Can't believe I was gone for 10 days & this wasn't a topic but Greg Olsen? (Update: He signed with SEATTLE)

[offbyone]

6 hours ago, turtle28 said:

I'd love to keep Reed, but he didn't play last year bc of a concussion he had in mid August - if that doesn’t tell you we can’t rely on him and he shouldn’t play football again, I don’t know what will! He shouldn't even play football again and we already know we can't count on him bc any hit he takes could be his last and even worse, he may not walk off the field the next time a LB or S cracks him over the middle. 

There's also the $ factor. You can complain about signing a TE on a one year deal that Rivera knows who played 14 games last year for $7 to 8 million, had a productive year last year and is a good blocker but on the flip side want to take a huge risk keeping a guy with concussion problems who's never played a full season, can't block and is overpaid bc of his inability to stay on the field?

That doesn't add up.

Reed makes $10.3 million next year since he at best plays 3/4 a season he's only worth $7 million and really not even that. I guess we could make him take a pay cut or be cut and turn half of his salary into incentives. 

If he is retained, he shouldn't be starting and should only be on the field in what seems like definite passing situations and goal line situations for play action as a move TE in a 1 WR set.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/all/tight-end/

Look at this list, if we retain Reed, what TE do you want on here who can start, be a blocking TE and come off the field on passing TEs?

Daniel Fells? He’ll be 34 and is projected to cost about $5 million and guess what, again, he’s going to be 34 in April! So what’s the difference between signing him and Olsen?

If we keep Reed, we can’t afford to sign Hooper, Henry and Ebron.
 

• We’d have to sign a second tier TE like Fells (again, 34) who’d probably take less $ to play with Houston again, so why not spend a few million more for Olsen?

• Nick Vanette who’s ok for the role we’d need him in if we keep Reed too. Personally, I’d love to see it bc my cousin, his father in law and another one of my cousins coached him in HS and he went to Ohio State but let’s be clear Nick is a blocking TE who at best gives us 25 catches a year. 

• Garrett Celek who missed last year bc of back surgery? Not a guy I want to try to count on but I guess vet min would do.

• Tyler Eifert? See Celek plus Hunter Henry plus Jordan Reed’s injuries all in one who’s been an average at best starter when healthy.

• Lance Kendricks? He’s going to be 33 and barely played last year bc of injury.

• Nick O’Leary who I've always had high hopes for and thought would be a Cooley type but hasn't lived up to the FSU hype, just 9 receptions last year w/ 1 TE bc of injury. Again, TE coming off only having played 8 games bc of injuries, that's who you want?

• Marcedes Lewis? He’ll be 36 in May and has never been a threat in the passing game.

Personally, I wouldn't keep Reed and I wouldn't sign Olsen to an expensive stop gap contract.  I would rather take a chance on a guy like Hunter Henry who at least is still young.  I'm just saying if we are gonna spend money on a stop gap, Reed is a much more explosive player than Olsen so why not keep him.  

But if we keep Reed I would be completely comfortable with Sprinkle as the #2 TE.  He was pretty effective last year in a generally ineffective offense.  I totally disagree that we have to sign a second TE like Fells.  Why?  What does he give us that Sprinkle doesn't?  Sprinkle is still improving.

You can't just look at the numbers.  Olsen's has some big years, but he has also been lucky enough to be central to that offense. 

Remember Gruden basically refused to use Sprinkle in his first 2 years here except to block in run sets.  I don't even think we threw the ball at him much more that 10 times in 2 years and if I recall one of those years Jordan Reed was banged up the whole time.  His development has been stunted by Gruden's refusal to develop youth.  I am not saying he will ever be great, but surely he is trending towards a solid #2.

TE might just not be a strength for another year.  

Anyways that is my opinion, I know it isn't the norm and totally get your point of view.  

[ripsean21]

8 hours ago, offbyone said:

Personally, I wouldn't keep Reed and I wouldn't sign Olsen to an expensive stop gap contract.  I would rather take a chance on a guy like Hunter Henry who at least is still young.  I'm just saying if we are gonna spend money on a stop gap, Reed is a much more explosive player than Olsen so why not keep him.  

But if we keep Reed I would be completely comfortable with Sprinkle as the #2 TE.  He was pretty effective last year in a generally ineffective offense.  I totally disagree that we have to sign a second TE like Fells.  Why?  What does he give us that Sprinkle doesn't?  Sprinkle is still improving.

You can't just look at the numbers.  Olsen's has some big years, but he has also been lucky enough to be central to that offense. 

Remember Gruden basically refused to use Sprinkle in his first 2 years here except to block in run sets.  I don't even think we threw the ball at him much more that 10 times in 2 years and if I recall one of those years Jordan Reed was banged up the whole time.  His development has been stunted by Gruden's refusal to develop youth.  I am not saying he will ever be great, but surely he is trending towards a solid #2.

TE might just not be a strength for another year.  

Anyways that is my opinion, I know it isn't the norm and totally get your point of view.  

Troutman would be a huge pick for this team. I’m not on Sprinkle. I’d love to be wrong but unless he is a late bloomer he wouldn’t prevent me from selecting a huge piece for Haskins. This is the teams Biggest need to develop this QB how we hope

[naptownskinsfan]

11 hours ago, offbyone said:

Personally, I wouldn't keep Reed and I wouldn't sign Olsen to an expensive stop gap contract.  I would rather take a chance on a guy like Hunter Henry who at least is still young.  I'm just saying if we are gonna spend money on a stop gap, Reed is a much more explosive player than Olsen so why not keep him.  

But if we keep Reed I would be completely comfortable with Sprinkle as the #2 TE.  He was pretty effective last year in a generally ineffective offense.  I totally disagree that we have to sign a second TE like Fells.  Why?  What does he give us that Sprinkle doesn't?  Sprinkle is still improving.

You can't just look at the numbers.  Olsen's has some big years, but he has also been lucky enough to be central to that offense. 

Remember Gruden basically refused to use Sprinkle in his first 2 years here except to block in run sets.  I don't even think we threw the ball at him much more that 10 times in 2 years and if I recall one of those years Jordan Reed was banged up the whole time.  His development has been stunted by Gruden's refusal to develop youth.  I am not saying he will ever be great, but surely he is trending towards a solid #2.

TE might just not be a strength for another year.  

Anyways that is my opinion, I know it isn't the norm and totally get your point of view.  

I agree with most of this, very good post.  

I do think Sprinkle has done enough to be worthy of a #2 TE spot on the depth chart.  No disagreement there.  Hale Hentges deserved a chance to battle with some other bodies for the #3 spot.  

The main issue here is the #1 spot.  I think most people think Jordan Reed's career is over with the concussions.  In either case, the Redskins can't afford to slot him into the top spot on the depth chart moving forward because the next concussion could be game over.  

So there is the debate between the draft and free agency.  Signing Olsen on a 1-2 year deal is a solid move.  He's a decent enough tight end where he can be a factor in the passing game and even if he slows down next year, his blocking ability makes him a solid #2 TE.  On the other hand, I also see the appeal of signing someone else who is younger, or drafting someone.  

The problem is that the TE position is something that all teams are investing heavily into.  There is a push for teams to draft the next Kittle, Ertz or Kelce, guys who are extreme matchup nightmares, and teams are also trying to have two of them in the mold of the Patriots when they had Gronk and Hernandez.  So talented TE's are not hitting the FA market unless they have huge blemishes.  Hunter Henry, as well as Olsen, have extensive injury histories.  Austin Hooper may get the highest FA contract amongst TE's, but is he worth it?  With his contract, he will need to perform being a top 1-2 option in his next offense.  Right now, he is Matt Ryan throwing him the football, and is the fourth option in that offense behind Julio Jones, Calvin Ridley and Devonta Freeman.  

Then there is the draft.  We are already committed to Chase Young.  We don't have a second round pick this year, so we really are limited on draft options this year.  Right now it's a bit early to get too specific on tight ends until we get to the combine at least, but I do like Cole Kmet from Notre Dame and Thaddeus Moss from LSU, and I've had more than a couple people compare him to being a "bigger" Jordan Reed.  

So there we have it.  Spend big and long term for Hooper, and likely Hunter Henry as well, neither which I'm not a fan of.  Then there is a Greg Olsen stopgap option, which becomes more appealing.  Then we can draft someone.  But I do think it is important to do something big with the TE #1 spot this coming season as a safety valve for Dwayne Haskins, which really makes Olsen stand out more, followed by a big contract for Hooper.  

[offbyone]

12 hours ago, naptownskinsfan said:

I agree with most of this, very good post.  

I do think Sprinkle has done enough to be worthy of a #2 TE spot on the depth chart.  No disagreement there.  Hale Hentges deserved a chance to battle with some other bodies for the #3 spot.  

The main issue here is the #1 spot.  I think most people think Jordan Reed's career is over with the concussions.  In either case, the Redskins can't afford to slot him into the top spot on the depth chart moving forward because the next concussion could be game over.  

So there is the debate between the draft and free agency.  Signing Olsen on a 1-2 year deal is a solid move.  He's a decent enough tight end where he can be a factor in the passing game and even if he slows down next year, his blocking ability makes him a solid #2 TE.  On the other hand, I also see the appeal of signing someone else who is younger, or drafting someone.  

The problem is that the TE position is something that all teams are investing heavily into.  There is a push for teams to draft the next Kittle, Ertz or Kelce, guys who are extreme matchup nightmares, and teams are also trying to have two of them in the mold of the Patriots when they had Gronk and Hernandez.  So talented TE's are not hitting the FA market unless they have huge blemishes.  Hunter Henry, as well as Olsen, have extensive injury histories.  Austin Hooper may get the highest FA contract amongst TE's, but is he worth it?  With his contract, he will need to perform being a top 1-2 option in his next offense.  Right now, he is Matt Ryan throwing him the football, and is the fourth option in that offense behind Julio Jones, Calvin Ridley and Devonta Freeman.  

Then there is the draft.  We are already committed to Chase Young.  We don't have a second round pick this year, so we really are limited on draft options this year.  Right now it's a bit early to get too specific on tight ends until we get to the combine at least, but I do like Cole Kmet from Notre Dame and Thaddeus Moss from LSU, and I've had more than a couple people compare him to being a "bigger" Jordan Reed.  

So there we have it.  Spend big and long term for Hooper, and likely Hunter Henry as well, neither which I'm not a fan of.  Then there is a Greg Olsen stopgap option, which becomes more appealing.  Then we can draft someone.  But I do think it is important to do something big with the TE #1 spot this coming season as a safety valve for Dwayne Haskins, which really makes Olsen stand out more, followed by a big contract for Hooper.  

Hmmm... This is making me rethink some stuff.  If we could keep the deal to 1-2 years maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea since this is such a weak draft for TEs. 

I think you are right that the demand for TEs is very high and so Hooper and Henry might end up being massively overpaid considering how think the free agent market is and the draft being weak this year.  

Or maybe Gronk will come back and we can rope him in for a couple years as a stop gap

[e16bball]

If you sign Olsen, you also draft a TE in the mid-rounds. They’re 1A and 1B, and you also have Sprinkle to keep around as a guy who can give you half-decent snaps in the event that the rookie isn’t quite ready (likely) or Olsen gets hurt (also likely). Although I guess there’s a possibility that Rivera and company would prefer a high-quality blocker at TE3, and that’s probably not Sprinkle. 

I don’t think that’s a terrible option, depending on the prospect they’re able to land in the draft. 

I still think the better option is to sign a young FA TE, largely because of the lack of draft picks. But also because I want immediate impact and reliability out of that position, and it can be a spot where it takes rookies some time to really emerge as top targets. 

[lavar703]

3 minutes ago, e16bball said:

If you sign Olsen, you also draft a TE in the mid-rounds. They’re 1A and 1B, and you also have Sprinkle to keep around as a guy who can give you half-decent snaps in the event that the rookie isn’t quite ready (likely) or Olsen gets hurt (also likely). Although I guess there’s a possibility that Rivera and company would prefer a high-quality blocker at TE3, and that’s probably not Sprinkle. 

I don’t think that’s a terrible option, depending on the prospect they’re able to land in the draft. 

I still think the better option is to sign a young FA TE, largely because of the lack of draft picks. But also because I want immediate impact and reliability out of that position, and it can be a spot where it takes rookies some time to really emerge as top targets. 

Brycen Hopkins 

[turtle28]

21 minutes ago, e16bball said:

If you sign Olsen, you also draft a TE in the mid-rounds. They’re 1A and 1B, and you also have Sprinkle to keep around as a guy who can give you half-decent snaps in the event that the rookie isn’t quite ready (likely) or Olsen gets hurt (also likely). Although I guess there’s a possibility that Rivera and company would prefer a high-quality blocker at TE3, and that’s probably not Sprinkle. 

I don’t think that’s a terrible option, depending on the prospect they’re able to land in the draft. 

I still think the better option is to sign a young FA TE, largely because of the lack of draft picks. But also because I want immediate impact and reliability out of that position, and it can be a spot where it takes rookies some time to really emerge as top targets. 

The only FA tight end I’d give big $ to is Hopper. Henry is injury prone. Ebron is aloof, you can’t count on him. Eifert is even more injury prone then Henry.

If it’s one of the last 3 I mentioned, there has to be an out like in Paul Richardson’s contract where it can be voidable after two years.

I’d rather sign Olsen to a one or two year deal worth $6 to $9 million a year and then, draft a mid round TE like Bryce Hopkins in round 3 - if he’s there - like @lavar703 said.

[turtle28]

 

[MikeT14]

He's negotiating with the Skins, Bills, and Seachickens. 

[turtle28]

1 hour ago, MikeT14 said:

He's negotiating with the Skins, Bills, and Seachickens. 

Juicy! Can’t stand those Seagulls! They always crampin my game at the beach! Haha 🤣 

Edited February 14, 2020 by turtle28

[e16bball]

Gotta be honest — if I’m him, I’m going to Seattle. 

Rivera is great and I’m betting we’ll probably offer the most money, and I like the direction we’re heading, but we aren’t quite in the mix yet. Seattle is right in the middle of the mix, and Russell Wilson is a real, live star QB in his prime. They’ve got two WRs who can stretch the field and a running game that will probably open some things up for him in the middle of the field. And they can pretty much promise him some big, meaningful games to get up for as he winds down his career.

I don’t have anything against Buffalo, they’ve got a solid team — but I can’t really see why you’d choose the Redskins or the Bills over the Seahawks unless the money was way off. But he’s an East Coast guy, so maybe he wants to stay home and play for a coach he knows/trusts.

[aceinthehouse]

5 minutes ago, e16bball said:

Gotta be honest — if I’m him, I’m going to Seattle. 

Rivera is great and I’m betting we’ll probably offer the most money, and I like the direction we’re heading, but we aren’t quite in the mix yet. Seattle is right in the middle of the mix, and Russell Wilson is a real, live star QB in his prime. They’ve got two WRs who can stretch the field and a running game that will probably open some things up for him in the middle of the field. And they can pretty much promise him some big, meaningful games to get up for as he winds down his career.

I don’t have anything against Buffalo, they’ve got a solid team — but I can’t really see why you’d choose the Redskins or the Bills over the Seahawks unless the money was way off. But he’s an East Coast guy, so maybe he wants to stay home and play for a coach he knows/trusts.

I think we will end up getting him & here's why..

Seattle is ready now. You're right about that. They are better at this time. But so are the other teams in that division. 

Niners were just in the SB. The Rams before that.

If he truly wants a chance at his team winning the Division title?

Does he go to Seattle, where the Competition is strong?

Does he go to Buffalo, to try to help beat the Patriots who have owned that Division for 20 years?

Or does he go to a team with his former Coaches, good talent on both sides of the ball, a franchise QB & inside a Division that is not only up for grabs, but watching 3 of the 4 teams in a transition period with new Head coaches.

Not to mention the need for TE here. But other Offensive pieces, so as to not have to be the only good piece.

But imo, if he comes here?

It won't necessarily be because of the dribble I mentioned above.

It will be because he wants to be part of this Culture Change with Rivera.

[HTTRDynasty]

I really hope he goes to Seattle. His blocking has been atrocious the past few years. He’ll be as big of a liability as Reed ever was in the run game and he’s lost a couple steps as a route runner.  He’s never been a good YAC player. He’s injury-prone as well. 
 

I’d rather not overpay for a guy whose only value-add feature is his experience in Turner’s system (and I guess having reliable hands). 

[e16bball]

13 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

I really hope he goes to Seattle. His blocking has been atrocious the past few years. He’ll be as big of a liability as Reed ever was in the run game and he’s lost a couple steps as a route runner.  He’s never been a good YAC player. He’s injury-prone as well. 
 

I’d rather not overpay for a guy whose only value-add feature is his experience in Turner’s system (and I guess having reliable hands). 

It’s not my preferred option either, as I would prefer a longer-term solution and I don’t really feel great about this draft’s TE options. I think in terms of ROI, the value you get from TE contracts is pretty good — they’re not highly paid and they can be crucial cogs in your offense — so I’d prefer to make a stronger, higher-reward investment in the FA market.  

But you’re kinda making it seem like it’s an accomplishment for this guy if he can take 3 or 4 steps without falling flat on his face 😂 He’s still a really good receiver. In 14 games, he ranked 11th in the league among TEs in both receptions and yards. Playing with Kyle Allen and Will Grier for most of the year. That’s still a pretty capable pass-catcher. 

[HTTRDynasty]

12 minutes ago, e16bball said:

But you’re kinda making it seem like it’s an accomplishment for this guy if he can take 3 or 4 steps without falling flat on his face 😂 He’s still a really good receiver. In 14 games, he ranked 11th in the league among TEs in both receptions and yards. Playing with Kyle Allen and Will Grier for most of the year. That’s still a pretty capable pass-catcher. 

We all know the TE position is a wasteland. Being 11th best is even less impressive than it sounds. 
 

But yeah, don’t get me wrong. I’d sign him to a cheap base, incentive-laden contract but even then, I definitely wouldn’t consider my job finished plugging the hole at TE.