Trading Up | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Trading Up

Originally posted by Graythreat


we couldn't afford to tag him buddy, the franchise tag would bring Winstrom money, we allready pay a butt load for JT. Franchise tag isn't really an option, if no one will give a first THIS year, they sure as hell wont' give TWO firsts next year.
Click to expand...

exactly. Point being is that he's not necessarily gone next year then. Whether or not we tag him or not all spends on the kind of season he has. If he sets the sack record, then you find the $$ somehow. we "found" a bunch this year, ya?? ;) But if he tanks it this year, then nothing is lost then.
 
If he sets the sack record, then you find the $$ somehow. we "found" a bunch this year, ya??
Click to expand...

I believe (Dan) Snyder is posting on this board.... :)

The only way you "FIND" money is to PURGE players. Thus, resulting in dead money and, quickly thereafter, SALARY CAP HELL.
BTW, let's see how Tennessee and Washington fair in the next 2 or 3 years. The Titans HAD to let Kearse go (regardless if they wanted him or not).
Tennessee's quandries (The Tennesseean)

Wally IS expendable. Jason Taylor helps us grow DE's (Armstrong, Wale).... we can manufacture another Wale in 2 years. But we CAN'T manufacture OL.

Will Wale's deal get done? Doubtful. RS is sitting on Wale because he KNOWS Wale is a product of our system. AND, if he can use him for currency, why not? Not too mention, RS has not built our Salary Cap system only to bust it apart for one player. BTW, who's more important (Chambers up for resigning)....
Wale and Taylor OR Boston and Chambers?

If I recall, our GREAT VAUNTED, :sleep: , Defense has been getting our Money for years. I think it's time to let the Offense try their hand at the Golden Goose.

Worry about Chambers, not Wale. Use Wale to acquire picks and save us from the headache of trying to figure out who to cut because Wale's big fat contract is chewing a hole in our cap.

Chambers can be resigned for less AND gives us more flexibility later.

I say trade Wale and resign Chambers. Use Wale to help beef up the line. Go OFFENSE!

PHINZ RULE
 
Originally posted by NathanHunt


I believe (Dan) Snyder is posting on this board.... :)

The only way you "FIND" money is to PURGE players. Thus, resulting in dead money and, quickly thereafter, SALARY CAP HELL.
BTW, let's see how Tennessee and Washington fair in the next 2 or 3 years. The Titans HAD to let Kearse go (regardless if they wanted him or not).
Tennessee's quandries (The Tennesseean)

Wally IS expendable. Jason Taylor helps us grow DE's (Armstrong, Wale).... we can manufacture another Wale in 2 years. But we CAN'T manufacture OL.

Will Wale's deal get done? Doubtful. RS is sitting on Wale because he KNOWS Wale is a product of our system. AND, if he can use him for currency, why not? Not too mention, RS has not built our Salary Cap system only to bust it apart for one player. BTW, who's more important (Chambers up for resigning)....
Wale and Taylor OR Boston and Chambers?

If I recall, our GREAT VAUNTED, :sleep: , Defense has been getting our Money for years. I think it's time to let the Offense try their hand at the Golden Goose.

Worry about Chambers, not Wale. Use Wale to acquire picks and save us from the headache of trying to figure out who to cut because Wale's big fat contract is chewing a hole in our cap.

Chambers can be resigned for less AND gives us more flexibility later.

I say trade Wale and resign Chambers. Use Wale to help beef up the line. Go OFFENSE!

PHINZ RULE
Click to expand...

Funny thing is that I actually agree with what you're saying except that purging players is not the only way to find money. restructuring will also but too much of it on too many and the wrong players will get you in cap hell later on also.
 
Good call on my err, De. However, in my zealous to respond, I overstepped a few details. I did not mean to imply "purging" is the only way to "find" money. However, RS and Co. appear to be very sweet talkers with as much restructuring as we do. (Makes you wonder when players will start accepting smaller GAURANTEED contracts... another topic, another day).
But, when I saw the word "purge", I immediately felt another Salary Cap butcherer was screaming "forget the cap, ... spend, spend, spend".
For Wale's sake, I hope he gets his money. Wouldn't any of us want as much as possible after putting up his numbers?
But, back in the real world, you simply can't have ever player making $50 million dollar contracts.
In another thread (I think) I mentioned using Wale for currency to acquire another 1st this year (possibly Washington's... Wale -> WAS, 1st (5) -> MIA).
Ultimately, the 5th player selected will get a $30+ contract (approx). So, for WAS it would appear paying near $50 for Wale would be a near equal trade value wise.
Regardless of the how's and who's, I simply don't think we can keep Wale. If we do, we WILL lose some of equal value (or more) later. No too mention, I feel the D had it's chance to build a dynasty. I think it's time to stop trying to get O on the cheap. We need to trade Wale's value for O. (while we still can)

good points De.
 
I don't think we "manufacture" RDEs as some suggest. I think that D. Bowens/Grigsby could fill in, but at #5 who is the guy we'd look at ??

Taylor...great choice but not a dire need.
Winslow...same.
Wilfork...too high for him.
Harris...good but top 5 ??
Ben Roth or Eli...yeah, could go that way but then AJ and our second rounder is wasted.
WR...good choices, but not a dire need.
Gallery...probably will be gone, even with this pick still leaves our guard position open...

I see a top 5 pick as difficult a decision for the Phins as the #20 pick might be....
 
Thanks for the reply, Larry. My thinking is having the 5th would create a very desireable situation for us. OK, you're right, Gallery wouldn't be there... But, with the 5th and 20th we COULD trade into 1,2 or 3 and get him.
But, another feeling I would get having the 5th is to trade down. Trade the 5th for something higher than 20th AND get a 2nd or 3rd as well. Details are up for argument. But, my main thinking is having the 5th may not necessarily help us get Gallery, but might enable us to net a 2nd or 3rd and move down a few spots in the 1st to a more suitable position to get Andrews.
And, for all those following at home, that would mean we would EVENTUALLY trade into an additional 1st and 3rd (or 2nd) for Wale. Bringing us 2 - 1st and 2 - 3rd picks on day one.
There's more than one way to skin that RFA cat. (so to speak)

Any thoughts?
 
It all depends on what it takes for us to get up there IMO.

I'd throw Walley and our first and a late pick next year (3rd?, make for a boring draft, but it would be worth it for this years players IMO) to move up there, but in all likely hood it would take 2 firsts and walley to jump that high.

While i was up there, I'd take a HARD look at Roth. He had an AMAZING workout. He was throwing 80 yard pinpoint bombs, and was supposedly VERY impressive. If I didn't take him there, i'd trade down a few spots snag a first and a 2nd, take Rivers with the first who also had a great workout, and a linemen with that 2nd round pick. Grove maybe?

people are kind of forgetting that we have options. A lot of teams are looking ot trade down this year, with the depth in this draft. That makes the asking price a slight bit cheaper to jump up in the draft. Instead of trading out of the first for 2 2nds, why not try to package O-gun, our first, and a late rounder for a high first, that could become a first and a 2nd?

Just a though anyway, that's how I'd go about it. Rivers or Roth, and snag OL late. Outside of Gallery and POSSIBLY andrews, the OL would just be depth wtih a training in year anyway. I won't expect to pull a starting Tackle out of this crew, if we sign Randall, we'll have depth at Tackle, prospective guards, and a great commpetition at center. i don't see a rookie fitting in much this year anyway, and I'm not sold on Andrews.

And I don't think that 2nd round pick would be wasted. it is TECHNICALLY a 3rd round pick, if you want to get picky. A 3rd round pick for a backup QB that will free up a LOT of cap room (plan on him staying for a few years as the #2 man if a rook beats him out, and cutting Fiedler) and has a potential upside isn't too much to pay IMO.
 
Originally posted by NathanHunt
Good call on my err, De. However, in my zealous to respond, I overstepped a few details. I did not mean to imply "purging" is the only way to "find" money. However, RS and Co. appear to be very sweet talkers with as much restructuring as we do. (Makes you wonder when players will start accepting smaller GAURANTEED contracts... another topic, another day).
But, when I saw the word "purge", I immediately felt another Salary Cap butcherer was screaming "forget the cap, ... spend, spend, spend".
For Wale's sake, I hope he gets his money. Wouldn't any of us want as much as possible after putting up his numbers?
But, back in the real world, you simply can't have ever player making $50 million dollar contracts.
In another thread (I think) I mentioned using Wale for currency to acquire another 1st this year (possibly Washington's... Wale -> WAS, 1st (5) -> MIA).
Ultimately, the 5th player selected will get a $30+ contract (approx). So, for WAS it would appear paying near $50 for Wale would be a near equal trade value wise.
Regardless of the how's and who's, I simply don't think we can keep Wale. If we do, we WILL lose some of equal value (or more) later. No too mention, I feel the D had it's chance to build a dynasty. I think it's time to stop trying to get O on the cheap. We need to trade Wale's value for O. (while we still can)

good points De.
Click to expand...

I didn't really think you meant that as the only way.
Agree on your other points also.
 
5th would be a great spot for us.

Manning, Roethlisberger, Fitzgerald, Roy Williams, Gallery, Taylor.

There's six guys. At least two of them are going to be available at 5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom