Re-Sign or Let Walk? The Case for Mack Hollins
As the offseason approaches, teams must make tough decisions about retaining key players. One such case is Mack Hollins, a wide receiver who made a significant impact both on and off the field. After signing a one-year, $2.6 million contract last season, Hollins is now expected to command around $3.5 million for another short-term deal. The question remains: Should the team re-sign him or let him walk?
The Case for Re-Signing Mack Hollins
1. Locker Room Presence & Leadership
One of Hollins’ biggest strengths is his leadership. He quickly became a fan favorite and a respected voice in the locker room. Players like him are valuable for team chemistry, especially in a young or developing roster. Losing such a presence could impact morale and cohesion.
2. Special Teams Value
Beyond his role as a wide receiver, Hollins is a strong contributor on special teams, a crucial aspect often overlooked. His ability to play multiple roles adds depth and reliability to the team, making him a valuable asset even if he isn’t a primary receiving option.
3. Affordable Veteran Depth
At an estimated $3.5 million, Hollins remains an affordable option compared to other veteran receivers. He provides solid WR4/WR5 depth, ensuring the team has experienced pass-catchers behind its starters. Given the increasing salaries of wide receivers, his price is reasonable for what he brings.
The Case for Letting Mack Hollins Walk
1. Limited Offensive Production
While Hollins is a great leader, his on-field production as a receiver has been inconsistent. He is not a go-to target and primarily serves as a depth piece. If the team wants to improve its passing game, investing in a more dynamic receiver might be a better option.
2. Cap Space & Roster Flexibility
Every dollar matters in free agency. If the team is looking to make bigger moves—such as signing a high-impact free agent or extending core players—then allocating $3.5 million to a depth receiver may not be the best use of resources.
3. Developing Younger Talent
If the team has young wide receivers waiting for an opportunity, keeping Hollins could block their development. Teams often prioritize younger, cheaper players who have potential upside rather than paying for a veteran with a capped ceiling.
Final Verdict: What Should the Team Do?
Ultimately, the decision depends on the team’s roster priorities and cap situation. If leadership, culture, and special teams depth are top concerns, then re-signing Hollins on a short-term deal makes sense. However, if the team is focused on upgrading offensive weapons or saving cap space for bigger moves, they might choose to let him walk and explore other options.
What would you do? Would you bring Mack Hollins back, or is it time to move on?