Forum Replies Created
-
Trade hinges on if Broncos, Colin Kaepernick can agree on restructured contract
Adam SchefterESPN Senior Writer
San Francisco and Denver have the parameters of an agreement in principle on a trade for Colin Kaepernick, sources said, but before any deal can be completed, the quarterback and the Broncos still have to agree on a restructured contract, and the two sides have not been close.
Kaepernick and the Broncos continue talking, trying to see if they can bridge their contractual differences, sources said.
Kaepernick is due to make $11.9 million in base salary this season and has a $15.9 million salary cap number for 2016. The Broncos want a much friendlier cap number and contract, and need to see whether they can get it.
Sources said talks on a restructured contract between Colin Kaepernick and the Broncos have not been close thus far. The QB is due to make $11.9 million in base salary this season and has a $15.9 million salary cap number. AP Photo/Ben MargotKaepernick and Broncos executive vice president of football operations/general manager John Elway have met at least once, as the San Francisco Chronicle reported, trying to see if the two sides can work out their differences.
The agreement on trade compensation between Denver and San Francisco will not be an issue in any potential trade for Kaepernick, sources said. The compensation is expected to be some type of mid-round pick.
The real question is whether the Broncos and Kaepernick can work out a restructured deal; the Broncos and 49ers already have the parameters of theirs in place.
Denver, which lost Peyton Manning to retirement and Brock Osweiler to the Houston Texans in free agency, has long been linked to Kaepernick, reportedly envisioning him competing with the recently acquired Mark Sanchez.
AgamemnonThe salary cap is always a moving target, with many changing points. I think this stuff is the best we are going to get. I think the guy did a good job on his post and this is a good current snapshot.
AgamemnonYou can also figure, if they make a deal with Trumaine, then that adds to space for 2016, but subtracts from 2017 and future years.
AgamemnonThat’s interesting, thanks. Does 4.8 sound good to you? But then…does that count the tender to BC?
2017 cap space as of right now (figuring a 153 M cap for next year though it will probably be more than that): 48 M.
Though they gain another 12+ M if they lose Foles.
They have the individual details at the article site. Yes, 4.8 counts everything, it matches what JT said in his chat. They say 53M above for 2017. It is in the last two paragraphs. It also answers your Foles question. Are you speed reading? 😉
I am speed typing. 😉
The Rams could very well have close to $83 million in salary cap space entering the 2017 offseason.
-
This reply was modified 9 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
This reply was modified 9 years, 11 months ago by .
AgamemnonBend don't break….. #MentalShift #OLPBuiltToDominate™ @G_ROB73 pic.twitter.com/P3xxJVLEKD
— LeCharles Bentley (@OLineWorld65) April 2, 2016
AgamemnonI am quite happy not making any trades at all. Just sitting and picking is fine.
I would rather trade down than up. More draft choices is a good thing.
I would virtually never trade into the top half of the first round. It is a seller’s market and the cost is prohibitive. imo
This is a good draft to take a QB somewhere, especially at 15. I would be ok with them not drafting a QB, although I like drafting a QB in every draft. I would settle for good players(talent not position).
Agamemnon
The all Fisher/Snead Draft. They look for players that can have multiple probowl seasons, franchise players, Snead said.
.
Gurley, Robinson, Donald. Garrett can be the next Quick. 😉 Marshall and Gurley were about equal when they were freshmen at Georgia. Hackenberg was doing more as a freshman than most of the QBs did as Seniors. Smith could equal Gurley. Nkemdiche might be the next Jenkins. Any TE is an upgrade over Cook. 😉That was a bit of fun. Who really knows how things will go?
AgamemnonWhy does everybody always have the Rams doing something stupid.
Fisher and Snead are more likely to wait and pick a QB at #15 or take Nkemdiche(maybe the best player in the draft. where have we heard this before?) or the first WR, than trade up. imo
Then they can take Jaylon Smith(a top 5 player if healthy. where have we heard this before?) in the second and red shirt him for a year.
Then take Hackenberg or some other QB.
AgamemnonI just thought I would look at some stuff from last year, in case the Rams don’t go with plan A, B, or C of the fans popular ideas to trade up for a QB. 😉
Randy Karraker said about a month after the draft, that the Rams would have take Cook at #10, over T Gurley.
AgamemnonQuarterbacks always dominate the draft conversation. The same will be true of the 2016 NFL draft. There are plenty of intriguing options out there who had notable games in week 3. Some good and some bad. Others a bit confusing but all very important. How do their stocks look afterwards?
Stock Down: Connor Cook (Michigan State)He returned to Michigan State first and foremost to win a national championship. So far Connor Cook is keeping to that goal as the Spartans remain undefeated. However, his other goal to be a top 10 pick in the draft won’t be helped by a rather unremarkable performance against Central Michigan.
He finished the afternoon just 11-for-19 passing for 143 yards and a touchdown, adding three runs for 16 yards. There were no turnovers, which is good but from an individual perspective this isn’t beneficial to Cook. This will be looked at as game management, and against an opponent they frankly should’ve handled even easier than they did.
Stock Down: Kevin Hogan (Stanford)
At the end of last season, many felt Stanford quarterback Kevin Hogan had a good chance to be the latest quarterback drafted in the first round from their program since Andrew Luck. Steadily though, over the past few weeks the buzz on the senior has cooled considerably.
After an ugly opener against Northwestern, Hogan hasn’t had any highlight games and didn’t help his cause when visiting Oregon State. Though the Cardinal won handily, he finished just 9-of-14 for 163 yards, two touchdowns and an interception. In fairness it was against a solid pass defense but given the favorable matchups he had thanks to his ground game, he could’ve done a lot better.
Stock Up: Christian Hackenberg (Penn State)
Most feel that junior quarterback Christian Hackenberg has the pedigree and skill set of a top 5 pick but has constantly been undermined by Penn State both in terms of his offensive line and the shaky play calling on offense. Even though many don’t hold that against him, it was becoming difficult to see him staying in the 1st round conversation without showing signs of progress.
Scouts finally got that as Hackenberg came alive to lead the Nittany Lions on an offensive spurt over San Diego State. He threw 35 times, completing 21 passes for 296 yards and three touchdowns without an interception. There is still plenty of work to do, but this is a step in the right direction.
Agamemnonhttps://www.football.com/en-us/2015-nfl-draft-first-look-at-qbs/3-kevin-hogan-stanford/
David Seigerman
Author2015 NFL Draft: First Look At QBs
Created on Jun. 13, 2014 5:16 AM EDT3. Kevin Hogan, Stanford
Stanford lost its top two running backs and several starters along the offensive line. That could be bad news for a team looking for its third straight trip to the Rose Bowl.
Or it could be a good thing. Certainly for Kevin Hogan’s development.
Hogan was not asked to do too much in most games in 2013. In half of his 14 games, he attempted fewer than 20 passes. In eight games, he threw for fewer than 200 yards. Those are not numbers usually associated with big-time quarterback prospects.
But the Cardinal offense may be looking to lean on Hogan a bit more this year, and he stands to make the biggest leap forward of any QB in the country.
Hogan is big (6-4, 228) with terrific accuracy and touch on short and intermediate passes. He’ll need to show a bit more consistency on the deep ball, but he’s as confident as he is competent and looks the part of an NFL quarterback.
The comparisons to Andrew Luck are inevitable and they are unfair. Hogan is not going to be the first pick of the 2015 NFL Draft. He is not ready to step right into an NFL job on Day One. But he is tough and talented and technically sound. And this year he will have more opportunity to show what he can do as a passer.
————————————————————————————-Mel Kiper of ESPN released his list of the top five senior quarterbacks and top five (actually six) underclass quarterbacks for the 2015 NFL draft.
AgamemnonThis means that hitting or not hitting isn’t proof of right or wrong but it is a result of the chance of hitting or not hitting.
Well, except, there’s more than chance at play here. Players are picked higher when they have more desirable qualities that make it at least look like they have a better chance. Naturally it’s not 100%, but then it seems to me that if you want a better shot at a qb, you take the one who looks like they have the best chance of succeeding. If you don’t someone else will. There are variations on that and exceptions and so on, but, as a rule if you want Rivers or Eli or Stafford or Roethlisberger or etc, you pick higher…cause they won’t fall lower, generally speaking.
So I am not sure strict chance is the way to look at it. There is some honest comparative player evaluation at work.
To me percentages = trends across time. Trends across time favor taking the qb higher.
But then everyone says this year is an exception. There’s more solid, tier 2 qbs–developmental. So there may be more Daltons in this draft and fewer Mariottas.
…
That means they have a better chance/probability. It doesn’t eliminate chance. It is just that the odds of hitting are higher. No matter how expert you get, it is a projection based on predicted success. No matter the reason for making a choice, it won’t change that if it contains unknowns there will be a certain probability in being right or wrong.
AgamemnonCleveland Browns Signing Of Robert Griffin Screams ‘Moneyball’
Nick Dudukovich
by Nick Dudukovich 4d ago Follow @dukeofnickCleveland Browns Signing Of Robert Griffin Screams ‘Moneyball’
Does the Cleveland Browns’ signing of Robert Griffin have Paul DePodesta’s finger prints on it? FoS writer Nick Dudukovich can’t help but smell “moneyball” all over this signing.
As the Tweets poured across my feed with the news of Robert Griffin III signing with the Browns, I couldn’t help but think of Jonah Hill portraying Paul DePodesta in “Moneyball,” as he helps Brad Pitt’s character (Billy Beane) change the way baseball teams are constructed.
The biggest element of moneyball at play? Find players the other teams don’t see value in and reap the benefits for yourself. Clearly, the NFL no longer sees value in RG3 and the new Browns analytically-driven front office, along with their quarterback guru head coach, Hue Jackson, believe they can make something out of the No. 2 overall pick in the 2012 NFL Draft.
After the signing, there were lots of Tweets and columns trying to bury Griffin with a label. He was “purely a runner who’s going to get hurt.” He’s “not comfortable in the pocket.” “He won’t last a game if he decides to run.”
Remember, think “Moneyball.” Go beyond what we already know and don’t let the labels get in the way. The Browns have an offensive-oriented coach who has done some great work with quarterbacks. He’s not going to make Griffin a pocket guy, or a one-read quarterback. Jackson’s going to make Griffin his guy.
More from Factory of SadnessDid LeBron Unfollow Chris Broussard For This Petty Reason?1h ago
Cleveland Indians Mailbag Preview: Part One3h ago
Three Reasons The Cleveland Cavaliers Won’t Win The East10h ago
Cleveland Browns: Pre-draft Visits Has Begun15h ago
Cleveland Indians: Chisenhall To DL Puts Team In Dire Straits18h agoLook at what Jackson did in Cincinnati. He used multiple schemes utilizing pro-style packages, with spread looks, as ESPN writer Matt Brown noted. Jackson liked giving his quarterback run-pass options, and even drew up quarterback designed runs with Andy Dalton taking snaps.
Jackson has a reputation to cater to his personnel. If there’s one coach who can resurect Griffin, Jackson’s on the short list.
Now, all of this can’t fall on the new coach’s shoulders. Griffin has to be coachable, and by all accounts, he’s come to the Browns a humbled man. He’s done himself a favor by signing now. He’ll be Jackson’s to sculpt for all of Cleveland’s offseason workouts.
This signing also screams moneyball, because consider what else is available. Let’s pretend Paul DePodesta views the position as the spot that should receive the biggest investment. Whom would you rather start? Ryan Fitzpatrick? Josh McCown? By adding Griffin, the Browns added a player with higher long-term upside at the most important position on the field.
Some think Griffin’s making too much at $15 million over two seasons. Remember, this is the NFL. Only guranteed money really matters, and the Browns are only on the hook for $6.75 in gurantees. If it doens’t work out, it’ll be easy to move on in 2017.
This upside versus the potential can’t be overlooked. If Griffin achieves the ceiling–or even comes close to do doing so–the DePodesta and the Browns will have found a diamond in a rock pile with Griffin.
Next: Top 10 QBs In Browns HistoryOK, now I know you don’t need to subscribe to moneyball tactics to see what this signing really is–a low-risk reclamation project. Not the first time it’s been done. If RG3 goes bust, the Browns simply move on. But as evidenced by the signing, the Browns believe there is still value in RG3, and are at least willing to see if they can harvest it for their own well being.
AgamemnonYou can use historical data to assign probability values to any pick. You can also compare hitting on a pick to making a hand in poker after the draw. This means that hitting or not hitting isn’t proof of right or wrong but it is a result of the chance of hitting or not hitting.
AgamemnonThat gets us to 60% vs 50% by devaluing 2 thirds of the first round to the equivalent of second and third round picks. I would think it is a sort of glitch in data that things seem to plateau like that. Maybe we need a bigger sample. You would think picks 13-32 are worth more than picks 33 to 96. Meanwhile, the price to trade up increases exponentially.
AgamemnonThe answer is to trade up in the first round, so I can get to the 30% range?
It depends on your measure I guess (which years? How far back? Etc.) but I found a much higher hit rate for the 1st round.
I did 2004-2014, which (with a year added) corresponds to the years for my 2nd and 3rd round qb search.
From 2004 to 2014, out of 31 1st round qbs, I got 15 hits: Rivers, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Eli, Ryan, Cutler, Newton, Flacco, Smith, Stafford, Luck, Tannenhill, Bradford, Bridgewater, and Bortles.
Granted we really don’t know about a couple of those yet. But either way, my list brings it to 48.4%.
Ok, I can take one roll at 50% or 2 rolls at 25%, one first round pick or a pick in round 2 and a pick in round 3.
How about one roll at 50% without trading up?
AgamemnonAs you can see, the cost to trade up for a quarterback doesn’t have to be exorbitantly high.
I just read that the QB hit rate in round 2 and round 3 is 26%. The answer is to trade up in the first round, so I can get to the 30% range?
Agamemnonhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1BcyZLtpyQ
A couple more WRs. This class is looking a bit better. And the TEs aren’t a desert like they might be perceived.
I want guys that will catch the ball. No more Jared Cook.
AgamemnonHey ag. Maybe as the draft approaches now, we can start new qb threads. 1 for Cook, 1 for Lynch, 1 for Goff/Wentz, 1 for “others.” Or keep up with this one.
What-choo think?
Separate threads are fine with me, zn.
Agamemnon
I guess Coples doesn’t count. He was probably cut by his former team? He was released.
.
The convoluted rules for comp picks are here. http://www.cincyjungle.com/2016/3/3/11145566/how-do-compensatory-picks-work-and-will-the-bengals-have-any-in-2016 Agamemnon -
This reply was modified 9 years, 11 months ago by
