The NYG free agency model

[GhostOfPelluer]

Forgive me if you think this has been played out, but there are only so many things to talk about during this point in the offseason.

I see two trains of thought when it comes to the success the Giants found in free agency.

First, they improved drastically from the year before. In 2015, they were last in yards allowed, 30th in points allowed. After spending big in free agency (and investing a pretty high 1st round pick), the defense improved to 10th in yards allowed and second in points allowed. So, the logic would say they found success in free agency.

On the other side, the Giants spent more than $71 million on their defense in 2016. By comparison, the Cowboys spent almost $61 million. And Dallas was 14th in fewest yards allowed. Dallas was fifth in fewest points allowed. The Giants created 25 turnovers. Dallas created 20. The Giants had 35 sacks. Dallas had 36. The Giants were 23rd in pass defense, Dallas was 26th. The Giants were third in rush defense. Dallas was first.

Most importantly, the Giants were 11-5, Dallas was 13-3. Both teams lost their first playoff game, but Dallas was a round further thanks to the bye earned.

I would argue that there's no guarantee that if we spend more money, we will get the same improvement the Giants did. There are many examples of teams that spend a bunch of money - ahem, Philly - and get little to no improvement in return.

I would also argue that Dallas got more out of what they spent than the Giants did. Of course, Dallas could zoom past the Giants in terms of money spent on the defense just by simply retaining their own FA in 2017. At which point the Cowboys would (likely) no longer be getting more bang for their buck than the Giants.

I don't know if I've proved anything definitively, but I do like to look at as much info as possible when formulating an opinion on something. If I'm missing something, I'd love to see it. Anyway, thanks for reading.

 

[KingintheNorth]

Nope. Free agency never, ever works.

Ask anyone here.

 

[Alexander]

Nope. Free agency never, ever works.

Ask anyone here.

It especially doesn't work when you don't have money to spend.

 

[Afigueroa22]

Nope. Free agency never, ever works.

Ask anyone here.

It kinda worked for Denver

 

[KingintheNorth]

It especially doesn't work when you don't have money to spend.

39,094 posts here so I'd imagine you've seen the "we can do whatever we want in free agency" theme.

Don't let the fact that we never actually do that deter you from believing.

 

[jujoboys]

Forgive me if you think this has been played out, but there are only so many things to talk about during this point in the offseason.

I see two trains of thought when it comes to the success the Giants found in free agency.

First, they improved drastically from the year before. In 2015, they were last in yards allowed, 30th in points allowed. After spending big in free agency (and investing a pretty high 1st round pick), the defense improved to 10th in yards allowed and second in points allowed. So, the logic would say they found success in free agency.

On the other side, the Giants spent more than $71 million on their defense in 2016. By comparison, the Cowboys spent almost $61 million. And Dallas was 14th in fewest yards allowed. Dallas was fifth in fewest points allowed. The Giants created 25 turnovers. Dallas created 20. The Giants had 35 sacks. Dallas had 36. The Giants were 23rd in pass defense, Dallas was 26th. The Giants were third in rush defense. Dallas was first.

Most importantly, the Giants were 11-5, Dallas was 13-3. Both teams lost their first playoff game, but Dallas was a round further thanks to the bye earned.

I would argue that there's no guarantee that if we spend more money, we will get the same improvement the Giants did. There are many examples of teams that spend a bunch of money - ahem, Philly - and get little to no improvement in return.

I would also argue that Dallas got more out of what they spent than the Giants did. Of course, Dallas could zoom past the Giants in terms of money spent on the defense just by simply retaining their own FA in 2017. At which point the Cowboys would (likely) no longer be getting more bang for their buck than the Giants.

I don't know if I've proved anything definitively, but I do like to look at as much info as possible when formulating an opinion on something. If I'm missing something, I'd love to see it. Anyway, thanks for reading.

This is like comparing apples to oranges. Dallas' defense was helped immensely by the offense and the running game. The Giants' offense was pretty bad all year long. Our offense basically saved our defenses bacon. Our offense scored 26.3 points per game while NY's offense only scored 19.4 points per game. NY"s defense carried their team while Dallas' offense carried their team. A better stat to look at would be points per drive. Dallas' defense ranked #12 giving up 1.89 points per drive while NYG's defense ranked #2 giving up 1.43 points per drive (only 2nd to NE's 1.42 points per drive). Offensively Dallas ranked #4 in points per drive scoring 2.54 points per drive while the NYG's offense ranked #27 in points per drive scoring 1.56 points per drive.

The NYG's opponents had 194 offensive drives/chances to score points while Dallas' opponents only had 166 offensive drives/ chances to score points. If Dallas can do something to really improve their defense this year then it could be lights out on our opponents. We have a chance to do something special if we can do whatever it takes (within reason) to improve our defense.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

This is like comparing apples to oranges. Dallas' defense was helped immensely by the offense and the running game. The Giants' offense was pretty bad all year long. Our offense basically saved our defenses bacon. Our offense scored 26.3 points per game while NY's offense only scored 19.4 points per game. NY"s defense carried their team while Dallas' offense carried their team. A better stat to look at would be points per drive. Dallas' defense ranked #12 giving up 1.89 points per drive while NYG's defense ranked #2 giving up 1.43 points per drive (only 2nd to NE's 1.42 points per drive). Offensively Dallas ranked #4 in points per drive scoring 2.54 points per drive while the NYG's offense ranked #27 in points per drive scoring 1.56 points per drive.

The NYG's opponents had 194 offensive drives/chances to score points while Dallas' opponents only had 166 offensive drives/ chances to score points. If Dallas can do something to really improve their defense this year then it could be lights out on our opponents. We have a chance to do something special if we can do whatever it takes (within reason) to improve our defense.

What if Dallas improved to 3.06 points per drive (where No. 1 Atlanta was this season). Wouldn't that be lights out, too?

 

[StarBoyz83]

The problem is the fa class this year is crap compared to last year!!

Still pissed! Dallas could've had sanu.!

 

[AzorAhai]

39,094 posts here so I'd imagine you've seen the "we can do whatever we want in free agency" theme.

Don't let the fact that we never actually do that deter you from believing.

Doing and able to do are two different things. This team won't do anything major. They are able to go get 1 or even 2 high priced FAs without really hurting their future. That's what happens when you have entire draft classes you don't re-sign or have no intention of extending.

It's all good though. We're only 2 years away from having a good defense. Keep building through the draft. It's worked out GREAT the last 5 years everyone has said this same thing....

 

[perrykemp]

Didn't help them much when Green Bay destroyed that defense in the 1st round of the playoffs.

The Giants offense was pretty wretched -- average OL, bad RBs, bad TEs, one good WR.... they should have spent some of that money on the offense.

 

[JoeKing]

• CB Janoris Jenkins (Signed by Giants; 5-years, $62.5 million)

• DT Damon Harrison (Signed by Giants; 5-years, $46.25 million)

• DE Olivier Vernon (Signed by Giants; 5-Years, $85 million)

• LB Keenan Robinson (Signed by Giants; 1-Year, $3.5 million)

• FB Will Johnson (Signed by Giants; 2-Years, $2.3 million)

• OG Ryan Seymour (Signed by Giants; 1-Year, $600,000 salary)

• LB Kelvin Sheppard (Signed by Giants; 1-Year, $840,000)

• RB Bobby Rainey (Signed by Giants; 1-Year, $840,000)

• OT Byron Stingily (Signed by Giants; 1-Year, $780,000)

• DT Jermelle Cudjo (Signed by Giants 1-Year, $760,000 salary)

• CB Leon Hall (Signed by Giants; 1-Year; $2 million)

• PK Randy Bullock (Signed by Giants; 1-Year, $675,000 salary)

No playoff wins... bad return on investment

 

[gimmesix]

Forgive me if you think this has been played out, but there are only so many things to talk about during this point in the offseason.

I see two trains of thought when it comes to the success the Giants found in free agency.

First, they improved drastically from the year before. In 2015, they were last in yards allowed, 30th in points allowed. After spending big in free agency (and investing a pretty high 1st round pick), the defense improved to 10th in yards allowed and second in points allowed. So, the logic would say they found success in free agency.

On the other side, the Giants spent more than $71 million on their defense in 2016. By comparison, the Cowboys spent almost $61 million. And Dallas was 14th in fewest yards allowed. Dallas was fifth in fewest points allowed. The Giants created 25 turnovers. Dallas created 20. The Giants had 35 sacks. Dallas had 36. The Giants were 23rd in pass defense, Dallas was 26th. The Giants were third in rush defense. Dallas was first.

Most importantly, the Giants were 11-5, Dallas was 13-3. Both teams lost their first playoff game, but Dallas was a round further thanks to the bye earned.

I would argue that there's no guarantee that if we spend more money, we will get the same improvement the Giants did. There are many examples of teams that spend a bunch of money - ahem, Philly - and get little to no improvement in return.

I would also argue that Dallas got more out of what they spent than the Giants did. Of course, Dallas could zoom past the Giants in terms of money spent on the defense just by simply retaining their own FA in 2017. At which point the Cowboys would (likely) no longer be getting more bang for their buck than the Giants.

I don't know if I've proved anything definitively, but I do like to look at as much info as possible when formulating an opinion on something. If I'm missing something, I'd love to see it. Anyway, thanks for reading.

You've proven that you can't just look at overall statistics in comparisons.

The Giants defense carried a fairly inept offense while the Cowboys offense kept a so-so defense off the field.

If the Giants had had our offense, there's a good chance they would have been a better team than us because their defense was better and a big part of that was because of their free agency haul.

 

[AzorAhai]

You've proven that you can't just look at overall statistics in comparisons.

The Giants defense carried a fairly inept offense while the Cowboys offense kept a so-so defense off the field.

If the Giants had had our offense, there's a good chance they would have been a better team than us because their defense was better and a big part of that was because of their free agency haul.

The Giants defense and the Cowboys offense probably results in a SB berth.

 

[reddyuta]

you use FA to fill a glaring hole which a draft pick will not provide immediate impact and that position is RDE.

 

[Longboysfan]

Forgive me if you think this has been played out, but there are only so many things to talk about during this point in the offseason.

I see two trains of thought when it comes to the success the Giants found in free agency.

First, they improved drastically from the year before. In 2015, they were last in yards allowed, 30th in points allowed. After spending big in free agency (and investing a pretty high 1st round pick), the defense improved to 10th in yards allowed and second in points allowed. So, the logic would say they found success in free agency.

On the other side, the Giants spent more than $71 million on their defense in 2016. By comparison, the Cowboys spent almost $61 million. And Dallas was 14th in fewest yards allowed. Dallas was fifth in fewest points allowed. The Giants created 25 turnovers. Dallas created 20. The Giants had 35 sacks. Dallas had 36. The Giants were 23rd in pass defense, Dallas was 26th. The Giants were third in rush defense. Dallas was first.

Most importantly, the Giants were 11-5, Dallas was 13-3. Both teams lost their first playoff game, but Dallas was a round further thanks to the bye earned.

I would argue that there's no guarantee that if we spend more money, we will get the same improvement the Giants did. There are many examples of teams that spend a bunch of money - ahem, Philly - and get little to no improvement in return.

I would also argue that Dallas got more out of what they spent than the Giants did. Of course, Dallas could zoom past the Giants in terms of money spent on the defense just by simply retaining their own FA in 2017. At which point the Cowboys would (likely) no longer be getting more bang for their buck than the Giants.

I don't know if I've proved anything definitively, but I do like to look at as much info as possible when formulating an opinion on something. If I'm missing something, I'd love to see it. Anyway, thanks for reading.

Historically the Giants sign their own FA's first then go after others.
Their drafts have not been the best the last few years and they needed that major injection of talent that cost them a lot of CAP $$$$$$.

 

[JoeKing]

The Giants defense and the Cowboys offense probably results in a SB berth.

Of course they would but they won't both fit under the cap.

 

[JoeKing]

You've proven that you can't just look at overall statistics in comparisons.

The Giants defense carried a fairly inept offense while the Cowboys offense kept a so-so defense off the field.

If the Giants had had our offense, there's a good chance they would have been a better team than us because their defense was better and a big part of that was because of their free agency haul.

Our offense can't coexist with their defense under the cap. What you are proposing would not be allowed by the league.

 

[conner01]

The giants improved their defense
thats what they set out to do and they accomplished that
The giants did not get over the hump of being a serious contender
Time will tell if their investment was worth it. If it hampers them improving the offense then it may not help them
Free agency is a gamble just like the draft. The only difference is the cost to play
In free agency if you miss, depending on the structure of the deal, it can hurt you or you can soon cut your loses
In the draft the gamble is generally cheaper and easier to cut your loses but you never get that pick back
Both are a gamble, it's just how much you want to bet

 

[Risen Star]

It especially doesn't work when you don't have money to spend.

But if you don't want to have the money to spend then it works perfectly.

 

[AzorAhai]

Of course they would but they won't both fit under the cap.

Yes they could and it's been shown exactly how in multiple threads. The Giants only spent 10 million more on defense last year than the Cowboys did. They would be in an even better place the following year after signing players like the Giants did because they won't be paying a 25 million per year contract to their QB. Stop spreading false narratives around to people. If you want to argue the Cowboys won't, then fine. Nobody can really argue otherwise. Stop telling people they can't do something that has been proven over and over.