Nabbs4u Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 (edited) 1 hour ago, Soko said: Have to think they see this as a great shot at a title, all things considered. At least with this core. Or in lamen terms, before having to pay Brock Purdy what 55-$60M? Even if they FTag Purdy which I honestly think they will do in an attempt to save money. That's still $42M. Not the $985K he's receiving for the 2024 season. This is the last season this core will financially be together. Just a fact. Edited July 22 by Nabbs4u Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 5 minutes ago, Nabbs4u said: Or in lamen terms, before having to pay Brock Purdy what 55-$60M? Even if they FTag Purdy which I honestly think they will do in an attempt to save money. That's still $42M. Not the $985K he's receiving for the 2024 season. This is the last season this core will financially be together. Just a fact. Hard to tag someone who has a year left on his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabbs4u Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 hour ago, Soko said: Hard to tag someone who has a year left on his contract. Love to see them justify "not pay him in 2025" if he yet again takes them to a NFCCG/SB appearance. 👌 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 hour ago, Nabbs4u said: Love to see them justify "not pay him in 2025" if he yet again takes them to a NFCCG/SB appearance. 👌 What’s that got to do with tagging Purdy in 2026, when his contract actually expires? Your first post confused me. Why’d you bring up the tag? The issue for keeping the core together in 2025 has much less to do with Purdy, and much more to do with big cap hits from Deebo, Trent, Bosa, Kittle, Warner, and Hargrave + not having Aiyuk under contract. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabbs4u Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 7 minutes ago, Soko said: What’s that got to do with tagging Purdy in 2026, when his contract actually expires? Your first post confused me. Why’d you bring up the tag? The issue for keeping the core together in 2025 has much less to do with Purdy, and much more to do with big cap hits from Deebo, Trent, Bosa, Kittle, Warner, and Hargrave + not having Aiyuk under contract. If you are not planning on tagging him in 26', why wouldn't you give him the contract extension in 2025 he deserves? To be actually paid amongst his peers? Not making 6 figures in 2025 because he was Mr. Irrelevant? So either they are going to sign him to a long term extension in 2025 at market value. Or They are going to criminally take advantage of his rookie contract which he has clearly outplayed if yet again the 49ers go deep in the playoffs. Led by Purdy. Unless they plan on doing the latter to their supposed FQB, those players you listed can not be kept with a FQB making $50M+. Hence 2024 is it for this particular "core" with the upcoming cap hits/contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 5 hours ago, Forge said: I think they'd just tag and trade him and I'd imagine that gets them a second, tbh. I don't think he just goes to market Fans suggest tag and trades far more often than they actually happen, which is extremely rare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 16 minutes ago, 43M said: Fans suggest tag and trades far more often than they actually happen, which is extremely rare. But they have shown up a little more often since about 2019, and aiyuk is the caliber of free agent that you would do it for. It's more about whether the niners will have the money to carry the tag for however long or would take to move him, which is tougher, but not impossible. It can be an issue though. Pretty sure that's the reason Miami didn't do it with Wilkins. Don't think the niners want to carry the cap hit for Aiyuk without flexibility, so I don't think he'll play on the tag. I can't remember ever suggesting a tag and trade for a previous niner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 Letting a receiver that you're willing to give 26-27 million a year for.... And that you're asking for at least a first round pick for to trade... Go for only a comp pick would be a failure by the niners organization. Especially since it shouldn't be that difficult to to carry the cap temporarily. Purdy will likely get his extension after June like everyone else, so his extension plays no role. But they are going to lose a lot of talent next year for nothing. They can't let Aiyuk go down that way too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 8 hours ago, Nabbs4u said: If you are not planning on tagging him in 26', why wouldn't you give him the contract extension in 2025 he deserves? To be actually paid amongst his peers? Not making 6 figures in 2025 because he was Mr. Irrelevant? So either they are going to sign him to a long term extension in 2025 at market value. Or They are going to criminally take advantage of his rookie contract which he has clearly outplayed if yet again the 49ers go deep in the playoffs. Led by Purdy. Unless they plan on doing the latter to their supposed FQB, those players you listed can not be kept with a FQB making $50M+. Hence 2024 is it for this particular "core" with the upcoming cap hits/contracts. Yeah, but you said you thought they’d tag him to save money. How does tagging him in 2026 affect the core in 2025? You realize that even if they extend Purdy during/prior to the 2025 season, that his cap hit is unlikely to exceed $50M in year one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 They will ride out the season and then get a 3rd for him when he walks. Unless they implode, there is no reason to trade him at this point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabbs4u Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 8 hours ago, Soko said: Yeah, but you said you thought they’d tag him to save money. How does tagging him in 2026 affect the core in 2025? You realize that even if they extend Purdy during/prior to the 2025 season, that his cap hit is unlikely to exceed $50M in year one? I bet that Cap hit won't be 6 figures? You're the cap guru. You tell me the going Cap hit on a $50M annual salary with upwards of a $150-70M Guaranteed, including signing bonus? His 2025 salary going to be 985K? Didn't think so. IF THEY PLAN on tagging him in 2026, guess who won't get an extension in 2025 be disgruntled and criminally under paid to "keep this core" together past 2024. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 5 minutes ago, Nabbs4u said: I bet that Cap hit won't be 6 figures? You're the cap guru. You tell me the going Cap hit on a $50M annual salary with upwards of a $150-70M Guaranteed, including signing bonus? His 2025 salary going to be 985K? Didn't think so. IF THEY PLAN on tagging him in 2026, guess who won't get an extension in 2025 be disgruntled and criminally under paid to "keep this core" together past 2024. I don’t even know what you’re saying at this point. You said you were betting on SF franchising Purdy, which can only be done in 2026. If your prediction happens, Purdy’s cap hit will be NFL pocket change in 2025. And if Purdy’s cap his is that low in 2025, I don’t see how he’s the issue with keeping the team together for 2025. To answer your strange question, just go look at other QB’s deals. Herbert’s $52M AAV deal held a $8M cap hit the season after it was signed and it’ll be $19M this year. Burrow’s was $19.5M in Y1, and is $29.5M now. Hurts’ was $6.1M and now $13.5M. Lamar’s was $22M and is now $32.4M. Those numbers are all smaller than Deebo, Trent, Bosa, Warner, Kittle, etc. The cause of 2025’s potential “breakup” isn’t really so much Purdy, as they could keep him on that cheap deal (as you said you expected) - it’s the rest of the guys. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaidersAreOne Posted July 24 Author Share Posted July 24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 9 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said: Aiyuk is obviously no shock. Trent is an interesting situation. There were whispers earlier in the off season that he wanted something done with his deal. He missed some of mini, but it was because of his daughter's graduation, I think. Then he attended the rest of the time. He's generally given off the earlier practices all year as well, so its possible that this is just a, "come in whenever" situation. But worth monitoring because of the contract whispers earlier. If it is a contract issue, I think that's easier to fix. Can probably just guarantee his salary this year and next or something and get him back if that is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Refugee Posted August 7 Share Posted August 7 On 7/24/2024 at 12:49 PM, Forge said: Aiyuk is obviously no shock. Trent is an interesting situation. There were whispers earlier in the off season that he wanted something done with his deal. He missed some of mini, but it was because of his daughter's graduation, I think. Then he attended the rest of the time. He's generally given off the earlier practices all year as well, so its possible that this is just a, "come in whenever" situation. But worth monitoring because of the contract whispers earlier. If it is a contract issue, I think that's easier to fix. Can probably just guarantee his salary this year and next or something and get him back if that is the case. So, I did some lurking on your page but feel like it’s better to ask in the general thread, what do you realistically think you can get back for Aiyuk at this point? On the one hand, he’s a talented player and young enough to continue to grow. On the other, he’ll want top money at a very premium position and only has one year left. It’s also pretty public that he wants out of SF. Obviously none of us really know but I don’t see SF getting the same return as GB did for Adams at this stage (a 1st and 2nd in the upcoming draft). I could be wrong but that was all negotiated in a more collaborative way and this one seems to have some bad blood. Anyway, rumor was they weren’t taking less than a 1st but at some point Lynch might need to just get something reasonable for the disgruntled player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts