DaveSpadaro

[News] Early Thinking On Some Roster Battles To Watch

Recommended Posts

That’s why I’m tired of talking comp picks. It’s a secret formula. It depends on the results after the season. Blah blah blah diddy blah blah waste of time thinking about. And on top of all that it’s a really dumb idea that it exist in today’s age anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Not really hard to compare first round RBs. That’s really what the issue is. The rookie cap keeps young players salaries down. A first round pick the team has a fifth year option. Then they can franchise tag...twice if they need. That puts most any player near thirty. No time left for a RB to cash in like other positional players. The truth is Bell, Zeke and Melvin are right. The system is unfairly setup to screw them. Why would you pay a RB? The system is setup to draft a RB in the first round and not have to come out of pocket until year six(to pay the tag). Which is still a bargain price relatively. Pro athletes all make crazy money compared to the rest of us. So nobody is crying but so much for them. But the market is what it is. 

Paying the RB the tag isn’t some chump change though and they get it all what is the RB tag at 14m-15m maybe higher when Barkley gets to that point....Plus again all different situations Zeke is being offer top 2 RB money and just wants more and Gordon being offer somewhere around 10m a year which is great for him....I don’t see the Giants being cheap when it comes to Barkley think they will make him the highest paid RB 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They RUMOR Zeke is offered second highest. But we know NFL contracts aren’t guaranteed. So tons of grey area to play in to say that kind of statement. They could make the contract number one paid ...if he wins the SB every year with incentives. That means not much. Jerry and all these GMs know how to play the game with the press.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Franchise Tags

QB: $24.865 million

RB: $11.214 million

WR: $16.787 million

TE: $10.387 million

OL: $14.067 million

DE: $17.128 million

DT: $15.209 million

LB: $15.443 million

CB: $16.022 million

S: $11.15 million

K/P: $4.971 million

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RB has the shortest shelf life by most everybodies standards. So when you look at the rookie pay cap and the tag numbers you can really see how they aren’t making the same as everybody else. We will take K and P out of the discussion to be real. TE is the cheapest. That’s why Jimmy Graham was so pissed. He was playing WR for most intensive purposes yet sticking him with five and half mil less. But back to RB. If you get one in the first round you control him for five years. At a cheap rate(for any non S or TE position). Rookie wage scale. Then you can tag him for that sixth. 11.2 isn’t peanuts but nothing crazy compared to other positions. So much so that you can even tag him twice without killing yourself. That’s seven years control over a RB. Puts them at about 29 or 30 years old(give or take). Nobody is giving out huge contracts to thirty year old RBs. So you strip them of any real chance of free agency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Surely.... until the guys at OTC put it in there... I'm inclined to believe them and only them... just logic because they have been the only ones I've seen consistently be correct on this.   

Which also makes sense.  A team steals a free agent away from another team by offering the certain level of contract. Original team gets rewarded for the contract that was given to the player. 

Also... been said, Sendejo and Fort would need to be cut by week 10.  Eagles don't get off the hook if they get injured.  Similar to what happened with Patrick Robinson last year.  Sturgis however,  was actually cut.  

Tate could be released I guess, I don't think he will, do you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I just quoted you saying Robinson’s injury cost us a comp pick

 

What I said page 881 of this thread ...." Patrick Robinson got hurt last year,  Blount didn't play much... the one that got factored in,  was Sturgis getting cut."

Ham, I figured out your problem.... you don't pay attention, just read what you want to read.... like here on my last quote on page 881 from this thread..... I clearly mentioned here that the one that was factored in was Sturgis getting cut.   The Eagles did NOT lose anything with Robinson getting injured nor with Blount not playing much.    That's the point I've been trying to make.   (But my bad in not using the word ONLY... as the ONLY factor was Sturgis getting cut)  Long day, family wedding yesterday.  Add to that school starts for both kids in 2 days and we still had some stuff to do.  Bad timing with the wedding and WTF with school starting before Labor day?      

Anyhow, Below here is the cancellation chart for the comp picks we received here in the 2019 draft.   As you can see Robinson was cancelled out via other free agent signings.... and whoa.... you see Mike Wallace counted.... not much playing time there right.

Further, if you kept reading the article you posted with Jimmy K.... he explains that the factor is the average annual pay.... Tate has a 4 year deal at $37.5 mil... 9.375 mil average... follow so far.  Tate was suspended 4 games.  Now he loses 4/17 of his 2019 salary ... (which his 2019 salary is $1.975 mil) ... that comes out to $464,705  ... now if you divide that by the 4 years of his deal.... that lowers Tate's average by $116k ... still at $9.26 mil per year.  If you go to the 2020 comp pick page on OTC website... you can see that it doesn't change Tate's slot at all on the chart.   The next guy is at exactly $9 mil per year, which is still 4th round comp level.   

Now, I give you props... technically a suspension could be a factor ... if the player signed a one year deal it and got suspended it would obviously lower his average annual pay a lot more.  Not the case for Tate and his 4 year deal though.   It's why Joe Banner (who is great at understanding rules) just said it could effect it... but wasn't getting into details or saying that it would for sure.   Congrats to you, you technically were correct and I was wrong ... still congrats to our Eagles for the suspension not really being a factor (which is more important than which fan is right or wrong or who is smarter)   But again though ... follow up your reading, don't just take out what you want to hear, Jimmy K does a great job in this article explaining in detail as to why it doesn't really effect things.   So for now... Jmatt making the team and staying on the roster to week 10 or if he does get cut, lets hope he gets picked up on waivers which technically still makes him qualify... because i'm with you, we don't want to rely on cutting Sendejo or Fort, especially if neither clears waivers.   But if Tate doesn't get us a comp pick, he still counts in the formula, and in reality without trading for him, the Foles comp pick would get cancelled instead if JMatt gets cut.  That's pick 97, not much drop off from the pick we gave up for Tate.  (which again technically you are right, we did pay a price for Tate, time value and a drop in # of the pick.... which obviously you need to give up something to get something)

https://overthecap.com/compensatory-draft-picks-cancellation-chart/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

RB has the shortest shelf life by most everybodies standards. So when you look at the rookie pay cap and the tag numbers you can really see how they aren’t making the same as everybody else. We will take K and P out of the discussion to be real. TE is the cheapest. That’s why Jimmy Graham was so pissed. He was playing WR for most intensive purposes yet sticking him with five and half mil less. But back to RB. If you get one in the first round you control him for five years. At a cheap rate(for any non S or TE position). Rookie wage scale. Then you can tag him for that sixth. 11.2 isn’t peanuts but nothing crazy compared to other positions. So much so that you can even tag him twice without killing yourself. That’s seven years control over a RB. Puts them at about 29 or 30 years old(give or take). Nobody is giving out huge contracts to thirty year old RBs. So you strip them of any real chance of free agency. 

Agreed the system doesn't work for the stud RBs.   Guys like Barkely and Zeke though, they got paid big early relative to their position.   And to me, I'm not paying RB $11 mil with it all counting towards the cap, that's a huge hit.   It's a passing league, give me the committee and the committee pay scale.  

That said, in the new CBA... they should put something down for RBs where they lose the 5th year option.   Or lose the franchise tags ... or some combo.   How about if you use a 5th year option, that player can't be tagged?    You can tag a player just once.  Basically it limits team control to 5 years with everyone.   Do we really need more than that?  

I can see the idea that you want time to develop a player you drafted... but geez 6 or 7 years control???  Exactly as you pointed out, for a RB that's basically their career because they aren't getting free agent offers that far in like other positions would.  And to further your point (which you did make earlier)  if you work a RB a ton, it shortens their career... but you aren't giving extra work loads to QBs, WRs, OL ...etc.  So it works against itself for a RB to have to get more touches to get more stats... unlike other positions.  Basically... the RB is screwed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

And suspensions come into play. Those four game checks that Tate lost effect his value. And I thought playing time was even a factor. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, GreenbleedinFL said:

Yeah,but he can be re-signed longer term(aka both parties agree to void the present contract).

That's not how this works. The deadline to sign tagged players was July 15th, that's since passed, so, he has to play on the 1 year tag for this year which is fully guaranteed.

Disregard

Edited by Don Corleone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Don Corleone said:

That's not how this works. The deadline to sign tagged players was July 15th, that's since passed, so, he has to play on the 1 year tag for this year which is fully guaranteed.

DC... was Melvin Gordon tagged? Or is it his 5th year option?   This is who GBFL is talking about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

DC... was Melvin Gordon tagged? Or is it his 5th year option?   This is who GBFL is talking about. 

OH, gotcha. Yeah, he's playing on his 5th year option.

 

Disregard then. Thank you Joe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Don Corleone said:

OH, gotcha. Yeah, he's playing on his 5th year option.

 

Disregard then. Thank you Joe.

No problem.     How about the OTC.. great website.  Those guys come prepared once they actually update their stuff.   The draft board, the comp pick chart, how to search specifics... great stuff!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Don Corleone said:

 

Disregard then. Thank you Joe.

DC.. the sky is falling.... we need that again on here. Lol.

I noticed like every Eagle blogger mentioning Suds to Indy... like first thought in their minds with the Luck news.   Not sure if it's like that in other areas,  but boy do our writers make everything about the Eagles... and they do it quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who was the Stanford TE that the Colts drafted same year as Luck... his name escapes me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Who was the Stanford TE that the Colts drafted same year as Luck... his name escapes me?

Austin Collie?

Nope he was a WR that suffered too many concussions

Coby Fleener?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don Corleone said:

Austin Collie?

Idk..  I think he was taken 2nd round of same draft.  Big TE, wasn't Collie like a slot WR? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

DC.. the sky is falling.... we need that again on here. Lol.

I noticed like every Eagle blogger mentioning Suds to Indy... like first thought in their minds with the Luck news.   Not sure if it's like that in other areas,  but boy do our writers make everything about the Eagles... and they do it quickly.

Image result for oh noes gif

Yeah, there were articles from nearly every beat writer withing about 15 minutes of Luck announcing his retirement.

I don't think the eagles will trade Sudfeld, they wanted him to be Wentz's back-up, it's just unfortunate he got hurt. Because of that, they'll probably keep 3 QB's on the roster this year and go with 4 RB's. I initially had them keeping 5 RB's with Smallwood being the 5th, but Sudfeld's injury changed things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Don Corleone said:

Austin Collie?

Nope he was a WR that suffered too many concussions

Coby Fleener?

Coby Fleener it is! Thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don Corleone said:

Image result for oh noes gif

Yeah, there were articles from nearly every beat writer withing about 15 minutes of Luck announcing his retirement.

I don't think the eagles will trade Sudfeld, they wanted him to be Wentz's back-up, it's just unfortunate he got hurt. Because of that, they'll probably keep 3 QB's on the roster this year and go with 4 RB's. I initially had them keeping 5 RB's with Smallwood being the 5th, but Sudfeld's injury changed things.

So originally you had 2 QBs ?   Or are you saying now we keep 4 QBs.   I'm confused?  I thought 3 was the norm? 

Btw... I think if Suds gets traded.. Thorson makes the team.  If not, Thorson to practice squad or Suds moved to IR on the Tuesday.   I think a trade would make the roster decision easier,  but don't think they just give Suds away either... but still time for things to develop. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

So originally you had 2 QBs ?   Or are you saying now we keep 4 QBs.   I'm confused?  I thought 3 was the norm? 

Btw... I think if Suds gets traded.. Thorson makes the team.  If not, Thorson to practice squad or Suds moved to IR on the Tuesday.   I think a trade would make the roster decision easier,  but don't think they just give Suds away either... but still time for things to develop. 

Yeah, I had two QB's, that's been the MO of Doug and the coaching staff, the only reason they promoted Sudfeld was to keep the Colts from getting him, otherwise it would've been just Wentz and Foles. I don't think there's any way they keep 4 QB's. Doing so would force them to cut someone they otherwise wouldn't.

I still think Thorson clears waivers and lands on the PS. Dave Zangaro mentioned this in an article earlier this morning, saying "if Thorson gets cut, he’ll pass through waivers. How many teams are going to claim a quarterback who doesn’t know their system and use one of their 53-man spots on him? "

Honestly, I don't see why they'd IR Sudfeld, his return was reported to be 6 weeks. So going by the 6 week timetable, he would only miss the first 2 games, and maybe miss Week 3, if you IR him, you're holding him out for another month for no reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don Corleone said:

Yeah, I had two QB's, that's been the MO of Doug and the coaching staff, the only reason they promoted Sudfeld was to keep the Colts from getting him, otherwise it would've been just Wentz and Foles. I don't think there's any way they keep 4 QB's. Doing so would force them to cut someone they otherwise wouldn't.

I still think Thorson clears waivers and lands on the PS. Dave Zangaro mentioned this in an article earlier this morning, saying "if Thorson gets cut, he’ll pass through waivers. How many teams are going to claim a quarterback who doesn’t know their system and use one of their 53-man spots on him? "

Honestly, I don't see why they'd IR Sudfeld, his return was reported to be 6 weeks. So going by the 6 week timetable, he would only miss the first 2 games, and maybe miss Week 3, if you IR him, you're holding him out for another month for no reason.

True on the IR... but holding out a 3rd string for a couple extra weeks isn't really a big deal. It would be to keep Thorson on... and sure technically they would have to cut a guy, but that guy could also clear waivers and be brought back once Suds goes to IR.

Although I agree totally with the idea Thorson getting picked up for a 53 spot is unlikely,  less likely than the guy they would cut to initially put 4 QBs on the roster. 

As for Doug's MO... he's only coached 3 years.  Not sure it's enough to think for sure they go 2 QBs, I think the Bradford last minute trade in 2016 left them without a 3rd guy, I think circumstances are different with the #3 being a guy they draft ... simply using the 4 years control as a factor, plus the investment of a pick.  I think they were using 3 no matter what THIS year. IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idk.... a Suds trade does a few things.  Opens up a roster space for Thorson, so they can keep him under contract control for 4 years.    It saves $3 mil of cap space, which is basically $3 mil more to rollover.  And it can add a player/draft pick to the assets. 

That's 3 things.. to where you can make a case for trading a player who is a UFA next year.    

The case for keeping him,  it maximizes your insurance for this year and if he walks he should count in the comp pick formula anyway. 

I think more time with Thorson and McCown and seeing what could be in a trade offer.  All are factors.   But IDK... a 4th round pick, $3 mil of cap space and 4 years control of Thorson is pretty decent value for a dude who probably looks to leave anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, joemas6 said:

True on the IR... but holding out a 3rd string for a couple extra weeks isn't really a big deal. It would be to keep Thorson on... and sure technically they would have to cut a guy, but that guy could also clear waivers and be brought back once Suds goes to IR.

Although I agree totally with the idea Thorson getting picked up for a 53 spot is unlikely,  less likely than the guy they would cut to initially put 4 QBs on the roster. 

As for Doug's MO... he's only coached 3 years.  Not sure it's enough to think for sure they go 2 QBs, I think the Bradford last minute trade in 2016 left them without a 3rd guy, I think circumstances are different with the #3 being a guy they draft ... simply using the 4 years control as a factor, plus the investment of a pick.  I think they were using 3 no matter what THIS year. IMHO.

IDK didn't see Thorson alot,but I liked what I saw and he seemed more capable early on than Suds did at the same point in his career.So IMO it's "a guy we've had awhile" vs a guy with potentially more upside.Since we have McCown,in my view Suds is expendable.Brisset is the QB in Indy,but Suds would be a better BU for them,and Brisset only need survive until game 3 to have that insurance kick in.Only other BU out there really is Osweiler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now