Priority of course is extending our own where appropriate. And yes, it’s imperative we continue to draft well and build with talented youth. That all said, for the first time in forever, we may indeed have more available cap money than we’ve ever enjoyed, if the projections are reasonably correct.
So, what would you, the armchair GM, do for this roster in addition to keeping our own talent?
Longterm we may need an upgrade at RT as well.
IMO come next off season those positions could be at the top of the wishlist. Things could change however.
Many will point to OV as a lesson in caution, but OV's problem was the projection. Reese saw a guy who was young and healthy (before his Giants tenure) that was a consistent 8 sack guy. The projection was that he was ready to take the next step into a consistent double-digit sack leader. It turns out he is and will be the consistent 8 sack guy, but now misses games on a yearly basis to injury.
Ideally, we continue to draft and develop our young talent. But the risk is that you are burning Barkley's youth in an attempt to save money and capture lightening in a bottle. If a difference maker like Yannick is available, you don't have to project what he will be. You don't have to wait and hope that he develops into a star. Pay him and capture his youth and productivity while it aligns with Barkley.
OL is imperative that we continue to draft/develop. We have to see what we have in Gates and Big George. But we can't wait as counting on Remmers and Solder is a losing hand in the long run. We need a long term answer at RT next year. Big George and Gates might only serve as depth. I would like a high draft pick at OT next year to add to the stable. Long term, Hernandez will be looking to be extended in 2 years. If he continues his development, he'll set the market. Zeitler if he continues his steady play will be looking for an extension at the same time. It is reasonable that we might be having the highest paid tandem at guard in a few years. Solder's contract will be tolling at the same time. We can't have 3 out of 5 OL be paid top salaries for their position. While it is nice to find OL to develop in the later rounds, sometimes you need to hedge your bet by picking talent higher.
The big NYG FA's will be Rosas (RFA), Remmers, Eli obviously and role players.
so, they can choose to be involved in FA if they decide or could extend young guys Barkley (if they want) or some of the other young guys who have 2020 as their last year under contract like Peppers. I don't have the answer, but it's interesting to think about.
I'll give you an example of what I mean. The Cowboys are projected to have the 2nd most space ($74M, but they have many potential FA's including Prescott (who would eat up $25M+ of that $74M, Sean Lee, Amari Cooper, La'el Collins, Byron Jones, Robert Quinn, and more.
No to Daryl Williams. Can't continue to set the market for OL especially those with an injury history.
And definitely no to Clowney. He's a dog.
Only big time FA I'd really go after is Myles Jack and the depending on how Remmers and some of the young tackles look, maybe Daryl William's or bring in Jack Conklin to compete on a 1 year deal.
interesting, and any position other than RB a healthy super star is a no-brainer, but teams just seem hesitant to give that 2nd RB contract early. So, in that case look for more opportunities like Peppers (if he's a good fit and high performer this year).
I'd also look at someone like Sean Davis or Justin Simmons at FS.
Kidding aside but if these draft classes pan out, would've nice to be able to keep them.
Happy Birthday I believe
Let's see what happens with WR. Will Slayton or Russell develop?
OLB/pass rush - again need to see if Carter and Xman develop or if Golden regains form.
FS - this seems to be the area most in need of help. Maybe Love turns into a keeper with his CB ability.
TE - will Engram shine or will they need a dominant TE
Quote:
would you tackle?
Happy Birthday I believe
Yesterday. Thanks, buddy
My sentiments exactly. Not only a power starting o-line, but young studs backing up the starters who have the qualities of future pro-bowlers. Build it like a concrete wall / bulldozer with solid depth. Keep Jones healthy and safe for the rest of his Giants' career.
Yannick Ngakoue would be my top target for ER. If we can't sign him I'd go after Clowney. If we can't sign either I'd go after Matt Judon.
I'd try to sign either Daryl Williams or Jack Conklin.
Jaylon Smith is a RFA next year, because he didn't play his entire rookie year. So he's off the table. In order at LB I'd try to sign one of Myles Jack, Jatavis Brown or Kamu Grugier-Hill.
I 100% agree with going after Jaylon Williams if he continues to stay healthy. Dallas is having a hard time paying the top 3 guys in Dak, Zeke, and Cooper. It looks as if Smith is not a priority. Nothing better than strengthening your team while weakening a division rival.
Also, I think it makes sense to pay for an OL. OL used to be one of the highest hit rates in the draft. It is becoming the worst now. It is so hard to evaluate OL in college nowadays. EVERY TEAM is in need of OL. If zi am going to spend big money then OL tops the list before pass rusber for me. 3/5 of our OL looks set. The two main question marks are C and RT. If they work out then resign them. If not, we could be players in the OL market. This doesn't mean that we should just ignore the position in the draft. We still need some developmental players but that is where those mid round picks come in handy.
We also may need a backup QB and a guy like Keenum could fit the bill.
Overall, just because we have the money doesn't mean we will be reckless with it. I think OL makes the most sense in protecting your top two picks the last two years in Barkley and Jones. That has to be a priority. After that edge rusher could be in play but no need to overspend imo. Jaylon Smith could line up next to Connelly next year and that looks pretty damn good. I don't think we should spend big on WR either as we seem to be getting production from the WR group. But the draft will have plenty of talent available there.
The players get the same guaranteed money, the team spends a lot of cap room up front to ensure additional space in subsequent years, and it helps keep the dead money from becoming an issue if the free agent(s) turn out to be a bad fit.
The only thing I can think of that might be a sticking point could be agents actually knowing the value of the dead money as implied leverage to help ensure that a greater sum of non-guaranteed money becomes likely to be paid.
Why would anybody want that?
And then rinse and repeat with the top picks in the draft, though you can probably wait on OL a little bit if they add a starter via FA.
F/A. Absolutely see if u can go ER. Or a real active ilb who can cover or top ballhawk safety
I like the idea so much of signing better core players who’s arrow is up like ss than overpaying a guy to stay when in f/a like jpp
The players get the same guaranteed money, the team spends a lot of cap room up front to ensure additional space in subsequent years, and it helps keep the dead money from becoming an issue if the free agent(s) turn out to be a bad fit.
The only thing I can think of that might be a sticking point could be agents actually knowing the value of the dead money as implied leverage to help ensure that a greater sum of non-guaranteed money becomes likely to be paid.
It is an interesting theory to discuss. A number of factors have to be considered to employ such a tactic.
First and foremost, we will have an eye to taking care of our own. Barkley is going to get paid a ton. He doesn't strike me as a player that will be demanding a new contract after next year when he'll be eligible. Also, the DG has annointed SB as the Chosen One. He is the Franchise. DG won't run Barkley into the ground with 5th year options and subsequent Franchise Tags. Barkley will get his deal, but it will likely be at the end of year 4. Planning ahead of time by rolling over cap will ensure the Giants are not left with their pants down.
The type of player personality wise determines if the high salary tactic could be used. For example, if Jalen Ramsay and Yannick are both to be paid, both deserve the money. But Jalen strikes me as a player interested in not only getting what he deserves, but also capturing the headline as being the highest paid. Once the PR subsides and other players surpass the benchmark, Ramsey will be griping about his contract in the team friendly years. Yannick on the other hand strikes me as a player who just wants to be fairly compensated. The headline doesn't matter to him. A player such as him, you can pay the high salary in year 1 with lower salaries in subsequent years.
Overall, I think it would be a good idea to front load the contract. With the emphasis on culture, DG isn't going to be shopping for players interested in capturing the headlines.
Hopefully add good OL talent via the draft.
IOW (and this is an obviously extreme example to make a point) I thought you couldn't give a player a 5 year 100M contract with a $98M salary in year 1 and a $1M signing bonus and 250k salaries year 2 - 5.
Or am I just completely mistaken?
IOW (and this is an obviously extreme example to make a point) I thought you couldn't give a player a 5 year 100M contract with a $98M salary in year 1 and a $1M signing bonus and 250k salaries year 2 - 5.
Or am I just completely mistaken?
I think there might be a rule that dictates the maximum year over year decrease in salary within the same contract, or at least there used to be, if memory serves. If that's the case, you're right - it would dictate the extent to which this tactic could be utilized.
Quote:
about how much of the contract can be in the first year(s) as salary or was that just in the uncapped year?
IOW (and this is an obviously extreme example to make a point) I thought you couldn't give a player a 5 year 100M contract with a $98M salary in year 1 and a $1M signing bonus and 250k salaries year 2 - 5.
Or am I just completely mistaken?
I think there might be a rule that dictates the maximum year over year decrease in salary within the same contract, or at least there used to be, if memory serves. If that's the case, you're right - it would dictate the extent to which this tactic could be utilized.
I think what PJ is referring to was within regards to the uncapped year. In his hypothetical, it couldn't happen as there are minimum that must be adhered to. Assumption that anyone getting a second contract is a vested veteran so the vet. minimum has to be the floor. A 250K salary is fiction, but for the sake of the hypothetical the point is clear.
Now, I can't remember specifics, but I think we did this with Osi's contract. His initial year was front loaded and subsequent years decreased. But in Osi's case, he was bitching in the later years because those year's salary was vastly underpaid. It is a delicate situation because then the club is made to look like bad guys when they have to remind the player that they were already paid.
Meh. Abrams is good enough, but hardly represents any sort of competitive advantage for the Giants.
This should be made into a neon sign and hung from a billboard stanchion on route 3.
There are no UFAs that are "must" re-signs on the roster. Remmers and the second group of receivers will be evaluated, but they won't block a younger, better replacement.
The Giants also have 2 straight 1st round picks they didn't re-sign or sign the 5th year option, that's talent that needs to be replaced and money that is there.
The key if they are going to open up the purse is to sign guys in their 5th or 6th year in the NFL not 9th or later.
Quote:
Thankfully, I believe Abrams has a good handle on things, imo
Meh. Abrams is good enough, but hardly represents any sort of competitive advantage for the Giants.
Wasn’t implying a competitive advantage. Merely stating that Abrams is quite good at what he does imo and so I have little concern with him moving forward. Nothing more than that.
If the arrow is pointing up, I'd follow the Colts lead from this offseason in targeting some "prove it" types and veteran cap casualties at positions of need. Maybe target a top shelf guy if there'e one there but it's pretty rare to find value in the early wave. I'm definitely in the "don't spend it just to spend it" camp.
The players get the same guaranteed money, the team spends a lot of cap room up front to ensure additional space in subsequent years, and it helps keep the dead money from becoming an issue if the free agent(s) turn out to be a bad fit.
The only thing I can think of that might be a sticking point could be agents actually knowing the value of the dead money as implied leverage to help ensure that a greater sum of non-guaranteed money becomes likely to be paid.
This is an interesting strategy and one that makes sense to me for the right candidate. But I don't think I've ever seen a team do this. There must be a valid reason why not.
2) LB because they're so important in a 3-4.
3) Anything else to solidify defense.
4) I'd actually rather invest in a premier double-threat TE and depth at WR rather than put huge money into a star WR. WR's always seem to get hurt and I'd rather have 3 very good and 2 good receivers rather than 1 great one and not much depth.
What positions make sense in free agency to me? Maybe a left tackle or a really good young center. A top wide receiver. A young Edge guy with a lot of upside.
Sometimes you can strike gold with guys who were buried on their previous team and are trying to step up, as Linval Joseph and Visanthe Shiancoe did on leaving the Giants for the Vikings. That's pretty much what the Giants did when they acquired Rob Carpenter in the 80s. Also pretty much how it went with Ottis Anderson, I think. Both turned out to be bargains because they weren't premier names .
The 2020 cap space is kind of a luxury, because it'll be a young team, but also a trap, because if they lean too much on acquiring FA veterans they're going to have trouble down the road.