Legal tampering period

[*ochocincos*]

(03-13-2023, 03:33 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: We'll see if we keep our own. We already believe Bates is gone. 

If they keep Pratt, fine, but I wouldn't call it my expectation. We are top 5 in the NFL in cap space and it's already starting to feel like we don't intend to do all that much with it.

My question was why the Chiefs, a team with huge money paid to their QB, a highly paid guard and a highly defensive tackle, can afford to sign a 20M AAV tackle to protect their investment, but we're just gonna...wait?

I was fine with the idea of the Jaguars in 2022 and the Bears in 2023, teams with more cap space than talent on their roster, overspending on the offensive line because I was told that you have to make sacrifices when you have a franchise QB.

But then I see a team with a franchise QB investing in protecting theirs and I get confused.

Go look at their cap distribution.

Yes, they have Mahomes at $49.3 mill this year cap space.
Jones at $28.3 mill.
Thuney at $22.1 mill.
Kelce at $14.8 mill.

But other than Justin Reid ($12.7 mill) and MVS ($11 mill), they got no one else above their kicker ($5.1 mill).
They are able to do what they do because they don't have a plethora of mid-to-high-priced vets.
They're getting by with a bunch of guys on rookie contracts:
- CEH
- Trent McDuffie
- George Karlaftis
- L'Jarius Sneed
- Nick Bolton
- Creed Humphrey
- Trey Smith

I'm sure there are more I'm forgetting, but they are able to do what they do because many of their rookie contract guys are key contributors. The Bengals have had to rely heavily on veteran guys to have their run.
If they can draft better and/or force their rookies into action even if they don't do great initially (e.g. if they put Dax Hill right into FS instead of tagging Bates), they could probably look to do the same.