Jump to content

Johnthan Hankins visited redskins


Dashing202

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, RSkinGM said:

I know, just that more and more it seems teams are considering him more suited to the 3-4.  Just looking for an edge :)

I don’t think that’s accurate. The Lions run a 4-3, and were going to sign him but must have gotte. Sly Williams - who’s comparable - at a reduced price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, turtle28 said:

I don’t think that’s accurate. The Lions run a 4-3, and were going to sign him but must have gotte. Sly Williams - who’s comparable - at a reduced price.

It is accurate. People view him better for the 3-4. Doesn't mean he can't do the 4-3, but apparently it's not where his strengths are.

Quote

For the Colts, the move likely comes down to their coaching change, which has them switching defensive schemes. Citing a league source, Stephen Holder of the The Indianapolis Star reported that the scheme change "was the driving force behind the decision to part with Hankins." Holder also reported that the move saves the Colts roughly $8.5 million against the cap after they paid him $10.5 million for his services in 2017.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/colts-surprisingly-cut-johnathan-hankins-one-year-after-giving-him-27-million-deal/ 

Quote

 

General manager Chris Ballard found some incredible deals in free agency last year in his first offseason with the Colts.

Jabaal Sheard, John Simon and Johnathan Hankins all came in and contributed right away even though Ballard didn’t pay top-dollar deals for any of them. Unfortunately, the Colts were forced to cut Hankins after one season as he does not fit well in the new 4-3 defensive scheme.

 

https://horseshoeheroes.com/2018/03/21/indianapolis-colts-release-johnathan-hankins-one-year/

 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22809037/indianapolis-colts-release-defensive-tackle-johnathan-hankins

Quote

The Colts, who are transitioning to a 4-3 defense under new coordinator Matt Eberflus, have Al Woods, Henry Anderson, Grover Stewart and Hassan Ridgeway playing on the interior part of the line on the roster. They also signed versatile lineman Denico Autry on March 15.

Quote

The Indianapolis Colts have released their biggest free-agent signing from 2017 one year into his deal.

The decision to cut Hankins comes when the Colts are moving to a new 4-3 defensive system under coordinator Matt Eberflus. This, according to a league source, was the driving force behind the decision to part with Hankins.

Hankins was a productive and disruptive player on the Colts’ defense in 2017, quickly becoming one of its best performers. He certainly demonstrated no lack of talent and lived up to the contract he was awarded.

Hankins, 25, immediately becomes a free agent, and a coveted one, at that.

The 6-2, 325-pound interior defender is a natural two-gap tackle, and had a great season centering the Indianapolis Colts’ 3-4 in what was the first season of a $27 million, three-year deal.

https://www.hogshaven.com/2018/3/17/17134610/could-johnathan-hankins-provide-the-answer-in-the-middle-that-the-redskins-have-been-looking-for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MikeT14 said:

It is accurate. People view him better for the 3-4. Doesn't mean he can't do the 4-3

I don't get this, and I get the basics of both defenses.

I can understand when someone looks at a guy that's 280 lbs.. is decent at pass rush, but terrible at run stopping... and says

"well, he could maaaaybe play as a strong-side 43DE or situational pass rusher in Nickel... but he has no real fit in a 34D as a DE (poor run D) or rush LB (lack of burst/athleticism)."

See, I get that. 

but Hankins is a huge run stopping Pig with some fairly quick feet for his size. I'd love for anyone to explain to me why he can't function equally well in either base D. His talent can easily play the 5.. and he's best off to play the 0 or 1 tech. I don't think a base D exists that has no use for this. 

I'm left to think there was an internal issue with F/O and Hankins... OR that they liked a player beneath him to do the same job at much less of the cap cost. That it's like the typical break-up ax of "it's not you.. it's me!"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The longer this goes now, the better for us. It is annoying as hell it isn't done yet, but the closer the draft gets he will have pressure to sign somewhere before a team waits and see what they can get in draft. I got a gut feeling this deal gets done before the end of next week 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Eric said:

The longer this goes now, the better for us. It is annoying as hell it isn't done yet, but the closer the draft gets he will have pressure to sign somewhere before a team waits and see what they can get in draft. I got a gut feeling this deal gets done before the end of next week 

Agreed. Players' asking prices get lower as FA drags on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2018 at 8:15 AM, MikeT14 said:

All of these people must not have watched him play in the 4-3 for the Giants for 4 or 5 years. It’s a lazy analysis and they’re just guessing that’s the main reason he was cut. The reason he got cut is because they could get out of his 3-year $28 million contract after one year and while he was their best interior defender, he’s not worth $8 or 10 million a year. He’s scheme diverse, as are most interior DL or most 3-4 OLBs/4-3 DEs. Most of these guys play 4-3 D in college but because of certain atributes they have - size for a NT, athleticism for a 3-4 OLB & size/length for a 3-4 DE - they are projected into a player who can play in the 3-4. The Steelers and Ravens have been correctly analyzing those college players into their scheme for over a decade and for the Steelers it’s more like 25 years. The Redskins have done decent at finding 3-4 players, they just haven’t found enough of them because they’ve been mostly drafting 1st round picks/spending most of their cap on offensive talent, not defensive talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, oldman9er said:

I don't get this, and I get the basics of both defenses.

I can understand when someone looks at a guy that's 280 lbs.. is decent at pass rush, but terrible at run stopping... and says

"well, he could maaaaybe play as a strong-side 43DE or situational pass rusher in Nickel... but he has no real fit in a 34D as a DE (poor run D) or rush LB (lack of burst/athleticism)."

See, I get that. 

but Hankins is a huge run stopping Pig with some fairly quick feet for his size. I'd love for anyone to explain to me why he can't function equally well in either base D. His talent can easily play the 5.. and he's best off to play the 0 or 1 tech. I don't think a base D exists that has no use for this. 

I'm left to think there was an internal issue with F/O and Hankins... OR that they liked a player beneath him to do the same job at much less of the cap cost. That it's like the typical break-up ax of "it's not you.. it's me!"

 

For me it comes down to one thing and that’s $

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...