Official Redskins Free Agency Thread 2013 Part II

I don't think we would bring back Hall and sign Winfield. That would give us 5 CBs on the roster and two-three guys who could possibly be gone next year (Wilson, Hall, Winfield)

Wouldn't we be best served by adding one more vet to the secondary and drafting the rest?

Yeah. I am pretty sure it's a choice between Hall or Winfield. Me, I go with Winfield in heartbeat.

Hall as a safety? It is to laugh.

I don't think we would bring back Hall and sign Winfield. That would give us 5 CBs on the roster and two-three guys who could possibly be gone next year (Wilson, Hall, Winfield)

Wouldn't we be best served by adding one more vet to the secondary and drafting the rest?

That's most likely the plan.

I'd bring Hall back simply based on his knowledge of the system and the rest of the players on the D .. rather than Winfield learning our D.. the skill level is closely comparable and I just see someone who has lived this system for a few years as being a better fit than someone compareable in skill level.. but for us, it's all going to come down to the amount of $ each of these players is willing to sign for... I'm fine with Hall coming back, he played well down the stretch and could be teaching a rookie or two this system when we draft them.. IMO i think that might be the better of these 2 scenarios

I'd bring Hall back simply based on his knowledge of the system and the rest of the players on the D .. rather than Winfield learning our D.. the skill level is closely comparable and I just see someone who has lived this system for a few years as being a better fit than someone compareable in skill level.. but for us, it's all going to come down to the amount of $ each of these players is willing to sign for... I'm fine with Hall coming back, he played well down the stretch and could be teaching a rookie or two this system when we draft them.. IMO i think that might be the better of these 2 scenarios

i disagree . . . the last person i would wan't mentoring the young secondary players is Hall, a corner that only positive aspect is his ability to get a pick . . . he is horrible in coverage, horrible against the run, horrible blitzing and a complete headcase . . . keep him as far away from the rookies as you can!! at least winfield has something to teach!! and winfield now is 10 times the player that hall ever was . . .

BOLD PREDICTION: We sign Hall AND Winfield (after some more restructuring), and then take 5 CBs and safeties in the draft….

It's not THAT bold...it's smart for our position.

We need to load up on young secondary players but need some certainty going into this year which Winfield and Hall could provide. Hopefully a few of the draft picks will be long-term gold but we shouldn't count on mid-round picks saving us this year.

To me, Hall and Davis are the last remnants of the Vinny years. Each has talent. Each is vastly overrating themselves in terms of that talent.

I concede that, both in terms of play and attitude Hall seemed to turn himself around a little the last half of last year. As others have pointed out, however, there is simply no guarantee that he continues to do so. If we end up with him back, it wouldn't be the end of the world although I think it best if both he and the team move on. [As for mentoring younger players - Hall is the one who needs constant mentoring. W/o Fletcher to ride herd, I am convinced Hall's gambling style and attitude would be astronomically worse].

As to "knowing the system", well ... Winfield is a good 10 year vet. While I don't know what his background is in terms of the defenses he has played, I think "system knowledge" is vastly overrated.

The real question is does he have the talent and qualities that make him a fit for our system. To that, I think he has shown himself to be a physical corner that our system requires. The guy knows how to blitz, is a physical tackler and can still cover well enough. Since his profile seems to fit the scheme we play, I feel pretty sure we don't run anything so exotic that a 10 year vet can't pick it up in an off-season.

The "knows the system" argument was the same some here advanced for keeping Gafney over Garcon last year. Pretty sure we all can agree that, in hindsight, we're glad the Skins made that switch.

I'd never want gaffney over and younger faster more upside garcon lol..

Let's face it Hall or Winfield are both stop gaps. Even at his age Winfield is the better player and value.

Yes, because a guy who can't make it on the field, is better then one who is.

To me, Hall and Davis are the last remnants of the Vinny years. Each has talent. Each is vastly overrating themselves in terms of that talent.

I concede that, both in terms of play and attitude Hall seemed to turn himself around a little the last half of last year. As others have pointed out, however, there is simply no guarantee that he continues to do so. If we end up with him back, it wouldn't be the end of the world although I think it best if both he and the team move on. [As for mentoring younger players - Hall is the one who needs constant mentoring. W/o Fletcher to ride herd, I am convinced Hall's gambling style and attitude would be astronomically worse].

As to "knowing the system", well ... Winfield is a good 10 year vet. While I don't know what his background is in terms of the defenses he has played, I think "system knowledge" is vastly overrated.

The real question is does he have the talent and qualities that make him a fit for our system. To that, I think he has shown himself to be a physical corner that our system requires. The guy knows how to blitz, is a physical tackler and can still cover well enough. Since his profile seems to fit the scheme we play, I feel pretty sure we don't run anything so exotic that a 10 year vet can't pick it up in an off-season.

The "knows the system" argument was the same some here advanced for keeping Gafney over Garcon last year. Pretty sure we all can agree that, in hindsight, we're glad the Skins made that switch.
Ye of little faith. We would have won 9 out of 9 games Gaffney played in.