Deshaun Watson requests trade

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, MWil23 said:

I’m saying that you can only allocate a % over the cap, and that number would be universal, for a single player. Not a % of that contract.

That's the same thing as just raising the salary cap.

[squire12]

Just now, MWil23 said:

I’m saying that you can only allocate a % over the cap, and that number would be universal, for a single player. Not a % of that contract.

Then just raise the cap by that amount.

Why create the exemption to go over if it is the same for all teams?

[ramssuperbowl99]

1 minute ago, squire12 said:

Why create the exemption to go over if it is the same for all teams?

As far as I can tell, the "problem" that the salary cap exemption is meant to solve is keeping a QB and the supporting cast. Which isn't a "problem" of the salary cap, it's the entire point.

The NFL doesn't want the Chiefs to be able to re-sign Mahomes, Hill, Kelce, and Jones (how the hell did they do that anyway).

 

Eventually, teams are going to figure out the "exemption" is to trade negative salary cap assets with a tanking team ala Brock Lobster-Cleveland a few years back.

[soflbillsfan]

49 minutes ago, NJC33 said:

Jets could conceivably make it work without mortgaging the future.

Hypothetically, say they offer #3, both of Seattle's 1s and maybe a conditional pick? Assuming they would then flip Darnold for a 2nd or 3rd - that leaves them with potentially six picks in rounds 2-4 this year, while retaining their first in each of the next two drafts. 

Your expectations of giving them a #2 pick and the 2 picks in the 20s while may be appealing to move up in the draft its not worth it for Texans. Look at what Washington had to give up to move from 6 to 2 to land RG3, 3 1st rd picks and a 2nd rd pick. Your talking about a proven veteran qb in the prime in which he was top 5 this year given the rollercoaster of a season for them. Then to say Darnold is worth a 2/3rd pick yet he has done absolutely nothing and in his last year of his contract, if it was like Josh Rosen where 3 years were remaining then that could be argued for such a high pick but expect a 4/5th for Darnold. To me its going to be at least 4 first rd picks in order to get it done. Also Watson has a no trade clause so he would have to be willing to accept the move to the Jets. Who is going to protect him outside of Becton? Who is he going to throw to outside of a slot receiver in Crowder. Where is the defense at? Not to mention now the Jets have to come in to the idea of paying him his $35 mil plus in 2022 and on which could cost them salary cap. All in all it would be crippling the jets organization for making the trade hoping this would be the quick fix with all other issues. Then Watson has to see it as an ideal landing destination which outside of Saleh at the moment is nothing other then getting out of Houston. Its a side stepping move for him. A team that is a qb away from being relative would be an ideal situation for him which is the Niners, Bears, or heck even the annoying Cowboys. They have to pay dak 40 mil so why not just give up the farm and pay for a better qb in Watson when they have more pieces to play with a respectable oline, 2 offensive wr weapons in cooper and lamb. 

[MWil23]

2 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

The NFL doesn't want the Chiefs to be able to re-sign Mahomes, Hill, Kelce, and Jones (how the hell did they do that anyway).

 

Pretty simple. They got Hill on a cheap deal because he’s a human underwear stain.

Mahomes backloaded his deal as well.

[squire12]

3 minutes ago, soflbillsfan said:

Your expectations of giving them a #2 pick and the 2 picks in the 20s while may be appealing to move up in the draft its not worth it for Texans. Look at what Washington had to give up to move from 6 to 2 to land RG3, 3 1st rd picks and a 2nd rd pick.

Multiple 1st for a cheap contract is different that a $30+M per year contract

3 minutes ago, soflbillsfan said:

 

Your talking about a proven veteran qb in the prime in which he was top 5 this year given the rollercoaster of a season for them. Then to say Darnold is worth a 2/3rd pick yet he has done absolutely nothing and in his last year of his contract, if it was like Josh Rosen where 3 years were remaining then that could be argued for such a high pick but expect a 4/5th for Darnold. To me its going to be at least 4 first rd picks in order to get it done. Also Watson has a no trade clause so he would have to be willing to accept the move to the Jets. Who is going to protect him outside of Becton? Who is he going to throw to outside of a slot receiver in Crowder. Where is the defense at? Not to mention now the Jets have to come in to the idea of paying him his $35 mil plus in 2022 and on which could cost them salary cap.

So any team is going to have to be comfortable giving the draft capital assets + take the contract.  Leaving limited options to fill the holes on the roster.

3 minutes ago, soflbillsfan said:

 

All in all it would be crippling the jets organization for making the trade hoping this would be the quick fix with all other issues. Then Watson has to see it as an ideal landing destination which outside of Saleh at the moment is nothing other then getting out of Houston. Its a side stepping move for him. A team that is a qb away from being relative would be an ideal situation for him which is the Niners, Bears, or heck even the annoying Cowboys. They have to pay dak 40 mil so why not just give up the farm and pay for a better qb in Watson when they have more pieces to play with a respectable oline, 2 offensive wr weapons in cooper and lamb. 

If Watson wants out and waives the no trade clause universally, then you have more potential suitors and the compensation package can go up.  If Watson is restrictive in where he wants to go, then the package can go down.

Going to be a fun few months.

[ET80]

56 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

It's a contract any team can get rid of with minimal dead money.

It's still dead money that the Texans don't have to account for.

57 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Because the 49ers don't need to add him to any Watson package as they can just get rid of him.

Then that's the course of action. Cut him, let any sort of offer not include Jimmy G; You take that minimal hit, don't pass that buck.

Jimmy G in relation to this trade is a liability.

59 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Trading him to the Texans would be due to the Texans wanting him not the other way around.

If I'm the Texans, I'm not wanting him.

59 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

This isn't a NBA trade where a team is trying to get rid of a big salary player and have to add draft picks along with it. 

I get that, but you can't just slide in a liability to a trade offer like that.

[ET80]

41 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

You are either blind about Watson or blind about other teams. But you are 100% blind in this scenario. Teams that would have no interest in trading and giving up capital for Watson isnt a huge list, but there are more than 3 teams.

Got additional names that wouldn't consider it? I'm willing to listen.

[squire12]

3 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Got additional names that wouldn't consider it? I'm willing to listen.

GB

[J-ALL-DAY]

6 minutes ago, ET80 said:

It's still dead money that the Texans don't have to account for.

Then that's the course of action. Cut him, let any sort of offer not include Jimmy G; You take that minimal hit, don't pass that buck.

Jimmy G in relation to this trade is a liability.

If I'm the Texans, I'm not wanting him.

I get that, but you can't just slide in a liability to a trade offer like that.

Once again, he is only added IF the Texans want him. It doesn't matter to the Niners one way or another as he would just be released if Watson is traded to the Niners. 

If the Texans would rather go another route, then they can do just that. But some just feel they would be interested in Jimmy for the time being until they get their QB of the future. 

He's not a "liability" per se. He's not a contract that needs to be moved to get this deal done. 

[CWood21]

18 minutes ago, soflbillsfan said:

Your expectations of giving them a #2 pick and the 2 picks in the 20s while may be appealing to move up in the draft its not worth it for Texans. Look at what Washington had to give up to move from 6 to 2 to land RG3, 3 1st rd picks and a 2nd rd pick. Your talking about a proven veteran qb in the prime in which he was top 5 this year given the rollercoaster of a season for them. Then to say Darnold is worth a 2/3rd pick yet he has done absolutely nothing and in his last year of his contract, if it was like Josh Rosen where 3 years were remaining then that could be argued for such a high pick but expect a 4/5th for Darnold. To me its going to be at least 4 first rd picks in order to get it done. Also Watson has a no trade clause so he would have to be willing to accept the move to the Jets. Who is going to protect him outside of Becton? Who is he going to throw to outside of a slot receiver in Crowder. Where is the defense at? Not to mention now the Jets have to come in to the idea of paying him his $35 mil plus in 2022 and on which could cost them salary cap. All in all it would be crippling the jets organization for making the trade hoping this would be the quick fix with all other issues. Then Watson has to see it as an ideal landing destination which outside of Saleh at the moment is nothing other then getting out of Houston. Its a side stepping move for him. A team that is a qb away from being relative would be an ideal situation for him which is the Niners, Bears, or heck even the annoying Cowboys. They have to pay dak 40 mil so why not just give up the farm and pay for a better qb in Watson when they have more pieces to play with a respectable oline, 2 offensive wr weapons in cooper and lamb. 

There's also the added bonus of being cost-controlled when you trade up for a QB in the draft.  You get Watson for cheap for a year, but then his contract exploded.

[ET80]

8 minutes ago, squire12 said:

GB

Ok, so you think GB would prefer developing Jordan Love over plugging and playing Watson? 

I guess this would ultimately be contingent on Rodgers - how long he plays, how hard a line he'd take if such a move was made - but it wouldn't be the first time this franchise traded away an aging legend for a younger model.

I'll allow this one, though. Green Bay.

[CWood21]

10 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Got additional names that wouldn't consider it? I'm willing to listen.

Buffalo (Josh Allen), Cincinnati (Joe Burrow), Green Bay (Aaron Rodgers), Kansas City Chargers (Patrick Mahomes) LA Chargers (Justin Herbert), and Seattle (Russell Wilson).  Those are teams that I don't think would have interest in Watson.  You can probably lump Jacksonville in there as well.  I think given their age, contract status, and teams' directions, they'd probably take their QBs over Watson if you include the cost to trade for him.

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, ET80 said:

Ok, so you think GB would prefer developing Jordan Love over plugging and playing Watson? 

I guess this would ultimately be contingent on Rodgers - how long he plays, how hard a line he'd take if such a move was made - but it wouldn't be the first time this franchise traded away an aging legend for a younger model.

I'll allow this one, though. Green Bay.

I mean, it just depends on what you think happens with Rodgers.  Given his play this year, I don't think there's any way he isn't the Packers' starting QB next year.  So you're taking away the one year that Watson's contract is SUPER cheap by QB standards, and one of him or Rodgers is on the bench.  The logistics of trying to make that QB room work isn't possible.

[RaidersAreOne]