(03-15-2022, 04:30 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]We pay 16M AAV for a guard. The Bucs just go and throw out a 5th rounder and get an elite one on a 2/16 contract. Why can't we ever get involved in these kind of deals?
Scherff is just a guard, Mason is an elite guard Lol
(03-15-2022, 04:30 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]We pay 16M AAV for a guard. The Bucs just go and throw out a 5th rounder and get an elite one on a 2/16 contract. Why can't we ever get involved in these kind of deals?
I mean technically they could have done both.
Paid Scherff, traded a 5th for Mason and then still trade a 3rd for Collins!
OLine solved and you rescind Cam to save even more money.
(03-15-2022, 03:58 PM)Caldrac Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 03:50 PM)TheDogCatcher Wrote: [ -> ]Start Shatley at Center and keep Linder around to rotate with Scherff at guard. Between the two of them, one should be healthy at any given time.
At $9.5M? Doubtful. Linder is on the move via trade or release. They'll pocket that cap hit Linder would have held this year and put it towards another player on defense.
I think Shenault and Chaisson are also potentially trading candidates to pick up another $5-$6M. Plenty of draft picks to add more lineman.
They retained Robinson and Shatley. Signed Scherff. Invested a 2nd RD pick in Little last year. Could see Baalke getting a player like Goedeke at RT [former TE, quick feet] and/or Sayler at G/T in this draft to fill the swingman role.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
I think they are more cut candidates. If we get anything for Shenault, it will be a very late round pick and no one in their right mind would give up a draft pick for Chaisson. He's a bust!
If we could land Jamaree Salyer for the other starting OG position, that would be fantastic! IMO, he is a borderline first rounder. After Ikem Ekwonu, he is my favorite OG prospect in the draft. I think both guys have the potential to be All-Pro OG's.
(03-15-2022, 07:35 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 03:58 PM)Caldrac Wrote: [ -> ]At $9.5M? Doubtful. Linder is on the move via trade or release. They'll pocket that cap hit Linder would have held this year and put it towards another player on defense.
I think Shenault and Chaisson are also potentially trading candidates to pick up another $5-$6M. Plenty of draft picks to add more lineman.
They retained Robinson and Shatley. Signed Scherff. Invested a 2nd RD pick in Little last year. Could see Baalke getting a player like Goedeke at RT [former TE, quick feet] and/or Sayler at G/T in this draft to fill the swingman role.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
I think they are more cut candidates. If we get anything for Shenault, it will be a very late round pick and no one in their right mind would give up a draft pick for Chaisson. He's a bust!
If we could land Jamaree Salyer for the other starting OG position, that would be fantastic! IMO, he is a borderline first rounder. After Ikem Ekwonu, he is my favorite OG prospect in the draft. I think both guys have the potential to be All-Pro OG's.
You like Salyer better than Zion Johnson?
(03-15-2022, 07:25 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 04:30 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]We pay 16M AAV for a guard. The Bucs just go and throw out a 5th rounder and get an elite one on a 2/16 contract. Why can't we ever get involved in these kind of deals?
I mean technically they could have done both.
Paid Scherff, traded a 5th for Mason and then still trade a 3rd for Collins!
OLine solved and you rescind Cam to save even more money.
If only...
Also, I figured out why Baalke didn't do the Cooper or Collins trade. The first year cap hits for all of these deals are very small so he could fit them all under the cap. If he traded for either Cowboy the 2022 cap hits for both would be too large for his "plan". If Collins gets cut he will attempt to negotiate a tiny first year cap hit and then backload the rest of the deal too.
(03-15-2022, 07:37 PM)I am Yoda Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 07:35 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]I think they are more cut candidates. If we get anything for Shenault, it will be a very late round pick and no one in their right mind would give up a draft pick for Chaisson. He's a bust!
If we could land Jamaree Salyer for the other starting OG position, that would be fantastic! IMO, he is a borderline first rounder. After Ikem Ekwonu, he is my favorite OG prospect in the draft. I think both guys have the potential to be All-Pro OG's.
You like Salyer better than Zion Johnson?
Yes, I do.
(03-15-2022, 07:40 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 07:25 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]I mean technically they could have done both.
Paid Scherff, traded a 5th for Mason and then still trade a 3rd for Collins!
OLine solved and you rescind Cam to save even more money.
If only...
Also, I figured out why Baalke didn't do the Cooper or Collins trade. The first year cap hits for all of these deals are very small so he could fit them all under the cap. If he traded for either Cowboy the 2022 cap hits for both would be too large for his "plan". If Collins gets cut he will attempt to negotiate a tiny first year cap hit and then backload the rest of the deal too.
God, I hate back loaded deals. That's what Baalke did in San Francisco and when they finally got rid of him, they were in "cap hell" for years, because of all the back loaded deals he did.
(03-15-2022, 07:55 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 07:37 PM)I am Yoda Wrote: [ -> ]You like Salyer better than Zion Johnson?
Yes, I do.
I was hoping you'd elaborate why!
(03-15-2022, 08:08 PM)I am Yoda Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 07:55 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, I do.
I was hoping you'd elaborate why!
I just see a bit more strength and balance in Salyer. He is very strong at the point of attack and is strong as a bull. Once he gets his hands on a defender, it's over.
I really think Zion Johnson ends up playing Center in the NFL. He is very strong as well, but tends to get knocked back on his heels a little more. He is very cerebral though, which is why I believe he would make the perfect Center.
I'd be perfectly happy with either player. I just like Salyer a tad better.
(03-15-2022, 04:30 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]We pay 16M AAV for a guard. The Bucs just go and throw out a 5th rounder and get an elite one on a 2/16 contract. Why can't we ever get involved in these kind of deals?
Because we don't have Tawmy takin snaps?
(03-15-2022, 07:55 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 07:40 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]If only...
Also, I figured out why Baalke didn't do the Cooper or Collins trade. The first year cap hits for all of these deals are very small so he could fit them all under the cap. If he traded for either Cowboy the 2022 cap hits for both would be too large for his "plan". If Collins gets cut he will attempt to negotiate a tiny first year cap hit and then backload the rest of the deal too.
God, I hate back loaded deals. That's what Baalke did in San Francisco and when they finally got rid of him, they were in "cap hell" for years, because of all the back loaded deals he did.
....so your preference is to pay a guy 30-odd mill this year between signing bonus and salary, and pray that he doesn't hold out for a new deal when the final year only pays 2-3MM?
The structures are not overly lopsided. Cap hits are reduced in the first year, but the player is getting the entirety of the bonus today to offset their temporarily reduced salary. If they are playing well, the contract affords them a salary consistent with other players around the league. If they aren't, the cap hit/dead money is not going to put us in a bare bones season to revive our cap.
Did you look at the deals before you dismissed them based on your preconceptions? Come on.
(03-16-2022, 08:34 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 07:55 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]God, I hate back loaded deals. That's what Baalke did in San Francisco and when they finally got rid of him, they were in "cap hell" for years, because of all the back loaded deals he did.
....so your preference is to pay a guy 30-odd mill this year between signing bonus and salary, and pray that he doesn't hold out for a new deal when the final year only pays 2-3MM?
The structures are not overly lopsided. Cap hits are reduced in the first year, but the player is getting the entirety of the bonus today to offset their temporarily reduced salary. If they are playing well, the contract affords them a salary consistent with other players around the league. If they aren't, the cap hit/dead money is not going to put us in a bare bones season to revive our cap.
Did you look at the deals before you dismissed them based on your preconceptions? Come on.
If I sign a guy to a front loaded deal, he can hold out if he wants, but I'm not giving him a new deal until the old one is finished. I word the contract that I can fine the crap out of him if he does hold out. If they want the big money up front, they will be expected to play out the contract. I'm sick of pushing money into the future. That's how you end up in cap hell and you have to end up cutting all your best players to get under the cap. San Francisco had to do it when Baalke structured all the contracts the same way and the Niners lost most of their good players and had to re-build.
I believe in spending what you have now and making the hits on the back end light enough, so if you make a mistake and sign a player who doesn't live up to the deal, you can cut him without taking a hit of dead money. We've got stuck with way too many bad players in the past that we couldn't cut, because of the way the contract was structured. Rayshawn Jenkins was awful last season and we're stuck with him this year, because the dead money cap hit is too big. I hate that.
(03-16-2022, 09:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (03-16-2022, 08:34 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ]....so your preference is to pay a guy 30-odd mill this year between signing bonus and salary, and pray that he doesn't hold out for a new deal when the final year only pays 2-3MM?
The structures are not overly lopsided. Cap hits are reduced in the first year, but the player is getting the entirety of the bonus today to offset their temporarily reduced salary. If they are playing well, the contract affords them a salary consistent with other players around the league. If they aren't, the cap hit/dead money is not going to put us in a bare bones season to revive our cap.
Did you look at the deals before you dismissed them based on your preconceptions? Come on.
If I sign a guy to a front loaded deal, he can hold out if he wants, but I'm not giving him a new deal until the old one is finished. I word the contract that I can fine the crap out of him if he does hold out. If they want the big money up front, they will be expected to play out the contract. I'm sick of pushing money into the future. That's how you end up in cap hell and you have to end up cutting all your best players to get under the cap. San Francisco had to do it when Baalke structured all the contracts the same way and the Niners lost most of their good players and had to re-build.
I believe in spending what you have now and making the hits on the back end light enough, so if you make a mistake and sign a player who doesn't live up to the deal, you can cut him without taking a hit of dead money. We've got stuck with way too many bad players in the past that we couldn't cut, because of the way the contract was structured. Rayshawn Jenkins was awful last season and we're stuck with him this year, because the dead money cap hit is too big. I hate that.
Jenkins is effectively on a 2/16 deal, potentially to 18. He made 9 last year between salary and signing bonus, and is guaranteed another 7 this year, with ~1M in bonuses each year. If we move on from him next season, it's a whopping $4M hit. I don't know how we'll cope.
His deal was 4/35. So you're saying you'd rather have paid him ~22M last year between salary and bonus (and taken similar cap hit) so that by year 4 he's playing for about $5M?
How long you think you last as a GM if you're paying (in your words) awful players $20M a year?
Front loading a deal like that is also gonna encourage loafing - they already got paid, what's the incentive to see the deal through to the end?
(03-16-2022, 09:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (03-16-2022, 08:34 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ]....so your preference is to pay a guy 30-odd mill this year between signing bonus and salary, and pray that he doesn't hold out for a new deal when the final year only pays 2-3MM?
The structures are not overly lopsided. Cap hits are reduced in the first year, but the player is getting the entirety of the bonus today to offset their temporarily reduced salary. If they are playing well, the contract affords them a salary consistent with other players around the league. If they aren't, the cap hit/dead money is not going to put us in a bare bones season to revive our cap.
Did you look at the deals before you dismissed them based on your preconceptions? Come on.
If I sign a guy to a front loaded deal, he can hold out if he wants, but I'm not giving him a new deal until the old one is finished. I word the contract that I can fine the crap out of him if he does hold out. If they want the big money up front, they will be expected to play out the contract. I'm sick of pushing money into the future. That's how you end up in cap hell and you have to end up cutting all your best players to get under the cap. San Francisco had to do it when Baalke structured all the contracts the same way and the Niners lost most of their good players and had to re-build.
I believe in spending what you have now and making the hits on the back end light enough, so if you make a mistake and sign a player who doesn't live up to the deal, you can cut him without taking a hit of dead money. We've got stuck with way too many bad players in the past that we couldn't cut, because of the way the contract was structured. Rayshawn Jenkins was awful last season and we're stuck with him this year, because the dead money cap hit is too big. I hate that.
But that is not what happens. Lots of player hold out asking for more money or new contract when they do perform, because they know the teams have all the leverage to cut you if don't perform.
Your plan that "I'm not giving him a new deal no matter what, and I can always cut him later" would piss off a lot a players and agents around the league and probably lead to lots of holdouts.
Players are not assets.
(03-16-2022, 11:08 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ] (03-16-2022, 09:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]If I sign a guy to a front loaded deal, he can hold out if he wants, but I'm not giving him a new deal until the old one is finished. I word the contract that I can fine the crap out of him if he does hold out. If they want the big money up front, they will be expected to play out the contract. I'm sick of pushing money into the future. That's how you end up in cap hell and you have to end up cutting all your best players to get under the cap. San Francisco had to do it when Baalke structured all the contracts the same way and the Niners lost most of their good players and had to re-build.
I believe in spending what you have now and making the hits on the back end light enough, so if you make a mistake and sign a player who doesn't live up to the deal, you can cut him without taking a hit of dead money. We've got stuck with way too many bad players in the past that we couldn't cut, because of the way the contract was structured. Rayshawn Jenkins was awful last season and we're stuck with him this year, because the dead money cap hit is too big. I hate that.
Jenkins is effectively on a 2/16 deal, potentially to 18. He made 9 last year between salary and signing bonus, and is guaranteed another 7 this year, with ~1M in bonuses each year. If we move on from him next season, it's a whopping $4M hit. I don't know how we'll cope.
His deal was 4/35. So you're saying you'd rather have paid him ~22M last year between salary and bonus (and taken similar cap hit) so that by year 4 he's playing for about $5M?
How long you think you last as a GM if you're paying (in your words) awful players $20M a year?
Front loading a deal like that is also gonna encourage loafing - they already got paid, what's the incentive to see the deal through to the end?
I want to structure the deal so I can get out of it at any time, without suffering any hit in dead money. Period. Personally, I would've never signed Jenkins to begin with. I certainly wouldn't have signed a below average Safety to a 4 year deal.
Encourage loafing? I think not. Make the remaining years of the deal incentive based, so they reach bonuses if they perform well. Other teams pay attention to this. These are grown men that should earn their money like everyone else. If they get their money and "dial it in" they will develop a reputation as a lazy player and their value will plummet. They would only be hurting themselves. I think this would only be the case in a handful of incidents from some very immature players and they wouldn't last long in the NFL.
(03-16-2022, 11:43 AM)rpr52121 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-16-2022, 09:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]If I sign a guy to a front loaded deal, he can hold out if he wants, but I'm not giving him a new deal until the old one is finished. I word the contract that I can fine the crap out of him if he does hold out. If they want the big money up front, they will be expected to play out the contract. I'm sick of pushing money into the future. That's how you end up in cap hell and you have to end up cutting all your best players to get under the cap. San Francisco had to do it when Baalke structured all the contracts the same way and the Niners lost most of their good players and had to re-build.
I believe in spending what you have now and making the hits on the back end light enough, so if you make a mistake and sign a player who doesn't live up to the deal, you can cut him without taking a hit of dead money. We've got stuck with way too many bad players in the past that we couldn't cut, because of the way the contract was structured. Rayshawn Jenkins was awful last season and we're stuck with him this year, because the dead money cap hit is too big. I hate that.
But that is not what happens. Lots of player hold out asking for more money or new contract when they do perform, because they know the teams have all the leverage to cut you if don't perform.
Your plan that "I'm not giving him a new deal no matter what, and I can always cut him later" would piss off a lot a players and agents around the league and probably lead to lots of holdouts.
Players are not assets.
They hold out, they get fined massive amounts of money. I structure the contracts this way.
Players are assets. Like it or not, football is a business and the players are the product.
(03-15-2022, 07:55 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 07:37 PM)I am Yoda Wrote: [ -> ]You like Salyer better than Zion Johnson?
Yes, I do.
(03-15-2022, 07:40 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]If only...
Also, I figured out why Baalke didn't do the Cooper or Collins trade. The first year cap hits for all of these deals are very small so he could fit them all under the cap. If he traded for either Cowboy the 2022 cap hits for both would be too large for his "plan". If Collins gets cut he will attempt to negotiate a tiny first year cap hit and then backload the rest of the deal too.
God, I hate back loaded deals. That's what Baalke did in San Francisco and when they finally got rid of him, they were in "cap hell" for years, because of all the back loaded deals he did.
"Cap hell"? In the 4 seasons since he left, they have been to two NFC championship games and one Superbowl.
I 'll take that kind of "hell" anytime.
(03-16-2022, 04:46 PM)Predator Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2022, 07:55 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, I do.
God, I hate back loaded deals. That's what Baalke did in San Francisco and when they finally got rid of him, they were in "cap hell" for years, because of all the back loaded deals he did.
"Cap hell"? In the 4 seasons since he left, they have been to two NFC championship games and one Superbowl.
I 'll take that kind of "hell" anytime.
That's because they made the deal to get Jimmy G. and they totally re-built the roster, thanks to John Lynch and Kyle Shanahan.
(03-16-2022, 09:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (03-16-2022, 08:34 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ]....so your preference is to pay a guy 30-odd mill this year between signing bonus and salary, and pray that he doesn't hold out for a new deal when the final year only pays 2-3MM?
The structures are not overly lopsided. Cap hits are reduced in the first year, but the player is getting the entirety of the bonus today to offset their temporarily reduced salary. If they are playing well, the contract affords them a salary consistent with other players around the league. If they aren't, the cap hit/dead money is not going to put us in a bare bones season to revive our cap.
Did you look at the deals before you dismissed them based on your preconceptions? Come on.
If I sign a guy to a front loaded deal, he can hold out if he wants, but I'm not giving him a new deal until the old one is finished. I word the contract that I can fine the crap out of him if he does hold out. If they want the big money up front, they will be expected to play out the contract. I'm sick of pushing money into the future. That's how you end up in cap hell and you have to end up cutting all your best players to get under the cap. San Francisco had to do it when Baalke structured all the contracts the same way and the Niners lost most of their good players and had to re-build.
I believe in spending what you have now and making the hits on the back end light enough, so if you make a mistake and sign a player who doesn't live up to the deal, you can cut him without taking a hit of dead money. We've got stuck with way too many bad players in the past that we couldn't cut, because of the way the contract was structured. Rayshawn Jenkins was awful last season and we're stuck with him this year, because the dead money cap hit is too big. I hate that.
Yes Jenkins was terrible last year. And will be the same this year.
(03-17-2022, 01:23 PM)D6 Wrote: [ -> ]According to ESPN Analytics, Brandon Scherff had the Highest Run Block Win Rate for an NFL Guard in the 2021 season ( 77 % win rate):
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/3217...e-rankings
Norwell was 7th
Linder was highest win rate vs Run at Center and 6th best vs the pass rush.