Squidly wrote:
>> I'm with you. We all love his big hits, but think back -- exactly how
>> many were there this year? I'm talking Easley-type bone-rattling hits
>
> Play in, play out, huge hits are the exception rather than
> the norm - even for Easley.
That goes without saying. What I'm asking is, think about it -- Hamlin
has this rep for laying big hits, but does he really lay bigger hits
and lay them more often than most other safeties out there? For all
the props we give him for being a "big hitter," what's the actual
reality? Maybe I'm mis-remembering, but I just can't recall more than
one or two really big pops this year that made me say "ooooh," and I'm
not sure that there's a significant difference between him and most
other NFL safeties when it comes to that.
> But anyway, we can live with Hamlin's lack of wrapping up,
> provided that there's a solid, consistant pass rush and
> other guys in the secondary who cover well and tackle
> securely most times.
Which we don't have. Trufant, Herndon and Jennings are okay, good some
days and not as good other days, but we definitely don't have anything
even approximating a "shutdown" corner (although those types of players
are rare nowadays anyway). Boulware, meanwhile, can't cover, and
Babineaux can't stuff the run game. So on the whole, I'd prefer a
solid tackler rather than a big hitter when it comes to the rest of the
personnel we have now.
> We can let Hamlin go, sure, but if we then
> do nothing else we're left with a no-tackle,
> no-cover secondary AND nobody left to
> supply physical intimidation.
The thought was never to do "nothing" else; of course if Hamlin goes,
we need to sign a replacement that's starter material.
> I also submit that his attitude (of aggression) supplies
> a worthwhile ingredient to a defense.
It does to an extent, but all other things being equal, I personally
value solid fundamentals over raw, unfocused aggression, and Hamlin
tends towards the latter.
If we re-sign him at a reasonable rate, I'm totally okay with that. We
should not overpay to keep him (which means if he wants top-10 safety
money, forget it), nor should we tag him, as was submitted elsewhere in
this thread. If he goes, I won't be heartbroken; if he stays and signs
for reasonable money, cool. If we pay him a lot of jack just to keep
him here, I think that's a bad decision.
