The same website has Hankins and Harrison each starting all 16 games. Bromley appeared in 15 with no starts, and Thomas appeared in 8, with no starts. Now, maybe they're wrong, but if they are, in which game (or games) did Thomas replace Hankins in the starting lineup?
Wait. Junk was off again? Making shit up you say? I don't buy it.
The same website has Hankins and Harrison each starting all 16 games. Bromley appeared in 15 with no starts, and Thomas appeared in 8, with no starts. Now, maybe they're wrong, but if they are, in which game (or games) did Thomas replace Hankins in the starting lineup?
Wait. Junk was off again? Making shit up you say? I don't buy it.
@Patricia_Traina 10m10 minutes ago
More
A name to keep an eye on in the draft: Chris Wormley.
That's been the MO with JR, when they lose one,
draft one in 2nd....I am glad the mystery is over, I thought
Hank would get about 12 mill. GTD., if the Giants kept him.
I don't think I would have went as high as Indy did on AAV.
Gives him enough money over the next three years to be set for life and another chance to cash in since its relatively short term and he is still young. Good for him but we will be fine, maybe better off if his replacement is a pass rushing DT.
He out with an unannounced illness the first half of the year.
When he returned, he leap-frogged Bromley when both were healthy.
These aren't really debatable or controversial statements. All you have to do is pay attention.
No, all you have to do is know how to do simple math.
In the final eight games of the season, Bromley averaged 15.7 defensive snaps per game. Thomas averaged 8.5.
As for Thomas being the first DT off the bench, maybe he was, but considering your track record, forgive me for doubting you (Ha! Doubting Thomas!) Once again, your penchant for making claims that are impossible to prove or disprove (without going back and watching the eight games in which both played) rears its ugly head.
Regardless, Thomas clearly spent more time on the bench than Bromley did, and the stats also show that when Bromley was in he was much more productive than Thomas.
We have to be careful with that stat if Bromley played more games because Thomas was injured and then both players annual play totals were divided by 16.
Imho, i hope we get a DT that helps us stop the run game of Dallas ( we often have to get by them at least one time in the regular season) and then getting more pass rush out of a drafted LB or Safety or CB or third DE
We have to be careful with that stat if Bromley played more games because Thomas was injured and then both players annual play totals were divided by 16.
Imho, i hope we get a DT that helps us stop the run game of Dallas ( we often have to get by them at least one time in the regular season) and then getting more pass rush out of a drafted LB or Safety or CB or third DE
Bill, Thomas missed the first five games with his illness, but he was a healthy scratch in three of the next eleven games - LA, CHI, DET. Bromley did not get in the Cleveland game. Regardless, there's no evidence - at least none that junc provided - that Thomas was the first DT off the bench, which was his first claim - or that Thomas started in place of Hankins, his second, even more dubious claim.
That said, I agree with the 'he's a good not great DT' comment and was almost already bulked up to a NT(which I thought actually hurt his rush ability).
Does this take Njoku out as a likely #23 if he was available, or might there be one at #55 that is decent to swing with Odrick? Bromley, and Thomas?
per game and per carry are being given up, and then this really bright guy named Hindsight will tell us whether Reese made the right call or not.
I have this feeling that when we get a close look at his contract we'll find that if you take away the incentives and conditions that he has to meet, there won't be much difference between the two contract offers.
RE: Halfway through next season we'll look at the average yards Â
Prior to 2016 Odrick had started in 80+ consecutive games(5+ seasons) and averaged 5+ sacks from the DT position in four of those.
So contrary to your opinion he was both durable and productive. He isn't a 'star' player but that's what Snacks is for. To make other guys better.
Now no one, at least not me, is saying pay the man 'whatever it takes' to sign him or any craziness. But if the contract is palatable he'd be a solid add to this defense.
Not sure where your numbers are coming from, but he hadnt started 80 consecutive games prior to last year. He missed 5 starts in '13, 4 in '12,, and 9 in '11. Throughout 2011-2015 he averaged over just 4 sacks a year and half of those came in 2011 and 2012. He has 7.5 in his last 38 starts. He's also now coming off shoulder surgery. He's not awful but he's not Hankins, either. He's just a guy and IMO not really worth signing. I'd rather let the current depth and a rookie do the jobs than a soon to be 30 year old with an injury history who is looking for hisn3rd team in 4 years.
the gentlemen w the bright ideas that Hankins 3 sacks and overall play was mediocre you are off. Don't look at his sacks. He did a decent job collapsing the pocket and is really really good against the run. He is way above mediocre. That being said, we couldn't pay another d lineman big money. We almost had him at 7 mil a year. As far as Hankins decision.... That's tough. 7 mil vs 10 mil a year. I think slightly more guaranteed. NFL careers are short man. I can't blame him but I do think he will regret it.
Hankins couldn't sniff linval Joseph's jock? Linvall is awesome but hank was really good. Line am better but hank certainly in jock sniffing range. Lol. How about having some respect for a good giant who was a near all pro and not relegate him to jock sniffing, or in the one posters poor disrespectful choice of words, non jock sniffing talent. Good luck hank. You should have stayed here. Not easy to replacev
The Colts aren't in the business of throwing away money so I'm not going to claim he is a JAG (I said that before and got hammered). He is being paid like a "plus player" and that's probably what he is, although my guess is that he comes under the heading of "ascending player" (which is what the Giants referred to William Beatty as when they gave him the big contract). He is young and has talent so the potential is there. It's a different kind of potential than a rookie's potential (because the baseline is higher), but it's still very much about the expectation of continued improvement.
But that potential was something for the Colts to gamble on, not the Giants. Unlike the Colts, the Giants have a strong DL even without him and didn't need to gamble "veteran dollars" on potential. They can pursue the cheaper variety that comes from the draft pool.
I'm happy for Hankins and happy for the Giants because I think the cap room that would've been devoted to him is best served in other places. The downside is that it means using a draft pick to replace him, probably somewhere between rounds 2 through 4, and with only a few names in the mix (Adams, J.Johnson, Kpassagnon, Tomlinson) they may come out of it empty handed.
As for a free agent replacement, I think they should go the veteran minimum route. Some 30+ year old whose better days are behind him but still has enough left in the tank to take advantage of his years of experience and be an asset, not a liability. Like Leon Hall last year.
RE: RE: RE: Well, there goes another DT that the Giants didn't sign to a second Â
contract?! All of the guys that we didn't re-sign were all pretty darn good, as well (Joseph, Coefield, and now Hankins). At least Reese has been damn good at picking DTs, 2nd round and later. Let's just hope that continues as we need another starter now alongside Snacks. I don't have confidence in Bromley starting?! For depth he's fine IMO.
You can add Cornelius Griffin to the list.
Look I am not a huge Reese fan, but not resigning Hankins for 10M @ season is smart on his part
I agree with you. I don't see it as a criticism of Jerry so much as pointing out a pattern. As a GM you have to know when a deal has the potential to create unfavorable cap situations in the future, and certainly don't want to overpay on a position that you've proven repeatedly can be replaced with equal talent. Its kinda of like what the Pats do, only the Pats do it on a much bigger scale.
the Giants didn't see Hankins as much of a core player to bring back after his rookie deal. They placed a value on him, made him and offer and basically said take it or leave it for something better. It's the same situation that they did with Cofield and Lindval Joseph. Like it or not, Bromley was always drafted with the eye towards being in position to replace Hankins if he didn't come back. Factor in that Snacks is one of the most dominant DTs in the NFL, Hankins value further slipped for the Giants and also made teams question Hankins' true impact with the players around him.
I wanted him to come back, but the Giants overall depth on the DL will cover for his loss. I'd imagine the Giants will sign a veteran stopgap guy and draft a DT while giving Bromley and Robert Thomas snaps.
I don't think this is as big a loss as Joseph. But it's a loss.
I agree. I just hope it's not a loss we end up regretting as much as Joseph. I remember the Giants gave BBI a lot of reasons to bitch about letting Joseph walk a year after Reese let him go.
You can't keep everyone and it's not like the giants just threw the guy away without trying. Hankins has been a good to very good player here late in his rookie season through 2016. Anyone saying he's mediocre is crazy. He's a true pro DT capable of greatness but likely is what he is at this point.
I think we would miss Robinson more even though hank got the bigger and longer payday.
Did anyone seriously think the Giants were going to pay their 4 starting defensive linemen 10-17 million dollars a year long term?
2017 cap hits
Vernon at 16
JPP at 7.2, (jumps to 17.5m in 2018)
Harrison at 10.6
It was always a 50/50 proposition at best that he'd be back, and his agent ended up getting what he wanted in the end. You can't keep all your players. It's exactly what the salary cap was meant to do.
the Giants got solid DT help by rotating in some ex-Eagle older DT veterans and that worked pretty well. After the draft they probably will sign at least 1 veteran run stuffer.
Wait. Junk was off again? Making shit up you say? I don't buy it.
Quote:
The same website has Hankins and Harrison each starting all 16 games. Bromley appeared in 15 with no starts, and Thomas appeared in 8, with no starts. Now, maybe they're wrong, but if they are, in which game (or games) did Thomas replace Hankins in the starting lineup?
Wait. Junk was off again? Making shit up you say? I don't buy it.
As incredible as it sounds, B, I think he was.
lol
More
A name to keep an eye on in the draft: Chris Wormley.
That's been the MO with JR, when they lose one,
draft one in 2nd....I am glad the mystery is over, I thought
Hank would get about 12 mill. GTD., if the Giants kept him.
I don't think I would have went as high as Indy did on AAV.
I would sign one on the cheap now, and draft one.
2. Caleb Brantley, Florida
3. Malik McDowell, Michigan State
4. Larry Ogunjobi, Charlotte
5. Chris Wormley, Michigan
He out with an unannounced illness the first half of the year.
When he returned, he leap-frogged Bromley when both were healthy.
These aren't really debatable or controversial statements. All you have to do is pay attention.
He out with an unannounced illness the first half of the year.
When he returned, he leap-frogged Bromley when both were healthy.
These aren't really debatable or controversial statements. All you have to do is pay attention.
You should really have statistics to back up your argument. Your credibility is rather low around here
He out with an unannounced illness the first half of the year.
When he returned, he leap-frogged Bromley when both were healthy.
These aren't really debatable or controversial statements. All you have to do is pay attention.
No, all you have to do is know how to do simple math.
In the final eight games of the season, Bromley averaged 15.7 defensive snaps per game. Thomas averaged 8.5.
As for Thomas being the first DT off the bench, maybe he was, but considering your track record, forgive me for doubting you (Ha! Doubting Thomas!) Once again, your penchant for making claims that are impossible to prove or disprove (without going back and watching the eight games in which both played) rears its ugly head.
Regardless, Thomas clearly spent more time on the bench than Bromley did, and the stats also show that when Bromley was in he was much more productive than Thomas.
The numbers don't lie. As for you, well...
Imho, i hope we get a DT that helps us stop the run game of Dallas ( we often have to get by them at least one time in the regular season) and then getting more pass rush out of a drafted LB or Safety or CB or third DE
So if Thomas got more snaps than him late in teh season - it is pure bullshit.
By the way, anyone else find the irony in Thomas making up shit about Thomas?
Not only are they debatable or controversial, they are false.
He out with an unannounced illness the first half of the year.
When he returned, he leap-frogged Bromley when both were healthy.
These aren't really debatable or controversial statements. All you have to do is pay attention.
You are eternally full of shit.
Imho, i hope we get a DT that helps us stop the run game of Dallas ( we often have to get by them at least one time in the regular season) and then getting more pass rush out of a drafted LB or Safety or CB or third DE
Bill, Thomas missed the first five games with his illness, but he was a healthy scratch in three of the next eleven games - LA, CHI, DET. Bromley did not get in the Cleveland game. Regardless, there's no evidence - at least none that junc provided - that Thomas was the first DT off the bench, which was his first claim - or that Thomas started in place of Hankins, his second, even more dubious claim.
Does this take Njoku out as a likely #23 if he was available, or might there be one at #55 that is decent to swing with Odrick? Bromley, and Thomas?
I have this feeling that when we get a close look at his contract we'll find that if you take away the incentives and conditions that he has to meet, there won't be much difference between the two contract offers.
Exactly... I think some people forget how bad we were against the run not too long ago. If we cannot stop the run, we are dead.... period
I hope Bromley can be a great NASCAR​ 4th.....we get a great edge rusher and JPP moves inside.....
Does Snacks stay on the field on 3rd?
So contrary to your opinion he was both durable and productive. He isn't a 'star' player but that's what Snacks is for. To make other guys better.
Now no one, at least not me, is saying pay the man 'whatever it takes' to sign him or any craziness. But if the contract is palatable he'd be a solid add to this defense.
Not sure where your numbers are coming from, but he hadnt started 80 consecutive games prior to last year. He missed 5 starts in '13, 4 in '12,, and 9 in '11. Throughout 2011-2015 he averaged over just 4 sacks a year and half of those came in 2011 and 2012. He has 7.5 in his last 38 starts. He's also now coming off shoulder surgery. He's not awful but he's not Hankins, either. He's just a guy and IMO not really worth signing. I'd rather let the current depth and a rookie do the jobs than a soon to be 30 year old with an injury history who is looking for hisn3rd team in 4 years.
Hankins couldn't sniff linval Joseph's jock? Linvall is awesome but hank was really good. Line am better but hank certainly in jock sniffing range. Lol. How about having some respect for a good giant who was a near all pro and not relegate him to jock sniffing, or in the one posters poor disrespectful choice of words, non jock sniffing talent. Good luck hank. You should have stayed here. Not easy to replacev
But that potential was something for the Colts to gamble on, not the Giants. Unlike the Colts, the Giants have a strong DL even without him and didn't need to gamble "veteran dollars" on potential. They can pursue the cheaper variety that comes from the draft pool.
I'm happy for Hankins and happy for the Giants because I think the cap room that would've been devoted to him is best served in other places. The downside is that it means using a draft pick to replace him, probably somewhere between rounds 2 through 4, and with only a few names in the mix (Adams, J.Johnson, Kpassagnon, Tomlinson) they may come out of it empty handed.
As for a free agent replacement, I think they should go the veteran minimum route. Some 30+ year old whose better days are behind him but still has enough left in the tank to take advantage of his years of experience and be an asset, not a liability. Like Leon Hall last year.
Quote:
In comment 13427171 Simms11 said:
Quote:
contract?! All of the guys that we didn't re-sign were all pretty darn good, as well (Joseph, Coefield, and now Hankins). At least Reese has been damn good at picking DTs, 2nd round and later. Let's just hope that continues as we need another starter now alongside Snacks. I don't have confidence in Bromley starting?! For depth he's fine IMO.
You can add Cornelius Griffin to the list.
Look I am not a huge Reese fan, but not resigning Hankins for 10M @ season is smart on his part
Quote:
the Giants didn't see Hankins as much of a core player to bring back after his rookie deal. They placed a value on him, made him and offer and basically said take it or leave it for something better. It's the same situation that they did with Cofield and Lindval Joseph. Like it or not, Bromley was always drafted with the eye towards being in position to replace Hankins if he didn't come back. Factor in that Snacks is one of the most dominant DTs in the NFL, Hankins value further slipped for the Giants and also made teams question Hankins' true impact with the players around him.
I wanted him to come back, but the Giants overall depth on the DL will cover for his loss. I'd imagine the Giants will sign a veteran stopgap guy and draft a DT while giving Bromley and Robert Thomas snaps.
I don't think this is as big a loss as Joseph. But it's a loss.
I agree. I just hope it's not a loss we end up regretting as much as Joseph. I remember the Giants gave BBI a lot of reasons to bitch about letting Joseph walk a year after Reese let him go.
I think we would miss Robinson more even though hank got the bigger and longer payday.
Need a vet DT.
2017 cap hits
Vernon at 16
JPP at 7.2, (jumps to 17.5m in 2018)
Harrison at 10.6
It was always a 50/50 proposition at best that he'd be back, and his agent ended up getting what he wanted in the end. You can't keep all your players. It's exactly what the salary cap was meant to do.