DC9

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

Recommended Posts

34 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 

I'm not saying go daft with signings like we did with Haynesworth at all, Hankins as an example fits the mild of a player Allen wants doesn't he?. Good player, young and plays one of our positions of need NT. A question for you, if you want us to build solely through the draft and pick up average players via FA then why trade one of our better draft picks and a 3rd rounder for Alex Smith, if your not going to give Smith the best chance to succeed ?. Also a good Defense helps a QB win games (turnovers, etc) but your right let's hope one of the 2 top NT/DT drops to us at 13 in the draft and hope that after the Dolphins take 1 of them before us nobody trades up and takes the other top DT before we pick. I've got a couple of words for you to look forward to Ziggy Hood. 

 

HTTR 

Share this post


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

I'm not saying go daft with signings like we did with Haynesworth at all, Hankins as an example fits the mild of a player Allen wants doesn't he?. Good player, young and plays one of our positions of need NT. A question for you, if you want us to build solely through the draft and pick up average players via FA then why trade one of our better draft picks and a 3rd rounder for Alex Smith, if your not going to give Smith the best chance to succeed ?. Also a good Defense helps a QB win games (turnovers, etc) but your right let's hope one of the 2 top NT/DT drops to us at 13 in the draft and hope that after the Dolphins take 1 of them before us nobody trades up and takes the other top DT before we pick. I've got a couple of words for you to look forward to Ziggy Hood. 

 

HTTR 

 

The point is Hankins hasn’t signed anywhere yet .. I want him here as much as anyone but  it is not just a case of caving to whatever his agent demanded ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, guys that Hankins hasn't signed her or will sign else where....doesn't mean our FO did a bad job. 

 

If I read this board it almost sounds that if we just show Hankins the money, he will sign here. It takes two to tango...and how important is this position? 10 million a year important? 

 

Run stopping NT is an important position but also a limited position. It's a part time job just like 10 years back the third CB was a part time job. This guy plays a limited amount of snaps...you don't just throw a lot of money into that. 

 

I believe that the FO has made Hankins a fair offer for his talents and position on this team. I also think that he has better options (scheme, money, playoffs) elsewhere. Offering him more money is only a good option when he gives the indication he wants to play here. You don't just sign the biggest contract, there are other parts to it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good riddance, Junior Galette.  How many teams are desperate to sign a guy with a past of off the field incidents plus multiple Achilles tears?  Dude really thought he was gonna fleece the Redskins with crazy contract demands?  Welcome, Pernell McPhee.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bedlamVR said:

 

The point is Hankins hasn’t signed anywhere yet .. I want him here as much as anyone but  it is not just a case of caving to whatever his agent demanded ... 

Didn't know you were from Manchester mate, I'm Bolton born and bred myself ?.

 

HTTR 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 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

 

4th LB man,  They don't have a PSer with any pass rush reputation

 

it's amazing how quickly a total change in philosophy becomes same ole, same ole around here

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

We've actually had a good hit rate on our free agents,

 

 

 

 

Someone posted the list the other day, hit rate if I recall at 19%.  Not hot.  But in their defense when you do the bottom shopping the odds are naturally not going to be with you.

 

10 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. 

 

 

I feel that way about a lot of their FA signings especially in recent years.   Last year, (which I think was their best crop in awhile) I did like Z. Brown, Swearinger, Pryor (was wrong about Pryor)

 

Scandrick to me looks like a flier who likely ends up a bust or close enough to that.  I'd rather them hang in there and wait for DRC.  But he's cheap so no big risk sort of like the Quick signing last year.

 

McPhee on the other hand has been the real deal when heathy in his career.  Better IMO track record than guys like Reyes, McClain, McGee.  Paea's pedigree wasn't bad but he was essentially a one hit wonder, good albeit not great season right before FA but somewhat disappointing before that.

 

If all they do to the D line is McPhee.  Than to me its yawn.  But if they sign Hankins and or draft a D lineman high -- then I think they might be cooking some.  To me McPhee is a piece.  But not a solution solving piece.  A side dish versus a main course. If that's part of the plan, i like it.  If its the whole plan, I think they will be gashed on the ground again unless they get incredibly lucky with health at that position.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

If all they do to the D line is McPhee.  Than to me its yawn.  But if they sign Hankins and or draft a D lineman high -- then I think they might be cooking some.  To me McPhee is a piece.  But not a solution solving piece.  A side dish versus a main course. If that's part of the plan, i like it.  If its the whole plan, I think they will be gashed on the ground again unless they get incredibly lucky with health at that position.

Agreed, SIP.  We need the main course and of course that is Hankins.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand it was needed for depth but color me unexcited at the signing of a "pass rusher" with 30 sacks in 7 season. Looks like Preston Smith Lite.

 

I sure hope this does not mean they are out on Hankins.  As frustrating as it was I was kind thinking the longer it went on the better their offer will look as other teams sign others, utilize their remaining cap and drop out. Clearly it will be tied with the Suh signing.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

I understand it was needed for depth but color me unexcited at the signing of a "pass rusher" with 30 sacks in 7 season. Looks like Preston Smith Lite.

 

I sure hope this does not mean they are out on Hankins.  As frustrating as it was I was kind thinking the longer it went on the better their offer will look as other teams sign others, utilize their remaining cap and drop out. Clearly it will be tied with the Suh signing.  

 

21.5 of those sacks came in the last four years.  His 2012 and 2013 numbers drag down his average.  And if he's Preston Smith lite?  He is essentially backing up Preston Smith

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Okay, guys that Hankins hasn't signed her or will sign else where....doesn't mean our FO did a bad job. 

 

 

I don't think its all on Hankins.  But if they AGAIN don't sign a marquee D lineman or draft one...when playoff teams that are already stacked at that position like the Vikings, Rams, Eagles have added or working to add even more marquee talent -- and if the upshot to this is they are significantly better than us again.   Then to me it matters. 

 

I think the last big rep D lineman we've signed is Barry Cofield.  We don't really draft D line high either.  J. Allen was a surprise godsend but it was an unexpected drop.  When Jay goes you can't really run against the Vikings in a Q & A because of their D line right after the season -- and its the Vikings of all teams that pursue and sign Richardson?  

 

 If we end up doing very little at that position.  Then at that juncture you have to start questioning the approach to building on the trenches when the teams who already have monster d line units or flirting with it  -- seem more desperate to make their monster D line now insanely great.  Whereas we are still worried if our D line can stop the run let alone have anything scary. 

 

It's just tough to miss that dichotomy because its glaring.  Having said that, its not all to me tied with Hankins.  If they draft someone, it does it for me too. But for me it would be early -- Vea in the first or Settle, Phillips in the 2nd, etc.

 

2 hours ago, wilco_holland said:

 

If I read this board it almost sounds that if we just show Hankins the money, he will sign here. It takes two to tango...and how important is this position? 10 million a year important? 

 

At some point though the teams that pay the bigger money for FAs on the D line like the Vikings who grabbed L. Joseph who many of us wanted at the time.  And now Richardson, etc.  I gather they don't mind "overpaying" for their D lineman because their defense is fierce.  You can also argue that Paea, McClain, Reyes who were stop gap signings at the position are penny wise and pound foolish signings since you end up dumping them quick anyway.  McClain remains to be seen though.

 

2 hours ago, wilco_holland said:

 

Run stopping NT is an important position but also a limited position.

 

Hankins though isn't a part time player.   Poe isn't a part time player.  Neither is Damon Harrison a part time player who the NY media likes to say the Giants coaching say he's the best defensive player on the team.  A guy who can clog lanes and provide push up the middle typically plays a lot.  Hankins though is more of a run stuffer in the mode of Harrison and Poe -- but like them he still does enough to warrant him in the category to be more than just a part time nose.  Hence that's why some beat guys have said the Redskins are interested in him. 

 

2 hours ago, wilco_holland said:

 

I believe that the FO has made Hankins a fair offer for his talents and position on this team.  

 

We got no idea one way or another.  Someone asked Keim this specific question on twitter and he wasn't even sure if the Redskins made him an offer.  He just said they are aware of Hankins price tag.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the numbers McPhee averaged 96 games over 7 years. That means he averaged 3.09 sacks per game. YES I know know there are more variables...... But if the money is right I will take that all day long. Welcome Mr. McPhee. 

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I think they are committed to improving the DL. The only way that does not happen is if they miss on Hankins and either both Vea and Payne are gone at 13 (not happening) or another higher rated player falls and they could not pass up that opportunity.

5 minutes ago, tmandoug1 said:

By the numbers McPhee averaged 96 games over 7 years. That means he averaged 3.09 sacks per game. YES I know know there are more variables...... But if the money is right I will take that all day long. Welcome Mr. McPhee. 

 

You may want to check your math there.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NickyJ said:

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*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Oh I think they are committed to improving the DL. The only way that does not happen is if they miss on Hankins and either both Vea and Payne are gone at 13 (not happening) or another higher rated player falls and they could not pass up that opportunity.

 

Payne is interesting in that I wonder how hot their interest is in him going purely with gossip though.  I recall Cooley before he left for the combine was all about Payne over Vea.  And after coming back he did a 180 (seems like he talked to some FO people at the combine) talking about Vea and how Payne brings almost no pass rush and it would likely be too early to take a guy like that in the first round.   If true the report of the Redskins fan talking to Tomsula on an airplane -- where he lit up talking about Vea but not Payne. 

 

Keim said the other day he thinks Vea goes before our pick.  I see Vea is a hot choice lately in mocks to the Dolphins.  But will see.

 

I wonder though with all the chatter about how they love Josh Jackson whether corner is hot on their wish list.  If lets say Payne is there at 13 but you got D. Ward as a possibility do you take Payne?  And they've also talked up running back so much in the early rounds.

 

My point to bring it back home to FA -- is that its not hard to see a scenario where they don't go D line early in the draft.  I think that's part of the reason why some of us are pumped on Hankins.  The thing is you can see a scenario where the draft just doesn't flow to fix that position.  Scot told me personally in 2016 that they wanted to address the D line in that years draft earlier than they did but the draft board just didn't flow that way.  In that vein, I can easily see that happen again.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Good riddance, Junior Galette.  How many teams are desperate to sign a guy with a past of off the field incidents plus multiple Achilles tears?  Dude really thought he was gonna fleece the Redskins with crazy contract demands?  Welcome, Pernell McPhee.

I agree. I am not loosing any sleep now that JG is gone. For 2 years I waited for this bum to show me how great of a pass rusher he was and when he finally got on the field he looked lost to me, without any deep penetration. Did he actually drive a LT back into the QB and make a sack like RK does, or did he get a couple tackling the QB as he was running towards the LOS to avoid the pass rush by some of our other guys. Another SM brainstorm?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Oh I think they are committed to improving the DL. The only way that does not happen is if they miss on Hankins and either both Vea and Payne are gone at 13 (not happening) or another higher rated player falls and they could not pass up that opportunity.

 

You may want to check your math there.  

Yep..... Please forgive only half cup in. Nevermind........ ?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, tmandoug1 said:

Yep..... Please forgive only half cup in. Nevermind........ ?

 

Before you totally wake up I was wondering if you would consider making me an offer on my house.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If NT is the recognized hole i think there are scenarios where we don’t sign Hankins and don’t take a DT at 13. 

 

Settle probably goes by R3 but would be a solid add. BJ Hill, Kendrick Norton ... guys who could be had in the 4th or 5th. So I don’t think missing Hankins necessarily means DL at 13. Although I will say, it would be dissapointing in many fronts to pass on an impact DL that would in theory fix the position before having to worry about the draft flowing the right way. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Good riddance, Junior Galette.  How many teams are desperate to sign a guy with a past of off the field incidents plus multiple Achilles tears?  Dude really thought he was gonna fleece the Redskins with crazy contract demands?  Welcome, Pernell McPhee.

 

Jeez man. It's not like he was a habitiual offender. And you have no idea if he's demanding anything crazy or trying to fleece someone. And he clearly has interest from other teams. Little harsh, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

Jeez man. It's not like he was a habitiual offender. And you have no idea if he's demanding anything crazy or trying to fleece someone. And he clearly has interest from other teams. Little harsh, no?

 

I agree we do not know what he is asking. May in reflection be reasonable. But I think his comments about being offered "slave" wages when many fans will not make in their entire lifetime what one years salary will be set people the wrong way on him. It was just a dumb statement and goes to his lack of judgement.  

 

Not at all unhappy they pulled the offer, and for me I a don't really care at this point if it was fair or a low-ball offer. The team does not need that kind of attitude. 

Edited by goskins10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

My point to bring it back home to FA -- is that its not hard to see a scenario where they don't go D line early in the draft.  I think that's part of the reason why some of us are pumped on Hankins.  The thing is you can see a scenario where the draft just doesn't flow to fix that position.  Scot told me personally in 2016 that they wanted to address the D line in that years draft earlier than they did but the draft board just didn't flow that way.  In that vein, I can easily see that happen again.

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, markmills67 said:

A question for you, if you want us to build solely through the draft and pick up average players via FA then why trade one of our better draft picks and a 3rd rounder for Alex Smith, if your not going to give Smith the best chance to succeed ?

 

Because you make an exception for the most important position in football. Losing a player like Fuller stings but unfortunately that's the cost of doing business when it comes to acquiring a top tier QB. Luckily we are very good at scouting and developing DB talent and may already have his replacement on the roster in Moreau.

 

And Alex Smith absolutely fits the team building philosophy we've stuck to the past few years. We refused to over-pay for a QB that was trying to hold us hostage and chose to think of the overall team first and foremost, which allowed us to sign complimentary pieces like Paul Richardson, Zach Brown, McPhee and potentially Hankins that would have been impossible otherwise.

 

He's still playing at the highest level and allows us to be competitive and continue to build through the draft with us ideally drafting a developmental QB in the next couple years to groom under him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that he's chosen the Skins over the Falcons more than anything.  I suspect he understands he's a role player in both spots.  Curious if the money and playing time are equal in both places, what made him choose us?

  • 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.