(08-12-2018, 02:17 AM)knarnn Wrote:

(08-11-2018, 11:28 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: That's a fallacious argument. First off, there are a lot of bad starting CBs in the NFL. I would want a CB we signed and expect to play roughly 60% of the time to be better than a lot of #2 CBs. So no, being 68th is not "pretty good" for a nickel. Or are you claiming that being only slightly worse than the two clots starters and the two tacks starters and the two tinhorn starters (just to use our division) is still "pretty good."

And since the argument was as much about the cap cost as the player, I'd add that probably more than half the starting CBs in the league make less than what we gave Hayden.

Let’s not speculate. Take a look at the numbers.

Cap hit:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/cap...ornerback/

Total cash:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/cash/cornerback/

(08-12-2018, 11:07 AM)Jags02 Wrote:

(08-11-2018, 08:38 AM)Upper Wrote: Because we paid him as a top ~20 corner and passed on a lot of slot corners who graded much higher and also cost much less.

Be sure to check out those links that knarnn posted. They show Hayden as right about #40 with his cap hit and right about #30 in cash earnings.