WindyCity Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 10 hours ago, AZBearsFan said: Johnson’s last 2 years: 2021: 88/923/7 2022: 107/1161/8 What’s Claypool’s leverage to ask for that? Johnson’s deal was for 18.5 that was my mistake. His leverage will be that he has in a bad situation out produced Russell Gage and produced similarly to Kirk and you just traded a premium pick for me and that shows you think I am better than Russell Gage or another #3. He will also look at the WR free agent market and it is weak and say that if he does hit free agency he is likely to be the top guy on the market. He would be this season. With the WR desperation that exists in the league, both Claypool and Mooney have to they can get 15-16 on the open market without blinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 1 hour ago, WindyCity said: Johnson’s deal was for 18.5 that was my mistake. His leverage will be that he has in a bad situation out produced Russell Gage and produced similarly to Kirk and you just traded a premium pick for me and that shows you think I am better than Russell Gage or another #3. He will also look at the WR free agent market and it is weak and say that if he does hit free agency he is likely to be the top guy on the market. He would be this season. With the WR desperation that exists in the league, both Claypool and Mooney have to they can get 15-16 on the open market without blinking. Claypool was literally in the same exact situation as Johnson. They were teammates. And Johnson outproduced him. I don’t think Kirk’s contract is the market barometer you seem to think it is. Gage got 10 and his stats are pretty similar to Claypool’s (CC averaged 54 and 57 ypg in 2021-22 and RG 49 and 55: TDs were 11-8). Allen Robinson had a far better resume than either and only got 15.5. Juju took an 1 year deal for less than 4 with a bunch of incentives up to 10. Also, Kirk was a UFA - Claypool isn’t. The relative weakness of this FA market doesn’t really matter regarding Claypool unless he were to hold out (can’t see that happening) but rather that of 2024, which at least for now looks much stronger (Evans, Higgins, Pittman, Brown, Davis). If he wants top FA dollars he might have to wait to actually get there, but that comes with significant risk of injury or underperformance too plus that he’ll be behind any of those guys who actually make it to market in terms of being the top available option. Plus, what does it do to his FA value if we draft a WR in R2/3 next April and they’re good right out of the box and all of a sudden CC is relegated to 60 targets instead of 115 and now his walk year is underwhelming? Not good things. All of those things potentially working against him factor into what deal he might see come his way too. And again, he’s not obligated to take a deal like the one I proposed. I just think it makes a lot of sense for both sides. Or maybe they make it a bolstering of his existing last year instead, though adding money without added term doesn’t make sense from the team’s side. How about in addition to the $10M extension for 2024 they add performance incentives to his existing 2023 as well? Get creative - the point of any of it is to extend the time window in a mutually beneficial way while we determine how he fits. They always have the option of tagging Claypool after 2023 too. Our only other obvious potential franchise tag players after 2023 right now are Mooney and Johnson, and I’ll be incredibly surprised if both aren’t extended this offseason. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyCity Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 If you trade a top 45 pick for a guy I can’t see how you would turn around and approach him in contract talks like he is a #3? You didn’t trade a top 45 pick for a #3… you traded it because you think at a minimum he is going to be a good #2. I think that is where contract talks start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 7 minutes ago, WindyCity said: If you trade a top 45 pick for a guy I can’t see how you would turn around and approach him in contract talks like he is a #3? You didn’t trade a top 45 pick for a #3… you traded it because you think at a minimum he is going to be a good #2. I think that is where contract talks start. Of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted November 5, 2022 Share Posted November 5, 2022 8 hours ago, WindyCity said: If you trade a top 45 pick for a guy I can’t see how you would turn around and approach him in contract talks like he is a #3? You didn’t trade a top 45 pick for a #3… you traded it because you think at a minimum he is going to be a good #2. I think that is where contract talks start. Amongst deals signed just since 3/2021: Courtland Sutton: $15.2M AAV (extended pre-FA) Curtis Samuel: $11.5M AAV (FA) Michael Gallup: $11.5M AAV (pre-FA) Tim Patrick: $11.33M AAV (pre-FA) Sutton is more of a lower end 1 than a 2, but the other three are 2s, and that’s way less than $16-18M/season. Kirk’s contract is an albatross that didn’t impact nor match with last year’s FA market. Diontae’s production is low end 1 production. Renfrow is an elite slot. Claypool fits more closely ability-wise and production-wise with Samuel, Patrick and Gallup than he does with Sutton, Renfrow or Johnson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskieBear Posted November 7, 2022 Share Posted November 7, 2022 i think if we can get both DM and CC signed for ~$14M/year long term thats a win. 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.