NFL Offseason 2022 - The Slog of Slogs!

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 hours ago, dbunting said:

I was perfectly fine w trading Cooper. The one WR I wish they had kept was Wilson. The offense was more dynamic with him on the field than with Cooper. With this draft, once again, being real deep with WR talent they can try to replace Wilson with one that's cheaper. Sure as hell can't count on getting a single franchise QB in this draft. So yeah, pay Dak and keep drafting WR's

Cooper was paid as a #1 WR and the Dallas offense doesn't really use or feed a #1 WR, they more of a spread it around and run (or try to run) offense.

So many WRs get taken in the first two rounds and usually 1-3 turn out to actually be good. QBs are kind of the same. All I'm saying is teams should draft one high every 3-4 years, be willing to move on from guys that are just okay and if you get a guy who is good, but not great, see if you can trade him to reload with more picks. It's not smart to pay an above average QB (cough, Kirk, cough) like he's a special QB.

6 hours ago, horangi said:

Granted Kupp just had the best WR season in history, so I can see him wanting a bit of extra scratch (debatable in RL, not in fantasy).  Also granted, that the guy earned me a $1k last year almost single handedly, so I might be slightly biased. 

Oh he has to be loving all these deals because no one can argue he deserves to be paid a cent less than Hill. 

[DMC]

I think it's a good point that the highest paid WRs jumping to $30 million a year this offseason is a pretty big change - for now.  With top QBs at ~$50 million a year, it would really debilitate the rest of your roster to keep both an elite QB and WR under the current cap of $208 million.  However, the cap is expected to drastically increase the next two years - saw an estimate that the 2024 cap will be around $260 million.  80 out of 260 looks a lot different than 80 out of 208, so hopefully this jump in the WR market evens out in the next couple years.

[briantw]

And to think this all started because the Jags gave Christian Kirk a terrible contract.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

20 minutes ago, DMC said:

I think it's a good point that the highest paid WRs jumping to $30 million a year this offseason is a pretty big change - for now.  With top QBs at ~$50 million a year, it would really debilitate the rest of your roster to keep both an elite QB and WR under the current cap of $208 million.  However, the cap is expected to drastically increase the next two years - saw an estimate that the 2024 cap will be around $260 million.  80 out of 260 looks a lot different than 80 out of 208, so hopefully this jump in the WR market evens out in the next couple years.

It's a valid point that the cap is expected to go up, though I haven't seen a number that high floated before. That said, it's just going to mean other positions are going to cost more. Traditionally LTs, edge rushers and CBs have been seen as being more valuable, so I think logically they're going to just ask for more too. I wouldn't be surprised, for example, if the Rams are faced with having to pay Kupp, Donald and Ramsey each $30m or more. Throw in Stafford and that's half of the 260 on four guys.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

That said, it's just going to mean other positions are going to cost more.

Sure!  And in doing so, the relative value of WRs will normalize.  Obviously, having an elite QB, WR, CB, and Edge is going to cost a shitload and be very difficult to maintain.  That's how it should be.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

Sure!  And in doing so, the relative value of WRs will normalize.  Obviously, having an elite QB, WR, CB, and Edge is going to cost a shitload and be very difficult to maintain.  That's how it should be.

Hence why I'm advocating for drafting a QB high every 3-5 years. If the most valuable thing in sports is a good QB on a rookie deal, why not try to always have that? 

[Maithanet]

Looking at just winning the Super Bowl, not many teams have done it with a qb on a rookie contract.  The rookie pay scale started in 2011 with Cam Newton.  Since then there have been two clear cases of rookies winning on their first contract (Wilson and Mahomes) and one more halfway case with the 2018 Eagles who benefited from Wentz's rookie deal but it was Foles who actually won the playoff games.  So it's about 2.5 out of 11 winners that had that benefit.  The other 8.5 had good veteran quarterbacks.

How many teams have starting quarterbacks on rookie deals varies year to year, but it is something like a third of the league.  So this isn't some abnormal win rate. 

Obviously if you hit on a great quarterback then that rookie contract is a steal.  But if that guy sucks then your team is going nowhere, and fans and GMs don't like that.  Trying to be one of the 8.5 teams that won with a veteran guy is definitely the safer bet. 

Paying top dollar for average quarterbacks like Cousins is a bad move, but then we already knew that.  The only way you can win with a contract like that on the books is if you are getting a ton of great production from other rookies, which is what every team is always trying to do and can only rarely pull off. 

[Nictarion]

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Hence why I'm advocating for drafting a QB high every 3-5 years. If the most valuable thing in sports is a good QB on a rookie deal, why not try to always have that? 

If drafting good QB’s is so easy how come your team hasn’t hit on one since the late 90’s?  

[Maithanet]

15 minutes ago, Nictarion said:

If drafting good QB’s is so easy how come your team hasn’t hit on one since the late 90’s?  

And it also assumes that team quality/stability is completely independent with quarterback development.  It is not.  There are definitely guys who could have been good qbs who inherited a mess of a team and their careers regressed into failure.  RG3 might be the best example of that, but there are plenty of others.  For those who don't remember, coming out of school Griffin's strengths were:  footwork, decisionmaking, straight line speed.  By the end of his second year in Washington, his footwork and decisionmaking were completely shit, and his speed didn't matter because he couldn't beat them as a passer anymore. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

29 minutes ago, Nictarion said:

If drafting good QB’s is so easy how come your team hasn’t hit on one since the late 90’s?  

They’ve only taken two in the first since Dante (with none taken in the second)) and Teddy was a Pro Bowler in his second season. His knee exploded in the offseason so what can you do? And everyone knew Ponder was a reach.

 

To Maith’s point though about SB QB’s since the contracts changed, it’s worth noting that four guys have made it to the big game and lost (Kaep, Wilson, Goff and Burrow). And if we’re looking at the winners, Brady has four which distorts everything. The only other good vet to win in that period is Stafford. Eli and Flacco were meh at their best and Peyton was a corpse.

[aceluby]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Eli and Flacco were meh at their best and Peyton was a corpse.

All of those guys were carried by their defense, which is harder to do these days.  Not impossible, but is very much dependent on how many games you get against ref crews that are flag happy and whether your offense can carry you through those games that they are.

[Mexal]

17 hours ago, briantw said:

I'd wager that there's almost no chance you keep Tee Higgins after his rookie deal.  

I have hope. I just don't know how we're going to handle guarantees given we don't normally beyond the first year or two and the Browns are handing out guarantees like it's the only way to do a contract.

[briantw]

29 minutes ago, Mexal said:

I have hope. I just don't know how we're going to handle guarantees given we don't normally beyond the first year or two and the Browns are handing out guarantees like it's the only way to do a contract.

Jimmy Haslam may be an asshole, but he's an incredibly rich asshole.  

[Rhom]

In other news, that I suppose is related... Deebo Samuel has told the Niners he wants a trade.  Apparently this originally happened a couple weeks ago.  Hard to get hard info on why its all going down like this. 

Is it that he sees the money DK Metcalf got and thinks he should get that?  Because as we have talked about in this thread over the last page or two, I don't know that its all that sustainable.  Not when they need to lock up Bosa too.

Is it how he's being used?  Because I get it.  I wasn't a fan of running him at the line of scrimmage, but did like when they got him some runs on some sweeps.  That sort of thing will cut down on his longevity significantly.  But I think he also needs to be aware that part of what makes him valuable to teams right now is his versatility.

And then there's the one my brother and I speculate on but haven't seen anywhere else... could he possibly believe that Trey Lance is hot garbage and his stats are going to suffer on a losing team?  Because I'm genuinely afraid this is what is going to happen.

[DMC]

57 minutes ago, Rhom said:

In other news, that I suppose is related... Deebo Samuel has told the Niners he wants a trade.  Apparently this originally happened a couple weeks ago.  Hard to get hard info on why its all going down like this.

He made it clear a few weeks ago when he unfollowed the niners on Instagram or whatever (that this is apparently the new negotiating tactic for athletes makes me feel very old).  The trade request makes sense if he thinks the Niners are lowballing him - as does citing the way he's used, which he did.  Honestly, I was never enthused about giving Deebo what he's worth due to injury concerns.  I was hoping they'd get a couple seasons out of him via the franchise tag, but if he isn't in their longterm plans I suppose the best move is to trade him now.  His value is never going to be higher.

Anyway, that Lance fear of yours is 100% you and your brother projecting.

[Rhom]

Just now, DMC said:

He made it clear a few weeks ago when he unfollowed the niners on Instagram or whatever (that this is apparently the new negotiating tactic for athletes makes me feel very old).  The trade request makes sense if he thinks the Niners are lowballing him - as does citing the way he's used, which he did.  Honestly, I was never enthused about giving Deebo what he's worth due to injury concerns.  I was hoping they'd get a couple seasons out of him via the franchise tag, but if he isn't in their longterm plans I suppose the best move is to trade him now.  His value is never going to be higher.

Anyway, that Lance fear of yours is 100% you and your brother projecting.

1)  Yes.  If we could swindle the Jets for their 10th pick and something in the future.  (Dare I hope for another 1st???) Then I honestly am happy.

2) You don't have the same fear about Lance?

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Rhom said:

2) You don't have the same fear about Lance?

I mean, there's always a chance he'll suck balls, sure.  But that fear isn't any more than it would be for many if not most first year starting NFL QBs.

[Rhom]

7 minutes ago, DMC said:

He made it clear a few weeks ago when he unfollowed the niners on Instagram or whatever (that this is apparently the new negotiating tactic for athletes makes me feel very old).  The trade request makes sense if he thinks the Niners are lowballing him - as does citing the way he's used, which he did.  Honestly, I was never enthused about giving Deebo what he's worth due to injury concerns.  I was hoping they'd get a couple seasons out of him via the franchise tag, but if he isn't in their longterm plans I suppose the best move is to trade him now.  His value is never going to be higher.

Anyway, that Lance fear of yours is 100% you and your brother projecting.

Ultimately, I don't want to get into the scenario you outlined above where there is so much money tied up in skill position players that you can't afford any depth.

And specific to Deebo, the fact that he was playing "wide back" puts him in the category of running backs which we have already established is the way to doom for a franchise when you start actually investing significant assets in them (like the Giants and the Cowboys).

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Rhom said:

And specific to Deebo, the fact that he was playing "wide back" puts him in the category of running backs which we have already established is the way to doom for a franchise when you start actually investing significant assets in them (like the Giants and the Cowboys).

Well, if the Niners are actually taking this line in negotiations I'm sure this is why Deebo is pissed and he should be.  He was only "wide back" due to emergency, and if the team is using him risking his own neck like that to argue his value isn't as high as others who outperformed him on pure receiving numbers, I'd be inclined to tell them to go fuck themselves too.  Of course, the Niners may be taking that line simply because they don't wanna pay him what he's actually worth, so I don't blame them either.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 hours ago, aceluby said:

All of those guys were carried by their defense, which is harder to do these days.  Not impossible, but is very much dependent on how many games you get against ref crews that are flag happy and whether your offense can carry you through those games that they are.

Flacco wasn't. He was legitimately great on that run, as anomalous as it was.