Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

Whats going on with Hankins?

Pete from Woodstock : 3/15/2017 7:48 am
Good article from a few days ago, but has some good information in it...
Link - ( New Window )
HANKINS!!!  
Big Blue '56 : 3/15/2017 7:53 am : link
.
RE: HANKINS!!!  
Pete from Woodstock : 3/15/2017 8:14 am : link
YES!!!
Apparently the answer to this question is - nothing.  
jcn56 : 3/15/2017 8:17 am : link
Nothing is going on with Hankins, much to his agent's dismay.
Good for us  
Pete from Woodstock : 3/15/2017 8:22 am : link
I guess
who is Hankins  
DCPollaro : 3/15/2017 8:34 am : link
agent?? i couldnt find it
I think the Giants  
Doomster : 3/15/2017 8:43 am : link
may have to Pay that 17M to JPP...and Hankins is out....

Reese may not want to mortgage the future by restructuring other contracts, to stay out of cap hell...

The weakness of the defense is the back 7......we need a good linebacker(s), a backup corner, and either a FS or a backup FS...Hankins is not someone who is irreplaceable...

The sad part about this is, what if JPP has another year, where he puts up good totals(by clustering his sacks against weaker teams), and we go through this again?

I'm not sold on Scarlett until I see her in action at TE....Reese is going to have to be very lucky in the upcoming draft, to help this offense out....If Eli does not have the time, I don't care who he has for receivers....

Being a snow day yesterday, I had a chance to watch a lot of Giant game highlights, and Eli missed a lot more passes than I remembered.....he will be another year older

Doesn't seem like Hankins will be  
ZogZerg : 3/15/2017 8:48 am : link
signing with the Giants, given the cap situation.
Anyone ever think the Giants like  
Tuckrule : 3/15/2017 8:57 am : link
Robert Thomas. Only 26 years old 330 lbs 6 foot 3 may be just as good playing next to snacks as Hankins was. Surrounding Hankins with 3 pro bowlers may have made him look better and the NFL took notice
RE: Anyone ever think the Giants like  
BigBlueDownTheShore : 3/15/2017 9:05 am : link
In comment 13393630 Tuckrule said:
Quote:
Robert Thomas. Only 26 years old 330 lbs 6 foot 3 may be just as good playing next to snacks as Hankins was. Surrounding Hankins with 3 pro bowlers may have made him look better and the NFL took notice


I think that's why Hankins had a down year this year. He was surrounded by 3 pro bowl level talent, and there are only so many tackles that can go around. Snacks is a tackling machine, and probably took a ton of tackles away that Hankins would have had. Hankins is being used more as a space eater as is right now.
RE: RE: Anyone ever think the Giants like  
UConn4523 : 3/15/2017 9:11 am : link
In comment 13393637 BigBlueDownTheShore said:
Quote:
In comment 13393630 Tuckrule said:


Quote:


Robert Thomas. Only 26 years old 330 lbs 6 foot 3 may be just as good playing next to snacks as Hankins was. Surrounding Hankins with 3 pro bowlers may have made him look better and the NFL took notice



I think that's why Hankins had a down year this year. He was surrounded by 3 pro bowl level talent, and there are only so many tackles that can go around. Snacks is a tackling machine, and probably took a ton of tackles away that Hankins would have had. Hankins is being used more as a space eater as is right now.


Which is part of the reason why finding another space eater for a fraction of the price might be a wise move. That doesn't account for a Snacks injury, so it isn't a full-proof plan, but replacing Hankins role (maybe not the player) is much easier than replacing JPP's.
Lots of poeple said that Linval Joseph wasn't that good, that he  
Victor in CT : 3/15/2017 9:20 am : link
could easily be replaced. Took 2 years and a huge contract to get Snacks Harrison.
RE: RE: RE:  
BigBlueDownTheShore : 3/15/2017 9:20 am : link
In comment 13393648 UConn4523 said:
Quote:



Which is part of the reason why finding another space eater for a fraction of the price might be a wise move. That doesn't account for a Snacks injury, so it isn't a full-proof plan, but replacing Hankins role (maybe not the player) is much easier than replacing JPP's.


I also think that Hankins presence is a big reason why when JPP was injured, there wasn't a significant drop off in the run defense. Okwara wasn't a great pass rusher, but our run d was still stout and forced some 3rd and longs especially against the Cowboys.
I think you're all wrong.....  
grizz299 : 3/15/2017 9:22 am : link
This team is about matching up with Dallas. And Hankins is key to stopping their running game and blunting their super strong interior line.
One caveat: Losing Mo Cauthorn (sp?) and gaining a great WR in NY, may drop The Cowboys out of contention. Then Philly becomes the big threat and against a passing first team, Hankins may not be so critical.
What sweet words: "Cowboys drop out of contention"...Just don't see how they stop our passing attack...no corners, no pass rush.
RE: Lots of poeple said that Linval Joseph wasn't that good, that he  
UConn4523 : 3/15/2017 9:24 am : link
In comment 13393667 Victor in CT said:
Quote:
could easily be replaced. Took 2 years and a huge contract to get Snacks Harrison.


Linval was much better with the Vikings than with us, good for him. We also didn't have anyone to pair with him, so his loss naturally should have hurt more. If Snacks wasn't here this wouldn't be a question, but he is.
RE: I think you're all wrong.....  
UConn4523 : 3/15/2017 9:25 am : link
In comment 13393669 grizz299 said:
Quote:
This team is about matching up with Dallas. And Hankins is key to stopping their running game and blunting their super strong interior line.
One caveat: Losing Mo Cauthorn (sp?) and gaining a great WR in NY, may drop The Cowboys out of contention. Then Philly becomes the big threat and against a passing first team, Hankins may not be so critical.
What sweet words: "Cowboys drop out of contention"...Just don't see how they stop our passing attack...no corners, no pass rush.


What makes you think we won't be able to stop the run without Hankins?
Yeah,  
Brown Recluse : 3/15/2017 9:28 am : link
it isn't like we're losing our best defensive tackle.

I know Hankins is a fan favorite but, I really don't think his loss will be that great. You'd think someone like him would have had a more productive season playing on a line with three pro bowl caliber players. His rookie season is feeling more and more like a fluke, in terms of being the complete player we thought he might become. And perhaps the lack of interest from other teams bears that out as well. I don't mean to imply he isn't a good player. I just don't think he's irreplaceable.
I really like Hankins  
UConn4523 : 3/15/2017 9:32 am : link
he would definitely be a loss, but he's likely more valuable to someone else than he would be to us. We can't keep everyone and we are going to have to concede with some players leaving for better offers.
RE: Yeah,  
BigBlueDownTheShore : 3/15/2017 9:36 am : link
In comment 13393676 Brown Recluse said:
Quote:
it isn't like we're losing our best defensive tackle.

I know Hankins is a fan favorite but, I really don't think his loss will be that great. You'd think someone like him would have had a more productive season playing on a line with three pro bowl caliber players. His rookie season is feeling more and more like a fluke, in terms of being the complete player we thought he might become. And perhaps the lack of interest from other teams bears that out as well. I don't mean to imply he isn't a good player. I just don't think he's irreplaceable.


His role changed this year. You put him where Snacks was, his production would probably be better. Snacks is not built to be a space eater. He's playing a little out of position, but at the same time, he is doing what he needs to do there. Take up space, and let the other 3 wreck havoc.
Sen'Derrick Marks might be a good replacement.  
Brown Recluse : 3/15/2017 9:45 am : link
And given his age, he might be cheaper. I'd be more than satisfied if it worked out that way.
Doomster  
blueblood'11 : 3/15/2017 9:56 am : link
Did you watch the Giants at all last year. They had arguably the best secondary in the NFL. And the line backing wasn't too shabby either.
RE: Doomster  
UConn4523 : 3/15/2017 10:01 am : link
In comment 13393720 blueblood'11 said:
Quote:
Did you watch the Giants at all last year. They had arguably the best secondary in the NFL. And the line backing wasn't too shabby either.


There's so much wrong with his post that I can't even take it seriously. Potential best secondary in the league leb by 2 DMVP candidates in Collins and Jenkins...
UConn  
blueblood'11 : 3/15/2017 10:15 am : link
And they should even be stronger next year. The experience Adams got by virtue of Thompson getting hurt was invaluable. Thompson was ultra impressive until he got hurt. That will make them even deeper next year.
I think it might come down to this for the Giants  
NoGainDayne : 3/15/2017 10:41 am : link
who is more valuable to the team?

JT Thomas + Harris or Hankins

Looks like the market for Hankins is a one year deal.

This is a tough call all around. If the Giants pay JPP long term we can't afford Hankins, if we don't we can.

The problem is that i'm not sure the Giants and JPP will ever match on a long term deal. It seems like JPP just wants to get paid the most possible and not a reasonable deal. He doesn't want to price in his injury risk. He can say he's changed and has learned his lesson and all but the bottom line is that was one of the dumbest off the field moves of all time so that risk contains both on and off the field events. Both of which he is not immune to. Throw in the fact that we've even seen games and one year in particular that he's been healthy and not played up to his talents, seemingly based on effort.

I see two probable scenarios for this year if JPP plays under the franchise tag:

1. Has a season where he is healthy and is one of the best two way DEs in the league and asks for the moon. He will not price out his risks and some losing team with a lot of cap room will be willing to paid more than OV maybe significantly. So we will be left with two shitty options of the higher tag or letting him walk.

2. He has a season similar to last season, looking great when he's in and missing some time. Asks for an OV type deal again, and we are left again with two shitty options.

Honestly I think every player is motivated to some degree by compensation and then many other things. JPP stirkes me as someone who is in the higher percent tile of money prioritization. (I do not blame him for this, it is a brutal game) But it makes it tough when this occurs with an unreliable player that is unwilling to fairly price in their risks.

IMO it's the JPP situation that complicates the Hankins situation and it's hard to run the scenarios and come out with a clear answer on what to do. I'm not even addressing the pull back the tag crowd because despite everything I said there is no denying that JPP is a much more valuable commodity than Hankins in this league. (The market has clearly illustrated this)

I just keep hoping that JPP signs for something that prices in his risk like 5 for 70 with 35M guaranteed. I think you can handle Hankins for one year at that price (maybe you cut JT Thomas) gives us another year to see what Bromley has and maybe another draft pick
RE: Lots of poeple said that Linval Joseph wasn't that good, that he  
TMS : 3/15/2017 10:48 am : link
In comment 13393667 Victor in CT said:
Quote:
could easily be replaced. Took 2 years and a huge contract to get Snacks Harrison.
Agree with your logic. Then we spent a 3rd pick on Bromley to replace him but that has not worked out either. Looks like it could happen again and our run game may down the tubes as well.
We didn't have a Harrison  
UConn4523 : 3/15/2017 10:59 am : link
when we had Linval, I really don't get the comparison other then the Giants letting a DT go for more than they are willing to pay (if that's what happens with Hankins).
RE: I think the Giants  
Moose and Fury : 3/15/2017 11:00 am : link
In comment 13393618 Doomster said:
Quote:
may have to Pay that 17M to JPP...and Hankins is out....

Reese may not want to mortgage the future by restructuring other contracts, to stay out of cap hell...

The weakness of the defense is the back 7......we need a good linebacker(s), a backup corner, and either a FS or a backup FS...Hankins is not someone who is irreplaceable...

The sad part about this is, what if JPP has another year, where he puts up good totals(by clustering his sacks against weaker teams), and we go through this again?

I'm not sold on Scarlett until I see her in action at TE....Reese is going to have to be very lucky in the upcoming draft, to help this offense out....If Eli does not have the time, I don't care who he has for receivers....

Being a snow day yesterday, I had a chance to watch a lot of Giant game highlights, and Eli missed a lot more passes than I remembered.....he will be another year older


Agreed with a couple other posters...weakness back 7? WTF? You could say LB's but definitely don't lump secondary into there. Our secondary was probably our best unit and should only get better in the 2nd year of the system, Apple making a year 1 to year 2 jump, DT back, etc. We aren't losing any core guys there.
RE: We didn't have a Harrison  
jcn56 : 3/15/2017 11:09 am : link
In comment 13393820 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
when we had Linval, I really don't get the comparison other then the Giants letting a DT go for more than they are willing to pay (if that's what happens with Hankins).


It's for people with short term memories. Joseph walked in a year where we were getting ready to pay for a bunch of playmakers on O (who subsequently were injured, one right after signing his deal). We had Hankins waiting in the wings, and he wasn't far off where Joseph was.

What people don't remember - Joseph wasn't as good here. It's something he himself has attributed to coaching (apparently, the Vikings defensive staff told him to change his stance). Combine that with better talent around him, and Joseph now looks like the one that got away.

Oddly enough, something similar was happening with Hankins. Prior to FA, he was the guy that much of BBI didn't care to pay. Sure enough, once he's linked to one team or another, it's "Oh no, we're going to lose Hankins!'.

Can't keep everyone. They kept JPP at a premium because it's harder to replace a pass rushing DE. For all we know, the Giants might not want a long term contract, they might figure that JPP isn't worth the money longer term, but that for one year as a bandaid he'd suffice, giving them time to draft a replacement and more money in FA next season.
Hankins gets no push up the middle  
Kevin(formerly Tiki4Six) : 3/15/2017 11:36 am : link
anymore like he did in 2014... I saw a lot of standing around while the other 3 Lineman made the play.

He also came in over weight this season.

In the end they must have some kind of deal once JPP signs, why would he not take any visits?? Im sure there are teams that want to take a look at him.
Doomster  
LakeGeorgeGiant : 3/15/2017 11:37 am : link
You seriously say some dumb shit sometimes. :)

The secondary is a strength. They need some depth beyond the top 3 CBs, but it's far from a weakness.
Hankins Visits  
Samiam : 3/15/2017 11:59 am : link
Has he visited any teams? I don't remember seeing any. I only saw references to interest by the Browns and Broncos . Nothing dunce then
Linval Joseph was nowhere near the player he turned into  
Ten Ton Hammer : 3/15/2017 12:36 pm : link
In Minnesota.

However you want to explain it, there was no reason to get into a bidding war at the offer he got from the vikings.


That said, you can learn from that experience with a player like Hankins who is still super young. And they have. They want to keep him.
There's a surprising lot of sentiment out there that the Giants  
SB 42 and 46 and ? : 3/15/2017 12:57 pm : link
should let Hankins go.

1) Having two run-stuffing DTs is redundant.

2) Hankins doesn't play as well further from the ball. Is an ideal nose tackle.

3) The draft is deep in tackles and the Giants can pick up a DT who is a good pass rusher.

Some feel that Hankins might want to leave the Giants because he won't want to be the forgotten fourth man on a line full of All Pros.

Makes some sense. The best reason for keeping Hanklin is that they shouldn't tamper with a combination that was so effective last season. It may seem logical that Harrison made Hankins less effective, but do we really know for a fact that maybe Hankins made Harrison look better.
I'm hopefull  
giantgiantfan : 3/15/2017 1:16 pm : link
Hankins signs a one year deal for 5 million or maybe we can get him in a 5 year / 20 million guaranteed. Three reasons I want him back.

1. Continuity
2. If Snacks gets injured Hankins can slide over and the defense will still be good against the run.
3. Maybe he develops in a penetrating DT, especially in a contract year (if its a 1 year prove it).

The 4 mil per year still puts him in the top 20 at his position with an average guaranteed per year right there with Hankins. Throw in some incentives and stuff to sweeten the deal.
I'd like to stress  
giantgiantfan : 3/15/2017 1:21 pm : link
if Snacks were to go down without Hankins, your line looks like JPP - Bromley - Thomas - OV. Two guys who have proven nothing up the gut.

Whether or not Hankins is resigned, the Giants need to get a DT which will likely be some journey man or a draft pick.
Back to the Corner