Slappy Mc Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 I still think we have to swing big on one of the big tickets DEs in FA. Burns, Huff, Allen or Hunter are at the too of my wish lists. Danielle Hunter may be one of the realistic ones. Been on short term contracts for a while and deserves a LTD after producing year after year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARTMONK HOF Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 4 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said: I still think we have to swing big on one of the big tickets DEs in FA. Burns, Huff, Allen or Hunter are at the too of my wish lists. Danielle Hunter may be one of the realistic ones. Been on short term contracts for a while and deserves a LTD after producing year after year. I think Burns/Allen will want too much $. Huff (25) is 4 years younger than Hunter (29). I think Huff would be a better option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSkinGM Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 1 minute ago, ARTMONK HOF said: I think Burns/Allen will want too much $. Huff (25) is 4 years younger than Hunter (29). I think Huff would be a better option. If we're spending BIG for an edge guy- why didn't we just pay Sweat . ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 3 minutes ago, RSkinGM said: If we're spending BIG for an edge guy- why didn't we just pay Sweat . ? Burns is better and we got a high 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARTMONK HOF Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 (edited) JP Finlay Adam Peters says the Commanders have had talks with Kam Curl’s representatives and they’re exploring options Nicki Jhabvala Adam Peters said the Commanders have had talks with safety Kam Curl’s reps and will continue those. “I can just say from playing against him … when I was in San Francisco, he was always one of the best players on the defense, a guy we had to watch out for, a guy we had to game plan for. So, a lot of respect for him. I’ve heard great things about him. … We’re going to definitely explore that and see if it fits into our overall plans.” Edited February 27 by ARTMONK HOF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSkinGM Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 4 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: Burns is better and we got a high 2nd. Swaet 12.5 sacks, Burns 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 1 minute ago, RSkinGM said: Swaet 12.5 sacks, Burns 8 Even if you want to call them equal in ability, shifting the cap from one to the other while adding a high 2nd is good business. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offbyone Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 3 hours ago, naptownskinsfan said: It was an absolutely worst-case scenario increase for our situation. Right because in a perfect world, the salary cap would have gone down like 2021. I guess more is more. In 2022 it went up slightly more than it did this year so it could be worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappy Mc Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 26 minutes ago, ARTMONK HOF said: I think Burns/Allen will want too much $. Huff (25) is 4 years younger than Hunter (29). I think Huff would be a better option. Hunter has had significantly better production for a longer amount of time. I'll take a consistent force over a guy who did it for one year. I have always liked Hunter and think he would thrive with DQ and JW scheming him open. Also, we aren't short on cash. Undoubtedly, we have lots of areas to improve and a consistent winner on the edge should be a top priority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 3 minutes ago, offbyone said: Right because in a perfect world, the salary cap would have gone down like 2021. I guess more is more. In 2022 it went up slightly more than it did this year so it could be worse. A 30% increase is nuts. I wish they would do the increases a year in advance. A moderate, year over year increase like MLB’s luxury tax thresholds makes more sense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappy Mc Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 28 minutes ago, RSkinGM said: If we're spending BIG for an edge guy- why didn't we just pay Sweat . ? Sweat is a good player. He just wasn't a game changer and big dollars should go to people who win on a consistent basis. This past season was Sweats first double digit sack season. You could absolutely make an argument that it was coaching that held him back, but he disappeared a lot during his time here. Getting a 2nd round pick and not paying him what he got paid, was the right call. I also think the Bears made the right call as well. Sweat immediately improved their defense, unlike that other defensive end we traded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSkinGM Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 19 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: Even if you want to call them equal in ability, shifting the cap from one to the other while adding a high 2nd is good business. good way to look at it.. money cancels but you get a second -Genius ! Damm, maybe you should never give second contracts ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappy Mc Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 1 minute ago, naptownskinsfan said: A 30% increase is nuts. I wish they would do the increases a year in advance. A moderate, year over year increase like MLB’s luxury tax thresholds makes more sense. The crazy thing is, there are still a handful of teams over the cap right now too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offbyone Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 11 minutes ago, naptownskinsfan said: A 30% increase is nuts. I wish they would do the increases a year in advance. A moderate, year over year increase like MLB’s luxury tax thresholds makes more sense. A year in advance makes total sense for teams to plan, or even longer. If they could make the increase more consistent, we could eliminate a lot of holdouts and stuff like that. I might be confused though, I think it was 13% not 30%. 224M->255M ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSkinGM Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 13 minutes ago, offbyone said: A year in advance makes total sense for teams to plan, or even longer. If they could make the increase more consistent, we could eliminate a lot of holdouts and stuff like that. I might be confused though, I think it was 13% not 30%. 224M->255M ? Almost 14% but sounds right . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts