DC9

2018 Free Agency Database - (Signed: WILLIAMS - McPhee - Scandrick - P-Rich) - (Lauvao, Bergstrom, Nsehke, Taylor, Z. Brown and Quick re-signed)

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

If its true I like the move, Junior had a PFF of 82.4 and Mcphee was a 79.9, McPhee has more size and versatility than Junior.

 

I found this quote from one of Falcons team sites where they were talking about signing him "he’s a quality pass rusher with experience at defensive end, defensive tackle, and linebacker".

With his size,he looks to fit in just about anywhere on the line,which makes his signing all the better..I love universal players,the guys who can play all over the place at a given need!!.those are the best players to have IMO!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IDK...McPhee and Scandrick. Seems like the same ole, same ole. Dumpster diving FA's that almost certainly will disappoint and be cut by next year, if they make it that far. 

 

Seriously, I'd rather just roll the money over and go with PS players. Although, the Scandrick deal barely makes the top 51 so whatever. But edge rusher at bottom of barrel still gonna cost some $. That money could be spent better

Edited by Bonez3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mr.Will said:

With his size,he looks to fit in just about anywhere on the line,which makes his signing all the better..I love universal players,the guys who can play all over the place at a given need!!.those are the best players to have IMO!!

Question:upcoming draft..should we draft Best player of need or Best player available after our quiet FA run??..i know this should be on the draft feed but after reading all the posts bout this player or that one we should sign,I’m just curious as to what anybody else thinks???...me personally,I feel we pick Best player available on the board..no matter if it’s either side of the line,TE,RB,DB..fingers are crossed we don’t reach for someone out of desperation instead of quality..If the best player at our pick is a corner or safety,then so be it-Go Get Em then..this is just my thought tho...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have rather seen a tweet about Hankins.  I think we can all move on from Hankins.  I've spent most of my days on twitter waiting for his signing after he visited.  Pretty simple.  If Skins don't sign him and they'd be STUPID not to then it seems like they almost have to dedicated the money to either Vea or Payne at #13.  Signing Hankins allow Allen to keep his cracker jack toys too because Hankins was released.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Hankins has the injury history for the Redskins to sign him. If he missed 1/3 of the past 2 seasons games and therefore cost only 6-7M a year they'd be all over him. 

 

It's not a big fluke that the Redskins somehow always lead the league or come close to it in injuries every year. It's because those are the players they get.

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SkinsFTW said:

I don't think Hankins has the injury history for the Redskins to sign him. If he missed 1/3 of the past 2 seasons games and therefore cost only 6-7M a year they'd be all over him. 

 

It's not a big fluke that the Redskins somehow always lead the league or come close to it in injuries every year. It's because those are the players they get.

U definitely got a point..fuller,Allen,Moreau,hosley just to name the most recent that I can call off the top of my head..but yeah,when ya pick up players with the injury history that a lot of our have coming right onto the team,not a whole lot else to be expected then huh??..also,think strength and conditioning coaches have a huge part to play into that as well-ours haven’t been all that great from what I’ve noticed over tha last several years!!

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, RWJ said:

I would have rather seen a tweet about Hankins.  I think we can all move on from Hankins.  I've spent most of my days on twitter waiting for his signing after he visited.  Pretty simple.  If Skins don't sign him and they'd be STUPID not to then it seems like they almost have to dedicated the money to either Vea or Payne at #13.  Signing Hankins allow Allen to keep his cracker jack toys too because Hankins was released.

 

Very little chance of Vea in the draft. I think Miami picks him at 11 to replace Suh. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man it sure is nice that we no longer get free agents only by being the top (read: overpaying) bidding team.

 

We extend fair offers and the player actually chooses the Redskins over other suitors. Speaks volumes about how far we've come. While we still may be looked down upon by other teams, the media, and a large portion our own fanbase... it's clear the players view of the Redskins is a little brighter.

 

We understand the risk in the player picking to go elsewhere, but we stay true to our team building philosophy of homegrown drafted players being the main focus, coupled with free agents sprinkled in that we refuse to overpay for.

 

I think that the confidence in allowing players to leave the building after a visit instead of coming off desperate may lead to players actually respecting us a little more. At least the ones who are interested in more than just money. Also shows that the player truly wants to be here which is a good first impression to the locker room as far as welcoming him with open arms (as opposed to players resenting the arrival of an overpaid FA)

 

 

Edited by DC Lumber Co.
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Mr.Will said:

U definitely got a point..fuller,Allen,Moreau,hosley just to name the most recent that I can call off the top of my head

 

Reed, Galette, Thompson.

 

Now Scandrick and McPhee.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

I don't think Hankins has the injury history for the Redskins to sign him. If he missed 1/3 of the past 2 seasons games and therefore cost only 6-7M a year they'd be all over him. 

 

It's not a big fluke that the Redskins somehow always lead the league or come close to it in injuries every year. It's because those are the players they get.

 

That's one way to view it. On the contrary targeting players in the draft with an injury allows you to get tremendous value. IE: Allen, Moreau, Fuller.

 

And with free agents busting more often than not statistically, I don't mind the approach in FA either. They are Low risk/high reward signings that don't put the teams salary cap situation in jeopardy moving forward. I'd much rather be able to use our big contracts on extending in-house talent. 

 

The alternative is overpaying for a guy who is historically likely to underperform but pleases the fanbase because it allows to view a roster weakness as "fixed" going into the season.

 

As far as the injuries go, I think it's all a crapshoot. Teams lose drafted players for the season with no prior injury history during training camp all the time.

Edited by DC Lumber Co.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mr.Will said:

U definitely got a point..fuller,Allen,Moreau,hosley just to name the most recent that I can call off the top of my head.

Yeah this is an interesting point, but I think more so in free agency than the draft. The players you name had injuries, except Allen. Allen just had a medical scare that removed him from teams draft boards, but he was never injured. 

 

But what stands out to me is that these aren't the guys who are injured in our team. Maybe Reed and Thompson, but Thompson had a freak injury. Was Williams an injury risk? Moses? Long? Doctson? Kelley? Perine? Ioannidis? 

 

I'd also counter this by saying that injury  is probably why Bruce likes to go after younger players instead of 30 something's. Look at Hall after 30, or Ty.

 

I think injuries just give opportunities to create steals in the draft. I think 2013 had a lot of inured players but only Reed and Thompson worked out. Others were said to have starter potential but it was severely overstated. But i think it is a factor just like small schools, shared playing time, system they're in, what year, etc. In Particular, i think a question to ask is how significant is the injury and how likely are they to fully recover or re - injure that same part later. If a guy has a first round grade based on video but an injury means he can't run at the combine but he'll be 100 before training camp, dies that drop him to UDFA? How low should he go? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

Reed, Galette, Thompson.

 

Now Scandrick and McPhee.

 

 

You’re right on those,but my point is that the players I listed were hurt prior to us drafting them and we picked them anyways-I distinctly remember it being said that their “Upside” was worth the risk of them being picked..I mean yeah,Fuller paid off big but football the sport is so hard on the body that I’d like to see us not jump on players on the thought of what they “might” be able to do once we pick them,instead look at the medical history and try to go for players who don’t have so much damage before we get them on our team..just like when the cowboys picked the LB Smith-he’s was a top 5 first round pick and they got him(traded up actually) to get him at the top of the second rd and he was already to be projected out for the next whole season..I’m sorry he was hurt but deep down glad he never recovered enough to be the impact player they hoped he’d eventually become(not that I’m rooting against any persons health over a game-just meaning that he never was able to be the guy that put a hurting on us twice a year)..grab the best player that stands a chance to be able to play week end and week out..I love J.Reed as our player but only having him 5-6 games a season sucks..pick the best possible,healthy player we can get,not the best player that Slips to us from the top five to thirteen cause of his previous injury history??!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wit33 said:

Not seeing any chance skins sign or draft a safety:

 

Nicholson’s extremely high level play forces them to give him a year to show he can stay healthy. 

 

He was the best player on the field when available. All pro kind of impact. 

Well...

1) Fitzpatrick can play corner too (including in the slot)

2) agree about Nicholson, big fan...but injuries are a big concern

3) Everett is just ok as a backup SS, but shouldn’t be put at FS (IMO)

4) Smithson is totally unproven at FS

5) Keim said we asked after Coleman (S)

6) Our depth is mostly fine everywhere (after the McPhee signing), but FS (safety in general), and DL.  

7) Fitzpatrick and James would be really hard to turn down. 

 

Right now we need a starting NT, back and G, and depth at S/DL.  I could definitely see the Skins drafting a safety, particularly late.  Also, a DL signing (even more so if they can play NT and DT) could make the decision to grab Fitzpatrick/James even easier.

 

 

On a tangent - if the Skins land a good player that can play NT and DT, plus a good back, I think this could be a really talented squad.  We’d need to find a decent guard and slot corner, but outside of that, I don’t see any real weak links.  Now if we could just stay mostly healthy...

Edited by skinny21
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RWJ said:

I would have rather seen a tweet about Hankins.  I think we can all move on from Hankins.  I've spent most of my days on twitter waiting for his signing after he visited.  Pretty simple.  If Skins don't sign him and they'd be STUPID not to then it seems like they almost have to dedicated the money to either Vea or Payne at #13.  Signing Hankins allow Allen to keep his cracker jack toys too because Hankins was released.

 

This is a very odd post and I'm not sure the point. You obviously want to see the team sign Hankins. That's fine. He's a good player and fits a team need. You seem to be frustrated that the signing didn't happen immediately by your pre-set timetable. I'm sure everyone's upset that they didn't meet your timetable, but it's  not shocking given Hankins' agent and history (i.e. he holds out for as much money as possible). Then it's like you just give up on ever signing Hankins for...unknown reasons. Nothing's really changed on the Hankins front. He's still holding out for more money. The Redskins still need DL help. The team still has a fair amount of cap space if they need it. The comment about saving the money for a first round pick really makes no sense. First round picks get slotted money and it would be much, much less than signing Hankins would cost. So everyone waits and it may or may not happen

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

Well...

1) Fitzpatrick can play corner too (including in the slot)

2) agree about Nicholson, big fan...but injuries are a big concern

3) Everett is just ok as a backup SS, but shouldn’t be put at FS (IMO)

4) Smithson is totally unproven at FS

5) Kirk said we asked after Coleman (S)

6) Our depth is mostly fine everywhere (after the McPhee signing), but FS (safety in general), and DL.  

7) Fitzpatrick and James would be really hard to turn down. 

 

Right now we need a starting NT, back and G, and depth at S/DL.  I could definitely see the Skins drafting a safety, particularly late.  Also, a DL signing (even more so if they can play NT and DT) could make the decision to grab Fitzpatrick/James even easier.

 

 

On a tangent - if the Skins land a good player that can play NT and DT, plus a good back, I think this could be a really talented squad.  We’d need to find a decent guard and slot corner, but outside of that, I don’t see any real weak links.  Now if we could just stay mostly healthy...

 

Well reasoned. Outside Swearinger, there's really no proven players on the roster. Nicholson, as a 4th round pick last year, might pan out. but he's the only other one you'd really want starting, and he comes with plenty of question marks (health, consistency). The starters are hardly settled and depth is a huge concern here.

 

The most obvious needs are DL (specifically a NT), LG, and RB. But WR is woefully thin, QB is old as hell, and CB needs depth. There are basically needs everywhere

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jericho

I’m not quite sure I agree with your last paragraph.  I see it a bit differently anyway.  

 

Yes, we need someone to take over for Smith in the not so distant future, but we have a solid starter and a solid backup as of now.  I’ve been saying we need to find a replacement for McCoy (someone with more upside, and cheaper), but I don’t think of it as a ‘need’ quite yet personally.  

 

I actually think the depth at corner and receiver are fine, it’s more the fact that we need a starter on each unit.  

 

I view Doctson and Richardson as fine #2 types.  Crowder is a good starter in the slot.  Quick is a solid replacement on the outside and Harris has some experience and upside.  Our last guy is a young guy with a lot of potential (exactly what you want in that spot).  The problem is, we don’t have a #1 receiver.  There is the potential that Doctson or Richardson steps up as a #1, but they may well not.  I don’t know that it holds back the offense though (if they don’t) - Smith has a blend of weapons to work with.  

 

At corner, I’m content/happy with Norman and Dunbar/Moreau as the top 3 (two starters, and solid depth on the outside).  Scandrick is ok as depth in the slot and maybe outside.  Holsey is in a similar position as Robert Davis - young guy with potential at the end of the depth chart (though it’s possible he earns the starting gig in the slot).  We’re missing a starter for the slot.  It’s possible Holsey steps up, and Scandrick might be ok there, but it’s a weak spot for now.  

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr.Will said:

With his size,he looks to fit in just about anywhere on the line,which makes his signing all the better..I love universal players,the guys who can play all over the place at a given need!!.those are the best players to have IMO!!

I dunno. Universal player sounds nice, but it seems like whenever we find a player who can "do it all", he's average at everything and not particularly good at anything outside of special teams. Like Lorenzo Alexander. *cough*SwissArmyNiles*cough*

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just wondering if Hankins is waiting on Suh signing ? But money has to be drying up and having been through this once you would think he would be aware of that 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, bedlamVR said:

I am just wondering if Hankins is waiting on Suh signing ? But money has to be drying up and having been through this once you would think he would be aware of that 

 

I think so. And if the Titans miss out on Suh, I think they may go all in on Hankins.

 

only a matter of time before we bring Logan in for a look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get used to it Ladies and Gentlemen, with cheap as chips Allen in charge of the purse strings Ziggy Hood will be our starting NT again this year. Sometime in the next few days Hankins will sign for a team for around $8m per year. 

 

HTTR 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, markmills67 said:

Get used to it Ladies and Gentlemen, with cheap as chips Allen in charge of the purse strings Ziggy Hood will be our starting NT again this year. Sometime in the next few days Hankins will sign for a team for around $8m per year. 

 

HTTR 

 

Yeeeah it was much much better when we were forking oout 100 million on haynesworth ... we have become what most people were calling for ... draft first team ... now we are people get upset that we are not bending over for every single free agent that comes to town 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bonez3 said:

IDK...McPhee and Scandrick. Seems like the same ole, same ole. Dumpster diving FA's that almost certainly will disappoint and be cut by next year, if they make it that far. 

 

Seriously, I'd rather just roll the money over and go with PS players. Although, the Scandrick deal barely makes the top 51 so whatever. But edge rusher at bottom of barrel still gonna cost some $. That money could be spent better

 

We've actually had a good hit rate on our free agents, not sure what you're getting at...scandrick is essentially insurance if youth development doesn't go as planned (Moreau, Holsey) and McPhee is arguably as good if not better than Junior (who he is replacing). Going with an equally talented player that is more versatile makes complete sense there.

 

As I've said before, statistically free agents typically underperform or completely bust with their new teams more often than not. Swearinger, Norman, Zach Brown and others more than make up for those that I assume you are referring to as "dumpster" FAs (McClain, McGee, Pryor).

 

And what's great is our misses aren't biting us in the rear in the form of dead cap either.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, bedlamVR said:

 

Yeeeah it was much much better when we were forking oout 100 million on haynesworth ... we have become what most people were calling for ... draft first team ... now we are people get upset that we are not bending over for every single free agent that comes to town 

Man, tell me about it.  Do fans want more of the same?  Or do they want change?  Change isn’t easy & maybe that’s the problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.