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(!!)***

[Skinsinparadise]

3 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

I hope not. I don't like him at NT. I'd like him at DE IF there wasn't such an issue with his work ethic. Guys like him boom with the Patriots, bust with us. Rather take a ILB with our pick in the first, a lot more talent and less issues.

 

Yeah I didn't mean McDowell at NT but DE.  I don't see their D line needs ending with just the NT.  McDowell wouldn't be my pick, though.   Just saying it would be flat out weird to hear from beat reporters this offseason (and I heard it directly from Scot's mouth) D line, D line, D line -- and it ends with this.  If they ride with what they have in FA I'd suspect they'd go after both a 5 technique and a 0 technique in the draft.

[Est.1974]

I think we sign another vet DT then draft a NT in the mid rounds. McGee will also see reps at DT in my view on later downs.

[justice98]

42 minutes ago, Why am I Mr. Pink? said:

 

Source close to the Cousins camp tells me as long as Bruce Allen is team president , he will NOT negotiate a long term deal. #redskins

— Chick Hernandez (@CHICKatCSN) March 10, 2017

 

More evidence this Cousins debacle is on Bruce. 

 

Unbelievable incompetence at this point. 

 

 

Chick hasn't exactly stood by his reporting on that.

[Morneblade]

4 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

I think we sign another vet DT then draft a NT in the mid rounds. McGee will also see reps at DT in my view on later downs.

 

Why? He's a non factor as a pass rusher. If anything he's going OUT on passing situations.

8 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah I didn't mean McDowell at NT but DE.  I don't see their D line needs ending with just the NT.  McDowell wouldn't be my pick, though.   Just saying it would be flat out weird to hear from beat reporters this offseason (and I heard it directly from Scot's mouth) D line, D line, D line -- and it ends with this.  If they ride with what they have in FA I'd suspect they'd go after both a 5 technique and a 0 technique in the draft.

 

I agree with this.

[justice98]

58 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You also still got June 1st cuts.   I like what they have done at WR.  I like Swearinger.  If they think they can ride with our current MLBs, I don't like it but I'll go for that ride again if need be.  My beef is all on the D line.   I don't like the status quo on D line.  But it seems IMO so crazy to ride with the status quo on D line that the one thing that makes me pause is they must have something cooking.  Similar to my take on Kirk getting a LTC, I think its too crazy for them not to get it done.

 

That seems kinda risky, hoping somebody worthwhile gets cut.  They can't plan on that. 

 

To not really upgrade at either ILB or DL, makes me think they're going all in on defense in the draft.  If they got 10 picks, 7-8 of 'em will be on defense and probably the first 2 or 3.

[ksun247]

1 hour ago, wilco_holland said:

He is Quick!

 

And tall. LOL!?

[Morneblade]

8 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

That seems kinda risky, hoping somebody worthwhile gets cut.  They can't plan on that. 

 

To not really upgrade at either ILB or DL, makes me think they're going all in on defense in the draft.  If they got 10 picks, 7-8 of 'em will be on defense and probably the first 2 or 3.

 

Which is also risky, hoping the guy you want makes it to you. What if he doesn't? Do you reach and take a guy that isn't as good (and at NT there is a pretty big drop off) or go for BPA (which is a better idea) but it doesn't help that hole?

[Skinsinparadise]

9 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

That seems kinda risky, hoping somebody worthwhile gets cut.  They can't plan on that. 

 

To not really upgrade at either ILB or DL, makes me think they're going all in on defense in the draft.  If they got 10 picks, 7-8 of 'em will be on defense and probably the first 2 or 3.

 

I agree its risky.  And I agree they are likely going full out on defense in the draft.  My one thought on D line is its possible to me that Bruce isn't done and or might fall into a deal he likes whether its now or post June 1st.  Do I endorse that approach, nope and I explained why in other posts.   But I do think its possible we stumble on something on D line. 

[justice98]

Just now, Morneblade said:

 

Which is also risky, hoping the guy you want makes it to you. What if he doesn't? Do you reach and take a guy that isn't as good (and at NT there is a pretty big drop off) or go for BPA (which is a better idea) but it doesn't help that hole?

 

The thing is, they have plenty of holes on that side of the ball, the chances are probably good that somebody in the neighborhood of BPA will be a defensive player.  

 

The other thing about BPA is we tend to talk about it as if there's always a clear separation between one guy and another guy.  It could get to their pick and there's several guys fairly close together where you're not necessarily blowing up the draft board by not taking the next ranked guy.  

[Morneblade]

6 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

The thing is, they have plenty of holes on that side of the ball, the chances are probably good that somebody in the neighborhood of BPA will be a defensive player.  

 

The other thing about BPA is we tend to talk about it as if there's always a clear separation between one guy and another guy.  It could get to their pick and there's several guys fairly close together where you're not necessarily blowing up the draft board by not taking the next ranked guy.  

 

Sometimes that is true. Sometimes that is not. In certain positions this year, there is one clear cut guy, and a big drop off after that. Or there happens to be a run at a position of need, and now the talent pool is tapped out when our pick comes. Things like this happen every year.

 

FA is a much better way to address big holes. The draft is a way to build the team with overall talent.

 

When you have glaring holes, you end up drafting a guy because you need him, not because he's the best available. Right now, if we had signed a NT and maybe a ILB, we don't HAVE to go defense. Myabe we go after a Corner, which would be nice, but not a gigantic hole, or a S which might be nice, there are some really good ones and might be a upgrade. Or a RB or WR, because we're "Ok there but maybe not great". Maybe a OLB that is a great pass rusher, which would help our D, but not it's biggest need. You now have "options".

 

As opposed to the only NT on the squad being a guy that was out of football for a couple years and coming off a 2nd knee injury.

[Skinsinparadise]

DT Johnathan Hankins -- He’s the highest-ranked free agent still available, according to ESPN’s John Clayton. Hankins is in search of a lucrative long-term deal that pays him handsomely. At some point during the process, Hankins' camp was asking for well over $10 million per season, according to multiple sources. That may have changed now that the market has spoken, but the belief is Hankins’ team is still hoping to land a long-term deal. Optimism has increased over the past week among Giants players that Hankins will return.

 

http://www.espn.com/blog/new-york-giants/post/_/id/51259/johnathan-hankins-victor-cruz-headline-list-of-remaining-giants-free-agents

[Califan007 The Constipated]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You also still got June 1st cuts.   I like what they have done at WR.  I like Swearinger.  If they think they can ride with our current MLBs, I don't like it but I'll go for that ride again if need be.  My beef is all on the D line.   I don't like the status quo on D line.  But it seems IMO so crazy to ride with the status quo on D line that the one thing that makes me pause is they must have something cooking.  Similar to my take on Kirk getting a LTC, I think its too crazy for them not to get it done.

 

That part in bold is me to a "T" lol...I didn't realize it until you put it into words.

[Morneblade]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

DT Johnathan Hankins -- He’s the highest-ranked free agent still available, according to ESPN’s John Clayton. Hankins is in search of a lucrative long-term deal that pays him handsomely. At some point during the process, Hankins' camp was asking for well over $10 million per season, according to multiple sources. That may have changed now that the market has spoken, but the belief is Hankins’ team is still hoping to land a long-term deal. Optimism has increased over the past week among Giants players that Hankins will return.

 

http://www.espn.com/blog/new-york-giants/post/_/id/51259/johnathan-hankins-victor-cruz-headline-list-of-remaining-giants-free-agents

 

I still can't for the life of me believe we're not even going to talk to the guy. ****, go in there, say 3 years, 21 million and see what happens.

[Est.1974]

1 hour ago, Morneblade said:

 

Why? He's a non factor as a pass rusher. If anything he's going OUT on passing situations.

 

Maybe so, can't agrue with that based on his career. What I read is that he improved in that area in 2016 and the deal he's got here suggests to me they think more is to come. Obviously that has holds no substance whatsoever until he proves it I guess..

[BigHuv21]

Sign Hankins and Zach Brown, trade a 3rd or 4th for Sheldon Richardson, Draft Forrest Lamp in the 1st and Joe Mixon in the 2nd #championship

 

I'm kidding, I think 

[Morneblade]

10 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Maybe so, can't agrue with that based on his career. What I read is that he improved in that area in 2016 and the deal he's got here suggests to me they think more is to come. Obviously that has holds no substance whatsoever until he proves it I guess..

 

Well, considering what he has done in his carrier, 2016 is an improvement. But that's not saying much. He looks to be a pretty strong run stuffer, and pretty powerful, when healthy. So they might see him as a guy that is going to help with run defense, which we really need help with. So I think that is why he is here. Seems to be some questions with motor, playing high and especially health though.

[Hail2theSkins24]

22 minutes ago, BigHuv21 said:

Sign Hankins and Zach Brown, trade a 3rd or 4th for Sheldon Richardson, Draft Forrest Lamp in the 1st and Joe Mixon in the 2nd #championship

 

I'm kidding, I think 

 

 At this point, very unlikely we get either Hankins or Brown. But Richardson still intrigues me, yes I know his cap hit is ~8 million but I really think this is the classic 'change of scenery' case. Richardson is one of the most talented DL in the league. For a 4th rounder? Yeah, I'll take my chances

[Why am I Mr. Pink?]

I think any trade for Richardson would have to include signing him to a LTD. Good chance that if we dont give him a lucrative contract, he remains a malcontent with us as a 1 year rental.  

[Gregpeck99]

Cousins will turn Brian Quick into a TD scoring machine.

 

Nice pick up!

 

Skins getting taller by the minute!! 

[bobandweave]

Like the quick news think he is among the low cost with a higher ceiling then the average fan even realizes, now we need to kick the tires on Jamal Charles and see if we can get a cheap deal done there.

[Morneblade]

5 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

Like the quick news think he is among the low cost with a higher ceiling then the average fan even realizes, now we need to kick the tires on Jamal Charles and see if we can get a cheap deal done there.

 

There is where I actually like Bruce's approach to FA. Finding some upgrades in depth for real moderate prices. He does a good job there. Unfortunately when he's looking at big ticket items we need, he's too many times "penny smart, dollar dumb."

[JamesMadisonSkins]

I have been wondering if Sheldon Richardson was on our radar. If it would only cost a 4th, it may be why we haven't splurged on a DL in FA (In terms of the top guys). If we trade one of our 4th for Richardson and sign him to an extension, he'd likely command $8-10 million per year. I think he'd be making $8m this year on the 5th year option. 

[Thinking Skins]

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Not sure where the history of success is coming from.  Tampa went 38-42 while Bruce was the GM.   The Redskins have gone 45-66 with him here.  With the Raiders he was senior executive and by most accounts Al Davis himself shopped for the groceries.  And they went 64-64.   He's an ex-agent who has a reputation of being savvy with money.  I like that about him but I want him to stay in his lane.  I don't want the dude overruling our personnel guys.  I have a really good plumber and an electrician.  I don't want my plumber overruling my electrician and making the ultimate call as to electrical work in my house.  That simple to me.  I don't think anyone here has issues with Bruce aside from that point. 

 

The Raiders (Al Davis) were a known franchise with problems stemming from the owner, his desire to win and his impatience. Bruce brought in Joe Gruden who took them to a Super Bowl (and three double digit win seasons).Then he went to Tampa to be the GM for an owner who was known to pinch pennies because he didn't really care about football. They had 3 winning and 2 losing seasons there. The losing was far worse than the winning and they were about a .500 team. As a point of reference, Gibbs was coach from 2004 - 2007 and had a similar pattern with 2 winning and 2 losing seasons in what many (still) call the best stretch of Danny's ownership. 

 

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I didn't like Vinny's approach to trading picks and I didn't like his overzealous approach to FA.  I didn't hate everything he did. There are aspects of it I like.   For example when Joe Gibbs came, Vinny went to town and brought in some horses:  Shawn Springs, Marcus Washington, C. Griffin.  It was our own version of what the Giants did last year in FA to turn the defense around.  It worked.  Imagine Bruce doing the same?  I don't.   Then in 2006, Vinny did what I don't like about him, he can't leave well enough alone so another spending spree, this time on mediocre players.  Would Bruce do the same?  I don't think so. 

 

Like Vinny, I don't like Bruce's approach to FA for the opposite reasons.  But there are aspects of it I like.  I like that he isn't going to saddle the team with a Haynesworth type of contract and I Iike that he isn't going to kill the cap with much dead money, etc.  But as Keim suggested, Bruce has to show he can succeed with his FA signings otherwise the approach will be summed up as cheap and ineffective.  It's the problem IMO of having a money guy run personnel.  Yeah the money aspect of it is smart but lets actually get more hits than misses in FA for a change.  The NY Giants weren't cheap in 2015, didn't get bargains in FA but rebuilt their defense in one fell swoop.  Does it feel like Bruce is doing the same?

 

The problem with VInny's approach to FA (and roster building in general) is that it cripples the team. Sure we can get lucky with the players you name, but what about the Trotters the Arch's, the Shaun Alexander's, the Haynesworths? Its not just the bad moves, the trades of draft picks, the screaming when a player goes down in training camp, the reliance on players over 30, its also not realizing how much that hurts the team in the future. People argue that as long as the cap keeps going up we'll never outspend the cap so we're fine. But we had a GM who in on record saying "a first round pick, thats all" for Mark Sanchez. And Only By the Grace of God did Orakpo drop that draft and we rushed to the podium and selected him. 

 

And I think you're shortchanging Bruce. He did sign D. Jackson. He did sign Hatcher. We brought in Norman. Are those value deals? I think those are situations where he saw players he wanted and went after them. Heck, if the Jones stuff is to be believed, then he went after Paea and RJF as well. He also held on to players like Baker and Riley back in 2014 (I think) when they were last up for FA. So he has shown he will pay players when their time comes. Even this year he was active on that first weekend signing young DL players and a S. Just because they're not pro bowlers doesn't mean they aren't f the Springs/Griffin quality. But him having just signed Hatcher 3 years back and seeing that not work out (remember the reports being that he was a "young" 32 or whatever his age was), I can understand him just going for actual young players along the DL. 

 

[justice98]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

DT Johnathan Hankins -- He’s the highest-ranked free agent still available, according to ESPN’s John Clayton. Hankins is in search of a lucrative long-term deal that pays him handsomely. At some point during the process, Hankins' camp was asking for well over $10 million per season, according to multiple sources. That may have changed now that the market has spoken, but the belief is Hankins’ team is still hoping to land a long-term deal. Optimism has increased over the past week among Giants players that Hankins will return.

 

http://www.espn.com/blog/new-york-giants/post/_/id/51259/johnathan-hankins-victor-cruz-headline-list-of-remaining-giants-free-agents

 

So is it the money now or the length?  Cuz that makes it sound like the money is coming down, but not enough that people aren't sold on him beyond a prove it deal.

52 minutes ago, Gregpeck99 said:

Cousins will turn Brian Quick into a TD scoring machine.

 

Nice pick up!

 

Skins getting taller by the minute!! 

 

Kinda feels like we're stick to what we know and throw the crap out if it again.  They haven't seemed to show much concern for improving the running game beyond hopes and positive vibes. 

[RabidFan]

In some jobs, length equals money.