2018 Free Agency Database - (Signed: WILLIAMS - McPhee - Scandrick - P-Rich) - (Lauvao, Bergstrom, Nsehke, Taylor, Z. Brown and Quick re-signed)

[steve09ru]

5 minutes ago, CTskin said:

So, you and I view draft picks differently. I absolutely believe that we would land a starter out of an extra 3rd, 4th, and 5th draft pick. I don't think many would disagree.

 

Spaight played well last year and may very well be our starter next year. Injuries previously kept him down.

Kyshon was our starter and all of us had high hopes until the injury. You can't discount the find him because of a freak injury.

Roullier will most likely be our starting C this year.

Montae is our starting FS. Kid's a beast.

JHC is the nickel tweener that Su'a couldn't be. 

Ionnidis is obviously very good.

The jury's still out about Davis and Sprinkle as late round skill position players rarely blossom in their rookie year. 

 

I just don't comprehend how you're discounting mid-round draft picks the way that you are. Also, to go back a couple more years, there was obviously Kirk, Breeland, Thompson, Alf... Read up amigo, there's plenty of talent available after the first couple of rounds.

 

 

Holy hell

I'm not saying there's not talent after the 3rd but to avoid proven starter talent that can improve your team to collect a couple comp. picks in hopes that they can become starters is where I do not agree. 

 

And the ones you mentioned still have not proven to be reliable starters.  How many times have we said "person X is going to be great and prove to be a great find" only to have them flame out?  Just to name a handful that people were saying the same thing on:  Rambo, Jenkins, Phillip Thomas, Seastrunk, Richard Crawford, Keenan Robinson

[Unbias]

Looks like the Eagles just got Michael Bennett and a 7th round pick for some backup WR and a 5th round pick....

 

Why can't we be a part of any deals that look like that? It's annoying. What do they do that's so different where people want to trade talented players their way? 

[CTskin]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

As I was telling Bobweave in my post to him, its a tough point to explain because its a grey one and can be taken if different directions -- if you take my point out of context.  That's what you are doing here -- and i know its not on purpose.  So let me clarify.

 

I LOVE keeping draft picks.  (I just wrote a whole bunch of posts about how I hate trading draft picks)

 

But If I have major FA needs, I am not letting a future comp pick preclude me from signing said impact FA especially if he's young.

SIP- my response was to another guy. And it began because he had no interest in late round picks. I was just making a point that there's absolutely value there, especially in 3rd and 4th rounders. But at the same time, I'd gladly pick up a definitive upgrade in FA if I knew it canceled out one of these picks.

 

My worry is derived from the Redskin way of free agency in which we overpay average talent. I don't want to see us land backup players like the Macs and cancel out a comp pick. 

[Rufus T Firefly]

Has to be another move coming for Philly. My guess is Vinny Curry is a June 1 cut, would save them about 9 mil. Or they trade him and save 5. Bennett probably turns some of his roster bonus into signing bonus and the Eagles actually get better while saving cap. 

 

That's how you do it when you have a window to win. Just to be clear, it's not how you do it when you're in the bottom half of your conference.

[CTskin]

14 minutes ago, steve09ru said:

I'm not saying there's not talent after the 3rd but to avoid proven starter talent that can improve your team to collect a couple comp. picks in hopes that they can become starters is where I do not agree. 

 

And the ones you mentioned still have not proven to be reliable starters.  How many times have we said "person X is going to be great and prove to be a great find" only to have them flame out?  Just to name a handful that people were saying the same thing on:  Rambo, Jenkins, Phillip Thomas, Seastrunk, Richard Crawford, Keenan Robinson

Sure, they're far from a guarantee. But I'd rather let our guys walk who want to be overpaid. If we land a stud, I'll happily cancel out a comp pick. I just think that we need to treat FA a bit differently knowing we have those on the line. 

[steve09ru]

Just now, CTskin said:

Sure, they're far from a guarantee. But I'd rather let our guys walk who want to be overpaid. If we land a stud, I'll happily cancel out a comp pick. I just think that we need to treat FA a bit differently knowing we have those on the line. 

Agreed - I don't think we go into free agency for depth or overpay average and lose the comp picks (at least the higher regarded ones) but I also don't think we sit quietly and avoid solid contributors/starters because we can get a comp pick.  It'd basically be saying don't offer Allen Robinson because we could potentially get a 3rd or 4th round comp. or don't go after a starting ILB because we could get a 5th for Brown.

[Unbias]

4 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

Has to be another move coming for Philly. My guess is Vinny Curry is a June 1 cut, would save them about 9 mil. Or they trade him and save 5. Bennett probably turns some of his roster bonus into signing bonus and the Eagles actually get better while saving cap. 

 

That's how you do it when you have a window to win. Just to be clear, it's not how you do it when you're in the bottom half of your conference.

 

Yeah, they have some moves to make. I read they can cut/trade/renegotiate with Curry, Celek, Foles and Peters. 

 

This just pisses me off. I wonder if we had a GM like Howie Roseman what we could have gotten for Kirk and what the Smith trade would have looked like...

5 minutes ago, CTskin said:

Sure, they're far from a guarantee. But I'd rather let our guys walk who want to be overpaid. If we land a stud, I'll happily cancel out a comp pick. I just think that we need to treat FA a bit differently knowing we have those on the line. 

 

You do realize almost every free agent signed want to be overpaid? Every guy we've signed came here because we gave more money, period. Outside of New England it's always about the money. 

[Rufus T Firefly]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

As I was telling Bobweave in my post to him, its a tough point to explain because its a grey one and can be taken if different directions -- if you take my point out of context.  That's what you are doing here -- and i know its not on purpose.  So let me clarify.

 

I LOVE keeping draft picks.  (I just wrote a whole bunch of posts about how I hate trading draft picks)

 

But If I have major FA needs, I am not letting a future comp pick preclude me from signing said impact FA to address that need especially if he's young.

 

While late round draft picks can bring impact players.  For me I am not going to rely on them in advance to address a major need. 

Going after comp picks is an odd strategy, imo, unless you're in certain specific situations. Like teams like Green Bay which is going to lose players pretty much every year, knowing you'll have a couple extra choices to recoup talent is nice. But Baltimore has gone too hard after them, imo. They limit themselves to castoffs every year, and even in years where it seems like they could make a real run they are stuck with talent deficiencies because they chase subpar FAs.

 

If I were in charge, this probably would have been the year we would have gone for some comp picks. My one year rebuild would have been- tag and deal Kirk for whatever you can get; gauge trade value for a few vets (like Norman, Reed, Davis, Smith); look to trade down in draft with an eye on extra value by getting picks in future years; stay out of FA, potentially get comp picks for Breeland, Brown Long, Murphy; bring back Galette for right price with an eye towards dealing him if he has the year I expect; sign one cheap vet mentor type QB; draft two developmental QBs outside the 1st round; look to lock up a couple of our own long-term; stay well under the cap to have big number to roll over, which would combine with the dead cap hits coming off the books in 2019 to give us a lot of room.

 

This would have given us a lot of draft capital, two shots at developing a future QB and a lot of cap space moving forward so we could start doing what rebuilding type teams do these days- sign guys with big roster bonuses, so you're never under the threat of big release fees and keep resetting your cap.

 

As it stands now, though, I don't really think it makes sense to worry about comp picks. We traded a young stud and a draft pick for a 34 year old QB and look to be backloading cap contracts. This is a win-now strategy. And as much as I don't like that, if you do it, you have to follow through. Cheaping out on FAs to gain an extra 4th or 5th in a year doesn't make any sense as part of that plan.

 

[Est.1974]

Eagles got several base salaries they can play around with to sort their cap out. That's a great move for them. 

 

So, when are we getting this second rounder for Cravens 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

 

As it stands now, though, I don't really think it makes sense to worry about comp picks. We traded a young stud and a draft pick for a 34 year old QB and look to be backloading cap contracts. This is a win-now strategy. And as much as I don't like that, if you do it, you have to follow through. Cheaping out on FAs to gain an extra 4th or 5th in a year doesn't make any sense as part of that plan.

 

 

Yeah, totally.  If they are going in that direction just wear the whole outfit.  Like you, I don't like it either.  But if you are going to play a major hand in a win now mode -- at that point just carry the whole thing out, don't half way do this.  

[CTskin]

5 minutes ago, Unbias said:

You do realize almost every free agent signed want to be overpaid? Every guy we've signed came here because we gave more money, period. Outside of New England it's always about the money. 

Overpay proven talent. Don't overpay backups. Again, my example is the Macs of last year. 

 

8 minutes ago, steve09ru said:

Agreed - I don't think we go into free agency for depth or overpay average and lose the comp picks (at least the higher regarded ones) but I also don't think we sit quietly and avoid solid contributors/starters because we can get a comp pick.  It'd basically be saying don't offer Allen Robinson because we could potentially get a 3rd or 4th round comp. or don't go after a starting ILB because we could get a 5th for Brown.

Yea Allen Robinson isn't on my wish list because I think he'll get pretty big money. A couple of years ago it would have made sense, but he regressed and tore his ACL since. 

 

The other part of the issue is that this FA class is terrible.

[Audible_Red40]

44 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

As I was telling Bobweave in my post to him, its a tough point to explain because its a grey one and can be taken if different directions -- if you take my point out of context.  That's what you are doing here -- and i know its not on purpose.  So let me clarify.

 

I LOVE keeping draft picks.  (I just wrote a whole bunch of posts about how I hate trading draft picks)

 

But If I have major FA needs, I am not letting a future comp pick preclude me from signing said impact FA to address that need especially if he's young.

 

While late round draft picks can bring impact players.  For me I am not going to rely on them in advance to address a major need. 

Not only that, a 2019 comp pick does us no good in 2018 and chances are very slim that they will make an immediate impact in 2019 as well.

 

I understand the comp pick, how it works, and it's luxury of getting one.  But more than likely you're waiting 2 years AT BEST before one will contribute.

 

We all know a 3rd round comp pick is basically a 4th round pick.  Food for thought, and I only went back to 2010.  There have been 30 - 3rd round comp picks awarded.  Zero, none, nil, zilch have made a probowl.

 

 

 

[bobandweave]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I didn't say a thing in that post about the Alex Smith trade. I talked about trading high draft picks (to me 1st-4th) for a veteran, which one has worked out so far? It's clear as heck that the majority of them bombed -- I can argue that ALL of them were failures to different degrees.  But if people want to split hairs and say hey most were bad, but one or two weren't awful, OK on that.   No argument IMO its been a failed policy here -- only question left is how bad -- crazy awful level of bad or just plain bad.    Anyway you cut it its been on the aggregate bad. 

 

  My point isn't that teams can't make good trades where they give up high picks.  See Howie Roseman who also knows how to acquire high picks.  I am saying that's not been the case with Vinny or Bruce.  Bruce is still here so the point is relevant. 

 

Why quote me if you refuse to answer the questions I ask you? I asked you with your negative outlook on trading for Veterans what does Alex have to do to show you that this was a good trade? If your never going to answer that question its shady and I don't have time for it.

 

Answer that for all of us while your banging your drum about trading for Vets not working out. Or stop shouting about old trades that mean nothing anymore. The people who were making those ancient trades aren't here anymore. Talking about them does no good and you saying to me again you like Alex Smith more then I do is beyond redic when you refusing to answer what he has to do to make it seem like a good trade to you lol

[JSSkinz]

47 minutes ago, fordranger76 said:

Massive cuts have to come with this latest Eagles move. If I am looking at it right they are roughly 18 million over the cap.

They are about to cut Vinny Curry which saves them $9M but yeah, they have more cuts to come.

[Audible_Red40]

Triple post, computer froze

 

[CTskin]

17 minutes ago, Audible_Red40 said:

Not only that, a 2019 comp pick does us no good in 2018 and chances are very slim that they will make an immediate impact in 2019 as well.

 

I understand the comp pick, how it works, and it's luxury of getting one.  But more than likely you're waiting 2 years AT BEST before one will contribute.

 

We all know a 3rd round comp pick is basically a 4th round pick.  Food for thought, and I only went back to 2010.  There have been 30 - 3rd round comp picks awarded.  Zero, none, nil, zilch have made a probowl.

 

This could blow up in my face, but how many FA pickups have we had that have gone on to make a pro bowl since 2010? Btw, pro bowl appearances are probably the worst litmus test to use for talent, but I'll play.

 

[bobandweave]

4 hours ago, steve09ru said:

Why are you so hard up on these damn comp picks?  They are end of the round picks and nothing guaranteed and the risk is higher on these panning out than having a solid contributor from FA.  There are MLBs/ILBs out there in FA that would be much better gets than having a pick in the 170s.  Also, not to mention these picks aren't until 2019 so the value is even worse to not do something in FA for the potential of a 4th or 5th next year.

 

What part of signing our own players are you forgetting? Look no idea if your understanding the state of the team right now....

 

Offensively they need playmakers

Defensively they need a NT

 

Now they go into free agency, and let half the Defense go, they have made the team much worse then it was last year. If they do that and it's looking like it then where are they at? 

 

Offensively they still need playmakers

Defensively they need to replace half of the starters and still need a NT

 

Some of you are just not understanding this at all. By not signing their own guys, they are opening huge holes in the team that didn't exist before.

 

They are going to spend money either on other teams players or the guys they had last year. If they let the guys go who were here last year they have to replace them. If they replace them with other teams players they screw themselves out of getting any comp picks for the guys they are going to lose.

 

Make no mistake they are going to lose players to other teams this year. Expecting that the right thing to do is sign the guys they can who were here last year because that does not hurt them at all, and get picks to restock the team next year for the players they lost.  

 

Or they can with 25 million try and compete in a market with other teams guys giving up half the defense when it was starting to play better and lose those damn compensatory picks as well. And what is the message? Play better and they won't pay you. Horrible management

[steve09ru]

6 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Why quote me if you refuse to answer the questions I ask you? I asked you with your negative outlook on trading for Veterans what does Alex have to do to show you that this was a good trade? If your never going to answer that question its shady and I don't have time for it.

 

Answer that for all of us while your banging your drum about trading for Vets not working out. Or stop shouting about old trades that mean nothing anymore. The people who were making those ancient trades aren't here anymore. Talking about them does no good and you saying to me again you like Alex Smith more then I do is beyond redic when you refusing to answer what he has to do to make it seem like a good trade to you lol

I know this wasn't directed at me but I'll give you a few points as to why I view it as a good trade (my opinion):

- stability for another 3 years at the most important position

- Fuller was horrendous on the outside so he was pretty much stuck to the nickel which a solid qb > solid nickel any day of the week

- Smith and Kirk with similar Adjusted Yard Per Attempt & Y/A

- Smith with a better Int%

- Smith is more mobile and can extend plays better

- Protects the ball better overall

- Similar completion percentage

- He didn't need to throw as much as Kirk in years past but in the couple seasons he did, his numbers were on par with Kirk with fewer turnovers.

- $$$ does not appear to be bad either

[bobandweave]

3 hours ago, JoggingGod said:

Great idea. Don’t sign players that can help you just so you can get extra 5th rounders. Comp picks aren’t valuable resources. They’re a consolation prize.

 

Clearly you need to run along.

 

I said use the money you want to spend on other teams players to sign its own players. That way they don't find themselves in a position going into the draft being much worse then they are now on that side of the ball and can truly elevate the offense. 

 

Your plan is to screw up the defense, for a 700 yard receiver Russell Wilson couldn't turn into a good player and get into bidding wars with teams that have 5 times the amount of cap space the Redskins do now. 

[dyst]

35 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 So, when are we getting this second rounder for Cravens 

This ****ing team couldn’t get a 2nd round pick for him if he was a pro bowlers on his rookie contract and the best safety in the league. We are prey, teams take advantage of us. So you are absolutely correct.

 

Only a terrible organization can’t ****ing get any compensation for an incredible talents like RG3 and Kirk. Young QBs who lead a team to the playoffs and nada...because we ****ing lower the value of our players publicly.

 

Also, damn the Eagles and their competence.

[Audible_Red40]

2 minutes ago, CTskin said:

This could blow up in my face, but how many FA pickups have we had that have gone on to make a pro bowl since 2010? Btw, pro bowl appearances are probably the worst litmus test to use for talent, but I'll play.

 

I know pro bowl is a bad example, but I don't have the time to go through and find "impact" player.  My point was you'd have to wait until at least year 3 in 99% of the cases when drafting a "comp pick" player to make an impact.

 

It was a lazy way of saying impact player.  FA's will supply more of an impact then a comp pick.  So you got me on that, but I can certainly say we have had more impact on some FA signings then the league has had on comp picks

[steve09ru]

1 minute ago, bobandweave said:

 

What part of signing our own players are you forgetting? Look no idea if your understanding the state of the team right now....

 

Offensively they need playmakers

Defensively they need a NT

 

Now they go into free agency, and let half the Defense go, they have made the team much worse then it was last year. If they do that and it's looking like it then where are they at? 

 

Offensively they still need playmakers

Defensively they need to replace half of the starters

 

Some of you are just not understanding this at all. By not signing there own guys, they are opening huge holes in the team that didn't exist before. They are going to spend money either on other teams players or the guys they had last year. If they let the guys go who were here last year they have to replace them. If they replace them with other teams players they screw themselves out of getting any comp picks for the guys they are going to lose. Make no mistake they are going to lose players to other teams this year. Expecting that the right thing to do is sign the guys they can who were here last year because that does not hurt them at all, and get picks to restock the team next year for the players they lost.  

 

Or they can with 25 million try and compete in a market with other teams guys giving up half the defense when it was starting to play better and lose those damn compensatory picks as well. 

They've lost 3 starters on D and will have a few that were out last year back healthy.  We need an ILB and CB due to Breeland and Brown (Brown may still be back but sounds like he is asking to get paid more than he's worth considering he is not very good against the pass and can't call a defense like all other MLB). We can upgrade in FA for what Brown is looking for.  Breeland can be replaced internally with one of the younger guys stepping up as we saw glimpses of last year - we could also go FA route here or bring Breeland back after he finds out his true market value >> same situation as Brown.

 

Offensively we need to grab a receiver and rb (unless we think Perine can be our starter with Thompson 3rd down with occasional 1-2).

 

I think it's smart not to overpay for Breeland and Brown and let them test the market.  I don't think they'll get what they are asking for and there's a chance they find their way back for fair market value.

[bobandweave]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

As I was telling Bobweave in my post to him, its a tough point to explain because its a grey one and can be taken if different directions -- if you take my point out of context.  That's what you are doing here -- and i know its not on purpose.  So let me clarify.

 

I LOVE keeping draft picks.  (I just wrote a whole bunch of posts about how I hate trading draft picks)

 

Your joking right? You LOVE keeping draft picks, while loving to let our players go to others teams and sacrificing more draft picks in the process hahaha. I've heard it all now

[Skinsinparadise]

5 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Why quote me if you refuse to answer the questions I ask you? I asked you with your negative outlook on trading for Veterans what does Alex have to do to show you that this was a good trade? If your never going to answer that question its shady and I don't have time for it.

 

 

I answered this question many times in other threads you participate in -- let alone I am refusing to answer it.  I am not sure how many times I have to explain my position on Alex.  I get your position.  I don't mean this sarcastically but I've hit every angle imaginable to you about this trade.  As you've hit with me.  Maybe if FA wasn't coming soon -- I'd be more into refreshing some of the points since there isn't much else to think about it. 

 

And I get people aren't going to remember everything.   I am just bored with rehashing stuff right now.  I've written to you a bible worth of opinions on it.  As you have with me.   However, since you asked again so nicely and sugarcoated it using the wordy "shady" I'll oblige. 

 

By the way, not sure what shady motive anyone would have on any topic?  I am secretly avoiding telling people what I think on aspects of Alex Smith for nefarious reasons?    But leaving that alone, here's my answer again.  

 

If you recall my take on Alex Smith is they need to do better than treading water.  It can't be hey we are 8-8 again but at least we don't stink.  They need to have a good playoff run.  Not, we snuck into the playoffs once and got knocked out in the first round.   We've been there and done that enough.  If that's the new holy grail for the team -- one and done in the playoffs every 3-5 years than that's sad to me.  That's not my version of success.  And I'd hope Alex can make this team a contender for 3 years. 

 

I can tolerate 8-8 when I think the QB is going to be here for another 7 years and things are evolving.  But not for a QB who might only be here for 3 years where we'd have to start over.  And I get you think Alex will be here for much longer.  Personally, I think that's a wild card.   But I am not interested in reopening that whole discussion again.  I've made my point on that clear, too. 

[bobandweave]

1 hour ago, Unbias said:

Looks like the Eagles just got Michael Bennett and a 7th round pick for some backup WR and a 5th round pick....

 

Why can't we be a part of any deals that look like that? It's annoying. What do they do that's so different where people want to trade talented players their way? 

 

This was clearly a salary dump for the Seahawks. Not sure we want Michael Bennet for three years and 26 million with him being 32 years old now.