.Buzz Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 Yes please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KhanYouDigIt Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 I think our 35-40 million includes that rollover. Going by spotrac.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VLoo Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 9 minutes ago, KhanYouDigIt said: I think our 35-40 million includes that rollover. Going by spotrac.com Was my initial thought too, but that doesn't seem to be the consensus on the twitters. Guess we'll have to wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 29 minutes ago, .Buzz said: This is a good question... I mean, we were never in "omg cap crisis" territory. But it helps to have cut Bortles hit for this coming season in half. That's basically an extra $10M of wiggle room by itself. Makes a difference. In addition to also having made our easy cuts and stuff. Still have a big chunk of that money that will inevitably go into ARob's pocket. Which i fully endorse, but will put a surprisingly large dent in things. Plus having to get our draft picks signed, which can add up pretty quickly. And we do still need to either re-sign or replace a starting Nickel and at least one Offensive Guard with guys who will be far from "spare change" just to get back on track with last year. But Bortles new contract takes us from, "everything's fine but we might have to make a couple hard choices and no walking around money in FA" to "totally fine, within reason". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 33 minutes ago, .Buzz said: Yes please. I wouldn't mind Pugh, or Sitton really. But at the same time...have to be a bit wary of big FA interior linemen contracts. In a league this starved for quality OL, always have to kick some tires and check under the hood to figure out why their original team doesn't think they're worth it. The team most familiar with them. With Sitton, it certainly seems like just an age thing more than anything. Bears want to get aggressively younger. If Pugh hits the market though...hmmm...Giants aren't exactly overrun with quality young linemen. Unless he just absolutely wants out of that mess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Buzz Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 10 minutes ago, Tugboat said: I wouldn't mind Pugh, or Sitton really. But at the same time...have to be a bit wary of big FA interior linemen contracts. In a league this starved for quality OL, always have to kick some tires and check under the hood to figure out why their original team doesn't think they're worth it. The team most familiar with them. With Sitton, it certainly seems like just an age thing more than anything. Bears want to get aggressively younger. If Pugh hits the market though...hmmm...Giants aren't exactly overrun with quality young linemen. Unless he just absolutely wants out of that mess? It sounds like Pugh is definitely gone. I am a bit hesitant on just offering our contracts with our situation, but I'm going to defer to our FO who has done a phenomenal job with our cap situation on this one. If we're in on him, we clearly think we are ok long-term to do it without affecting our young core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 3 minutes ago, .Buzz said: It sounds like Pugh is definitely gone. I am a bit hesitant on just offering our contracts with our situation, but I'm going to defer to our FO who has done a phenomenal job with our cap situation on this one. If we're in on him, we clearly think we are ok long-term to do it without affecting our young core. I'm not gonna just write management a blank cheque for support. As a whole, they really have done a good job thus far of keeping our cap situation in great shape. They've also been playing on "easy" mode until now though. With miles of headroom, and very little expectation. They're entering a phase now, where the headroom isn't infinite anymore, and the timeline is compressed...a bad contract even for a year, is wasted money that matters more because it's sacrificed opportunity on something not helping get this team deeper into the playoffs. They're at a place where just one or two missteps can be debilitating. And they've made their missteps, even with OLinemen. Hardly batting 100% on those deals. Just...reason for caution i think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Buzz Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 Just now, Tugboat said: I'm not gonna just write management a blank cheque for support. As a whole, they really have done a good job thus far of keeping our cap situation in great shape. They've also been playing on "easy" mode until now though. With miles of headroom, and very little expectation. They're entering a phase now, where the headroom isn't infinite anymore, and the timeline is compressed...a bad contract even for a year, is wasted money that matters more because it's sacrificed opportunity on something not helping get this team deeper into the playoffs. They're at a place where just one or two missteps can be debilitating. And they've made their missteps, even with OLinemen. Hardly batting 100% on those deals. Just...reason for caution i think. I am. Why shouldn't I? John Idzik is known for how great he is with cap management. They have been here for 5 years now and I have yet to see a contract that is structured that affects us/has really hurt us down the line. Has there been FA's that haven't worked out/we missed on? Sure. But with the Bortles extension, consistently putting our contracts to FA's that we are able to get out of in 2 years or so with limited/no dead money, etc. I am most definitely leaving it to them. They know much more about our cap situation, and you definitely know they are aware of Fowler/Ngakoue/Jalen/Jack etc. on the horizon needing deals. Doesn't mean whatever they do I'll be on board with, but if we are pursuing an OL that will cost a lucrative contract, I definitely trust that they know they'll be fine in the future for the other guys which is all I'm worried about. We're in SB contention with our current squad, we desperately need interior OL help and if we want Blake/rookie QB to succeed we need to stack up talent around him. Pugh would be a big addition for our OL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 5 minutes ago, .Buzz said: I am. Why shouldn't I? John Idzik is known for how great he is with cap management. They have been here for 5 years now and I have yet to see a contract that is structured that affects us/has really hurt us down the line. Has there been FA's that haven't worked out/we missed on? Sure. But with the Bortles extension, consistently putting our contracts to FA's that we are able to get out of in 2 years or so with limited/no dead money, etc. I am most definitely leaving it to them. They know much more about our cap situation, and you definitely know they are aware of Fowler/Ngakoue/Jalen/Jack etc. on the horizon needing deals. Doesn't mean whatever they do I'll be on board with, but if we are pursuing an OL that will cost a lucrative contract, I definitely trust that they know they'll be fine in the future for the other guys which is all I'm worried about. We're in SB contention with our current squad, we desperately need interior OL help and if we want Blake/rookie QB to succeed we need to stack up talent around him. Pugh would be a big addition for our OL. Your last paragraph is exactly the answer to your first questions. It's less about years down the road problems, and more about this year problems. A Zane Beadles megaflop is a total non-issue when you have unlimited space and a terrible going-nowhere team on the field with no expectations. If you sign a Beadles when you're gunning for SB contention right now though...that's a massive problem. Even if you can walk away easily after the year. That's money that, as you said...we desperately need to spend on OL help (or some sort of talent stacked up around Bortles) for this year. Bad money spent when cap is tighter and expectations are higher, is more detrimental than bad money spent when nothing really matters. You can't have "throwaway" contracts the same way. Significant cap allocations have to be contributing, because any money that isn't playing close to value...is money that could have, and should have been spent on something else. It's a higher stakes game now. They're at the big boy table. Lower margin for error. As much as they've done a great job (and they 100% have) in keeping flexibility open and able to walk away clean...the cutesy "audition style" big money contract is more detrimental now if it goes bust. With great expectations come great consequences or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Buzz Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 4 minutes ago, Tugboat said: Your last paragraph is exactly the answer to your first questions. It's less about years down the road problems, and more about this year problems. A Zane Beadles megaflop is a total non-issue when you have unlimited space and a terrible going-nowhere team on the field with no expectations. If you sign a Beadles when you're gunning for SB contention right now though...that's a massive problem. Even if you can walk away easily after the year. That's money that, as you said...we desperately need to spend on OL help (or some sort of talent stacked up around Bortles) for this year. Bad money spent when cap is tighter and expectations are higher, is more detrimental than bad money spent when nothing really matters. You can't have "throwaway" contracts the same way. Significant cap allocations have to be contributing, because any money that isn't playing close to value...is money that could have, and should have been spent on something else. It's a higher stakes game now. They're at the big boy table. Lower margin for error. As much as they've done a great job (and they 100% have) in keeping flexibility open and able to walk away clean...the cutesy "audition style" big money contract is more detrimental now if it goes bust. With great expectations come great consequences or whatever. Well yeah, but you can literally pick out any FA and say the exact same thing as you just said. Doesn't change the fact that they altered Bortles contract and carried over cap to take a shot on FA(s). Any FA could flop. It's all a risk. But that doesn't mean you don't take it if it's something the team needs desperately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 27 minutes ago, .Buzz said: Well yeah, but you can literally pick out any FA and say the exact same thing as you just said. Doesn't change the fact that they altered Bortles contract and carried over cap to take a shot on FA(s). Any FA could flop. It's all a risk. But that doesn't mean you don't take it if it's something the team needs desperately. Yeah. Fair enough. Just that OLine in free agency seems like it's often a bigger roll of the dice than a lot of other positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Buzz Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 43 minutes ago, Tugboat said: Yeah. Fair enough. Just that OLine in free agency seems like it's often a bigger roll of the dice than a lot of other positions. Oh for sure. Just not sure what other spot makes sense to look at in FA. TE maybe, but the options are guys like Graham (who is intriguing, but not sure I see us going after a TE that can't block considering what happened with Julius), Eifert (walking injury although very talented), Trey Burton (now this guy makes sense, but he isn't a #1 I don't think), etc. QB (someone to sit back and learn), TE, interior OL/developmental RT, SLB, and depth is all I see as things we really need to get. As you can see with the list, most of those are only going to be filled through the draft. I'm all about drafting OL too, but if we want to nab a guy or two in FA than OL is likely one that makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaguarCrazy2832 Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 11 hours ago, .Buzz said: This is a good question... Right? Before it was, we certainly cant afford Blake/Rob/Colvin and now even before the Bortles deal would could easily keep those 3 and go after Burton/Sitton and still rollover money for our young guys on rookie deals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaguarCrazy2832 Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 10 hours ago, Tugboat said: I wouldn't mind Pugh, or Sitton really. But at the same time...have to be a bit wary of big FA interior linemen contracts. In a league this starved for quality OL, always have to kick some tires and check under the hood to figure out why their original team doesn't think they're worth it. The team most familiar with them. With Sitton, it certainly seems like just an age thing more than anything. Bears want to get aggressively younger. If Pugh hits the market though...hmmm...Giants aren't exactly overrun with quality young linemen. Unless he just absolutely wants out of that mess? Sitton will be what 32 going into the season? That isnt old though. Give him a 2-3 year deal. He’s from Jacksonville and went to UCF so maybe he wants to come home Also Pugh would be great but obviously we’re going to do our homework. I think having Coughlin makes us feel good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaguarCrazy2832 Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 9 hours ago, Tugboat said: Yeah. Fair enough. Just that OLine in free agency seems like it's often a bigger roll of the dice than a lot of other positions. I feel like OL that are even above average barely hit free agency so when one comes available and the $ is right you have to go for it imo. Again if the $ is right. You say it could be wasted money but also the money spent on a different guy or not at all compared to what Pugh could do for someone else is also a concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.