If Ryans/Caserio decide to draft defense and add on offense in FA then Barkley should be in play as well as Samuels. The thing those stats dont take into account is Barkley's ability to run pass patterns and catch the ball like a WR. He fits what Slowik wants to do like a glove.
Tried to capture that in the yards per touch, because he is a great receiving weapon, and he was better than singletary while working with the Giants OL, zero actual receivers, and freakin VITO. Lol, all defenses just focused on him. He would erupt on this offense, with this scheme. I don’t hate adding Samuel, I would just rather grab one of the receivers in this draft. Whether that’s Brian Thomas/Troy Franklin early, or Legette/worthy in the second. I could be convinced of some others in later rounds if we wanna focus on D with the early picks.
What they do in FA will help me makeup my mind about what I would do? Example, if they let JG walk, then Chop would be a great pick. I could see Chop at 1-23 and Fiske at 2-59. That would make for the most athletic DL in the NFL. (I would rather have Sweat at 2-59 though.) Sign Al Shaair in FA. WA/Collins/Fiske/Chop Cashman/Al Shaair/Harris Stingley/Nelson/Quantez Stiggers 3rd rd pick Whitehead/Ward/Cole Bishop 4th rd pick/Houston Carson That's a fast young playmaking defense. You could add a WR like Brenden Rice in the 4th in addition to adding Samuels/Barkley in FA. Bottom line is the future is bright.
At least some of y'all are talking about Samuel as a possible FA WR to sign. I think he'll fit well with this team, especially as WR3.
As a FA value play, Kicker and Punter are far and away the best bang for the buck if you find a superior player. After that, RB and TE are the next best values for Superior Players. Starting QB is far and away the best value play for a Draft Pick. OT follows with EDGE, then other OL and DL. These are just generalization and there are exceptions. I use the Franchise Player values as a guide. The higher the franchise price, the more the value shifts toward draft over FA. The basis for this is the positional irrelevance of position in the draft order determination and the skew of positions selected in the Draft.
Can we just sign Fairbairn and Johnson already? I do NOT want to downgrade those areas by taking flyers on untested kids. One area where we were elite before last year was on Special Teams and I'd like to keep it that way.
I have a question for the salary cap wizards. If you tag a player then trade them, does any part of their salary count against the cap. For instance; if we Franchise Tag Jon Greenard then trade him to another team, does any of his salary count against our cap?
The Franchise Tag, when exercised, results in a very simple one year contract at a set price. So a trade will not involve dead cap, signing, or other issues which might be retained by the team trading the player. But any obligations previously assumed by a restructure deal extending beyond his FA would have to be dealt with by the trading team, but not because he was tagged and traded. At least that is my understanding. The problem with the idea is his est value in FA is $13.4M and it is far too less than the franchise tag of $20,247,000. This is why I scoff every time Franchising him is mentioned. We really do not have a serious Franchise tag candidate unless the transition tag is substantially less and that wouldn't technically be a franchise tag. It appears to be about 10% less. I didn't get into the exclusive Tag since I don't think it's been used since 2017. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39580128/what-nfl-franchise-tag-how-does-work
Because his 20 mil would be better spent filling holes all along the team. Say you could add a WR like Samuels and a RB like Barkley for the same money you would be paying Greenard. Give me Samuels/ Barkley and I will draft Chop or Darius Robinson in the 1st rd to replace Greenard.
Personally I'd rather keep him, get the best RB in free agency and draft a couple defensive studs to replace our weakest guys on defense, which isn't Greenard, along with a WR, and CB/Safety or two.
I was asking because I heard that exact situation on The Killer B's yesterday. I'm okay with bringing Greenard back but not at $20M+. If we don't re-sign him, why not try to get a 3rd (?) rounder back this year instead of a 4th round compensatory pick next year.
I get your logic, but I don't think is that easy to decide. Dlinemen are often not ready to be productive at BOTH rushing the passer and stopping the run in their first year. Anderson was very special. A lot of dlineman struggle at first to do anything other than pin their ears back. You could take a step back next year significantly if you let him go. I think the Texans have a tough balancing act to do this offseason. They clearly need to get some offensive weapons, they have to address in the interior offensive line, they need to address interior dline, they need another linebacker, they need better safety play, they can't let their special teams fall apart... It's crazy how many FA they have.
This is why you bring back Barnett and draft an edge early. I'm betting you get close to the same production.
I think we could still afford Barklay signing Greenard. I wouldn't worry about a receiver in free agency, unless we can afford one keeping Greenard. I love that Greenard's only 26. That's a big plus. We can draft guys. Our passing game definitely wasn't our weakness. There are plenty of guys in college who would be capable of catching Stroud's passes.
