Week 4 Thread: (2-1) Commanders at (3-0) Eagles - GIF THEME Rocky

[MKnight82]

38 minutes ago, lavar703 said:

Why focus on Sweat? I don’t understand the obsession with locking down Sweat? He’s like three years older and is just as inconsistent. I love the guy but he just disappears for stretches at a time and it’s like it goes completely unnoticed. You don’t consider it because if this continues a 25-year old premier pass rusher has exponentially more value than a RB on a big contract. 
 

And the reason we didn’t get multiple first round picks for Kirk and Trent is because the owner was an idiot. That is the simplest and only answer needed. He’s the reason. 

Young's injury history alone is the reason I'd offer Sweat an extension before him (at this time). I also think Sweat will be more reasonably priced to retain than Young. 

[MKnight82]

10 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

This post is exactly why, before the season, I suggested that neither were going to get a LTD (barring a historic season).

To answer your question however, Sweat had a huge lead over Chase before the season on earning a LTD. A lot of it has to do with availability. Also, Sweats stats are simply just better than Chase's. Even this year (I know Chase missed week 1) Sweat has the advantage on his production. 

Chase: 2.5 sacks, 7 tackles, 2 assist, 3 TFL, 4 QB hits

Montez: 3 sacks, 12 tackles, 3 assist, 4 TFL, 7 QB hits, 2 FF.

If neither of them separate from each other, I do feel that Sweat would earn the contract before Young, but unless either of them break double digit sacks and show true game changing ability, I don't expect either to be resigned to a LTD.

I know this opinion isn't popular around here, but I do think one could earn a LTD, but the likelihood that both are gone is still high, IMO. 

I agree, I think it is highly unlikely they retain both, and I don't think they plan on retaining both purely because paying all four the the Dlineman isn't sustainable. 

[turtle28]

22 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

I will say that getting "good defensive ends" doesn't mean we have to draft them high or pay an arm and a leg to sign them in FA. 

Maxx Crosby 4th round, Josh Sweat 4th round, Danielle Hunter 3rd round, Trey Hendrickson 3rd Round, Josh Uche 2nd round, Zadarius Smith 4th round, etc*. 

It isn't impossible to get a quality DE outside of drafting them in the 1st and I absolutely would not allow this staff to draft another DLineman in the 1st, if I had any say. 

I expect one of them to get franchised if they perform well and essentially told, "good job for that season, now do it again if you want the LTD."

*I could have listed more, especially historically from non-active players, but I think I listed enough to make the point. 

This is the ole’ you can find good QBs or other players after round 1 argument which I do understand but it’s literally a needle in a haystack, it’s like a dozen hits out of hundreds of misses on DEs.

Outside of Preston Smith who was the 5th pick in the 2nd round in 2015, I can’t think of a DE we drafted outside of round 1 who was a good starter for us since Charles Mann in the mid 80s.

Edited October 2, 2023 by turtle28

[turtle28]

4 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

Young's injury history alone is the reason I'd offer Sweat an extension before him (at this time). I also think Sweat will be more reasonably priced to retain than Young. 

Of course Sweat will be cheaper, he’s going to be 28 next year and before we know it he’ll be on the downside of his career in his 30s towards the end of his deal while he’s making $20 mil a year and putting up like 5 sacks a season.

[lavar703]

7 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

Young's injury history alone is the reason I'd offer Sweat an extension before him (at this time). I also think Sweat will be more reasonably priced to retain than Young. 

Young has had one serious injury. His injury history isn’t that extensive. 

[Slappy Mc]

Just now, turtle28 said:

This is the ole’ you can find good QBs or other players after round 1 argument which I do understand but it’s literally a needle in a haystack, it’s like a dozen hits out of hundreds of misses on DEs.

I can’t think of a DE we drafted outside of round 1 who was a good starter for us since Charles Mann in the mid 80s.

The issue is who has been drafting and making the decisions for us since then. 

The other issue is that when a player is drafted using a "premium" pick, the drafting team usually puts a ton of eggs into that basket rather than giving others a shot. Very few coaches go against draft position to give other players chances. (Kyle Shanahan with Brock Purdy, Jay Gruden with Kirk Cousins are a few off the top of my head).

I'm not telling you we could go out there and draft Chase's or Montez's replacement on Day 3 of the draft. I am however saying that you don't have to force the situation with a 1st round pick or high priced FA, because we aren't replacing world beaters*, we just need adequacy for that position.

*(For all the Chase and Montez lovers, please don't crucify me. I know that's an unpopular take)

[turtle28]

17 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

This post is exactly why, before the season, I suggested that neither were going to get a LTD (barring a historic season).

To answer your question however, Sweat had a huge lead over Chase before the season on earning a LTD. A lot of it has to do with availability. Also, Sweats stats are simply just better than Chase's. Even this year (I know Chase missed week 1) Sweat has the advantage on his production. 

Chase: 2.5 sacks, 7 tackles, 2 assist, 3 TFL, 4 QB hits

Montez: 3 sacks, 12 tackles, 3 assist, 4 TFL, 7 QB hits, 2 FF.

If neither of them separate from each other, I do feel that Sweat would earn the contract before Young, but unless either of them break double digit sacks and show true game changing ability, I don't expect either to be resigned to a LTD.

I know this opinion isn't popular around here, but I do think one could earn a LTD, but the likelihood that both are gone is still high, IMO. 

If they have similar production they should re-sign Chase just based on age alone. 
 

Sweat is going to be 28 next year and will be starting a 4 or 5 year long term deal making around or over $20 mil a year?

He’ll be making $20 mil a year being 30 years old & older and very likely not getting double digit sacks a year.

Meanwhile, if Chase gets the long term deal he’ll just be hitting his prime when he’s making $20 mil plus a year.

[Slappy Mc]

4 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

Of course Sweat will be cheaper, he’s going to be 28 next year and before we know it he’ll be on the downside of his career in his 30s towards the end of his deal while he’s making $20 mil a year and putting up like 5 sacks a season.

So pretty much no different than his entire career...

[turtle28]

3 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

So pretty much no different than his entire career...

The obvious difference is that on his rookie deal Sweat was making less than $10 mil until this year. So getting 5 to 9 sacks while making that is different than making $20 mil in your 30s, getting only 5 sacks and being a step slower than you were 5 years before.
 

Re-signing Sweat means we’d be doubling his salary as his career is winding down. That doesn’t make much sense to me at all.

[Slappy Mc]

Just now, turtle28 said:

If they have similar production they should re-sign Chase just based on age alone. 
 

Sweat is going to be 28 next year and will be starting a 4 or 5 year long term deal making around or over $20 mil a year?

He’ll be making $20 mil a year being 30 years old & older and very likely not getting double digit sacks a year.

Meanwhile, if Chase gets the long term deal he’ll just be hitting his prime when he’s making $20 mil plus a year.

The issue that I think you are running into is that it seems you believe we HAVE to resign either one of them. That is simply not the case. 

If they both perform well (10+ sacks each, etc.), but neither of them separate from the other, it's going to be a preference from the F.O./ new owners for which one gets a LTD. In this scenario, I think at least one of them would get resigned. 

If one outperforms the other (with at least 10+ sacks), it's an easy decision who deserves the LTD, but still a FO decision if they want to give them that or tag and make them play on another 1 year prove it deal. In this scenario I'm not sure what the team would do. I would imagine a LTD is offered for what the team believes is "fair". 

If one outperforms the other (but the numbers are not great), I think the team evaluates whether to tag the DE that performed the best and offer neither a LTD. (This is the most likely scenario IMO)

The problem is LTD with either is not an absolute must. Draft position does not outweigh production. Just because you were drafted early doesn't mean you are going to get or earn a LTD faster than anyone drafted later that has the production to back it up.

Again, I would love for both of them to get long term deals, specifically because that would mean that the production on the field warranted it. They are both off to a great start this year. I really hope they both continue that trend and that we look foolish for not picking up Chase's 5th year option/ for not signing Montez to a LTD sooner. 

[lavar703]

26 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

This post is exactly why, before the season, I suggested that neither were going to get a LTD (barring a historic season).

To answer your question however, Sweat had a huge lead over Chase before the season on earning a LTD. A lot of it has to do with availability. Also, Sweats stats are simply just better than Chase's. Even this year (I know Chase missed week 1) Sweat has the advantage on his production. 

Chase: 2.5 sacks, 7 tackles, 2 assist, 3 TFL, 4 QB hits

Montez: 3 sacks, 12 tackles, 3 assist, 4 TFL, 7 QB hits, 2 FF.

If neither of them separate from each other, I do feel that Sweat would earn the contract before Young, but unless either of them break double digit sacks and show true game changing ability, I don't expect either to be resigned to a LTD.

I know this opinion isn't popular around here, but I do think one could earn a LTD, but the likelihood that both are gone is still high, IMO. 

I don’t think it’s extreme to say a GM who let two premier (if these numbers continue) pass rushers walk in their prime would probably never work in the NFL again. Outside of letting Cousins walk for nothing in his prime it would be one of the most unprecedented decisions I think a GM would have ever made. You would be creating two holes on a roster for absolutely no good reason especially considering the amount of cap space this team will have and what they can spend. 

[Slappy Mc]

Just now, lavar703 said:

I don’t think it’s extreme to say a GM who let two premier (if these numbers continue) pass rushers walk in their prime would probably never work in the NFL again. Outside of letting Cousins walk for nothing in his prime it would be one of the most unprecedented decisions I think a GM would have ever made. You would be creating two holes on a roster for absolutely no good reason especially considering the amount of cap space this team will have and what they can spend. 

The highlighted is a big if, my friend. History would indicate neither of them sustain, but I would be ecstatic if they both continued their trajectories.

Also, in the scenario that neither get a LTD/Franchise tag, neither would have produced to a level of equating being called "premier pass rushers". 

If this team had two pass rushers that performed at a Pro Bowl/All-Pro level and they let both walk for absolutely nothing, 💯 those decision makers would never hold a FO job again. That's just not the scenario being described. 

[turtle28]

18 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

The issue that I think you are running into is that it seems you believe we HAVE to resign either one of them. That is simply not the case. 

If they both perform well (10+ sacks each, etc.), but neither of them separate from the other, it's going to be a preference from the F.O./ new owners for which one gets a LTD. In this scenario, I think at least one of them would get resigned. 

If one outperforms the other (with at least 10+ sacks), it's an easy decision who deserves the LTD, but still a FO decision if they want to give them that or tag and make them play on another 1 year prove it deal. In this scenario I'm not sure what the team would do. I would imagine a LTD is offered for what the team believes is "fair". 

If one outperforms the other (but the numbers are not great), I think the team evaluates whether to tag the DE that performed the best and offer neither a LTD. (This is the most likely scenario IMO)

The problem is LTD with either is not an absolute must. Draft position does not outweigh production. Just because you were drafted early doesn't mean you are going to get or earn a LTD faster than anyone drafted later that has the production to back it up.

Again, I would love for both of them to get long term deals, specifically because that would mean that the production on the field warranted it. They are both off to a great start this year. I really hope they both continue that trend and that we look foolish for not picking up Chase's 5th year option/ for not signing Montez to a LTD sooner. 

If I’m building a roster I DO NOT open up unnecessary HOLES. So, I don’t let players walk who I drafted, that fit my scheme and are in their mid 20s when they’re coming into their 2nd contract unless I truly can’t afford them, which is not the case here with Chase Young for ex. bc we have $83 mil in cap space before we even make cuts to someone such as Andrew Wylie next March which will open up another $1.5 million & Logan Thomas which is another $6.5 mil. We could have over $90 mil to re-sign Curl, Chase and/or Sweat. 
 

I said back a decade ago that I would’ve re-signed Rak on a long term deal and Kerrigan. If we had re-signed Rak, then we wouldn’t have had to draft Preston Smith in R2 in 2015 at #37 and instead you take Eddie Goldman to be your starting NT.

I’d much rather retain our drafted and developed players than go on a free agency spree like Snyder in 2000.

 

Edited October 2, 2023 by turtle28

[lavar703]

2 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

The highlighted is a big if, my friend. History would indicate neither of them sustain, but I would be ecstatic if they both continued their trajectories.

Also, in the scenario that neither get a LTD/Franchise tag, neither would have produced to a level of equating being called "premier pass rushers". 

If this team had two pass rushers that performed at a Pro Bowl/All-Pro level and they let both walk for absolutely nothing, 💯 those decision makers would never hold a FO job again. That's just not the scenario being described. 

That’s my premise though. IF this continues. Obviously if they regress to the mean it’s a very easy decision. 

[Slappy Mc]

10 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

The obvious difference is that on his rookie deal Sweat was making less than $10 mil until this year. So getting 5 to 9 sacks while making that is different than making $20 mil in your 30s, getting only 5 sacks and being a step slower than you were 5 years before.
 

Re-signing Sweat means we’d be doubling his salary as his career is winding down. That doesn’t make much sense to me at all.

Again, I'm not advocating for Sweat to receive a LTD. 

We are talking hypothetical WAY too early in the season based off decent production in the first 4 games. 

This conversation in week 14-18 makes a ton more sense, when you have almost a seasons worth of performances to measure.