DTs Drafted but Not Signed to a 2nd Contract

[uconnjack8]

Since Dexter Lawrence became the 1st Giants DT in a long time to be signed to a 2nd contract after being drafted by the team,  I thought it would be fun to revisit this discussion (we have had it before without a poll).

I am thrilled they signed DeX and wish they would have signed most of the guys on the list....Some more than others

[True Blue]

Either Joseph ir Tomlinson

Hill sucked too he was very underrated

[uconnjack8]

I voted for Linval, but Tomlinson and Griffin were a close 2nd. 

Always felt like Griffin was underappreciated.

[TONKA56]

1. Joseph
2. Tomlinson
3. Christian Peter*

[TONKA56]

I voted for Linval, but Tomlinson and Griffin were a close 2nd. 

Always felt like Griffin was underappreciated.

We got rid of Christian Peter because Griff represented higher draft investment but Peter was a better player even though he gave you a little less as a pass rusher. 

[Gman329]

Linval and Dalvin....but I understood the economics in each case. 

[uconnjack8]

We got rid of Christian Peter because Griff represented higher draft investment but Peter was a better player even though he gave you a little less as a pass rusher. 

Should have mentioned that I only went back to 2000.

I think Griffin was the better player as well. 

[MightyGiants]

I think I am in the minority but none of them.  I understood the tactic.  The fact that there were so many is why there were so many.  One thing the Giants were very good at was drafting day two DTs and making them into really good players.  As a way to help their salary cap (which was a challenge during this period), the team would opt for low-cost players on rookie contracts rather than costly veterans.   

If there was no salary cap, this was a terrible strategy.   With a salary cap it wasn't the worst idea or tactic I have witnessed.

 

[uconnjack8]

I think I am in the minority but none of them.  I understood the tactic.  The fact that there were so many is why there were so many.  One thing the Giants were very good at was drafting day two DTs and making them into really good players.  As a way to help their salary cap (which was a challenge during this period), the team would opt for low-cost players on rookie contracts rather than costly veterans.   

If there was no salary cap, this was a terrible strategy.   With a salary cap it wasn't the worst idea or tactic I have witnessed.

 

Rich,

You make a good point and I think most understood why these guys left, but that still didnt make it easier to stomach in some cases when you saw how good these players were.

[coggs]

I understand but still hated the need to let these guys go.  Joseph was not re-signed and they draft Hankins who turned out to be a disappointment.  Then, they drafted Marvin Austin was useless, then TOmlinson.  So, it was like the RB strategy my friend has, just at earlier round.  Draft, play for 3 years, do not bring back, draft replacement.

[zephirus]

Kinda funny that with the exception of Hill - all of them went to either Washington or Minnesota for a stint. 

[TONKA56]

I understand but still hated the need to let these guys go.  Joseph was not re-signed and they draft Hankins who turned out to be a disappointment.  Then, they drafted Marvin Austin was useless, then TOmlinson.  So, it was like the RB strategy my friend has, just at earlier round.  Draft, play for 3 years, do not bring back, draft replacement.

Hankins was a good player until he suddenly let himself get fat and out of shape. It was weird.

[TONKA56]

I think I am in the minority but none of them.  I understood the tactic.  The fact that there were so many is why there were so many.  One thing the Giants were very good at was drafting day two DTs and making them into really good players.  As a way to help their salary cap (which was a challenge during this period), the team would opt for low-cost players on rookie contracts rather than costly veterans.   

If there was no salary cap, this was a terrible strategy.   With a salary cap it wasn't the worst idea or tactic I have witnessed.

 

I completely understand the strategy. It has the added benefit of refreshing a position that is very hard on the body...but it also had other risks that came along with it. It conceded that you're going to be spending a high draft pick every other year on a defensive tackle. The guy HAD to be good, be healthy, and get up to the speed of the NFL quickly. If you missed, you basically tanked your defense for at least one season if you couldn't pull in free agent help.

[MightyGiants]

I completely understand the strategy. It has the added benefit of refreshing a position that is very hard on the body...but it also had other risks that came along with it. It conceded that you're going to be spending a high draft pick every other year on a defensive tackle. The guy HAD to be good, be healthy, and get up to the speed of the NFL quickly. If you missed, you basically tanked your defense for at least one season if you couldn't pull in free agent help.

No doubt there are downsides to this strategy.  Worse, I think the Giants failed to fully take advantage of the strategy because it should be enacted in conjunction with a let more FAs walk than you sign strategy so the losses lead to comp picks.  Unfortunately, the Giants were almost always buyers in the FA market so they rarely were rewarded with the comp picks.