Jump to content

Lions sign OL Halapoulivaati Vaitai (5 year, $50 M)


RaidersAreOne

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Bishop86 said:

Maybe he's in play for a OG spot? Sounds like he can play 4 spots on the OL.  

This actually crossed my mind ala Erik Flowers resurrection project but even so the contract still doesn’t make any sense.  His resume suggests a guy who should be brought in to compete for a job not be a pencilled in starter 

14 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, as I don't feel that 20 starts is really an experiment.

If Lions aren’t banking on him playing significantly better than he did in philly than this is a just a bad signing

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BigC421/ said:

This actually crossed my mind ala Erik Flowers resurrection project but even so the contract still doesn’t make any sense.  His resume suggests a guy who should be brought in to compete for a job not be a pencilled in starter 

If Lions aren’t banking on him playing significantly better than he did in philly than this is a just a bad signing

I agree. So they 1) keep him away from LT, and 2) use their versatile TE to chip quality DEs, helping to negate their speed. He's an immediate upgrade in the running game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, as I don't feel that 20 starts is really an experiment.

20 starts all over the line, over 4 seasons. 3 starts last year, 1 the year before, 10 starts in 2017.  That part makes me nervous. He had 10 starts and was not good enough to maintain his starting job on the line, and didnt get it back until an injury two years later for all of three games at the end of the year.  He was so good he couldn't start more than 25% of his games last year while healthy, but should be paid as a top 8 RT?  Its definitely an experiment.  Any time you sign someones backup and give them an expanded role, its an experiment.  And this one is a long term expensive one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I agree. So they 1) keep him away from LT, and 2) use their versatile TE to chip quality DEs, helping to negate their speed. He's an immediate upgrade in the running game.

Should a top 10 RT's success be dependent on having to keep a TE in to help him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

Should a top 10 RT's success be dependent on having to keep a TE in to help him?

Sure, if they're a great run blocker and struggle in the passing game against elite speed rushers. There are very few dominant OTs, and the clear majority play LT. Getting a guy that excels at one facet of the game, and is serviceable in the other, is in that range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

20 starts all over the line, over 4 seasons. 3 starts last year, 1 the year before, 10 starts in 2017.  That part makes me nervous. He had 10 starts and was not good enough to maintain his starting job on the line, and didnt get it back until an injury two years later for all of three games at the end of the year.  He was so good he couldn't start more than 25% of his games last year while healthy, but should be paid as a top 8 RT?  Its definitely an experiment.  Any time you sign someones backup and give them an expanded role, its an experiment.  And this one is a long term expensive one. 

Of course he couldn't keep his job. The Eagles had Jason Peters and Lane Johnson both playing at an elite level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

20 starts all over the line, over 4 seasons. 3 starts last year, 1 the year before, 10 starts in 2017.  That part makes me nervous. He had 10 starts and was not good enough to maintain his starting job on the line, and didnt get it back until an injury two years later for all of three games at the end of the year.  He was so good he couldn't start more than 25% of his games last year while healthy, but should be paid as a top 8 RT?  Its definitely an experiment.  Any time you sign someones backup and give them an expanded role, its an experiment.  And this one is a long term expensive one. 

He was also beat out for the 3rd tackle/ 1st guy off bench position by a rookie most people considered to very talented but equally as raw and unready to play year 1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The kool-aid is in full force around here this morning.  If you think giving a backup RT big money over 5 years is a good move, share whatever you are on.  I get why they wanted him, I get that it is intriguing, but these are the types of players good teams give prove it deals to, not long term top at their position deals. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

20 starts all over the line, over 4 seasons. 3 starts last year, 1 the year before, 10 starts in 2017.  That part makes me nervous. He had 10 starts and was not good enough to maintain his starting job on the line, and didnt get it back until an injury two years later for all of three games at the end of the year.  He was so good he couldn't start more than 25% of his games last year while healthy, but should be paid as a top 8 RT?  Its definitely an experiment.  Any time you sign someones backup and give them an expanded role, its an experiment.  And this one is a long term expensive one. 

I also think it’s worth pointing out that if everyone thought he was a stud, someone would have traded for him over the last few years. Someone would give a 3rd in a heartbeat if they saw a top-10 RT based on his film after he played a ton in 2017 on a rookie deal. Or the Eagles would have made a move to figure out how to get him more snaps. I just don’t see a relatively smart franchise in the Eagles wasting a potential top RT as a swing tackle for 4 years without getting more value. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, winitall said:

I also think it’s worth pointing out that if everyone thought he was a stud, someone would have traded for him over the last few years. Someone would give a 3rd in a heartbeat if they saw a top-10 RT based on his film after he played a ton in 2017 on a rookie deal. Or the Eagles would have made a move to figure out how to get him more snaps. I just don’t see a relatively smart franchise in the Eagles wasting a potential top RT as a swing tackle for 4 years without getting more value. 

Agreed,  Their LG play was bad, they didnt fit him there.  They didn't get any trade compensation for him.  I am sure they could have signed him for 3M less a year and if not, let him go elsewhere.  Draft a RT in the 3rd round and get similar production.  Let Crosby play RT for pebbles compared to this for similar production. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...