Anyone else fine if they let Barkley walk ?

.

.

especially if the speculation is true that Team Barkley is looking for a deal in the $16M range for the AAV. Laughable.

The only reason to keep SB is if we apply the NEFT. Of course, that course of action hinges on what happens to Jones.

tag him and than see what happens.

tag Barkley. It's not that complicated. Then negotiate a long term contract with Barkley.

An expensive RB is better value than the same money for an average WR.

Don't overthink it.

But for now I'll trust the Giants brain trust to do what they think is right. But my hope is they re-sign him.

to keep Saquon, I would do so only with a reasonable budgeted contract. I would not mind a 3 year deal that they can be out of in 2 years if needed. A lot depends on Jones' contract and if they decide to extend AT, DL, and Love.

but it’ll also depend on how they handle the void. I trust these guys know what they are doing.

But, expect a drop in play from Jones if you do.

Especially if the plan is to take those funds to help mix with some other limited cap space and address immediate holes at maybe an IOL stalwart and a WR/TE on offense and a LB.

Then add a RB in draft.

he's a top 5 running back, and the centerpiece of the offense.

Will he leave because they can't come to an agreement.....would be acceptable.

But paying him more doesn't upgrade the team and the RB supply chain is long and plentiful.

With some decent evaluations, contract negotiations and grabbing a rookie in the next draft the Giants would be jsut fine going forward if Barkley isn't on the team.

Put a value and if he doesn't agree, let him go.

Late round RB’s do well in the league. Edge, OL, WR and LB’r would be a better use of money. Plus Barkley is only good for a half season generally.

a rebuilding team can't afford. Don't let this surprise season fool you. There's a lot of work still to be done.
Paying top dollar to a RB on a second contract is a mistake.
They need cheaper cost-controlled players to kick-start the rebuild. They can get 80% of the production at 50% of the cost with a couple of FAs or draft picks

Saquon Barkley- #2
Christian McCaffrey #8
Derrick Henry- 45
Josh Jacobs- 45
Dalvin Cook- 41
Jonathan Taylor- 41
Miles Sanders - 53
Nick Chubb- 35
Kenneth Walker - 41
Joe Mixon- 48

Next up and comers
Travis Etienne- 25
Breece Hall- 36
Najee Harris - 24


The guys you listed that were taken late got some yards for 2 very bad teams for 1 season, we have no real idea how they will respond in difficult situations for playoff teams

There are silver linings to be found, camp impact and roster build chief among them. But you never feel fine about losing the offenses engine. We have short memories, Barkley shouldered that entire offense early on.

There are a handful of very realistic ways this team takes a (hopefully short and brief) step back next season. Losing Barkley is in just about every one of them.

.

In comment 16017359 HardTruth said:

Quote:

Saquon Barkley- #2 Christian McCaffrey #8 Derrick Henry- 45 Josh Jacobs- 45 Dalvin Cook- 41 Jonathan Taylor- 41 Miles Sanders - 53 Nick Chubb- 35 Kenneth Walker - 41 Joe Mixon- 48 Next up and comers Travis Etienne- 25 Breece Hall- 36 Najee Harris - 24 The guys you listed that were taken late got some yards for 2 very bad teams for 1 season, we have no real idea how they will respond in difficult situations for playoff teams

Dave Gettleman LOL

Hes of diminishing value, probably for the rest of his career. He wont replicate this year, and he'll cost more.

Paying more and getting less is not ideal.

based on the reasons the OP laid out. Thomas and Lawrence are second and first team NFL All Pros respectively at their position. That’s going to be very expensive to re-sign them. Definitely $20-25M per season AAV for each player.

So assuming Jones is retained somewhere in the $30-35M AAV range, and two exceeding $20M each, can you really afford to have a RB who reportedly wants $16M per year AAV?

The most financially prudent move would probably be to tag him for $10M and hope he doesn’t hold out. Or let him walk, sign a mid level guy like Alexander Mattison who may shine in a bigger role to less than half of what Barkley wants and draft a complement with one of our third round picks.

The thing with Barkley is that he has had two healthy seasons out of 5. Year two was marred by a bad high ankle sprain which zapped his athleticism even when he came back later in the season. Season 3 was over with the ACL, and year 4 was basically a rehab year from the ACL.

A lot of people will point to the McCaffrey and Henry deals, but those guys had been great and very healthy when they signed their second contracts. I think the CMC deal was a disaster for the Panthers, but at least he had a clean injury history when they signed him. Barkley has been healthy for basically 40-50% of his rookie deal. Why would he expect to get the same that CMC got?

In comment 16017334 Sean said:

Quote:

But, expect a drop in play from Jones if you do.

I don't think so Sean.

I did a break down of when the Giants had Jones and No Barkley and Barkley with No Jones a little while back.

It was something like this:

With Jones and no Barkley, The Giants were around 8 wins and 19 losses..

With Barkley and no Jones the Giants didn't win a game.

I sometimes think we underestimate Jones and over estimate Barkley.

Whatever the Giants brass thinks is best I am good with.

if Saquon Barkley leaves, what's the likelihood he ends up in Dallas? I could see Jerruh backing up the Brinks truck for him, considering Zeke's health, the Pollard injury, Saquon's star power (no pun intended), etc. Plus, it would be an amazing F*** YOU to the Giants.

I don't know Dallas's cap going into next year, but if he was available, it wouldn't surprise me to see Dallas makes a run at him (if they have the cap).

that would make me sick, by the way. I hate myself a little just for thinking it.

Depends on how much he wants.

He’s the only ‘headache’ player we have. Something to expand from not have less of. He’s good for the team. Good attitude and easy to root for.

Does anyone think a team will pay Barkley $16M per season? I’m not so sure. The rest of the league I’m sure paid attention to what happened in Carolina and now Tennessee when you spend big cash on RB vs. other positions.

I’m curious to see if Schoen is like we want you back, but $16M is a little high and let’s him hit the market. It sounds like Barkley wants to be a Giant so maybe they make some kind of gentleman’s agreement that he’ll come back to the Giants with an offer he gets elsewhere and asks them if they want to match.

All it takes is one delusional GM.

History shows will most likely happen given his age and position he plays?

All that money tied up and nothing to show for it.

I would not resign him. Why not draft the top running back in the draft and use the savings to improve the team in other areas.

you have to take into account that GMs don’t always see the risks the same ways fans do. And a 2 year $30m deal that’s almost fully guaranteed is pretty damn low risk for a sure fire playmaker.

I don’t think he’s getting a 5/$75m type deal, unless the guarantees were incredibly low (like $30m in which case it’s a lot of window dressing).

Letting him walk and taking it on the chin with his next contract, I’ll let him walk.

If the coach and GM think he's worth to the team what they end up paying for him, then good. If they think what he wants to be paid will hurt the team in the long run, then fine. I trust those two guys to make the right decision.

In comment 16017411 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

you have to take into account that GMs don’t always see the risks the same ways fans do. And a 2 year $30m deal that’s almost fully guaranteed is pretty damn low risk for a sure fire playmaker. I don’t think he’s getting a 5/$75m type deal, unless the guarantees were incredibly low (like $30m in which case it’s a lot of window dressing).

I agree a team may pay big for a 1-2 year deal. Kind of like the 49ers with CMC right now. A win now team that has a lot of guys on rookie deals and extra cap space. But does Barkley accept a contract that’s less than 3 years?

I think the Giants ought to let him walk.

We don’t have as much cap space as everyone thinks, especially after extending Love and Sexy, and probably signing DJ. We can use the $14-16M Barkley wants to address needs along the OL and LB, which frees us up to draft wisely rather than rashly.

I love Saquon, but RBs hit the wall hard when they’re done, and these days that’s after about six years. As Jerry Reese used to say - correctly - it’s better to cut ties with a player a year too early than a year too late.

That’s where we are with Saquon.

"fine" means. If you're asking do I want to lose him, no.

The Giants were just part of the final 8. They have tangible evidence they're moving in the right direction, and reason to keep this train rolling.

I'm fine using the available cap space to keep this team together, rather than sign expensive UFA's. I've grown to hate the expensive UFA unless it's a finishing piece. Focus on keeping the core intact (DJ, Barkley, Thomas, LW, Dexter & Love should all be locked up) and add another solid draft class.

But you not only have to ask is he worth the contract $ needed to retain but also - what else could that $ buy.

And, he's had some major injuries already

but TRADE FOR Tee Higgins who would cost us draft capital and he may also earn the same amount as Barkley.

I would much rather tag and then trade Barkley if that is at all possible. At least we would get something in return for him.

In comment 16017415 eric2425ny said:

Quote:

In comment 16017411 UConn4523 said: Quote: you have to take into account that GMs don’t always see the risks the same ways fans do. And a 2 year $30m deal that’s almost fully guaranteed is pretty damn low risk for a sure fire playmaker. I don’t think he’s getting a 5/$75m type deal, unless the guarantees were incredibly low (like $30m in which case it’s a lot of window dressing). I agree a team may pay big for a 1-2 year deal. Kind of like the 49ers with CMC right now. A win now team that has a lot of guys on rookie deals and extra cap space. But does Barkley accept a contract that’s less than 3 years?

All depends on guarantees. A 2 year $30m contract that’s almost fully guaranteed still sets him up for another payday at 28. Any long term deal he signs won’t have high guarantees so I don’t think it matters much.

would make more per year than franchising Barkley twice. And on top of it would cost Atleast our 1st and likely more. I don’t even think it’s an option and that’s before looking under the hood a bit and asking if he’s even going to live up to being paid as a top 5 player.

I'd try to use it to patch up the interior of the OL and ILB.

...we don't have a playoff season this year without him, and he played really well in the 2nd Washington game and both Minnesota games.

But he also was clearly gassed for most of the games in the 2nd half. Also the staff didn't feature him in the Philly playoff game.

So I am not sure he is worth $10-$12 million if he is not going to be the focus of the offense, AND he wears down late.

And $10-$12 million is the low end of what he'll sign for.

.

In comment 16017392 GiantSteps said:

Quote:

if Saquon Barkley leaves, what's the likelihood he ends up in Dallas? I could see Jerruh backing up the Brinks truck for him, considering Zeke's health, the Pollard injury, Saquon's star power (no pun intended), etc. Plus, it would be an amazing F*** YOU to the Giants. I don't know Dallas's cap going into next year, but if he was available, it wouldn't surprise me to see Dallas makes a run at him (if they have the cap).

To the extent the Giants don't won't to overpay for Saquon, isn't it a good thing that Dallas would?

think Barkley and Love are both gone. Someone will offer them a lot more than what the Giants are willing to pay. Jones is going to cost a lot of money, and as someone else said, Thomas, Lawrence, and McKinney will be very expensive to resign. We can't afford everyone, and Barkley has had some injuries, including an ACL. The sliver of good news is that both will count in the comp pick formula calculations for 2024.

In comment 16017482 chick310 said:

Quote:

In comment 16017392 GiantSteps said: Quote: if Saquon Barkley leaves, what's the likelihood he ends up in Dallas? I could see Jerruh backing up the Brinks truck for him, considering Zeke's health, the Pollard injury, Saquon's star power (no pun intended), etc. Plus, it would be an amazing F*** YOU to the Giants. I don't know Dallas's cap going into next year, but if he was available, it wouldn't surprise me to see Dallas makes a run at him (if they have the cap). To the extent the Giants don't won't to overpay for Saquon, isn't it a good thing that Dallas would?

Dallas is $5 mill over the cap right now. That is a lot of money to move around for another RB.

.

But it will be a tough decision. He is a dominant player at times who we need but a dispassionate evaluation of the position and his injury history will make it hard to match his likely contract demands.

And by the way, I would not olay on the tag if I were him. He might have one more shot at a big payday. I would risk injury playing on the tag.

In comment 16017321 Chip said:

Quote:

tag Barkley. It's not that complicated. Then negotiate a long term contract with Barkley.

this

Night and day difference them vs our 2 guys

If you mean, not try to sign him at all, or at least not a serious effort? No. You don't get better by replacing your biggest weapon with a late round pick or a vet minimum guy.

If you mean, is there some limit to what you will pay? Of course. You can't manage a team in the cap era if you are always unwilling to let players you like go at any price.

What is the number? Of course, depends how the deal is structured, whether they have the tag available (Jones negotiations) and whether they think they can use it without messing up the culture. As both teams and players have learned, the structure of a deal matters at least as much as the announced AAV, so I wouldn't put a number out. But the McCaffrey deal, three years later, that is, with the cap having gone up, doesn't seem a crazy starting point. That was $64M over 4 years, $30M guaranteed at signing. Of course, the Giants will have to manage their dealing around the Golladay dead money and the need to sign other young stars, so timing of the cap hit will be an issue for both Barkley and Jones.

but I think it would be the smart thing to do. Keeping Barkley is short term thinking that will bite us in the ass later.

Put a first round pick on him and let someone out bid us. Is that an option?

I certainly wouldn’t give him a multi year deal.

Is going nowhere. I am surprised any Giant fan can't see this. It's the same crew that wants Jones for 3 years and 50 milliin. Just clueless. He is a weapon. Kookvat the total yards, compare him to all players, recievers and backs, where does he fit in? How do the Giants replace that when they are looking to addvmire weapons. Uf you lack into the position, you are missing the entire boat. Ge is a weapon. Going noplace. Get on board.

Have FOUR running backs. Let that sink in

We can’t count on him to remain healthy and productive through a long term, expensive contract. He’s only had two good seasons out of five and it’s just not worth it. If we spend that money to improve the interior of the OL then we can likely replicate that production by committee.

Then





























































































































Stop over thinking

I feel like they money spent on Barkley could secure either: a premium player at anotheir posi

In comment 16018431 santacruzom said:

Quote:

I feel like they money spent on Barkley could secure either: a premium player at anotheir posi

Jesus Christ phone.

Anyway: either a premium player at another position AND a decent replacement running back; or a nice contract extension for one of our other more valuable players AND a decent replacement running back.

I just don't think we're at a point roster-wise to spend a lot of money on Barkley at the potential expense of stocking up in multiple other spots.

In comment 16017347 chick310 said:

Quote:

But paying him more doesn't upgrade the team and the RB supply chain is long and plentiful.

Exactly... Paying him more does not upgrade the team.

In comment 16017687 Paulie Walnuts said:

Quote:

In comment 16017321 Chip said: Quote: tag Barkley. It's not that complicated. Then negotiate a long term contract with Barkley. this

Or just tag Barkley two years in a row. Cheaper than a long term deal and that takes you through his seventh season. He would probably hold out in 2024 though on that second tag, but it’s like the Bell situation years ago with Pittsburgh. Not much leverage on his side. He should take the Chubb deal, 3 years, about $12M per.

In comment 16017391 Tom from LI said:

Quote:

In comment 16017334 Sean said: Quote: But, expect a drop in play from Jones if you do. I don't think so Sean. I did a break down of when the Giants had Jones and No Barkley and Barkley with No Jones a little while back. It was something like this: With Jones and no Barkley, The Giants were around 8 wins and 19 losses.. With Barkley and no Jones the Giants didn't win a game. I sometimes think we underestimate Jones and over estimate Barkley. Whatever the Giants brass thinks is best I am good with.

Lol really? Does anything from 2021 count in your equation? Mike Glennon and Jake Fromm. We would have been better off starting Barkley at QB.

When Barkley was banged up/ineffective this year mid season, the offense stalled big time and we weren't winning games. Nothing Sean said is off the mark. He is right. Taking away Jones' best weapon would have a negative impact on him and the whole offense.

Barkley would be a nice player to have, not critical. If this offense can’t function without SB, then we are nowhere near being able to compete for the NFC anyway

Paying 12-16 mil is not good value.

IF your RB is your main/only weapon, you're not anywhere near ready to compete with the big dogs.

The team might be better served tagging him, and praying some foolish team signs him and gives up a couple of # 1's, or trades at least one.

But could be better two years from now. The team has been too reliant on him. You don't win with a runningback anymore.

In comment 16017322 HopePhil and Optimistic said:

Quote:

An expensive RB is better value than the same money for an average WR. Don't overthink it.

100% agree.

For ne, it depends more on the term than the money.

...that tells me they are not serious about keeping him. They basically made him an offer they knew he would not accept.

In comment 16017332 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

but it’ll also depend on how they handle the void. I trust these guys know what they are doing.

Serious question for you.
You and I debated even drafting Barkley in 2018, and we were on very different sides then.
It appears to me that you have changed your mind.
Is that correct?
If so, what led you to a different conclusion?

In comment 16017359 HardTruth said:

Quote:

Saquon Barkley- #2 Christian McCaffrey #8 Derrick Henry- 45 Josh Jacobs- 45 Dalvin Cook- 41 Jonathan Taylor- 41 Miles Sanders - 53 Nick Chubb- 35 Kenneth Walker - 41 Joe Mixon- 48 Next up and comers Travis Etienne- 25 Breece Hall- 36 Najee Harris - 24 The guys you listed that were taken late got some yards for 2 very bad teams for 1 season, we have no real idea how they will respond in difficult situations for playoff teams

How many times are you going to post this?
And how many times do people have to repost the counter examples that you conveniently exclude?

Besides even in your list, there are only 2 in the top 20.

The majority in your list are in the 40s. That is a far cry from #2! In terms of Draft value that is 2600 vs between 450 and 500... Is Barkley worth 5 or 6 high second round choices?

The Giants/Eagles playoff game showed me everything I need to see. The Eagles "no-name" runners ran for 207 more yards than Barkley.

Who are we paying from the Barkley savings? Where is this guy? Some of you want to spend that money on another free agent running back, a vet FA running back, no less. So you want to downgrade at running back and spend probably $10 million on that FA downgrade and then do what, exactly? Where is the rest of that money going to that four or five extra million? No? I’m wrong? OK fine do you want to draft a running back and spend that 15 or so million where? Who is getting that money? What free agent wide receiver are we paying that money to?

I’m still wrong? Ok then. Why can’t we have two nice things on offense? Apparently teams don’t pay the running back in the quarterback? Yeah that’s bullshit. So we’re gonna save some money and let Barkley go and who the fuck are we paying that money to? where is this guy? And is he worth it? The FA wide receivers suck.

Don’t tell me you want to save money and let Barkley go just because of stupid made up nonsense about RBs not worth the money. Please offer me something better than that. Please explain to me why we’re gonna let a known commodity just leave “because running backs aren’t worth i it.” Please give me more than that.

Not 20 years.

You guys treat these contracts like the fucking plague. 3 years. Not 10.

In comment 16018931 djm said:

Quote:

Who are we paying from the Barkley savings? Where is this guy? Some of you want to spend that money on another free agent running back, a vet FA running back, no less. So you want to downgrade at running back and spend probably $10 million on that FA downgrade and then do what, exactly? Where is the rest of that money going to that four or five extra million? No? I’m wrong? OK fine do you want to draft a running back and spend that 15 or so million where? Who is getting that money? What free agent wide receiver are we paying that money to? I’m still wrong? Ok then. Why can’t we have two nice things on offense? Apparently teams don’t pay the running back in the quarterback? Yeah that’s bullshit. So we’re gonna save some money and let Barkley go and who the fuck are we paying that money to? where is this guy? And is he worth it? The FA wide receivers suck. Don’t tell me you want to save money and let Barkley go just because of stupid made up nonsense about RBs not worth the money. Please offer me something better than that. Please explain to me why we’re gonna let a known commodity just leave “because running backs aren’t worth i it.” Please give me more than that.

djm, this is a dumb question.
It isn't any one specific player. It is a matter of roster construction and where you choose to spend resources.
Maybe it is a OL, maybe a CB, a LB, some better DL rotation guys, more available money for a WR, or your favorite QB. If not this year, than next.
Look at all the FA the Giants need to sign
QB, at least 2 WR, probably 2 IOL, 2 ILB, 2 rotational DL, a CB. And that is for starter/players with significant snaps. The can save 6M releasing KG. That leave 60M, about 48M after the rookie pool.

Just how far is that 48M going to stretch? Can we sign all those players to the contracts they want? I know you don't want to believe it, but the cap actually matters.

In comment 16017359 HardTruth said:

Quote:

Saquon Barkley- #2 Christian McCaffrey #8 Derrick Henry- 45 Josh Jacobs- 45 Dalvin Cook- 41 Jonathan Taylor- 41 Miles Sanders - 53 Nick Chubb- 35 Kenneth Walker - 41 Joe Mixon- 48 Next up and comers Travis Etienne- 25 Breece Hall- 36 Najee Harris - 24 The guys you listed that were taken late got some yards for 2 very bad teams for 1 season, we have no real idea how they will respond in difficult situations for playoff teams

That list says to me you find your RB in the 2nd round.

Trade? Absolutely.

Acquire as much draft capital as possible.

be able to run the ball in the KC v Cincy game, I bet both would have liked to have Saquon tonight. Even Mixon, who is a decent back, had a crappy game. Pacheco is too small to be effective on 3rd and short. KC worst team in NFL on 3rd an 1 converting.

if they think it will lead to a SB. At least until they show they don't know what they're doing.

They have a way to function and center their offense with Barkley...at 12-16 million, he cannot be easily replaced for touches and impact. You may not choose to build around the RB Position, Philosophically, but you have a field tilting player on a Talent Needy Offense with a very strongly established production. He's a star and an anchor.

In comment 16018931 djm said:

Quote:

Who are we paying from the Barkley savings? Where is this guy? Some of you want to spend that money on another free agent running back, a vet FA running back, no less. So you want to downgrade at running back and spend probably $10 million on that FA downgrade and then do what, exactly? Where is the rest of that money going to that four or five extra million? No? I’m wrong? OK fine do you want to draft a running back and spend that 15 or so million where? Who is getting that money? What free agent wide receiver are we paying that money to? I’m still wrong? Ok then. Why can’t we have two nice things on offense? Apparently teams don’t pay the running back in the quarterback? Yeah that’s bullshit. So we’re gonna save some money and let Barkley go and who the fuck are we paying that money to? where is this guy? And is he worth it? The FA wide receivers suck. Don’t tell me you want to save money and let Barkley go just because of stupid made up nonsense about RBs not worth the money. Please offer me something better than that. Please explain to me why we’re gonna let a known commodity just leave “because running backs aren’t worth i it.” Please give me more than that.

A+ work

In comment 16019409 Rafflee said:

Quote:

In comment 16018931 djm said: Quote: Who are we paying from the Barkley savings? Where is this guy? Some of you want to spend that money on another free agent running back, a vet FA running back, no less. So you want to downgrade at running back and spend probably $10 million on that FA downgrade and then do what, exactly? Where is the rest of that money going to that four or five extra million? No? I’m wrong? OK fine do you want to draft a running back and spend that 15 or so million where? Who is getting that money? What free agent wide receiver are we paying that money to? I’m still wrong? Ok then. Why can’t we have two nice things on offense? Apparently teams don’t pay the running back in the quarterback? Yeah that’s bullshit. So we’re gonna save some money and let Barkley go and who the fuck are we paying that money to? where is this guy? And is he worth it? The FA wide receivers suck. Don’t tell me you want to save money and let Barkley go just because of stupid made up nonsense about RBs not worth the money. Please offer me something better than that. Please explain to me why we’re gonna let a known commodity just leave “because running backs aren’t worth i it.” Please give me more than that. A+ work

Quite the grading system you put in place here.

He's a special talent. He's injury prone and the Giants aren't in a position to make a luxury signing like that. Running games in the NFL are based on the OL and scheme more than anything. The Giants have a ton of premium picks and should be able to get a RB in rd 2 or 3 that is a blue chip talent. That player will cost pennies against the cap. They can also sign specialists to fill rolls(pass catcher, bruiser) depending on who they draft.

I think the Giants have to let Barkley walk to be honest.

Where else are you going to find a guy who was responsible for 1,650 yds and 10 TDs for only $12-$14M? A WR would get 20+M for this output. Plus just about every play we do is some derivative of "faking" to Barkley, since the D just keys on the guy, his value is even larger than the stats above. Do you think Jones runs would be open like they are without the fakes to Barkley first, or do you think those RPO slants Jones loves (where the WR's actually are open) would happen without first putting the ball in Barkleys stomach?

The guy is the key to our current offense. His value to us is more than a RB, and would be very hard to replace (and certainly not for $12-$14M).

where every other team finds these players.

Look at the Eagles...

For those of you who love Barkley, do you think he is better than Sanders?

But Sanders put up nearly identical numbers as Barkley.

They did it because they have a better OL. Having a better OL has also had a positive impact on the passing game, their back RB numbers, and Hurt's numbers running.

The way to replace the production is to improve the OL.

Improving the WR won't hurt either.

The point is, the money is more effective when used to bolster other parts of the team.

In comment 16020023 .McL. said:

Quote:

Look at the Eagles... For those of you who love Barkley, do you think he is better than Sanders? But Sanders put up nearly identical numbers as Barkley. They did it because they have a better OL. Having a better OL has also had a positive impact on the passing game, their back RB numbers, and Hurt's numbers running. The way to replace the production is to improve the OL. Improving the WR won't hurt either. The point is, the money is more effective when used to bolster other parts of the team.

There was a thread going on last week with GBN guys posting adamantly that the Eagles did not have a dominant line at all, and their prodcutivity was comparable to that of the NYG's OL.

feels like the game theory optimal move with Barkley, viewing it in isolation.

The externality is that they need that tag in their pocket until they work things out with DJ.

It would be great if they can work things out with DJ in advance of the tag deadline, but that will require either some come-to-jesus on Jones' part or the organization substantially giving in to what he's asking for (which I suspect many of us would consider an overpay).

My baseline expectation is that the tag will need to be used on Jones and that Barkley will be allowed to walk.

from a different year. When you watch the Eagles do you confuse them with the Giants OL?

Is better spent at a young and ascending IOL….

week to week, in sometimes dominant fashion.

When I see Jason Kelce, it's what I wish we had anchoring our line no matter who is behind center at QB or split out wide at WR.

The Eagles line is excellent.

In comment 16020059 chick310 said:

Quote:

week to week, in sometimes dominant fashion. When I see Jason Kelce, it's what I wish we had anchoring our line no matter who is behind center at QB or split out wide at WR.

So why do you keep posting about GBN and their line being comparable to ours? I truly don’t understand it.

as to where NY Giant investment is best served to flow.

Much like this thread about whether the team should let Barkley walk.

In comment 16020031 chick310 said:

Quote:

In comment 16020023 .McL. said: Quote: Look at the Eagles... For those of you who love Barkley, do you think he is better than Sanders? But Sanders put up nearly identical numbers as Barkley. They did it because they have a better OL. Having a better OL has also had a positive impact on the passing game, their back RB numbers, and Hurt's numbers running. The way to replace the production is to improve the OL. Improving the WR won't hurt either. The point is, the money is more effective when used to bolster other parts of the team. There was a thread going on last week with GBN guys posting adamantly that the Eagles did not have a dominant line at all, and their prodcutivity was comparable to that of the NYG's OL.

Yes, I saw that.... I rolled my eyes!

of player I enjoy rooting for. If he was my shortstop, I’d be pissed if Cohen let him walk. But in a hard cap sport where RB’s are just pretty fungible and can be made or broken by scheme, I’d totally be fine with it after an initial lang of sadness.

In comment 16020371 jpkmets said:

Quote:

of player I enjoy rooting for. If he was my shortstop, I’d be pissed if Cohen let him walk. But in a hard cap sport where RB’s are just pretty fungible and can be made or broken by scheme, I’d totally be fine with it after an initial lang of sadness.

Top 5 players at any position are not fungible but they are big hits to the cap. These are the players that teams don’t usually let hit FA - SB coming off an injury and awful cap management put us in this situation.

He was excellent this year, is always fun to watch, he became a solid pass blocker, has great ball security, a great guy to root for and was the driving force for a number of wins that wouldn’t happen with an average rb.

In short, he’s a guy you build with…even though he’s a Jets fan

A guy that put his body on the line week in and week out, playing through injury and being a leader on this team and a class act on the field, off the field and at the podium… to see the hunger he has and the passion he plays with… to reward this player by letting him walk is a slap n the face and it certainly sends the wrong message to the other players on the team

he's the centerpiece of the offense/can't replace him.

That was true this season. The issue is that betting on a running back to replicate that for even 2-3 more years goes against mountains of prior evidence. The list of RBs who have maintained their level of play into their second contracts is EXTREMELY short. The fact that we ran him so hard this year is EXACTLY THE REASON they shouldn't bank on being able to do it into the future.

You're worried about how do we replace him if we let him walk. The issue is we likely will have to replace him even if we don't.

Draft a stud running back in the 2nd or 3rd round.
Use the savings elsewhere.

no way should a RB take up a ton of cap space.
How did the Giants do when Tiki retired?

Either way, just don't go crazy.

In comment 16019632 chick310 said:

Quote:

In comment 16019409 Rafflee said: Quote: In comment 16018931 djm said: Quote: Who are we paying from the Barkley savings? Where is this guy? Some of you want to spend that money on another free agent running back, a vet FA running back, no less. So you want to downgrade at running back and spend probably $10 million on that FA downgrade and then do what, exactly? Where is the rest of that money going to that four or five extra million? No? I’m wrong? OK fine do you want to draft a running back and spend that 15 or so million where? Who is getting that money? What free agent wide receiver are we paying that money to? I’m still wrong? Ok then. Why can’t we have two nice things on offense? Apparently teams don’t pay the running back in the quarterback? Yeah that’s bullshit. So we’re gonna save some money and let Barkley go and who the fuck are we paying that money to? where is this guy? And is he worth it? The FA wide receivers suck. Don’t tell me you want to save money and let Barkley go just because of stupid made up nonsense about RBs not worth the money. Please offer me something better than that. Please explain to me why we’re gonna let a known commodity just leave “because running backs aren’t worth i it.” Please give me more than that. A+ work Quite the grading system you put in place here.

My post was meant to get people to think. Don't just offer up catch phrases. Offer up data. REAL data. Offer up something other than "you can't pay RBs" because I have refuted that line with facts. Teams do pay RBs. Well run teams at that.

don't just look at the stats even if the stats are great, especially when factoring in the OL and skill talent around Barkley.

The guy came into the NFL as one of the most talented players ever. That's not hyperbole. Facts. He virtually dominated as a rookie despite playing on a bad tea. Would have dominated 19 if not fore the ankle but still finishes with good numbers and countless wow plays. Sees his knee explode in 2020 and sure enough it impacts his 2021 season. The ankle injury didn't help in 21...so fine, we're worried about Barkley heading into 2021--there's NOTHING wrong with being worried prior to 2022, shit I even was right until late summer when reports kept coming in that he looked great in practice, but not until the first game was I convinced he was back.

HE goes on to play well all year long. Runs hard. Finishes runs as so many here demanded.

Not good enough? Go back to his skill set and pedigree and overall talent. Then imagine that talent playing in a loaded or very good offense. Then imagine that same player playing in that offense behind great offensive coaching.

There's plenty of reasons to believe 2022 was merely the beginning. That better times lie ahead and Barkley (and Jones) could be the big winners here.

What happens to good or great players when better players and coaching surround them and help their cause? Give up? Here is a refresher:

-Marshall Faulk going from indy to greatest show on turf

-Tiki Barber going from Fassel and solid surrounding to Coughlin and good to even great surrounding offensive talent.

-John Riggins from the Jets to Wash

-Matt Stafford from DET to the Rams

-Plunkett from NE to the Raiders

The list goes on and on. BArkley is an MVP caliber talent. I don't know HOW people can't see this. I ain't that fucking smart.

but the issue is his durability. He's been in the league for 5 years and 3 were derailed by injury.

For me, the biggest issue is the position he plays. It's just not a position you can lock up a lot of money and resources in when you are rebuilding the rest of the roster. Its a position thats completely reliant on all other offensive positions and a position thats not hard to fill. Its hard to fill with HOF caliber players, but its not hard to fill year to year.

In comment 16022936 djm said:

Quote:

In comment 16019632 chick310 said: Quote: In comment 16019409 Rafflee said: Quote: In comment 16018931 djm said: Quote: Who are we paying from the Barkley savings? Where is this guy? Some of you want to spend that money on another free agent running back, a vet FA running back, no less. So you want to downgrade at running back and spend probably $10 million on that FA downgrade and then do what, exactly? Where is the rest of that money going to that four or five extra million? No? I’m wrong? OK fine do you want to draft a running back and spend that 15 or so million where? Who is getting that money? What free agent wide receiver are we paying that money to? I’m still wrong? Ok then. Why can’t we have two nice things on offense? Apparently teams don’t pay the running back in the quarterback? Yeah that’s bullshit. So we’re gonna save some money and let Barkley go and who the fuck are we paying that money to? where is this guy? And is he worth it? The FA wide receivers suck. Don’t tell me you want to save money and let Barkley go just because of stupid made up nonsense about RBs not worth the money. Please offer me something better than that. Please explain to me why we’re gonna let a known commodity just leave “because running backs aren’t worth i it.” Please give me more than that. A+ work Quite the grading system you put in place here. My post was meant to get people to think. Don't just offer up catch phrases. Offer up data. REAL data. Offer up something other than "you can't pay RBs" because I have refuted that line with facts. Teams do pay RBs. Well run teams at that.

Ok, here's some real data because you feel like nobody but you is really thinking put there.

In 2022, the NYG tandem of Barkley, Breida and Brightwell had a combined cost of just over $9M against the cap for an avg cap spread of $3M for each.

Two really well run teams that just happen to be meeting in the Super Bowl next week have the following:

Philly - has Scott, Sanders, Gainwell and Sermon that combined cost only $5.2M against the cap for an avg spread of $1.3M for each.

KC - has Jones, McKinnon and Pacheco that combined cost $3.3M or an average of $1.1M each. They also have Hellaire on IR and his cap hit is $2.9M because he has been an underperforming first rd pick, yet they aren't missing a beat with him gone and just basically using Pacheco and McKinnon.

So now give Barkley $12M-$14M next year and re-run these numbers for the Giants and tell me why we shouldn't be spreading the running back money around more prudently than just giving it to one guy on an expensive second contract when we can get production like KC and Phil are seeing from a cheaper stable of backs? OR maybe we should go cheaper with RBs and use the excess to upgrade the Guard or Center position as well?

Let me know.