Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

The 2017 FA Thread - OP Updated with Signings (Sundberg, Galette, VD, Hood re-signed) *** Terrell McClain, Stacy McGee, DJ Swearinger, Terrelle Pryor, Chris Carter, Brian Quick, ZACH BROWN(!!)***

DC9

By DC9
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

bobandweave

bobandweave

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, jsharrin55 said:

With Logan looking for a 1 year deal only, maybe looking for multiple years of Hankins would be the better option.  Outside of getting both :)

 

Sign him to a one year deal. How many of these "Free" Agents over the past two decades would we have been better off doing that one year deal instead of a multiple year deal we actually did? Many many more then what we did. Players want one year deals for many reasons, give it to them. Nothing stops the team from keeping them longer IF it works out with them here at a later point. By signing to a one year deal we get them here and can work on the next step

1 minute ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Long term deal is better at this stage, agree

 

In what way? Your worried about the cap money we have is that it? I don't understand how after decades of giving guys long term deals and wanting out of them sooner we wouldn't embrace short term try outs. That keeps the players motivated to perform as they are always playing for more money

Link to comment
Share on other sites
goskins10

goskins10

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Rookie pool is 7mil. That means you have to set aside that amount for rookie pay. However, under the cap rules only the top 51 salaries count against the cap. In short, basically the rookie pool is 7mil, but the effect on cap will be about 4mil....ie, some rookie signings will replace others in the '51' so it offsets in cap space, sign some, cut soon.

 

After rookies we probably have 10mil in free space. It is normal practice to keep some back, that's limited for us.... But...

 

cut Hall save 4mil

cut Lavaou save 4mil

sign Kirk LTD save 4-6mil

cut RJF save 3mil

convert 50% of Normans 2017 salary to bonus and defer 6mil to future years cap

 

Cap space is limited, but we have option to create space ~10mil to pick up 2 more very good FA.

 

 

Sporttrac has the draft pool at $7.5M (close). Good point about the bottom salaries being counterfeited. I had forgotten about that.

 

I would not count on the Cousins savings or the Norman savings. But the rest is plenty. Team can pretty mush sign who they want.

2 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Sign him to a one year deal. How many of these "Free" Agents over the past two decades would we have been better off doing that one year deal instead of a multiple year deal we actually did? Many many more then what we did. Players want one year deals for many reasons, give it to them. Nothing stops the team from keeping them longer IF it works out with them here at a later point. By signing to a one year deal we get them here and can work on the next step

 

In what way? Your worried about the cap money we have is that it? I don't understand how after decades of giving guys long term deals and wanting out of them sooner we wouldn't embrace short term try outs. That keeps the players motivated to perform as they are always playing for more money

 

 

I am with you. I am liking these 1 yr deals. For every guy you have to pay up fro later, there are several that don't; stay on the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bobandweave

bobandweave

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

I am with you. I am liking these 1 yr deals. For every guy you have to pay up fro later, there are several that don't; stay on the team.

 

These are refreshing to me, makes looking at cap money next year so much easier. We can always pull money out of thin air if we needed it. Also in the chance the players go absolutely nuts and we can't keep them the following year we can get tradable picks to use for free if they are signed elsewhere for big money. Hard for me to see any downside to this for us fans, for the ownership I can see jersey sales being effected but who gives a damn about that lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Est.1974

Est.1974

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

In what way? Your worried about the cap money we have is that it? I don't understand how after decades of giving guys long term deals and wanting out of them sooner we wouldn't embrace short term try outs. That keeps the players motivated to perform as they are always playing for more money

 

Not worried about cap. Pryor is either gonna tank or be ELITE. One year deal at 6mil through cap is amazing, see 14mil for AJ as case in point.

 

Logan though, stout DL. What you gonna see in 2017, 2018, 2019 that you ain't seen already. He isn't gonna look like **** here for 3 years, you know what's on the table. Sign him long term and move on.

8 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

I would not count on the Cousins savings or the Norman savings. 

 

Norman has a 16.5mil salary in 2017. He will convert some to help our near term cap, book it.

4 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

If we had our pick of the litter, we'd take Hankins over Logan right?

I think jury is out on how much better Hankins was made to look by his premier DL colleague.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HTTRDynasty

HTTRDynasty

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

If we had our pick of the litter, we'd take Hankins over Logan right?

 

I'm fine with either one, but prefer the youth and pass rushing ability of Hankins.  Quick stat comparison:

 

Hankins - 52 games (41 starts), 89 tackles, 10 sacks, four pass deflections, three forced fumbles

 

Logan - 59 games (51 starts), 124 tackles, 5.5 sacks, one pass deflection, three forced fumbles, two fumble recoveries

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burgundy Yoda

Burgundy Yoda

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

I'm fine with either one, but prefer the youth and pass rushing ability of Hankins.  Quick stat comparison:

 

Hankins - 52 games (41 starts), 89 tackles, 10 sacks, four pass deflections, three forced fumbles

 

Logan - 59 games (51 starts), 124 tackles, 5.5 sacks, one pass deflection, three forced fumbles, two fumble recoveries

 

How's Hankins against the run though? Everything I've read on Logan says he's one of the best. Does Hankins hold a candle to him in this regard?

1 minute ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

DHall on Twitter now backing Bruce. Love DHall, but bet he's restructuring his deal to stick around. I'll say 2mil saved in cap space and he isn't getting cut anytime soon. 

 

I kind of hope he doesn't get cut. He may not be awesome, but he's definitely one of our best leaders who holds players accountable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
goskins10

goskins10

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

DHall won't get cut anytime soon IMO. Salary cut, no doubts.

 

As long as he restructures no problem him staying. His starting days are over but he could provide depth at S. Just not at his current salary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fordranger76

fordranger76

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

If we had our pick of the litter, we'd take Hankins over Logan right?

Hankins was who I was hoping for the whole time but I don't know anything about big fat guys tackling smaller quick guys. He just looks the best doing it to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JSSkinz

JSSkinz

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Rookie pool is 7mil. That means you have to set aside that amount for rookie pay. However, under the cap rules only the top 51 salaries count against the cap. In short, basically the rookie pool is 7mil, but the effect on cap will be about 4mil....ie, some rookie signings will replace others in the '51' so it offsets in cap space, sign some, cut soon.

 

After rookies we probably have 10mil in free space. It is normal practice to keep some back, that's limited for us.... But...

 

cut Hall save 4mil

cut Lavaou save 4mil

sign Kirk LTD save 4-6mil

cut RJF save 3mil

convert 50% of Normans 2017 salary to bonus and defer 6mil to future years cap

 

Cap space is limited, but we have option to create space ~10mil to pick up 2 more very good FA.

 

 

Thanks for the breakdown, makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zCommander

zCommander

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

As long as he restructures no problem him staying. His starting days are over but he could provide depth at S. Just not at his current salary.

 

Pretty sure he will restructure. I think he already did a restructure couple of years back as well to stay. Since he is from this area and was glad to be back after leaving the Raiders. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carex

carex

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

DHall on Twitter now backing Bruce. Love DHall, but bet he's restructuring his deal to stick around. I'll say 2mil saved in cap space and he isn't getting cut anytime soon. 

 

Don't act like it's some suck up thing.  People can claim Allen needs a yes man, but he's done plenty of ceding power since he got here, Shanny ran things, then he left and Bruce ran things for one year, then hired Scot

 

And Kirk's bit about only signing a long term deal if Allen is gone, if true, is his right I guess.  But there's been plenty of other people who have signed long term deals here with Bruce as Team Pres.  So why's Kirk feeling so wronged if they're cool

 

I like Kirk.  I want him to stick around.  But as it stands I'm not liking his attitude.  Guys showing himself to have a bit of a fragile ego and seems to be a bit of a control freak right as he's becoming a father so he's going to need ot work on that

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reaper Skins

Reaper Skins

Posted
Posted

Regarding swearinger...

 

Seems like one of the big points of emphasis for our secondary is versatility and the ability to play multiple roles in the system.  Who cares what his "official position" is.  If the past few years are any indication, it's going to be a constantly rotating group of guys who shift in and out in different roles throughout the game depending on what the offense is showing.  He's played a bunch of different positions in the past, that's probably why we were so eager to add him. Regardless of where he plays on the field, he's an upgrade from a purely athletic standpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bonez3

Bonez3

Posted
Posted

DHall is definetely a Skin I will get behind. He has been straight up his whole time here and already stated he essentially is ready for a paycut. Further, I'm not sure he wont be a viable FS in rotation and certain looks. 

 

Compared to the likes of Garcon, this is a guy I would thank for his service here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CommDownMan

CommDownMan

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, bobandweave said:

 

Sign him to a one year deal. How many of these "Free" Agents over the past two decades would we have been better off doing that one year deal instead of a multiple year deal we actually did? Many many more then what we did. Players want one year deals for many reasons, give it to them. Nothing stops the team from keeping them longer IF it works out with them here at a later point. By signing to a one year deal we get them here and can work on the next step

 

In what way? Your worried about the cap money we have is that it? I don't understand how after decades of giving guys long term deals and wanting out of them sooner we wouldn't embrace short term try outs. That keeps the players motivated to perform as they are always playing for more money

 

If Logan wants a one year deal I am ok with that.  Why I said I would be happy with both.

 

Hankins is 24 (25 end of this month).  Even a 5 year deal and he's 30 at the end of it.  Generally he is more of a pass rusher compared to Logan and lesser against the run.  He is no slouch.  24 yo rarely get to FA and he still has room to improve.  

 

Logan vs Hankins (this is a Madden thing, but it's about the closest you'll see for DT comparisons)

http://www.mutrank.com/16/compare/19042/8114

Power Moves goes to Hankins, Run Stopping Logan.  Both solid.

 

There are times for 1 year deals and times for longer deals.  I think either would be worth a longer deal.  If Logan doesn't want it, I'd still happily take him for one year.  Size, talent and youth is worth signing longer.  So with what we've heard so far, I'd rather sign Hankins long over Logan for one.  I'd happily take both.   

 

edit:

As for the cap comment, teams turning over their entire roster each year doesn't help either.

 

We will never truly know why the team didn't sign Cousins to a bigger deal last offseason, but you should probably see the downfall in his case.  Teams need a core of guys and then supplement with smaller deals.  But again there is a time and place fo both.  We need youth at DL and I think Hankins long term is worth the risk.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rattlesnake88

Rattlesnake88

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Bonez3 said:

DHall is definetely a Skin I will get behind. He has been straight up his whole time here and already stated he essentially is ready for a paycut. Further, I'm not sure he wont be a viable FS in rotation and certain looks. 

 

Compared to the likes of Garcon, this is a guy I would thank for his service here. 

If he retires a redskin I would be happy. I love Hall. I may even snag a 23 jersey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...