Dolphins extend WR Jaylen Waddle (3 years, $84.75M, $76M gtd)

[Jakuvious]

6 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said:

It'll probably be tight, but there's currently room to move things around. Cap continues to grow too, of course.

I mean, he'd be the WR1 on the majority of teams in the league. Throwing shade because he plays on the same roster as Tyreek Hill is kinda silly. As someone who has watched every snap of Waddle as a pro, I'm quite confident on relying on him post-Hill, he's been a fantastic player. I'm not even entirely sure what the basis for his detractors even is. If you'd like to elaborate, be my guest.

6th least projected cap space in 2026, with the 8th fewest players under contract. Cap goes up, but it does that for everyone. In a relative sense, it's still going to be a very bad cap situation.

I just don't come away that impressed. I don't have much more to say than that. Maybe I'm too colored by his performances against KC. I felt like Spags's gameplan was to make sure we stop Hill and the run game, and the rest will take care of itself. So maybe that left too much of an impression on me. But like, I spent years arguing that Hill was more than just speed, that he had other elite traits in his route running, his agility, and his ball tracking. I don't see that kind of thing in Waddle. He's not like, Mecole Hardman or John Ross or something, obviously, where he's speed and nothing else. But the vibe I get is that he has elite speed and is just kind of solid at everything else. He's not an elite separator from a route running perspective, he isn't high pointing balls or breaking tackles after the catch. He's getting open targets on in breaking routes and screens because that's what that offense can create for him. I don't see him creating as much for himself as an A.J. Brown or Ja'Marr Chase or something. I just don't see an elite overall WR, which to me is what you should be getting at that price tag.

[MrOaktown_56]

1 hour ago, Jakuvious said:

6th least projected cap space in 2026, with the 8th fewest players under contract. Cap goes up, but it does that for everyone. In a relative sense, it's still going to be a very bad cap situation.

I just don't come away that impressed. I don't have much more to say than that. Maybe I'm too colored by his performances against KC. I felt like Spags's gameplan was to make sure we stop Hill and the run game, and the rest will take care of itself. So maybe that left too much of an impression on me. But like, I spent years arguing that Hill was more than just speed, that he had other elite traits in his route running, his agility, and his ball tracking. I don't see that kind of thing in Waddle. He's not like, Mecole Hardman or John Ross or something, obviously, where he's speed and nothing else. But the vibe I get is that he has elite speed and is just kind of solid at everything else. He's not an elite separator from a route running perspective, he isn't high pointing balls or breaking tackles after the catch. He's getting open targets on in breaking routes and screens because that's what that offense can create for him. I don't see him creating as much for himself as an A.J. Brown or Ja'Marr Chase or something. I just don't see an elite overall WR, which to me is what you should be getting at that price tag.

For someone to "deserve" WR1 pay for me, they need to make their $ outside, be able to beat/produce against press, #1 corners, and double coverage. I came under fire for a take about another WR and my rationale was the same. Waddle is a damn good receiver, but he doesn't do the things I mentioned above on a consistent basis like the true cream of the crop. Doesn't mean I wouldn't have paid him if I was Miami. Of course I would have. But you can pay someone as the market dictates and it can still be criticized accordingly.

[squire12]

7 hours ago, Soko said:

Yes, more commonly referred to as dead money, cap hits, and savings. Tyreek on the roster will cost Miami $56M against their cap. Releasing him would cost Miami $11M to have him off the team. 

No ****.  Hill costs $11M regardless.  It's the $45 in added cap hit that is important.

7 hours ago, Soko said:

No shot he plays for $56M when the dead cap hit is only $11M. My prediction is they either give him a short extension with void years, or give him a raise that tacks on void years. 

So an extension at $30M in cap hit for 26 and 27 with added dead cap with void years?

[Soko]

8 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

For someone to "deserve" WR1 pay for me, they need to make their $ outside, be able to beat/produce against press, #1 corners, and double coverage. I came under fire for a take about another WR and my rationale was the same. Waddle is a damn good receiver, but he doesn't do the things I mentioned above on a consistent basis like the true cream of the crop. Doesn't mean I wouldn't have paid him if I was Miami. Of course I would have. But you can pay someone as the market dictates and it can still be criticized accordingly.

Worth noting, Waddle’s three total 100+ yard games came in 2+ score wins vs NE and NYJ x2. Two out of those three, Tyreek also was producing 100+ yards a clip. Only other 80+ yard game was also a win vs NE. Waddle hasn’t really been a guy you look to when the offense needs it, he’s more like the counter punch when teams are focusing on Hill/the run game, but even then it doesn’t seem like he was relied upon all that much. Certainly wasn’t in the playoff game. 

[TheKillerNacho]

11 hours ago, Jakuvious said:

6th least projected cap space in 2026, with the 8th fewest players under contract. Cap goes up, but it does that for everyone. In a relative sense, it's still going to be a very bad cap situation.

I mean, sure, but a lot of that is the year of Tyreek's contract that the consensus here agrees we will not probably pay (he'll be extended or released). I'm not saying our cap has a ton of space that we can afford to sign free agents, but it's in a manageable situation that shouldn't deter resigning our own players. Considering this contract is about the same Amon-Ra St. Brown just signed an extension for earlier this offseason (and less than $10M more than Nico Collins over the same amount of years), I'd say that doing so now actually will save us money (assuming we wouldn't just let him walk)... I think it's really quite a bargain.

Quote

Maybe I'm too colored by his performances against KC.

Probably what it is, tbh. Not to sound too rude, but I can't really respond to your feelings, ultimately. He should remain an extremely productive player moving forward, perhaps moreso when Tyreek is out of the picture.

[TheKillerNacho]

9 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

For someone to "deserve" WR1 pay for me, they need to make their $ outside, be able to beat/produce against press, #1 corners, and double coverage. I came under fire for a take about another WR and my rationale was the same. Waddle is a damn good receiver, but he doesn't do the things I mentioned above on a consistent basis like the true cream of the crop.

While it's true he hasn't faced double coverage much outside his rookie year, the huge reason Tyreek Hill is moved around so much presnap is to get him in favorable matchups. As the player who usually stays on the perimeter, Waddle does face opposing team's "CB1s" more often than other "WR2"s woluld. Additionally, he is actually likely our best receiver at beating press coverage (as opposed to Hill, who tends to struggle with it due to his size).

30 minutes ago, Soko said:

Worth noting, Waddle’s three total 100+ yard games came in 2+ score wins vs NE and NYJ x2. Two out of those three, Tyreek also was producing 100+ yards a clip. Only other 80+ yard game was also a win vs NE. Waddle hasn’t really been a guy you look to when the offense needs it, he’s more like the counter punch when teams are focusing on Hill/the run game, but even then it doesn’t seem like he was relied upon all that much. Certainly wasn’t in the playoff game. 

I'd honestly argue the presence of Tyreek Hill hurts Waddle's production more than helps due to simply being targeted less, tbh. In Waddle's rookie year (the year before Hill was signed), he was targeted 140 times in 16 games (104 receptions). In the two seasons after signing Hill, his targets dropped to just 117 in 17 games and 104 in 14 games respectively (75, 72 receptions), despite his efficiency actually improving. Last season he was also nursing a few niggling injuries that sapped his production a bit even when he was active.

Regarding the playoff game... yeah, but that goes for the whole team tbh.

...

At the end of the day, he's done everything Miami has asked of him at an extremely high level. The fact this role doesn't match that of a typical WR1 so far (outside of his rookie year) can make analysis more difficult, but I can't hold it against him nor do I worry about his ability to function as a true #1 WR when he eventually is asked to retain that role.

[Jakuvious]

1 hour ago, TheKillerNacho said:

While it's true he hasn't faced double coverage much outside his rookie year, the huge reason Tyreek Hill is moved around so much presnap is to get him in favorable matchups. As the player who usually stays on the perimeter, Waddle does face opposing team's "CB1s" more often than other "WR2"s woluld. Additionally, he is actually likely our best receiver at beating press coverage (as opposed to Hill, who tends to struggle with it due to his size).

Not sure the stats back you up on that one.

Also, Tyreek is bigger/heavier than Waddle. Just shorter.

[sparky151]

20 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

So you believe it's better to sign a player 2 yrs late, then 2 years early? Better to wait and see, let the market fail where it may? Rather then being proactive and get that same player extended earlier, saving potentially 10's of Millions in the end?

The Eagles were wrong to extended Smitty from the same 2021 draft class as Chase? The Dolphins with Waddle?

God help you if the Bengals take that approach with the best player on that team.

Hell maybe in 2027 you guys can get Ja'marr at a "team friendly" $40M APY contract? 👌

If the Bengals gave Chase a market value extension now, it would cost them tens of millions. He's under contract for 2 more years at a combined 28 mil or so. Let's say his fair market value is 33 mil per year. He'd be worth more than the tag numbers too. The Bengals don't need to use the tag on another player so he'd be the priority. The team has the leverage here and Mike Brown knows how to use it. The team would be happy to sign him to an extension if he takes the reality of the situation into account. If not, they'll get the best 7 years of his career from him and move on. 

This is pretty much the opposite of the Cowboys where Dak has the leverage. The Bengals don't use void years or guarantee money past year 1 for non-QBs. So they are never in cap trouble and can afford to pay decently. 

 

19 hours ago, Soko said:

Cool, I’d still look to trade him, assuming he wants to be in this ballpark. Assuming Tee shows up to camp both seasons (no shot he wouldn’t hold out if he got tagged again), creates zero problems, still comes in relatively healthy, and produces at his usual rate - I don’t want a WR2 taking up $26M+ in cap space. It’s not AAV, it’s a one year hit. These other deals have flexibility, their cap hits aren’t that big yet. Not having all that drama with Higgins with a cap hit around 10% of the cap, pass.

This never happens. Kirk is probably the only example, and Washington F’d themselves in doing so.

Bengals are about 20 mil under the cap currently and about 45 mil under the cap for next year (plus whatever they carry over). So they can easily afford Higgins at 26 mil if they tag him and keep him. Their hope is that one of the younger receivers like Andre Iosivas or Jermane Burton play well this year and are ready to take over. In that case they may well tag Tee and trade him. I doubt he'd mind too much if they establish 26 mil as his baseline. He certainly isn't going to hold out, he may come to camp late ala Jessie Bates (they have the same agent) but he'll be playing on his tag number and in camp well before the end of preseason. He wants to have a good contract year. 

[Soko]

1 hour ago, TheKillerNacho said:

I'd honestly argue the presence of Tyreek Hill hurts Waddle's production more than helps due to simply being targeted less, tbh. In Waddle's rookie year (the year before Hill was signed), he was targeted 140 times in 16 games (104 receptions). In the two seasons after signing Hill, his targets dropped to just 117 in 17 games and 104 in 14 games respectively (75, 72 receptions), despite his efficiency actually improving. Last season he was also nursing a few niggling injuries that sapped his production a bit even when he was active.

Regarding the playoff game... yeah, but that goes for the whole team tbh.

Efficiency up, bulk down, that’s exactly what you’d expect out of a guy taking a back seat to Tyreek Hill. It is what it is. I just don’t see Waddle as being the game changer that this price tag warrants. There’s a reason the W/L correlates highly with Hill’s production, and less so with Waddle’s. 

Swinging big on WR2 while you’re facing bad cap situations, not having your QB under contract for 2025, losing multiple starters on the OL, and losing your only trench player on defense, certainly sounds like a luxury to me.  hard pressed to find a better example of a luxury than that.

[TheKillerNacho]

17 minutes ago, Jakuvious said:

Not sure the stats back you up on that one.

Also, Tyreek is bigger/heavier than Waddle. Just shorter.

In fairness, "If you have more on ball snaps than Tyreek and face more press snaps than Tyreek but get half the catches and less than half the yards of Tyreek against press" applies to a vast majority of WRs in the league.

I retract my statement about Hill in man, although in my experience it's moreso because he's successful at using presnap movement to simply bypass it.

[TheKillerNacho]

9 minutes ago, Soko said:

 There’s a reason the W/L correlates highly with Hill’s production, and less so with Waddle’s.

???

Waddle's production correlates to wins far more than Tyreek's does (not that this is a strong argument for or against either player anyway) - literally all of Waddle's best games in 2022 were wins, while none came in losses. This is also true for Tyreek, but not in 2022 when some of his best games came in losses. If anything, the lack of passing success in general is what correlated to W/L.

Quote

Efficiency up, bulk down, that’s exactly what you’d expect out of a guy taking a back seat to Tyreek Hill.

i have not argued against this point, 2022 and 2023 have seen gameplans to highlight their big FA acquisition. But he showed more than capable of being a prodcutive WR1 in his rookie year, and has only progressed as a player since then.

Quote

Swinging big on WR2 while you’re facing bad cap situations, not having your QB under contract for 2025, losing multiple starters on the OL, and losing your only trench player on defense, certainly sounds like a luxury to me.  hard pressed to find a better example of a luxury than that.

He will be the WR1 on this team most if not all of the contract's added years.

[Jakuvious]

12 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said:

In fairness, "If you have more on ball snaps than Tyreek and face more press snaps than Tyreek but get half the catches and less than half the yards of Tyreek against press" applies to a vast majority of WRs in the league.

But when you specifically called out him being better than Hill against press, yet he was significantly less productive against press coverage on more snaps against press coverage, your statement doesn't exactly track. Most WRs are worse than Hill at most things, sure, but no one specifically stated that any other WRs were better than Hill against press, like you did with Waddle.

Also, I'm highly doubtful that the vast majority of WRs would have both more snaps against press and half the production against press, but okay. One or the other, sure. Probably not both.

[Soko]

8 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

Bengals are about 20 mil under the cap currently and about 45 mil under the cap for next year (plus whatever they carry over). So they can easily afford Higgins at 26 mil if they tag him and keep him. Their hope is that one of the younger receivers like Andre Iosivas or Jermane Burton play well this year and are ready to take over. In that case they may well tag Tee and trade him. I doubt he'd mind too much if they establish 26 mil as his baseline. He certainly isn't going to hold out, he may come to camp late ala Jessie Bates (they have the same agent) but he'll be playing on his tag number and in camp well before the end of preseason. He wants to have a good contract year. 

 

20 hours ago, Soko said:

Cool, I’d still look to trade him, assuming he wants to be in this ballpark. Assuming Tee shows up to camp both seasons (no shot he wouldn’t hold out if he got tagged again), creates zero problems, still comes in relatively healthy, and produces at his usual rate - I don’t want a WR2 taking up $26M+ in cap space. 

Higgins has already been vocal about requesting a trade, and outing the team as putting virtually zero effort into re-signing him (surprise surprise, Cincy ownership). If you think Higgins is going to be tagged again in 2025, and then a third time in 2026 without any issues? I’ve got a bridge to sell you. 

I’m not paying Higgins this amount, he’s not worth that IMO. What the Bengals’ plan is remains irrelevant, just saying I wouldn’t want my favorite team giving Higgins a $28.5M AAV.

[TheKillerNacho]

4 minutes ago, Jakuvious said:

But when you specifically called out him being better than Hill against press, yet he was significantly less productive against press coverage on more snaps against press coverage, your statement doesn't exactly track. Most WRs are worse than Hill at most things, sure, but no one specifically stated that any other WRs were better than Hill against press, like you did with Waddle.

Also, I'm highly doubtful that most WRs would have both more snaps against press and half the production against press, but okay.

I retract my claim that he's necissarily better than Hill at it but I'm not entirely sure what his source is (I can't find hard data about it, at any rate), and I assume is including instances where presnap movement allowed Hill to simply blaze past press coverage (I've certainly witnessed Hill get clobbered by it when he isn't in motion several times last season).

[Soko]

1 minute ago, TheKillerNacho said:

???

Waddle's production correlates to wins far more than Tyreek's does (not that this is a strong argument for or against either player anyway) - literally all of Waddle's best games in 2022 were wins, while none came in losses. This is also true for Tyreek, but not in 2022 when some of his best games came in losses. If anything, the lack of passing success in general is what correlated to W/L.

Waddle under 100 yards (2023): 7-4

Hill under 100 yards (2023): 2-4

Waddle under 100 (2022): 6-5

Hill under 100 (2022): 6-4

Combined 13-9 for Waddle, 8-8 for Hill. 

1 minute ago, TheKillerNacho said:

i have not argued against this point, 2022 and 2023 have seen gameplans to highlight their big FA acquisition. But he showed more than capable of being a prodcutive WR1 in his rookie year, and has only progressed as a player since then.

He had a fine rookie season, a good one. He was also force fed and the offense sucked. 

1 minute ago, TheKillerNacho said:

He will be the WR1 on this team most if not all of the contract's added years.

In the same way Michael Pittman is a WR1. Waddle’s an elite complementary piece more so than he is an engine of an offense, IMO. I don’t see how recent history disagrees with that. No, he hasn’t had the opportunity (really) to prove that yet, but paying him as if he already has while also having Hill on the books for $100M+ these next three years, isn’t a risk I’d want to take.