DT Dan Williams

too much sense.

Didn't follow him all that much the last few years..I'd be fine with him here if he hasn't declined significantly

?

Jerry!

In comment 13433313 Ira said:

Quote:

?

Hankins had a 47.1 grade from PFF
Link - ( New Window )

before siging any other FAs, but I'd be on board with him or Odrick.

Never seemed to be a fan of Big Hank

In comment 13433313 Ira said:

Quote:

?

For reference, other PFF grades
(take the PFF grades for what they are)

Hankins
2016: 47.1
2015: 80.9
2014: 85.9
2013: 79.5


Odrick
2016: 44.2
2015: 60.2
2014: 82.2
2013: 82.4
2012: 71.6
2011: 61.5
2010: 71.0

It does make sense and the Giants were very interested in Williams when he was a free agent a few years ago. I believe they even brought him in for a visit.

I also read something the other day, I believe it was Raanan, that did the team isn't necessarily looking for a slashing, penetrating DT to pair what Harrison, and they would be interested in another run stuffing DT like they had last year with Hankins.

Something to keep an eye on indeed.

What kind of salary was he due?

He signed a big contract, had a decent year, then the next year he showed up overweight and out-of-shape. Now he's cut and the Raiders have $4.5 million more they can throw at Marshawn Lynch.

.

The consensus seems to be that he showed up overweight and under-motivated last season. Would like to see how he would fare in a more disciplined environment.

Transmission still strong

Just needs an engine tuneup and this baby is good Togo another 32-48 games

off after a contract, hats good enough for me. No idea what he has left though.

Odrick' potential value is that he could play DE too. As a pure tackle, Williams probably is better.

DT seems to be an easy position to cut when teams are trying to find money to sign draft picks. Maybe some other DT talent will be cut loose between now and June 1 and the Giants can wait and see.

Bromley and Robert Thomas are both young and largely unproven. Williams' experience would be a useful addition to the rotation.

.

Williams, Marks and Odrick out there it makes too much sense to go grab one of these Vets. I'd rather not have to take a early pick on a DT because it is a need now with Hankins gone

We already have one of those. We need a 3T.

See my 7:01 post.

In comment 13433756 Vin_Cuccs said:

Quote:

See my 7:01 post.

I've been wondering this all offseason. Fans have been clamoring for a 3T, but it's not crazy to think that the Giants actively prefer two big bodied DTs in the center of the defense. Being a premier run-stopping unit does so many things for a defense - primarily giving you favorable down and distance on 2nd and 3rd down to make the opposing offense one-dimensional. That's where Spags' exotic blitz packages can wreak havoc on an offense. Of course, that comes at a price; it means that the defense is less likely to generate pass rush out of its base set, which sort of necessitates exotic pass rush strategy (either by way of NASCAR or blitz packages). But if you can't stop the run effectively, you'll just get carved up with play-action on 2nd and 3rd down anyway.

Obviously, there's a best of both worlds scenario that exists as well: find a penetrating 3T that is also a stout run defender. Those guys are few and far between and typically very expensive (and you really have to find them via the draft because they don't come up in FA very often). But given the either/or choice, doubling down on run-stoppers at DT can be a bit more cost-effective, and be a valuable cog in the overall defensive scheme.

In comment 13433700 Peppers said:

Quote:

We already have one of those. We need a 3T.

Counter argument is that our main division rival is built on a power running game and adding another run stuffer would help shut down the Dallas offense.

stuffing the run with ferocity has been a pleasure to watch and opens up the game for the rest of the 9 defenders. There's pros and cons to both but they atleast proved last year that the philosophy works in this system.

...going back to college. He's a guy that will play his best on a one year deal. So he might be a good shot term fit here. No way I would offer him a multi year deal. Ever. Even if he came in and played well. Stop gap signing.

In comment 13433862 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

stuffing the run with ferocity has been a pleasure to watch and opens up the game for the rest of the 9 defenders. There's pros and cons to both but they atleast proved last year that the philosophy works in this system.

Agreed.

In comment 13433865 Torrag said:

Quote:

...going back to college. He's a guy that will play his best on a one year deal. So he might be a good shot term fit here. No way I would offer him a multi year deal. Ever. Even if he came in and played well. Stop gap signing.

Usually not a fan of 1 year deals..In agreement here

We have a job opening for a 2-down run stuffer. Spags likes to get speed on the field in the subpackages and play odd fronts so finding a pass rushing 3T isn't as much a concern as finding a 3rd ER.

To me, Dan Williams is a perfect replacement for Hankins. He's exactly what we need to continue our effectiveness vs. DAL and hopefully add a pass rusher in the draft.

even moreso than Odrick, who I wouldn't mind here on a 2 year deal..So if Odrick is not in their plsns on a 2-3 year deal, DT for ONE YEAR, would be perfect as I see it. Draft a 3 tech

Bring him in on a "prove it" deal, and as BB56 said, draft another DT, perhaps one of these mid to late round gems Dave Te has been touting.

If they don't bring in a FA I expect they go DT much earlier.

In comment 13433822 giants#1 said:

Quote:

In comment 13433700 Peppers said: Quote: We already have one of those. We need a 3T. Counter argument is that our main division rival is built on a power running game and adding another run stuffer would help shut down the Dallas offense.

Suppose our main division rival in 2017 turns out to be Philly, not Dallas. Philly, which has gone to great lengths to upgrade their passing game.