downs, who do they bring in? OWA and Bromley? I highly doubt it. Hankins was super solid in 2014 and had I believe 7 or 8 sacks. He pushed the pocket. He will be on the field downs 1 through 4 with the exception of breathers, knicks and injuries and such. Look, I'd love it if we had Ayers for another year and we used him as the NASCAR or ACES DT on pure pass downs but we don't have him.
SGMen  
Milton : 7/24/2016 9:23 pm : link
With all the substitutions during the preseason, we probably won't get a feel for the Giants plan until the regular season begins. One thing Hankins has on his side, as you point out, is a lack of quality competition. Unless of course Bromley steps up his game and becomes the player they drafted him to be in the 3rd round.
Devon Kennard most likely will line up as a DE on passing downs,  
BlueLou : 7/24/2016 9:26 pm : link
along with OO and JPP inside and OV outside. That will likely be one of the NASCAR personnel groups.

Depending on who looks like "the next Dave Tollefson" it may be Romeo Okwara or Ishaq Williams or Kerry Wynn or in fact Jay Bromley... but you can lay a bet Hankins isn't playing on 3rd and long.

Please stop the yammering. Or are you sneakily making your case for Whitlock?
RE: RE: Also depends on how Odi and Bromley play this season.  
chopperhatch : 7/24/2016 9:33 pm : link
In comment 13043207 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
In comment 13043128 j_rud said:


Quote:


If either has a breakout year I think that would influence who they let walk. In any scenario I think they're more inclined to resign JPP. Getting to the QB is still prioritized, and if Odighizuwa does come on strong that would give them a solid 3 DE rotation that the team 1) hasn't had in awhile and 2) has thrived with in the past.



I don't know what is more fantasy...Chopper's stat assumptions in his OP or the idea that Odi and Bromley could have break-out years...


Jimmy its not surprising you have reading comprehension issues. I had been throwing out numbers, that is not an assumption. I also retracted when adamg pointed out those numbers for Hank were ridiculous...offering up 60 tackles and 7-9 sacks.

And yea, it is totally unreasonable that a DT in his 3rd year figures it out. Also ridiculous to expect a 3rd round DE improve is second year.

Go back to sleep Googs.
RE: Devon Kennard most likely will line up as a DE on passing downs,  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 9:35 pm : link
In comment 13043668 BlueLou said:
Quote:
along with OO and JPP inside and OV outside. That will likely be one of the NASCAR personnel groups.

Depending on who looks like "the next Dave Tollefson" it may be Romeo Okwara or Ishaq Williams or Kerry Wynn or in fact Jay Bromley... but you can lay a bet Hankins isn't playing on 3rd and long.

Please stop the yammering. Or are you sneakily making your case for Whitlock?
There will be various packages, for sure, based on talent and abilities and of course health.

As for FB Nikita Whitlock, we can only hope he surprises. Not likely, but he did do well in college and the coaches did use him a bit as a pass rusher last year. It isn't a totally "crazy" thought....but it is just a thought.
RE: I agree Hankins is a 3 down player  
chopperhatch : 7/24/2016 9:41 pm : link
In comment 13043342 Matt M. said:
Quote:
But, 95 tackles is ridiculous for a DL.


Jesus fucking Christ, I threw out a bad number.

The question remains if both have excellent years...or better yet, if JPP has a "good" year and Hankins is excell3nt, who would you think the Giants offer the contract to?

And to those of you who dont think Pugh has earned his second contract, you are out to lunch. He played very well at Guard and cam play Tackle in a pinch. Plus, you really want to shuffle the O line again at this stage of Eli's career?
RE: RE: I agree Hankins is a 3 down player  
Milton : 7/24/2016 9:50 pm : link
In comment 13043676 chopperhatch said:
Quote:
The question remains if both have excellent years...or better yet, if JPP has a "good" year and Hankins is excellent, who would you think the Giants offer the contract to?
They are separate negotiations and will be handled based on their bang for buck. Hankins's competition is Harrison and Bromley and whoever else plays DT, not JPP. What if Hankins has a good year and Bromley has an excellent year?
p.s.-- Management has had three years to form an opinion on Hankins and his potential. If they thought he was capable of your idea of an excellent year, I just don't think they would have backed up the Brinks truck for a two-down run-stuffing DT. Everything that we don't know about Hankins and the Giants do was revealed to us by that move. At least that's what my spider sense tells me.
RE: RE: I agree Hankins is a 3 down player  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 9:53 pm : link
In comment 13043676 chopperhatch said:
Quote:
In comment 13043342 Matt M. said:


Quote:


But, 95 tackles is ridiculous for a DL.



Jesus fucking Christ, I threw out a bad number.

The question remains if both have excellent years...or better yet, if JPP has a "good" year and Hankins is excell3nt, who would you think the Giants offer the contract to?

And to those of you who dont think Pugh has earned his second contract, you are out to lunch. He played very well at Guard and cam play Tackle in a pinch. Plus, you really want to shuffle the O line again at this stage of Eli's career?
We all make mistakes. :)

But seriously, if OWA and Bromley are clear cut starters of the future (ability wise) I can't see us justifying a big contract to yet another DL? We have so much invested in two guys already?

I honestly don't know what we'd do if OWA and Bromley are looking more like "average at best" starters and we don't want that. Maybe draft a DL round 1? Or go after other cheaper UFA's?

I mean, if both Hankins and JPP are looking at huge contracts from other teams willing to overpay we may let them walk and take the 3rd round compensatory picks we'd likely get. The NFL is just a tough business on players.

Guys, you really don't need to be a rocket scientist to  
BlueLou : 7/24/2016 9:54 pm : link
read the tea leaves on this.
The Giants always planned to keep JPP around for a second contract. If that wasn't their desire and intention they would have jettisoned him after he be blew his hand half off last summer! Duh!!!!

And IF they viewed big Hank as a long term keeper they wouldn't likely have backed up the Brinks' truck to Snacks Harrison.

Please stop playing dumb and dumber.
RE: RE: RE: I agree Hankins is a 3 down player  
chopperhatch : 7/24/2016 9:55 pm : link
In comment 13043682 Milton said:
Quote:
In comment 13043676 chopperhatch said:


Quote:


The question remains if both have excellent years...or better yet, if JPP has a "good" year and Hankins is excellent, who would you think the Giants offer the contract to?

They are separate negotiations and will be handled based on their bang for buck. Hankins's competition is Harrison and Bromley and whoever else plays DT, not JPP. What if Hankins has a good year and Bromley has an excellent year?
p.s.-- Management has had three years to form an opinion on Hankins and his potential. If they thought he was capable of your idea of an excellent year, I just don't think they would have backed up the Brinks truck for a two-down run-stuffing DT. Everything that we don't know about Hankins and the Giants do was revealed to us by that move. At least that's what my spider sense tells me.


Once again Milton, you keep insisting he is a "2 down run stuffer" when he has been on for three downs most of the time up until he got injured
RE: RE: RE: RE: I agree Hankins is a 3 down player  
Milton : 7/24/2016 10:13 pm : link
In comment 13043685 chopperhatch said:
Quote:
In comment 13043682 Milton said: Management has had three years to form an opinion on Hankins and his potential. If they thought he was capable of your idea of an excellent year, I just don't think they would have backed up the Brinks truck for a two-down run-stuffing DT.

Once again Milton, you keep insisting he is a "2 down run stuffer" when he has been on for three downs most of the time up until he got injured
It's Harrison I see as the two-down run stuffer, but they wouldn't've signed him to that kind of deal if they thought Hankins was the run-stuffer they drafted him to be. That was supposed to be his strong suit, not pass-rushing. I don't think their opinion of him has changed so much that now they see Hankins as more of a pass-rusher than a run-stuffer. And if he was all-World at both, they would never have signed Harrison.

I'm not saying they wouldn't've looked into it, but not for the kind of money they signed him to. It was unprecedented. If they had confidence in Hankins, they wouldn't've been that desperate. It surprises me that people don't see the Harrison contract as an indictment on Hankins. It's not like they did it so that they could free up Hankins to be the pass-rushing demon hidden inside of him.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: I agree Hankins is a 3 down player  
SGMen : 7/24/2016 10:19 pm : link
In comment 13043698 Milton said:
Quote:
In comment 13043685 chopperhatch said:


Quote:


In comment 13043682 Milton said: Management has had three years to form an opinion on Hankins and his potential. If they thought he was capable of your idea of an excellent year, I just don't think they would have backed up the Brinks truck for a two-down run-stuffing DT.

Once again Milton, you keep insisting he is a "2 down run stuffer" when he has been on for three downs most of the time up until he got injured

It's Harrison I see as the two-down run stuffer, but they wouldn't've signed him to that kind of deal if they thought Hankins was the run-stuffer they drafted him to be. That was supposed to be his strong suit, not pass-rushing. I don't think their opinion of him has changed so much that now they see Hankins as more of a pass-rusher than a run-stuffer. And if he was all-World at both, they would never have signed Harrison.

I'm not saying they wouldn't've looked into it, but not for the kind of money they signed him to. It was unprecedented. If they had confidence in Hankins, they wouldn't've been that desperate. It surprises me that people don't see the Harrison contract as an indictment on Hankins. It's not like they did it so that they could free up Hankins to be the pass-rushing demon hidden inside of him.
Honestly, I don't think DT Harrison's big deal had anything to do with DT Hankins. I think Snacks was signed because we knew the tandem of Hankins and him would be as strong as it gets vs the run in today's NFL.

I'm also not saying DT Hankins is a great pass rusher because he isn't. But he is better than most, and likely better than Bromley or Nix as a rusher.

Needless to say, camp will be interesting and game 1 will be great! I look forward to the season.
RE: RE: RE: Also depends on how Odi and Bromley play this season.  
Jimmy Googs : 7/25/2016 7:57 am : link
In comment 13043670 chopperhatch said:
Quote:
In comment 13043207 Jimmy Googs said:


Quote:


In comment 13043128 j_rud said:


Quote:


If either has a breakout year I think that would influence who they let walk. In any scenario I think they're more inclined to resign JPP. Getting to the QB is still prioritized, and if Odighizuwa does come on strong that would give them a solid 3 DE rotation that the team 1) hasn't had in awhile and 2) has thrived with in the past.



I don't know what is more fantasy...Chopper's stat assumptions in his OP or the idea that Odi and Bromley could have break-out years...



Jimmy its not surprising you have reading comprehension issues. I had been throwing out numbers, that is not an assumption. I also retracted when adamg pointed out those numbers for Hank were ridiculous...offering up 60 tackles and 7-9 sacks.

And yea, it is totally unreasonable that a DT in his 3rd year figures it out. Also ridiculous to expect a 3rd round DE improve is second year.

Go back to sleep Googs.


Don't get mad at me that your original post has pipe-dream thoughts in it. Stand by what you wrote or next time review it better.

And "improve" does not equal "breakout" for the two other guys. Try an on-line dictionary or Wikipedia before criticizing others.
JPP  
stretch234 : 7/25/2016 8:41 am : link
You saw what Hankins was with JPP and without JPP next to him. That tells you the value of JPP. You always sign the pass rusher if having to make a choice. They could resign both

As of now, next year they are 20M under the 2017 cap. They also still have room this year, where they could pull in future salary/bonus to free up more for next year.

You also have a few guys who might be gone and cap savings

Cruz 7.5M
DRC 4.5M
Thomas 3.0M
Casillas 2.5M
Jennings 2.5M
I did not realize that Hankins had had much of an impact except on BBI  
Bob in Newburgh : 7/25/2016 10:33 am : link
Seems to have a real good PR firm (Geno Smith take note) representing him on this site.

JPP (if he can grasp with strength in both hands) is fully capable of being a HOF caliber player.

Hankins has show to be a solid, above average starting DT.

The ceiling margin between them is huge, even if comparing apples to oranges.
RE: JPP  
SGMen : 7/25/2016 11:33 am : link
In comment 13043788 stretch234 said:
Quote:
You saw what Hankins was with JPP and without JPP next to him. That tells you the value of JPP. You always sign the pass rusher if having to make a choice. They could resign both

As of now, next year they are 20M under the 2017 cap. They also still have room this year, where they could pull in future salary/bonus to free up more for next year.

You also have a few guys who might be gone and cap savings

Cruz 7.5M
DRC 4.5M
Thomas 3.0M
Casillas 2.5M
Jennings 2.5M
I don't see DRC being cut or asked to take a paycut simply because he is likely still our best pure cover corner. You can't find guys like him on the open market that easily. You need three super solid cover corners in this league and 4.5 million is not that huge a number when you consider our cap space.

WR Victor Cruz will take a paycut and stay if he is healthy and productive. He is a fan favorite and strong locker room guy. If he has a total rebound and gets 75-1000-8 type numbers or something like that well we'll have to see what the Giants do there. You need three superb wideouts in this league to totally blow defenses away since you can't cover all three consistently.

The rest of the bunch: Casillas, Thomas, Jennings are gone and we'll once again be pursuing LB help via the draft and UFA.
Back to the Corner