Jump to content

eSJayDee

Members
  • Content Count

    1,577
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

122 Excellent

About eSJayDee

  • Rank
    Put me in coach

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Albany, NY

Recent Profile Visitors

983 profile views
  1. In some ways, I think it has helped us though. 1) Beane is very "fiscally responsible" w/ how he structures contracts, so we're not often left w/ large amounts of dead cap space or players we can't afford to cut. 2) We were able to retain almost all of our own FAs, I think in large part cuz there wasn't large amounts of $ elsewhere to attract them. Were it not for that, I think a few of our retained players may well have cost $1m or more each per yr to keep.
  2. I've heard of choking the chicken, but I'm not familiar w/ "tweaking the rooster". :LOL:
  3. Actually, the Law of Supply & Demand would dictate that w/ so many FAs out there, prices should be kept down. Prices go up when there's many bidders & minimal supply.
  4. How old are you? You do know that the Bills made it to the SB 4 yrs in a row? Who was our most successful coach of all time? I'll give you a hint - he started as a ST coach. Granted, this was before the cap era, but the effort & emphasis was definitely there, and this was at a time w/ smaller rosters.
  5. That's like $140m/yr! Over that span, that's around 75% of their total cap. Granted, rookies & young players don't count much cap-wise, but to me that indicates that they retain virtually none of their players after their 1st contract. That's indicative of a) not doing a good job of scouting/acquiring players and b) a recipe for continued suckitude.
  6. I think it's more a matter of him not wanting to sign w/ us. He's a solid contributor here, as a 4th or 5th WR. One can't afford to pay a 5th WR well. Further, I would suspect someone desperate to upgrade their WR position would see his productivity here & think he's got a (good) chance of being a significant contributor for them & of course offer him commensurate pay. As for KR, I think he could be good & therefore worthy more $. I'd be hesitant to let him return punts as I think he'd be a noticeable downgrade relative to Roberts WRT fielding the ball.
  7. Rather surprised that his projected salary is about the same as Williams. I think the consensus is Williams ranks higher among Ts than Feliciano among Gs AND, more importantly, Ts get paid better than Gs.
  8. I don't know this for sure, but I believe this to be the case, too. Although in the example you provided, I would assume Bojo would decline that proposal & instead opt for the 1 yr deal. I would think a multi-year deal amenable to both parties would either include a "significant" signing bonus &/or escalating salaries.
  9. I definitely think an effort should be made to re-sign him, the question is whether or not he's even worth the minimum tender though. That would put him in the top 1/3 of punters salary-wise. If we were flush w/ cap space, then yes. I don't think he's worth the higher tenders (though if someone wants to surrender the pick, then thank you very much), but I don't think his market value is much less than that & I wouldn't want to lose him over a few hundred K. Then again, perhaps a better solution for both parties would be a multi-year deal.
  10. The "cash to cap" was really just a clever marketing slogan so as to justify not spending TO the cap. You're obviously limited by the cap for amortized money, but if you also constrain yourself by "cash to cap" it really means you're gonna spend (well) below the cap. There's a difference between the previous regimes "cash to cap" "strategy" & actually a "pay as you go" (to the extend practical) that we currently seem to employ.
  11. I'll add that WRT Milano's situation, one of the ways I think this regime is fiscally responsible is to not give large bonuses. What some teams do, is give large bonuses w/ small initial yr(s) salaries. This allows you to easier afford signings by pushing fwd the liability. Problem w/ this is if the player doesn't work out, you're left w/ substantial dead cap when you release them. As much as possible, I think we currently pretty much "pay as you go".
  12. I wonder why at this juncture. He's gotta be making close to minimum wage for his experience & he's gotta be replaced by someone else, so the savings are really only (eventually) a few 100k. When he's on the field, he's comparable (or better) than Wallace or Norman. Only thing I can think of, is we intend to re-sign someone & need the cap space while only the top 51 count.
  13. A shoulder could definitely effect a kicking; an elbow maybe. A hand I doubt, though. Just an emergency Covid-type signing. Either that or after going 1-3 in FGs they wanna give the kid some competition. -jk
  14. Roberts is good at fielding punts. Not only does he not muff very many, but also the majority of time he fields them rather than letting them go. The latter is worth several yards (provided you fulfill the 1st part & not muff it). As I recall McKenzie is "dangerous" when fielding punts & not in a good way.
  15. Part of the answer is he fumbles a lot cuz he fumbles a lot. I think once he has a reputation as a fumbler, defenders are much more apt to make an effort to force it out. Part of the problem might be that he's difficult to bring down, so that gives more opportunity to cause a fumble. Unfortunately, I don't think that's entirely the situation as he seems to fumble quite easily under "normal" contact. Someone mentioned his height. That might sort of contribute to the problem, but I think it's more his upright running style. More/easier access to the ball.
×
×
  • Create New...