Lombardi skewers Giants, speaks the truth on The Athletic

Williams is a good player. A strong DL with some pass rush and good run stopping. He was expected to be a star. That he is not and he's going to get over paid as a FA. He is not worth giving up a top 70 pick and that contract but he's miles better than Ogletree when Gettleman took that contract.

But he's not good enough to justify the level of investment in him, particularly considering the fact that Lawrence was already the best player on the defense and Hill was supposedly one of Gettleman's draft gems.

In comment 14701609 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

But he's not good enough to justify the level of investment in him, particularly considering the fact that Lawrence was already the best player on the defense and Hill was supposedly one of Gettleman's draft gems.

100% - spending assets on good, not great players and needing to spend market rates to keep them for a team not sniffing contention is so dumb.

a 1 year deal at the $15m DT tag in a year where we project to have have more cap room than we can spend (80m+) is not an overly significant investment IMO - which is why that's what I'd do for next year (especially with a new coaching staff/scheme likely). That investment is certainly lower and a lot less risky than a potential 4 year/50m+ deal whether it's for LW or a comparable player in UFA.

and if he resigns for a reasonable amount then we are talking about a 3rd and a 4th for a solid but unspectacular player. Which doesn't seem so out of balance to me given we aren't overflowing with solid players and we know the investment level paid was far below that paid for top level players his same age / draft pedigree (Ramsey, Tunsil, Mack, OBJ, etc). Yes he'd be a lot more expensive than a typical 3rd like BJ Hill, but he's also a better player from what i've seen.

And as far as BJ Hill goes he's definitely regressed and looking JAG'y but just the fact that he was good enough to make a few all rookie teams probably skews him closer towards a good outcome of a 3rd round pick than bad. As we are all too well aware more 3rd rounders probably never even see meaningful playing time than do. Or at least most of ours haven't in the last 3+ decades.

$15 million dollar "flyers" on tagged veterans. Spending cap room like a drunken sailor is how they've blown the cap the last two years.

saying more Markus Goldens is fine, but even if they could find more, he made $3.75m this year. That amount of cap space would accommodate 21 Markus Golden's. Giving LW $15m brings that number down to being able to sign 17 Markus Golden's.

I actually think going almost entirely with 1 year deals is a decent strategy - LW on a tag included. That keeps maximum future flexibility to resign players who prove they are worth it (as Markus Golden may have done this year). I wouldn't be opposed to targeting 1 or 2 guys on bigger multi-year deals as well like a Shaq Thompson or an OL, but I fail to see where having $65m free vs. $80m will preclude them from anything.

I believe either scenario is still more space than they had when they got drunk in March 2016 and miraculously signed 3 of the top 8 highest paid FA that offseason.

We are about the middle of the pack in available cap space. So the amount is relative. I could easily see us missing out on guys some around here pegged as good fits...

when discussing David Tepper's success as a business leader. Let's see how his 'now' restructuring of the Panthers' leadership team goes and how fairly Mike from Jersey evaluates it for us.

In comment 14701794 Eric on Li said:

Quote:

saying more Markus Goldens is fine, but even if they could find more, he made $3.75m this year. That amount of cap space would accommodate 21 Markus Golden's. Giving LW $15m brings that number down to being able to sign 17 Markus Golden's. I actually think going almost entirely with 1 year deals is a decent strategy - LW on a tag included. That keeps maximum future flexibility to resign players who prove they are worth it (as Markus Golden may have done this year). I wouldn't be opposed to targeting 1 or 2 guys on bigger multi-year deals as well like a Shaq Thompson or an OL, but I fail to see where having $65m free vs. $80m will preclude them from anything. I believe either scenario is still more space than they had when they got drunk in March 2016 and miraculously signed 3 of the top 8 highest paid FA that offseason.

Neither you nor I can predict with any accuracy who will be available or when at this point. Again, this team needs players at almost every position. Markus Golden was a discounted player coming back from injury looking to play a year cheap to build his value. Whatever they paid him isn't actually representative of the cost of adding healthy, effective players who are going to improve the state of the team. You don't want to rely on guys coming off big injuries.

And even if you don't spend it all, you CAN carry a percentage of your cap saved over to the next year. You don't have to burn it all.

In comment 14701799 bw in dc said:

Quote:

We are about the middle of the pack in available cap space. So the amount is relative. I could easily see us missing out on guys some around here pegged as good fits...

I tend to agree - I saw a list of the top 25 FA and most of the top 20 was projected to get resigned or tagged (including most BBI favorites like Yannick Ngakwe).

Separately, this is a pretty interesting chart from OTC that lays out which teams will be spenders and which won't based on available cap room + guys their need to resign. I don't believe it factors in guys who are likely to be cut (which should make our position look even more favorable).



Carolina in particular is not in good shape, so the best FA I could realistically see us landing is 1 of Shaq Thompson or James Bradberry. Both are guys who I think would be good signings.

In comment 14701811 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

Neither you nor I can predict with any accuracy who will be available or when at this point. Again, this team needs players at almost every position. Markus Golden was a discounted player coming back from injury looking to play a year cheap to build his value. Whatever they paid him isn't actually representative of the cost of adding healthy, effective players who are going to improve the state of the team. You don't want to rely on guys coming off big injuries. And even if you don't spend it all, you CAN carry a percentage of your cap saved over to the next year. You don't have to burn it all.

On all of the above we agree and especially the bolded part - which is why I don't have an issue securing LW's rights right now. He's a healthy, performing asset, albeit not coming off a peak year (but again we also aren't paying a peak price - off his pro bowl second year acquiring him would have probably cost 2 firsts). They clearly view him as a potential core piece, and those are not easy to find in FA even if they aren't gamebreakers. For every great Markus Golden/Shaq Thompson there are 10 Deone Buchanon/Daryl Williams who end up cut a year later.

At the end of the day it will come down to their evaluation of him - if he's a good player going forward who starts 85 games here like Linval Joseph has in Minnesota, it will be viewed as a good move - even if he never quite lives up to the draft hype. If they overpay pay him and he disappoints he will be Ogletree 2.0. I can't tell you which he'll be because I haven't seen him enough but I don't mind the gamble. And I don't think we are "over a barrel" to resign him since we can tag him.

mentioned on twitter today that he feels a lot of the players don’t fit the scheme in which James Bettcher is running.

This has been going on for years & it’s because the GM/HC are 2 separate entities. It was an issue with Coughlin/Reese and still present today.

We’ve got Pat Shurmur as coach with an OC who was clearly a Gettleman pick.

We are all over the place.

That's an interesting graph. I don't see that as depicting the Giants in an advantageous position. It seems to me it's more important to be far along the X-axis than the Y.

In comment 14701919 Go Terps said:

Quote:

That's an interesting graph. I don't see that as depicting the Giants in an advantageous position. It seems to me it's more important to be far along the X-axis than the Y.

I read it as you want to be in the top left quadrant (Colts and Dolphins in the best position). The Y axis is cap space (which is why it goes negative while the X axis doesn't). The higher up towards the top you are, the more cap room you have. We are slotted at $65m which is what we've seen reported.

The X axis is the OTC valuation of that team's UFA's. So the more good UFA's you have, the further to the right of the chart you are - like the Cowboys with Dak and Cooper leading the way of guys they need to resign.

We appear to be 1 of 6 teams in that top left quadrant projecting to have more cap room than players to resign. We also have room to further improve by cutting guys. Not sure we rate compared to others in terms of "room to be gained via cuts".

But wouldn't you want to be a team with good UFA's? If you don't sign them, you recoup comp picks...it's a market inefficiency the Pats have been exploiting for years.

The Dolphins have a lot of cap space, sure...but signing high-priced UFAs is not how you build the foundation for a good team. Miami has no players and a bunch of cash. Conversely, Dallas has a lot of players and a bunch of cash. They have the option of paying Dak and/or Cooper. Good players. New England has a bunch of players that are all going to walk and be overpaid somewhere else (like Trey Flowers and Trent Brown were last year).

I don't see the Giants in an advantageous position here.

I don't think the Cowboys consider it a good thing that they could lose Dak or Cooper. If they were able to recycle players the way the Pats do, maybe, but I don't think any other franchises have shown that they can do what the Pats do. Maybe Seattle/Philly to an extent, but they both utilize FA too.

The positive for the giants is that they enter this offseason with a clear cap and most of the core of the roster under contract on their first contract. The best utilization of that cap room is up for discussion but they have it and that's better than not having it.

did you suggest Leonard Williams would command two firsts if he was acquired after a year like his sole Pro Bowl season?

You know Khalil Mack basically went for 2 firsts, right?

In comment 14702126 jcn56 said:

Quote:

did you suggest Leonard Williams would command two firsts if he was acquired after a year like his sole Pro Bowl season? You know Khalil Mack basically went for 2 firsts, right?

I think I said if he'd been traded at his peak which is admittedly a highly improbable hypothetical - rarely are second year players drafted 6th overall, off a pro bowl with 3 years of control left on his first contract up for sale. The best currently aged DL comparables I could think of from the 2018 draft would be Daron Payne, Vita Vea, or Bradley Chubb. I think any of them would return what Minkah Fitzpatrick returned and it's conceivable all could still return more than that even with Chubb's injury. I know Vea in particular has been coming on this year.

In his second season - with 3 years of cost control ahead of him, he'd have been worth a lot more. Especially in light of the fact that you wouldn't know at that point that he'd never hit or surpass that year's sack total, and that his overall play would decline year over year.

In comment 14702136 jcn56 said:

Quote:

In his second season - with 3 years of cost control ahead of him, he'd have been worth a lot more. Especially in light of the fact that you wouldn't know at that point that he'd never hit or surpass that year's sack total, and that his overall play would decline year over year.

Correct - had things gone the same way there's no doubt whoever made that purchase would probably have some buyers remorse. But to buy low on anything previously high there's going to have been some non-ideal results along the way.

Maybe Williams just is what he is - a solid run plugger who gets some QB hits. Or maybe he is closer than anyone realizes to step his game up a little bit like both Smiths did after signing in GB this past season. For a 3rd + 4th round pick I think that's a decent gamble. Instead of risking a mega deal via UFA (which was far from a known outcome) we can tag him (twice if we want) for a motivated contract year. If it doesn't work out let him walk and recoup 1 of the picks. 0 dead money long term. Hopefully their eval on him is right and he ends up as good as Joseph worked out for Minnesota. Williams seems somewhat comparable to what Joseph was when Reese let him walk.

In comment 14701851 Eric on Li said:

Quote:

In comment 14701799 bw in dc said: Quote: We are about the middle of the pack in available cap space. So the amount is relative. I could easily see us missing out on guys some around here pegged as good fits... I tend to agree - I saw a list of the top 25 FA and most of the top 20 was projected to get resigned or tagged (including most BBI favorites like Yannick Ngakwe). Separately, this is a pretty interesting chart from OTC that lays out which teams will be spenders and which won't based on available cap room + guys their need to resign. I don't believe it factors in guys who are likely to be cut (which should make our position look even more favorable). Carolina in particular is not in good shape, so the best FA I could realistically see us landing is 1 of Shaq Thompson or James Bradberry. Both are guys who I think would be good signings.

This chart can't be accurate. How is the infallible TC running the Jaguars into the ground with the cap for a second time?

The core of the Giants roster stinks.

We can talk about cap space all we want. Anything the Giants build will be on sand. Lol p

Didn't mean to type the lol. Guess my phone finds the state of the Giants funny.

Those are the guys who should be in their 3rd, 4th, 5th years getting ready for their second contracts. That should be the core the way Byron Jones, Dak, Jaylon Smith, Zeke, etc. are a big chunk of the core of the Cowboys. Look at all the best rosters right now and this is an obvious fact. The Seahawks drafted Lockett, Carson, Griffin, Jarran Reed, Frank Clark, and a few other starters over those 3 years. The 49ers added Armstead, Buckner, Kittle, Tartt, DJ Jones, etc.

From our drafts those 3 years only Shepard has a 2nd contract here and he's been hurt most of the year. The only others who got multi-year 2nd contracts are Collins and Bobby Hart, though Flowers and Apple are at least still kind of starters. Tomlinson and Engram still have a chance. That's it and that is the biggest problem with this team and roster right now.

But all of that is well documented and it's why Jerry Reese and Marc Ross got fired. Complaints about "the core" is either willful ignorance of those poor results or agenda driven.

The young core from the past 2 drafts (Barkley, Jones, Lawrence, Connelly, Hernandez, Slayton) is already a lot more promising than those previous 3, though it's certainly still early especially for the 2019 picks.

In comment 14702458 Eric on Li said:

Quote:

Those are the guys who should be in their 3rd, 4th, 5th years getting ready for their second contracts. That should be the core the way Byron Jones, Dak, Jaylon Smith, Zeke, etc. are a big chunk of the core of the Cowboys. Look at all the best rosters right now and this is an obvious fact. The Seahawks drafted Lockett, Carson, Griffin, Jarran Reed, Frank Clark, and a few other starters over those 3 years. The 49ers added Armstead, Buckner, Kittle, Tartt, DJ Jones, etc. From our drafts those 3 years only Shepard has a 2nd contract here and he's been hurt most of the year. The only others who got multi-year 2nd contracts are Collins and Bobby Hart, though Flowers and Apple are at least still kind of starters. Tomlinson and Engram still have a chance. That's it and that is the biggest problem with this team and roster right now. But all of that is well documented and it's why Jerry Reese and Marc Ross got fired. Complaints about "the core" is either willful ignorance of those poor results or agenda driven. The young core from the past 2 drafts (Barkley, Jones, Lawrence, Connelly, Hernandez, Slayton) is already a lot more promising than those previous 3, though it's certainly still early especially for the 2019 picks.

If the Giants are so bereft of talent in the core (and I agree with you that they are), why don't they have more cap room going into 2020, especially with a franchise QB coming off the books? It's not Reese, at least not very much - most of his players have already been purged, hence the lack of a talented core.

and that's before cutting anyone else.

In comment 14702484 Eric on Li said:

Quote:

and that's before cutting anyone else.

I think you might be leaving out carryover cap space. OTC linked below. The Giants are 6th lowest in committed cap spend for 2020, but aren't carrying over much cap room compared to other teams near the top of the list.

Link - ( New Window )

on the salary cap is "2020 FA valuations vs. 2020 estimated cap space"

Emphasis added on the 'estimated cap space' because I take that at face value, that they have estimated all the inputs that go into estimating total cap space based on who is currently on the roster.