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(!!)***

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

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

 

1 hour ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

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

Damn right. Offer a hair more than the giants on a one year deal and let him come in pissed off ready to make his old team and everyone else pay for it, while our hopeful 4rth round pick NT develops.

 

Do it. Do it now. Run to the choppa....redskin 1.

[TSO]

 

4 years, $28 million supposedly. This obviously doesn't mean much though considering they don't say how it's structured or what's guaranteed. 

 

But total is 7 million per year according to this. 

 

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

I'd like to see us make a move on Hankins, I just don't see it happening.  No way Bruce pays 8 per year.  

 

My guess is he stays where he is.

[HTTRDynasty]

27 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

4 years, $28 million supposedly. This obviously doesn't mean much though considering they don't say how it's structured or what's guaranteed. 

 

But total is 7 million per year according to this. 

 

 

 

From that article:

 

Hankins is only 25 years old and, if he accepts the offer to stay with the Giants, he could become a free agent again at 29. It certainly looks as if Hankins’ agent, Kevin Poston, misread the market. A source said the first contract sought from Hankins’ camp was for $15 million per year, a ridiculous demand that quickly dropped to $10 million per year — more on average than the five-year, $46.25 million deal Damon “Snacks’’ Harrison got from the Giants a year ago. Harrison is considered the best run-stopping defensive tackle in the league. The Giants value Hankins and see him as a bona fide starter, but they do not view him as a difference-maker in the mold of Harrison.

 

$15M per?  I've read a little about the agent's past, but this is just next level stupidity.

[moondog]

11 hours 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.

 

 

The post directly above yours by submitted is spot on as is the one below by morneblade. I fear brown will be minimized by how bad our line is. He is a sideline to sideline player but if the dline gets blown up like last year and the year before he's not really the type to run through guards. It's mostly the same for any linebacker. Hell I think we'd be surprised at how good Compton and foster would look behind the Giants line from last year. 

 

Ill echo that you address holes, at least the big ones and especially at the most crucial positions in free agency so you're not forced to pick needs in the draft. And that's not even accounting for injuries. How's our line look with an injury to McClain or McGee? Hankins should be signed AND we should bring in some picks hopefully at dline depending on how the draft works out. 

 

And I know everyone gets spun up about free agents but I don't see swearinger as some great player for us. I think he'll be an average starter that we will grow tired of due to attitude and unsportsmanlike conduct penalties. 

[DC Lumber Co.]

1 hour ago, moondog said:

And I know everyone gets spun up about free agents but I don't see swearinger as some great player for us. I think he'll be an average starter that we will grow tired of due to attitude and unsportsmanlike conduct penalties. 

 

I agree with your post other than this point. I think Swearinger was atop Scot's FA grocery list and was signed quickly because he is a player who was a late bloomer and miscast early on. Definitely a guy on the up-swing, IMO. Got Cooley's stamp of approval for whatever thats worth too.

 

Now, I know he had a bonehead play or two due to choreographed celebrations/taunting last year or something so your comments regarding growing tired of penalties may still hold true, but I don't think it will be due to his hits like we had to worry about with Brandon Merriweather if thats what you mean.

 

Nonetheless I still think Swearinger will be the best solution we've tried in a long time at FS. He better be though, because the only thing that worries me is that his signing may have prevented us from drafting a developmental FS due to a logjam at the position now with the presence of D.Hall, Blackmon, and Everett behind him on the depth chart. Hall and Blackmon could be viewed as tough-cuts due to versatility and vet leadership (we wont know what Hall has left until post-draft unfortunately), and Everett showed some promise late in the year and is no longer PS eligible, IIRC.

 

I realize I'm likely dreaming, but one best case scenario I'm hoping the coaching staff envisions is D.Hall bouncing back from injury and being able to come in as FS, allowing Swearinger to roll down into the box and Cravens to the Moneybacker role he performed well at last year. Would be a very cool 3-safety look, situationally.

[Est.1974]

So there is no need for anyone to offer Hankins 10mil py when it's 7mil py from the Giants. He's being seriously misrepresented.

 

Poe, Logan, getting 8mil py so that's the line really. He's going to get more than I thought but 4/34 range is probably what it takes.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

IMO the cornerstone of a killer 3-4 defense:  fast linebackers who can move sideline to sideline and are good tacklers.  With Zach Brown we have at least one guy like that.  Also, a big D line especially NT who can clog lanes (stop the run) and keep guards, etc off of the speedy MLBs.  We don't have that yet, IMO.  And great pass rush off the edges -- on that we are ok IMO but nothing special.  Signing Hankins IMO would help fill a key gap easing off pressure on filling these needs in the draft.  But I agree its unlikely they sign Hankins. At this point IMO, the key for the draft is NT, one 5 technique type who can bring some pass rush and a speedy-wide 9 type pass rusher to give a different dimension from the edge compared to the power pass rushers we have now. 

[Morneblade]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

IMO the cornerstone of a killer 3-4 defense:  fast linebackers who can move sideline to sideline and are good tacklers.  With Zach Brown we have at least one guy like that.  Also, a big D line especially NT who can clog lanes (stop the run) and keep guards, etc off of the speedy MLBs.  We don't have that yet, IMO.  And great pass rush off the edges -- on that we are ok IMO but nothing special.  Signing Hankins IMO would help fill a key gap easing off pressure on filling these needs in the draft.  But I agree its unlikely they sign Hankins. At this point IMO, the key for the draft is NT, one 5 technique type who can bring some pass rush and a speedy-wide 9 type pass rusher to give a different dimension from the edge compared to the power pass rushers we have now. 

 

Agreed. We need a NT, another DL (at least) and a speed rushing OLB. I don't know if this will happen, but will the rise of some of the RB's there is a chance that someone like Barnett will drop to 17. I'd love to have him as a OLB. He's better against the run that people know as well as being a excellent pass rusher.

[bowhunter]

Wasn't Indy the first actual visit that Hankins made? Now with that behind him, I would think that the next few days will be very telling. If we truly have an interest we should know something very soon.  If there's not news of a visit planned in the next 48 hours, I doubt that we're in play.

[moondog]

4 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

I agree with your post other than this point. I think Swearinger was atop Scot's FA grocery list and was signed quickly because he is a player who was a late bloomer and miscast early on. Definitely a guy on the up-swing, IMO. Got Cooley's stamp of approval for whatever thats worth too.

 

Now, I know he had a bonehead play or two due to choreographed celebrations/taunting last year or something so your comments regarding growing tired of penalties may still hold true, but I don't think it will be due to his hits like we had to worry about with Brandon Merriweather if thats what you mean.

 

Nonetheless I still think Swearinger will be the best solution we've tried in a long time at FS. He better be though, because the only thing that worries me is that his signing may have prevented us from drafting a developmental FS due to a logjam at the position now with the presence of D.Hall, Blackmon, and Everett behind him on the depth chart. Hall and Blackmon could be viewed as tough-cuts due to versatility and vet leadership (we wont know what Hall has left until post-draft unfortunately), and Everett showed some promise late in the year and is no longer PS eligible, IIRC.

 

I realize I'm likely dreaming, but one best case scenario I'm hoping the coaching staff envisions is D.Hall bouncing back from injury and being able to come in as FS, allowing Swearinger to roll down into the box and Cravens to the Moneybacker role he performed well at last year. Would be a very cool 3-safety look, situationally.

I hope you're right. I've always viewed Swearinger as a bigger but damn near identical player as Cravens. Not a crazy athlete, more of a just a good football player but also miscast as a free safety. 

 

I've always seen him as the ideal "tweener" player between linebacker and safety - a perfect nickel player and guy to fill that "Tyrann Mathieu" role - but not an every down free safety....maybe an every down strong safety. Basically I view us as having two excellent playmaking tweener types without a true safety at either position. I think Arizona had such a star studded and complete defense across the board it breeds the perfect storm for a tweener kind of guy to just run free and make plays due to the people around him. 

 

Again, with such a weak d-line, it allows teams to run all day on us and be in favorable 2nd and 3rd downs and pass/play-action situations. This, to me, more than anything negates having a strong group of pass rushers (I believe we do) and a decent or maybe even strong secondary (I think they're better than most believe they are but due to the aforementioned reasons they look worse than they are). At absolute best I think we are just as well off on the dline as last year, which is to say we suck, at least against the run. To me, I think we've made a slight regression. 

[Hail2theSkins24]

I wouldn't hate if we just tossed an offer to Hankins agent 1 year $6.5 mill that can hit $8.5 mill if he hits some incentives (games played, snap %, playoffs). At the very least it competes with Giants offer and may drive the price up for him to resign with them

[RWJ]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

IMO the cornerstone of a killer 3-4 defense:  fast linebackers who can move sideline to sideline and are good tacklers.  With Zach Brown we have at least one guy like that.  Also, a big D line especially NT who can clog lanes (stop the run) and keep guards, etc off of the speedy MLBs.  We don't have that yet, IMO.  And great pass rush off the edges -- on that we are ok IMO but nothing special.  Signing Hankins IMO would help fill a key gap easing off pressure on filling these needs in the draft.  But I agree its unlikely they sign Hankins. At this point IMO, the key for the draft is NT, one 5 technique type who can bring some pass rush and a speedy-wide 9 type pass rusher to give a different dimension from the edge compared to the power pass rushers we have now. 

Who would you like to see them fill those positions with in the draft, SIP?

[carex]

49 minutes ago, moondog said:

I hope you're right. I've always viewed Swearinger as a bigger but damn near identical player as Cravens. Not a crazy athlete, more of a just a good football player but also miscast as a free safety. 

 

 

he didn't play free safety until he reached the Cards, where he played best, he was the Texans strong safety

[Cooleyfan1993]

15 hours ago, abdcskins said:

I just found out like a minute ago that we signed Brian Quick.  Apparently I'm not reading this thread often enough haha.  I like that acquisition, he's a solid WR and adds quality depth.

I guess you weren't quick enough with the news  

[WelshSkinsFan]

2 hours ago, Hail2theSkins24 said:

I wouldn't hate if we just tossed an offer to Hankins agent 1 year $6.5 mill that can hit $8.5 mill if he hits some incentives (games played, snap %, playoffs). At the very least it competes with Giants offer and may drive the price up for him to resign with them

 

I think the 1 year deal is the most likely if we get involved.  The reason we got Brown and Pryor was that they did not get the multi year deals they were looking for and so they want to try again next year and that might be the only way to get Hankins right now.  The biggest plus to signing Hankins for me is the cap situation, we don't have much room and a biggish contract for Hankins might create more pressure to get a LTD with Kirk so that we can reduce his cap hit for 2017.

[Morneblade]

1 hour ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

 

I think the 1 year deal is the most likely if we get involved.  The reason we got Brown and Pryor was that they did not get the multi year deals they were looking for and so they want to try again next year and that might be the only way to get Hankins right now.  The biggest plus to signing Hankins for me is the cap situation, we don't have much room and a biggish contract for Hankins might create more pressure to get a LTD with Kirk so that we can reduce his cap hit for 2017.

 

We can make room even without a LTD, but it would require working with multiple players, and it would still be tight. The cap is pretty much tapped out right now.

[PartyPosse]

Wel forget it, Hankins going to Colts for 3/30 so we can put that nonsense to bed.

[HTTRDynasty]

Insane deal.  O well, at least he's not going back to the Giants.

[SkinsPassion4Life]

Can't blame the Skins for not signing him....too rich for my blood

[MEANDWARF]

My only wish we can open a thread title:

 

WHO DOES THIS SCHMUCK HANKINS THINK HE IS!?!?

 

FYI, IT WILL READ BETTER IF YOU USE A GILBERT GOTTFRIED VOICE.

 

[Hail2theSkins24]

4 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

Insane deal.  O well, at least he's not going back to the Giants.

 

This. I'm glad we aren't paying $10m for him AND he goes away from a division rival who, I'm sure, was banking on him resigning. 

[Est.1974]

9 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

Insane deal.  O well, at least he's not going back to the Giants.

Agreed. Would have been great at the right price. Far easier to move on knowing the deal he got was pretty over the top for my money. 

 

 

[MEANDWARF]

I'm just glad we are not the ones that forked out 10 mil.. Colts must be desperate for DL help. 

[Morneblade]

Well, I'm not going to loose sleep over not getting him at that price. On to the draft, or get Phil Taylor some magic legs. (say that in a Forest Gump voice, it works better)