I would like to try to extend him now at a discount because we are signing to second contract. IMHO a 2nd contract for SB is a forgone conclusion. Article on SB second contract - ( New Window )
from SB's perspective he gets guaranteed money and security knowing he could easily get hurt again and lose his chance at a big second contract, even if its somewhat less money now then what he could make if he comes back and has a huge season.
I think if the Giants keep DG after this season its a foregone conclusion he extends SB. If however DG is jettisoned the new GM may not want to invest a huge contract in the RB position as one of his first decisions on the job.
If we give him a second contract at a market rate for a top 5 back
this offseason everybody should be fired. I doubt we will do it. I just can't tie that money up in a RB, especially a RB who has been hampered two straight years with an injury and is coming off a significant injury. If you gave me a binary choice right now, cut SB or resign him to a long term deal--I would cut him (I realize this is not a binary choice and I would suspect the Giants would act very cautiously with respect to him moving forward).
from SB's perspective he gets guaranteed money and security knowing he could easily get hurt again and lose his chance at a big second contract, even if its somewhat less money now then what he could make if he comes back and has a huge season.
I think if the Giants keep DG after this season its a foregone conclusion he extends SB. If however DG is jettisoned the new GM may not want to invest a huge contract in the RB position as one of his first decisions on the job.
In order for it to be worth doing for us, the contract would need to be heavily discounted. The guaranteed money for RB's is already low, see CMC/Kamara and that's for 2 guys coming off career years not injuries.
I just don't see him taking a huge discount when he's already guaranteed $10m this year + the 5th year option that we likely be another $10-11m.
The Barkley decision isn't one that needs any focus right now
by the Giants front office. They have far more important roster decisions to concern themselves with and Barkley is smart enough to know his future is tied to a successful rehab/recover.
Yearning for a discount with a Barkley extension isn't enticing for either side right now in my view.
It would be rather foolish to re-sign him before seeing how he comes
is that Barkley comes back and kills it at 100%. From there we exercise the 5th year tag, and can then Frnahcise if a deal isn't met, or if we simply want to move on after 6 years. It also allows us to secure him for a trade without a long term committment.
He'd have to take a hell of a discount for me to get on board with an extension now.
The owner loves the kid. I think he is getting signed to a second contract. I would gamble on him right now. I think he makes it back from injury. I know he could gamble on himself but if he gets injured again, the big second contract is gone. 4 years 40 million extension, give him more than usually guaranteed.
The better question is what's the date to exercise his 5th year option
is that Barkley comes back and kills it at 100%. From there we exercise the 5th year tag, and can then Frnahcise if a deal isn't met, or if we simply want to move on after 6 years. It also allows us to secure him for a trade without a long term committment.
He'd have to take a hell of a discount for me to get on board with an extension now.
Totally agree. He’s missed almost a full season (2020 knee) and was hampered much of the prior season with that high ankle sprain. This is the exact approach I would take. Let him play this year, if he’s healthy pick up the 5th year option. If he becomes the next Reggie Bush we at least didn’t shell out tons of cash for little impact to our winning %.
The owner loves the kid. I think he is getting signed to a second contract. I would gamble on him right now. I think he makes it back from injury. I know he could gamble on himself but if he gets injured again, the big second contract is gone. 4 years 40 million extension, give him more than usually guaranteed.
Gamble on an injured running back? Tossing out non-required guaranteed salaries, particularly "more than the usual"?
which is exactly why Barkley shouldn't. Unless that new guaranteed money is in addition to this years salary + the 5th year (which together is going to be $20-$25m anyway), why would he sign?
I believe the 5th year option needs to be picked up by the Giants between the players 3rd and 4th season. The Giants will exercise that option this spring and we will see what happens. Unless Barkley has a simply great 2021 season...I think you go the franchise tag after his 5th season. There is nothing about Barkley that screams durability at this point.
The owner loves the kid. I think he is getting signed to a second contract. I would gamble on him right now. I think he makes it back from injury. I know he could gamble on himself but if he gets injured again, the big second contract is gone. 4 years 40 million extension, give him more than usually guaranteed.
Gamble on an injured running back? Tossing out non-required guaranteed salaries, particularly "more than the usual"?
OP - This is beyond silly.
Questions:
Do you think he is working hard and will recover? How strongly do you feel about it?
For me? Very strongly.
Do you feel based on comments by the owner and GM that we will sign hem to another contract?
For me? Even more strongly OK?
What kind of year do you feel SB will have in 2021?
For me? Exceeds his rookie year.
If all of the above turn out to be true, how big will that second contract be?
Fucking gigantic.
I don't want to pay that. There has to be some part of Barkley that is worried losing that big payday. If we were to gamble on him now, I think we could get a bargain.
This is a friendly talk on a Monday where we speculate. I want to thank everyone for being open to discussion.
Dead - fine to speculate as I realize that is all we ever do
He has played 16 games just once out of his three years in the league and is coming off a serious injury. How much of a discount do you think he is giving? Honestly, I would expect Barkley doesn't want to sign an extension now either, since his market value can't really go much lower unless he is not the same RB when he comes back.
I imagine there is almost zero chance of an extension prior to the end of the 2021 season.
RE: Dead - fine to speculate as I realize that is all we ever do
He has played 16 games just once out of his three years in the league and is coming off a serious injury. How much of a discount do you think he is giving? Honestly, I would expect Barkley doesn't want to sign an extension now either, since his market value can't really go much lower unless he is not the same RB when he comes back.
I imagine there is almost zero chance of an extension prior to the end of the 2021 season.
I hear you but what if he injures the same leg again in 2021? $40 million with some guarantees makes sure your family is set for generations. 4 years is not forever and if he outplays the contract he has options.
and many reasons to see how he plays returning from an injury. SB is now on a one year prove it deal. If he has a good season and helps win games he can be franchised or extended. No reason to do it now with questions about his health and his ability to be a game changer for this team. It is all on Barkley now.
RE: Not this again - ZERO reason to extend him now
and many reasons to see how he plays returning from an injury. SB is now on a one year prove it deal. If he has a good season and helps win games he can be franchised or extended. No reason to do it now with questions about his health and his ability to be a game changer for this team. It is all on Barkley now.
That is definitely the safe play. This team needs a bargain somewhere. If we could get a discount banking on Barkley's work ethic to come back, I would take it. I want him on the team for long stretch but I don't to break the bank.
I think he exceeds his rookie year in 2021. This comes from that premise on my part.
He has played 16 games just once out of his three years in the league and is coming off a serious injury. How much of a discount do you think he is giving? Honestly, I would expect Barkley doesn't want to sign an extension now either, since his market value can't really go much lower unless he is not the same RB when he comes back.
I imagine there is almost zero chance of an extension prior to the end of the 2021 season.
I hear you but what if he injures the same leg again in 2021? $40 million with some guarantees makes sure your family is set for generations. 4 years is not forever and if he outplays the contract he has options.
How would a 4 year/$40M contract that kicks in after his current one (as suggested in the article) pay him all of that money if he injures his leg again next year? If you are suggesting the Giants fully guarantee his contract I think that is insane.
I also don't think Saquon is a guy who is trying to hedge his bets on his health. I imagine he is approaching this year as an opportunity to show he is the top back in the league and worthy of a contract that reflects that.
I think that article is largely silly.
The Giants have won only 8 games in 3 years with SB on the field
...That's not a knock on SB who is amazingly talented, but it shows the lesser importance of a RB in today's NFL and why drafting a RB when your OL is garbage is putting the cart before the horse, so to speak.
Even teams with good OLs like Dallas and the Rams probably wish they hadn't signed Elliot or Gurley to huge deals.
if he allowed him to sign a team-sweetheart deal now coming off injury. Basically playing the fear or injury against him.
Yes and no. Will his agent have done his job if he injures the same leg in 2021? He plays the game in such a way that he will be unable to limit the torque on that joint. If I were his father I might advise him to take 4/40 now instead of gambling on 5/75 because if the same joint goes he is done.
if he allowed him to sign a team-sweetheart deal now coming off injury. Basically playing the fear or injury against him.
Yes and no. Will his agent have done his job if he injures the same leg in 2021? He plays the game in such a way that he will be unable to limit the torque on that joint. If I were his father I might advise him to take 4/40 now instead of gambling on 5/75 because if the same joint goes he is done.
Which is the exact reason if I am the Giants I say "let's talk a year from now."
RE: RE: RE: I would not even consider extending him now
He has played 16 games just once out of his three years in the league and is coming off a serious injury. How much of a discount do you think he is giving? Honestly, I would expect Barkley doesn't want to sign an extension now either, since his market value can't really go much lower unless he is not the same RB when he comes back.
I imagine there is almost zero chance of an extension prior to the end of the 2021 season.
I hear you but what if he injures the same leg again in 2021? $40 million with some guarantees makes sure your family is set for generations. 4 years is not forever and if he outplays the contract he has options.
How would a 4 year/$40M contract that kicks in after his current one (as suggested in the article) pay him all of that money if he injures his leg again next year? If you are suggesting the Giants fully guarantee his contract I think that is insane.
I also don't think Saquon is a guy who is trying to hedge his bets on his health. I imagine he is approaching this year as an opportunity to show he is the top back in the league and worthy of a contract that reflects that.
I think that article is largely silly.
not fully, don't go strawman. Whatever the current guarantees are in the NFL I would guarantee a little more to get him to bite. That percentage guarantee increase would be negotiable and there would definitely be a point I would not cross.
But please, don't argue against a fully guaranteed contract, that is fiction.
if he allowed him to sign a team-sweetheart deal now coming off injury. Basically playing the fear or injury against him.
Yes and no. Will his agent have done his job if he injures the same leg in 2021? He plays the game in such a way that he will be unable to limit the torque on that joint. If I were his father I might advise him to take 4/40 now instead of gambling on 5/75 because if the same joint goes he is done.
Which is the exact reason if I am the Giants I say "let's talk a year from now."
Understandable, we did that with LW and it didn't work out.
My premise is based on SB exceeding his rookie production and what the contract demands will be after. This is absolutely a gamble for both sides, but because of the risks for both sides, I think there is compromise that could work.
he's making what, $31m on his rookie deal? Add in the 5th year that's almost a lock and that brings him right around $45m. He's already set for life. There's really not that much upside for him signing a team friendly deal.
to extend Barkley now. As it made no sense to spend the #2 pick of the draft on him. What is the possible upside of resigning him? He is not going to agree to some massive discount. Whatever he demands will surely have great risk for the team.
Seriously, game this out.
Running back is the mist fungible position in the game. Great backs can often have their production replaced by two or three lesser backs at far less money. The Bucs son the Super Bowl with a solid rushing attack and they have Fournette and Jones and, trust me, they won't spend a ton to retain Fournette. They'll find the next guy up. You just don;t need a supreme talent at RB to win. And if you overpay it is probably a hindrance.
As to the risk, why would the Giants pay a back long term who has Barkley's injury profile at the moment. You don't know what you are paying for. It is questionable to extend Barkley, or any top running back, when they are playing at an all-pro level, why would you pay him when he can't stay on the field. Try to take emotion out of the equation. Most long term, high dollar, RB deals turn out poorly for the team. Why would we bet Barkley is an outlier, especially at this stage?
Finally, let's think about the risk/reward. The upside of signing Barkley long term now is that you get a discount on a player who performs at top-3 at the position - that's the hop, right? And even if he is healthy that performance level is not at all certain. But let's assume he will do it. Well we can have that performance level for his 4th yr, his 5th year rookie season, and two franchise tags. If he's the best back in the game and we get him for franchise dollars, that will be a huge boon. It's basically what you get with the long term deal, with far less risk. It's kind of the obvious play.
to extend Barkley now. As it made no sense to spend the #2 pick of the draft on him. What is the possible upside of resigning him? He is not going to agree to some massive discount. Whatever he demands will surely have great risk for the team.
Seriously, game this out.
Running back is the mist fungible position in the game. Great backs can often have their production replaced by two or three lesser backs at far less money. The Bucs son the Super Bowl with a solid rushing attack and they have Fournette and Jones and, trust me, they won't spend a ton to retain Fournette. They'll find the next guy up. You just don;t need a supreme talent at RB to win. And if you overpay it is probably a hindrance.
As to the risk, why would the Giants pay a back long term who has Barkley's injury profile at the moment. You don't know what you are paying for. It is questionable to extend Barkley, or any top running back, when they are playing at an all-pro level, why would you pay him when he can't stay on the field. Try to take emotion out of the equation. Most long term, high dollar, RB deals turn out poorly for the team. Why would we bet Barkley is an outlier, especially at this stage?
Finally, let's think about the risk/reward. The upside of signing Barkley long term now is that you get a discount on a player who performs at top-3 at the position - that's the hop, right? And even if he is healthy that performance level is not at all certain. But let's assume he will do it. Well we can have that performance level for his 4th yr, his 5th year rookie season, and two franchise tags. If he's the best back in the game and we get him for franchise dollars, that will be a huge boon. It's basically what you get with the long term deal, with far less risk. It's kind of the obvious play.
I hate this plan - but it's clearly the right move for the organization.
I feel bad for NFL RBs - b/c this is how the good ones should be treated moving forward.
He hasnt earned the 2nd contract at Market value. I think it would benefit both sides to wait. I dodnt want to draft a RB 2nd overall in the 1st place but now after 3 seasons it looks like a horrible pick. He had a very good rookie season followed by average and then a few bad games into his 3rd season a major injury. He will not be 100% this season so he will probably have another avgerage season at best. Im sorry, but as much as I like the kids attitude hes not a top 5 back at this point and may never be.
His pass blocking may be some of the worst I have seen. He lacks the desire for contact in blocking as well as running. thats a bad thing for a RB coming off injury. The man has all the talent in the world but his problem is in his head and Im not sure that can be fixed. I would look to draft a RB in the 3rd round or later and hope for the best. maybe even a cluster draft like we did at LB abd have several guys fill the need. I dont see SB as the guy we drafted unfortunately. great kid, great talent but doesnt seem like a football player. maybe im worng but until he shows a willingness for contact he's not a guy I can count on in a big spot.
but its at a cheaper position and we can stop at anytime we no longer feel its worth it. Not sure how they will effect the human side of the game, and if that would rock the boat with player relations, but from a cap + value perspective its what I'd do.
If he never got injured and had a productive 2020 i'd be all for an early extension but those are the breaks, unfortunately.
to extend Barkley now. As it made no sense to spend the #2 pick of the draft on him. What is the possible upside of resigning him? He is not going to agree to some massive discount. Whatever he demands will surely have great risk for the team.
Seriously, game this out.
Running back is the mist fungible position in the game. Great backs can often have their production replaced by two or three lesser backs at far less money. The Bucs son the Super Bowl with a solid rushing attack and they have Fournette and Jones and, trust me, they won't spend a ton to retain Fournette. They'll find the next guy up. You just don;t need a supreme talent at RB to win. And if you overpay it is probably a hindrance.
As to the risk, why would the Giants pay a back long term who has Barkley's injury profile at the moment. You don't know what you are paying for. It is questionable to extend Barkley, or any top running back, when they are playing at an all-pro level, why would you pay him when he can't stay on the field. Try to take emotion out of the equation. Most long term, high dollar, RB deals turn out poorly for the team. Why would we bet Barkley is an outlier, especially at this stage?
Finally, let's think about the risk/reward. The upside of signing Barkley long term now is that you get a discount on a player who performs at top-3 at the position - that's the hop, right? And even if he is healthy that performance level is not at all certain. But let's assume he will do it. Well we can have that performance level for his 4th yr, his 5th year rookie season, and two franchise tags. If he's the best back in the game and we get him for franchise dollars, that will be a huge boon. It's basically what you get with the long term deal, with far less risk. It's kind of the obvious play.
I hate this plan - but it's clearly the right move for the organization.
I feel bad for NFL RBs - b/c this is how the good ones should be treated moving forward.
that's the NFL as it is. The rules changes and evolution of offensive philosophy brought us here. it's better to be a receiver.
Is that they sign him to a big extension following year 5, and like all running backs, the wheels fall off in year 6-7.
His injury was just brutal. If he was healthy and performing in 2020, you sign him to an extension now, eat the big money in his most productive years and then move on maybe a year early versus several years late.
If he returns to his 2018/19 form, and it's a positive 2021 campaign, look to trade SB next offseason. It's the ideal outcome and SB should be at his highest market value.
If he's struggles with production/injuries, then you need to consider either cutting him or maybe trading him next offseason. Take the cap hit and move on.
Essentially l don't like any idea of keeping him past 2021. We can find other cheaper solutions at RB.
2018 was his best season. That year the average play to Barkley (any touch + incompletions intended for him) went for 5.3 yards.
The average play league wide that year went for 5.6 yards.
I don't think Barkley's a great running back. I don't think he makes great decisions at and behind the LOS, and we know he's a poor blocker.
What he IS great at is being an open field runner. I think getting him out of the backfield and put in the slot more (especially on third down) is a better use of what he does well. Do that, and paying him will make a lot more sense.
If he returns to his 2018/19 form, and it's a positive 2021 campaign, look to trade SB next offseason. It's the ideal outcome and SB should be at his highest market value.
If he's struggles with production/injuries, then you need to consider either cutting him or maybe trading him next offseason. Take the cap hit and move on.
Essentially l don't like any idea of keeping him past 2021. We can find other cheaper solutions at RB.
That would be best.
I am coming from the universe in which the NY Giants, owned by Mara are signing him to a second contract unless video comes out showing him smacking a woman in the middle of Times Square.
In that universe, I am willing to gamble on signing him to friendlier deal before he proves it in 2021. I think he is going to have such a monster year that it will be PR nightmare not to sign him.
I don't want to get locked into the largest annual contract a RB has ever signed for 5 years...Nope, don't want that. That is where I believe we are headed.
just like Kamara and CMC. Part of what makes them valuable running routes is there ability to also carry the ball. Can't just make Barkley into a WR - the unpredictability is gone.
He also got those stats despite an inept OL, another reason why its misleading. He led the league in 2018 getting hit behind the LOS (iirc), can't just ignore that.
at the end of his deal then sure, sign him now. But again, he's not accepting a team friendly deal which is the sticking point for me - there's really no incentive for him to do that. You outlined a $40m deal earlier - he's going to make $25m the next 2 years alone and it will be 100% guaranteed. From there he can be franchised (another $15m give or take) or will sign a longer term deal somewhere.
I think if the Giants keep DG after this season its a foregone conclusion he extends SB. If however DG is jettisoned the new GM may not want to invest a huge contract in the RB position as one of his first decisions on the job.
I think if the Giants keep DG after this season its a foregone conclusion he extends SB. If however DG is jettisoned the new GM may not want to invest a huge contract in the RB position as one of his first decisions on the job.
In order for it to be worth doing for us, the contract would need to be heavily discounted. The guaranteed money for RB's is already low, see CMC/Kamara and that's for 2 guys coming off career years not injuries.
I just don't see him taking a huge discount when he's already guaranteed $10m this year + the 5th year option that we likely be another $10-11m.
Yearning for a discount with a Barkley extension isn't enticing for either side right now in my view.
He'd have to take a hell of a discount for me to get on board with an extension now.
I'd guess in the $13 million area.
He'd have to take a hell of a discount for me to get on board with an extension now.
Totally agree. He’s missed almost a full season (2020 knee) and was hampered much of the prior season with that high ankle sprain. This is the exact approach I would take. Let him play this year, if he’s healthy pick up the 5th year option. If he becomes the next Reggie Bush we at least didn’t shell out tons of cash for little impact to our winning %.
Gamble on an injured running back? Tossing out non-required guaranteed salaries, particularly "more than the usual"?
OP - This is beyond silly.
Quote:
The owner loves the kid. I think he is getting signed to a second contract. I would gamble on him right now. I think he makes it back from injury. I know he could gamble on himself but if he gets injured again, the big second contract is gone. 4 years 40 million extension, give him more than usually guaranteed.
Gamble on an injured running back? Tossing out non-required guaranteed salaries, particularly "more than the usual"?
OP - This is beyond silly.
Do you think he is working hard and will recover? How strongly do you feel about it?
For me? Very strongly.
Do you feel based on comments by the owner and GM that we will sign hem to another contract?
For me? Even more strongly OK?
What kind of year do you feel SB will have in 2021?
For me? Exceeds his rookie year.
If all of the above turn out to be true, how big will that second contract be?
Fucking gigantic.
I don't want to pay that. There has to be some part of Barkley that is worried losing that big payday. If we were to gamble on him now, I think we could get a bargain.
This is a friendly talk on a Monday where we speculate. I want to thank everyone for being open to discussion.
Overpaying for recovered ones on a second contract aren't either, but don't see the point of just accelerating a similarly poor decision.
But agree its all speculative.
I imagine there is almost zero chance of an extension prior to the end of the 2021 season.
Overpaying for recovered ones on a second contract aren't either, but don't see the point of just accelerating a similarly poor decision.
But agree its all speculative.
I could get behind the tag solutions.
Only thing I am really against is making him the highest paid back in the sport.
just no.
I imagine there is almost zero chance of an extension prior to the end of the 2021 season.
I think he exceeds his rookie year in 2021. This comes from that premise on my part.
Quote:
He has played 16 games just once out of his three years in the league and is coming off a serious injury. How much of a discount do you think he is giving? Honestly, I would expect Barkley doesn't want to sign an extension now either, since his market value can't really go much lower unless he is not the same RB when he comes back.
I imagine there is almost zero chance of an extension prior to the end of the 2021 season.
I hear you but what if he injures the same leg again in 2021? $40 million with some guarantees makes sure your family is set for generations. 4 years is not forever and if he outplays the contract he has options.
How would a 4 year/$40M contract that kicks in after his current one (as suggested in the article) pay him all of that money if he injures his leg again next year? If you are suggesting the Giants fully guarantee his contract I think that is insane.
I also don't think Saquon is a guy who is trying to hedge his bets on his health. I imagine he is approaching this year as an opportunity to show he is the top back in the league and worthy of a contract that reflects that.
I think that article is largely silly.
Even teams with good OLs like Dallas and the Rams probably wish they hadn't signed Elliot or Gurley to huge deals.
So yeah, I wouldn't extend him now.
Quote:
if he allowed him to sign a team-sweetheart deal now coming off injury. Basically playing the fear or injury against him.
Yes and no. Will his agent have done his job if he injures the same leg in 2021? He plays the game in such a way that he will be unable to limit the torque on that joint. If I were his father I might advise him to take 4/40 now instead of gambling on 5/75 because if the same joint goes he is done.
Which is the exact reason if I am the Giants I say "let's talk a year from now."
Quote:
In comment 15158621 Mike from Ohio said:
Quote:
He has played 16 games just once out of his three years in the league and is coming off a serious injury. How much of a discount do you think he is giving? Honestly, I would expect Barkley doesn't want to sign an extension now either, since his market value can't really go much lower unless he is not the same RB when he comes back.
I imagine there is almost zero chance of an extension prior to the end of the 2021 season.
I hear you but what if he injures the same leg again in 2021? $40 million with some guarantees makes sure your family is set for generations. 4 years is not forever and if he outplays the contract he has options.
How would a 4 year/$40M contract that kicks in after his current one (as suggested in the article) pay him all of that money if he injures his leg again next year? If you are suggesting the Giants fully guarantee his contract I think that is insane.
I also don't think Saquon is a guy who is trying to hedge his bets on his health. I imagine he is approaching this year as an opportunity to show he is the top back in the league and worthy of a contract that reflects that.
I think that article is largely silly.
But please, don't argue against a fully guaranteed contract, that is fiction.
Quote:
In comment 15158639 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
if he allowed him to sign a team-sweetheart deal now coming off injury. Basically playing the fear or injury against him.
Yes and no. Will his agent have done his job if he injures the same leg in 2021? He plays the game in such a way that he will be unable to limit the torque on that joint. If I were his father I might advise him to take 4/40 now instead of gambling on 5/75 because if the same joint goes he is done.
Which is the exact reason if I am the Giants I say "let's talk a year from now."
My premise is based on SB exceeding his rookie production and what the contract demands will be after. This is absolutely a gamble for both sides, but because of the risks for both sides, I think there is compromise that could work.
Seriously, game this out.
Running back is the mist fungible position in the game. Great backs can often have their production replaced by two or three lesser backs at far less money. The Bucs son the Super Bowl with a solid rushing attack and they have Fournette and Jones and, trust me, they won't spend a ton to retain Fournette. They'll find the next guy up. You just don;t need a supreme talent at RB to win. And if you overpay it is probably a hindrance.
As to the risk, why would the Giants pay a back long term who has Barkley's injury profile at the moment. You don't know what you are paying for. It is questionable to extend Barkley, or any top running back, when they are playing at an all-pro level, why would you pay him when he can't stay on the field. Try to take emotion out of the equation. Most long term, high dollar, RB deals turn out poorly for the team. Why would we bet Barkley is an outlier, especially at this stage?
Finally, let's think about the risk/reward. The upside of signing Barkley long term now is that you get a discount on a player who performs at top-3 at the position - that's the hop, right? And even if he is healthy that performance level is not at all certain. But let's assume he will do it. Well we can have that performance level for his 4th yr, his 5th year rookie season, and two franchise tags. If he's the best back in the game and we get him for franchise dollars, that will be a huge boon. It's basically what you get with the long term deal, with far less risk. It's kind of the obvious play.
Seriously, game this out.
Running back is the mist fungible position in the game. Great backs can often have their production replaced by two or three lesser backs at far less money. The Bucs son the Super Bowl with a solid rushing attack and they have Fournette and Jones and, trust me, they won't spend a ton to retain Fournette. They'll find the next guy up. You just don;t need a supreme talent at RB to win. And if you overpay it is probably a hindrance.
As to the risk, why would the Giants pay a back long term who has Barkley's injury profile at the moment. You don't know what you are paying for. It is questionable to extend Barkley, or any top running back, when they are playing at an all-pro level, why would you pay him when he can't stay on the field. Try to take emotion out of the equation. Most long term, high dollar, RB deals turn out poorly for the team. Why would we bet Barkley is an outlier, especially at this stage?
Finally, let's think about the risk/reward. The upside of signing Barkley long term now is that you get a discount on a player who performs at top-3 at the position - that's the hop, right? And even if he is healthy that performance level is not at all certain. But let's assume he will do it. Well we can have that performance level for his 4th yr, his 5th year rookie season, and two franchise tags. If he's the best back in the game and we get him for franchise dollars, that will be a huge boon. It's basically what you get with the long term deal, with far less risk. It's kind of the obvious play.
I hate this plan - but it's clearly the right move for the organization.
I feel bad for NFL RBs - b/c this is how the good ones should be treated moving forward.
His pass blocking may be some of the worst I have seen. He lacks the desire for contact in blocking as well as running. thats a bad thing for a RB coming off injury. The man has all the talent in the world but his problem is in his head and Im not sure that can be fixed. I would look to draft a RB in the 3rd round or later and hope for the best. maybe even a cluster draft like we did at LB abd have several guys fill the need. I dont see SB as the guy we drafted unfortunately. great kid, great talent but doesnt seem like a football player. maybe im worng but until he shows a willingness for contact he's not a guy I can count on in a big spot.
If he never got injured and had a productive 2020 i'd be all for an early extension but those are the breaks, unfortunately.
Either way, I think there is virtually no change of it happening anyway because it is one of those rare options that is a bad deal for both sides.
Quote:
to extend Barkley now. As it made no sense to spend the #2 pick of the draft on him. What is the possible upside of resigning him? He is not going to agree to some massive discount. Whatever he demands will surely have great risk for the team.
Seriously, game this out.
Running back is the mist fungible position in the game. Great backs can often have their production replaced by two or three lesser backs at far less money. The Bucs son the Super Bowl with a solid rushing attack and they have Fournette and Jones and, trust me, they won't spend a ton to retain Fournette. They'll find the next guy up. You just don;t need a supreme talent at RB to win. And if you overpay it is probably a hindrance.
As to the risk, why would the Giants pay a back long term who has Barkley's injury profile at the moment. You don't know what you are paying for. It is questionable to extend Barkley, or any top running back, when they are playing at an all-pro level, why would you pay him when he can't stay on the field. Try to take emotion out of the equation. Most long term, high dollar, RB deals turn out poorly for the team. Why would we bet Barkley is an outlier, especially at this stage?
Finally, let's think about the risk/reward. The upside of signing Barkley long term now is that you get a discount on a player who performs at top-3 at the position - that's the hop, right? And even if he is healthy that performance level is not at all certain. But let's assume he will do it. Well we can have that performance level for his 4th yr, his 5th year rookie season, and two franchise tags. If he's the best back in the game and we get him for franchise dollars, that will be a huge boon. It's basically what you get with the long term deal, with far less risk. It's kind of the obvious play.
I hate this plan - but it's clearly the right move for the organization.
I feel bad for NFL RBs - b/c this is how the good ones should be treated moving forward.
that's the NFL as it is. The rules changes and evolution of offensive philosophy brought us here. it's better to be a receiver.
Either way, I think there is virtually no change of it happening anyway because it is one of those rare options that is a bad deal for both sides.
Yes, suggested the same Mike.
His injury was just brutal. If he was healthy and performing in 2020, you sign him to an extension now, eat the big money in his most productive years and then move on maybe a year early versus several years late.
Now it’s purgatory.
Let Barkley play out 2021.
If he returns to his 2018/19 form, and it's a positive 2021 campaign, look to trade SB next offseason. It's the ideal outcome and SB should be at his highest market value.
If he's struggles with production/injuries, then you need to consider either cutting him or maybe trading him next offseason. Take the cap hit and move on.
Essentially l don't like any idea of keeping him past 2021. We can find other cheaper solutions at RB.
This.
2018 was his best season. That year the average play to Barkley (any touch + incompletions intended for him) went for 5.3 yards.
The average play league wide that year went for 5.6 yards.
I don't think Barkley's a great running back. I don't think he makes great decisions at and behind the LOS, and we know he's a poor blocker.
What he IS great at is being an open field runner. I think getting him out of the backfield and put in the slot more (especially on third down) is a better use of what he does well. Do that, and paying him will make a lot more sense.
I agree we need to use him differently but your assessment is misleading.
I agree we need to use him differently but your assessment is misleading.
Because I'm not comparing him to other backs. I'm talking about the best way to use him.
Let Barkley play out 2021.
If he returns to his 2018/19 form, and it's a positive 2021 campaign, look to trade SB next offseason. It's the ideal outcome and SB should be at his highest market value.
If he's struggles with production/injuries, then you need to consider either cutting him or maybe trading him next offseason. Take the cap hit and move on.
Essentially l don't like any idea of keeping him past 2021. We can find other cheaper solutions at RB.
I am coming from the universe in which the NY Giants, owned by Mara are signing him to a second contract unless video comes out showing him smacking a woman in the middle of Times Square.
In that universe, I am willing to gamble on signing him to friendlier deal before he proves it in 2021. I think he is going to have such a monster year that it will be PR nightmare not to sign him.
I don't want to get locked into the largest annual contract a RB has ever signed for 5 years...Nope, don't want that. That is where I believe we are headed.
He also got those stats despite an inept OL, another reason why its misleading. He led the league in 2018 getting hit behind the LOS (iirc), can't just ignore that.