for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Leonard Williams wants big pay from NYG or will hit FA

FranknWeezer : 12/9/2019 9:35 am
No big surprise, of course. The "I'm sick of losing" angle seems like a real thing with hin. It's been beaten to death around here, but the thought of Gettleman renting him for part of a year when we are in rebuilding/non-contending mode and badly needed the picks he traded away is infuriating.
Now Leonard Williams is talking - ( New Window )
Pages: 1 2 3 4 <<Prev | Show All |
RE: RE: RE: RE: 1 of the most complained about decisions last year was not tagging LC  
Brown Recluse : 12/9/2019 12:12 pm : link
In comment 14708590 bw in dc said:
Quote:
.

1. What exactly does LW do that we haven't been able to get from our current DTs at much cheaper contracts?


He does do some pretty obvious things our cheaper DT's don't. I'm surprised BBI's crystal ball-toting draft expert slash cap expert slash analytics expert even has to ask.
RE: RE: So a player about to be a FA wants the Giants to pay him like a FA  
rsjem1979 : 12/9/2019 12:15 pm : link
In comment 14708591 Essex said:
Quote:
In comment 14708582 sb from NYT Forum said:


Quote:


....so why again didn’t Gettleman just wait for him to be a FA?


because he would pay more money in Free Agency than if you had him now with some leverage to get a team friendly deal. And, if Williams isn't willing to take less money, you franchise him until he will. The cost of this trade is the cap savings we make vs the value of the picks we gave up. Obviously, they can't be quantified directly against each other but if we save a whole bunch of cap money than losing the picks might be worth it because then we can spend the savings elsewhere on a proven NFL player as opposed to crapshoot.


That "team friendly deal" is never going to happen, and if you believed it I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Williams doesn't have an idiot for an agent, and the Giants never had any actual leverage because they're the ones who have already made the investment to acquire LW's rights.
RE: RE: RE: So a player about to be a FA wants the Giants to pay him like a FA  
Essex : 12/9/2019 12:18 pm : link
In comment 14708610 rsjem1979 said:
Quote:
In comment 14708591 Essex said:


Quote:


In comment 14708582 sb from NYT Forum said:


Quote:


....so why again didn’t Gettleman just wait for him to be a FA?


because he would pay more money in Free Agency than if you had him now with some leverage to get a team friendly deal. And, if Williams isn't willing to take less money, you franchise him until he will. The cost of this trade is the cap savings we make vs the value of the picks we gave up. Obviously, they can't be quantified directly against each other but if we save a whole bunch of cap money than losing the picks might be worth it because then we can spend the savings elsewhere on a proven NFL player as opposed to crapshoot.



That "team friendly deal" is never going to happen, and if you believed it I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Williams doesn't have an idiot for an agent, and the Giants never had any actual leverage because they're the ones who have already made the investment to acquire LW's rights.

Maybe so, but if LW never gets to the market that is a win for us. Second, in the NFL when a career can be over in a flash nobody is going to want to wait a year before the second contract--so I think the Giants have quite a bit of leverage given that the worst case scenario is we pay the franchise tag. I am not saying Gettleman can't--or won't--mess this up, but I see enough here to let it play out before I make that judgment.
put me down on the side of  
fkap : 12/9/2019 12:55 pm : link
"what's with the uproar?"

any sane person should have known this was going to be the case from the start.
any sane person knows players/agents enter the process by expressing a desire to be well compensated.

I don't think DG is such a huge idiot that he didn't know LW was going to want top dollar. I'd be surprised if a dollar range wasn't agreed to before the trade. with that in mind, DG and Co decided before the trade that the picks and contract were going to be worth it. I'm a believer that DG does not act in a vacuum, so Mara has put his stamp of approval on it. Whether we, the fans, think it's worth it is immaterial.

There's nothing new to see here.

Mara is a businessman.  
penkap75 : 12/9/2019 12:56 pm : link
Can he not see what a stupid business move this was by DG?
Its GM malpractice worthy of termination.
There are outs  
Coach Red Beaulieu : 12/9/2019 1:17 pm : link
Franchising him for a year or two might be a good option.
He's wrong  
santacruzom : 12/9/2019 1:19 pm : link
He won't. It's been well established by DG defenders that because we traded for him, we have an advantage in signing him.
A lot of people keep trying to turn this into a referendum on Williams  
Greg from LI : 12/9/2019 1:22 pm : link
as a player, and that's not what the problem is. He's pretty good, although he's not one of the top ten at his position.

As Brett in particular has pointed out repeatedly, it's that the trade represents a poor allocation of resources.
RE: RE: 1 of the most complained about decisions last year was not tagging LC  
Eric on Li : 12/9/2019 1:24 pm : link
In comment 14708546 jcn56 said:
Quote:


And that still just skips past the most galling part of all this - that Gettleman TRADED 2 PICKS for the right to tag Williams. That's why people are upset - it's not 'consistent' because it's a completely different situation.


I'm specifically talking about the hyperbolic insistence on not utilizing the tag now, after the trade has already been made. That's basically arguing into the necessity of a long term deal which I think would be a more needless risk than making the deal in the first place.

Had they tagged LC for 2019 they surely would have listened to trade offers for him at the deadline as they did in 2018, same as they can do for LW next year if he's on a 1 year deal. That would give them the opportunity to recoup the picks traded in the first place if he doesn't work out on the field. Making this move in the first place was a gamble but there is a very easy way to mitigate that gamble at the expense of nothing but a little cap room for 1 season.
RE: I was ok with it  
Danny Kanell : 12/9/2019 1:25 pm : link
In comment 14708502 Joey in VA said:
Quote:
Initially but I have done a complete 180 on Gettleman. This trade is horrible he is horrible and we suck more than ever and it's his fault.


This pretty much sums up my thoughts.
Danny, Joey  
fkap : 12/9/2019 1:33 pm : link
what's changed since the trade?
His play is what was expected.
His contract demands are what was expected.

What did you guys expect? that he was going to come in and single handedly change the defense and/or sign for a song?
I think this was a pretty good trade, I don't see why there's outrage  
cosmicj : 12/9/2019 1:34 pm : link
1) Williams wasn't hitting the open market. The Jets were going to trade him to someone for picks and that trade partner was going to sign him or tag him. If you wanted Williams, you had to do the trade.

2) The Giants actually have a lot of negotiating leverage. The franchise tag (better than the transition tag) can be used and will give Williams every incentive to sign a market price deal. In fact, the tag makes it likely that having Williams on the roster for 2019 will help them save some money.

3) The Giants have no players to spend money on, the results of years of drawing failure. And there will be few good players on the market in the spring. With Williams, at least they can spend the money on a good young player who can help the team's depleted talent base instead of Nate Solder Part II.

There's a continual delusion on the part of fans that a cheap vet will fall into our laps during free agency. I guess there are examples of good economical signings out there, but they are few and far between. The trade market has been really important the last few years as a way for teams to get value of players that they won't be extending. Example: Dee Ford was traded last March by the Chiefs to the 49ers after the Chiefs applied a franchise tag.

I'm not a fan of all of Gettleman's moves, but I thought this was a transaction that makes sense.
agree with everything in Cosmic's post with an addition to point 1  
Eric on Li : 12/9/2019 1:41 pm : link
The 1 year tag @ $17m is far more preferable to me than signing LW for that amount over 4 or 5 years right now (which is what it would have taken to get in him via UFA).

In return for that option year, we had to give up 1 pick this year and 1 the following. But picks can be recouped if decide to not extend him by next year's trade deadline. Or if we tag again next year. This is a safe gamble - unless we overpay needlessly.
Good bye  
KWALL2 : 12/9/2019 1:49 pm : link
Just take the loss and move on. Oh...and fire the idiot who made the trade.
RE: agree with everything in Cosmic's post with an addition to point 1  
pjcas18 : 12/9/2019 1:54 pm : link
In comment 14708734 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
The 1 year tag @ $17m is far more preferable to me than signing LW for that amount over 4 or 5 years right now (which is what it would have taken to get in him via UFA).

In return for that option year, we had to give up 1 pick this year and 1 the following. But picks can be recouped if decide to not extend him by next year's trade deadline. Or if we tag again next year. This is a safe gamble - unless we overpay needlessly.


How does signing Williams to 1 year at $17+M help the Giants and justify a 3rd round pick and a 4th round pick?

How does that make sense to anyone as a good option and cause you to say good trade?
This was a terrible move  
Tim in Eternal Blue : 12/9/2019 1:57 pm : link
by DG. If you defend this move then you are just trolling for the sake of trolling. It was a shitty decision in a long list of shitty decisions.
RE: Zero  
Justlurking : 12/9/2019 2:01 pm : link
In comment 14708530 Les in TO said:
Quote:
Sacks 12 pressures in a contract year lol


and Giants gonna give him 18 million a year!
RE: RE: agree with everything in Cosmic's post with an addition to point 1  
Eric on Li : 12/9/2019 2:02 pm : link
In comment 14708755 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
I

How does signing Williams to 1 year at $17+M help the Giants and justify a 3rd round pick and a 4th round pick?

How does that make sense to anyone as a good option and cause you to say good trade?


The same way signing players to a 1 year deal (or acquiring players with 1 option year left on their contract) would help any other team in any other sport? By having the player's rights for 1 year.

This isn't a great comparison bc you know I hate the other deal but the reason I hated the other deal is different here (mets not spending $), but this is a lot like the Stroman trade by the Mets. Adding a player for the following season when he is available at the trade deadline in season when you aren't in the playoff race. Adding Stroman for 2020 was fine, the issue I had was the Wilpons wouldn't spend to resign him long term even if he's great and let him walk like Wheeler. And they could have just resigned Wheeler who is a better player. We don't have a better player here and I don't think there would have been a better player available in FA (definitely not on a 1 year deal).
RE: Mara is a businessman.  
Justlurking : 12/9/2019 2:05 pm : link
In comment 14708669 penkap75 said:
Quote:
Can he not see what a stupid business move this was by DG?
Its GM malpractice worthy of termination.


He has bungled the rebuild at every opportunity.
RE: so for a 3-4 defense  
GiantsFan84 : 12/9/2019 2:06 pm : link
In comment 14708327 Justlurking said:
Quote:
assuming he signs -

DG will have used a 1st (Dlaw), a high 3rd (BJ Hill), replaced that high third with another high third PLUS a 4th PLUS paying LW 10% our our cap space. (in addition to the 2017 2nd rounder)

For positions that theyre supposed to eat blockers and make room for the LBs to make tackles.

Any people still dont understand what I mean when I say DG does not understand asset allocation and positional value.

He is the worst general manager in the NFL. He has to go.


^^^THIS^^^

And this entire situation with Williams was 100% predictable to anyone with a brain.

And those of you saying mid round picks don't matter have no clue what you are talking about.

There is no defending this. There never was a valid reason to do it. It alone is a fireable offense.
And he decided to hide like a coward after his fuck up  
GiantsFan84 : 12/9/2019 2:07 pm : link
and put a BS fluff piece out on Giants.com. DG needs to GTFO.
This can turn out to be very embarrassing  
5BowlsSoon : 12/9/2019 2:08 pm : link
How do you make a trade not knowing he is returning to your team?
RE: RE: RE: agree with everything in Cosmic's post with an addition to point 1  
pjcas18 : 12/9/2019 2:16 pm : link
In comment 14708776 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 14708755 pjcas18 said:


Quote:


I

How does signing Williams to 1 year at $17+M help the Giants and justify a 3rd round pick and a 4th round pick?

How does that make sense to anyone as a good option and cause you to say good trade?



The same way signing players to a 1 year deal (or acquiring players with 1 option year left on their contract) would help any other team in any other sport? By having the player's rights for 1 year.

This isn't a great comparison bc you know I hate the other deal but the reason I hated the other deal is different here (mets not spending $), but this is a lot like the Stroman trade by the Mets. Adding a player for the following season when he is available at the trade deadline in season when you aren't in the playoff race. Adding Stroman for 2020 was fine, the issue I had was the Wilpons wouldn't spend to resign him long term even if he's great and let him walk like Wheeler. And they could have just resigned Wheeler who is a better player. We don't have a better player here and I don't think there would have been a better player available in FA (definitely not on a 1 year deal).


Bad comparison because the NFL has a salary cap and you can front load contracts differently so when you do have space you can control to an extent when you realize the cap hit, making future years less risky (for example).

You (or someone) even said franchise him for a couple years.

It's a terrible use of resources. That would be $37M guaranteed dollars over 2 years.

Most likely that would be close to the total guarantees on a 5 year deal (or close).

RE: I think this was a pretty good trade, I don't see why there's outrage  
Gatorade Dunk : 12/9/2019 2:25 pm : link
In comment 14708726 cosmicj said:
Quote:
1) Williams wasn't hitting the open market. The Jets were going to trade him to someone for picks and that trade partner was going to sign him or tag him. If you wanted Williams, you had to do the trade.

I don't know how you can say that with absolute certainty. Let's say Dallas was the team that traded for him. Are they using their FT on Williams with Prescott and Cooper about to become FAs? I think it's very possible that a team other than the Giants could have traded for Williams as a rental for this season, with the hopes that they might re-sign him, but with no intent or realistic ability to tag him.

Let's say that the cost in trade would have to start with a 3rd round pick, since that's the presumed comp pick that the Jets could project (even though they're also unlikely to get comp picks next year due to their available cap space), or that the team receiving Williams could project to receive. In that case, the trade negotiations start with a 3rd rounder, although the comp pick you're trying to beat is a 2021 late 3rd rounder, not a 2020 early 3rd. So if you're Gettleman, you're already well ahead of the comp pick calculus giving up your 2020 early 3rd round pick. I'm not sure you need to go any further than that, even if you're completely locked onto the need to trade for him in the first place.

I still think Williams is a good player, but not the type of player that you sacrifice draft picks for solely to get the inside track for him as a FA. He's good enough to be one of your primary FA targets. Or he's good enough to trade for if he has multiple years left on his contract. But he's not good enough, IMO, to trade multiple picks just for the right to be the team with the tag in your pocket.

All that said, I'll even throw a bone to those that feel like the trade itself is defensible - I'd feel significantly better if the terms of the trade were reversed - if the 2020 pick was the 4th/5th with the re-signing condition attached to it and the 3rd round pick was for 2021. At least then the Giants would have an additional season to improve their record and hope to lower that pick's value, and it's still fair to the Jets since 2021 is when any comp pick for LW would occur. That would also mean that if the Giants do use the tag and then lose LW in 2021, they'd be better positioned to get a comp pick in 2022 which would only be one year removed from the 3rd round pick that they traded, instead of two years removed.

Those are all little details that probably feel like nitpicking to many fans, but I think those are the little nuances that our front office has been ignoring for too long. And do I know for sure that Gettleman ignored those details or didn't try to flip the terms of the trade in the way that I suggest? Of course not - this is definitely coming from a cynical view of this front office. But in the context of none of us knowing how the negotiations went, if you had a gun to your head, are you confident in saying that Gettleman definitely worked through every iterative computation?
RE: I think this was a pretty good trade, I don't see why there's outrage  
bw in dc : 12/9/2019 2:29 pm : link
In comment 14708726 cosmicj said:
Quote:


2) The Giants actually have a lot of negotiating leverage. The franchise tag (better than the transition tag) can be used and will give Williams every incentive to sign a market price deal. In fact, the tag makes it likely that having Williams on the roster for 2019 will help them save some money.


For a minimum of $17M/yr, which is what the franchise tag will cost, what extra value does LW bring that we really need?

What force multiplier impact does he bring at that cost?
RE: RE: I think this was a pretty good trade, I don't see why there's outrage  
BillKo : 12/9/2019 2:38 pm : link
In comment 14708828 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 14708726 cosmicj said:


Quote:




2) The Giants actually have a lot of negotiating leverage. The franchise tag (better than the transition tag) can be used and will give Williams every incentive to sign a market price deal. In fact, the tag makes it likely that having Williams on the roster for 2019 will help them save some money.




For a minimum of $17M/yr, which is what the franchise tag will cost, what extra value does LW bring that we really need?

What force multiplier impact does he bring at that cost?


Well, he's a big body that you'd be pairing up with possibly our current linemen and also the kid from Ohio State.........that could be imposing from a run and pass defense standpoint.

I think DG made the trade with the idea they would sign him, but also have a period of negotiating w/ him exclusively.

The narrative that you let him go to FA from the Jets and simply sign him doesn't hold true.........there's no guarantee.

In fact there's no guarantee either way but you might slightly improve your chances once you get him in the locker room, culture, etc....but of course that's sorta be thrown out the window too given our nose dive........

RE: RE: RE: RE: agree with everything in Cosmic's post with an addition to point 1  
Eric on Li : 12/9/2019 2:42 pm : link
In comment 14708808 pjcas18 said:
Quote:

Bad comparison because the NFL has a salary cap and you can front load contracts differently so when you do have space you can control to an extent when you realize the cap hit, making future years less risky (for example).

You (or someone) even said franchise him for a couple years.

It's a terrible use of resources. That would be $37M guaranteed dollars over 2 years.

Most likely that would be close to the total guarantees on a 5 year deal (or close).


The ability to manipulate cap hit in a long term deal is not lost on me but I disagree with the bolded statement for 2 reasons:

1- this year in particular we have more cap room than we can spend - so tagging LW this year is pretty painless. The 1 year/17m will be a smaller contract than every other comparable UFA that hits the market and they will still have $50m+ to spend on others (of which I doubt there will be many appealing options). And that's because...

2- ...unlike baseball, Rendon/Cole/Harper/Machado types do not hit FA. And the few prime aged tier 2 guys who get there (like Zack Wheeler) get paid what the Rendon/Cole types do because the competition is so fierce. That's how Solder and Vernon and Trent Brown and Trey Flowers end up with record setting contracts even though they are not nearly record setting players. So spending big via FA is sometimes necessary (as it probably was with Solder) but also an extremely risky use of significant resources that can set you back farther than any 1 year deal can. Cap space is generally better to use to lock down your own core on their 2nd year contracts as early as possible to get favorable terms, of which hopefully LW can prove he's worthy of becoming part of next year.

So if the cap room is there (as it is this year, and may be next year) I have no problem fully guaranteeing a 1 year deal at an inflated AAV in return for not having the future liability of dead cap space and lack of maneuverability. For LW it is a 'rent to own' and if we don't want to own we can trade him away or let him walk in 2021 (possibly for a comp pick).
RE: RE: RE: I think this was a pretty good trade, I don't see why there's outrage  
Gatorade Dunk : 12/9/2019 3:09 pm : link
In comment 14708850 BillKo said:
Quote:
The narrative that you let him go to FA from the Jets and simply sign him doesn't hold true.........there's no guarantee.

I think this is the crux of the argument. Those who criticize the deal are well aware that there's no guarantee that he makes it to FA. And given his career production to date, they're ok with taking that chance.

For me personally, I'd have rolled the dice that he'd make to FA and then pursue him aggressively as one of the main UFA targets. And if he didn't make it to FA, so be it. It would mean that someone else made the inefficient move to sacrifice draft picks for the exclusive negotiating window with a player that is good but not great.

It's not just about each move improving the roster in a vacuum. It's about construction of the roster and the overall state of the rebuild. Those draft picks are important, whether they're used to choose players or to trade for other players who are under contract, or to trade up/down in the draft. And I like LW as a player, but not enough to want him at the exclusion of the added benefit of having those picks to do more for the rebuild in addition to LW.

It's become increasingly clear that the only thing the trade bought us was the opportunity to be the team who can tag LW. And IMO, he's not even good enough to be a tag candidate, so what it really comes down to was making one inefficient move (trading picks) solely for the right to make another (tagging LW).
he should keep his mouth shut  
bc4life : 12/9/2019 3:12 pm : link
he's not taking over games. he knows Giants GM stuck his neck out on this one. if he decides to go elsewhere fine - but why bring this shit up before season's end and the day of the 9th loss in a row?
who could have seen this coming  
jintz4life : 12/9/2019 3:16 pm : link
but please keep saying gettleman knows what hes doing

he's a buffoon
Have you guys not paid attention to guys who have gotten  
ajr2456 : 12/9/2019 3:26 pm : link
Franchise tagged?

So let’s say you franchise tag Williams, and he still wants to get his long term deal at $18 million per.

He’s either going to hold out or play under the tag and the Giants will have to either tag him at more money or again hand him a long term contract. Where’s the benefit for the Giants?
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: agree with everything in Cosmic's post with an addition to point 1  
Gatorade Dunk : 12/9/2019 3:31 pm : link
In comment 14708856 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
So if the cap room is there (as it is this year, and may be next year) I have no problem fully guaranteeing a 1 year deal at an inflated AAV in return for not having the future liability of dead cap space and lack of maneuverability. For LW it is a 'rent to own' and if we don't want to own we can trade him away or let him walk in 2021 (possibly for a comp pick).

It's important to remember that unused cap space carries over. So issuing excessive short term guaranteed dollars to avoid future dead money isn't really more efficient - you're just guaranteeing that you're going to burn that money this year instead of hoping that you don't have to burn it as dead money in the future.

And worse yet, by tagging a player that you might ultimately want to keep beyond that one year, you're overspending for one year and then following it up with the same dead money risk that you're trying to avoid in the first place, but now doing it with a player that's another year older than he was before.

If aversion to future dead money and a desire to preserve cap maneuverability for the future is your goal, your approach should be to avoid bad contracts at all, regardless of whether they're for one year or for five. Wasting money just because you have it is still wasting money, and you're effectively still wasting future cap space if you overpay a player on a one-year deal.
A lot of parallels to the Knicks  
widmerseyebrow : 12/9/2019 3:32 pm : link
When your hopelessness is projecting beyond the next year then you know it's bad.
I just dont understand the argument here  
Ten Ton Hammer : 12/9/2019 3:38 pm : link
You don't pay top of the market, top of the position pay scale for guys who aren't proven pass rushers.

Fools pay 17 million a year for run defenders. And I don't want to hear "he gets a lot of pressures".
This is going to end up worse than the Vernon signing  
Default : 12/9/2019 3:44 pm : link
and that didn't cost the team 2 draft picks...
RE: I just dont understand the argument here  
Essex : 12/9/2019 3:44 pm : link
In comment 14708975 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
You don't pay top of the market, top of the position pay scale for guys who aren't proven pass rushers.

Fools pay 17 million a year for run defenders. And I don't want to hear "he gets a lot of pressures".

Brandon Graham has never gotten ten sacks in his entire NFL career and all I hear is that he is one of the most valuable edge rushers because of his pressures. So, what is it? I understand a sack finishes it off, but is there no value in forcing the qb to throw it quickly?
RE: RE: I just dont understand the argument here  
Gatorade Dunk : 12/9/2019 3:47 pm : link
In comment 14708986 Essex said:
Quote:
In comment 14708975 Ten Ton Hammer said:


Quote:


You don't pay top of the market, top of the position pay scale for guys who aren't proven pass rushers.

Fools pay 17 million a year for run defenders. And I don't want to hear "he gets a lot of pressures".


Brandon Graham has never gotten ten sacks in his entire NFL career and all I hear is that he is one of the most valuable edge rushers because of his pressures. So, what is it? I understand a sack finishes it off, but is there no value in forcing the qb to throw it quickly?

If the Giants get LW to sign the same exact contract as Graham (3 yrs/$40M), I'll gladly commend DG for his strategy on this one.

I don't see it playing out like that, though. I think we end up paying full price, which will be closer to double that in total contract value, and give up picks on top of it.
We all know how this is going to play out. Gettleman will overpay to  
Jim in Hoboken : 12/9/2019 3:51 pm : link
sign him. At the press conference Williams will say he appreciates the Giants trading for him, neglecting to mention that the Giants offered the most money.

In three years, he will be traded for a 5th round pick by the next GM.

The few who are actually defending Gettleman are just trying to rationalizing something this supposedly professional GM did. It’s one thing to do that at the time of the trade, it’s another to do it now, we’ve lost four straight games with him and the team looks as bad as ever. I can understand if a contender traded for him for a playoff push. But we were/are fucking tanking for all intents and purposes?!?! This is as idiotic as it gets!! I’d feel better if Gettleman just comes out and says he was trying to save his job by mortgaging the future, which is probably the truth.

Let’s blame everything on Reese even though 80% of the roster is his making. Gettleman needs to go.
Gatorade Drunk - the average team carried over $11m next year  
Eric on Li : 12/9/2019 3:52 pm : link
Even with tagging LW, I think it's possible to exceed that amount of carry over AND still find some guys who can help from FA (ideally with more efficiency than the previous 2 years). I posted some cap math somewhere earlier but here it is again.

Current Proj. = $60m
Proj. vet cuts = +$20m ($80m total space)
Proj. draft pool = $13m ($67m space)
LW Tag = $17m ($50m space)

Below is a list of the top 50 free agents and frankly i's hard to pin point where they will be able to spend $40m. Among BBI's favorite FA targets:

Shaq Thompson - resigned
Ngakwe, Scherff, Barrett - likely to be tagged or resigned
Justin Simmons - Fangio indicated yesterday he's getting resigned long term

The best players I can envision being realistic as multi-year targets are probably Joe Schubert, James Bradberry, and Jack Conklin. And I personally don't have any interest in being the team to overpay Matt Judon, Kyle Van Noy, or Bud Dupree. Hunter Henry would be a great target too but I suspect he will get tagged by SD.
Top 50 2020 free agents - ( New Window )
BBI's fantasy of all these players hitting FA is ridiculous  
Zeke's Alibi : 12/9/2019 4:01 pm : link
with the increase of the cap. 3/4's of the league has money to resign their guys. The only guys of value that hit FA are players that play on teams that are in cap trouble. Guys that were any good or worth the contracts they are given at the top end are rarely worth it unless they shake free because of cap issues. Yannick fits that bill, but apparently they are going to resign him.
RE: Gatorade Drunk - the average team carried over $11m next year  
Gatorade Dunk : 12/9/2019 4:02 pm : link
In comment 14709006 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
Even with tagging LW, I think it's possible to exceed that amount of carry over AND still find some guys who can help from FA (ideally with more efficiency than the previous 2 years). I posted some cap math somewhere earlier but here it is again.

Current Proj. = $60m
Proj. vet cuts = +$20m ($80m total space)
Proj. draft pool = $13m ($67m space)
LW Tag = $17m ($50m space)

Below is a list of the top 50 free agents and frankly i's hard to pin point where they will be able to spend $40m. Among BBI's favorite FA targets:

Shaq Thompson - resigned
Ngakwe, Scherff, Barrett - likely to be tagged or resigned
Justin Simmons - Fangio indicated yesterday he's getting resigned long term

The best players I can envision being realistic as multi-year targets are probably Joe Schubert, James Bradberry, and Jack Conklin. And I personally don't have any interest in being the team to overpay Matt Judon, Kyle Van Noy, or Bud Dupree. Hunter Henry would be a great target too but I suspect he will get tagged by SD. Top 50 2020 free agents - ( New Window )

I'm not sure what your point is. Because there are fewer impact free agents available, the Giants should overpay for one of them simply because they traded for him? Or is it that because the league average in cap carryover is a certain amount, that should be some sort of guiding light for how an efficient team should operate?

The Giants don't have a lot of players on their own roster worth extending right now (especially among those that are eligible for an extension), but they can absolutely stockpile their cap room for when they do have players worth extending and have a huge war chest at their disposal to add reinforcements for a roster that will be a lot closer to being a contender. That doesn't mean don't spend, but they don't have to be swimming in the Top 50 pool if they want to be assembling depth and balance for their roster. Especially if they're going to piss away mid-round picks that usually represent that depth and balance.

I stand by my reasoning that paying more up front to avoid dead money later is just paying cash for your cap inefficiencies instead of using your credit card. Just because it doesn't show up on the ledger later on as dead money doesn't mean you didn't waste some money along the way.

Also, it's DUNK. No R.
RE: Have you guys not paid attention to guys who have gotten  
Eric on Li : 12/9/2019 4:06 pm : link
In comment 14708952 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Franchise tagged?

So let’s say you franchise tag Williams, and he still wants to get his long term deal at $18 million per.

He’s either going to hold out or play under the tag and the Giants will have to either tag him at more money or again hand him a long term contract. Where’s the benefit for the Giants?


The benefit to the Giants next year is if Williams helps them win games. Period. That is the immediate return on the $17m franchise tag investment. So if he holds out the trade was a disaster, though I doubt that happens since it rarely does outside the RB position. Next year is year 3 of a near complete roster turnover. Just because it will likely be a new head coach, the expectations should be in accordance with year 3 of any multi-year rebuild and year 2 of any potential franchise QB.

If they get to week 7 and the team is still a doormat they should trade him the same way the Jets did this year. The move will have been a failure to a certain degree depending on what kind of compensation they receive it could be close to zero sum. If that's the worst case scenario I don't think that's so bad given there's a best case that he's a very good DL.
RE: We all know how this is going to play out. Gettleman will overpay to  
FStubbs : 12/9/2019 5:21 pm : link
In comment 14709003 Jim in Hoboken said:
Quote:
sign him. At the press conference Williams will say he appreciates the Giants trading for him, neglecting to mention that the Giants offered the most money.

In three years, he will be traded for a 5th round pick by the next GM.

The few who are actually defending Gettleman are just trying to rationalizing something this supposedly professional GM did. It’s one thing to do that at the time of the trade, it’s another to do it now, we’ve lost four straight games with him and the team looks as bad as ever. I can understand if a contender traded for him for a playoff push. But we were/are fucking tanking for all intents and purposes?!?! This is as idiotic as it gets!! I’d feel better if Gettleman just comes out and says he was trying to save his job by mortgaging the future, which is probably the truth.

Let’s blame everything on Reese even though 80% of the roster is his making. Gettleman needs to go.


Yeah, the Gettleman is good Reese is bad narrative should die now. This was a stupid trade, and I don't understand why we made it.

But don't compound it by overpaying Williams. Have a dollar amount, if he wants too much, you let him hit the market.
RE: RE: RE: I think this was a pretty good trade, I don't see why there's outrage  
bw in dc : 12/9/2019 5:49 pm : link
In comment 14708850 BillKo said:
Quote:

Well, he's a big body that you'd be pairing up with possibly our current linemen and also the kid from Ohio State.........that could be imposing from a run and pass defense standpoint.

I think DG made the trade with the idea they would sign him, but also have a period of negotiating w/ him exclusively.

The narrative that you let him go to FA from the Jets and simply sign him doesn't hold true.........there's no guarantee.

In fact there's no guarantee either way but you might slightly improve your chances once you get him in the locker room, culture, etc....but of course that's sorta be thrown out the window too given our nose dive........


Before LW arrived, after 8 games we had a total of 21 sacks. An average of 2.6 sacks per game.

Since LW arrived, we've played 4 games and totaled 4 sacks. An average of 1 per game.

Before LW arrived, our points allowed per game was 27+.

Since LW arrived, our points allowed per game is 30+.

I know it's a small sample, and there are other levers involved in this, but on just basic stats I think LW's addition to the same is negligible...

Does that feel like a good $18M/yr investment?
RE: RE: Gatorade Drunk - the average team carried over $11m next year  
Eric on Li : 12/9/2019 6:12 pm : link
In comment 14709032 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:


Also, it's DUNK. No R.


I've been misreading your handle for months and now you tell me? Don't know if I've done that before but if so my b.

Re: the rest - the main point was that as is almost always the case with teams who have a lot of cap room, there aren't enough good players who reach FA in the NFL to use it all effectively. This year appears to be no exception.

I agree that we need to be prudent with reserving future cap space to resign our own drafted players worthy of 2nd contracts, but that's why to me it makes a lot more sense to have LW on a 1 year deal than a large 4 or 5 year deal. At least until we know for sure that he is (or isn't) a core player. I don't like having to give up a 3rd round pick to do it, but they can get that pick back if they don't sign him long term either next deadline or via comp pick or via tag & trade next year.
RE: RE: I just dont understand the argument here  
Ten Ton Hammer : 12/9/2019 6:25 pm : link
In comment 14708986 Essex said:
Quote:
In comment 14708975 Ten Ton Hammer said:


Quote:


You don't pay top of the market, top of the position pay scale for guys who aren't proven pass rushers.

Fools pay 17 million a year for run defenders. And I don't want to hear "he gets a lot of pressures".


Brandon Graham has never gotten ten sacks in his entire NFL career and all I hear is that he is one of the most valuable edge rushers because of his pressures. So, what is it? I understand a sack finishes it off, but is there no value in forcing the qb to throw it quickly?


Is there? Olivier Vernon is Mr. QB Pressure, and we couldn't wait to run him out of town and lament how ineffective he is considering his contract. Pay the most money to guys who make plays. Let your younger, cheaper players worry about making the QB throw quickly.

Williams is a better run defender by some measure, but this league doesn't pay run defenders, because pass rush is a premium resource. You can find run pluggers. Good teams do.
RE: This can turn out to be very embarrassing  
santacruzom : 12/9/2019 6:33 pm : link
In comment 14708795 5BowlsSoon said:
Quote:
How do you make a trade not knowing he is returning to your team?


If you're David Gettleman, you do it happily, that's how.
RE: RE: Have you guys not paid attention to guys who have gotten  
ajr2456 : 12/9/2019 6:38 pm : link
In comment 14709039 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 14708952 ajr2456 said:


Quote:


Franchise tagged?

So let’s say you franchise tag Williams, and he still wants to get his long term deal at $18 million per.

He’s either going to hold out or play under the tag and the Giants will have to either tag him at more money or again hand him a long term contract. Where’s the benefit for the Giants?



The benefit to the Giants next year is if Williams helps them win games. Period. That is the immediate return on the $17m franchise tag investment. So if he holds out the trade was a disaster, though I doubt that happens since it rarely does outside the RB position. Next year is year 3 of a near complete roster turnover. Just because it will likely be a new head coach, the expectations should be in accordance with year 3 of any multi-year rebuild and year 2 of any potential franchise QB.

If they get to week 7 and the team is still a doormat they should trade him the same way the Jets did this year. The move will have been a failure to a certain degree depending on what kind of compensation they receive it could be close to zero sum. If that's the worst case scenario I don't think that's so bad given there's a best case that he's a very good DL.


What? Leonard Williams has yet to show in 5 years he impacts games enough to win games.

If you tag Williams and trade him the move won’t be seen as a failure to a degree, it will be an abject disaster. Trading will net less than a top 60 pick, so they would have essentially traded a top 60 pick for a lesser pick and wasted $17 million.
Gentleman has certainly made some mistake but this one  
LauderdaleMatty : 12/9/2019 8:41 pm : link
Was just fucking stupid. Guy is a a NFL starter but he’s closer to a jag than star. Bye. The draft picks are capital and DG just fucked up. And it was an utter needless trade.

I didn’t think he should be fired earlier but clean house w him and this staff ASAP please
Let him walk  
LT56GOAT : 12/11/2019 1:52 pm : link
Make a standard shorterm offer or let him walk. No premium offer. This is how he plays auditioning for big contract imagine the effort once he is paid. he is a servicable DL not a star and has proven that. I bet he will take a standard contract to stay in NY.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner