Author Topic: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?  (Read 1007 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

4thand17

  • All-Pro
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 324
  • Liked: 39
    • View Profile
So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« on: March 19, 2017, 07:02:25 PM »
Here's my thinking.

On running downs (we know these from studied tendencies and down and distance), we are better off with a run stuffer.  This was demonstrated last season.

On passing downs the Giants move JPP inside a lot or put another NASCAR rusher in. This will be more productive than any 3 tech we will acquire with our budget. (We are not getting another Aaron Donald.)  I know the NASCAR package needs upgrade but that just makes my point.  Put the effort there.

So are we going to squander our cap room for someone to play on the small set of downs that don't fall in either category.

Vette

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4972
  • Liked: 509
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2017, 07:05:18 PM »
You raise a good point there. Hankins is still a possibility.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"There is a greater purpose...that purpose is team. Winning, losing, playing hard, playing well, doing it for each other, winning the right way, winning the right way is a very important thing to me... Championships are won by teams who love one another, who respect one another, and play for and support one another."
~ Coach Tom Coughlin

Bob In PA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7113
  • Liked: 431
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2017, 07:12:18 PM »
Here's my thinking.

On running downs (we know these from studied tendencies and down and distance), we are better off with a run stuffer.  This was demonstrated last season.

On passing downs the Giants move JPP inside a lot or put another NASCAR rusher in. This will be more productive than any 3 tech we will acquire with our budget. (We are not getting another Aaron Donald.)  I know the NASCAR package needs upgrade but that just makes my point.  Put the effort there.

So are we going to squander our cap room for someone to play on the small set of downs that don't fall in either category.

4th: You're right, but Hankins is only "right" for the Giants if his price is right.

Reportedly, Hankins wants the type of money reserved only for tackles who deserve to play all three downs.

However, he is a 2-down tackle (in my book, and I see you recognize that also), so if he reduces his demand by 33 percent he may be able to play another year for the Giants.

To me, it's just that simple.

Bob


Jolly Blue Giant

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 807
  • Liked: 211
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2017, 07:13:53 PM »
There was an article posted about this very thing. The fact that Hankins is more of a run stuffer than someone who upsets the apple cart in the offensive backfield, he is only on the field for about 60% of the snaps. Hence, one of the reasons teams aren't throwing big money at him. According to the article, the top of the heap 3-techs need to be on the field for a minimum of 70% of the snaps and preferably more than that. From what I gathered by the article (and if I wasn't so lazy I'd look it up and post it), Hankins is kind of a situation player when the team is expecting a running play. He was not in a lot on 3rd downs, especially if it was more than 3rd and 2 where they expected a pass play.

murderhill

  • Guest
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #4 on: March 19, 2017, 07:26:59 PM »
We need someone who can do the job that Hankins did for half of what he seems to be asking.  The alternative would be to draft someone like the way the Giants always seem to do.  I wonder what the Giants think Hankins is worth.

4thand17

  • All-Pro
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 324
  • Liked: 39
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #5 on: March 19, 2017, 07:28:44 PM »
Bob, Dennis and Jolly.

I want Hankins back.  Don't mess with success.  I leave it to the Giants to figure the price.   With Snacks, I think we can get by with a second tier run stuffer, if necessary. I wouldn't be surprised if Thomas can do the job.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2017, 07:30:24 PM by 4thand17 »

gregf

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2367
  • Liked: 48
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2017, 07:44:57 PM »
Agree, we need a 2 down player. To commit more big money to the D line doesn't seem fiscally responsible to me. I expect a draft pick between rounds 2 to 4 to rotate with Bromley and the other D tackle ( Hughes?)

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk


Philosophers

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4551
  • Liked: 154
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2017, 09:37:47 PM »
What we need is an effective 3Tech rookie playing for a rookie's salary.  That's our best balance for the higher wages of our veterans on the DL.

MightyGiants

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 48462
  • Liked: 1171
    • View Profile
    • Giants Fans
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2017, 07:07:17 AM »
There is a reason for the 3 tech in a 4-3 defense.  While on obvious passing downs the 3 tech will often be subbed out (or moved over to the 1 tech), there are many passing downs that are not so obvious.   Plus it's not like the 3 tech doesn't have a role in run defense.   The 3 tech DT is supposed to be the disruptive DT who penetrates into the backfield.  That can cause issues with the rushing game as much as it can the pass.   Stopping a RB for a loss is what sets up those obvious passing downs where you can sub in your NASCAR type packages.
"THE 2007 and 2011 GIANTS WERE NEVER PERFECT, NOR MEANT TO BE.  THEY WERE FIGHTERS, SCRAPPERS, NOW THEY CAN BE CALLED SOMETHING ELSE....WORLD CHAMPIONS!"

COGiantFan

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7061
  • Liked: 377
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #9 on: March 20, 2017, 12:09:25 PM »
There is a reason for the 3 tech in a 4-3 defense.  While on obvious passing downs the 3 tech will often be subbed out (or moved over to the 1 tech), there are many passing downs that are not so obvious.   Plus it's not like the 3 tech doesn't have a role in run defense.   The 3 tech DT is supposed to be the disruptive DT who penetrates into the backfield.  That can cause issues with the rushing game as much as it can the pass.   Stopping a RB for a loss is what sets up those obvious passing downs where you can sub in your NASCAR type packages.

Should we be looking at (and are there any viable candidates) at 3-4 DEs as possibly 3-technique guys.  Isn't that basically what they did with Canty?
I'd rather be a disappointed optimist than a vindicated pessimist

MightyGiants

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 48462
  • Liked: 1171
    • View Profile
    • Giants Fans
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2017, 12:13:46 PM »
Should we be looking at (and are there any viable candidates) at 3-4 DEs as possibly 3-technique guys.  Isn't that basically what they did with Canty?

Rich,

You're correct, some 3-4 DEs are also suited to play the 3 tech DT (some but not all).  So yes, there are some guys that are listed as DE that have the strength to play DT.  Draft prospect DE Chris Wormley comes to mind.  He is 6' 5" and 298 pounds so with a little more weight he could play inside at the 3 tech. 
"THE 2007 and 2011 GIANTS WERE NEVER PERFECT, NOR MEANT TO BE.  THEY WERE FIGHTERS, SCRAPPERS, NOW THEY CAN BE CALLED SOMETHING ELSE....WORLD CHAMPIONS!"

Vette

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4972
  • Liked: 509
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #11 on: March 20, 2017, 12:28:55 PM »
Rich,

You're correct, some 3-4 DEs are also suited to play the 3 tech DT (some but not all).  So yes, there are some guys that are listed as DE that have the strength to play DT.  Draft prospect DE Chris Wormley comes to mind.  He is 6' 5" and 298 pounds so with a little more weight he could play inside at the 3 tech.
Romeo oh Romeo, where for art thou Romeo!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"There is a greater purpose...that purpose is team. Winning, losing, playing hard, playing well, doing it for each other, winning the right way, winning the right way is a very important thing to me... Championships are won by teams who love one another, who respect one another, and play for and support one another."
~ Coach Tom Coughlin

MightyGiants

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 48462
  • Liked: 1171
    • View Profile
    • Giants Fans
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #12 on: March 20, 2017, 12:35:34 PM »
Romeo oh Romeo, where for art thou Romeo!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ed,

At the Combine last year Romeo 6' 4 5/8" and 265 lbs.   Asking a player to put on 40 pounds of mostly muscle may be a tall order.
"THE 2007 and 2011 GIANTS WERE NEVER PERFECT, NOR MEANT TO BE.  THEY WERE FIGHTERS, SCRAPPERS, NOW THEY CAN BE CALLED SOMETHING ELSE....WORLD CHAMPIONS!"

Vette

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4972
  • Liked: 509
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #13 on: March 20, 2017, 12:40:37 PM »
Ed,

At the Combine last year Romeo 6' 4 5/8" and 265 lbs.   Asking a player to put on 40 pounds of mostly muscle may be a tall order.
He doesn't look 265 to me and he's listed at 275. If that's correct and I know you don't believe that but if he is, twenty pounds can do it. They have Bromley for run support so I can see them moving him inside to get him on the field in a rotation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"There is a greater purpose...that purpose is team. Winning, losing, playing hard, playing well, doing it for each other, winning the right way, winning the right way is a very important thing to me... Championships are won by teams who love one another, who respect one another, and play for and support one another."
~ Coach Tom Coughlin

Philosophers

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4551
  • Liked: 154
    • View Profile
Re: So, do we really need a 3 tech DT?
« Reply #14 on: March 20, 2017, 01:00:55 PM »
Cant look at weight alone but weight, strength, endurance and anticipation.  A 285 pound 3 Tech with all 3 trumps a 310 pounder.