Should we have interest in Tank Johnson?

hawaiianboy

hawaiianboy

Unfuckupable
Joined
Oct 5, 2006
Messages
29,849
Reaction score
25,270
The Bears just waived him and of course he is on suspension for at least the first 6 games... LINK



We have first claim on waivers and he is signed through 2008... This wouldn't be a move so much for this year, but as a replacement for Sapp at UT in '08 since this is probably Sapp's final season... He has played a one gap NT for the Bears and could be used there in Terd's place in passing downs the last half of this year...

Yes his past is worrisome but that's not exactly new ground for us and talented DT's are hard to come by... Past Sapp, the pond isn't exactly stacked at DT with talent... That we're looking at Brayton there, and pinning so much hope on the underachieving Antaj doesn't really say much...

At worst we have a couple or three months to evaluate him before we'd have to dedicate a roster spot on him and I imagine the contract we'd inherit won't be prohibitive... EDIT: Base salaries of $510,000 for 2007 and $548,750 in 2008....


Yay or nay?...
 
Last edited:
Wont happen. I'd welcome him, but i dont see it happen in anyway ATM.
 
I say Nay, partly because I don't think they will really consider him, as I think character is a very real issue for this current Raider club, and I also don't think he'll be worth the headache.

He was a wave player in Chicago, and I don't think his talent is worth the potential headache. A decent player that is too stupid to keep himself out of trouble.
 
I almost started this thread, but had not made up my mind about what I think. Then I found this at Rotoworld:
Tank Johnson - 6/28/2004: Signed a five-year contract. 2007: $510,000 (- $255,000 for eight-game suspension), 2008: $548,750, 2009: Free Agent

We should take him at that price. He has no leverage to renegotiate more jack, will play his ass off or bust entirely (likely not somewhere in between). Either way the Defense is strong in leadership and KK will have half a season to get the team behind him. If he plays well we have the option of res-signing him to an extension in 2008 - one for which he may have some gratitude.
He's a great guy in the locker rooom according to the Chi-town media.
Give him a shot on a short leash. High ceiling low floor and first dibsies - no brainer Al. Make it happen.
 
I could see us taking a stab. Why not? If the guy get's his life in order, we just acquired a solid DT without surrendering a draft pick. If's trouble continues to stick to him like flies on shit, we waive him.

No real risk IMHO.
 
Why not? is the real question...............
 
Found this nugget while trying to check out TJ's locker-room image:
(whole article here: http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...1,2642256.column?coll=chi-sportscolumnist-hed)

In theory, the layoff only will make Johnson more durable for the stretch run and more marketable heading into an incentive-laden, contract-drive season of 2008. Even if the Bears have locked up Tommie Harris by then, which is likely, they might decide before the '08 season that it makes sense to re-up Johnson, too, to retain a defensive tackle tandem that could be one of the NFC's best for years.

Nobody really is thinking about Johnson's long-term future now, but consider how this enforced vacation could be one of the best things that ever happened to Johnson as an NFL breadwinner. The suspension generally will cut in half his chance of getting injured next season, and he won't lose his spot in the rotation because no NFL team ever has enough disruptive defensive tackles. Cynically, it also reduces his opportunities to have flaws exposed.
In theory, the layoff only will make Johnson more durable for the stretch run and more marketable heading into an incentive-laden, contract-drive season of 2008. Even if the Bears have locked up Tommie Harris by then, which is likely, they might decide before the '08 season that it makes sense to re-up Johnson, too, to retain a defensive tackle tandem that could be one of the NFC's best for years.


Sounds a bit weak, but some good points.
 
Well, I was thinking about this. I looked at his measurables and he's only 6-2, 280+ so he isn't what we need now.... but, talking about the future I think we should take a shot.

I heard he's out for at least 8 games. If he's comes to the other end of the continent and is still a dumbass, we just dump him... I think it's worth the risk, and maybe Sapp and Millard can do him some good.
 
Well as alluded to, he'd certainly come at a reasonable price so the risk is minimal. It's really going to boil down to whether Kiff wants to take a chance on a player with less than ideal character If there's an ideal situation to re-start his career, none better than under the tuetelage of one Mr. Sapp. We're certainly not stacked at the DT position and one or two injuries would deplete us.

I say Yay as he'd be ready in time for our playoff stretch:)
 
He might not be available at all this season if the DUI thing holds up. That said, his contract is so minimal that we would be foolish not to take a shot. Maybe then RR would finally move Kelly back to DE.
 
Looks like this will turn into one of those damned if you do... damned if you don't situations.

The best thing that could happen for Tank's career is to have no team claim him off waivers. Will kind of put pressure on him to really rehabilitate himself since everybody's counting him out. As soon as a team claims him off waivers, he could very easily revert back to his usual self, knowing he's still got a contract, and ultimately be no better for it.

Only problem is there is almost no chance Tank clears waivers with such a cap friendly contract. If we agree that there is going to be at least one team out there that will roll the dice on him (Bucs, Ravens, Broncos...) well then why not claim him so that we get first dibs?

Really interesting call for Davis. Either way, it won't make or break my off season if we take a flyer on this guy. At least it makes June a li'l more interesting.
 
Can you claim a guy off of waivers and trade him?
Not that there will be anyone pounding on the door, but at least we'd be in charge of where he goes (not Denver).
Also, does anyone know when he hits the wire and how long teams have to decide?
 
I'd pick him up in a heartbeat.

Getting a talented guy with something to prove at a cheap price would be great for at least one season.

And let's face it, the straw that broke this camel's back was especially light -- he was pulled over for going 40 in a 25 and wasn't charged with DUI.
 
Not really part of my offseason wishlist, picking up one of Turk Goodell's marked men. But a player with his talent at a need position for such little cost? Man, that's hard not to like.

I agree that we likely won't give the guy a look. But if we did, I'd be amped about it.
 
In the past I would have thought this was a no brainer for Al Davis. Now I'm not too sure with all the emphasis on character players. God knows the Raiders don't need the spotlight on them.

IMO, however, it should be kind of a no brainer especially since he's gonna come cheap. -- that is if he ever gets out of the NFL doghouse.
 
Is he really that good? Im not sure his play matches the trouble he brings. I dont wanna mess up our teams good vibes so far.
 
The guy's already down for half a year and there is no reason whatsoever that he's responsible enough to come back from that in anything resembling game shape... so, no I'm not big on the idea. Additionally, while everyone points to the "reasonable" contract the guy's toting, the fact is that if or when he ever gets reinstated, he's going to have to come to teams with his hat in hand and beg for a shot. He's going to end up somewhere, playing a short term deal at the minimum salary. With that in mind, taking him off waivers would not only mean that we've hired a guy who can't play for half the year, but we're drastically overpaying him at that.

If we have an interest in Tank Johnson after he is reinstated and shown himself to be a better, more responsible person, that's fine. But until then, there's really no point in adding that type of influence to this young locker room, regardless of his perceived upside or his contract.

To me this one is as much of a no-brainer as Tank Johnson is himself: Just say no.
 
TheNextStep said:
The guy's already down for half a year and there is no reason whatsoever that he's responsible enough to come back from that in anything resembling game shape.
Click to expand...

I don't know, man. A change of scenery, none of the old hangers-on. New scene. Could be what I guy needs. Besides Oaktown is a small town atmosphere, not a place where gun-toting, juice-sipping folks get into trouble.
 
TheNextStep said:
If we have an interest in Tank Johnson after he is reinstated and shown himself to be a better, more responsible person, that's fine.
Click to expand...


The problem with that scenario is that we'd be then vieing against other teams on the open market... Scenario two is we put a claim in and have him on board for an inexpensive evaluation... We can see how he responds to coaching during training camp... we can see what kind of approach he takes to staying ready during his suspension... If he proves to be unstable off the field or undedicated on it, it's pretty simple to cut the cord... It's like we get to redshirt him for half a year without using a roster spot... Do we even have to pay a player under suspension?...


I really don't see much of a downside here... we wouldn't be relying on him and the burden of proof is entirely on his shoulders as far as whether he becomes a roster player and productive teammate once he comes off suspension... At best we get a young high motor player at a position we aren't very good at, at worst we cut him with no financial impact...


We are the Raiders, reclamation projects are our game...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top