Jump to content
SportsWrath

Some thoughts on Green and Whittle being released


Money

Recommended Posts

The release of Barrett Green and Jason Whittle comes as a surprise to me. I thought that Carlos Emmons seemed like a better bet to get, and Whittle's versatility seemed to be enough to ensure his roster spot. The Giants really went out on a limb this past season for Green by keeping him on the active roster for several weeks before reluctantly placing him on IR. To add to that, a lot of Green's injury problems stem from misdiagnosis by the Giants medical staff. Factor in both Green's comparative youth (he is 4 years younger than Emmons) and Reggie Torbor waiting in the wings at SLB, and Emmons, to me, appeared to be a more logical choice for release. With Whittle, I suppose his salary was too high the justify his role on the team, despite his versatility. Interestingly enough, I heard from a fairly reliable source that Coughlin wanted to cut Whittle and keep Wayne Lucier instead at the end of the 2005 preseason. But Wellington Mara intervened and asked that Whittle stick around, and Coughlin obliged. I don't know if I buy that story (since it would suggest Whittle's departure should coincide with Lucier's triumphant return), but perhaps Coughlin thinks less of Whittle than I initially presumed. Anyway, here are some thoughts on these roster moves:

 

Barrett Green = OUT, Carlos Emmons = IN (but for how long?)

 

- Green getting released likely means one fo two things: either he is not healthy, or he refused a pay cut. I don't buy the line of reasoning the Coughlin wanted to get rid of Green because of his injuries. If that was the case, it would have happened earlier. The timing of this (a week or so before the start of free agency) indicates that a new contract agreement could not be reached ... or Green's knee is in worse condition than reported.

 

- Emmons not getting released has some interesting implications. It could mean the team fully expects him to be healthy and starting at SLB in 2006. Or it could mean that the Giants intend to enter 2006 with the same starting trio of LBs they had entering 2005: Emmons at WLB, Pierce at MLB, and Reggie Torbor at SLB. In that case, I imagine they would draft a pure WLB with a high draft choice to develop behind Emmons.

 

- Of course, Emmons could be on the way out, too. I have a hard time believing the team will keep him around at $4.0 million this year. Either the Giants are confident they can restructure Emmons (a development which may certainly have sealed Green's fate), or they intend to release him as well and use the savings to sign a new starting WLB in free agency.

 

- Regardless of the undertones of the Emmons/Green scenario, I imagine the team is going to either bring in a solid WLB via free agency (either big-name like Witherspoon or an unheralded guy like Leber), or invest a 1st or 2nd round pick in one. Green's departure combined with Emmons's situation makes that a lock.

 

Jason Whittle: Ex-Giant Again

 

- Whittle getting cut has two possible ramifactions -- 1.) the Giants are optimistic they will re-sign Bob Whitfield, and/or 2.) They intend to bring in another OL (likely LT) through the draft. They only have room for a standard 8 OL on next year's roster, and right now they have 6 guys guaranteed to be on the roster, barring injury: Petitgout, Diehl, O'Hara, Snee, McKenzie, Seubert. That being said, I can't imagine they would cut Whittle unless they are confident they can retain Whitfield, otherwise they are entering free agency with 2 key back-up spots to fill.

 

- This move may be a precursor to Seubert moving to OC part-time, or it could be a precursor to the Giants finding O'Hara's replacement. Since O'Hara is entering a contract year, it's possible that they may be prepared to draft an OC and let O'Hara walk in 2007.

 

- Assuming Whitfield returns and Seubert can successfully serve as the primary back-up to OG and OC (thus having 7 out of 8 lineman in place), the Giants may also be positioning themselves to add a rookie LT with a premium draft pick. They can develop that player while having veteran depth in Whitfield and Seubert.

 

- While the "Seubert to OC" is nice, the Giants just might add another vet interior lineman in free agency and forego investing a draft pick in a LT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well if im not sure but wasnt whittle due a bunch of money i actully think he was going to make more money then o'hara and he is his back-up still a shock w/ the versitilty of him and being able to trust him in situations over younger players

 

with the relese of green i mean he was in coughlin's dog house ever since he has been here and he hasnt been healthy so they figure get a younger player that they can mould maybe???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well if im not sure but wasnt whittle due a bunch of money i actully think he was going to make more money then o'hara and he is his back-up still a shock w/ the versitilty of him and being able to trust him in situations over younger players

 

with the relese of green i mean he was in coughlin's dog house ever since he has been here and he hasnt been healthy so they figure get a younger player that they can mould maybe???

 

I'm not a big believer in the "Green was in Coughlin doghouse" theory because the Giants really went out on a limb for Barrett this past season. I doubt they would have done that for a guy who the coach was dissatisfied with.

 

If age was a consideration, Emmons is a better choice for release since he's 4 years older than Green. I agree that it's probable that the team wanted a healthier player at WLB, and obviously they didn't want to pay Green $2.5 million this year, but they could have achieved their goal buy restructuring Green, cutting Emmons, and signing or drafting another WLB. Thus, I think Green getting cut is based on the inability of he and the Giants to agree on a restructured contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either Green or Emmons was going to be released

 

Really it was 50-50 who would be back

 

I was leaning to Green staying due to age, obviously his injury history, size and possibly attitude were bigger issues for the Giants. With this years draft and free agency, we can upgrade WLB, which is why Green is gone.

 

Emmons has more versatility (he can cover more positions if needed), has been healthier than Green, but also has alot of valuable experience. At 33, he isn't a long term solution, so it hints strongly at a good LB in the draft.

Edited by BigPete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a big believer in the "Green was in Coughlin doghouse" theory because the Giants really went out on a limb for Barrett this past season. I doubt they would have done that for a guy who the coach was dissatisfied with.

 

If age was a consideration, Emmons is a better choice for release since he's 4 years older than Green. I agree that it's probable that the team wanted a healthier player at WLB, and obviously they didn't want to pay Green $2.5 million this year, but they could have achieved their goal buy restructuring Green, cutting Emmons, and signing or drafting another WLB. Thus, I think Green getting cut is based on the inability of he and the Giants to agree on a restructured contract.

 

 

I have a feeling that a lot of what the Giants "did" for Green had to do with his contract and the depth on the roster as opposed to the fact that they liked him. It was no secret he ruffled some feathers over the two years. I for one was enraged when he talked shit to the Jets, yet missed the practice that day and the subsequent game thereafter. I figured Green to stay, but I guess like you had said there was no way he was taking a pay cut. Emmons I would assume is going to accept a pay cut. Emmons also can play the Will and Sam spots and maybe that was what was the final judgement in who stays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Barrett Green gone, the Giants #52 is available for D'Qwell Jackson :TU:

 

I'd be lying if I didn't say that the same exact thought crossed my mind as well. Great minds, Pete. Great minds...

Edited by Money
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we can re-structure Emmons he is very valuable for our depth and spot-starting, something we did not have last year. Kevin Lewis and Nick Greisen are as good as gone, so I won't be suprised if we invest our 1st and 4th round picks on a stud LB, and possibly another long term solution but for now, more depth (a speedy ILB could do us good.)

Whittle was old and out of shape and we should have never traded our 7th round pick for him last year. This is because Ernie had a man crush on him when he was with the Giants before. I don't care that he was an average-above average solution at guard for 16 games in 2004 >:-|. Anyway it does clear up salary for possibly a younger, stronger OG via draft/free agency.

Edited by Blue_Jeans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whittle was old and out of shape? Ok.

 

I'd say a 7th round pick for 15 decent starts out of the LG position was a pretty good deal. Unless you think guys like Drew Strojny and Isaac Hilton are better investments at the same cost...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we can re-structure Emmons he is very valuable for our depth and spot-starting, something we did not have last year. Kevin Lewis and Nick Greisen are as good as gone, so I won't be suprised if we invest our 1st and 4th round picks on a stud LB, and possibly another long term solution but for now, more depth (a speedy ILB could do us good.)

Whittle was old and out of shape and we should have never traded our 7th round pick for him last year. This is because Ernie had a man crush on him when he was with the Giants before. I don't care that he was an average-above average solution at guard for 16 games in 2004 >:-|. Anyway it does clear up salary for possibly a younger, stronger OG via draft/free agency.

Whittle was actually a fine acquisition before the season started. It was nice to have him during the 2004 season even though it didn't make much of a difference. If he didn't cost as much against the cap, I don't think he would have been cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our 7th round pick would not have started 15 games and given quality depth the past 2 years that Whittle did.

 

I like Whittle and hope he ends up somewhere(NYJ?) where he can compete for some playing time and be a valuable member of a teams O line.

 

i think money is right in assuming this leads to a re-signing of Whitfield(something I have said is as important as any at this point in time). My guess is now with the versatility of Diehl and having a healthy Suebert the Giants just may look to add a young T to develop in the draft.. I cannot reiterate enough how important I think it is that this team re-signs Whitfield as the domino effect is depth is clear to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our 7th round pick would not have started 15 games and given quality depth the past 2 years that Whittle did.

 

I like Whittle and hope he ends up somewhere(NYJ?) where he can compete for some playing time and be a valuable member of a teams O line.

 

i think money is right in assuming this leads to a re-signing of Whitfield(something I have said is as important as any at this point in time). My guess is now with the versatility of Diehl and having a healthy Suebert the Giants just may look to add a young T to develop in the draft.. I cannot reiterate enough how important I think it is that this team re-signs Whitfield as the domino effect is depth is clear to see.

 

Another to consider re: the Whittle trade is that our LG entering the 2004 season would have been Wayne Lucier and we would have had very little depth.

 

I heard somewhere that the team may re-sign Whittle at a later date, but I don't know if there is much veracity to that predication ... if they wanted to keep Whittle, they could have simply restructured his deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

btw, I looked up who the Bucs drafted with the picks we gave them for Whittle and here's what I got.

 

With the 225th pick in the draft, the Bucs selected Paris Warren, who when I looked him up on the Bucs website, his stats are unlisted.

 

With Whittle we got some nice depth and some quality starts.

 

I agree with that trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another to consider re: the Whittle trade is that our LG entering the 2004 season would have been Wayne Lucier and we would have had very little depth.

 

I heard somewhere that the team may re-sign Whittle at a later date, but I don't know if there is much veracity to that predication ... if they wanted to keep Whittle, they could have simply restructured his deal.

 

Unless of course the respect that the franchise says they have for him lead them to allow him a chance to seek a better deal elsewhere. Could explain the early cut as opposed to doing it March1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless of course the respect that the franchise says they have for him lead them to allow him a chance to seek a better deal elsewhere. Could explain the early cut as opposed to doing it March1.

 

That could have been the case, although I remember hearing that Whittle truly valued being apart of the Giants organization and was thrilled upon getting traded to NY. I have to believe he would have taken a pay cut to stay with the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

btw, I looked up who the Bucs drafted with the picks we gave them for Whittle and here's what I got.

 

With the 225th pick in the draft, the Bucs selected Paris Warren, who when I looked him up on the Bucs website, his stats are unlisted.

 

With Whittle we got some nice depth and some quality starts.

 

I agree with that trade.

 

 

Parris Warren was a undersized and slow WR out of Utah that left for the draft because he was afraid his stock would drop without the benefit from the Urban Meyer offense. He is practice squad type guy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parris Warren was a undersized and slow WR out of Utah that left for the draft because he was afraid his stock would drop without the benefit from the Urban Meyer offense. He is practice squad type guy

And considering we had security of depth and solid starting out of Whittle, I think we got the better of that trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another to consider re: the Whittle trade is that our LG entering the 2004 season would have been Wayne Lucier and we would have had very little depth.

 

I heard somewhere that the team may re-sign Whittle at a later date, but I don't know if there is much veracity to that predication ... if they wanted to keep Whittle, they could have simply restructured his deal.

 

When Whittle was brought in, the cupboard was bare, we had alot of problems on our Oline, which have only really been addressed this year with McKenzie anchoring RT, Diehl moving to LG and Seubert being healthy

 

EA did say that he would resign Whittle if there was an increase in the 2006 salary cap due to the new CBA (if it gets signed).

 

Whittle was not cut for poor playing ability, but we need to invest that money in other areas of our team (ie: defensive back seven)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Green being released is a surprise. I can only think that either physically

he is worse than anticipated or he wont restructure his contract.

 

emmons is older and pricey also ! But as mentioned when the D was

playing well it was Pierce Emmons and Tobor so maybe they feel they

dont want to break up the continuity and will draft the eventual emmons replacement

a pure WSLB. Blackburn will backup Pierce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that so many people are surprised at Green's release.

 

Dead weight and whether or not he was misdiagnosed is speculative at best. What is certain is that he's not been any kind of impact player for us.

 

Emmons is more consistant, so he stays for a little while longer.

 

Couldn't care less about Whittle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The release of Barrett Green and Jason Whittle comes as a surprise to me. I thought that Carlos Emmons seemed like a better bet to get, and Whittle's versatility seemed to be enough to ensure his roster spot. The Giants really went out on a limb this past season for Green by keeping him on the active roster for several weeks before reluctantly placing him on IR. To add to that, a lot of Green's injury problems stem from misdiagnosis by the Giants medical staff. Factor in both Green's comparative youth (he is 4 years younger than Emmons) and Reggie Torbor waiting in the wings at SLB, and Emmons, to me, appeared to be a more logical choice for release. With Whittle, I suppose his salary was too high the justify his role on the team, despite his versatility. Interestingly enough, I heard from a fairly reliable source that Coughlin wanted to cut Whittle and keep Wayne Lucier instead at the end of the 2005 preseason. But Wellington Mara intervened and asked that Whittle stick around, and Coughlin obliged. I don't know if I buy that story (since it would suggest Whittle's departure should coincide with Lucier's triumphant return), but perhaps Coughlin thinks less of Whittle than I initially presumed. Anyway, here are some thoughts on these roster moves:

 

Barrett Green = OUT, Carlos Emmons = IN (but for how long?)

 

- Green getting released likely means one fo two things: either he is not healthy, or he refused a pay cut. I don't buy the line of reasoning the Coughlin wanted to get rid of Green because of his injuries. If that was the case, it would have happened earlier. The timing of this (a week or so before the start of free agency) indicates that a new contract agreement could not be reached ... or Green's knee is in worse condition than reported.

 

- Emmons not getting released has some interesting implications. It could mean the team fully expects him to be healthy and starting at SLB in 2006. Or it could mean that the Giants intend to enter 2006 with the same starting trio of LBs they had entering 2005: Emmons at WLB, Pierce at MLB, and Reggie Torbor at SLB. In that case, I imagine they would draft a pure WLB with a high draft choice to develop behind Emmons.

 

- Of course, Emmons could be on the way out, too. I have a hard time believing the team will keep him around at $4.0 million this year. Either the Giants are confident they can restructure Emmons (a development which may certainly have sealed Green's fate), or they intend to release him as well and use the savings to sign a new starting WLB in free agency.

 

- Regardless of the undertones of the Emmons/Green scenario, I imagine the team is going to either bring in a solid WLB via free agency (either big-name like Witherspoon or an unheralded guy like Leber), or invest a 1st or 2nd round pick in one. Green's departure combined with Emmons's situation makes that a lock.

 

Jason Whittle: Ex-Giant Again

 

- Whittle getting cut has two possible ramifactions -- 1.) the Giants are optimistic they will re-sign Bob Whitfield, and/or 2.) They intend to bring in another OL (likely LT) through the draft. They only have room for a standard 8 OL on next year's roster, and right now they have 6 guys guaranteed to be on the roster, barring injury: Petitgout, Diehl, O'Hara, Snee, McKenzie, Seubert. That being said, I can't imagine they would cut Whittle unless they are confident they can retain Whitfield, otherwise they are entering free agency with 2 key back-up spots to fill.

 

- This move may be a precursor to Seubert moving to OC part-time, or it could be a precursor to the Giants finding O'Hara's replacement. Since O'Hara is entering a contract year, it's possible that they may be prepared to draft an OC and let O'Hara walk in 2007.

 

- Assuming Whitfield returns and Seubert can successfully serve as the primary back-up to OG and OC (thus having 7 out of 8 lineman in place), the Giants may also be positioning themselves to add a rookie LT with a premium draft pick. They can develop that player while having veteran depth in Whitfield and Seubert.

 

- While the "Seubert to OC" is nice, the Giants just might add another vet interior lineman in free agency and forego investing a draft pick in a LT.

 

IMO green was released because he did not want to renegotiate his contract. I also believe he will resign for the league min depending on offers he gets from other teams.

 

I completely agree with this statment:

- This move may be a precursor to Seubert moving to OC part-time, or it could be a precursor to the Giants finding O'Hara's replacement. Since O'Hara is entering a contract year, it's possible that they may be prepared to draft an OC and let O'Hara walk in 2007.

 

I see seubert starting and not part-time next year, i see him having a good camp....

 

the real twist here will be the CBA....IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also shocked that Barret Green was cut like Money and agree about him possibly declining to take a pay cut. As for Emmons, I belive the Giants are leaving him here for competition reasons. While the Giants are interested in Julian Peterson, I think the Giants will end up with a high drafted LB that they will have attempt to be the WLB. Since Emmons did get some decent playing time at WLB, he has some versatility. The Giants could have him in two battles, one for the SLB vs Reggie Torbor, and the other for the WLB vs the draft pick.

 

As for Whittle, I'm not all that shocked about his re-lease. Yes he's very versatile (he can play LG, RG, C, and he can long snap). He was making over a million dollars this year (correct me if I'm wrong) and they needed some more cap space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also shocked that Barret Green was cut like Money and agree about him possibly declining to take a pay cut. As for Emmons, I belive the Giants are leaving him here for competition reasons. While the Giants are interested in Julian Peterson, I think the Giants will end up with a high drafted LB that they will have attempt to be the WLB. Since Emmons did get some decent playing time at WLB, he has some versatility. The Giants could have him in two battles, one for the SLB vs Reggie Torbor, and the other for the WLB vs the draft pick.

 

As for Whittle, I'm not all that shocked about his re-lease. Yes he's very versatile (he can play LG, RG, C, and he can long snap). He was making over a million dollars this year (correct me if I'm wrong) and they needed some more cap space.

i am guessing here but maybe Ny did not cut emmons so not to accelerate his Bonus money.

 

In all fairness Green has been hurt more than emmons, don;t get me wrong i like what i saw out of green when he was not injured, I loved it when he stuck up for manning when trotter was acting like a toolbag that one game.

 

But IMO this is simple math, the guy has not played, who is to say that he will be healthy next year, and for how long?

 

Again I see him resigning with NY for less momey. What team is gonna drop 2mil on this guy? He now has to prove himself again....this is the nature of the beast.....in the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Whittle was brought in, the cupboard was bare, we had alot of problems on our Oline, which have only really been addressed this year with McKenzie anchoring RT, Diehl moving to LG and Seubert being healthy

 

EA did say that he would resign Whittle if there was an increase in the 2006 salary cap due to the new CBA (if it gets signed).

 

Whittle was not cut for poor playing ability, but we need to invest that money in other areas of our team (ie: defensive back seven)

 

Good post. All too many people are forgetting what kind of year we were coming off of when we traded for Whittle. It was a move to improve our depth and versatility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...