Jump to content

Peon Awesome

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Peon Awesome

  1. It definitely makes the most sense to at least wait until the draft. If we draft a qb at 8, it doesn't make much sense to have him sit behind Darnold for 2 years or pay Darnold nearly $20 million to be a backup in 2022. If we don't draft a qb at 8, I do think we'd be a bit obligated to pick up the 5th year option. You don't make an evaluation on a guy that he's worth a 2nd round pick plus change and worry he'll be damaged goods after 1 year. The 5th year option is a huge bargain for a decent starting qb. And as others have said, we probably need more than a year in our system to truly find out
  2. Not a fan of trading for Orlando Brown when this is such a deep class of OT. The guy is clamoring out of Baltimore because he wants to get a chance to play LT and get a contract commensurate with the position (e.g $20 million per year). We'll be stuck either dumping 20% of our cap for him and Moton in 2022 or having to let one go after giving up a high pick to get Brown. If you really want Horn, why not still trade back, use the extra 2nd to get any one of Leatherwood, Cosmi, Radunz or whoever else might be there that we like and get a low cost tackle for the next 4 years. Would you rather hav
  3. If they're really pulling out the consensual card (and I say "if" because I haven't directly heard about that), that's going to be a terribly hard sell. A high profile athlete paying a woman to meet him in a private location which then leads to sex? At best it comes off as implicit prostitution which is obviously illegal in its own right. But it's just as easy to argue these women were indirectly coerced out of retaliatory fear of a physically imposing and financially and pop culturally powerful individual for whom they were in a business/service relationship contingent on satisfied customers.
  4. I'm still not understanding why so many people are jumping at the chance to cut Teddy this second and lose an extra $10 million in cap space. In a world where Sam Bradford fetched a 1st round pick with a $20 million salary after a starter got injured, how is everyone so sure we can't get a late round pick, especially if we convert some of his guaranteed salary into a signing bonus? If we made $5 million into a signing bonus, the trading team gets Teddy for $12 million, we save $5 million extra on our cap (so $13 million post June 1st) and get a nominal draft pick in 2022. I mean hell, we could
  5. What part of keeping him until final cuts did you skip over? Why cut him now when there's months before the season starts and plenty of time for someone to get injured? We're not paying his 2021 salary before week 1.
  6. It would be moronic if we rush into cutting Teddy. For one, there's a chance a high profile starting qb for a competitive team will get injured sometime before the start of the season leaving Teddy as one of the few available qbs that could keep them afloat. Envision a team like Seattle losing Russell Wilson or Tom Brady's body finally breaking down in Tampa. You think those teams wouldn't throw a late round 2022 pick, especially if we restructure Teddy's contract to take some of the hit off them? Why eat $10 million extra and forfeit the chance at any pick at all unless you absolutely have to
  7. Definitely premature to be hailing praises over the Darnold trade. We could look back at the whole thing as a disaster, particularly if, say, Fields is there at 8 and he becomes a pro bowl caliber qb. Meanwhile Darnold statistically has been worse than Bridgewater. I know we all hope better weapons and coaching will make him look more competent but let's say he turns into at best, a comp for Teddy. We pick up his 5th year option to pay him nearly $20 million in 2022 and are in the same position we're in this year with Teddy: stuck with an overpaid qb that won't take us anywhere with a contract
  8. Additional point: Let's say Carolina is all in on Darnold and not enthused by the rookie qbs. And the draft plays out so that all but one of the highly regarded qbs has been picked by 8, which seems increasingly likely. Denver looks like a prime candidate to take the final one which ups the value of pick 8 tremendously. Let's say New England wants to move up. We would almost certainly get pick 15 plus next year's first and maybe a later round pick. So we'd more than recoup the value of trading for Darnold with moving back a bit in the 1st.
  9. Shoot, you're right. That was one of the changes in the latest CBA. I feel less strongly about this theory now but still plausible especially for a player like Lance who might benefit from a couple years learning. Anyhow, for the record, I'm not personally hoping we draft a qb. I'm definitely willing to give Darnold a chance and hope he's successful. Just seemed like it could have played a role and thought I'd share the theory especially for those baffled by the decision.
  10. OK, this might sound far fetched, but hear me out. To this point, literally everybody in the world knew the Panthers were 100% all in on getting a new quarterback. We reeked of desperation. And that put us at a severe disadvantage heading into the draft. If one of the top qbs actually did start dropping a bit and looked like they might be available at 8, there would almost certainly be a couple teams aggressively trying to move up ahead of us to take them. It would effectively force us to trade up or lose out. And the price to trade up appears to be exponentially high this year; just think abo
  11. San Francisco has a bit of leverage. Trading him compared to cutting him doesn't save money, so it wouldn't be a cap saving measure. And they see value in keeping him as an ideal bridge for whoever they draft at 3. So while I think there's certainly an element of starting the negotiating price high, I don't think it's a Carson Wentz situation where they're going to trade him no matter what, taking the best offer they can find. I think internally they'd probably take less ,like a 2 or a conditional 3rd, but I think if the best offer is a conditional 4th, which may be, they'd just as well hold o
  12. The other big point that hasn't been mentioned is that Detroit seems to be all-in on a rebuild which makes them a prime candidate to trade back, even to 19 if the package was good. Why do I think that? Well if they actually cared about being competitive at all sooner rather than later, they would've been better off taking our trade package for Stafford rather than trading with the Rams for 2 future 1sts. Passing on the #8 pick plus an extra pick this year so you can get 2 1sts in future years that will likely be in the late 20s? You don't do that unless you've written off this year and are all
  13. It's looking more and more likely that we could have our pick of LT at 8. People are expecting a run of qbs and receivers in front of us. 2 months ago, if someone told you we could draft Sewell without trading away a single pick, who wouldn't have happily taken that? I know everyone wants a qb, but we could have an elite offensive line for the next 5 years minimum with Sewell and Moton. Granted, if we like a qb available at 8, yeah take him and opt for someone like Cosmi or Leatherwood in the 2nd. But if the choice is trade a bunch of picks to move up and take Fields or stay at 8 and take Sewe
  14. I've got a Luxe myself (120) and have been happy with it. Of course I have nothing to compare it to but it gets the job done and it's affordable. Thinking about getting a 2nd one for my guest bathroom.
  15. How was that an option? Trade up with Miami, a team 100% in on drafting a qb last year, for them to move back to 7 and miss out on drafting one of the coveted qbs? Realistically, the Giants were the logical trade up partner. Meanwhile we all enjoy this revisionist history where Tua wasn't the clear, consensus #2 over Herbert. If we trade up to 4, we'd probably be trying to leapfrog Miami to draft Tua and ease him slowly with Teddy while he gets up to speed after his injury. Think about that: giving up prime draft capital to take Teddy lite with even less mobility after his hip fracture.
  16. Now it's possible the 49ers really do love Mac Jones and still possible he turns into a great qb, especially on a loaded 49ers team. But it's hard to think SF decided they needed to move up to 3 to get him especially after Miami proceeds to trade that very pick to Philly to move up to 6 where Mac would almost certainly still be available and not have to lose that 2023 1st. Moving up to 3 for Fields or even Lance on paper makes a lot more sense because neither is guaranteed to be there at 6. But teams do strange things all the time. Sounds like them drafting Jones is mostly educated conjec
  17. Wait and see for me. I think his free agency hasn't stood out from what we've seen with Hurney the last couple years. Couple good value signings, a couple head scratchers that seem a bit of an overpay while also letting some contributors leave over fairly low salary amounts. But the draft is where you really build a team so I am reserving judgment until we see how that plays out. Really can't accurately grade things for a couple years.
  18. Wasn't there like a dozen posts before the start of free agency from people whining about how the Panthers never have cap room? Somehow we go on a free agent spending spree, tag Moton and still have among the most cap space in the league.
  19. Solid list. Gotta think we can snag someone of this caliber at a relative bargain to address probably our biggest immediate need. And if we can solidify our team a bit better before the draft, would make me less nervous of trading away picks to move up if necessary, within reason.
  20. I think the argument for Pitts is that you could view and use him effectively like an elite WR and from that standpoint, drafting him in the top 10 isn't unreasonable. My issue with taking him is that we've invested enough in our receiving corps. Between DJ, Anderson, CMC, David Moore, Dan Arnold, we should be ok for the next couple years. You can't really say that confidently for CB, LT and QB, 3 positions of at least equal to higher value than receiver. If you can take a position of need and high value with a player worthy of that spot, you do it. And between Lance, Fields, Sewell, Slater, F
  21. So reflecting on it more, my guess is the team felt at minimum he could come in and be one of our starting guards with the versatility to serve as an injury replacement at tackle if needed. Which if you think about it, is effectively what Dennis Daley is when healthy, for under a million dollars. So very likely an overpay, particularly in a year with a depressed cap and fewer teams with ample space, but at least we're talking 5 million and not a Matt Kalil level contract. If he somehow revives himself on the level of Michael Oher in 2015 then it'll be a great signing but nothing in his play to
  22. Main thing I would say is that these moves basically reek of our free agency from last year. High end backup/cheap starter level deals on players a bit below that grade. Recall Schofield, Burris, Whitehead, Weatherly. It's super early of course but between that and restructuring a bunch of contracts, if you didn't know Hurney got fired, could you even tell? I'm all for finding bargains in free agency but we're basically paying these guys to show us more than they have so far and to come across as a successful offseason, several of them will have to. I hope they do.
  23. I was going to suggest exactly this. Makes a lot of sense. From what I recall, he was a disappointment for Minnesota. But even if he underperforms, at worst he becomes a slightly expensive backup on a team with significant injury history on the line or just a straight up sunk cost of $6 million spread over 2 years. But the potential upside of getting a 3 year starter on the offensive line for $4.5 million per year makes it a reasonable roll of the dice.
  24. Just curious, why do so many people suddenly forget about the concept of a bridge qb? Did you forget about Tyrod Taylor or Fitzpatrick last year? Just because it's become clear Teddy is not the long term starter here doesn't mean he's 100% gone before the season starts. Hate to break your hearts. Sure if we can somehow trade him away and save a bit more money we should but it's a bit silly to outright cut him and barely save anything. Especially when the 2 qbs we'll be most likely to draft have each only played 1 year as a starter, 1 of whom has essentially not played in over a year and when h
  25. The Saints have 2 problems: a) they have to make massive cuts to get under the cap, even before factoring in Wilson's salary and b) they have to offer a huge enough package to convince the Seahawks to agree to a trade when they're drafting at the end of each round. All reports suggest this isn't a Watson scenario; Wilson isn't demanding to be traded and the Seahawks aren't going to be eager to dump him without a tremendous haul. So the only scenario involving the Saints that might make sense would be a HUGE assortment of picks and players. Seahawks aren't going to want just a couple late 1sts.
  • Create New...