We don't really have one of these yet, so figured we could use this as a place to discuss potential free agent acquisitions and what we would like to look for them to bring in.
If any of you guys are interested, heres a good place to do some research.
Originally Posted by Kman34:
True but any improvement over the last two years Defense gets us where we want to go..
I wouldn't say that.
We just gutted the #1 Pass rush. The only thing we had going for us.
So if you take away the only thing you did well, that makes you better?
I know, i know, we have a long way to go before the roster is final....but the point being they need at least one or two more impact players in addition to the draft. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I think the goal here is to get the defense to merely credible.
You can do that if you just flat don't have any glaring holes in it and if Jones can continue to play at an elite level.
Now the hell of it is, just getting to 'not having any glaring holes' will still require us to sign 3 mid-tier FAs and hit on a couple of draft picks, but I guess it is what it is.
Right now I guess the starting defense would be
Speaks - Nnadi - Jones - Kpass
Wilson - Hitchens - DoD
Ward - Matthieu- Lucas - Watts - Fuller
I mean...that's bad. That's really bad. Granted, the draft will get you some help there but I still think you need a couple of solid signings.
So if you take about 1/2 that freed up space and put it towards extensions, you have some runaround money. You can put that towards 2 year deals with Golden, Brown and maybe a 4 year deal for Darby.
So you're looking at:
Speaks - Nnadi - Jones - Golden
Hitchens - Brown - DoD
Ward - Matthieu - Watts/Lucas - Fuller - Darby
That's still not good, but it's quite a bit better. It's capable of getting you to average to slightly below AND you're not relying on any immediate impact contributions from your rookie class (which is imperative because you just can't know what you're getting there).
And you've taken no wild swings that would interfere with your long-term outlook.
Essentially you need 2 or 3 of those "Mike DeVito" kind of signings; affordable players that come in and do yeoman's work who, if they are replaced by rookies who outperform them, you can bench and eventually cut without hurting your cap.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I think the goal here is to get the defense to merely credible.
You can do that if you just flat don't have any glaring holes in it and if Jones can continue to play at an elite level.
Now the hell of it is, just getting to 'not having any glaring holes' will still require us to sign 3 mid-tier FAs and hit on a couple of draft picks, but I guess it is what it is.
Right now I guess the starting defense would be
Speaks - Nnadi - Jones - Kpass
Wilson - Hitchens - DoD
Ward - Matthieu- Lucas - Watts - Fuller
I mean...that's bad. That's really bad. Granted, the draft will get you some help there but I still think you need a couple of solid signings.
So if you take about 1/2 that freed up space and put it towards extensions, you have some runaround money. You can put that towards 2 year deals with Golden, Brown and maybe a 4 year deal for Darby.
So you're looking at:
Speaks - Nnadi - Jones - Golden
Hitchens - Brown - DoD
Ward - Matthieu - Watts/Lucas - Fuller - Darby
That's still not good, but it's quite a bit better. It's capable of getting you to average to slightly below AND you're not relying on any immediate impact contributions from your rookie class (which is imperative because you just can't know what you're getting there).
And you've taken no wild swings that would interfere with your long-term outlook.
Essentially you need 2 or 3 of those "Mike DeVito" kind of signings; affordable players that come in and do yeoman's work who, if they are replaced by rookies who outperform them, you can bench and eventually cut without hurting your cap.
Pretty much agree with you here...I think Zach Brown would be a good pickup as much as I bring up Collins both are good fits here.
You just do what you mentioned and grab Adderly and maybe a Ferguson and hopefully a CB falls and all of the sudden this D should be respectable. [Reply]
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
What does tendered at 6th round level mean?
He wasn't tendered at 'a 6th round level'
He was given an original round tender and he was originally a 6th rounder. So if a team poaches him, they owe us a 6th.
For $3 million we could've had him on a 3rd round tender and a team has to give up a 3 to snake him. That effectively means he's ours. At an original round tender there may still be some interest there.
It's a gamble from Veach. I like Lucas and would have few qualms starting him so I'd have probably gone with the 3rd round tender. But at the original round, perhaps someone comes around with a long-term deal that's at a lower price point and we'll just match it. We have the space now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Kiimosabi:
All everyone did was bitch about either Berry, Houston or Ford and post long diatribes whining about these guys and how you want them gone.
It's been an hour since the last one was released and now we're starting in on Spags.
My point is people just like to complain. It's annoying.
If it makes you feel better i was pointing out Spag's inconsistency back when he was hired. And i didn't want any of those players gone. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
He wasn't tendered at 'a 6th round level'
He was given an original round tender and he was originally a 6th rounder. So if a team poaches him, they owe us a 6th.
For $3 million we could've had him on a 3rd round tender and a team has to give up a 3 to snake him. That effectively means he's ours. At an original round tender there may still be some interest there.
It's a gamble from Veach. I like Lucas and would have few qualms starting him so I'd have probably gone with the 3rd round tender. But at the original round, perhaps someone comes around with a long-term deal that's at a lower price point and we'll just match it. We have the space now.
With so many Safeties on the market i highly doubt anyone bites. [Reply]