Vinny Curry [No Longer Available] and Jonathan Hankins Available

[André]

View: https://twitter.com/john_keim/status/975150444354981889?s=21

Booooooo!

 

[Ranma]

After the Sullivan signing I doubt the Rams spend more than $5M more in free agency. Unless the Donald contract is creative in keeping the 2018 cap hit low. So bargain basement deals may be all that’s left. are all that’s left

I'm going to disagree. The Rams were supposedly "aggressive" in trying to re-sign Watkins and McVay seemed intent on keeping or otherwise confident that Sullivan was returning to the team all with the Donald extension in mind. That didn't keep the Rams from offering Eifert about $8.5 million per season or pursuing Terrelle Pryor, which I assume is still an active pursuit.

Why not take the money that was previously earmarked for either Eifert or Watkins and offer it to Hankins? It's probably moot at this point since Hankins is reportedly going to visit with Washington.

 

[RAMpage28]

Something tells me I'm going to be pissed when I see the contract he gets if he signs elsewhere.

 

[Ranma]

Something tells me I'm going to be ticked when I see the contract he gets if he signs elsewhere.

That's what I'm afraid of as well, but we theoretically could have traded a future bottom-round draft pick to acquire him from the Colts, so I'm curious why the Rams wouldn't pull the trigger on such a deal.

 

[Akrasian]

That's what I'm afraid of as well, but we theoretically could have traded a future bottom-round draft pick to acquire him from the Colts, so I'm curious why the Rams wouldn't pull the trigger on such a deal.

It may not have been offered - they may have been negotiating with Hankins for a salary reduction until the last minute, or they may have held out for more in trade for him.

If it were offered, it may not have been in the Rams' budget. They might have a budget for the offense and for the defense, for instance. Or they may figure that with the figures they are discussing with Donald and the amount they already are paying Brockers that paying well over $8 million to the nt would make the DL too expensive, with linebackers still needed.

 

[Ranma]

It may not have been offered - they may have been negotiating with Hankins for a salary reduction until the last minute, or they may have held out for more in trade for him.

If it were offered, it may not have been in the Rams' budget. They might have a budget for the offense and for the defense, for instance. Or they may figure that with the figures they are discussing with Donald and the amount they already are paying Brockers that paying well over $8 million to the nt would make the DL too expensive, with linebackers still needed.

The first scenario seems unlikely since the Colts stated that he wasn't released due to his lack of production. It had to do with him not being a fit for their change from a 3-4 to 4-3 defense. Negotiating a lower salary for a non-fit doesn't seem to apply.

With regards to separate budgets for the offense and defense, that makes more sense but given the dwindling options available in free agency--particularly on offense--why not use money that was supposed to be for the offense and apply it further to the defense since the goal is to improve the team overall during our window for championship contention?

Whatever we overspend on defense this off-season could be applied on offense next off-season when more salary cap space is opened up. Yeah, it probably gives the front office pause to invest so much money on the defensive line, but there are no difference-making OLB, ILB, WR, TE candidates left on the market with the possible exception of Terrelle Pryor, who isn't as valuable IMO than Hankins, anyway.

Should we continue to wait for something better to come along with possibly more players to be waived? It seems like sitting on the spending money we have right now only to spend it on depth pieces would be a waste when opportunity presents itself to get a difference-maker.

 

[Akrasian]

It's not clear they really are sitting on money. Much of the apparent salary cap space is already allocated to the defense - i.e., to Donald's contract. Some is likely allocated to offense - specifically to finding an additional TE, what with losing Carrier and the offer to Eifert. They could decide to move money around - but it is likely easier for them to find a run stuffing NT in the draft who will be cheap for 4-5 years than to find a good hands TE.

 

[Mackeyser]

I think Hankins is far better than any option even of the 1st round FA options.

I'd even take him over Watkins (and the cap diff is nice as well).

A DL of Brockers, Hankins and AD would be HUGE.

But... I think they have a plan and they're only really targeting a few players, specifically TEs.

I think beyond that, they're going to sign AD and have as much of the hit this year as possible so that they can budget for Gurley and Goff.

 

[Mackeyser]

It's not clear they really are sitting on money. Much of the apparent salary cap space is already allocated to the defense - i.e., to Donald's contract. Some is likely allocated to offense - specifically to finding an additional TE, what with losing Carrier and the offer to Eifert. They could decide to move money around - but it is likely easier for them to find a run stuffing NT in the draft who will be cheap for 4-5 years than to find a good hands TE.

Not going after Hankins AND the dinner they had with Tim Settle lets me know that they probably are going to target him.

And I'd be okay with that.

That means a likely trade down, but I don't think they can go much past the early 2nd round or Snead's gonna get Wagner'd again.

Looks like the play is Settle.

I'd rather have an edge at #23 and Hankins, but I trust this crew...so much.

 

[Petrowsky]

Hankins would be a really nice addition. Doesn’t look like the Rams will get him now that he’s visiting Washington. I would feel really good about this off-season if they added Barwin and Hankins. That allows the Rams to focus on LBers, OL depth, and pretty much whatever else they want to get.

 

[RAMpage28]

If there won't be heavy cash investment in the LB corps, then why not allocate more cap space to the line? I don't see any expensive edge guys being brought in and it seems the draft will be used through out the linebacker and edge positions. Those players will be inexpensive. I'm sure Hankins could be signed to a 1yr or short term 1-3yr deal. The team is going into a hyper competitive 2 year window anyways. I'm sure Hankins can be fit into this window and not cause issues with future extensions.

 

[Ranma]

If there won't be heavy cash investment in the LB corps, then why not allocate more cap space to the line? I don't see any expensive edge guys being brought in and it seems the draft will be used through out the linebacker and edge positions. Those players will be inexpensive. I'm sure Hankins could be signed to a 1yr or short term 1-3yr deal. The team is going into a hyper competitive 2 year window anyways. I'm sure Hankins can be fit into this window and not cause issues with future extensions.

Exactly. One of the Rams' off-season priorities is to address our run defense along with pass-rushing defense and we have yet to make any improvements other than shipping out Ogletree and Quinn. I get that the draft offers more cost-effective options, but I'd like to address one of our priorities, particularly improving the run defense--with an accomplished veteran.

 

[André]

If you add Hankins to the Defensive Line, then the Rams arguably have a top three secondary as a top five DL. Why wouldn't you want to do that?

Windows close fast in the NFL. Jump on this one before another drought comes along.

I hate that Hankins is visiting the Redskins first - too often the first team just doesn't let a free agent leave without a deal. I hope Snead is in Hankins' agent's ear telling him how good it would be for his career to be lined up next to Donald and in front of that secondary.