No, I want to franchise tag him for one year. I don’t know why you’re failing to address the things I say to instead argue against things I didn’t say. Franchise tagging him again next year would be one of at least three options I described. If he plays poorly in 2024, or gets hurt, we would simply be able to extend him for much cheaper than a second franchise tag.
If he plays extremely well again and we choose to tag him again, we not only got another year of great production, but the total two-year cost for Wilkins would be 2024’s $21M tag and 2025’s ~$28M tag. So $49 million for two years, without any long-term risk or commitment. That’s roughly equivalent to what we’d have to give him on a long-term deal, and it doesn’t include any of the negatives of a long-term deal.
You haven’t articulated any ideology so I don’t see how our ideologies differ. You don’t want to give Wilkins a long-term deal or franchise tag him. Which means, by default, you want to let him walk for nothing. But you aren’t elaborating on what you think we should do with the money instead.
What does Wilkins’s $21M buy you in free agency that we can’t otherwise afford? How are we a better team by letting Wilkins walk and deploying the money elsewhere? I’m happy to be convinced but you’re not explaining.