then he is gone. At $10-$12 million per, I think the Giants make it happen. Given their cap situation, the Giants will have options in future years to get players paid to keep them this year (i.e. signing bonus in 2021 and then guarantee salaries in '22 & '23). And if you don't think a player is worth guaranteeing them in yrs 2 & 3, then you probably shouldn't resign them anyway. If the Giants plan to use the draft on the offensive side of the ball, then I think this deal gets done and they keep both LW and DT.
even if the giants don't have a chance at the top 2 WRs (Golladay / Robinson), i'd rather they go out and sign Moton to play RT rather than use the money on tomlinson.
tomlinson is fine. he's not the player LW is. and his skill set is replaceable. they can draft that big fat guy Shelvin from LSU who can do exactly what dalvin does. and they can probably get shelvin in rd 3
Under the Possible if not Probable file...
Dek Lawrence is a natural nose and would be better there than Tomlinson - and significantly so (remember this is just conjecture).
BJ Hill improved as last year moved along and would be as good as Lawrence as an end in the 3-4.
Just idle speculation, Still.....,,,,
Under the Possible if not Probable file...
Dek Lawrence is a natural nose and would be better there than Tomlinson - and significantly so (remember this is just conjecture).
BJ Hill improved as last year moved along and would be as good as Lawrence as an end in the 3-4.
Just idle speculation, Still.....,,,,
I agree about Dex, I think NT would be his best spot. Hill was fine in his role, I do worry that he would be exposed given more PT, but that can be addressed in the draft or a less expensive FA.
LW is going to get big money, so unless DT gets little interest, I don't see keeping both.
that? Keeping Tomlinson and LW for a total cap hit over $30M+ for DTs.
What a total waste of cap resources that would be.
We need at least another 10ppg on offense to really compete next year and beyond. While many here consider Barkley the best RB ever, his return isn't going to create another 160 points next year. That's where the fix needs to occure - on offense.
The most important person on defense isn't LW or Tomlinson. It's Graham. And he stayed.
Keeping LW is not the answer. Keeping Tomlinson at $12-14 is not the answer either, but it's a better answer than keeping LW.
that? Keeping Tomlinson and LW for a total cap hit over $30M+ for DTs.
What a total waste of cap resources that would be.
We need at least another 10ppg on offense to really compete next year and beyond. While many here consider Barkley the best RB ever, his return isn't going to create another 160 points next year. That's where the fix needs to occure - on offense.
The most important person on defense isn't LW or Tomlinson. It's Graham. And he stayed.
Keeping LW is not the answer. Keeping Tomlinson at $12-14 is not the answer either, but it's a better answer than keeping LW.
Agreed. If I had to choose, it would be Tomlinson at a cheaper deal. It will still be overpaying, but that is the nature of a lot of FA deals. But, it would cost a lot less. I agree that re-signing both would be a mistake from a cap perspective.
Agreed. If I had to choose, it would be Tomlinson at a cheaper deal. It will still be overpaying, but that is the nature of a lot of FA deals. But, it would cost a lot less. I agree that re-signing both would be a mistake from a cap perspective.
I disagree. LW supplies a badly needed skill - the ability to get to the QB, and he does it without giving up anything when defending the run. Guys like him are much harder to find, and why he is certain to get big money.
As good as DT is, his skills are replaceable. In fact, his replacement is already likely on the roster in Dex. So the issue will be how to replace Dex at the other DT/DE spot.
I'm not sure I trust Williams to be a big time passrusher
if they are not going to resign him it really makes you wonder why they didn't trade him at the deadline when teams reportedly were trying to trade for him
Agreed. If I had to choose, it would be Tomlinson at a cheaper deal. It will still be overpaying, but that is the nature of a lot of FA deals. But, it would cost a lot less. I agree that re-signing both would be a mistake from a cap perspective.
I disagree. LW supplies a badly needed skill - the ability to get to the QB, and he does it without giving up anything when defending the run. Guys like him are much harder to find, and why he is certain to get big money.
As good as DT is, his skills are replaceable. In fact, his replacement is already likely on the roster in Dex. So the issue will be how to replace Dex at the other DT/DE spot.
My issue is whether it is safe to expect that kind of pass rush from him consistently and for at least 3 more years. That is what you need to justify a 5 year deal at the money it will take. I just don't see considering last year was the anomaly in his career thus far, by a significant margin.
My issue is whether it is safe to expect that kind of pass rush from him consistently and for at least 3 more years. That is what you need to justify a 5 year deal at the money it will take. I just don't see considering last year was the anomaly in his career thus far, by a significant margin.
His pressure ratings from the year prior were really good, he just didn't finish often enough. I don't know that he'll be able to replicate what he did this year, but there is no reason to think he won't be a very productive player down the road, especially if he has a good ER outside.
My issue is whether it is safe to expect that kind of pass rush from him consistently and for at least 3 more years. That is what you need to justify a 5 year deal at the money it will take. I just don't see considering last year was the anomaly in his career thus far, by a significant margin.
H
His pressure ratings from the year prior were really good, he just didn't finish often enough. I don't know that he'll be able to replicate what he did this year, but there is no reason to think he won't be a very productive player down the road, especially if he has a good ER outside.
I expect him to be productive and even very good. But, if he isn't anywhere near the amount of pressure, sacks, and TFL as last year, then the deal he is going to get is not worth it. As I said the other day, he has already been paid for his production here. He got nearly $18M last year, which paid for the year. Giving him more than that for 5 years means he has to live up to that level because he has no other years of production he is "owed" for. If you can't honestly and confidently say he should produce at that level, then why would you pay a DT nearly $20M for 5 years?
What I hate about this, is arguing against signing him
is too often mistaken for not liking him, etc. That is far from the truth. I do like him as a player and I loved his output last year. That doesn't mean I think it is a wise cap move to allocate that kind of money for a player I don't honestly believe will replicate his production for the enough of the deal. Even if he has a big year next year, it won't mean anything if he reverts back to his normal levels. What he does next year won't determine the value of the deal. What he does 3 years from now will.
This is why I didn't like the trade either. I would have been 100% on board with pursuing him via FA. They could have signed him to a 3-5 year deal which would have overpaid him for what he already produced to that point, but been far less restrictive than the deal he is going to get now and he would already be on year 2, where the remainder of the deal would be less of a concern.
Instead, we already paid him over $17M, which worked out. But, now we are looking at 4 or 5 more years at more than that.
Under the Possible if not Probable file...
Dek Lawrence is a natural nose and would be better there than Tomlinson - and significantly so (remember this is just conjecture).
BJ Hill improved as last year moved along and would be as good as Lawrence as an end in the 3-4.
Just idle speculation, Still.....,,,,
"Dek" is a new one. Do you misspell your favorite Cowboys players' names this frequently?
RE: What I hate about this, is arguing against signing him
is too often mistaken for not liking him, etc. That is far from the truth. I do like him as a player and I loved his output last year. That doesn't mean I think it is a wise cap move to allocate that kind of money for a player I don't honestly believe will replicate his production for the enough of the deal. Even if he has a big year next year, it won't mean anything if he reverts back to his normal levels. What he does next year won't determine the value of the deal. What he does 3 years from now will.
This is why I didn't like the trade either. I would have been 100% on board with pursuing him via FA. They could have signed him to a 3-5 year deal which would have overpaid him for what he already produced to that point, but been far less restrictive than the deal he is going to get now and he would already be on year 2, where the remainder of the deal would be less of a concern.
Instead, we already paid him over $17M, which worked out. But, now we are looking at 4 or 5 more years at more than that.
Except for one thing: Trading for him made him ours; to get the first and only crack at him. Not trading for him allowed many other suitors to attempt to outbid us. That’s a huge difference..
DT is a fine player, but resources do have to be allocated rationally. DG drafted DL. I hope he did not project DL to a fine all-around DE. Great speed inside is a lower bar than enough speed outside.
If the market value for DT is rational, I do not believe we can consider re-signing him.
is an important distinction, because it was reportedly why they drafted him. Hill goes back to DE and they draft another, bring back Austin Johnson or similar.
is an important distinction, because it was reportedly why they drafted him. Hill goes back to DE and they draft another, bring back Austin Johnson or similar.
I liked what Johnson did on the field. I would do exactly as you suggest.
Akiem Hicks broke out in his 6th year. You don’t know what u got till it’s gone
This is why if they decide to keep both at the expense of everything else I could get on board. Guys that play in the trenches tend to get better as they get their man strength, which really gets better every year significantly until approx 25 and then marginal improvements until your mid 30's. There is a good possibility his contract looks like a bargain in a few years.
and starts making interceptions and sacking the QB...I think it would be wise for the Giants to pay players that can play.
LW and DT can play.
You can't just go out and re-allocate that money to the offensive side of the ball and expect to produce more points.
There are very few offensive weapons available to fix that offense in FA.
Plus, if DJ isn't any good - it doesn't matter how much money you spend on guys that can make explosive plays on offense.
But that's the quagmire. We are playing on the QB Roulette Wheel and essentially putting all of our chips on #8. So we HAVE to spend.
We could certainly bolster the OL in free agency, right?
So I would think a few of these would - Thuney, Taylor, Linsley, Williams, etc - could be a pretty good start to closing the gap on the extra ten points we need to compete.
Maybe add a WR in the draft and/or free agency - Schuster, Samuel, Bourne, etc - and start to eliminate excuses why Jones can't do this, that, etc.
The clock is ticking. The fate of the team lies with Daniel Jones. It's that simple. So we need to get our heads out of the sand and realize that's where we have to spend money right now. Not for LW.
RE: RE: What I hate about this, is arguing against signing him
is too often mistaken for not liking him, etc. That is far from the truth. I do like him as a player and I loved his output last year. That doesn't mean I think it is a wise cap move to allocate that kind of money for a player I don't honestly believe will replicate his production for the enough of the deal. Even if he has a big year next year, it won't mean anything if he reverts back to his normal levels. What he does next year won't determine the value of the deal. What he does 3 years from now will.
This is why I didn't like the trade either. I would have been 100% on board with pursuing him via FA. They could have signed him to a 3-5 year deal which would have overpaid him for what he already produced to that point, but been far less restrictive than the deal he is going to get now and he would already be on year 2, where the remainder of the deal would be less of a concern.
Instead, we already paid him over $17M, which worked out. But, now we are looking at 4 or 5 more years at more than that.
Except for one thing: Trading for him made him ours; to get the first and only crack at him. Not trading for him allowed many other suitors to attempt to outbid us. That’s a huge difference..
To me, not really. If we took a crack and missed, oh well. We had him all to ourselves and spent over $17M on the franchise. What would have happened if we didn't have him? We would have finished with a middle of the pack D and won 5 or 6 games? That's what happened anyway. So, maybe we would have finished with a bottom 1/3 D instead. The end result wouldn't have been terribly different.
is an important distinction, because it was reportedly why they drafted him. Hill goes back to DE and they draft another, bring back Austin Johnson or similar.
This.
Dexter at NT/1T/0T gives the Giants an enormous advantage with a flex/multiple front - he can push the pocket from any alignment. Tomlinson is solid in a very defined role, but he's not especially dynamic.
The Giants need dynamic players in more spots - Lawrence in an IDL slot is potentially very dynamic with almost no downside. He can cover the loss of Tomlinson, or so we should reasonably hope. Hill has flashed - he's not a superstar, but given the defensive scheme, we shouldn't be asking him to be one. He can, however be a solid contributor as a strong-side 30-front DE.
Depth becomes a question - can Johnson and McIntosh hold their own as rotational pieces? Can we slot a mid-round rookie into the mix that can slide between 0T and 5T (I'd have an eye on Georgia's Jordan Davis on day 3)?
The multi-million dollar question is whether the stability that DT provides is worth rolling the dice on instability at QB if we can't use his cap space to acquire a playmaker to help solidify DJ.
For any fans who are hellbent on re-signing Tomlinson, are you prepared for a QB carousel beginning next offseason?
is an important distinction, because it was reportedly why they drafted him. Hill goes back to DE and they draft another, bring back Austin Johnson or similar.
This.
Dexter at NT/1T/0T gives the Giants an enormous advantage with a flex/multiple front - he can push the pocket from any alignment. Tomlinson is solid in a very defined role, but he's not especially dynamic.
The Giants need dynamic players in more spots - Lawrence in an IDL slot is potentially very dynamic with almost no downside. He can cover the loss of Tomlinson, or so we should reasonably hope. Hill has flashed - he's not a superstar, but given the defensive scheme, we shouldn't be asking him to be one. He can, however be a solid contributor as a strong-side 30-front DE.
Depth becomes a question - can Johnson and McIntosh hold their own as rotational pieces? Can we slot a mid-round rookie into the mix that can slide between 0T and 5T (I'd have an eye on Georgia's Jordan Davis on day 3)?
The multi-million dollar question is whether the stability that DT provides is worth rolling the dice on instability at QB if we can't use his cap space to acquire a playmaker to help solidify DJ.
For any fans who are hellbent on re-signing Tomlinson, are you prepared for a QB carousel beginning next offseason?
Good post, I agree. Really like DT, but we can’t spend all of our money on the defensive line with the mess we have on offense right now. Lawrence will be one hell of a nose tackle.
As you both know, I am a advocate of keeping Tomlinson, not at any price but can Lawrence do that "dirty work" and still be as effective as? I don't know the answer so I asking. Tomlnson excelled at it and I am sure LW ad the LB's were grateful.
What I envisioned is a scenario like the WFT. They pretty much won 7 games on the strength of their defense. 3 or 4 different QB's. I would resign Tomlinson if feasible, of course, but i would rather strengthen the defense even more. I would not go out and spend big money on a name WR. I would rather get a DE or strengthen the LB and back 7.
I think the idea of trying to force players into an offense that don't fit the scheme or to the detriment of the defense. If the defense keep stopping the run and forcing 3 and outs, that would give any QB more opportunities, regardless if he has a Gollladay/Robinson/Jones type.
And I would take Jones over any of the QB's in the NFC East right now. And that speaks volumes..
I think that is really important. But that doesn't mean they overpay. I think that means that the team player that does everything right, produces on the field, superstar or not, he gets a fair even maybe slightly rich deal. He is treated fairly and with respect.
If some other team wants to go all out, well that's business and the players get that.
All we have to avoid is looking at that all around great player and saying 'k seeya bye' thanks for your rookie deal my man.
Give the player an option to come back at a fair cost that he can respect and his peers will respect and he'll either take it or not. Capology to make those deals work.
If he walks, well the team's rep isn't harmed. At least I can't see it would be. Players get how you build a roster and make smart money choices. They just don't want to get lowballed or flat out dropped.
is an important distinction, because it was reportedly why they drafted him. Hill goes back to DE and they draft another, bring back Austin Johnson or similar.
This.
Dexter at NT/1T/0T gives the Giants an enormous advantage with a flex/multiple front - he can push the pocket from any alignment. Tomlinson is solid in a very defined role, but he's not especially dynamic.
The Giants need dynamic players in more spots - Lawrence in an IDL slot is potentially very dynamic with almost no downside. He can cover the loss of Tomlinson, or so we should reasonably hope. Hill has flashed - he's not a superstar, but given the defensive scheme, we shouldn't be asking him to be one. He can, however be a solid contributor as a strong-side 30-front DE.
Depth becomes a question - can Johnson and McIntosh hold their own as rotational pieces? Can we slot a mid-round rookie into the mix that can slide between 0T and 5T (I'd have an eye on Georgia's Jordan Davis on day 3)?
The multi-million dollar question is whether the stability that DT provides is worth rolling the dice on instability at QB if we can't use his cap space to acquire a playmaker to help solidify DJ.
For any fans who are hellbent on re-signing Tomlinson, are you prepared for a QB carousel beginning next offseason?
McIntosh? I'm not quite sure why he's still here, considering he didn't do a thing last year.
is an important distinction, because it was reportedly why they drafted him. Hill goes back to DE and they draft another, bring back Austin Johnson or similar.
This.
Dexter at NT/1T/0T gives the Giants an enormous advantage with a flex/multiple front - he can push the pocket from any alignment. Tomlinson is solid in a very defined role, but he's not especially dynamic.
The Giants need dynamic players in more spots - Lawrence in an IDL slot is potentially very dynamic with almost no downside. He can cover the loss of Tomlinson, or so we should reasonably hope. Hill has flashed - he's not a superstar, but given the defensive scheme, we shouldn't be asking him to be one. He can, however be a solid contributor as a strong-side 30-front DE.
Depth becomes a question - can Johnson and McIntosh hold their own as rotational pieces? Can we slot a mid-round rookie into the mix that can slide between 0T and 5T (I'd have an eye on Georgia's Jordan Davis on day 3)?
The multi-million dollar question is whether the stability that DT provides is worth rolling the dice on instability at QB if we can't use his cap space to acquire a playmaker to help solidify DJ.
For any fans who are hellbent on re-signing Tomlinson, are you prepared for a QB carousel beginning next offseason?
McIntosh? I'm not quite sure why he's still here, considering he didn't do a thing last year.
I'd expect him to be quickly displaced by a draft pick on the DL, so I don't have particularly high hopes for McIntosh. But he's on the roster, and somehow has managed to avoid ever being on the release/re-sign track even when roster moves might have called for that, so maybe the braintrust sees something in him that just isn't translating yet - after all, his claim to fame is that he handed Quenton Nelson his lunch when they squared off in college.
That said, he also hasn't gotten a jersey on Sunday in a long time, so I think he probably enters camp as roster fodder with a chance to flash. I'm not counting on him, but if he's the 5th or 6th DL in 2021, I'll assume he earned it since some of the guys drafted with late picks under DG have had their scholarships expire already.
Dexter's best position is supposedly NT, so it's time to deploy him there and potentially use the cap dollars at positions of need. Remains to be seen if they'll spend them at WR, given the cost and not so great options available.
Right now, I expect to come out of the draft with a WR, CB, more parts on defense and the OL. We're still in need of a starter upgrade at boundary CB, WR, RT, Edge x 2, and perhaps more help brought in for the interior OL and DL.
as an insurance policy on Tomlinson?. I always thought that Hill and Williams played the same position and didn't play together on the line. I admit, i've haven't watched a lot of the personnel changes on the DL.
he's proven to be scheme diverse, but probably still best suited to 4-3 DT.
Dexter is a highly regarded prospect picked by the current regime. Cost-controlled, was drafted to be a NT, and is also scheme diverse. He has strengths and AA Tomlinson doesn't have, plus the latter is going to cost considerably more.
If the plan is to keep LW and find help at positions like WR, Tomlinson winds up a luxury they might not be able to afford.
The problem is they're not nailing their drafts, and even their best premium picks are needing time to develop.
considering he'll have a few years to earn the next one. My only concern has been what do we lose in Tomlinson?. LW and BJ Hill both had their career years playing along side him.
If LW reverts back to his first year play and without a bonafide ER, the LB's and secondary are going to take a beating.
The defense would have taken a step back and that would put a lot of pressure on DJ and the offense..
of Hill Lawrence Tomlinson, provided we have quality depth? I wouldn't be upset with that DL and some legit LBs on the outside as opposed to paying Williams $20M.
RE: Would it really be a bad prospect of having a DL
of Hill Lawrence Tomlinson, provided we have quality depth? I wouldn't be upset with that DL and some legit LBs on the outside as opposed to paying Williams $20M.
And, no this doesn't mean I expect any one of those guys to be as productive as Williams was last year. But, they are all solid and I don't expect Williams to be as productive as he was last year either./
RE: Would it really be a bad prospect of having a DL
of Hill Lawrence Tomlinson, provided we have quality depth? I wouldn't be upset with that DL and some legit LBs on the outside as opposed to paying Williams $20M.
This is the right question and the answer is no.
Especially if we can grab a second tier Edge in free agency or grab a Edge prospect like Ojulari in the draft (assuming he's drop to the second round or if we - smartly - traded out of the 11th spot).
LW is a very good player, but this team has too many holes in the damn to afford him right now. It's just that simple.
In Graham, I Trust. ;)
RE: Would it really be a bad prospect of having a DL
of Hill Lawrence Tomlinson, provided we have quality depth? I wouldn't be upset with that DL and some legit LBs on the outside as opposed to paying Williams $20M.
I have the same questions. I would rather have that combination and add a ER then pay LW the about 19M per but I don't know. I was hoping someone smarter than me could offer some insight.
RE: RE: Would it really be a bad prospect of having a DL
of Hill Lawrence Tomlinson, provided we have quality depth? I wouldn't be upset with that DL and some legit LBs on the outside as opposed to paying Williams $20M.
This is the right question and the answer is no.
Especially if we can grab a second tier Edge in free agency or grab a Edge prospect like Ojulari in the draft (assuming he's drop to the second round or if we - smartly - traded out of the 11th spot).
LW is a very good player, but this team has too many holes in the damn to afford him right now. It's just that simple.
In Graham, I Trust. ;)
So, no you wouldn't rather have the DL with some added depth and an EDGE player and/our dynamic outside LB than re-sign Williams at $20M?
My guess is Leonard would have less drops and Dalvin would be a better blocker...
tomlinson is fine. he's not the player LW is. and his skill set is replaceable. they can draft that big fat guy Shelvin from LSU who can do exactly what dalvin does. and they can probably get shelvin in rd 3
Dek Lawrence is a natural nose and would be better there than Tomlinson - and significantly so (remember this is just conjecture).
BJ Hill improved as last year moved along and would be as good as Lawrence as an end in the 3-4.
Just idle speculation, Still.....,,,,
The last 2nd round drafted player to get a lengthy extension was Corey Webster!
That's crazy.
Dek Lawrence is a natural nose and would be better there than Tomlinson - and significantly so (remember this is just conjecture).
BJ Hill improved as last year moved along and would be as good as Lawrence as an end in the 3-4.
Just idle speculation, Still.....,,,,
I agree about Dex, I think NT would be his best spot. Hill was fine in his role, I do worry that he would be exposed given more PT, but that can be addressed in the draft or a less expensive FA.
LW is going to get big money, so unless DT gets little interest, I don't see keeping both.
What a total waste of cap resources that would be.
We need at least another 10ppg on offense to really compete next year and beyond. While many here consider Barkley the best RB ever, his return isn't going to create another 160 points next year. That's where the fix needs to occure - on offense.
The most important person on defense isn't LW or Tomlinson. It's Graham. And he stayed.
Keeping LW is not the answer. Keeping Tomlinson at $12-14 is not the answer either, but it's a better answer than keeping LW.
Or maybe try and sign both,and make it harder to improve the rest of the team.
If there's any truth to it,have fun sorting it out Johnny
What a total waste of cap resources that would be.
We need at least another 10ppg on offense to really compete next year and beyond. While many here consider Barkley the best RB ever, his return isn't going to create another 160 points next year. That's where the fix needs to occure - on offense.
The most important person on defense isn't LW or Tomlinson. It's Graham. And he stayed.
Keeping LW is not the answer. Keeping Tomlinson at $12-14 is not the answer either, but it's a better answer than keeping LW.
only to then add what?
I disagree. LW supplies a badly needed skill - the ability to get to the QB, and he does it without giving up anything when defending the run. Guys like him are much harder to find, and why he is certain to get big money.
As good as DT is, his skills are replaceable. In fact, his replacement is already likely on the roster in Dex. So the issue will be how to replace Dex at the other DT/DE spot.
Quote:
Agreed. If I had to choose, it would be Tomlinson at a cheaper deal. It will still be overpaying, but that is the nature of a lot of FA deals. But, it would cost a lot less. I agree that re-signing both would be a mistake from a cap perspective.
I disagree. LW supplies a badly needed skill - the ability to get to the QB, and he does it without giving up anything when defending the run. Guys like him are much harder to find, and why he is certain to get big money.
As good as DT is, his skills are replaceable. In fact, his replacement is already likely on the roster in Dex. So the issue will be how to replace Dex at the other DT/DE spot.
His pressure ratings from the year prior were really good, he just didn't finish often enough. I don't know that he'll be able to replicate what he did this year, but there is no reason to think he won't be a very productive player down the road, especially if he has a good ER outside.
Quote:
My issue is whether it is safe to expect that kind of pass rush from him consistently and for at least 3 more years. That is what you need to justify a 5 year deal at the money it will take. I just don't see considering last year was the anomaly in his career thus far, by a significant margin.
H
His pressure ratings from the year prior were really good, he just didn't finish often enough. I don't know that he'll be able to replicate what he did this year, but there is no reason to think he won't be a very productive player down the road, especially if he has a good ER outside.
This is why I didn't like the trade either. I would have been 100% on board with pursuing him via FA. They could have signed him to a 3-5 year deal which would have overpaid him for what he already produced to that point, but been far less restrictive than the deal he is going to get now and he would already be on year 2, where the remainder of the deal would be less of a concern.
Instead, we already paid him over $17M, which worked out. But, now we are looking at 4 or 5 more years at more than that.
LW and DT can play.
You can't just go out and re-allocate that money to the offensive side of the ball and expect to produce more points.
There are very few offensive weapons available to fix that offense in FA.
Plus, if DJ isn't any good - it doesn't matter how much money you spend on guys that can make explosive plays on offense.
Dek Lawrence is a natural nose and would be better there than Tomlinson - and significantly so (remember this is just conjecture).
BJ Hill improved as last year moved along and would be as good as Lawrence as an end in the 3-4.
Just idle speculation, Still.....,,,,
"Dek" is a new one. Do you misspell your favorite Cowboys players' names this frequently?
This is why I didn't like the trade either. I would have been 100% on board with pursuing him via FA. They could have signed him to a 3-5 year deal which would have overpaid him for what he already produced to that point, but been far less restrictive than the deal he is going to get now and he would already be on year 2, where the remainder of the deal would be less of a concern.
Instead, we already paid him over $17M, which worked out. But, now we are looking at 4 or 5 more years at more than that.
Except for one thing: Trading for him made him ours; to get the first and only crack at him. Not trading for him allowed many other suitors to attempt to outbid us. That’s a huge difference..
DT is a fine player, but resources do have to be allocated rationally. DG drafted DL. I hope he did not project DL to a fine all-around DE. Great speed inside is a lower bar than enough speed outside.
If the market value for DT is rational, I do not believe we can consider re-signing him.
This is why if they decide to keep both at the expense of everything else I could get on board. Guys that play in the trenches tend to get better as they get their man strength, which really gets better every year significantly until approx 25 and then marginal improvements until your mid 30's. There is a good possibility his contract looks like a bargain in a few years.
Giants probably already have an idea which of the two is staying.
LW and DT can play.
You can't just go out and re-allocate that money to the offensive side of the ball and expect to produce more points.
There are very few offensive weapons available to fix that offense in FA.
Plus, if DJ isn't any good - it doesn't matter how much money you spend on guys that can make explosive plays on offense.
But that's the quagmire. We are playing on the QB Roulette Wheel and essentially putting all of our chips on #8. So we HAVE to spend.
We could certainly bolster the OL in free agency, right?
So I would think a few of these would - Thuney, Taylor, Linsley, Williams, etc - could be a pretty good start to closing the gap on the extra ten points we need to compete.
Maybe add a WR in the draft and/or free agency - Schuster, Samuel, Bourne, etc - and start to eliminate excuses why Jones can't do this, that, etc.
The clock is ticking. The fate of the team lies with Daniel Jones. It's that simple. So we need to get our heads out of the sand and realize that's where we have to spend money right now. Not for LW.
Quote:
is too often mistaken for not liking him, etc. That is far from the truth. I do like him as a player and I loved his output last year. That doesn't mean I think it is a wise cap move to allocate that kind of money for a player I don't honestly believe will replicate his production for the enough of the deal. Even if he has a big year next year, it won't mean anything if he reverts back to his normal levels. What he does next year won't determine the value of the deal. What he does 3 years from now will.
This is why I didn't like the trade either. I would have been 100% on board with pursuing him via FA. They could have signed him to a 3-5 year deal which would have overpaid him for what he already produced to that point, but been far less restrictive than the deal he is going to get now and he would already be on year 2, where the remainder of the deal would be less of a concern.
Instead, we already paid him over $17M, which worked out. But, now we are looking at 4 or 5 more years at more than that.
Except for one thing: Trading for him made him ours; to get the first and only crack at him. Not trading for him allowed many other suitors to attempt to outbid us. That’s a huge difference..
This.
Dexter at NT/1T/0T gives the Giants an enormous advantage with a flex/multiple front - he can push the pocket from any alignment. Tomlinson is solid in a very defined role, but he's not especially dynamic.
The Giants need dynamic players in more spots - Lawrence in an IDL slot is potentially very dynamic with almost no downside. He can cover the loss of Tomlinson, or so we should reasonably hope. Hill has flashed - he's not a superstar, but given the defensive scheme, we shouldn't be asking him to be one. He can, however be a solid contributor as a strong-side 30-front DE.
Depth becomes a question - can Johnson and McIntosh hold their own as rotational pieces? Can we slot a mid-round rookie into the mix that can slide between 0T and 5T (I'd have an eye on Georgia's Jordan Davis on day 3)?
The multi-million dollar question is whether the stability that DT provides is worth rolling the dice on instability at QB if we can't use his cap space to acquire a playmaker to help solidify DJ.
For any fans who are hellbent on re-signing Tomlinson, are you prepared for a QB carousel beginning next offseason?
Quote:
is an important distinction, because it was reportedly why they drafted him. Hill goes back to DE and they draft another, bring back Austin Johnson or similar.
This.
Dexter at NT/1T/0T gives the Giants an enormous advantage with a flex/multiple front - he can push the pocket from any alignment. Tomlinson is solid in a very defined role, but he's not especially dynamic.
The Giants need dynamic players in more spots - Lawrence in an IDL slot is potentially very dynamic with almost no downside. He can cover the loss of Tomlinson, or so we should reasonably hope. Hill has flashed - he's not a superstar, but given the defensive scheme, we shouldn't be asking him to be one. He can, however be a solid contributor as a strong-side 30-front DE.
Depth becomes a question - can Johnson and McIntosh hold their own as rotational pieces? Can we slot a mid-round rookie into the mix that can slide between 0T and 5T (I'd have an eye on Georgia's Jordan Davis on day 3)?
The multi-million dollar question is whether the stability that DT provides is worth rolling the dice on instability at QB if we can't use his cap space to acquire a playmaker to help solidify DJ.
For any fans who are hellbent on re-signing Tomlinson, are you prepared for a QB carousel beginning next offseason?
Good post, I agree. Really like DT, but we can’t spend all of our money on the defensive line with the mess we have on offense right now. Lawrence will be one hell of a nose tackle.
What I envisioned is a scenario like the WFT. They pretty much won 7 games on the strength of their defense. 3 or 4 different QB's. I would resign Tomlinson if feasible, of course, but i would rather strengthen the defense even more. I would not go out and spend big money on a name WR. I would rather get a DE or strengthen the LB and back 7.
I think the idea of trying to force players into an offense that don't fit the scheme or to the detriment of the defense. If the defense keep stopping the run and forcing 3 and outs, that would give any QB more opportunities, regardless if he has a Gollladay/Robinson/Jones type.
And I would take Jones over any of the QB's in the NFC East right now. And that speaks volumes..
If some other team wants to go all out, well that's business and the players get that.
All we have to avoid is looking at that all around great player and saying 'k seeya bye' thanks for your rookie deal my man.
Give the player an option to come back at a fair cost that he can respect and his peers will respect and he'll either take it or not. Capology to make those deals work.
If he walks, well the team's rep isn't harmed. At least I can't see it would be. Players get how you build a roster and make smart money choices. They just don't want to get lowballed or flat out dropped.
Quote:
is an important distinction, because it was reportedly why they drafted him. Hill goes back to DE and they draft another, bring back Austin Johnson or similar.
This.
Dexter at NT/1T/0T gives the Giants an enormous advantage with a flex/multiple front - he can push the pocket from any alignment. Tomlinson is solid in a very defined role, but he's not especially dynamic.
The Giants need dynamic players in more spots - Lawrence in an IDL slot is potentially very dynamic with almost no downside. He can cover the loss of Tomlinson, or so we should reasonably hope. Hill has flashed - he's not a superstar, but given the defensive scheme, we shouldn't be asking him to be one. He can, however be a solid contributor as a strong-side 30-front DE.
Depth becomes a question - can Johnson and McIntosh hold their own as rotational pieces? Can we slot a mid-round rookie into the mix that can slide between 0T and 5T (I'd have an eye on Georgia's Jordan Davis on day 3)?
The multi-million dollar question is whether the stability that DT provides is worth rolling the dice on instability at QB if we can't use his cap space to acquire a playmaker to help solidify DJ.
For any fans who are hellbent on re-signing Tomlinson, are you prepared for a QB carousel beginning next offseason?
McIntosh? I'm not quite sure why he's still here, considering he didn't do a thing last year.
Quote:
In comment 15159697 JonC said:
Quote:
is an important distinction, because it was reportedly why they drafted him. Hill goes back to DE and they draft another, bring back Austin Johnson or similar.
This.
Dexter at NT/1T/0T gives the Giants an enormous advantage with a flex/multiple front - he can push the pocket from any alignment. Tomlinson is solid in a very defined role, but he's not especially dynamic.
The Giants need dynamic players in more spots - Lawrence in an IDL slot is potentially very dynamic with almost no downside. He can cover the loss of Tomlinson, or so we should reasonably hope. Hill has flashed - he's not a superstar, but given the defensive scheme, we shouldn't be asking him to be one. He can, however be a solid contributor as a strong-side 30-front DE.
Depth becomes a question - can Johnson and McIntosh hold their own as rotational pieces? Can we slot a mid-round rookie into the mix that can slide between 0T and 5T (I'd have an eye on Georgia's Jordan Davis on day 3)?
The multi-million dollar question is whether the stability that DT provides is worth rolling the dice on instability at QB if we can't use his cap space to acquire a playmaker to help solidify DJ.
For any fans who are hellbent on re-signing Tomlinson, are you prepared for a QB carousel beginning next offseason?
McIntosh? I'm not quite sure why he's still here, considering he didn't do a thing last year.
I'd expect him to be quickly displaced by a draft pick on the DL, so I don't have particularly high hopes for McIntosh. But he's on the roster, and somehow has managed to avoid ever being on the release/re-sign track even when roster moves might have called for that, so maybe the braintrust sees something in him that just isn't translating yet - after all, his claim to fame is that he handed Quenton Nelson his lunch when they squared off in college.
That said, he also hasn't gotten a jersey on Sunday in a long time, so I think he probably enters camp as roster fodder with a chance to flash. I'm not counting on him, but if he's the 5th or 6th DL in 2021, I'll assume he earned it since some of the guys drafted with late picks under DG have had their scholarships expire already.
Right now, I expect to come out of the draft with a WR, CB, more parts on defense and the OL. We're still in need of a starter upgrade at boundary CB, WR, RT, Edge x 2, and perhaps more help brought in for the interior OL and DL.
Dexter is a highly regarded prospect picked by the current regime. Cost-controlled, was drafted to be a NT, and is also scheme diverse. He has strengths and AA Tomlinson doesn't have, plus the latter is going to cost considerably more.
If the plan is to keep LW and find help at positions like WR, Tomlinson winds up a luxury they might not be able to afford.
The problem is they're not nailing their drafts, and even their best premium picks are needing time to develop.
If LW reverts back to his first year play and without a bonafide ER, the LB's and secondary are going to take a beating.
The defense would have taken a step back and that would put a lot of pressure on DJ and the offense..
This is the right question and the answer is no.
Especially if we can grab a second tier Edge in free agency or grab a Edge prospect like Ojulari in the draft (assuming he's drop to the second round or if we - smartly - traded out of the 11th spot).
LW is a very good player, but this team has too many holes in the damn to afford him right now. It's just that simple.
In Graham, I Trust. ;)
I have the same questions. I would rather have that combination and add a ER then pay LW the about 19M per but I don't know. I was hoping someone smarter than me could offer some insight.
Quote:
of Hill Lawrence Tomlinson, provided we have quality depth? I wouldn't be upset with that DL and some legit LBs on the outside as opposed to paying Williams $20M.
This is the right question and the answer is no.
Especially if we can grab a second tier Edge in free agency or grab a Edge prospect like Ojulari in the draft (assuming he's drop to the second round or if we - smartly - traded out of the 11th spot).
LW is a very good player, but this team has too many holes in the damn to afford him right now. It's just that simple.
In Graham, I Trust. ;)