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 )
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
If you're David Gettleman, you do it happily, that's how.
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.
I didn’t think he should be fired earlier but clean house w him and this staff ASAP please