A case for the value Williams brings

"This is a first round impactful player in his mid 20’s, the 3 rd and 4 th pick next season were no sure thing to garner his kind of value"

But this isn't the debate. They still have to pay him the same amount in FA to sign him. He's not taking a discount because the Giants trading for him.

that when the Giants bring a real edge rusher in, and the Defensive line with Williams starts obliterating our opponents because they have some horses teaming up with them, that those of you who are panning this move, and saying that players like WIlliams are a dime a dozen, easily obtained, and not worth the money, will step up and admit how badly you evaluated this.

WIlliams is not just a space eater. He is an upper tier Defensive lineman. He performed consistently and impactfully in a defensive scheme that was over the heads of the entire defense, and as part of a very badly coached unit. He also came from a very suspect Jets defensive scheme, with equally bad coaching.

You guys are not seeing the forest for the trees. One of the things this Giants FO can do and has been able to do fairly consistently (with the exception of Marvin Austin, and I maintain his issue was in his head and not about his talent) is identify and bring in really good Defensive Tackles. But their good ones have all been either 1's or 2's in the draft. They will save using a 1 or a 2 in the draft to get another player of WIlliams ability and will be able to use those picks on other areas of need and hopefully bring in an upper echelon player in each instance.

There are not a plethora of really good DTs across the league, and even rarer are above average DTs drafted in the 3rd or lower rounds.

I want to also remind you that the arguments you are advancing about Williams were same arguments being made when Linval Joseph's rookie contract ended. The Giants let him go and he has only been one of the most impactful DTs in the league since then. I was among those that thought we should let Joseph walk instead of pay him elite DT money. Boy was that a bad move.

We replaced Linval with Snacks, which at first blush seemed like a great move. Snacks, however, was not the leader we needed. He demurred, and his attitude in this regard sucked. By all accounts Williams is a leader, with a great mentality to go along with his talent. This talent was fully on display during his Giants tenure, as was his attitude.

I know that none of this will persuade those of you who have dug your heels in on this one. You have invested yourselves in panning this move. I am going on record as endorsing the Giants retaining Williams and bringing in a premier ER and an above average LB. They do this and the CBs grow up and Peppers plays to his potential - and the Giants Defense will be restored.

The Giants need to have a fearsome defense again. That is Giants football. A player like Williams takes you a step closer to this imo. Bring in the Defensive horses baby. That's what I'm talking about

Joseph went off to Minny and overachieved - and the first thing he credited it to was improved coaching from Minny that helped him improve his stance and technique.

The mere fact that you need to add more resources around Williams to see his value should be enough to convince you he won't be worth anywhere near what he expects to get paid. The cherry on that sundae is that the non-competitive Giants lit a 3rd and 4th round pick on fire to get a trial of his services.

Calling the Jets poorly coached and run is funny when you consider where the finger is being pointed from. Bowles wasn't a bad defensive coach, and neither is Gregg Williams.

In comment 14780153 arniefez said:

Quote:

I'll guess the Giants pay Williams 13 million a year for 4 years with about 35 million guaranteed. Of course it could be more. The two draft picks will make about a million each for four years. So Williams costs 35 million and the two draft picks over 3 years cost 6 million. about 6 times not 20 times for both about 12 times for each.

If we ink LW for $13M/yr then LW is represented by the worst agent(s) in the NFL.

Williams is part of a scheme flexible unit with all season long rotation based staying power as a unit.

We agree that he will get more from one of 32 teams than that floor and ceiling was worth in the past. In the past. But not after $1.5B can be spent chasing the non star players who teams will not sign.

We agree that without the threat of a franchise tag we would have to spend more to get him

Using the same money for other hope to be available to us FA is of course debatable and sounds very good if other better players do in fact in the future become available to us at reasonable pay for performance ratios ( in the going forward FA priced market...they all will be over priced compared to past pay for performance ratios. )

None of us think a league with David Tepper's in it is going to stop with just overpaying coaches?

To me, as the time comes closer its hard to call the best option forward. Depends on what we can get him for. I sure hope we have self imposed or org imposed limits for a very good, but not essential, path forward.

I like Eric Li's suggestion. Sign Tomlinson longer term to remove the threat of him getting ridiculous FA money and franchise LW into a reasonable contract. That path minimizes team future risk while exerting as much downward pressure as we can given the past situation the trade put us in

In comment 14780181 Eric on Li said:

Quote:

In comment 14780155 Thegratefulhead said: Quote: In comment 14780144 Eric on Li said: Quote: is it better to have overpaid and kept the picks or a more reasonable contract and no picks? If either was a guaranteed outcome it would be easier to say, but since neither is it would seem "wait and see" is probably the best approach. They certainly rolled the dice but it's also not out of the question that Williams is a player worthy of rolling the dice on. What evidence do you possess that says we will sign him for less because we traded for him? I can point to quote of William's that says no discount. What is your supporting evidence to your claim? I have no idea what we will sign him for, but I can all but guarantee a 1 year tag will be less years and less total guarantee than whatever he or any other comparable FA will receive on open market - which is why that's been my preferred option since the day the trade happened. What % of UFA contracts end up with dead money at some point? 99.9%? The nature of UFA is that anyone in demand gets close to the top dollar for their position on a 4-6 year deal even if they aren't an elite player (as Solder and Vernon both did). That may still be what the extension price for Williams is long term, but by tagging him we can get him on the field without necessarily being the team to give him that. I doubt we do this but if we wanted to I believe we could tag him both this year and next, getting him on 2 low risk short term deals, and then let him walk via UFA and probably get back a comp pick on top of the 2.5 years on the field (and ZERO dead money).

you want to pay that for LW?
Franchise tag for DE - ( New Window )

Are the Giants going to pay him like an interior DL, or like a DE?

Also, I'll repeat what I said on the other thread: where is the proof that Williams was a big difference maker? The Giants conceded 30+ points in 5 of the 8 games Williams played. And when Dallas (172 yards) and Philly (Boston Scott 4 TDs in 2 games) wanted to run the ball against us, they did so easily.

If we're going to pay someone $15-$18M, I would think the case for the player would be obvious. But as far as I can tell the case doesn't go much past the support staff saying the juice was worth the squeeze.

Eric on LI

In comment 14780220 jcn56 said:

Quote:

Joseph went off to Minny and overachieved - and the first thing he credited it to was improved coaching from Minny that helped him improve his stance and technique. The mere fact that you need to add more resources around Williams to see his value should be enough to convince you he won't be worth anywhere near what he expects to get paid. The cherry on that sundae is that the non-competitive Giants lit a 3rd and 4th round pick on fire to get a trial of his services. Calling the Jets poorly coached and run is funny when you consider where the finger is being pointed from. Bowles wasn't a bad defensive coach, and neither is Gregg Williams.

and Jonathan Hankins was a #2 pick in the draft -- a 3 & 4 in the following year does not equal the value of a #2 pick. Greg William's coaching style requires aggressive maverick's. I don't think it's a style that plays well anymore -- and the Jets had a horribly inconsistent team last year -- on both sides of the ball.

give up on someone with his talent and at his age. You create a winning culture with coaching and adding talent. Now don't blast me when I say this because I am not comparing LW to LT. But I am comparing the situation. LT's great talent was further enhanced with coaching (Parcells and Belichick), culture, and teammates most importantly team captain Harry Carson and other Lb's added

In comment 14780235 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Are the Giants going to pay him like an interior DL, or like a DE? Also, I'll repeat what I said on the other thread: where is the proof that Williams was a big difference maker? The Giants conceded 30+ points in 5 of the 8 games Williams played. And when Dallas (172 yards) and Philly (Boston Scott 4 TDs in 2 games) wanted to run the ball against us, they did so easily. If we're going to pay someone $15-$18M, I would think the case for the player would be obvious. But as far as I can tell the case doesn't go much past the support staff saying the juice was worth the squeeze.

LW will be viewed as a DT. And that's for the best because the projected conservative FT tags - and these are fluid - are $16M+ for DTs and $19M+ for DE.

The best move right now is this - eat the loss of the draft picks for LW. And don't sign him. Hard lesson learned.

And use $16-19M that would have been used for LW on more pressing needs.

what was LW's salary this past season? How many people thought that was a bad deal when the Jets picked up that option? When he hit the trade market there were clearly teams out there who didn't think his salary was under water.

The NYG are going to have almost $100m free to spend this year. Mara said they aren't going overboard with FA like they did in 2016. A low risk 1 year deal at a fractionally higher AAV as last year seems like a great use of that present day flexibility to defer future risk since the main alternative it would prohibit would be bigger/riskier long term UFAs.

And there will still be plenty of room to make an abundance of mid-level value signings we all want more of (like Golden last year).

I have never been one of the pessimists on the Williams trade. If the point of this rebuild is to start with solidifying both lines, Williams is a key to doing just that.

In comment 14780238 gidiefor said:

Quote:

and Jonathan Hankins was a #2 pick in the draft -- a 3 & 4 in the following year does not equal the value of a #2 pick. Greg William's coaching style requires aggressive maverick's. I don't think it's a style that plays well anymore -- and the Jets had a horribly inconsistent team last year -- on both sides of the ball.

Not sure what you mean - a 2nd rounder doesn't equate to a 3rd and a 4th? This is a FREE AGENT we're talking about. They didn't just trade the 3rd and 4th rounder to get a couple of years of Williams, just half a season before he hit FA.

Say what you want about the Jets consistency (which lately, the Giants could only dream about unfortunately). Both Bowles and Williams are good defensive coaches - they have coached some very aggressive and productive defenses, particularly interior linemen.

One couldn't get much out of LW, the other decided he wanted him gone.

And now the Giants traded 2 picks and the discussion is whether they should compound that mistake by paying him edge rusher money for being a good run stopper who hasn't lived up to his potential of possibly more.

The best argument on this thread is that the Giants like a lot of the league are going to have a lot of money to throw around, so there'll be plenty to burn. And even in that case, I'd rather see them retain more, second tier FAs to bolster some really shitty positions on the roster than throw $18M at Williams. I'd rather pay $18M to Golden to be honest. If we're going to burn money, burn it on an edge rusher who has at least proven himself before.

the latest narrative??

Quote:

If we're going to pay someone $15-$18M, I would think the case for the player would be obvious. But as far as I can tell the case doesn't go much past the support staff saying the juice was worth the squeeze.

References to support staff? Fuck us all.

start with whatever round number you want for their total cap space. Let's say 80m.

Who are you looking to add with the full $80m, that you can't get with the $60m you'd have available after tagging LW?

Also i'm not being snarky, it's an honest question bc from my POV in either scenario you can add 5+ guys on 1 year deals at a higher AAV than Markus Golden got last year and still only be half way there. Or 2 or 3 bigger level signings like Conklin or Schobert (depending on how they structure year 1 #).

So if you like Williams at all as a player and think there's a better chance our own spending would cancel a comp pick next year vs. this year, it seems like a no brainer to tag. I don't see what he prohibits other than just having more cap room itself.

In comment 14780266 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

the latest narrative?? Quote: If we're going to pay someone $15-$18M, I would think the case for the player would be obvious. But as far as I can tell the case doesn't go much past the support staff saying the juice was worth the squeeze. References to support staff? Fuck us all.

If there's a narrative being spun, it's that Leonard Williams was a big difference maker worth paying premium money. Shit, Gettleman himself had to spin the justification for the trade repeatedly at his press conference.

It doesn't matter, the Williams signing was a foregone conclusion when the trade was made. If they don't sign him how does Gettleman look?

don't sign him, I guess we'll have to blame the support staff....

you make it sound like the Williams signing being a foregone conclusion is a negative.

Wasn't another foregone conclusion that Garrett would be the HC next year?

a poster told me that Golden is overrated despite what his stats say. But LW is underrated despite what his stats say.

You really can't make it up around here anymore.

Golden had double digit sacks with no complimentary help and he had nearly 20 tackles for loss, which led the team. He also 72 total tackles. Recovered a fumble.

Meanwhile, LW's combined Jets/Giants stats for the year equated to .5 sack, 3.5 tackles for loss, 3 passes defended, 46 total tackles. One forced fumble, no fumbles recovered.

Hey, but at least LW almost got to the QB...

In comment 14780276 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

don't sign him, I guess we'll have to blame the support staff....

Yes we would - for throwing away two draft picks.

See, that's how ridiculous the trade was - it put the Giants in a lose-lose situation. Now we're just stuck hoping for the less shitty option.

In comment 14780258 jcn56 said:

Quote:

Not sure what you mean - a 2nd rounder doesn't equate to a 3rd and a 4th?

I would think it would be obvious that what I mean is that instead of spending a 1rst or a 2nd round pick on a potentially comparable DT talent - the opportunity to have dibs on LW was purchased for a 3rd round pick this coming draft and a 4th round pick in a following year (and btw also returnable for a 3rd rd comp pick in the following year if not signed instead of losing 3rd rd comp pick capital if signed as a FA).

I also maintain and will continue to maintain that the grade on LW should be equal to the talent expected of a first round pick, for which opportunity the acquisition was purchased for the expenditure of much lesser draft capital. Those of you who don't like that comparison and are so anxious to spend this capital on more mid level talent I am going to continue to take issue with.

In comment 14780277 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

you make it sound like the Williams signing being a foregone conclusion is a negative. Wasn't another foregone conclusion that Garrett would be the HC next year?

I'm sure there's a point somewhere in this post...

In comment 14780279 Go Terps said:

Quote:

See, that's how ridiculous the trade was - it put the Giants in a lose-lose situation. Now we're just stuck hoping for the less shitty option.

No - the lose lose situation is bringing back Remmers and Golden -- which is what you have proposed -- as they are two players that can't hold Leonard Williams boot straps let alone equal his value to the team.

and I for one can't believe that there are proposals above suggesting that paying Golden $18 million is a better use of the Giants resources than retaining LW.

In comment 14780211 gidiefor said:

Quote:

that when the Giants bring a real edge rusher in, and the Defensive line with Williams starts obliterating our opponents because they have some horses teaming up with them, that those of you who are panning this move, and saying that players like WIlliams are a dime a dozen, easily obtained, and not worth the money, will step up and admit how badly you evaluated this. WIlliams is not just a space eater. He is an upper tier Defensive lineman. He performed consistently and impactfully in a defensive scheme that was over the heads of the entire defense, and as part of a very badly coached unit. He also came from a very suspect Jets defensive scheme, with equally bad coaching. You guys are not seeing the forest for the trees. One of the things this Giants FO can do and has been able to do fairly consistently (with the exception of Marvin Austin, and I maintain his issue was in his head and not about his talent) is identify and bring in really good Defensive Tackles. But their good ones have all been either 1's or 2's in the draft. They will save using a 1 or a 2 in the draft to get another player of WIlliams ability and will be able to use those picks on other areas of need and hopefully bring in an upper echelon player in each instance. There are not a plethora of really good DTs across the league, and even rarer are above average DTs drafted in the 3rd or lower rounds. I want to also remind you that the arguments you are advancing about Williams were same arguments being made when Linval Joseph's rookie contract ended. The Giants let him go and he has only been one of the most impactful DTs in the league since then. I was among those that thought we should let Joseph walk instead of pay him elite DT money. Boy was that a bad move. We replaced Linval with Snacks, which at first blush seemed like a great move. Snacks, however, was not the leader we needed. He demurred, and his attitude in this regard sucked. By all accounts Williams is a leader, with a great mentality to go along with his talent. This talent was fully on display during his Giants tenure, as was his attitude. I know that none of this will persuade those of you who have dug your heels in on this one. You have invested yourselves in panning this move. I am going on record as endorsing the Giants retaining Williams and bringing in a premier ER and an above average LB. They do this and the CBs grow up and Peppers plays to his potential - and the Giants Defense will be restored. The Giants need to have a fearsome defense again. That is Giants football. A player like Williams takes you a step closer to this imo. Bring in the Defensive horses baby. That's what I'm talking about

Good post Gidie

In comment 14780284 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 14780277 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: you make it sound like the Williams signing being a foregone conclusion is a negative. Wasn't another foregone conclusion that Garrett would be the HC next year? I'm sure there's a point somewhere in this post...

One very blatant point is the one about Garrett being our HC. And as soon as Rhule was announced by Carolina, you proudly announced to the board, "As I called it for weeks, Garrett is going to be the HC". Followed by a slam against the team.

That doesn't get tiresome to you?

In comment 14780269 Eric on Li said:

Quote:

start with whatever round number you want for their total cap space. Let's say 80m. Who are you looking to add with the full $80m, that you can't get with the $60m you'd have available after tagging LW? Also i'm not being snarky, it's an honest question bc from my POV in either scenario you can add 5+ guys on 1 year deals at a higher AAV than Markus Golden got last year and still only be half way there. Or 2 or 3 bigger level signings like Conklin or Schobert (depending on how they structure year 1 #). So if you like Williams at all as a player and think there's a better chance our own spending would cancel a comp pick next year vs. this year, it seems like a no brainer to tag. I don't see what he prohibits other than just having more cap room itself.

I haven't studied the FA list closely yet. I have always felt the best way to approach FA is to wait for the second wave where teams start the cutting process and real bargain hit the market.

I would definitely stay in touch with Golden and ask him to check back in with us when he thinks he has a solid offer. If he's in the $10-12M range, I think that's a bargain. And certainly keep my eye on Judon for obvious reasons...Dupree concerns me. Did the light finally go off and now he's off to the races with great production? Or was his 2019 fool's gold and a guy who finally went all out in his contract year?

But the more pressing problems are on the OL where I think every player on that OL should not be - to quote Terps - on scholarship. I think they are all question marks right now. The only one arguably worth keeping is Hernandez based on his rookie contract.

So if we have all of this money, I would earmark a good portion of it on the OL. Unfortunately, how can anyone trust Gettleman to make the right decisions to fix it...

In comment 14780278 bw in dc said:

Quote:

a poster told me that Golden is overrated despite what his stats say. But LW is underrated despite what his stats say. You really can't make it up around here anymore. Golden had double digit sacks with no complimentary help and he had nearly 20 tackles for loss, which led the team. He also 72 total tackles. Recovered a fumble. Meanwhile, LW's combined Jets/Giants stats for the year equated to .5 sack, 3.5 tackles for loss, 3 passes defended, 46 total tackles. One forced fumble, no fumbles recovered. Hey, but at least LW almost got to the QB...

Why do you keep bringing up sack totals when talking about LW. Its not his function. Its like judging Slayton on rushing yards, they are nice when it happens. Golden's role was sacks. LW's role is to clog up and collapse the middle, thus wrecking the whole line play. This opens up the sack opportunities for others, and shuts down the rushing game. It also gets pressure in the fact of the QB, which is what is stated in the text.

"No - the lose lose situation is bringing back Remmers and Golden -- which is what you have proposed -- as they are two players that can't hold Leonard Williams boot straps let alone equal his value to the team."

Okay, this is a gem.

Remmers can't hold LW's "boot straps". Fine.

But Golden can't hold LW's "boot straps"..?? At this point, I think it's the other way around. At least Golden gets to the QB, makes tackles for losses, and just makes more tackles.

The cost-benefit ratio for Golden is projecting to be much better than LW's.

In comment 14780211 gidiefor said:

Quote:

WIlliams is not just a space eater. He is an upper tier Defensive lineman. He performed consistently and impactfully in a defensive scheme that was over the heads of the entire defense, and as part of a very badly coached unit. He also came from a very suspect Jets defensive scheme, with equally bad coaching.

This is opinion and not fact on which this entire posts rests. I personally do not put LW in the upper tier. Neither does the NFL because of what it took to acquire him and the Jets were willing to let him walk. Aaron Donald and the like are upper tier. We can agree to disagree there as it it is subjective.

What did we get for a top of the third round pick? Wins?

We got "dibs" Fucking "dibs" for Valuable picks. We got the right to tag him for those picks. Not good enough.

Don't go all Strawman. Not saying this is a fire worthy offense or makes anyone stupid. I just do not feel we received ANYTHING of value for those picks. I feel this is a deep draft for a few positions of need for us. A top of the 3rd round pick would be handy right about now.

I never proposed bringing back Remmers and Golden...it's incredible how people put words in your mouth around here.

I said (and have been saying) those signings made sense last year, and are the types of signings we should pursue this offseason. I think we should identify targets in the secondary FA market and sign a bunch of them to provide depth and supplement the players we draft.

We're talking about possibly paying Williams $18M. Last year the following players signed 1 year deals on new teams:

Ndamukong Suh (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $9.25M
Gerald McCoy (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $8M

Alternatively, $18M would have covered all of these players:

WR Breshad Perriman (1-$4M)
EDGE Shaq Barrett (1-$4M)
RT Jared Veldheer (1-$3.5M)
S Ha-Ha Clinton Dix (1-$3M)
LB Jamie Collins (1-$2M)

Those five guys together add up to $16.5M.

Instead of paying Williams $18M how about we some scouting of pro personnel around the league and get value in the 2020 secondary free agent market?

Quote:

Williams is a synergystic add Mike in Prescott : 10:43 am : link On his own, it doesn't look like he adds that much value. But what he does do is make those around him better. I actually expect that our line will become a top unit in relatively short order (if we are able to get a premium edge player). I view him as a "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts" type of addition.

+1.
This is all about what the Giants pay to re-sign him, right? Let's wait and see.

In comment 14780332 Go Terps said:

Quote:

I never proposed bringing back Remmers and Golden...it's incredible how people put words in your mouth around here. I said (and have been saying) those signings made sense last year, and are the types of signings we should pursue this offseason. I think we should identify targets in the secondary FA market and sign a bunch of them to provide depth and supplement the players we draft. We're talking about possibly paying Williams $18M. Last year the following players signed 1 year deals on new teams: Ndamukong Suh (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $9.25M Gerald McCoy (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $8M Alternatively, $18M would have covered all of these players: WR Breshad Perriman (1-$4M) EDGE Shaq Barrett (1-$4M) RT Jared Veldheer (1-$3.5M) S Ha-Ha Clinton Dix (1-$3M) LB Jamie Collins (1-$2M) Those five guys together add up to $16.5M. Instead of paying Williams $18M how about we some scouting of pro personnel around the league and get value in the 2020 secondary free agent market?

Hell yes!

I didn't call Garrett for weeks...it was a lot longer than that. I'm glad I was wrong, but let's not act like it was a crazy fucking thing to say. And I didn't post what you wrote...my post was in disbelief that I might actually end up being right about Garrett.

Criticizing the Giants isn't tiresome to me...seeing them make mistakes worth criticizing is.

Isn't it tiresome to rationalize and make excuses for them?

In comment 14780320 PatersonPlank said:

Quote:

Why do you keep bringing up sack totals when talking about LW. Its not his function. Its like judging Slayton on rushing yards, they are nice when it happens. Golden's role was sacks. LW's role is to clog up and collapse the middle, thus wrecking the whole line play. This opens up the sack opportunities for others, and shuts down the rushing game. It also gets pressure in the fact of the QB, which is what is stated in the text.

LW isn't trying to rush the passer on passing downs? You don't think one of the reason DG traded for LW was to get more sacks? A .5 sack for the year is embarrassing. Let's be honest.

Look, I get your point to a degree that there is an apple/orange piece to this. But if I'm going to pay ANYBODY on the DL $17M+ they had better rack up more than .5 sack per year. You'd better be getting 8-10+.

contract Williams will get.

A Hall of Famer like Aaron Donald gets $25M. A perennial Pro Bowler like Fletcher Cox gets $22M. Williams is in a tier below that and he should be paid that way.

You guys needs to spend some time looking at the DT & DE contracts. These are rare individuals and they get paid a lot of money. That's the market.

In comment 14780283 gidiefor said:

Quote:

In comment 14780258 jcn56 said: Quote: Not sure what you mean - a 2nd rounder doesn't equate to a 3rd and a 4th? I would think it would be obvious that what I mean is that instead of spending a 1rst or a 2nd round pick on a potentially comparable DT talent - the opportunity to have dibs on LW was purchased for a 3rd round pick this coming draft and a 4th round pick in a following year (and btw also returnable for a 3rd rd comp pick in the following year if not signed instead of losing 3rd rd comp pick capital if signed as a FA). I also maintain and will continue to maintain that the grade on LW should be equal to the talent expected of a first round pick, for which opportunity the acquisition was purchased for the expenditure of much lesser draft capital. Those of you who don't like that comparison and are so anxious to spend this capital on more mid level talent I am going to continue to take issue with.

I just wonder what games you're watching that you think this is anywhere close to fair value.

Williams was added to a bad defense and it remained - drum roll please - a bad defense.

His impact was negligible. People pointed out a statistical increase in run defense, which didn't translate to much else AND coincided with a weaker part of the schedule.

Now - you get to part with upwards of $15M *AND* a 3rd and a 4th.

If you're asking - do I think the Giants would be better off with LW *or* the FAs you could sign with a 3rd this year, a 4th next year, and $15M AAV for FA the next 3-5 years, I think there's no debate. Not only is Williams not an impact player, he's not even a very good player. He's an average player who flashes from time to time, whose most distinguishing characteristic is that he was drafted 6th overall.

A draft bust that the Giants didn't make, but will try to make up for by overpaying and trading away picks for the right to do so.

I'll give the Giants this much - they're consistent the past few years.

In comment 14780375 cosmicj said:

Quote:

contract Williams will get. A Hall of Famer like Aaron Donald gets $25M. A perennial Pro Bowler like Fletcher Cox gets $22M. Williams is in a tier below that and he should be paid that way. You guys needs to spend some time looking at the DT & DE contracts. These are rare individuals and they get paid a lot of money. That's the market.

The top DT contract signed last year was Grady Jarrett (age 26) at an average salary of $17M. I don't consider Williams to be in Jarrett's class as a player, and I don't think anyone would.

In comment 14780332 Go Terps said:

Quote:

I never proposed bringing back Remmers and Golden...it's incredible how people put words in your mouth around here. I said (and have been saying) those signings made sense last year, and are the types of signings we should pursue this offseason. I think we should identify targets in the secondary FA market and sign a bunch of them to provide depth and supplement the players we draft. We're talking about possibly paying Williams $18M. Last year the following players signed 1 year deals on new teams: Ndamukong Suh (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $9.25M Gerald McCoy (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $8M

Suh - is not a better player than Williams -- he is historically an outlier and not a team first player whereas Williams is a classic "team player"

Gerald McCoy will be 32 next year and is not a long term solution to anything - let alone a building team

Saying "those signings made sense last year, and are the types of signings we should pursue this offseason" is endorsing the signings of Remmers and Golden -- they were not good additions to the team last year and not building blocks by any stretch of the imagination -- it is a poor allocation of resources to make like signings or bring them back (which would be like signings) -- and paying an undisciplined Golden $18 million as opposed to WIlliams as is being bandied above would be a bad signing

You continue to grasp at straws, over simplify how a front office should work, call for backwards solutions, and contradict your own statements in the desperate throes of your anti Giants FO agenda -

the issue is his new contract value. If he gets open market dollars, I really would prefer it not be from NYG.

Especially, since that money should be going to the Edge first, imo.

In comment 14780337 Thegratefulhead said:

Quote:

In comment 14780332 Go Terps said: Quote: I never proposed bringing back Remmers and Golden...it's incredible how people put words in your mouth around here. I said (and have been saying) those signings made sense last year, and are the types of signings we should pursue this offseason. I think we should identify targets in the secondary FA market and sign a bunch of them to provide depth and supplement the players we draft. We're talking about possibly paying Williams $18M. Last year the following players signed 1 year deals on new teams: Ndamukong Suh (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $9.25M Gerald McCoy (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $8M Alternatively, $18M would have covered all of these players: WR Breshad Perriman (1-$4M) EDGE Shaq Barrett (1-$4M) RT Jared Veldheer (1-$3.5M) S Ha-Ha Clinton Dix (1-$3M) LB Jamie Collins (1-$2M) Those five guys together add up to $16.5M. Instead of paying Williams $18M how about we some scouting of pro personnel around the league and get value in the 2020 secondary free agent market? Hell yes!

yadda yadda 20/20 hindsight makes everything so easy. cherry picking the 5 absolute best FA signings from last offseason is a horrible argument.

it becomes more expensive (draft pick wise) if we sign him, which obviously would always be the goal to trade for him in the first place.

I don't like the picks getting more expensive if he signs. I have no issue with the player.

In comment 14780514 gidiefor said:

Quote:

In comment 14780332 Go Terps said: Quote: I never proposed bringing back Remmers and Golden...it's incredible how people put words in your mouth around here. I said (and have been saying) those signings made sense last year, and are the types of signings we should pursue this offseason. I think we should identify targets in the secondary FA market and sign a bunch of them to provide depth and supplement the players we draft. We're talking about possibly paying Williams $18M. Last year the following players signed 1 year deals on new teams: Ndamukong Suh (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $9.25M Gerald McCoy (a better player than Williams) - 1 year, $8M Suh - is not a better player than Williams -- he is historically an outlier and not a team first player whereas Williams is a classic "team player" Gerald McCoy will be 32 next year and is not a long term solution to anything - let alone a building team Saying "those signings made sense last year, and are the types of signings we should pursue this offseason" is endorsing the signings of Remmers and Golden -- they were not good additions to the team last year and not building blocks by any stretch of the imagination -- it is a poor allocation of resources to make like signings or bring them back (which would be like signings) -- and paying an undisciplined Golden $18 million as opposed to WIlliams as is being bandied above would be a bad signing You continue to grasp at straws, over simplify how a front office should work, call for backwards solutions, and contradict your own statements in the desperate throes of your anti Giants FO agenda -

You're the one making shit up. Who wants to pay Golden $18M? I don't.

In comment 14780517 JonC said:

Quote:

the issue is his new contract value. If he gets open market dollars, I really would prefer it not be from NYG. Especially, since that money should be going to the Edge first, imo.

Both for me. When the 4th pick in the 3rd round comes along take a look at what centers are available. I think we are going to wish we had that pick. What did we get out of the Williams trade that is worth it?

Not commenting on the trade. That is done. It is now time to decide what to do.

The player
He has an excellent pedigree some said he was the best player in the draft when he came out
He played well for the Giants this year
He is still young
He has remained healthy
He seems to be a great guy

The scheme
Interior pressure is a key with mobile QBs they escape when edge rushers are too aggressive.
The best success vs. Prescott and Wentz comes when edge rushers contain and there is pressure up the middle.

The money
He clearly has value
How much will he cost?
What are the alternatives for the $$?

I have said before that I would tend to resign him or franchise him. Which gets you the player, gives a chance at extension and adds to your cap the next year when they come off the books if there is no extension.

I would try to draft two OTs and a Center with premium picks.

Use Free Agency to get ILB, S, ER.

In comment 14780537 Thegratefulhead said:

Quote:

In comment 14780517 JonC said: Quote: the issue is his new contract value. If he gets open market dollars, I really would prefer it not be from NYG. Especially, since that money should be going to the Edge first, imo. Both for me. When the 4th pick in the 3rd round comes along take a look at what centers are available. I think we are going to wish we had that pick. What did we get out of the Williams trade that is worth it?

I made that point the other day. Centers, Guards, Tight Ends, Safeties...positions that get devalued in the draft except for the bona fide college superstars.

Honestly, though, I think this whole discussion is pointless. Gettleman is going to do whatever it takes - whatever it costs - to sign Williams.

Period. End of discussion.

one will say Period. End of Discussion. When something actually is final.

So if Williams wants $25M/year Gettleman is paying it? Alrighty then...

In comment 14780517 JonC said:

Quote:

the issue is his new contract value. If he gets open market dollars, I really would prefer it not be from NYG. Especially, since that money should be going to the Edge first, imo.

I'm sort of in the same spot. I didn't like the investment of trade picks, but they are sunk cost at this point.

So unless Team LW is in some magnanimous mood and takes a significant discount off the projected market value for DTs, I say let him walk and use that money to solve bigger needs.

In comment 14780576 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

one will say Period. End of Discussion. When something actually is final. So if Williams wants $25M/year Gettleman is paying it? Alrighty then...

Absolutely. Comma. There's no way Gettleman lets him walk after trading for him.

LW and his agent are going to ask for what they believe he will get in free agency, or they are going to wait until free agency.

Oh, and by the way, why the hell wouldn't they wait until free agency...