Bill Barnwell posted an article making it appear that there could be something to a Christian Kirk reunion with Kliff Kingsbury. He's only 29. If traded for he'll cost $15 million. But I kind of imagine the Jags just release him instead and we could sign him for cheaper.
Slot WR, knows the offense. Plays well still but was a bit injured lately. I think I'd prefer him (for cheap) then Deebo Samuel who is looking washed.
I'd prefer a WR with some size. I feel like teams can play press man and beat our guys up a bit too easily. Even McLaurin gets bullied from time to time by big physical CBs.
Amari Cooper would be a good fit but he's over 30 and might be hitting that washed stage at this point. He didn't do much in Buffalo and that's with an MVP throwing him the ball. But he's a team first guy who's willing to block and doesn't throw a fit when he doesn't get the ball.
I think the Browns would have to rework that contract as part of the trade.
There is definitely a chance the Browns don't trade him. I genuinely think they don't want to trade him. What they are up against it seems is Garrett seems determined to be a pain in the butt to push himself out.
To expound on my pount on why Garrett. We got a dude at QB, where among other things 4 ESPN reporters are picking already as next years MVP. Graziano is picking them to go to the SB with Daniels being compared that SB week next year to Mahomes. And none of that to me sounds silly at all.
If Daniels keeps at this pace, he will be the highest paid player in the league. We got him cheap for a few more years. Carpe Diem.
When was the last star, legit star we had at defense? A dude that opponents game plan against? It's been a long time. Sean Taylor arguably and he was a safety and teams don't game plan much against safeties even great ones like him. Kerrigan was good -- not special. J. Allen has been good -- not special.
Bringing a guy that teams have to account for makes everyone else better. While this team was hyper focused on Jalen Carter for example, it opened things up for Jordan Davis. Or in the SB for Milton Williams and Josh Sweat. A killer player especially on the D line can change a defense. It's a tough thing for us to buy because we haven't seen that in forever to think of it as an apples to apples comparison.
What defensive lineman have we seen that was great here let alone elite? Maybe Dexter Manley in his heyday? And Garrett is arguably better than him, too.
I don't think the Browns have any way to restructure Garrett's contract to reduce or fix the dead cap hit they'd take for moving him. From my (admittedly limited) understanding of cap math, that dead cap is mostly from bonuses already paid. Even if he were to reach an agreement on a contract with a new team before a trade, it wouldn't make the dead cap disappear.
The only way to manipulate the dead cap is to possibly spread the hit out over two years if they wait until after June 1st. But that still doesn't help them a ton, considering they're already $30 million over the cap. That's why I don't see any clear impetus for them to trade him outside of a massive godfather type offer.
They can let him complain, and if he refuses to report or play, they don't have to pay him, they can fine him every day, and they can also try to reclaim a portion of his signing bonus by bonus forfeiture. So they can also make his life hell as well as the other way around.
I've heard another ex-GM forgetting whom specifically talk about extending-reworking the contract as a way to lower the cap hit. I am not a cap expert, so you got me how to do it. But that's where the notion is coming from.
It wouldn't be the first time anyway in recent years where some said the cap hit is too prohibitive for a trade to happen, yet in the end the trade happened anyway.
Yep. I am aware. Ill expound later. But in short, you can stagger his contract to fit this window for Jaydens rookie deal. Assuming two number 1s. It would be a disaster IMO if the Eagles got him instead.
Honestly, I'm guessing the Browns will call his bluff, with only a godfather type of offer moving the needle for them. They're going to have to eat an unholy amount of dead cap if they trade him (even if after June 1st), which is untenable given that they're already $30 million over the cap.
So unless someone comes with a three 1st round + player kind of deal, I don't see much incentive for them to do the trade. If Garret refuses to report, they can fine him, not pay his salary, and then also try and get back some of the signing bonus money.
Don't know. Depends on the personalities in that front office-ownership. Bruce would clearly take the chance and call the players "bluff" and worse case let the house burn to make a point -- some others would, too. Sometimes FOs' buck and don't want the headache and or use it as an excuse to rebuild (assuming the owner is on board).
Not sure how you or I can guess the machinations-thoughts of their FO. So its a wildcard.
My main issue with it is if the Eagles trade for Garrett. Game over. He's the perfect add to that team for them to work a long run here -- Chiefs-Patriots style. As much as I like Garrett for this team. I LOVE the fit to the Eagles. Arguably the weakness of that team especially losing Sweat is their edges. Their edges aren't bad. But not unstoppable. If you add Garrett to that mix, along with their DTs, it makes their already special defense potentially one for the ages.
And the Eagles coaches, Fangio, and company don't exactly struggle to know how to use talent. They can already beat you with their front 4 and keep 7 in coverage. Imagine with Garrett? What we saw against KC would be tame in comparison. Their defense would potentially rival some of the 80s Bears ones, or Ravens from the 2000s, it would be sick.
Bill Barnwell posted an article making it appear that there could be something to a Christian Kirk reunion with Kliff Kingsbury. He's only 29. If traded for he'll cost $15 million. But I kind of imagine the Jags just release him instead and we could sign him for cheaper.
Slot WR, knows the offense. Plays well still but was a bit injured lately. I think I'd prefer him (for cheap) then Deebo Samuel who is looking washed.
I'd prefer a WR with some size. I feel like teams can play press man and beat our guys up a bit too easily. Even McLaurin gets bullied from time to time by big physical CBs.
Amari Cooper would be a good fit but he's over 30 and might be hitting that washed stage at this point. He didn't do much in Buffalo and that's with an MVP throwing him the ball. But he's a team first guy who's willing to block and doesn't throw a fit when he doesn't get the ball.
I mean, not like Amari Cooper has plus size either. Kirk is only like 5 pounds smaller, but is 2 inches shorter. Cooper is more of the Terry McLaurin type where he tries but he's not the most physical WR. He can also be redirected.
I think it's pretty telling that Coopers stats fell off so hard. Before the Bills trade I wanted is to trade for him thinking he'd be a bounce back candidate. Yet he struggled to separate in Buffalo and the contested catches weren't coming down for him. Problem for this FA period is we have a lot of big names, but most of them have been showing some problematic signs of decline. Speed is falling off, separation is lacking, not as physical anymore, etc.
If Tee Higgins at 30+ million is too expensive, then the next best options are slot guys like Kirk or Godwin and hope they can stay healthy.
I bet we can get Kirk for like 6 million. It doesn't mean we shouldn't also draft a WR if that turns out to be BPA on Day 1 or 2. But it at least means we aren't as desperate.
I think the Browns would have to rework that contract as part of the trade.
There is definitely a chance the Browns don't trade him. I genuinely think they don't want to trade him. What they are up against it seems is Garrett seems determined to be a pain in the butt to push himself out.
To expound on my pount on why Garrett. We got a dude at QB, where among other things 4 ESPN reporters are picking already as next years MVP. Graziano is picking them to go to the SB with Daniels being compared that SB week next year to Mahomes. And none of that to me sounds silly at all.
If Daniels keeps at this pace, he will be the highest paid player in the league. We got him cheap for a few more years. Carpe Diem.
When was the last star, legit star we had at defense? A dude that opponents game plan against? It's been a long time. Sean Taylor arguably and he was a safety and teams don't game plan much against safeties even great ones like him. Kerrigan was good -- not special. J. Allen has been good -- not special.
Bringing a guy that teams have to account for makes everyone else better. While this team was hyper focused on Jalen Carter for example, it opened things up for Jordan Davis. Or in the SB for Milton Williams and Josh Sweat. A killer player especially on the D line can change a defense. It's a tough thing for us to buy because we haven't seen that in forever to think of it as an apples to apples comparison.
What defensive lineman have we seen that was great here let alone elite? Maybe Dexter Manley in his heyday? And Garrett is arguably better than him, too.
I don't think the Browns have any way to restructure Garrett's contract to reduce or fix the dead cap hit they'd take for moving him. From my (admittedly limited) understanding of cap math, that dead cap is mostly from bonuses already paid. Even if he were to reach an agreement on a contract with a new team before a trade, it wouldn't make the dead cap disappear.
The only way to manipulate the dead cap is to possibly spread the hit out over two years if they wait until after June 1st. But that still doesn't help them a ton, considering they're already $30 million over the cap. That's why I don't see any clear impetus for them to trade him outside of a massive godfather type offer.
They can let him complain, and if he refuses to report or play, they don't have to pay him, they can fine him every day, and they can also try to reclaim a portion of his signing bonus by bonus forfeiture. So they can also make his life hell as well as the other way around.
I've heard another ex-GM forgetting whom specifically talk about extending-reworking the contract as a way to lower the cap hit. I am not a cap expert, so you got me how to do it. But that's where the notion is coming from.
It wouldn't be the first time anyway in recent years where some said the cap hit is too prohibitive for a trade to happen, yet in the end the trade happened anyway.
Teams have to eat the dead cap, but sometimes they're willing to do it in some circumstances. The Broncos with Wilson, the Packers with Rodgers, the Falcons with Ryan. They all had to eat a bunch of dead cap. They dealt with it by releasing or restructuring other players' contracts.
The difference there is that those players were all older and past their prime, not relevant to the team's long term plans, or both. Garrett is still in his prime, is one of the best players in the NFL, and is the cornerstone of their team right now.
That doesn't mean it can't happen. But it does mean that they'd likely have to make some other big roster moves and accept that they're now in a full-on rebuild. Even then, the trade offer would probably have to be huge.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have Garrett on this team, I just don't know if I'd want to give up the kind of crazy haul the Browns would probably require in order to make it worth it for them.
I don't think the Browns have any way to restructure Garrett's contract to reduce or fix the dead cap hit they'd take for moving him. From my (admittedly limited) understanding of cap math, that dead cap is mostly from bonuses already paid. Even if he were to reach an agreement on a contract with a new team before a trade, it wouldn't make the dead cap disappear.
The only way to manipulate the dead cap is to possibly spread the hit out over two years if they wait until after June 1st. But that still doesn't help them a ton, considering they're already $30 million over the cap. That's why I don't see any clear impetus for them to trade him outside of a massive godfather type offer.
They can let him complain, and if he refuses to report or play, they don't have to pay him, they can fine him every day, and they can also try to reclaim a portion of his signing bonus by bonus forfeiture. So they can also make his life hell as well as the other way around.
I've heard another ex-GM forgetting whom specifically talk about extending-reworking the contract as a way to lower the cap hit. I am not a cap expert, so you got me how to do it. But that's where the notion is coming from.
It wouldn't be the first time anyway in recent years where some said the cap hit is too prohibitive for a trade to happen, yet in the end the trade happened anyway.
Teams have to eat the dead cap, but sometimes they're willing to do it in some circumstances. The Broncos with Wilson, the Packers with Rodgers, the Falcons with Ryan. They all had to eat a bunch of dead cap. They dealt with it by releasing or restructuring other players' contracts.
The difference there is that those players were all older and past their prime, not relevant to the team's long term plans, or both. Garrett is still in his prime, is one of the best players in the NFL, and is the cornerstone of their team right now.
That doesn't mean it can't happen. But it does mean that they'd likely have to make some other big roster moves and accept that they're now in a full-on rebuild. Even then, the trade offer would probably have to be huge.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have Garrett on this team, I just don't know if I'd want to give up the kind of crazy haul the Browns would probably require in order to make it worth it for them.
I hear you. I just don't care enough to think long and hard about the Brown's motivations on this one way or another nor feel like if I did I would have a good handle on it. Multiple Browns beat reporters, gone on 106.7 among other places) have thought he's more likely to be traded than not. But they if I recall put it around the 60-70% range it happens. Not 90%, etc. So they are hedging.
I've digested enough on the topic to at a minimum think for the moment its not some wild fantasy. It feels like its at least a possibility.
Part of me rather not see him hit the trade market because I think he does even more for the Eagles and the Lions than he does for this team. The Eagles could book their SB trip now if they acquired Garrett. It's hard enough to stop them as is -- but getting Garrett feels like game over on that front. the Lions with him and Hutchinson would have the best edge combo in the league.
The exec isn't wrong. Daniels has raised the ceiling of the team but the floor is still super low. For comparison sake, look at the Cowboys. They had a rash of injuries, including to their starting QB, and still managed 7 wins. 49ers were similar, tons of injuries, but still won 6. If we had those same kind of injuries we MAYBE win 3 games.
I could see Peters looking at this roster and thinking: "Last year was great, but I still need to infuse the team with more young talent and rebuild our development infrastructure."
I get the point but...
Teams with top 5 QBs generally are in the playoffs almost every year in spite of their roster. IMO Daniels is that level good and likely keeps climbing.
Teams like the Bengals last year are an exception. But heck even with them, they ended with a winning record, came close to making the post season -- lost super close games to the Commanders, both Ravens games, Chiefs, etc.
This team was 60 minutes away from a SB appearance with no running game, a subpar O line and missing their best O lineman. Not having a legit #2 WR. One of the worst teams in the NFL against the run. Lattimore I assume wasn't healthy-right and was awful. They don't create turnovers.
Yet a QB masked that all. I get the step back in the context of a tougher schedule. But otherwise we just gave Quinn-Peters a full off season with much cap room and 7 draft picks to improve this team where they don't have this level of weaknesses.
I am betting Jayden doesn't plateau or takes a step back and keeps getting better. Even Mahomes referenced he could see Jayden's progression as a player by watching his three games versus the Eagles. Can this team fix all of their weaknesses in one off season? No chance. But I think Peters would have to be horrible at his job if he can't make this roster better from last season and better by a full peg or more.
Part of my faith that they will keep climbing isn't just Jayden's ability as a QB but also the dude is so clutch. Such a gamer with the game on the line and in big games, etc. If you got an elite QB who plays his best when games matter the most you got a shot at the big dance every year.
Maybe that makes me sound like a homer. But heck we got 2 national reporters predicting Washington makes the SB next year. 4 national reporters predicting Jayden is league MVP.
The exec isn't wrong. Daniels has raised the ceiling of the team but the floor is still super low. For comparison sake, look at the Cowboys. They had a rash of injuries, including to their starting QB, and still managed 7 wins. 49ers were similar, tons of injuries, but still won 6. If we had those same kind of injuries we MAYBE win 3 games.
I could see Peters looking at this roster and thinking: "Last year was great, but I still need to infuse the team with more young talent and rebuild our development infrastructure."
I get the point but...
Teams with top 5 QBs generally are in the playoffs almost every year in spite of their roster. IMO Daniels is that level good and likely keeps climbing.
Teams like the Bengals last year are an exception. But heck even with them, they ended with a winning record, came close to making the post season -- lost super close games to the Commanders, both Ravens games, Chiefs, etc.
This team was 60 minutes away from a SB appearance with no running game, a subpar O line and missing their best O lineman. Not having a legit #2 WR. One of the worst teams in the NFL against the run. Lattimore I assume wasn't healthy-right and was awful. They don't create turnovers.
Yet a QB masked that all. I get the step back in the context of a tougher schedule. But otherwise we just gave Quinn-Peters a full off season with much cap room and 7 draft picks to improve this team where they don't have this level of weaknesses.
I am betting Jayden doesn't plateau or takes a step back and keeps getting better. Even Mahomes referenced he could see Jayden's progression as a player by watching his three games versus the Eagles. Can this team fix all of their weaknesses in one off season? No chance. But I think Peters would have to be horrible at his job if he can't make this roster better from last season and better by a full peg or more.
Part of my faith that they will keep climbing isn't just Jayden's ability as a QB but also the dude is so clutch. Such a gamer with the game on the line and in big games, etc. If you got an elite QB who plays his best when games matter the most you got a shot at the big dance every year.
Maybe that makes me sound like a homer. But heck we got 2 national reporters predicting Washington makes the SB next year. 4 national reporters predicting Jayden is league MVP.
I hear you. Elite Qbs mask a ton of deficiencies. We really have a lack of talent compared to most teams in the league to be honest. The Giants are frankly more talented than we are. I also think they will trade for Stafford. Too much smoke there for that trade not to happen. If they are pot committed and don't take a QB at 3, and instead, take BPA (say like Mason Graham, assuming Carter & Hunter go in the first two selections), they will be tough to play against for sure. I actually think SF is going to be a major bounce-back team next year and contend for the #1 seed in the NFC. With a last place schedule, they will rack wins.
I always think your schedule difficulty is based primarily on the QB you are playing against. Here's who we play next year:
Dak x2
Hurts x2
NYG (tbd) x2
Goff
Caleb
Love
(JJ or Darnold)
Penix
Geno
Maholmes
Herbert
Nix
Raiders (tbd)
Tua
We only play one elite QB (Maholmes), three very good QBs (Hurts, Dak, and Herbert), two good qbs (Goff & Love), and the rest are average at this stage.
