If Miami cuts Suh

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

7 hours ago, NFL_Fan said:

I wouldn't take back Suh for even 8 million a year. Screw that guy. And to the person who said imagine that line....yeah it still wasn't great....lmao. We had it...then decided to let Avril walk for nothing...Then draft piece of glass Ansah...

Our defense was pretty great during the last few Suh years, and would arguably be even better now, considering the improved personnel and Patricia's intent on using players to their strengths.

Want to hear a funny story?  You labeled Ansah "piece of glass", ignoring the fact that Ansah and Avril both played the same number of games (73) throughout their first five years in the league.  That, and Avril was constantly battling injuries himself.  Quite the narrative.

[theuntouchable]

1 hour ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Our defense was pretty great during the last few Suh years, and would arguably be even better now, considering the improved personnel and Patricia's intent on using players to their strengths.

Want to hear a funny story?  You labeled Ansah "piece of glass", ignoring the fact that Ansah and Avril both played the same number of games (73) throughout their first five years in the league.  That, and Avril was constantly battling injuries himself.  Quite the narrative.

Avril wasn’t starting his first year or two tho I believe. Granted he did have nicks and bumps here and there.

[NFL_Fan]

8 hours ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Our defense was pretty great during the last few Suh years, and would arguably be even better now, considering the improved personnel and Patricia's intent on using players to their strengths.

Want to hear a funny story?  You labeled Ansah "piece of glass", ignoring the fact that Ansah and Avril both played the same number of games (73) throughout their first five years in the league.  That, and Avril was constantly battling injuries himself.  Quite the narrative.

also Avril wasnt a top 10 pick.....and I still would pick Avril even tomorrow...Ansah just isnt worth superstar money to me. 

[Louis Friend]

3 hours ago, NFL_Fan said:

also Avril wasnt a top 10 pick.....and I still would pick Avril even tomorrow...Ansah just isnt worth superstar money to me. 

Avril also got progressively better as a Lion whereas Ziggy has regressed. We also never paid Avril $17 million to "prove" anything. $17 million is not "prove it" money to me. It's franchise money and Ziggy hasn't played like a franchise guy.

My issue is the money. I don't hate Ziggy. I think he's got talent that needs to be developed still. But we just put a hefty price tag on him to prove he can return to form from 3 seasons ago. If we were a complete team with the cap room, I wouldn't take issue. But IMO, our entire defense needs to be overhauled. I'm seriously happy with 5 guys on defense and think 6 others could develop into good players. And those 11 players aren't even all starters. $17 million could have been used to sign 2 or 3 good players to fill some of those holes.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

10 hours ago, theuntouchable said:

Avril wasn’t starting his first year or two tho I believe. Granted he did have nicks and bumps here and there.

Avril started 15 games during his first two years, playing in 28.  He battled frequent injuries throughout his years in Detroit.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

3 hours ago, NFL_Fan said:

also Avril wasnt a top 10 pick.....and I still would pick Avril even tomorrow...Ansah just isnt worth superstar money to me. 

You would rather invest in a player who may not play football again due to a serious neck injury, over one who is three years younger, has arguably more upside, and doesn't carry the same injury concern?  I don't understand that.

And this isn't about "superstar money".  Being paid $17 for one year with zero financial commitment after this season isn't "superstar money"... it's essentially a one year "prove it" deal to avoid losing him in FA.  If we would have signed him to a huge deal this offseason, I would've been against it.  This isn't that deal, and we have plenty of cap space.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

31 minutes ago, Louis Friend said:

Avril also got progressively better as a Lion whereas Ziggy has regressed. We also never paid Avril $17 million to "prove" anything. $17 million is not "prove it" money to me. It's franchise money and Ziggy hasn't played like a franchise guy.

My issue is the money. I don't hate Ziggy. I think he's got talent that needs to be developed still. But we just put a hefty price tag on him to prove he can return to form from 3 seasons ago. If we were a complete team with the cap room, I wouldn't take issue. But IMO, our entire defense needs to be overhauled. I'm seriously happy with 5 guys on defense and think 6 others could develop into good players. And those 11 players aren't even all starters. $17 million could have been used to sign 2 or 3 good players to fill some of those holes.

Franchise money?  I disagree completely.  But that's probably where our different feelings on this originate.

A franchise player gets locked up long term with a significant cap hit.  A franchise player isn't kept around for one more season of evaluation.  (I think you're assuming that the name of the tag dictates the player's value, and it's not true.  It's not like the Bears view Kyle Fuller as a "transition player".  It gives the franchise an option between a long-term deal and losing the player outright.  I mean, you know this, so it's weird to me that you'd tie them together.)

Lastly, we have few holes on offense and still plenty of cap space to sign two or three of those good defensive players (not to mention the cap fluidity that exists in the NFL).  Ansah didn't prevent us from building this roster.

[Louis Friend]

1 minute ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Franchise money?  I disagree completely.  But that's probably where our different feelings on this originate.

A franchise player gets locked up long term with a significant cap hit.  A franchise player isn't kept around for one more season of evaluation.  (I think you're assuming that the name of the tag dictates the player's value, and it's not true.  It's not like the Bears view Kyle Fuller as a "transition player".)

Lastly, we have few holes on offense and still plenty of cap space to sign two or three of those good defensive players (not to mention the cap fluidity that exists in the NFL).  Ansah didn't prevent us from building this roster.

Has nothing to do with the name of the tag and everything to do with the money. He's now top 5 paid DL for 2018. He's not a top 5 DL in the league. He's making almost $10 million more than Avril, since that comparison seems to be popular around here.  Top 5 money shouldn't be reserved for a player who had one great year 3 seasons ago.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

1 hour ago, Louis Friend said:

Has nothing to do with the name of the tag and everything to do with the money. He's now top 5 paid DL for 2018. He's not a top 5 DL in the league. He's making almost $10 million more than Avril, since that comparison seems to be popular around here.  Top 5 money shouldn't be reserved for a player who had one great year 3 seasons ago.

But we all know that circumstances lead to a situation like this happening.  Much like QB contracts, which make a player like Jimmy Garoppolo the top paid QB in the league.  It's circumstance.  And he should be getting paid significantly more than Avril, considering Avril's career is likely over.

The lack of foresight here is alarming.  They didn't tag him because he's a top 5 DE... that was never the mentality, and shouldn't be.  There were only two options: 1) use a portion of your significant cap space to keep him, or 2) lose him for nothing.  They chose to keep him.  Considering his age, past performance, athletic ability and upside, it made the most sense.  Losing Ansah would've forced us to pay a starting DE in FA a significant contract, and one with future cap consequence.  From both a cap and roster standpoint, this decision was the best option.

This reminds me of the Stafford contract.  Some were against it because it made him the top paid QB in the NFL, but the only alternative to that contract was to lose him completely.  Clearly the contract, despite not an accurate portrayal of his league ranking, was better than losing him.

[Louis Friend]

7 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

But we all know that circumstances lead to a situation like this happening.  Much like QB contracts, which make a player like Jimmy Garoppolo the top paid QB in the league.  It's circumstance.  And he should be getting paid significantly more than Avril, considering Avril's career is likely over.

The lack of foresight here is alarming.  They didn't tag him because he's a top 5 DE... that was never the mentality, and shouldn't be.  There were only two options: 1) use a portion of your significant cap space to keep him, or 2) lose him for nothing.  They chose to keep him.  Considering his age, past performance, athletic ability and upside, it made the most sense.  Losing Ansah would've forced us to pay a starting DE in FA a significant contract, and one with future cap consequence.  From both a cap and roster standpoint, this decision was the best option.

This reminds me of the Stafford contract.  Some were against it because it made him the top paid QB in the NFL, but the only alternative to that contract was to lose him completely.  Clearly the contract, despite not an accurate portrayal of his league ranking, was better than losing him.

Except there was a third and fourth option. They could have used the transition tag on him, or worked the phones on trade possibilities. Even paying a FA DE significant money, would be much less than what we are now paying Ansah.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

22 minutes ago, Louis Friend said:

Except there was a third and fourth option. They could have used the transition tag on him, or worked the phones on trade possibilities. Even paying a FA DE significant money, would be much less than what we are now paying Ansah.

The transition tag is a joke.  If another team decided to offer him a bad contract, we'd get nothing in return.  You're also assuming that Quinn didn't work the phones, which I think is a bit presumptuous.  (And we still could trade him.)  So, let me clarify: there were two legitimate options, and one of them - losing him to get nothing in return - would have been foolish.

And, sure, our cap hit this year for that FA DE would be less.  But we're fine this year.  Years from now, we'd be paying that player far more than he's worth.  It's one of the reasons why teams that spend heavily in FA find themselves struggling financially.  That, and there isn't a FA DE better than Ansah.

Decisions like this reinforce my faith in Quinn.  He's building a cap-conscious roster and giving his ability-based HC different skill sets to work with.  I expect Ansah to thrive under Patricia.

[Louis Friend]

1 minute ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

The transition tag is a joke.  If another team decided to offer him a bad contract, we'd get nothing in return.  You're also assuming that Quinn didn't work the phones, which I think is a bit presumptuous.  (And we still could trade him.) So, let me clarify: there were two legitimate options, and one of them - losing him to get nothing in return - would have been foolish.

And, sure, our cap hit this year for that FA DE would be less.  But we're fine this year.  Years from now, we'd be paying that player far more than he's worth.  It's one of the reasons why teams that spend heavily in FA find themselves struggling financially.  That, and there isn't a FA DE better than Ansah.

Decisions like this reinforce my faith in Quinn.  He's building a cap-conscious roster and giving his ability-based HC different skill sets to work with.  I expect Ansah to thrive under Patricia.

1. Losing him would not have been for nothing, it would have been for $17.1 million that could be used in better ways.

2. So this hypothetical FA DE does not live up to his hypothetical contract passed this season? Now who is being presumptuous?

3. I hope Ansah thrives under Patricia. Otherwise, we just wasted $17.1 million on 3 games of production. Of course, he doesn't get to face the OLs of the Giants and Bengals this season.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

6 hours ago, Louis Friend said:

1. Losing him would not have been for nothing, it would have been for $17.1 million that could be used in better ways.

2. So this hypothetical FA DE does not live up to his hypothetical contract passed this season? Now who is being presumptuous?

3. I hope Ansah thrives under Patricia. Otherwise, we just wasted $17.1 million on 3 games of production. Of course, he doesn't get to face the OLs of the Giants and Bengals this season.

That money isn't needed.  Its only use would be for overspending on free agents, and we don't need to do that.

Hypothetical?  The only DE at or near Ansah's level that could've potentially been a FA this year is DeMarcus Lawrence (tag).  Vinny Curry (not yet released) and Adrian Clayborn are a step below, and will likely seek substantial contracts.  This isn't blindly speculating as to if the organization pursued potential trades... these are actual possibilities.

This "three games of production" rhetoric is insane.  How a player can perform well over a five year span and have his contribution trimmed to only three games is ridiculous.

[Asylum247]

Hey guys, both sides are right and wrong. I think using the tag on Ziggy was OK. Our D line is below average (and that's being nice). I would rather give Ziggy one more shot to bounce back, also give him a shot under new coaching. That's a better move than to sign an extension or just let him walk. I think he is better off as a rotation guy until he can play every game. But he's going to commnd too mmch $$$ for that

[diehardlionfan]

Of course the money could’ve been spent elsewhere but what guarantee is there those players work out?

If Quinn’s judgement with Ansah is questioned why assume that he would sign the right guys?

Quinn and Patricia know the player, his off season workouts, his motivation and they have his medical reports.

Its my guess they believe he will earn the money and I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re correct then they tag him again in 2019 and let him walk in 2020,

I think they have a plan and I’m willing to see how it works out. In any event they haven’t signed players to long term commitments maintaining cap freedom for next year and beyond.