In the offseason, we will all be focused on the JPP drama. And the anticipated cuts/salary reductions for guys like Cruz, Vereen, JT Thomas, etc. Of course, we will be looking at free agents, trade market, and the draft.
But one of the biggest decisions for the Giants will be what to do with Hankins. If you followed the Reese plan around DTs the past few years, his motto has been to draft a DT to trail behind starting DT who is approaching free agency. He did it with Barry Cofield, where he first tried (and almost) traded him to the Saints, only to leave as a free agent and swap in Lindval Joseph. Similarly, as Joseph approached free agency, the Giants had Hankins in the wings ready to take his position.
Now we have the similar set up, Hankins, who turns 25 in March, and was healthy for a full season, hitting free agency. Behind him was Jay Bromley, who after an embarassing off-season scandal, seemed to play pretty well when he was called upon. The entire DL played much better in 2016, as we all know. So the question is, do the Giants think the Hankins' play in 2016, where he was very active, including playing at DE on some pass rush formations, a result of the other talent around him, specifically a space eater like Snacks next to him, or did he hold his own and the Giants are looking at someone ready to take the next step in his prime.
And how much did the play of Bromley factor into their decision. I don't have the PFF grades available on him (and yes, we crap on PFF, but teams do use it), but I recall seeing his name up there in the higher graded groups after a few games this year. And by the eye test, he looked to play much better this year when called upon.
So the question is, do the Giants look to retain Hankins and give him a fairly sizable contract, or do they let him go and slot in Bromley and look to draft another DT this year and prepare for the cycle to repeat again.
I think the Vikings would beg to differ.
My order is JPP as a must-sign, Hankins as desireable but you place a value on him and do not go above it.
I agree that JPP is a necessity and Hankins is desired. Yes, we would like to keep all of our players. Part of our run defense was also the improved play of our linebackers. That is a chicken an egg scenario though. Did our LBs play better because of our DL? Yes. Did our DL benefit from having better LB play? Maybe.
Still, going back to what I mentioned earlier, our push up the middle was gone for long stretches throughout games. A lot of our sacks were coverage sacks. So, not only do I believe that we need JPP, I also feel that we need another true pass rusher on the edge. Getting that Villanova kid in the second would be great. It doesn't have to be him but someone like him. Let him develop under Vernon and JPP on a cost controlled contract. When it is time for him to get paid then one of JPP and Vernon's contracts will be up if not both. This would allow us to really just pressure with 4 with having a nice rotation to keep our DEs fresh. JPP and Vernon are going break down real fast if they play as many snaps as they played this year. They need help.
With that in mind, Hankins cannot get big money. I think like all of out other DTs that have left they. Need to have a price and they need to stick to that. However, unlike some of our other DTs, I don't think the market will be that great for Hankins. I hope I am right.
Another poster brings up a good point about Snacks and his backup. Who would it be? Well, as much as I agree that Hankijs would be that guy I still dont 5hink that warrants a huge contract. We can say the same about Manning's backup, Beckham's backup, etc. If that happens you just have to roll with the bodies you have.
I would say JPP is priority number 1 and Hankins would be number 2B at a certain price range while being able to upgrade our OL as 2A. We don't have to go after the big fish in FA along the OL but we need an upgrade.
What do the Giants want out of the DT position? I am not in the front office but I assume that the number 1 goal is stop the run and to get a push up the middle versus the pass and in this regards, the Giants had two reliable DT's that accomplished this.
I wouldn't overpay for Hankins, but I believe Hankins has the attributes desired by the Giants and those attributes may be hard to replace. Snacks cost a lot for a reason.
I also want to throw out there that Snacks has said on at least two occasions that Hanks hasn't reached his potential AND that his physical potential is much higher than Snacks himself. He said something to the effect of 'I'm jealous of Hanks and want him to get better because he has more innate talent than me.' That makes me hesitant to just drop him in lieu of JPP.
Joseph was never as good as snacks and never will be as good as snacks.
Cmon. Move on already the guy left the Giants three years ago.
I would be OK with thathe although I would prefer to franchise Jpp vs. A long term deal. I don't love this most recent I jury and he has a long history of injuries now.
That's the thing that bothered me all season. I was fully expecting to see a return of the 2014 version of Big Hank but for whatever reason he had issue with rushing the passer in 2016 like he did in 2015. But like someone mentioned maybe that's what Spags wanted since under Perry he rushed a lot more. I don't really want to see him walk though. Giants have to pay to keep them both.
Wow - someone actually watches the games and comes up with an accurate assessment. Nice job - and I'll throw Mason in there too for agreeing.
The frustrating thing is that 2014 season: that's his upside. But he was known as a lazy player with weight issues at OSU and for whatever reason, he was unable to duplicate the '14 season in a contract year playing between 2 All Pros. Personally, I'd rather get a pass rusher at the 3 - nobody's running the ball with OV/Snacks/JPP up front. I don't really care who the other DT is.
I'd be willing to bet he gets at least 8. He will likely get somewhere between 8 and 9 imv.
Hankins is more replaceable than JPP. I'm expecting someone to overpay Hankins, I just don't see the Giants matching the market with so much cash tied up in the DL already.
JPP gets paid, Hankins leaves imo.
Quote:
The dominant players. OV did next to nothing when JPP went down. Hankins had a subpar and injury ridden 2015. In 2016 with a dominant DT next to him he still never regained 2014 form. Giants should pay a ton for him.
That's the thing that bothered me all season. I was fully expecting to see a return of the 2014 version of Big Hank but for whatever reason he had issue with rushing the passer in 2016 like he did in 2015. But like someone mentioned maybe that's what Spags wanted since under Perry he rushed a lot more. I don't really want to see him walk though. Giants have to pay to keep them both.
Both of you are spot on. Hankins is severely overrated around here. Good player, but he only has 1 very good season under his belt. Disappeared without JPP last year, and he was talking big this year about getting 16 sacks. JPP's are much harder to come by, and those are the guys you pay. Hankins is still important to what we do, but we've had a lot of success in refilling the cupboard at the DT position.
This. I don't know what Reese will do, but re-signing Hankins would be my first priority.
Reese would put that at risk for what?
If Bromley was good enough then you would have seen a real rotation in there at some point last season, and we didn't...
But we do know he does a good job, in area we just fixed...