NFL 2020: Vanity of Vanity; All is Vanity

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

That's the issue, yeah.  His cap hit the next two years is $31 and $45 million.  Even if they released him after next season, they'd still have $10 million in dead cap.

I thought we'd have to eat some of that money if we traded him before the start of next year. Either way it was a stupid extension to offer him, but that has less to do with him than the fact we're in cap hell.

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

Taking on way too much risk if he gets injured.  Which, ya know, is quite possible for a 37 year old.

Sure, but it's hard to see any other path to the SB. There aren't good FA replacements, you're not drafting a QB high and only a few teams can part with their established vets. If the Packers fail again in the playoffs, they may decide to move on from Rodgers. I threw out three first rounders as a high price, but it may not actually cost you that much. Would you be interested if it was dropped to two first rounders or equivalent value? 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Is Handsome Jimmy 'not good' or he just super injury prone?  I really can't tell anymore. 

I think it has more to do with the coach simply not trusting him. Idk how good he is or isn't, but his ceiling appears to be average with the occasional good week.

[Rhom]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

I thought we'd have to eat some of that money if we traded him before the start of next year. Either way it was a stupid extension to offer him, but that has less to do with him than the fact we're in cap hell.

Sure, but it's hard to see any other path to the SB. There aren't good FA replacements, you're not drafting a QB high and only a few teams can part with their established vets. If the Packers fail again in the playoffs, they may decide to move on from Rodgers. I threw out three first rounders as a high price, but it may not actually cost you that much. Would you be interested if it was dropped to two first rounders or equivalent value? 

As long as it doesn’t include Bosa... I’m willing to listen

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I thought we'd have to eat some of that money if we traded him before the start of next year. Either way it was a stupid extension to offer him, but that has less to do with him than the fact we're in cap hell.

From the Barnwell article:

Quote

If the Vikings traded him next spring, they would eat $20 million in dead money, but they would simultaneously free up $11 million of cap space in 2021 and a whopping $45 million in 2022. The team acquiring him would basically pick up his two-year, $66 million extension.

6 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Would you be interested if it was dropped to two first rounders or equivalent value? 

Maybe, I dunno.  Depends on where their pick is in the offseason.  They could have a shot at that Oregon guy and who knows, maybe Shanahan really likes him.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, Rhom said:

As long as it doesn’t include Bosa... I’m willing to listen

I assume and players the Niners would deal would just be to make the cap work. The hypothetical trade wouldn't include any key players. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

From the Barnwell article:

Maybe, I dunno.  Depends on where their pick is in the offseason.  They could have a shot at that Oregon guy and who knows, maybe Shanahan really likes him.

 

Hmm, interesting. Wish I followed the logistics of sports contracts like I did as a kid.

Okay, let's try another scenario. Would you give up three first rounders or equal value for Watson? That would seem like a good fit, he's still really young and Houston needs to just blow it all up.

[Rhom]

7 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Hmm, interesting. Wish I followed the logistics of sports contracts like I did as a kid.

Okay, let's try another scenario. Would you give up three first rounders or equal value for Watson? That would seem like a good fit, he's still really young and Houston needs to just blow it all up.

Three first rounders seems a lot to me.  I do agree that Houston needs to blow things up and they are woefully short on draft capital as it stands too.

[DMC]

8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Would you give up three first rounders or equal value for Watson?

I dunno, like Rhom said 3 first rounders is a lot.  Has anyone ever traded 3 first rounders for one player since your team did for Herschel Walker?  That didn't work out too well.  And I'd be especially reticent if their pick this year is pretty high.

[Maithanet]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

I dunno, like Rhom said 3 first rounders is a lot.  Has anyone ever traded 3 first rounders for one player since your team did for Herschel Walker?  That didn't work out too well.  And I'd be especially reticent if their pick this year is pretty high.

Washington traded the #6 and #34 pick in 2012, the #21 pick in 2013 and the #2 pick in 2014 for the #2 pick in 2012 (RG3). 

EDIT:  It is kind of embarassing that I could remember this without looking it up.  I struggle to remember so many things, and yet useless shit like this...

[DMC]

Just now, Maithanet said:

Washington traded the #6 and #34 pick in 2012, the #21 pick in 2013 and the #2 pick in 2014 for the #2 pick in 2012 (RG3). 

Sorry for bringing it up, that's gotta be tough to be reminded of.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Washington traded the #6 and #34 pick in 2012, the #21 pick in 2013 and the #2 pick in 2014 for the #2 pick in 2012 (RG3). 

EDIT:  It is kind of embarassing that I could remember this without looking it up.  I struggle to remember so many things, and yet useless shit like this...

Goff cost the Rams two firsts, two seconds and two thirds. 

Watson is a known commodity and a borderline top five QB who is young. Seems like better value than two unknown rookie prospects.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Okay @DMC and @Rhom, what would you send Dallas for Dak, who may also be willing to field offers? 

[DMC]

8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Okay @DMC and @Rhom, what would you send Dallas for Dak, who may also be willing to field offers? 

I don't know.  Are you trading for him on franchise tag or after working out an extension?  Either way, I'd have to put a lot more thought into it than I'm willing to in order to come up with an offer.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

I don't know.  Are you trading for him on franchise tag or after working out an extension?  Either way, I'd have to put a lot more thought into it than I'm willing to in order to come up with an offer.

Let's just say with a 3 year, $90m contract, $60m guaranteed, even though you'd probably have to pay more and add a year or two.

You have to keep in mind you don't have a lot of options and have a win now roster outside of the position. The way I see it you have to make a big move this offseason or just accept being on the outside looking in, and Idk what your cap situation is 2-3 years down the road when the roster probably has to be reshuffled anyways.

[Jace, Extat]

I would give three 1s and three 2s for Watson, but I want two 3s in return.

 

[DMC]

14 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You have to keep in mind you don't have a lot of options and have a win now roster outside of the position.

I am.  What you have to keep in mind is they got to the Super Bowl last year with Garoppolo barely throwing any passes while easily beating the Vikings and Packers in the playoffs.  Exploring less costly possibilities is still a viable option - their team is designed to still be able to compete with a middling quarterback.  ...As long as it's healthy of course.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

I am.  What you have to keep in mind is they got to the Super Bowl last year with Garoppolo barely throwing any passes while easily beating the Vikings and Packers in the playoffs.  Exploring less costly possibilities is still a viable option - their team is designed to still be able to compete with a middling quarterback.  ...As long as it's healthy of course.

So what's your plan of attack, GM DMC? Feeling the Fitzmagic?

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

So what's your plan of attack, GM DMC? Feeling the Fitzmagic?

Jesus man I don't know.  Just saying it's possible to find a cheaper alternative that could still provide Jimmy's type of production the past two seasons other than maybe that Saints game last year where he showed his potential ceiling.  Moreover, that might be the wisest move for the longterm health of the organization as they have to pay a lot of guys this offseason if they want to keep the team together.  So saving money on QB makes that a lot easier.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

Jesus man I don't know.  Just saying it's possible to find a cheaper alternative that could still provide Jimmy's type of production the past two seasons other than maybe that Saints game last year where he showed his potential ceiling.  Moreover, that might be the wisest move for the longterm health of the organization as they have to pay a lot of guys this offseason if they want to keep the team together.  So saving money on QB makes that a lot easier.

What you're saying though is that you want to make a lateral move to save some money. That won't be good enough. You're better off trading a package of picks, and yes serval high picks, to either acquire a win now higher end QB or moving up heavily in the draft, and this wouldn't appear to be the year to do that because the top two prospects are going one and two and who knows about the other couple of guys people are mentioning.

A scenario that hasn't been brought up is trading for Stafford. I think you could get him for a first and a second, ideally in different drafts, and when healthy, he is a top 10 QB.  You're not saving any money here, but the upgrade would be significant. 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

What you're saying though is that you want to make a lateral move to save some money. That won't be good enough.

Says you.  Pretty sure I saw them nearly win the Super Bowl last year, so I think a lateral move could well be good enough.