Ghostnote Posted November 13, 2017 Author Share Posted November 13, 2017 3 hours ago, MKnight82 said: The problem is that Reed is probably worth more to us than what we'd get for him on the trade market. Reed's the 3rd highest paid TE in the NFL, and his injury history is well known. No one is going to give us anything of value for him. I think I am more suggesting that 2018 is the decision year and he needs to decide if he is going to be here or not. That means he has to play. PERIOD. The Redskins have the option to cut him after 2018 and not have to worry about a large cap hit. Its an option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 5 minutes ago, mike23md said: If he cannot see the field, and you cant just cut him while there might be interest, trading him has to be a part of the equation. It will absolutely be part of the equation, but don't expect much value in return for him. Maybe a later round conditional pick depending on performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostnote Posted November 13, 2017 Author Share Posted November 13, 2017 In all honesty, I would be ok with that @Danger. I cannot fathom seeing this guy be continually injured considering he is only gonna get older and feabler. Don't get much weaker than glass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Just now, mike23md said: I think I am more suggesting that 2018 is the decision year and he needs to decide if he is going to be here or not. That means he has to play. PERIOD. The Redskins have the option to cut him after 2018 and not have to worry about a large cap hit. Its an option. I get that. He's definitely expensive, especially for a player that isn't on the field all the time. I think people are forgetting just how dominate he can be when healthy though (I don't think he's been healthy at any point this year). Reed only counts $5.7 mil against the Redskins cap this year and he'll be counting anywhere from $9-10 mil against the Redskins cap for the next 4 years. We're currently projected to have about $58 in open cap space for 2018. That is with Cousins coming off the books, so if we retained him let's assume we'd have $30 mil left in cap space. $30 mil is still a lot of space. We'd have enough space to add a marquee free agent or two, sign our rookies and do some depth chart filling with lesser tiered free agents, and that's before doing anything like cutting players or contract restructures. Really I don't see the point in cutting him before 2018. We'd only be saving $4.9 mil when we don't even really need it. Anything he provides on the field is worth more than that IMO. Plus maybe he puts up a great 2018 campaign then we could look into selling him high in the offseason after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 33 minutes ago, mike23md said: In all honesty, I would be ok with that @Danger. I cannot fathom seeing this guy be continually injured considering he is only gonna get older and feabler. Don't get much weaker than glass. If Vernon Davis were 23-24 instead of 33-34, then I could understand this. The problem is that Davis's contract expires one year after your Reed decision year. At that point, we would only have Jeremy Sprinkle on the roster. I get the idea of trading Reed to get value for him, but I'm not sure we would get anything close to value. I also doubt that Allen would do that since that would require planning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostnote Posted November 13, 2017 Author Share Posted November 13, 2017 The idea was not for just trade value, it was that he is eating up space on the roster, in the cap, and simply isnt producing and has not been since he signed his extension. Yes, healthy, he is a beast, but not healthy when we could use him makes it more of an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 31 minutes ago, mike23md said: The idea was not for just trade value, it was that he is eating up space on the roster, in the cap, and simply isnt producing and has not been since he signed his extension. Yes, healthy, he is a beast, but not healthy when we could use him makes it more of an issue. From a roster perspective, it's one spot out of 53 (1.9% of the roster space). Is Reed for only half a season more valuable than say a guy we picked up off the street a la Tony Bergstrom? I'd argue yes. As for the cap, he's taking up 3.33% of the cap by himself. So, he's absorbing about 1.75x more than a single guy on the roster would take assuming an even distribution across all players. That to me feels worth it, even if we don't get him for a full sixteen game season. (someone check my math) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 1 hour ago, Woz said: From a roster perspective, it's one spot out of 53 (1.9% of the roster space). Is Reed for only half a season more valuable than say a guy we picked up off the street a la Tony Bergstrom? I'd argue yes. As for the cap, he's taking up 3.33% of the cap by himself. So, he's absorbing about 1.75x more than a single guy on the roster would take assuming an even distribution across all players. That to me feels worth it, even if we don't get him for a full sixteen game season. (someone check my math) I refuse to check your math. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Just now, MKnight82 said: I refuse to check your math. I WIN!! YAY ME!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 4 hours ago, mike23md said: I think I am more suggesting that 2018 is the decision year and he needs to decide if he is going to be here or not. That means he has to play. PERIOD. The Redskins have the option to cut him after 2018 and not have to worry about a large cap hit. Its an option. He can't play if he's too hurt. And no one is going to want him injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeattleSkin Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 Math? Such wizardry shall surely get one burned at the stake as a heretic. Sure, I'd be OK with a trade. I'd rather have a guy who catches as many TDs in 16 games as Reed does in 8. At least a guy that would be in the lineup for 16 games. Can't count on Paul's health and he hasn't done much. Still need at least a couple of guys outside of Davis (how much longer can he go) and Sprinkles (whose just unknown at this point) so maybe a trade doesn't work but not opposed to one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostnote Posted November 14, 2017 Author Share Posted November 14, 2017 17 hours ago, Woz said: From a roster perspective, it's one spot out of 53 (1.9% of the roster space). Is Reed for only half a season more valuable than say a guy we picked up off the street a la Tony Bergstrom? I'd argue yes. As for the cap, he's taking up 3.33% of the cap by himself. So, he's absorbing about 1.75x more than a single guy on the roster would take assuming an even distribution across all players. That to me feels worth it, even if we don't get him for a full sixteen game season. (someone check my math) Woz, I can appreciate the analytical perspective, but that is assuming that each and every player is equal to the person to his right or left. Its not. Honestly, I would gladly take a Troy Niklas or Austin Sefarian Jenkins over Jordan Reed at this point. They both have shown they can be productive and stay on the field. Oh, and both are free agents at the end of this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dashing202 Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 Been said this for 2 weeks i loved him in 20115-2016- hell every year we could ****** a 4th pick for him next year tho he would be a boom or bust for a team the Rams could take him niles Paul wasn't a bad TE at all and he's very young still we should give him more playing time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 1 hour ago, Dashing202 said: Been said this for 2 weeks i loved him in 20115-2016- hell every year we could ****** a 4th pick for him next year tho he would be a boom or bust for a team the Rams could take him niles Paul wasn't a bad TE at all and he's very young still we should give him more playing time Dude Niles Paul is garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 8 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: Dude Niles Paul is garbage. He's not very good at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.