thebandit27

That's what I would do. Dak and Cooper don't have cap figures for 2020, so their deals can only raise the teams cap commitment, whereas Zeke's deal can lower it

He was above average before they added Cooper; he was very good once Cooper was in the fold: Dak before Cooper: 7 games, 128/206 (62.1%), 1,417 yards (6.88 YPA), 8 TDs, 4 INTs, 23 sacks for 135 yards, 87.38 passer rating Dak with Cooper: 9 games, 228/320 (71.2%), 2,468 yards (7.71 YPA), 14 TDs, 4 INTs, 33 sacks for 212 yards, 102.97 passer rating

They can actually. Zeke's extension most likely helps their 2020 cap situation by lowering his cap hit from the 5th year option number of $9.1M. Even with La'el Collins' new deal and Zeke's option number, the Cowboys have only $133M committed to the 2020 cap. If you assume the cap is ~$200M, then they'd have $67M in space. Easy enough to afford Cooper on a market-value contract; figure $18M AAV. Even if they absorb $20M of that in year 1 (which they probably won't), they'd still have $47M in cap space. If you assume that they tag Dak, then they'll be down to about $22M in cap space. The problem for them is that--with Cooper signed and Dak tagged--they'd have only 40 players under contract, so they'd have to be judicious about how they fill their last 13 roster spots. Obviously 4-5 of those can come from the draft, so it's really going to be a question of how they handle their bottom 9-10 on the roster. Of course, none of that takes into account cap savings (or open roster spots) from letting go of overpriced vets like Tyrone Crawford and Cam Fleming, which would save the team $12.5M in cap space. Plus, they have Will McClay; the dude is as good as it gets when it comes to roster-building.

Dallas' defense is legitimately good. They have a chance to be a top-5 unit if their young secondary players round into form and a secondary pass rusher steps up to complement Lawrence (looking at you, Taco).

Why not Marshall Mathers?

He completed 3 full seasons. Josh won't have completed 3 full seasons until the completion of the 2020 league year, which happens in March 2021.

Has to be Charles Harris, right?

We don't know. That's part of the point. They all matter. I don't have anything else that I can add to my point

I know I shouldn't engage here, but just for fun... Suppose I flip a typical coin 10 times, and 6 times it comes up heads. What is the probability that it will come up heads on the 11th flip? Going by the logic you're using here, the answer would be 60%. Do you think that's correct? If not, then it would behoove you to rethink who's wrong here.

What you mean to say is that, historically, teams that win in week 1 have a 54% success rate of making the playoffs. Any team's individual probability of making the playoffs after starting 1-0 or 0-1 will not be 54% or 25%, respectively, every time. Probability and historical success rate are not the same thing. This is statistics 101. Last year, you'd have told me that Seattle, New Orleans, Chicago, LAC, Indianapolis, Houston, and Dallas all had a 25% chance of making the playoffs...but that wouldn't be true, because you're basing that purely upon historical success rate, and not on other very relevant factors like talent, coaching, strength of schedule, injury rate, bye week, suspended players, etc. But I won't belabor the point any further.

Ah shoot, you're right; it was Beane that I heard talk about Taron outside.

Absolutely he's their best LB. And Edmunds is Buffalo's best chance to have a dynamic LB. IMO, the most impactful defenders on the field are stud pass rushers and stud corners; they're the guys that typically can make the game-changing plays most often because of the role they're asked to play. If I've got my choice, I want Edmunds to have more chances to make such plays, which means putting him in more situations to rush the passer. Don't get me wrong, I still want him to play MLB...and to do it a lot. I just think that the upside of letting him rush the passer from the EDGE on, say, 35% of his defensive snaps outweighs the drop off at MLB that you'd see between him and a guy like Stanford/Vosean on those same 35% of the team's defensive snaps. ' But I've said my piece on that, and I'm starting to derail the thread topic, so I'll let those be my closing remarks on that particular viewpoint.

Yeah, exactly this.

There's just as good a chance that I missed something when I listened.

I'll accept arrogant, but clueless I'm not Yes, his steamrolling of Miami's LT in week 17 is a great example of what he can do on the EDGE. And no, I'm actually not missing that at all. As I said in my last post: he shouldn't leave the field. I just believe that he can play outside more and have more chances to impact the game. Truthfully it doesn't matter, because they aren't going to ask me for my opinions.

That's not what McDermott said. He said that Neal could play in the slot, and that Taron Johnson could slide outside in an emergency.

You'd be wrong (and fantastically wrong at that), and you'd be missing the point. When it comes right down to it, historical percentages don't matter at all for this upcoming season. That's the point of my reference to 2018. You can lose in week 1, even to a divisional opponent, and make the playoffs. You can even lose in week 1 and make the Super Bowl. Week 1 isn't worth any more than any other week in the final standings...that is the very simple point that I was making. Case-in-point: coming into 2018, only 28 out of 223 teams that started 0-2 made the postseason since the NFL expanded it to 12 teams in 1990. Then, last season, both Houston and Seattle did exactly that. Nobody is under the delusion that starting 0-1 with a divisional loss is better than starting 1-0 with a divisional road win. Some of us, however, believe that the season will not be over if they lose.

No worries...I tend to get lost in who can and can't get new contracts myself.

I have had 2 different posters tell me that the playoffs more or less hinge on this game. Week 1. Which is, quite simply, silly.

Can't extend either Foster or Wallace until after the 2020 season at the earliest. And I think he should play in the middle; I just think he should play elsewhere too is all. You can probably effectively combine the LB role that he and LorAx are playing currently and hand that to Edmunds--that's how talented he is...the only practical change would be that Edmunds plays outside when there are 3 LBs on the field. And it's because of how good Edmunds is, not any type of deficiency. It's fine if other folks don't want to move him, but I'm a bit surprised at the level of vitriol from the mere suggestion that he can be put to better use.

I think folks are misreading me re: Edmunds. I think he'll be a very good MLB. I also think that he will have far greater value if he's allowed to move around the defense and play on the EDGE at least as much as in the middle. I just think that a lesser player can do what is asked of a MLB, and that he can do much more than what most LBs are capable of. My. Word. Guys. I didn't knock Edmunds. At all. I've explained why we would do this multiple times. EDGE players have, to a man, more value than MLBs, and Edmunds is capable of making more plays than your typical MLB who stays in the funnel.

I think the team is trying to avoid a grievance being filed against him if they release him and the chargers turn out to be false.

Huh? No...not at all. I would play Edmunds in the role that LorAx plays. Only difference would be that Edmunds would never leave the field. Point being that he's got so much more in him than just a MLB. He can rush the passer, play over the TE, play down the funnel, cover backs, blitz from the inside, etc. He's got more value playing elsewhere, whereas someone far less talented (like Vosean, for instance) can play MLB.

Very well then: apparently the season is on the line on Sunday!

7/12 playoff teams from 2018 lost in week 1; 3 of those were division losses. It's one game