whodatOL Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 Are there any limits on how many extensions we can do? I have seen the limit of 4 for the restructures, but no number for extensions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YogiBiz Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 Hey guys, IDL Dalvin Tomlinson is still on the block. Post accepting the Shepard trade, the Giants are going to move away from taking calls on Engram for the time being. We don't want to neuter or young QB's weapon cache. I will likely say no to Engram unless the deal nets a 2nd Rounder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jch1911 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 Just now, whodatOL said: Are there any limits on how many extensions we can do? I have seen the limit of 4 for the restructures, but no number for extensions I think that is the change Mike is implementing now. Restructures = there is a capped $$$ amount (look at the restructure sheet to see your $$$ amount) Extensions = capped at 3 IIRC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 3 minutes ago, YogiBiz said: Hey guys, IDL Dalvin Tomlinson is still on the block. Post accepting the Shepard trade, the Giants are going to move away from taking calls on Engram for the time being. We don't want to neuter or young QB's weapon cache. I will likely say no to Engram unless the deal nets a 2nd Rounder. He neutered himself with turnovers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whodatOL Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 2 minutes ago, jch1911 said: I think that is the change Mike is implementing now. Restructures = there is a capped $$$ amount (look at the restructure sheet to see your $$$ amount) Extensions = capped at 3 IIRC Thanks for the quick response. Where did you get the information about the extensions? The Saints will extend up to 5 players this year, as both Brees and Klein are considered extensions due to their voiding years. Do these two count normally in the counting of the three extensions? Maybe more of a question for the big boss! @ny92mike 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YogiBiz Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 5 minutes ago, Counselor said: He neutered himself with turnovers Uncalled for. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 1 minute ago, YogiBiz said: Uncalled for. lol Truth hurts 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowserBroncos Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 11 minutes ago, squire12 said: I think once you post it here, it official. The marked aspect is for the accounting purposes. I don't get the rush to cut players that could yield some interest in order to save some cap space when FA is still a week+ from now. I have no problem with going through the release. I offered Davis to a bunch of guys and didn't received any interest on him. Trade or release my objective would be the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nayad Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 Are any drafts picks excluded from potential trades? @mountainpd and I agreed on a trade involving pick 142 but it appears that might be a compensatory pick that hasn't officially been released yet. I was just using the workbook as the source for draft picks, could there be drastic changes to the distribution of picks in there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowserBroncos Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 I'm going through with Davis release. Don't want to create any problem (Mike has enough problems to deal with). Sorry for the confusion guys, I shouldn't even consider the possibility of pulling Davis back. Thanks for the replies. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 1 hour ago, EaglesPeteC said: The issue is that is sets a bad precedent to essentially trade a player for essentially nothing in a 1 year mock. If enough trades like that go through then it depletes the FA pool. Dalton is under contract which means he can be traded. Bengals had him on the trade block and said they were willing to take a low price. We got a single offer for him so we accepted it. Dalton is the real winner in this since he gets a starting job and the chance to keep it instead of going into free agency and getting either backup offers or a lower bid from the Chargers since they seem to be the only team that wants him as a starter. If Dalton takes his chances in free agency, he might only get 4-5 mil as a veteran backup/mentor type. That's if the Chargers sign Bridgewater, Brady, or someone else. Or the Chargers are his high bidder at 8 mil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EaglesPeteC Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 3 minutes ago, sparky151 said: Dalton is under contract which means he can be traded. Bengals had him on the trade block and said they were willing to take a low price. We got a single offer for him so we accepted it. Dalton is the real winner in this since he gets a starting job and the chance to keep it instead of going into free agency and getting either backup offers or a lower bid from the Chargers since they seem to be the only team that wants him as a starter. If Dalton takes his chances in free agency, he might only get 4-5 mil as a veteran backup/mentor type. That's if the Chargers sign Bridgewater, Brady, or someone else. Or the Chargers are his high bidder at 8 mil. Ok........Those are all things But none of it addresses what the issue with the trade is for this mock. Your failing to see that the issue is not with Dalton as a singular case in a vacuum, but if Mike lets this trade go through that it opens the door for more like it which is where it gets messy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 No, there isn't an issue in the first place. It's imaginary. The rules adequately covered this which is why there was no need for midnight improvisation. If Mahomes can be traded, why not Dalton on terms agreeable to both sides. That's why it's called Total Control, not Mike's mock. If the Dalton trade is still vetoed, what is the actual rule? People in the last year of their contract can't be traded? People listed on a team's trade block can't be cut? Future year draft picks can't be used in trades? What? It's less work for Mike and more fun for everyone if there aren't last minute rules changes for imaginary dilemmas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jch1911 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, sparky151 said: No, there isn't an issue in the first place. It's imaginary. The rules adequately covered this which is why there was no need for midnight improvisation. If Mahomes can be traded, why not Dalton on terms agreeable to both sides. That's why it's called Total Control, not Mike's mock. If the Dalton trade is still vetoed, what is the actual rule? People in the last year of their contract can't be traded? People listed on a team's trade block can't be cut? Future year draft picks can't be used in trades? What? It's less work for Mike and more fun for everyone if there aren't last minute rules changes for imaginary dilemmas. I may be wrong, but I thought Mike's issue was the fact that it was a 2022 pick. I believe the rules say it has to be a 2020 or 2021 pick. Edit: So instead of saying if team makes playoffs in 2020 or 2021, it would just be if they make playoffs in 2020 THEN it becomes 2021 pick. i appreciate the creativity, but I am pretty sure that was in the rules. Edited January 27, 2020 by jch1911 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadpulse Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 5 minutes ago, sparky151 said: No, there isn't an issue in the first place. It's imaginary. The rules adequately covered this which is why there was no need for midnight improvisation. If Mahomes can be traded, why not Dalton on terms agreeable to both sides. That's why it's called Total Control, not Mike's mock. If the Dalton trade is still vetoed, what is the actual rule? People in the last year of their contract can't be traded? People listed on a team's trade block can't be cut? Future year draft picks can't be used in trades? What? It's less work for Mike and more fun for everyone if there aren't last minute rules changes for imaginary dilemmas. For the love of.... It has NOTHING to do with Dalton. Its the future picks you received, which in a one year mock amount to NOTHING. They have ZERO value. That is the precedent they dont want to set. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.