Jump to content

Raiders sign RB Kenyan Drake (2 years, up to $14.5, $11M gtd)


RaidersAreOne

Recommended Posts

Just now, .Buzz said:

$5.5M still echoes my thoughts to be fair lol.

It's not cheap but we've been running Jacobs into the ground and as a result has been getting hurt and less effective. We needed a big time COP back and I don't think $5.5 for a low end RB1/high end RB2 is that bad. We now have one of the better and more well-rounded RB rooms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

This won't be much on the cap if we cut our backup RB. A net of ~ 3 million if we move on from Richard. That being said, I agree that we need to continue to invest into the defense. I'm not sure where things are on that front.

whether or not we cut another player, 5.5 mil on a backup RB is bad business. 7+ is terrible business.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 11sanchez11 said:

in your opinion?

He probably meant IIRC.   It happens lol.

(But yes @Turnobili is correct - incentives likely to be hit are counted for present-year, unlikely to next year.  Don't ask how they decide this - it's probably the same spinning wheel that doles out punishment).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Turnobili said:

whether or not we cut another player, 5.5 mil on a backup RB is bad business. 7+ is terrible business.

Terrible is very strong. He is a good player and he's going to play a lot. People were complaining about RB depth. Booker is getting 3 a year. Paying Drake 5.5 when Drake is substantially better isn't the worst thing in the world. We were paying Richard 3.5. What is 2 more million in the big scheme of things? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

It's not cheap but we've been running Jacobs into the ground and as a result has been getting hurt and less effective. We needed a big time COP back and I don't think $5.5 for a low end RB1/high end RB2 is that bad. We now have one of the better and more well-rounded RB rooms.

I'm not saying having more than 1 RB/someone to take the weight off Jacobs is bad, I'm talking strictly from a $ prospective.

Just not a smart investment imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

Terrible is very strong. He is a good player and he's going to play a lot. People were complaining about RB depth. Booker is getting 3 a year. Paying Drake 5.5 when Drake is substantially better isn't the worst thing in the world. We were paying Richard 3.5. What is 2 more million in the big scheme of things? 

it is. and i used it intentionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

Terrible is very strong. He is a good player and he's going to play a lot. People were complaining about RB depth. Booker is getting 3 a year. Paying Drake 5.5 when Drake is substantially better isn't the worst thing in the world. We were paying Richard 3.5. What is 2 more million in the big scheme of things? 

That's where I am at too. We're a lot more explosive and versatile on O now. Too expensive but I am glad he's a Raider. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

Tired: Paying good OL

Wired: Paying a RB after cutting good OL because of cap issues

If we're talking Jackson and Brown, Brown didn't even play and Jackson wasn't great last year. Hudson literally asked to be released so we didn't have much of a choice. But I do agree there are a lot of other places I'd invest $ first. OL/S/CB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...