and it doesn't sound like we will. Where do we spend that money in your opinion? And how do we fill his absence? I don't think this is a strong DT draft.
If we don't re-sign him, the odds are that Bromley or Thomas will be starting... even if we draft someone. DT's don't usually start as rookies unless they are really good.
I will admit this is a pet peeve of mine. I don't think we should have let Cofield go. And I didn't think we should have let Linval Joseph go. When we do that, it feels like treading water.
We do not just have 14 million. We can always find money if we have to, not to mention I am more than confident JPP will have a deal signed by tomorrow. This will free up significant $'s.
the only reason I think we're hearing about a player like Pryor is bec
they should have some cash to spend if they aren't resigning hankins, even if they re-up with JPP. We will spend the money elsewhere and based on Mara's comments, they aren't enamored with the offensive line. I also think Pryor might make sense because we have put an awful lot of eggs in one basket with OBJ. If he's injured, the season is done.
lock up JPP long term and the giants would still still have 3/4 of their DL in tact and great vs the run.
love Hankins, but Snacks is so good they'll remain stout up front regardless
Situation changes rapidly if Damon Harrison gets hurt. Doesn't it?
yes, it'd be a huge blow. tough to allocate resources based on a bunch of what ifs though. Giants have huge money already tied into the DL - I'm sure some joke of a franchise like Cleveland will overpay Hankins.
I love Hankins, but Vernon/JPP/Snacks is still 1 of the best DL in the NFL regardless of who slides in @ DT. Time to put some money into the OL.
RE: the only reason I think we're hearing about a player like Pryor is bec
they should have some cash to spend if they aren't resigning hankins, even if they re-up with JPP. We will spend the money elsewhere and based on Mara's comments, they aren't enamored with the offensive line. I also think Pryor might make sense because we have put an awful lot of eggs in one basket with OBJ. If he's injured, the season is done.
ODB/Pryor/Shep is my dream offseason - instant best WR corp in football.
RE: RE: the only reason I think we're hearing about a player like Pryor is bec
they should have some cash to spend if they aren't resigning hankins, even if they re-up with JPP. We will spend the money elsewhere and based on Mara's comments, they aren't enamored with the offensive line. I also think Pryor might make sense because we have put an awful lot of eggs in one basket with OBJ. If he's injured, the season is done.
ODB/Pryor/Shep is my dream offseason - instant best WR corp in football.
The giants history of drafting DTS (Cofield->Joseph->Hankins) basically confirms that the position isn't worth spending the rumored $10m per on. If you can get a comparable player in the 2nd/3rd you do it every day.
Hell, if they were confident of replacing JPP's production with a 1st they'd likely let him walk (and if that was the case you could argue that would be the smart play).
RE: RE: RE: the only reason I think we're hearing about a player like Pryor is bec
they should have some cash to spend if they aren't resigning hankins, even if they re-up with JPP. We will spend the money elsewhere and based on Mara's comments, they aren't enamored with the offensive line. I also think Pryor might make sense because we have put an awful lot of eggs in one basket with OBJ. If he's injured, the season is done.
ODB/Pryor/Shep is my dream offseason - instant best WR corp in football.
They drafted a few DTs who haven't panned out. With Nassib, Ogbah, Garrett, and Hanks, they'd be super up front and really young and cost controlled outside of Hanks.
Again, love Hankins - can't have it all. Time to spend on the offense - preferably OL or Pryor / draft 1 of these TEs and get back to lighting it up on offense
is a very good run stuffing DT. A draft pick won't be as good, but we have to hope that one plus Thomas will be at least a good approximation of what Hankins produced.
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor. Thomas/Sanders (Denver) right off the bat are better than Beckham/Shep. Oakland's WR's are damn good too.
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor. Thomas/Sanders (Denver) right off the bat are better than Beckham/Shep. Oakland's WR's are damn good too.
hold up....youre taking d thomas/sanders over OBJ and pryor??? lol NO SHOT. Im taking OBJ, Shep, pryor over nelson, cobb, adams too btw. atlanta and pitt you have legit arguments...oakland is close
this isn't the same scenario. If we had no Harrison, Hankins would likely stay. Harrison is far better and more important and if letting Hankins go nets us another weapon on offense, I'm all for it.
I'm sure the Giants have a price in mind for hankins
He's not as good as gone yet. Depends on whether another team blows his doors off. Giants can't possibly think losing Hank would be addition by subtraction and they likely don't think they can replace Hank adequately unless they sign another vet FA DT, and while that will be cheaper it won't be free. With that in mind the Giants will likely offer Hank more than the cheap vet fix route. Question is will it be enough. If not use that extra loot elsewhere. If they keep him, great, you have an embarrassment of riches in the DL. Worst case You're robbing Peter to pay Paul but Peter has more in the coffers to steal. The Giants DL can take a slight blow and still hum. But only a slight blow. Hopefully if they do lose Hank the guy they bring in can generate more interior pass rush.
He's not as good as gone yet. Depends on whether another team blows his doors off. Giants can't possibly think losing Hank would be addition by subtraction and they likely don't think they can replace Hank adequately unless they sign another vet FA DT, and while that will be cheaper it won't be free. With that in mind the Giants will likely offer Hank more than the cheap vet fix route. Question is will it be enough. If not use that extra loot elsewhere. If they keep him, great, you have an embarrassment of riches in the DL. Worst case You're robbing Peter to pay Paul but Peter has more in the coffers to steal. The Giants DL can take a slight blow and still hum. But only a slight blow. Hopefully if they do lose Hank the guy they bring in can generate more interior pass rush.
What do you think Bennie Logan's market is? He'd be perfect next to Snacks.
is a very good run stuffing DT. A draft pick won't be as good, but we have to hope that one plus Thomas will be at least a good approximation of what Hankins produced.
Giants didn't need him to be a run stuffing DT this season. They were looking for pass rush from him and run stuffing from Snacks. Hankins as properly pointed out by advanced stats did not have the season they anticipated playing next to Snacks who completely eclipsed him. Bromley was actually more effective playing next to Snacks in the 4th quarter of games.
Like Eric said, the Giants could create the cap space if re-signing
Hankins was important enough. The Cowboys went from 10 over to 8.5 under by restructuring three contracts. If they release Romo they've got their 13.5 under.
I think that it's really risky for a team to sign Hankins based on how he played this year with a line of three current or prior All Pros. Pay all that money, start him at DT, expect Hankins to be the leader and the top producer.
I don't know. Hankins could play it safe by re-signing for New York and playing on a line where he's not expected to be the major playmaker.
Like Eric said, the Giants could create the cap space if re-signing
Hankins was important enough. The Cowboys went from 10 over to 8.5 under by restructuring three contracts. If they release Romo they've got their 13.5 under.
I think that it's really risky for a team to sign Hankins based on how he played this year with a line of three current or prior All Pros. Pay all that money, start him at DT, expect Hankins to be the leader and the top producer.
I don't know. Hankins could play it safe by re-signing for New York and playing on a line where he's not expected to be the major playmaker.
The giants history of drafting DTS (Cofield->Joseph->Hankins) basically confirms that the position isn't worth spending the rumored $10m per on. If you can get a comparable player in the 2nd/3rd you do it every day.
Hell, if they were confident of replacing JPP's production with a 1st they'd likely let him walk (and if that was the case you could argue that would be the smart play).
Good post. People fall in love with their roster now but you can't a lot that money to the defensive line. We have other needs. Hankins and Harrison are 2 of the same players. Let's see what Bromley can do he flashed a decent amount last season. Bring in a vet maybe a draft pick and let them compete.
RE: Like Eric said, the Giants could create the cap space if re-signing
Hankins was important enough. The Cowboys went from 10 over to 8.5 under by restructuring three contracts. If they release Romo they've got their 13.5 under.
I think that it's really risky for a team to sign Hankins based on how he played this year with a line of three current or prior All Pros. Pay all that money, start him at DT, expect Hankins to be the leader and the top producer.
I don't know. Hankins could play it safe by re-signing for New York and playing on a line where he's not expected to be the major playmaker.
I like Hankins, just like I liked Joseph and Cofield. The Giants had a choice of JPP or Hankins and they chose JPP. You can't have 40% of your cap tied up in the defensive line starters. Most would say put the money in the offensive line, but it seems like the weak first round grades on the offensive lineman are driving up he price of the average offensive lineman free agents available this year
is a very good run stuffing DT. A draft pick won't be as good, but we have to hope that one plus Thomas will be at least a good approximation of what Hankins produced.
Giants didn't need him to be a run stuffing DT this season. They were looking for pass rush from him and run stuffing from Snacks. Hankins as properly pointed out by advanced stats did not have the season they anticipated playing next to Snacks who completely eclipsed him. Bromley was actually more effective playing next to Snacks in the 4th quarter of games.
They needed two run stuffers to control the Cowboys OL. Relying on Hankins to be a pass rusher was misguided. He's very good at what he does, but is one dimensional.
past 3 years. The 1 injury was a legit injury that could happen to any player, not some "nagging" issue which affects so many players. And he bounced back no problems the next season.
100% in favor of overpaying for him. A very, very good player who was my favorite pick in years at the time.
I just don't trust him. And rumor is he wants 10mil/yr. So that's out. If I hadn't seen that rumor i would have thought he would be available for around 5 mil making him an option.
past 3 years. The 1 injury was a legit injury that could happen to any player, not some "nagging" issue which affects so many players. And he bounced back no problems the next season.
100% in favor of overpaying for him. A very, very good player who was my favorite pick in years at the time.
I agree with you, I would have chosen Hankins over JPP. I like JPP, but he's rarely had a healthy season, and I mean the back/core muscle injuries, not the hand. I just think it's funny that everyone seems to think JPP is a must sign, but the defense played damn good without him those last several games.
RE: Nick Fairley would actually be good next to Hanks
I just don't trust him. And rumor is he wants 10mil/yr. So that's out. If I hadn't seen that rumor i would have thought he would be available for around 5 mil making him an option.
Fairly is not a good option, I live in Lions country, no one wanted him resigned here a few years back. Lazy, etc
We do not just have 14 million. We can always find money if we have to, not to mention I am more than confident JPP will have a deal signed by tomorrow. This will free up significant $'s.
Don't forget out of that current $14 million we have to cover the rookie pool and have some funds to go into the season with.
RE: RE: I'm sure the Giants have a price in mind for hankins
He's not as good as gone yet. Depends on whether another team blows his doors off. Giants can't possibly think losing Hank would be addition by subtraction and they likely don't think they can replace Hank adequately unless they sign another vet FA DT, and while that will be cheaper it won't be free. With that in mind the Giants will likely offer Hank more than the cheap vet fix route. Question is will it be enough. If not use that extra loot elsewhere. If they keep him, great, you have an embarrassment of riches in the DL. Worst case You're robbing Peter to pay Paul but Peter has more in the coffers to steal. The Giants DL can take a slight blow and still hum. But only a slight blow. Hopefully if they do lose Hank the guy they bring in can generate more interior pass rush.
What do you think Bennie Logan's market is? He'd be perfect next to Snacks.
I really like Logan as a player but he'd be a bit of a redundancy next to Harrison IMO. He's a 2 down run stuffer who doesn't generate much pass rush. As for his contract, if Hankins is in the 10 mill range I'd expect Logan to be in the neighborhood of 6 mill per but I'm obviously only guessing.
RE: Nick Fairley would actually be good next to Hanks
I just don't trust him. And rumor is he wants 10mil/yr. So that's out. If I hadn't seen that rumor i would have thought he would be available for around 5 mil making him an option.
we can probably find a "Shaun Rogers" run stuffer for near the vet minimum to take his place in the base D.
And he came off the field on passing downs.
I'm with Eric - I'd love to retain our homegrown talent but it just doesn't seem to add up. No cap? Fine, not my $$$, but it's hard to imagine them seeing the value in it.
I just don't trust him. And rumor is he wants 10mil/yr. So that's out. If I hadn't seen that rumor i would have thought he would be available for around 5 mil making him an option.
Fairly is not a good option, I live in Lions country, no one wanted him resigned here a few years back. Lazy, etc
He actually had a pretty good year for the Saints. But yah its he time with the Lions that makes you worry. How do you give big money to someone that only turned it on in a contract year.
But he is a penetrating DT, which i think would be a good fit next to Harrison.
There is something about these 2 round DT's who develop and are valued more by other teams (C. Griffin and Linval). I know every player is different and it's stupid to base my opinion on this, but I just don't feel like it is a priority to pay Hank what others will likely pay for him. It's a bummer because he is a staple on the DL, but maybe they can plug in a veteran who makes less, leverage Bromley and Thomas, then pick another DT with high upside in the top 3 rounds.
Huge lol at Terelle Pryor making this WR group top 5
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor.
Explain.
You asking me to explain?
Let's hypothetically put Pryor on the NYG as the poster above says. Add in King and Lewis Jr for our 5 after Beckham and Shep.
Then let's look at Pittsburgh. Brown, Coates, Martavius Bryant, Heyward Bey, and Eli Rodgers. You think the NYG talent pool is better?
Martavis Bryant can't even get on the field to play football.
And Heyward-Bey? I don't see the point in including guys who barely play and don't make catches. He had as much impact on his team as King did for us. Namely, not much.
The number two receiver on that team is a running back. Sterling Shepard is absolutely better than Eli Rogers. So if the tipping point is Coates, then we're talking about a receiver who had fewer catches than Rashad Jennings.
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor.
Explain.
You asking me to explain?
Let's hypothetically put Pryor on the NYG as the poster above says. Add in King and Lewis Jr for our 5 after Beckham and Shep.
Then let's look at Pittsburgh. Brown, Coates, Martavius Bryant, Heyward Bey, and Eli Rodgers. You think the NYG talent pool is better?
Boss is right, no way Pryor makes our corps better than Pittsburgh, assuming Martavis Bryant is clean
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor.
Explain.
You asking me to explain?
Let's hypothetically put Pryor on the NYG as the poster above says. Add in King and Lewis Jr for our 5 after Beckham and Shep.
Then let's look at Pittsburgh. Brown, Coates, Martavius Bryant, Heyward Bey, and Eli Rodgers. You think the NYG talent pool is better?
Boss is right, no way Pryor makes our corps better than Pittsburgh, assuming Martavis Bryant is clean
Now if we had an NFL caliber offensive line with Beckham/Shepard/Pryor, different story. Doesnt make much sense to have a bunch of weapons that Eli has no time to throw to
I will admit this is a pet peeve of mine. I don't think we should have let Cofield go. And I didn't think we should have let Linval Joseph go. When we do that, it feels like treading water.
We can create cap room if we need it.
Eric, that's exactly how I feel. We keep "wasting" 2nd and 3rd round picks while training good young players for other organizations. I'd rather fiddle with the cap, keep Hankins, and have the luxury of filling other spots in the draft.
The argument that signing him precludes us from signing any other top FAs this year seems specious, because, as you suggest, the team can massage their cap figures for a few years while Eli is on his last legs. That's especially true since Eli's money is going to come off the books after two more offseasons.
RE: RE: I'm sure the Giants have a price in mind for hankins
He's not as good as gone yet. Depends on whether another team blows his doors off. Giants can't possibly think losing Hank would be addition by subtraction and they likely don't think they can replace Hank adequately unless they sign another vet FA DT, and while that will be cheaper it won't be free. With that in mind the Giants will likely offer Hank more than the cheap vet fix route. Question is will it be enough. If not use that extra loot elsewhere. If they keep him, great, you have an embarrassment of riches in the DL. Worst case You're robbing Peter to pay Paul but Peter has more in the coffers to steal. The Giants DL can take a slight blow and still hum. But only a slight blow. Hopefully if they do lose Hank the guy they bring in can generate more interior pass rush.
What do you think Bennie Logan's market is? He'd be perfect next to Snacks.
No idea I'm honestly not too familiar with Logan. I just figure it's either gonna be hankins here on close to what he could get on the open market or a slightly less or slightly older option as a fall back. I want Hank back it's annoying watching all these developed nyg DTs going elsewhere but I kind of get it if he leaves. For all the talk of regretting the loss of Joseph and cofield did the Giants really truly miss those guys? How much better would the 2014-2015 Giants have been with Joseph here? The D would have been less terrible but still pretty terrible. And in some ways you could say that losing Joseph led to signing snacks.
This is kind of uncharted territory with the whole DT dynamic here
When they lost Joseph the Giants were entering a rebuild phase. When they lost cofield they had a young emerging Joseph and an established canty. I think they also had Bernard in place. Now they have an all pro snacks and two young players. Neither has the pedigree that a young hankins or Joseph had. If the Giants lose hank and somehow couldn't land or find a suitable FA replacement DT, they'd be forced to draft a DT in April. In the past when they lost the DT they had the drafted DT in tow already. Not the case now. As good as the DL is it's not as stacked as it was in the mid to late 2000s. With hankins it's more top heavy but less star power depth.
just started learning the WR position and flashed signs of dominance as a size/speed freak of nature - despite the abortion that is the Browns QB situation.
Beckham, Pryor, Shepard >
Reese really sounded like he wanted to keep Hankins,
If the league keeps adding ten million or more to the salary cap like it has the last four years and is supposed to do for the next three years, we're going to have to start thinking about the cap differently.
A good team will be able to keep its core together for a few years. If your best free agent is your fourth lineman, you can keep him (although not at any price).
I will admit this is a pet peeve of mine. I don't think we should have let Cofield go. And I didn't think we should have let Linval Joseph go. When we do that, it feels like treading water.
We can create cap room if we need it.
Eric, that's exactly how I feel. We keep "wasting" 2nd and 3rd round picks while training good young players for other organizations. I'd rather fiddle with the cap, keep Hankins, and have the luxury of filling other spots in the draft.
The argument that signing him precludes us from signing any other top FAs this year seems specious, because, as you suggest, the team can massage their cap figures for a few years while Eli is on his last legs. That's especially true since Eli's money is going to come off the books after two more offseasons.
While I agree with this, Hankins is not the DT Coefield was or even in the same league as Joesph. They should have never been let to leave.
rather keep Hankins than JPP. JPP plays a more important position, but Hankins is cheaper, healthier, and younger. But I wouldn't pay $10 or even $8M a year for Hankins. I also wouldn't pay $17M to JPP. If the Giants can't work out a long term deal with JPP, then they should tell other teams that they will be willing to accept less than two #1s as compensation. I'd take two #2s.
We do not just have 14 million. We can always find money if we have to, not to mention I am more than confident JPP will have a deal signed by tomorrow. This will free up significant $'s.
Actually they don't, you are not accounting for the rookie contracts with that number. It's like that Aamco commercial
years ago, pay me now or pay me later.
Either way one slices it, that money for the rookies
is coming from the same pot of money.
In two months or less, they will have about 6 mill. less, and that includes benefits for the rookie contracts.
is as good as gone now I believe, sounds like he will get
somewhere between 8-10 mill. a season. The DT's rotate every four years around here as Eric noted above.
I am not excited to see a Bromley start. JR can do what he generally does, lose one, draft another in the second round.
Doesn't mean bromley will start. The Giants will most likely find a replacement FA DT to offset the loss of Hank. The FA replacement willl push and rotate with bromley Thomas and draft pick.
We can create cap room if we need it.
love Hankins, but Snacks is so good they'll remain stout up front regardless
love Hankins, but Snacks is so good they'll remain stout up front regardless
Situation changes rapidly if Damon Harrison gets hurt. Doesn't it?
We do not just have 14 million. We can always find money if we have to, not to mention I am more than confident JPP will have a deal signed by tomorrow. This will free up significant $'s.
Quote:
lock up JPP long term and the giants would still still have 3/4 of their DL in tact and great vs the run.
love Hankins, but Snacks is so good they'll remain stout up front regardless
Situation changes rapidly if Damon Harrison gets hurt. Doesn't it?
yes, it'd be a huge blow. tough to allocate resources based on a bunch of what ifs though. Giants have huge money already tied into the DL - I'm sure some joke of a franchise like Cleveland will overpay Hankins.
I love Hankins, but Vernon/JPP/Snacks is still 1 of the best DL in the NFL regardless of who slides in @ DT. Time to put some money into the OL.
ODB/Pryor/Shep is my dream offseason - instant best WR corp in football.
Quote:
they should have some cash to spend if they aren't resigning hankins, even if they re-up with JPP. We will spend the money elsewhere and based on Mara's comments, they aren't enamored with the offensive line. I also think Pryor might make sense because we have put an awful lot of eggs in one basket with OBJ. If he's injured, the season is done.
ODB/Pryor/Shep is my dream offseason - instant best WR corp in football.
Not even top 5.
Stop.
DeAngelo Brown - ( New Window )
Hell, if they were confident of replacing JPP's production with a 1st they'd likely let him walk (and if that was the case you could argue that would be the smart play).
Quote:
In comment 13382630 CMicks3110 said:
Quote:
they should have some cash to spend if they aren't resigning hankins, even if they re-up with JPP. We will spend the money elsewhere and based on Mara's comments, they aren't enamored with the offensive line. I also think Pryor might make sense because we have put an awful lot of eggs in one basket with OBJ. If he's injured, the season is done.
ODB/Pryor/Shep is my dream offseason - instant best WR corp in football.
Not even top 5.
Stop.
Name 5 better.
Sucks because I'd like to see him stick around.
Again, love Hankins - can't have it all. Time to spend on the offense - preferably OL or Pryor / draft 1 of these TEs and get back to lighting it up on offense
Here are 5 I'd immediately put ahead:
Pittsburgh
Atlanta
Green Bay
Oakland
Denver
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
And we will draft a 2nd round DT
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor. Thomas/Sanders (Denver) right off the bat are better than Beckham/Shep. Oakland's WR's are damn good too.
Quote:
others, not even close.
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor. Thomas/Sanders (Denver) right off the bat are better than Beckham/Shep. Oakland's WR's are damn good too.
hold up....youre taking d thomas/sanders over OBJ and pryor??? lol NO SHOT. Im taking OBJ, Shep, pryor over nelson, cobb, adams too btw. atlanta and pitt you have legit arguments...oakland is close
They would definitely be top 5, I think the Falcons/Steelers may have the edge though
1.) Atlanta: Jones, Sanu, Gabriel
2.) Steelers: Brown, Wheaton, Rodgers, Bryant (when not suspended)
3.) Patriots: Edelman, Hogan, Gronk (He plays like a WR), Amendola, Malcolm Mitchell
4.) Raiders: Cooper, Crabtree, Roberts, Holmes
5.) Chiefs: Maclin, Wilson, Hill, Conley
What do you think Bennie Logan's market is? He'd be perfect next to Snacks.
The fact you listed 4 guys that basically overlapped in their tenures proves that it is the correct move.
Giants didn't need him to be a run stuffing DT this season. They were looking for pass rush from him and run stuffing from Snacks. Hankins as properly pointed out by advanced stats did not have the season they anticipated playing next to Snacks who completely eclipsed him. Bromley was actually more effective playing next to Snacks in the 4th quarter of games.
I think that it's really risky for a team to sign Hankins based on how he played this year with a line of three current or prior All Pros. Pay all that money, start him at DT, expect Hankins to be the leader and the top producer.
I don't know. Hankins could play it safe by re-signing for New York and playing on a line where he's not expected to be the major playmaker.
I think that it's really risky for a team to sign Hankins based on how he played this year with a line of three current or prior All Pros. Pay all that money, start him at DT, expect Hankins to be the leader and the top producer.
I don't know. Hankins could play it safe by re-signing for New York and playing on a line where he's not expected to be the major playmaker.
Hell, if they were confident of replacing JPP's production with a 1st they'd likely let him walk (and if that was the case you could argue that would be the smart play).
Good post. People fall in love with their roster now but you can't a lot that money to the defensive line. We have other needs. Hankins and Harrison are 2 of the same players. Let's see what Bromley can do he flashed a decent amount last season. Bring in a vet maybe a draft pick and let them compete.
I think that it's really risky for a team to sign Hankins based on how he played this year with a line of three current or prior All Pros. Pay all that money, start him at DT, expect Hankins to be the leader and the top producer.
I don't know. Hankins could play it safe by re-signing for New York and playing on a line where he's not expected to be the major playmaker.
I like Hankins, just like I liked Joseph and Cofield. The Giants had a choice of JPP or Hankins and they chose JPP. You can't have 40% of your cap tied up in the defensive line starters. Most would say put the money in the offensive line, but it seems like the weak first round grades on the offensive lineman are driving up he price of the average offensive lineman free agents available this year
Quote:
is a very good run stuffing DT. A draft pick won't be as good, but we have to hope that one plus Thomas will be at least a good approximation of what Hankins produced.
Giants didn't need him to be a run stuffing DT this season. They were looking for pass rush from him and run stuffing from Snacks. Hankins as properly pointed out by advanced stats did not have the season they anticipated playing next to Snacks who completely eclipsed him. Bromley was actually more effective playing next to Snacks in the 4th quarter of games.
They needed two run stuffers to control the Cowboys OL. Relying on Hankins to be a pass rusher was misguided. He's very good at what he does, but is one dimensional.
9
16
past 3 years. The 1 injury was a legit injury that could happen to any player, not some "nagging" issue which affects so many players. And he bounced back no problems the next season.
100% in favor of overpaying for him. A very, very good player who was my favorite pick in years at the time.
9
16
past 3 years. The 1 injury was a legit injury that could happen to any player, not some "nagging" issue which affects so many players. And he bounced back no problems the next season.
100% in favor of overpaying for him. A very, very good player who was my favorite pick in years at the time.
I agree with you, I would have chosen Hankins over JPP. I like JPP, but he's rarely had a healthy season, and I mean the back/core muscle injuries, not the hand. I just think it's funny that everyone seems to think JPP is a must sign, but the defense played damn good without him those last several games.
Fairly is not a good option, I live in Lions country, no one wanted him resigned here a few years back. Lazy, etc
Quote:
And we need 2 Oline, Lber, DT, Rb, wr, TE...
We do not just have 14 million. We can always find money if we have to, not to mention I am more than confident JPP will have a deal signed by tomorrow. This will free up significant $'s.
Don't forget out of that current $14 million we have to cover the rookie pool and have some funds to go into the season with.
Quote:
He's not as good as gone yet. Depends on whether another team blows his doors off. Giants can't possibly think losing Hank would be addition by subtraction and they likely don't think they can replace Hank adequately unless they sign another vet FA DT, and while that will be cheaper it won't be free. With that in mind the Giants will likely offer Hank more than the cheap vet fix route. Question is will it be enough. If not use that extra loot elsewhere. If they keep him, great, you have an embarrassment of riches in the DL. Worst case You're robbing Peter to pay Paul but Peter has more in the coffers to steal. The Giants DL can take a slight blow and still hum. But only a slight blow. Hopefully if they do lose Hank the guy they bring in can generate more interior pass rush.
What do you think Bennie Logan's market is? He'd be perfect next to Snacks.
I really like Logan as a player but he'd be a bit of a redundancy next to Harrison IMO. He's a 2 down run stuffer who doesn't generate much pass rush. As for his contract, if Hankins is in the 10 mill range I'd expect Logan to be in the neighborhood of 6 mill per but I'm obviously only guessing.
He is a bum,, period...
And he came off the field on passing downs.
I'm with Eric - I'd love to retain our homegrown talent but it just doesn't seem to add up. No cap? Fine, not my $$$, but it's hard to imagine them seeing the value in it.
Source?
Quote:
I just don't trust him. And rumor is he wants 10mil/yr. So that's out. If I hadn't seen that rumor i would have thought he would be available for around 5 mil making him an option.
Fairly is not a good option, I live in Lions country, no one wanted him resigned here a few years back. Lazy, etc
He actually had a pretty good year for the Saints. But yah its he time with the Lions that makes you worry. How do you give big money to someone that only turned it on in a contract year.
But he is a penetrating DT, which i think would be a good fit next to Harrison.
He's the late bloomer JPP of WR's
Quote:
others, not even close.
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor.
Explain.
Quote:
In comment 13382655 annexOPR said:
Quote:
others, not even close.
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor.
Explain.
You asking me to explain?
Let's hypothetically put Pryor on the NYG as the poster above says. Add in King and Lewis Jr for our 5 after Beckham and Shep.
Then let's look at Pittsburgh. Brown, Coates, Martavius Bryant, Heyward Bey, and Eli Rodgers. You think the NYG talent pool is better?
The number two receiver on that team is a running back. Sterling Shepard is absolutely better than Eli Rogers. So if the tipping point is Coates, then we're talking about a receiver who had fewer catches than Rashad Jennings.
Quote:
In comment 13382661 The_Boss said:
Quote:
In comment 13382655 annexOPR said:
Quote:
others, not even close.
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor.
Explain.
You asking me to explain?
Let's hypothetically put Pryor on the NYG as the poster above says. Add in King and Lewis Jr for our 5 after Beckham and Shep.
Then let's look at Pittsburgh. Brown, Coates, Martavius Bryant, Heyward Bey, and Eli Rodgers. You think the NYG talent pool is better?
Boss is right, no way Pryor makes our corps better than Pittsburgh, assuming Martavis Bryant is clean
Would upgrade our DL immensely for 2017
Quote:
In comment 13382771 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
In comment 13382661 The_Boss said:
Quote:
In comment 13382655 annexOPR said:
Quote:
others, not even close.
guess I'm higher on Pryor than some though ... and I love Shepard long term.
That's your opinion. Pittsburgh WR talent blows away the NYG talent, even with Pryor.
Explain.
You asking me to explain?
Let's hypothetically put Pryor on the NYG as the poster above says. Add in King and Lewis Jr for our 5 after Beckham and Shep.
Then let's look at Pittsburgh. Brown, Coates, Martavius Bryant, Heyward Bey, and Eli Rodgers. You think the NYG talent pool is better?
Boss is right, no way Pryor makes our corps better than Pittsburgh, assuming Martavis Bryant is clean
Now if we had an NFL caliber offensive line with Beckham/Shepard/Pryor, different story. Doesnt make much sense to have a bunch of weapons that Eli has no time to throw to
We can create cap room if we need it.
Eric, that's exactly how I feel. We keep "wasting" 2nd and 3rd round picks while training good young players for other organizations. I'd rather fiddle with the cap, keep Hankins, and have the luxury of filling other spots in the draft.
The argument that signing him precludes us from signing any other top FAs this year seems specious, because, as you suggest, the team can massage their cap figures for a few years while Eli is on his last legs. That's especially true since Eli's money is going to come off the books after two more offseasons.
Quote:
He's not as good as gone yet. Depends on whether another team blows his doors off. Giants can't possibly think losing Hank would be addition by subtraction and they likely don't think they can replace Hank adequately unless they sign another vet FA DT, and while that will be cheaper it won't be free. With that in mind the Giants will likely offer Hank more than the cheap vet fix route. Question is will it be enough. If not use that extra loot elsewhere. If they keep him, great, you have an embarrassment of riches in the DL. Worst case You're robbing Peter to pay Paul but Peter has more in the coffers to steal. The Giants DL can take a slight blow and still hum. But only a slight blow. Hopefully if they do lose Hank the guy they bring in can generate more interior pass rush.
What do you think Bennie Logan's market is? He'd be perfect next to Snacks.
No idea I'm honestly not too familiar with Logan. I just figure it's either gonna be hankins here on close to what he could get on the open market or a slightly less or slightly older option as a fall back. I want Hank back it's annoying watching all these developed nyg DTs going elsewhere but I kind of get it if he leaves. For all the talk of regretting the loss of Joseph and cofield did the Giants really truly miss those guys? How much better would the 2014-2015 Giants have been with Joseph here? The D would have been less terrible but still pretty terrible. And in some ways you could say that losing Joseph led to signing snacks.
Beckham, Pryor, Shepard >
If the league keeps adding ten million or more to the salary cap like it has the last four years and is supposed to do for the next three years, we're going to have to start thinking about the cap differently.
A good team will be able to keep its core together for a few years. If your best free agent is your fourth lineman, you can keep him (although not at any price).
Quote:
I will admit this is a pet peeve of mine. I don't think we should have let Cofield go. And I didn't think we should have let Linval Joseph go. When we do that, it feels like treading water.
We can create cap room if we need it.
Eric, that's exactly how I feel. We keep "wasting" 2nd and 3rd round picks while training good young players for other organizations. I'd rather fiddle with the cap, keep Hankins, and have the luxury of filling other spots in the draft.
The argument that signing him precludes us from signing any other top FAs this year seems specious, because, as you suggest, the team can massage their cap figures for a few years while Eli is on his last legs. That's especially true since Eli's money is going to come off the books after two more offseasons.
While I agree with this, Hankins is not the DT Coefield was or even in the same league as Joesph. They should have never been let to leave.
Quote:
And we need 2 Oline, Lber, DT, Rb, wr, TE...
We do not just have 14 million. We can always find money if we have to, not to mention I am more than confident JPP will have a deal signed by tomorrow. This will free up significant $'s.
Actually they don't, you are not accounting for the rookie contracts with that number. It's like that Aamco commercial
years ago, pay me now or pay me later.
Either way one slices it, that money for the rookies
is coming from the same pot of money.
In two months or less, they will have about 6 mill. less, and that includes benefits for the rookie contracts.
somewhere between 8-10 mill. a season. The DT's rotate every four years around here as Eric noted above.
I am not excited to see a Bromley start. JR can do what he generally does, lose one, draft another in the second round.