Why not go after Eric Reed for Safety?

[jdpanther5]

28 minutes ago, Zaximus said:

   

You'd rather have a 3rd round pick instead of a proven starter at a position at need?   

In this case, yes. Reid is fine but not a major difference maker compared to some others available that won't cost a pick. Look at it this way: would you trade a third round pick for Reid instead of signing say Ron Parker without giving anything up? If yes that's fine, but personally I wouldn't. 

26 minutes ago, La Pantera said:

Why!?!? Because of comp picks??? 

Yeah, I said as much. 

I really think we're underestimating the value of having an extra top 100 pick for a team with several veterans leaning into retirement soon. I understand the desire to fill every hole possible, but there's a few good safeties on the cut market as well. 

15 minutes ago, Smithers said:

a mid to late round draft pick that may not even make the roster is kind of silly. 

Your premise here isn't exactly likely. I'm not advocating avoiding a player in favor of a sixth-round camp body, the Norwell pick would be a third, and those guys aren't usually cut in camp. 

I'm also not saying we shouldn't address safety. Plenty of options out there that were cut that won't cost future picks. 

[Riv]

22 minutes ago, SetfreexX said:

According to his twitter, it's because he took a knee with Kaep.

Decisions have consequences.  

[Jangler]

2 minutes ago, Riv said:

Decisions have consequences.  

so do principles.

 

[jumpman910]

The safety market will probably get goin after some teams get over this tyrann dream. But some also feel he's getting the Kapernick treatment for healing with him first. 

Really hope the latter isn't the case but only time will tell. 

[Cyberjag]

27 minutes ago, SetfreexX said:

According to his twitter, it's because he took a knee with Kaep.

A guy who's already making excuses when no one else has been signed?  Sounds perfect for us.  I wonder why he chose to bring up politics and didn't mention knee injuries and concussions.

Here is a list of UFA Safeties.  Lots of names there that are unsigned, and I don't hear any of them whining discussing why yet.  

[d-dave]

7 minutes ago, jdpanther5 said:

I really think we're underestimating the value of having an extra top 100 pick for a team with several veterans leaning into retirement soon. I understand the desire to fill every hole possible, but there's a few good safeties on the cut market as well. 

That's a good point.  While I wouldn't have a problem with checking Reid out, is he that good?  Just some casual youtube highlights show an average safety who can hit.  I think he's more name now than product.  But I'm not an expert.  Maybe he just needs a change of scenery?

I totally get the comp pick strategy considering the number of veterans who will be retiring in the next few years.

[Jangler]

3 minutes ago, Cyberjag said:

A guy who's already making excuses when no one else has been signed?  Sounds perfect for us.  I wonder why he chose to bring up politics and didn't mention knee injuries and concussions.

Here is a list of UFA Safeties.  Lots of names there that are unsigned, and I don't hear any of them whining discussing why yet.  

probably a tinderbox lurker.

[Rick Grimes]

How was Vacarro in NO? I thought he was a nice prospect coming out a few years back

[NcPsa10]

 

  

[Riv]

15 minutes ago, Jangler said:

so do principles.

 

Not sure what this means....?

[SOJA]

I'd love to have him, he would be a great fit on our defense as we often swap the safety positions and Reid has played all over the field

 

[Pazhoosier89]

Sign him and then draft his brother and we are set at safety. I don't trust old man Mike Adams so we basically need two safeties.

[GoobyPls]

Cause he’s not good 

 

SF who has a more cap space than almost any team and are in dire need of secondary help, doesn’t want him, why should we?

 

[Jangler]

21 minutes ago, Riv said:

Not sure what this means....?

not surprised.