News Archives

New York Giants Free Agent Profile: WR Domenik Hixon, Will He Stay or Will He Go?

January 22nd, 2013 at 10:30 AM
By Simon Garron-Caine

Domenik Hixon may not be the biggest name at wide receiver for the New York Giants with Hakeem Nicks and Victor Cruz on the team, but the Giants are going to have to make a decision on Hixon's future with the team as the battle-tested veteran hits free agency.

Hixon's had his share of setbacks, from the Kevin Everett situation to two seasons lost to separate ACL repairs, but he's always battled back and last year proved he was still a capable player.

Hixon has been really flexible for the Giants: he's played the slot, he's lined up outside and he's always been a reliable and productive special teams player. He certainly has value to the Giants…but with Nicks and Cruz entrenched at the top of the depth chart (and getting closer to new contracts of their own), Reuben Randle heading coming on strong and Jerrel Jernigan heading into his third year, we wonder if the Giants will want to pay what Hixon is worth on the open market.

Armchair GM says:

Hixon's got experience, versatility and last year as proof that the knees haven't totally hampered him, so there should be a market for his services. Can the Giants afford to compete in that market if Hixon is likely to be, at best, the fourth guy on their depth chart?

Sure, the Giants would love to have him as a trustworthy veteran in that role, but it's likely some team with a good eye for value will have a better deal than that waiting for him in free agency (though we should all hope he remains).

Up Next on New York Giants free agent profile:

Tight End Martellus Bennet

photo credit: West Point Public Affairs via photopin cc


Tags: Domenik Hixon, Football, Hakeem Nicks, Jerrel Jernigan, New York, New York Giants, NFL, Victor Cruz, wide receiver

10 Responses to “New York Giants Free Agent Profile: WR Domenik Hixon, Will He Stay or Will He Go?”

  1.  GOAT56 says:


    Kevros says:
    January 21, 2013 at 11:09 AM
    The new CBA:

    Starting on page 92 Valuation of Player Contracts, it talks about what pieces count against the cap and when. It’s pretty confounded legal talk, but it seems pretty similar to the old CBA when it comes to calculating cap hits…

    Kevros says:
    January 21, 2013 at 11:32 AM
    I calculated a rough estimate of what the team would save by cutting the three players FF55 mentioned above. The numbers are based on Rotoworld’s contract details which are a simplified since nobody (outside of the Giants organization) really knows all of the working parts of a player’s contract.

    Cutting Canty would save $920k.
    Cutting Webster would save $3.67m.
    Cutting Boley would save $2.05m.

    fanfor55years says:
    January 21, 2013 at 1:01 PM
    So, obviously, cutting Canty makes absolutely no sense. Can we all agree on that?

    Webster is a tougher choice. Restructure would seem in order.

    As I’ve said, the depth behind Boley allows Reese to consider cutting him, but for a savings of only $2.05MM I would certainly not. I think he’s still our best linebacker. I like Rivers, but before I’d sign him again at something like $1.25MM I’d probably allocate that money to keeping Boley. he has been quite productive whereas Rivers is still largely “potential”.

    GOAT56 says:
    January 22, 2013 at 10:13 AM
    If this is correct then I agree with F55 about Canty. It even seems with Canty restructuring would be hard unless we add another year. But adding another year could be dangerous.

    I assumed that more money than this would be saved by cutting Webster. Though saving 3.7 mil is a lot it still doesn’t replace Webster if we would sign a free agent. At least not with a player that doesn’t have even more questions than Webster. Though it is a chance given Webster’s performance this year given this info I can see a restructure by adding another year and 2-3 mil. This would create a 2 year 10 mil type of deal for Webster. I know many will not want that but when I consider Ross signed for 3 year 15 mil last year, it’s not the worse idea sense an early round CB might not be ready for a starting role until 2015.

    Boley is just a matter of what we think of Paysinger and Williams. If we feel that those 2 by 2013 are Boley’s equal or close then we let him go. If that’s not the case then he stays. I think we let him go but keeping him is definitely possible.


  2.  GOAT56 says:


    It seems unrealistic to me no matter the player that we would expect the 19th pick to replace Beatty in the starting lineup for game #1 next year if he’s not re-signed. I can see drafting a player for RT maybe but not LT. I understand how many view Beatty but given our cap situation an extra 3 mil for Clady or Long just might not be possible. I think the more likely not Beatty signing would be a mid tier free agent LT like Branden Albert or Sam Baker. We are fortunate that this seems to be the best OT free agent class in a while. So Beatty doesn’t have quite the power he would have in another season because their are reasonable replacements out there. Plus looking at the rankings below maybe Beatty is capable of being elite. He has basically played only 2 years so his upside could be more than he’s shown.

    •  fanfor55years says:

      You draft a great college tackle who has played the left side, and whether you keep Beatty or not you allow him to compete for that spot with the understanding that he will also compete for the starting position on the right side. The ideal is to have Beatty, Brewer and a draftee competing for playing time and, hopefully, Mosley healthy enough to do so too (Mosley’s advantage is that he can also play guard so should be able to get a spot on the roster if he has recovered from his injury).

      If Beatty leaves then they need to draft a potential LT with the first or second pick and sign a mid-level free agent to hold down the fort until the draftee, Brewer, Mosley and McCants can show that among them is the solution.

      In any case, Reese should be drafting a tackle.

      •  BigBlueGiant says:

        Unless we’re trading up, there’s no OT worthy taking at 19. Or unless Womack falls ( i know he plays G). I just can’t see us drafting an O-lineman at 19 when there’s noone worthy.

        McCants shouldnt even be in this discussion. Unless that kid has improved so much over a 6 month period (which would be a miracle), he will be nothing but a camp fodder, practice squader.

      •  GOAT56 says:

        I agree that in any case we should be drafting a OT. Similar to CB even with Webster or replacement CB free agent we need to draft a CB. My point is just that drafting a LT wouldn’t be a 2013 solution for our LT needs without Beatty.

        I also wonder what style of OT we go after. The bama kid is a classic RT mauler but struggel in pass protection. The OK kid is more LT type and should be fine pass proection wise but might not add to the run game. I think in todays NFL you got with the more athletic type, especially with a RB like Wilson who should be better on the edges.

        •  BigBlueGiant says:

          what round you guys looking at?? 1st? at 19?

          we’d be making a terrible mistake drafting an OT at 19.

          •  fanfor55years says:

            There are a few kids who are AT LEAST as good coming out as was Beatty when we grabbed him. I’d much prefer that we get our guy with the second pick, but it isn’t true that there are no players worth a #19 pick. I think there are at least 2-3 who might be. And if Beatty leaves we’d better have a stud added to this team, pronto.

            My guess is that Beatty stays but we STILL draft a potential LT high. Not with the #19 pick, but probably before the third round is over. I would change my approach if they know Mosley is fully-recovered, has learned the scheme, has Flaherty’s imprimatur, and shows signs already of being a player who could successfully play tackle at a high level in the NFL.

            As for McCants, he’s definitely a project and was described as such when they drafted him. Doesn’t mean he’ll never be good. Just means that if he ever is to become good it will be later rather than sooner. You cannot give up on these kids so quickly.

  3.  G-MenFan says:

    I’m surprised about the division there seems to be about Hixon. I’m in the “keep him on the cheap” camp because I think he’s a solid player when healthy and gives us reliable depth at a critical position. That said, he’s an unrestricted FA and the Giants can’t afford to let another team run the price beyond his worth. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that no one does something stupid and we get him back.

  4.  kujo says:

    To the point of this article, Hixon stays. He knows the offense, can make critical catches and has the total and complete trust of Eli. That last part is perpetually undervalued around here, and absolutely cannot be overstated. He’s a veteran and a glue-guy in the locker room. Best of all, he’ll come cheap.

    •  fanfor55years says:


      Unless they are in a completely dire cap situation there’s no doubt Reese will try hard to keep Hixon. He is ALWAYS underrated by the fans but greatly appreciated by his teammates, and especially his quarterback.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: