The (only!) official ES all things Kirk Cousins should we shouldn't we off-season thread.

[CommanderDOOM]

Been reading these threads for a while now and I still don't (maybe I missed that part) know what the pro 'show him the $$) Kirk side thinks is too much money.

 

@Alexa , @onedrop, @Skinsinparadise, @goskins10.......how much is too much for you. 26,27,28 or would you even give KC 30mill a year+++??

 

[Alexa]

23 minutes ago, Taylor703 said:

 

Sure, they could've but they didn't. He was good for half the season and they weren't going to give him over $20M a year for a half season of good play. 

No they didn't. Picking up Griffins option was basically a death kneel for his redskins career. The first sign of injury in a preseason game and he never took another snap again. Quit with the lame ass conspiracy theories of why Kirk hasn't been paid. The team isn't as high on him as some fans are. That's life. 

Well part of the reason he didn't take a snap was he was not only beat out by Kirk, but also Colt.

 

We all know who isn't high on him and it's Snyder. Gruden made his point at the end of the season and I'll take his knowledge of QB's over Snyder and Allen.

[SkinsPassion4Life]

I'll predict that Kurt is traded on March 6th to the 49ers for two 2nd rd picks and Carlos Hyde

[goskins10]

Just now, TheShredSkinz said:

Been reading these threads for a while now and I still don't (maybe I missed that part) know what the pro 'show him the $$) Kirk side thinks is too much money.

 

@Alexa , @onedrop, @Skinsinparadise, @goskins10.......how much is too much for you. 26,27,28 or would you even give KC 30mill a year+++??

 

 

Quite frankly you can't have read them very closely. @Skinsinparadise actually asked this question about 100 pages ago and I and several others answered. Also, I asked this question of others, almost verbatim a few times and got a few responses. But to save you the looking for the answers, here is mine - again:

 

I am not on the pay him whatever he wants plan. Never have been. I am on the pay him whatever the team feels it OK, no matter how high that is. To that end, my thoughts are that they should be willing to pay him Andrew Luck type money: $24.5M/yr 5 yrs with a total of $87M in guarantees. I can see a little more say $25M/5yrs with $90M in guarantees. If that's not enough for Kirk (and here is absolutely no evidence this is true), then he really does not want to be here. In that case, move him in whatever way helps the team the most.

 

But in the end, it really does not matter what we think is too much. It matters what the team thinks is too much and if they can make it work with the salary cap. If they sign him for $30M yr and they have a plan to cover the CAP that's on them. But to be honest, any assumption that anyone would sign Kirk to that much over the current highest contract is irrational.

 

Outside of mostly irrational speculation there is no data on exactly what the team is offering or what Kirk's team is asking. There is also a lot of negotiating time left. It is 100% normal at this point in the negotiations for the two sides to be far apart.

[Est.1974]

12 minutes ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

I'll predict that Kurt is traded on March 6th to the 49ers for two 2nd rd picks and Carlos Hyde

 

Kirk's staying then eh.

[SkinsPassion4Life]

Just now, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Kirk's staying then eh.

 

Haha...reverse psychology

[goskins10]

15 minutes ago, Alexa said:

Well part of the reason he didn't take a snap was he was not only beat out by Kirk, but also Colt.

 

We all know who isn't high on him and it's Snyder. Gruden made his point at the end of the season and I'll take his knowledge of QB's over Snyder and Allen.

 

No one "knows" this. It's pure speculation, and a narrative driven one at that. The one thing that is a fact is that Snyder likes to win and Kirk has helped him win more than any QB since he has been the owner. Why in the world would he have a problem with that.

 

It's interesting to see people jumping to all these wild ass conclusions when the major time lines have not even come to pass yet.

[Veryoldschool]

Questioning whether to give Cousins to top LTD is as ridiculous as a homely high school geek questioning whether he should say yes to the charming, high school homecoming queen who shocked everyone by recently taking an interest in him and actually asked him to the prom.  Should he say yes to the prettiest girl in town or sit by the phone hoping Scarlett Johansson will call and ask him also?  

[goskins10]

19 minutes ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

I'll predict that Kurt is traded on March 6th to the 49ers for two 2nd rd picks and Carlos Hyde

 

This actually makes less and less sense. Kyle is a first time HC. He would have to give up major resources and apply them to one player. Also, if hit does not work he will not be able to recover - as opposed to drafting a QB and that not working. They will not be tied to them so deeply and can draft another.

 

I find it interesting that many of the people concerned with how much Kirk get's paid by the Redskins think it's likely another team will be willing to spend those same resources and see that as a good decision by them. Seems a bit contradictory.

 

I also find it interesting that all the mocks have the 49ers taking Trubisky at #2. With the 49ers just signing Mitchell it seems less likely (not impossible) that they go DL at #2. Doesn't mean they go QB. But it does take away one of her other options.

[PigskinRedskin]

7 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

Questioning whether to give Cousins to top LTD is as ridiculous as a homely high school geek questioning whether he should say yes to the charming, high school homecoming queen who shocked everyone by recently taking an interest in him and actually asked him to the prom.  Should he say yes to the prettiest girl in town or sit by the phone hoping Scarlett Johansson will call and ask him also?  

I don't know...that's a tough call..

[elkabong82]

13 hours ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

Umm, no.  Actually, Cousins has 42 starts.  1 in 2012, 3 in 2013, 5 in 2014, 17 in 2015, and 16 in 2016.  And Reed has been a very good receiving TE since he came into the league (2013).  Just because he broke out on the national scene in 2015 and became a household name doesn't mean he hadn't "emerged" yet.  The graphic clearly demonstrates how much Cousins needs Reed in order to put up the stats and wins of an above-average QB. 

 

And how can you say his production only dropped off without Reed when you ignore his rushing TDs?  He had 5 rushing TDs in his career with Reed playing, and only 4 rushing TD's without Reed.  Seems pretty obvious that adding rushing TDs would help, not hurt, the case for Cousins putting up worse stats without Reed.  Also, do you realize how drastic a 11% drop (from 69.7% to 58.8%) in completion percentage is?  Only 6 QBs had lower than a 60% completion percentage last season, and only Ryan Fitzpatrick and Brock Osweiler had a lower passer rating than the 75.6 Cousins had without Reed.

 

No matter how much you try to twist the argument, it is clear that Cousins is nowhere close to the same player without Reed in the game.  He is not a QB that can play above average without his number 1 option, such as Brady does without Gronk, or Matt Ryan does without Julio, or Drew Brees did when he lost Jimmy Graham, or Matt Stafford when he lost Calvin.  His stats are much more similar to Andy Dalton without AJ Green.  Which would be fine if we were going to pay him a contract similar to Dalton's and if Jordan Reed wasn't a much bigger injury risk going forward than AJ Green.

 

Yes, Reed was so good that at the start of last season he wasn't even going to be the starter until Niles Paul got hurt. 

 

You used the Reed W-L thing to state a point that Kirk is reliant on his main weapon (as if other QBs somehow aren't as well), but you included stats from when Reed wasn't a primary weapon and when Kirk wasn't a full time starter. I looked at THIS season, when both were established starters, and the drop off without Reed, in terms of overall production (NOT just W-L since that is a team stat that goes beyond just 2 players) wasn't there. 

 

Since you seemingly are unwilling to bring up the stats for THIS season for Kirk when Reed was in and not in:

 

Reed out week 6 and 7, out or a decoy week 13 through 16. 

 

Kirk w/ Reed, 10 games:  273/399  68%  3,263 yds  18 pass TDs, 8 INTs, sacked 16, 0 rush TDs : 1.8 TDs per game, 0.8 INTs per game

Kirk w/o Reed, 6 games:  133/207 64%   1,654 yds  7 pass TDs, 4 INTs, sacked 7, 4 rush TDs : 1.8 TDs per game, 0.66 INTs per game

 

The last time I posted this, actual posters tried to argue that Kirk's rush TDs didn't count, that only the 7 pass TDs should count. They were being ridiculous just to fit their narrative. That's what I was talking abot before.

 

So this season, his 2nd year as a starter, Cousins didn't really drop off in production when Reed wasn't a viable threat. 

 

That compared to your box stat graphic shows significant growth from Cousins in his 2nd year as starter.

 

Where production did drop off was in the red zone, but that has happened with every QB not named Tom Brady when his primary weapon goes down and I've pointed that out in these KIrk threads also.

 

Kirk is a franchise QB. He is good and the team can win games with him. He's not perfect, he has some flaws, but so does pretty much every QB (something a portion of ES doesn't seem to realize). At the end of the day, our passing offense has been at the top 2 years in a row now, and the team has posted winning records, and done so with lousy defenses and bottom tier run game. Frankly unless we get a king's ransom in a trade, this team would be stupid not to re-sign Kirk after 2 seasons of overall good performance. Even with improvements to only a medicore run game and an average defense and Kirk can lead this team to postseason.

 

[Est.1974]

7 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

This actually makes less and less sense. Kyle is a first time HC. He would have to give up major resources and apply them to one player. Also, if hit does not work he will not be able to recover - as opposed to drafting a QB and that not working. They will not be tied to them so deeply and can draft another.

 

I find it interesting that many of the people concerned with how much Kirk get's paid by the Redskins think it's likely another team will be willing to spend those same resources and see that as a good decision by them. Seems a bit contradictory.

 

I also find it interesting that all the mocks have the 49ers taking Trubisky at #2. With the 49ers just signing Mitchell it seems less likely (not impossible) that they go DL at #2. Doesn't mean they go QB. But it does take away one of her other options.

 

They dont, Jonathan Allen is a popular choice at #2 in a number of mocks. I've just mentioned the Mitchell signing earlier, seems to take  DL off the board at #2 to a degree.

 

Also, the 49ers have about 80mil in cap space. Cousins would be the obvious move for them, irrespective of whether they get the chance or not. I find that hard for anyone to dispute.

[Dark Acre]

Since when has $ ever been an issue?  Snyder always finds a way around it.  The real issue is whether you think Kirk can get the job done here like other QBs (the Gibbs standard).  If you think he'll be the next Jay Cutler, you trade him now and move on.  If you think he has a chance and he'll actually want to play here (versus earn a huge check), then you pay him and give him a LTD.  Otherwise, if say, we can do a tag-and-trade to S.F. for it's next 2 firsts (which might be doable as this year's 1 & 2, next year's 2), then you do it. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, TheShredSkinz said:

Been reading these threads for a while now and I still don't (maybe I missed that part) know what the pro 'show him the $$) Kirk side thinks is too much money.

 

@Alexa , @onedrop, @Skinsinparadise, @goskins10.......how much is too much for you. 26,27,28 or would you even give KC 30mill a year+++??

 

 

For me I'd go as far as 25 million a year if need be -- Mike Jones intimated that he thought they could lock him down for 23.9 million a year (same figure as the franchise).  Though buying into what the beat reporters are saying its not like there is any hot bargaining going on -- club offers 22, Kirk comes back with 25, with back and forth.  

 

There is a lot of back and forth on this thread and on talk radio -- but doesn't sound like much action yet with the two sides negotiating unless its done very quietly.  Having said that, I gather something like that might go down the beginning of the week with the March 1st deadline being Wednesday. 

[goskins10]

1 minute ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

They dont, Jonathan Allen is a popular choice at #2 in a number of mocks. I've just mentioned the Mitchell signing earlier, seems to take  DL off the board at #2 to a degree.

 

Also, the 49ers have about 80mil in cap space. Cousins would be the obvious move for them, irrespective of whether they get the chance or not. I find that hard for anyone to dispute.

 

 

4 of 5 on CBS have SF taking Trubisky - http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/mock-draft

Here is 3 out of 5 at NFl.com - http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/mock-drafts

 

That's 7 of 10 - and that's just two sites. I have seen it elsewhere too.

 

$80M in CA goes quickly when you need just about everything. Trading for Kirk is anything but obvious. If Kirk even stumbles a little bit in SF the whole thing will come down around both him and Kyle quickly. On the other hand, Kyle will have a much longer leash if he goes the more traditional way. And I know he has a 6 yr contract. Teams fire coaches before the contract is over all the time. Jed York is the king or impatience.

[bobandweave]

1 hour ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

I'll predict that Kurt is traded on March 6th to the 49ers for two 2nd rd picks and Carlos Hyde

 

I can see it happening, the 49ers have a ton of money much more then we do but not sure about Hyde since they like him and he's only 25 years old. I think all we get back is picks not players. I suspect that if they do trade for Kirk they also add Garcon as well. Future NFC Wild Card teams franchise flipped with the 49ers leap frogging us and becoming relevant and we falling off back into the dumpster

 

When we hear that DeSean's gone to Tampa our complete team rebuild begins. That's what I see happening to us. 49ers and Bucs are playoff teams and we are back to picking top 10 and have a wasted 2017 season as we try and fail with the Colt McCoy experience. 

 

We go from a Wild Card team in the NFC to an NFL farm system in a single year.

 

It sucks but when your players don't want to be here and won't sign deals for this club and force Free Agency "gangsta" style like Kirk did then the only thing you can do is blow it up and start rebuilding. Hope that who ever we draft actually likes being here and it won't take more then 3 years to get back to the playoffs

 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

We get into semantic debates about Kirk Cousins but the article below about teams desperation at that position sum up my take on this.  This conversation IMO isn't about Kirk versus Andrew Luck or name that QB or whether he can improve on this stat or that.  His aggregate stat metrics -- QBR, QB rating, etc are very good but still getting into semantic debates about different micro stats and how relevant they are -- isn't the operative point IMO either.  To me watching this team for a long time, the idea they can be competitive in every game just about is a novel experience.  And I don't want to throw that in the garbage and start over.  The key question IMO is what's the alternative?  To me the alternative is going back to the old days -- a wing and prayer and hope to get lucky.  For example, heck maybe Colt isn't who he's been his whole career, wait to see the new Colt!  To me its a familiar sad narrative.   Don't want to go back to those days.

 

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/02/23/aj-bouye-nfl-free-agents-houston-texans

Your offseason lesson of the week: Don’t be surprised when some team sells the farm for Jimmy Garoppolo or gives up valuable capital for AJ McCarron, or reaches for Mitch Trubisky or DeShone Kizer or DeShaun Watson, or gives Jay Cutler a chance, or is willing to trade for Tony Romo’s contract.

The reality is the NFL does have players who are paid and treated like basketball superstars, and they all play one position.

More and more, teams are taking the approach that you can’t hit a home run without taking a few cuts. It worked for Seattle at the start of the decade, with strikeouts on Charlie Whitehurst and Matt Flynn leading to Russell Wilson. It seems to have worked for the Eagles last year, with the Bradford and Chase Daniel deals as precursor to the Wentz blockbuster.

Here’s how Eagles coach Doug Pederson broke it down for me a few months back: “It’s a lot to invest in one position, but I know this—through my experiences in the National Football League, that’s the one position [where you over invest]. You have to make sure you have a guy, or a couple of guys, in that spot. If you’re not looking into the future or picking guys for your future, I think you’ll struggle.

“It was just the right thing to do for us.”

And the truth is, it’s the right thing to do for any team that doesn’t have a long-term answer at the position.

That’s why a first-round pick doesn’t seem outrageous to me for a guy, in Garoppolo, with two career starts. It’s why I view Trubisky or Watson being overdrafted as a probability. And it’s why when I look at what’s left on Romo’s deal, and see $14 million for 2017, and de facto team options for 2018 (at $19.5 million) and 2019 (at $20.5 million), I don’t get why anyone would look at the contract as untradeable.

 

[bobandweave]

48 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

This actually makes less and less sense - No it doesn't

 

Kyle is a first time HC. - I will make a case that it would be much worse for Kyles future in San Fran if he were to use the 2nd overall pick on a QB and he be wrong about that. His first selection in this new roll could spell disaster for his tenure there.

 

With how short leashed the 9ers have been the last few years he knows he has to win now. He can do that with Kirk more so then any rookie QB in this draft.

 

Plus by trading for Kirk he's using that 2nd overall pick to either trade down gathering more picks or on another position of need. That means for 2 second round picks he gets his QB and another dominating elite player. His teams instantly better and when he adds Garcon who in this system and with that QB led the league in receptions the last time they played together everyone knows it will work.

 

It makes much less sense for a first year HC to not do this if he can. Now the Redskins could balk at this franchise tag Kirk and force the issue next year but everyone knows that Kyle's made it clear. He will wait a year for Kirk if we play hard ball. Might as well do the deed this off season so we can get picks back instead of losing him for nothing

 

Quote

 

He would have to give up major resources and apply them to one player - Two second round picks to answer the QB position question on a guy that he knows can play in the league is smart. It's not risky, he's going to use one of those picks or maybe even a higher pick on a QB anyway so really your against them losing only a a single 2nd round pick for a QB? I don't get it. Either Kyle gets Kirk this year or next at this point, might as well do it now with so much Free Agency money in the San Fran pocket. 

 

Also, if hit does not work he will not be able to recover - So you don't believe in Kirk then? Why wouldn't it work there when we are discussing a player we want to sign ourselves? Time to stop that narrative or admit that Kirk's not worth what he's asking for here if he's a question mark about working out or not. 

 

Quote

I also find it interesting that all the mocks have the 49ers taking Trubisky at #2 - Do you want the rookie if your them or Kirk? One guys a project, the other guys shown he can do it in your offense. If you say you want the super unknown well then your not a believer in Kirk so why do you want him here then? Rookie QBs are RISKY, extremely risky. Kirk isn't risky he's shown he works in this league. This trade is all lined up for them, it's great for the 49ers and sucks for us, but Kirk won't sign here long term anyway so its us making the best of a bad situation

[Est.1974]

34 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

4 of 5 on CBS have SF taking Trubisky - http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/mock-draft

Here is 3 out of 5 at NFl.com - http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/mock-drafts

 

That's 7 of 10 - and that's just two sites. I have seen it elsewhere too.

 

$80M in CA goes quickly when you need just about everything. Trading for Kirk is anything but obvious. If Kirk even stumbles a little bit in SF the whole thing will come down around both him and Kyle quickly. On the other hand, Kyle will have a much longer leash if he goes the more traditional way. And I know he has a 6 yr contract. Teams fire coaches before the contract is over all the time. Jed York is the king or impatience.

 

You said all. It levels out nearer half of the mocks. If York is the king of impatience, why does Shanny Jr get a longer leash drafting a QB in a mediocre class. Trade for Kirk, Garcon probably follows, still got 50mil to spend and still have some avenues through the draft, doesn't take much to get to 8 wins in his first season. Beats 2-14 and a rookie QB already mashed.

 

Really don't agree, it would be a great move for Shanny Jr and Lynch.

[goskins10]

11 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

You said all. It levels out nearer half of the mocks. If York is the king of impatience, why does Shanny Jr get a longer leash drafting a QB in a mediocre class. Trade for Kirk, Garcon probably follows, still got 50mil to spend and still have some avenues through the draft, doesn't take much to get to 8 wins in his first season. Beats 2-14 and a rookie QB already mashed.

 

Really don't agree, it would be a great move for Shanny Jr and Lynch.

 

Didn't mean to say all. It was a mistake. I meant many - which is true. You also said they Jonathan Allen is a "popular choice" when at least half have Trubisly with the rest being split.

 

So if it's such a goode move for the 49ers, what makes it a good thing for the redskins? The Redskins have to agree, right? If Kirk is such a key part of the 49ers success and such a great move fro them, why would the redskins let him go?

 

Your entire thought process is based on your deep rooted dislike for the Redskins FO and are assuming they have no idea what tey are doing. If you look at it without a bias, it is really too much a risk.

 

28 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

 

 

Not even wasting my time with this one. Where did I say I have no faith in Kirk. A stupid assumption and irrational jump.

 

To that end, I am done with this idiocy. I will be back to this thread when something actually happens. Please, carry on with the irrational discussion. Not wasting any more of my time on it.

 

 

[bobandweave]

12 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

Not even wasting my time with this one. Where did I say I have no faith in Kirk. A stupid assumption and irrational jump.

 

 

Haha okay man your right, you said if it doesn't work with Kirk in San Fran, which implies that you have doubts about him. Sorry to point that out to you but if you have no doubt about Kirk here then you shouldn't have doubt with him there. Simple logic but lost on you. 

[Est.1974]

13 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

Your entire thought process is based on your deep rooted dislike for the Redskins FO and are assuming they have no idea what tey are doing.

 

You obviously don't read my posts correctly. That's about as far away from being accurate as you could get.

[Alexa]

I think Kirk should get slightly less than Luck.

[HTTRDynasty]

1 hour ago, elkabong82 said:

 

Yes, Reed was so good that at the start of last season he wasn't even going to be the starter until Niles Paul got hurt. 

 

You used the Reed W-L thing to state a point that Kirk is reliant on his main weapon (as if other QBs somehow aren't as well), but you included stats from when Reed wasn't a primary weapon and when Kirk wasn't a full time starter. I looked at THIS season, when both were established starters, and the drop off without Reed, in terms of overall production (NOT just W-L since that is a team stat that goes beyond just 2 players) wasn't there. 

 

Since you seemingly are unwilling to bring up the stats for THIS season for Kirk when Reed was in and not in:

 

Reed out week 6 and 7, out or a decoy week 13 through 16. 

 

Kirk w/ Reed, 10 games:  273/399  68%  3,263 yds  18 pass TDs, 8 INTs, sacked 16, 0 rush TDs : 1.8 TDs per game, 0.8 INTs per game

Kirk w/o Reed, 6 games:  133/207 64%   1,654 yds  7 pass TDs, 4 INTs, sacked 7, 4 rush TDs : 1.8 TDs per game, 0.66 INTs per game

 

 

 

Reed has always been an extremely good receiving TE since he came into the league, and definitely at the start of the 2015 season.    Please don't insult the intelligence of this forum by trying to claim otherwise.  His issues have always been health and blocking.  Niles Paul was talked about as the starter going into 2015 because he was a much more capable blocker than Reed.  I'm pretty sure we can agree that receiving prowess out of a TE is a bigger boon to a QB than blocking prowess. 

 

Anyway, sure, we can just use 2016 stats if you want.  By the way, Reed was actually out vs. Arizona too, so it's 9 games with Reed and 7 games without Reed or with him as a decoy:

 

Kirk w/ Reed, 9 games: 251/364, 69%, 331 yards per game, 17 pass TDs, 6 INTs, sacked 12 times, 0 rush TDs: 1.9 TDs per game, 0.67 INTs per game

Kirk w/o Reed, 7 games: 155/242, 64%, 277 yards per game, 8 pass TDs, 6 INTs, sacked 11 times, 4 rush TDs: 1.7 TDs per game, 0.86 INTs per game

 

The passer rating stats with and without Reed this season?  104 passer rating with Reed.  92 passer rating without Reed.

 

[Wildbunny]

1 hour ago, PigskinRedskin said:

I don't know...that's a tough call..

Damn how in the hell did you get this picture of my wife?

 

41 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

To that end, I am done with this idiocy. I will be back to this thread when something actually happens. Please, carry on with the irrational discussion. Not wasting any more of my time on it.

We should have glimpse of answer in the next three days though.

 

27 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Haha okay man your right, you said if it doesn't work with Kirk in San Fran, which implies that you have doubts about him. Sorry to point that out to you but if you have no doubt about Kirk here then you shouldn't have doubt with him there. Simple logic but lost on you. 

The 49ers are on hell on a crappy team since Harbaugh left. It'll take time to climb up. Kirk wouldn't help much.