Ramius Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 (edited) http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/washington-redksins-oj-atogwe-free-safety-signed-030311 Scratch one off the list. I'd say i'm interested to see the terms of the deal, but the redskins probably overpaid as usual. Either way, the parameters should put up a definitive price for Whitner. Edited March 3, 2011 by Ramius
Thoner7 Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 5 years 26 mil per ESPN bottom line. Shockey also signed a 1 yr deal with Carolina.
Ramius Posted March 4, 2011 Author Posted March 4, 2011 5 years 26-30 million would be a reasonable price to keep Whitner in the fold.
Zulu Cthulhu Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 Surprising the Redskins made a semi-sensible move.
Thoner7 Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 5 years 26-30 million would be a reasonable price to keep Whitner in the fold. Meh, I still think thats too much for a back up safety. Id rather have GW in there. Give that contract to Florence.
Erik Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/washington-redksins-oj-atogwe-free-safety-signed-030311 Scratch one off the list. I'd say i'm interested to see the terms of the deal, but the redskins probably overpaid as usual. Either way, the parameters should put up a definitive price for Whitner. I figured Atogwe and Sanders were off of the table for us any way once we re-signed Wilson, he's the same hybrid FS/SS type of player as them...we need to add one more true SS to the roster.
Bill from NYC Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 5 years 26-30 million would be a reasonable price to keep Whitner in the fold. Whitner gives up touchdowns galore. He cannot cover tight ends. I think he is worth something slightly above the veteran minimum to be a solid backup. But, I would offer him a few dollars as a bonus to save the twitter world some pain and stop tweeting.
Ramius Posted March 4, 2011 Author Posted March 4, 2011 Meh, I still think thats too much for a back up safety. Id rather have GW in there. Give that contract to Florence. Wilson will be the backup safety.
Ramius Posted March 4, 2011 Author Posted March 4, 2011 Whitner gives up touchdowns galore. He cannot cover tight ends. I think he is worth something slightly above the veteran minimum to be a solid backup. But, I would offer him a few dollars as a bonus to save the twitter world some pain and stop tweeting. I'm not going to get into an argument about his play with someone who has zero interest in having a reasonable discussion about his play, and is content to blame all the secondary issues on him. Wherever he signs, Whitner will make a lot closer to 6 million per year than the vet minimum. But hey, if you'd rather create another hole on D that needs to be filled via the draft, that's your opinion. I'd rather get him back at SS and focus on the D front 7, but that's just me.
Ghost of Rob Johnson Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 Eric Weddle is a UFA and likely won't be resigned by SD now that they signed Bob Sanders. He'd also have Buddy Nix connections. I could see this as their move at SS.
GG Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 Eric Weddle is a UFA and likely won't be resigned by SD now that they signed Bob Sanders. He'd also have Buddy Nix connections. I could see this as their move at SS. Seemed to run out of gas last year a bit, but certainly has been more productive than Whitner over the years.
Chimp Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 I'm not going to get into an argument about his play with someone who has zero interest in having a reasonable discussion about his play, and is content to blame all the secondary issues on him. Wherever he signs, Whitner will make a lot closer to 6 million per year than the vet minimum. But hey, if you'd rather create another hole on D that needs to be filled via the draft, that's your opinion. I'd rather get him back at SS and focus on the D front 7, but that's just me. yeah, but you're a Florida State fan...
Orton's Arm Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) Donte Whitner was the second-highest draft pick the Bills have had over the last 20 years. (The highest was Mike Williams, taken 4th overall.) Any time you make a controversial pick with such a high draft pick, it's going to create a strong reaction on these boards! I think there's an element of people on both sides of this debate seeing in Whitner what they expect to see. Those who'd opposed the pick from the beginning expect to see a completely useless player. Those who supported the pick expect to see a player who at least partially justifies his eighth overall draft selection. The truth is Whitner is neither. If Whitner had come to the Bills by the same road as George Wilson, we could look at him without this emotional overlay. Whitner and Wilson are roughly comparable players. Whitner is better in run support, a better hitter, and seems to have better athleticism. Wilson is better in coverage against tight ends and seems to have significantly better instincts. Re-signing Whitner offers the Bills two advantages: 1) Better play than George Wilson, at least in some aspects of the game. (But worse play in others.) 2) Better depth at SS. (Wilson + Whitner = more depth at SS than either player alone, regardless of who's starting.) I'd argue the second consideration is far more important than the first; especially because it's not clear that Whitner is the better overall player. How much is it worth to the Bills to have better depth at SS? Should they shell out $5 million or $6 million a year for that better depth? Are there other, better ways that money could be used instead? Are there cheaper ways to obtain good depth at the SS position? The Bills have a bad habit of letting their DBs with the best combination of youth + proven accomplishment go first contract and out. Over the last decade we've seen that happen with Antoine Winfield, Nate Clements, and Jabari Greer. Now Whitner has one foot out the door, making it a grand total of 3.5 DBs lost over the last decade. I'm not a fan of letting DBs go first contract and out, especially because the people who run the Bills' front office seem to think they absolutely must use a first round pick on a DB whenever the secondary has the slightest hole. (The only exception to that rule is when it's been two or more years since the last time the Bills used an early pick on a RB.) All this being said, I'm very far from convinced that Whitner's presence on the roster would add $6 million a year worth to the team's ability to win games. If the Bills are going to throw $6 million at the SS position, they need to come away with a player who's a clear and definitive upgrade over Wilson. Edited March 4, 2011 by Edwards' Arm
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 The Bills have a bad habit of letting their DBs with the best combination of youth + proven accomplishment go first contract and out. Over the last decade we've seen that happen with Antoine Winfield, Nate Clements, and Jabari Greer. Now Whitner has one foot out the door, making it a grand total of 3.5 DBs lost over the last decade. Never let it be said that you don't have a sense of humor!
Orton's Arm Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 Never let it be said that you don't have a sense of humor!
Thoner7 Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) Wilson will be the backup safety. If the Bills FO has a clue, GW will be starting and lil Donte will be on the bench. That said, Wilson will prob be the backup safety. Edited March 4, 2011 by Thoner7
Turbosrrgood Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) Nobody talks about Bryan Scott, but he is and has been better than Whitner when he plays. Whitner has had the edge simply because of his draft status. Scott is bigger, more physical, and can cover tight ends better than Whitner. Whitner only does one thing well, he hits somewhat hard. He is awful in coverage. While he hits hard, unless it knocks the guy down he won't get the tackle. He always opts to "hit" over tackle, which leads to big plays when the guy stays on his feet. He almost never breaks up passes because he is too focused on going for the body. If we could get him cheap, fine...Since we can't, I'd say no thanks. Wilson or Scott would both be better as starters, actually, they have been. Edited March 4, 2011 by Turbosrrgood
Recommended Posts