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(!!)***

[skinny21]

46 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Who cares if we're greedy. How is it even greedy to want one legit starter on the line?

I'm not sure that's the argument though KB

[CTskin]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

Who cares if we're greedy. How is it even greedy to want one legit starter on the line?

I've echoed your opinion about the disappointing DL acquisitions so of course I'd still ecstatically welcome Hankins. My point is that the last 2-3 FA periods were very underwhelming, I'm not sure if we landed one player in the "top 25." This year we got three. I'm all about making it four, but give credit where credit's due.

[Hail2theSkins24]

Looks like Josh Gordon wants out of CLE ? What an amazing talent, and First team all-headcase 

[Morneblade]

3 hours ago, skinny21 said:

Kinda agree there @CTskin - there seems to be this prevailing idea that every hole must be filled come draft time.  Obviously this is related to not wanting to force draft picks, but it seems like this view is way more... extreme than usual.  What ever happened to the notion that all teams have holes and/or weak links in-season?

 

With that said, I do get the angst over not improving the dline.  

 

It's not that really. something like ILB, S or even DE could have been addressed early in the draft (and still can) because of there is a lot of really good talent in those areas, if we had done nothing in FA. Guess which area doesn't have it?

 

NT.

 

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

Who cares if we're greedy. How is it even greedy to want one legit starter on the line?

 

Nope.

[moondog]

3 hours ago, skinny21 said:

Kinda agree there @CTskin - there seems to be this prevailing idea that every hole must be filled come draft time.  Obviously this is related to not wanting to force draft picks, but it seems like this view is way more... extreme than usual.  What ever happened to the notion that all teams have holes and/or weak links in-season?

 

With that said, I do get the angst over not improving the dline.  

You don't have to fill every need but our defense has been dreadful for years now. They are one of, if not the worst run defense in the league over the last two years. And really the only position you can even argue we've gotten better at is safety. At best, the defensive line is as good as last year's, which is to say it's horrible. We have a damn good offense so yes it is worth aggressively addressing the defensive line to help out the offense. 

 

There are good players on the line in the draft and we damn well better come away with some. But that doesn't mean you don't try to bring in the player in free agency that is the absolute best combo of youth and stopping the run available. Reduce dhalls salary or cut him and you have the money for Hankins. It's really that simple. Signing cousins would do it to. A defensive line of Hankins McGee and McClain starting with Ioannidis Lanier and a couple rookies that are up and coming is perfect. Especially if Hankins is on a one year deal and the rookies are ready after this year to start. 

[DC9]

It would be too perfect to get Hankins signed.  No chance we get all of our (well...most of us) top 3 players on the FA board in the same offseason.

 

They don't want to spoil us.

 

But good franchises do that.  And we're a fanbase that deserves some spoiling.

[TSO]

My concern right now is that the solid signings of Brown and Swearinger are going to be minimized or (gasp!) even nullified by the lack of overall talent on the Dline. If you continue to invest only minimal resources (cheaper FAs, lower rounders, undrafted guys) at the most important positional group on the defense, it's very unlikely to work out and it's going to affect every single position behind them.  

 

That's exactly what we saw last year, in my mind. That's not to say we were good around them otherwise and didn't upgrade at ILB and Safety this offseason... no way. It's just acknowledging how much more impactful Dline was to the overall failure of our D than our suckitude elsewhere. 

 

I would just rather not be boxed in going into the draft in having to pick up a Dlineman because, as it stands right now, if we don't come away with an immediate impact player there (chances of which lessen considerably as each round goes by), it could legitimately ruin the entire defense! 

 

That's a scary thought for me considering how close I feel we are as a roster in terms of contending. It's also scary for me because I absolutely HATE the idea of reaching for need. I really want them to take the highest ranked player on the board at every pick, and if it means not picking even a single Dlineman I'd rather that be the case. So there's solid potential here for that position to ruin one season if the draft doesn't fall their way, as well as more than just one season if they do force it and reach, skipping the more impactful player in the process who ends up having the better career. The draft should never mainly be about the upcoming season. 

 

To @skinny21's great point, I agree, it's not about having zero weaknesses. It's near impossible not to but, for me, it's about where they are. It's just that I despise having our potential weakness being the trenches on either side. I'd rather it be anywhere else (outside of QB, of course). I would still choose Hankins over Brown or Swearinger, for instance.

 

And that's not to say the lines need to be perfect (though having elite ones can elevate the entire team). I don't even mind if we end up having Lauvao still starting at LG even though he's the weakest link on an otherwise very good Oline. 

[WelshSkinsFan]

26 minutes ago, moondog said:

You don't have to fill every need but our defense has been dreadful for years now. They are one of, if not the worst run defense in the league over the last two years. And really the only position you can even argue we've gotten better at is safety. At best, the defensive line is as good as last year's, which is to say it's horrible. We have a damn good offense so yes it is worth aggressively addressing the defensive line to help out the offense. 

 

I think you are being a little bit too negative here.  The D Line itself you could argue that the 2 in and 2 out were a wash although personally I think McClain is better than Baker but you have to admit we got better at ILB with the Zach Brown signing.  The line can be addressed through the draft and that seems to be the plan from what Manusky, Gruden et al have said.  I get the angst over the NT position but there were only 3 out there worth signing and the price has been too steep for the position.  There are good developmental NT guys in the draft and we just hired one of the best D Line coaches in the business, we also have guys in the building who have been bulking up and so again I am going to trust that Tomsula can make a difference the way Callahan does with our O Line.

 

[Est.1974]

The story a while back was we were still tracking a couple of free agents, business was over unless the cards fell out way. They did with Brown, find it hard to believe we are not sitting on the nest waiting to see if Hankins shows a glimmer our way. 

 

[Morneblade]

20 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

 

I think you are being a little bit too negative here.  The D Line itself you could argue that the 2 in and 2 out were a wash although personally I think McClain is better than Baker but you have to admit we got better at ILB with the Zach Brown signing.  The line can be addressed through the draft and that seems to be the plan from what Manusky, Gruden et al have said.  I get the angst over the NT position but there were only 3 out there worth signing and the price has been too steep for the position.  There are good developmental NT guys in the draft and we just hired one of the best D Line coaches in the business, we also have guys in the building who have been bulking up and so again I am going to trust that Tomsula can make a difference the way Callahan does with our O Line.

 

 

Continually throwing **** at the most important position in the 3-4 is insane. 7-8 million is not too much for a high quality starter there. Oh, and as you comparison between OL and DL, it's not even close

 

OL: 2 top 5 picks, 2 3rd rounders and a 2nd rounder

DL: 2nd round DE now playing NT (Hood).,UDFA (Lanier), 6th round (McGee) 3rd round (McClain)

 

Talent isn't even close.

[Est.1974]

1 hour ago, Hail2theSkins24 said:

Looks like Josh Gordon wants out of CLE ? What an amazing talent, and First team all-headcase 

We'd be all over him.

[Morneblade]

7 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

We'd be all over him.

 

[skinny21]

Yeah, it's a valid point that NT is the most important position in a 3-4 and thus a crucial one to address ... and you're risking reaching in the draft when you have such a void (and the draft is a crapshoot).  

 

My point was just that we (as DC9 mentioned) got a good S, ILB and WR (along with some linemen and Brian Quick).  I also think that even if we have the same problem going forward, the D should still improve in some key areas (we actually did pretty well in some of these areas under Barry in '15).  Probably not enough to be a top tier, but maybe good enough to make some noise.  

[WelshSkinsFan]

48 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

Continually throwing **** at the most important position in the 3-4 is insane. 7-8 million is not too much for a high quality starter there. Oh, and as you comparison between OL and DL, it's not even close

 

OL: 2 top 5 picks, 2 3rd rounders and a 2nd rounder

DL: 2nd round DE now playing NT (Hood).,UDFA (Lanier), 6th round (McGee) 3rd round (McClain)

 

Talent isn't even close.

 

But until the draft is done and you know the plan you can't say we are throwing **** at the position.  Poe showed signs of declining last year and KC made a business decision not to keep him, Logan had no intention of coming here and Hankins wants a laughable amount for what he brings.  I could also argue that 7-8 million is too much when we are only in a 3-4 front a percentage of snaps and so the NT in our scheme is a rotational player.

 

Reference the OL/DL comparison, I didn't say that talent was the same just that Tomsula has a record of improving what he has in the same way Callahan does and when he only just started work I am willing to give him time to make an impact.

 

I don't have rose colored glasses but honestly the time for negativity is mid way through the season if we are 2-6 and our additions are flaming out.  I refuse to act like the sky is falling when we are still two weeks away from the draft and can and probably will still add pieces through FA.  I can't hate a plan that I have not seen and nobody truly knows what the team will do in the next few weeks because every team lies at this time of year anyway.

[Morneblade]

11 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

Yeah, it's a valid point that NT is the most important position in a 3-4 and thus a crucial one to address ... and you're risking reaching in the draft when you have such a void (and the draft is a crapshoot).  

 

My point was just that we (as DC9 mentioned) got a good S, ILB and WR (along with some linemen and Brian Quick).  I also think that even if we have the same problem going forward, the D should still improve in some key areas (we actually did pretty well in some of these areas under Barry in '15).  Probably not enough to be a top tier, but maybe good enough to make some noise.  

 

It's should be better, but unlike a lot of people I think you still need to build from the lines out, not outside in. We have not done that. I think it's going to minimize the effects of the FA's and whatever draft choices we make.

 

Just now, WelshSkinsFan said:

 

But until the draft is done and you know the plan you can't say we are throwing **** at the position.  Poe showed signs of declining last year and KC made a business decision not to keep him, Logan had no intention of coming here and Hankins wants a laughable amount for what he brings.  I could also argue that 7-8 million is too much when we are only in a 3-4 front a percentage of snaps and so the NT in our scheme is a rotational player.

 

You can argue that, but it's a really bad argument. Basically, if you don't have a real NT, you're not going to stop the run. If you don't stop the run, you're not going to force teams to throw. And if you still want to go in your nickle packages regardless, you need to just drop the 3-4 and get 4-3 players on the front 7.

 

Just now, WelshSkinsFan said:

I don't have rose colored glasses but honestly the time for negativity is mid way through the season if we are 2-6 and our additions are flaming out.  I refuse to act like the sky is falling when we are still two weeks away from the draft and can and probably will still add pieces through FA.  I can't hate a plan that I have not seen and nobody truly knows what the team will do in the next few weeks because every team lies at this time of year anyway.

 

Maybe. But there isn't a impact NT in the draft. It's not coming from there. FA is the only way it's coming this year.

 

Unless we're going to rely on Phil Taylor to find new knees.

[WelshSkinsFan]

52 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

Maybe. But there isn't a impact NT in the draft. It's not coming from there. FA is the only way it's coming this year.

 

Unless we're going to rely on Phil Taylor to find new knees.

I don't think there is an impact NT in FA either though unless you want to overpay for Hankins.  I am not saying it is not a position of need and if he drops his demands I would happily take Hankins.  For now, maybe Taylor does shock us and return to his best, maybe we draft a NT in the 7th round and he turns out to be one of those under scouted legends that winds up in the Hall of Fame, heck maybe we just go back and sign Knighton and after a year of watching games on his couch he decides to take his career seriously.

[Morneblade]

1 minute ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

I don't think there is an impact NT in FA either though unless you want to overpay for Hankins.  I am not saying it is not a position of need and if he drops his demands I would happily take Hankins.  For now, maybe Taylor does shock us and return to his best, maybe we draft a NT in the 7th round and he turns out to be one of those under scouted legends that winds up in the Hall of Fame, heck maybe we just go back and sign Knighton and after a year of watching games on his couch he decides to take his career seriously.

 

This is where we disagree. I don't think paying 7-8 million is overpaying. And everything else in your post just screams "NT doesn't matter".

 

I have a feeling if I used to same logic to address QB or LT, you would completely disagree.

[WelshSkinsFan]

If Hankins wants 7-8 million lets talk but the only figure quoted so far is $10 million plus and that is too much.  I do think NT matters but I can't magically make an all pro appear for us to sign and right now those are our limited options.  If it is any comfort, most of the Pro Bowl NT's in the league were not considered impact players in their draft class either so just because you don't see one now it does not mean they are not there.  Of course I would feel happier with that logic if SM was making the choice and not the Harvest Festival king. 

[Morneblade]

4 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

If Hankins wants 7-8 million lets talk but the only figure quoted so far is $10 million plus and that is too much.  I do think NT matters but I can't magically make an all pro appear for us to sign and right now those are our limited options.  If it is any comfort, most of the Pro Bowl NT's in the league were not considered impact players in their draft class either so just because you don't see one now it does not mean they are not there.  Of course I would feel happier with that logic if SM was making the choice and not the Harvest Festival king. 

 

I agree on the 10 million/per. And I also agree you don't know what you're going to get. The issue I have is treating the position as an afterthought. You can take a QB in the 1st 2 picks, and he might bust, and take one in the 4th (see what I did there!) and he becomes very good. But if all you do is pick late round picks for a position, you really don't care about it. Chances are you're not going to get much out of that position.

[WelshSkinsFan]

I agree, if we don't get Hankins then we do need to make this a draft priority and if we get beyond the 4th round without a NT there will probably be a bucket of wings getting tossed at the tv.  I personally like Dalvin Tomlinson and could live with that as a choice if we don't address this through FA.

[HTTRDynasty]

The Indianapolis Star reports the Colts are unlikely to sign free agent DT Johnathan Hankins.

 

Hankins left his visit Tuesday without a contract. The Colts have a huge need at nose tackle, but aren't willing to meet Hankins' asking price. With Miami also reportedly out on Hankins, re-signing with the Giants is looking like his most likely landing spot.

[Est.1974]

Time to swoop, offer slightly more the the Giants and see if he bites. 

[Conn]

Swoop in like with Brown. Swoop, FO. Swoop. 

[goskins10]

2 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

I agree on the 10 million/per. And I also agree you don't know what you're going to get. The issue I have is treating the position as an afterthought. You can take a QB in the 1st 2 picks, and he might bust, and take one in the 4th (see what I did there!) and he becomes very good. But if all you do is pick late round picks for a position, you really don't care about it. Chances are you're not going to get much out of that position.

 

That's just not true. They brought Bennie Logan in and talked to him for 2 days. Either they didn't like what they saw or he didn't want to paly here. We are one of now 3 teams even in the conversation for Hankins. So to say they are treating as an afterthought is a bit of an exaggeration.

 

If they were to pay Hankins $7M he becomes the 4th highest paid NT in the NFL. And that's only because Logan is on a 1 yr $8M contract. The next highest would be $5.5M. If reports are to be believed his own team is only offering about $5M/yr. At least right now he has priced himself out. Yes, we need a NT. But you can't just spend whatever. It's not like we are that one player from a SB.

 

If they can get him for just over $5M or maybe $5.5M take a run at him. Otherwise, move on. $7M to $8M is entirely too much for him IMO.

 

Let's see what the draft does bring - which is exactly what I think teams are doing. Also, I believe the upgrades in the other parts of the defense will help mitigate the lack of a dominant NT. That does not mean we don't need one. But let's get carried away with the importance - at least not right now.

 

It's just April. Let's see what Tomsula and Manusky put together.

[Morneblade]

15 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

I agree, if we don't get Hankins then we do need to make this a draft priority and if we get beyond the 4th round without a NT there will probably be a bucket of wings getting tossed at the tv.  I personally like Dalvin Tomlinson and could live with that as a choice if we don't address this through FA.

 

I don't think he's a true NT, but a DT in a 4-3 or a DE in a 3-4. I think as a NFL NT he's going to get abused.

 

5 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

Time to swoop, offer slightly more the the Giants and see if he bites. 

 

We should, and let the chips fall where they may. If we don't at least try, Bruce Allen is getting a Atomic Wedgie from me next time I see him.