Is Cook worth it?

[DrDawkinstein]

10 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

No way they franchise Cook IMHO. Unless they're super confident in finding a trading partner. 

 

To franchise James Cook, after he reluctantly soldiers through his contract year, would be to invite distraction and disruption. The comp pick value could very well be fair enough compensation without the headaches. 

 

I'm generally very anti-Tag because I think it creates more problems than it solves since players hate it, and it's often used almost as a punishment and trump cards for teams to handcuff players.

 

However, with Cook (and high talent 2nd rounders in general), I can see it being used as equivalent to a 5th year option that teams get on 1st round picks. And therefore I'm less against it.

 

If push come to shove and Beane decides to use the tag, I hope it's presented that way.

[PayDaBill$]

13 hours ago, Victory Formation said:

Cook did not go about it the right way. If you want a new contract, don’t take to Twitter and don’t get your brother involved either.. Get it done with Beane behind closed doors..
 

This will be his last year in Buffalo. If you can get a 2nd or 3rd for him, do it..

Blah blah blah, I don’t blame the guy one bit. RB’s generally have a short lifecycle in this game.  He wants to be paid bank to maximize  his earnings.  If we don’t pay him, someone will. IMO he’s a talented player, good runner and an under utilized pass catcher.

 

He’ll have a solid year, & hopefully we can negotiate a deal that he and BB can be happy  with…

 

 

Edited yesterday at 01:56 PM by PayDaBill$

[C.Biscuit97]

A stat I found that is pretty interesting is Ray Davis, who is going to be turning 26, had 746 carries in college and 113 last year. 
 

Cook, who will also be 26, had 533 nfl carries and 230 in college. In terms of wear and tear, Cook is the “younger” player. 

[Logic]

15 hours ago, 3rdand12 said:

 

So

 Is Cook a worthwhile investment for the Bills at this point

Not at the price he's reportedly asking for, no.

I've stated a few times on this forum the reasons I don't think he's worth a big second contract, and have not wavered from my general stance toward giving running backs second contracts unless they're truly elite, which I don't believe James Cook to be.

[PromoTheRobot]

Go back and watch some games, then tell me how easily Cook is to replace. He isn't. He's an elite player. Figure it out and pay him.

[Virgil]

1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Go back and watch some games, then tell me how easily Cook is to replace. He isn't. He's an elite player. Figure it out and pay him.

 

I have no issue paying Cook, but the price tag matters.  If I were the Bills, I would allow Cook to seek a trade and negotiate with other teams so he can see what his real value is.  Comparing himself to Henry and Barkley is insane, and I don't think any team would give him that type of contract.  I'm okay with up to 12 mil per, if it's front loaded, for cap flexibility while we have it.

[DrDawkinstein]

2 minutes ago, Virgil said:

 

I have no issue paying Cook, but the price tag matters.  If I were the Bills, I would allow Cook to seek a trade and negotiate with other teams so he can see what his real value is.  Comparing himself to Henry and Barkley is insane, and I don't think any team would give him that type of contract.  I'm okay with up to 12 mil per, if it's front loaded, for cap flexibility while we have it.

 

No one is Barkley, and he isnt asking for Barkley money. Folks need to stop bringing his name up.

 

The better comparison, and in range with his ask, is Henry and Jonathan Taylor. Both are in that $14-15M range. Henry is old and Taylor is often injured. Cook is absolutely in their range. Bills fans are just devaluing their own, and not remembering his play last year.

[Mango]

17 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

No one is Barkley, and he isnt asking for Barkley money. Folks need to stop bringing his name up.

 

The better comparison, and in range with his ask, is Henry and Jonathan Taylor. Both are in that $14-15M range. Henry is old and Taylor is often injured. Cook is absolutely in their range. Bills fans are just devaluing their own, and not remembering his play last year.

 

To be fair, Barkleys contract is a little wonky to describe. He got a two year extension with 2 years left, and had 4 dead years on top of that. Tough to wrap your head around how much he is paid when he has just as many void years as he does playable years in his deal. 

Does he cost the Eagles $18M per over those 4 years? No. But he does over 8 if you normalize the void years. Normally I don't blink at void years, but it seems strange to have a guy listed on spotrac for 8 years and then not play for half of that. 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/player/_/id/25097/saquon-barkley

Edited 23 hours ago by Mango

[DrDawkinstein]

3 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

To be fair, Barkleys contract is a little wonky to describe. He got a two year extension with 2 years left, and had 4 dead years on top of that. Tough to wrap your head around how much he is paid when he has just as many void years as he does playable years in his deal. 

Does he cost the Eagles $18M per over those 4 years? No. But he does over 8 if you normalize the void years. Normally I don't blink at void years, but it seems strange to have a guy listed on spotrac for 8 years and then not play for half of that. 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/player/_/id/25097/saquon-barkley

 

Yeah, crazy amount of void years imo. I dont even count them in my discussions because I think they can do more damage than good in the long run, unless you get a new, new deal in place.

 

But to that end, we could use one void year, and then a 4/$60M extension becomes 5/$60M and more in range with that $12M number so many fans are stuck on. And by then the cap will be well north of $300M, so we either get a new, new deal in place by then or just eat the void for 1 year.

[boater]

1 minute ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Yeah, crazy amount of void years imo. I dont even count them in my discussions because I think they can do more damage than good in the long run, unless you get a new, new deal in place.

 

But to that end, we could use one void year, and then a 4/$60M extension becomes 5/$60M and more in range with that $12M number so many fans are stuck on. And by then the cap will be well north of $300M, so we either get a new, new deal in place by then or just eat the void for 1 year.

 

The jury is out on whether the voodoo of void years works. Philadelphia has used void years extensively, I'd like to see how their situation looks a year or two from now. I half expect bad things for them.

[DrDawkinstein]

1 minute ago, boater said:

 

The jury is out on whether the voodoo of void years works. Philadelphia has used void years extensively, I'd like to see how their situation looks a year or two from now. I half expect bad things for them.

 

Agreed. Although if it means making 3 Super Bowls in 4 years and winning 1 or 2 of them... then they totally worked and you eat those tough years while basking in the Lombardi afterglow. I think most of us would take that.

[FireChans]

30 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

No one is Barkley, and he isnt asking for Barkley money. Folks need to stop bringing his name up.

 

The better comparison, and in range with his ask, is Henry and Jonathan Taylor. Both are in that $14-15M range. Henry is old and Taylor is often injured. Cook is absolutely in their range. Bills fans are just devaluing their own, and not remembering his play last year.

"Devaluing their own" and your  range comparison to James Cook is the geriatric RB who is going to fall off a cliff any second now and the one hit wonder RB who is the picture perfect example of why you don't overpay an RB. 

 

"We should pay Dareus, look at how much money Albert Haynesworth got" type beat lol. 

[DrDawkinstein]

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

"Devaluing their own" and your  range comparison to James Cook is the geriatric RB who is going to fall off a cliff any second now and the one hit wonder RB who is the picture perfect example of why you don't overpay an RB. 

 

"We should pay Dareus, look at how much money Albert Haynesworth got" type beat lol. 

 

Not my comparison. These are the names often brought up by folks saying both those players are much better than Cook so therefore Cook shouldnt get paid. So youre kinda making my point for me. When you compare Cook's age/wear and tear/and athletic ability to the geriatric RB and the injured one-hit wonder, he is absolutely worth that money (relative to the market).

 

 

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Not my comparison. These are the names often brought up by folks saying both those players are much better than Cook so therefore Cook shouldnt get paid. So youre kinda making my point for me. When you compare Cook's age/wear and tear/and athletic ability to the geriatric RB and the injured one-hit wonder, he is absolutely worth that money (relative to the market).

 

 

Running back money is funny. JT is always hurt and he's the 4th highest paid RB in the league by AAV. Henry is 3rd. So you are saying Cook wants top 3 money?  He's certainly not going to sign for less than those guys, right?

 

Beane grew up with Gettleman who used to do strange things like pay TWO running backs. I don't think it's a philosophical problem. I think Cook is asking to be the second or third highest paid RB in the NFL and the Bills don't think he is. That's all. 

[Big Blitz]

I brought this up last week. 
 

I think a good comp as far as production and age is Pacheco.  Same draft class.  
 

What do you think the Chiefs do with him?  

[SCBills]

3 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

I brought this up last week. 
 

I think a good comp as far as production and age is Pacheco.  Same draft class.  
 

What do you think the Chiefs do with him?  

Cook is way more dynamic and far more talented than Pacheco.  

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, Virgil said:

 

I have no issue paying Cook, but the price tag matters.  If I were the Bills, I would allow Cook to seek a trade and negotiate with other teams so he can see what his real value is.  Comparing himself to Henry and Barkley is insane, and I don't think any team would give him that type of contract.  I'm okay with up to 12 mil per, if it's front loaded, for cap flexibility while we have it.

Interesting idea, but it would depend on how another team would want to use him.  If they see him as a higher volume, 3 down guy then they’ll likely offer a bigger deal.  I want him signed but when you have him only getting maybe 50% of snaps, and Ty Johnson used as a 3rd down back a lot, it’s hard to see him getting a big number.

[DrDawkinstein]

37 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

I brought this up last week. 
 

I think a good comp as far as production and age is Pacheco.  Same draft class.  
 

What do you think the Chiefs do with him?  

 

Great comparison and question.

 

I think Pacheco being a 7th round pick, like other late picks Benford and Shakir, may be more willing to sign a team-friendly deal than 2nd rounder and college National Champion Cook.

 

I also think the Chiefs will be willing to pay Pacheco what he is after considering, like the Bills, they do not have a high-priced WR on the roster. And while they will look to extend Rice, who knows how that plays out with his legal troubles. So a similar skill-position situation to the Bills as well.

 

If your MVP QBs (Allen and Mahomes) can automatically make your JAG WRs better and help carry the passing game. As they should since they are taking up 20% of cap space, then IMO, RB is the next best skills place to invest to help your QB. The threat of a real running attack releases that pressure on the passing game. Brings down those high safeties that have been used to try to stop Mahomes and Josh.

 

Will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

28 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Interesting idea, but it would depend on how another team would want to use him.  If they see him as a higher volume, 3 down guy then they’ll likely offer a bigger deal.  I want him signed but when you have him only getting maybe 50% of snaps, and Ty Johnson used as a 3rd down back a lot, it’s hard to see him getting a big number.

 

I'm so over this "50% snaps, 2-down back" arguement.

 

Even at 50% of the snaps, the only player on Offense that touched the ball more than Cook was Josh.

 

Cook had 207 carries and 32 receptions. He had the ball 239 times. He accounted for 1267 yards and 18 TDs.

 

Shakir, who just got $15M/yr, and just had his best year yet, had 78 total touches, 825 yds, and 4 TDs.

Roughly 1/3 Cook's total production depending how you want to look at it.

 

Rousseau, who just got $20M/yr is on a regular rotation.

 

Cook sees the field and touches the ball far more than either of them.

[Big Blitz]

47 minutes ago, SCBills said:

Cook is way more dynamic and far more talented than Pacheco.  

 

I agree - would you be shocked if the Chiefs gave Pacheco say 7-9 mill per year?  
 

If yes, then Cook is definitely in the 10-12 category minimum.  

[Don Otreply]

Cook is worth eleven and incentives that could get him to his desires, three years eighteen guaranteed, jmo,