(07-16-2019, 01:27 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I wouldn't say Trent Williams is the answer, but it's July and we are already talking about next year, in a sense.  Also, what roster moves can we make next year?  AJ and/or Boyd get extended and that might it.

Seeing as we had 50+ million cap space this year and brought in below average external guys mostly...I doubt that we do more with less.

We have the aging remnants of a playoff team on our roster...and with guys like Atkins and Green we'll be competitive to win 6-8 games a year. Other than that, our free agency has been bad recently and the draft has been mediocre at best outside of a hit here and there.

(07-15-2019, 10:49 PM)impactplaya Wrote: I guess it makes too much sense to acquire Trent and move Glenn back to RG.

You guess wrong.

You don't even know if Washington would trade him.

You don't know what they would demand in return.

You don't know if Williams would even play here under his current contract.

And you don't even know if he is healthy enough to hold up for a full season.

(07-16-2019, 01:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You guess wrong.

You don't even know if Washington would trade him.

You don't know what they would demand in return.

You don't know if Williams would even play here under his current contract.

And you don't even know if he is healthy enough to hold up for a full season.

All we know is the guy hain't coming here.

(07-15-2019, 11:35 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: Over 30, hasn't played a full season since 2015, and would probably cost a 2nd Rd pick.

(07-16-2019, 12:11 AM)Whatever Wrote: Williams turns 31 this week.  He's not an anchor for 10 years.  He's a stopgap.  There's also rumors that he wants a new contract, which isn't good when we've got Boyd and AJ to lock up.

The other thing is does Williams even want to come here?  Trading for a malcontent that doesn't want to play for you isn't a smart move.

(07-16-2019, 01:19 PM)ochocincos Wrote: If we're talking essentially using Trent Williams just for this year until Jonah comes back, that's a poor investment of $14 mill this year.
I'd rather save that money to use on player(s) next year.
I only want Trent Williams if he's viewed as the franchise LT over the length of Jonah's rookie contract (5 years).

I agree with each of you.  Going over the top for a guy like Trent Williams, who get's injured every year and seems to just be looking for a final cash-out, would be a move reeking of desperation.  The Bengals don't NEED a high priced rental.  What they DO need, is a solid vet to play swing Tackle for a year or two.  They can easily find that guy when the cuts start happening in camp, in just a couple weeks.

(07-16-2019, 01:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You guess wrong.

You don't even know if Washington would trade him.

You don't know what they would demand in return.

You don't know if Williams would even play here under his current contract.

And you don't even know if he is healthy enough to hold up for a full season.

yet your positive Cordy Glenn will hold up for 16 games right?

(07-16-2019, 03:46 PM)impactplaya Wrote: yet your positive Cordy Glenn will hold up for 16 games right?

No, but Cordy Glenn was able to participate in OTA's last year while Williams isn't.

(07-16-2019, 03:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.

Im not worried about the depth at RG.
its the paperthin depth at LT now.
if Glenn gets hurt for any amount of time then what?

(07-16-2019, 04:00 PM)impactplaya Wrote: Im not worried about the depth at RG.
its the paperthin depth at LT now.
if Glenn gets hurt for any amount of time then what?

RT depth as well. The Bengals have Kent Perkins, Keaton Sutherland, and O'Shea Dugas for OT depth behind Glenn and Hart. One would have to assume that Hopkins is actually the swing OT but no one can say that with 100% confidence.

(07-16-2019, 01:27 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I wouldn't say Trent Williams is the answer, but it's July and we are already talking about next year, in a sense.  Also, what roster moves can we make next year?  AJ and/or Boyd get extended and that might it.




Seeing as we are down 2 linemen before training camp even starts...

Paying someone like Trent would be acceptable for a 2-3 year contract.

The money will still be there for AJ and Boyd next year.
AJ's money is on the books right now for $15 mil. So giving him a few more will be easy.
Boyd's money will come from Cordy Glenn's $9.5 mil contract expiring and then a little extra needed.

Then next year there is also Dennard's $4.5 mil back in the fold if we elect to not retain him.
Also another $4.5 mil in dead money comes back into the fold (Burfict $1.8 mil, Iloka $1.2 mil, Walton $.5 mil)
And there should be another increase I in the Annual Salary Cap.

So the money is not the Issue. If we signed Trent to a nice deal we still have enough left to keep both WR's.
Also Trent would be the LT for 2-3 Years and Jonah would become the RT and move to LT when Trent's contract is up, buying us time to draft a RT and develop him.

It's not a move that would save the year, but it would setup the next few years for OL Stability. And again, not having the money is not the issue, it's getting MB to part with that money and a pick that is the issue.

(07-17-2019, 05:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Paying someone like Trent would be acceptable for a 2-3 year contract.

The money will still be there for AJ and Boyd next year.
AJ's money is on the books right now for $15 mil. So giving him a few more will be easy.
Boyd's money will come from Cordy Glenn's $9.5 mil contract expiring and then a little extra needed.

Then next year there is also Dennard's $4.5 mil back in the fold if we elect to not retain him.
Also another $4.5 mil in dead money comes back into the fold (Burfict $1.8 mil, Iloka $1.2 mil, Walton $.5 mil)
And there should be another increase I in the Annual Salary Cap.

So the money is not the Issue. If we signed Trent to a nice deal we still have enough left to keep both WR's.
Also Trent would be the LT for 2-3 Years and Jonah would become the RT and move to LT when Trent's contract is up, buying us time to draft a RT and develop him.

It's not a move that would save the year, but it would setup the next few years for OL Stability. And again, not having the money is not the issue, it's getting MB to part with that money and a pick that is the issue.

Yeah, the cap isn't much of an issue.  They are well under.  

I doubt that Williams is the kind of player he was talking about, but Lapham did say he thought that it was likely that they'd trade for an OT before the season starts (mention in the Boling retirement article).

In the odd event that it did happen, I'd guess that they'd put Cordy back at LG and also designate him backup swing tackle.  

I just don't want them to give up a ton in draft capital for him.  Our draft picks are likely to be high and valuable in 2020.

(07-16-2019, 01:32 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote:  the draft has been mediocre at best outside of a hit here and there.

Every team in the league has a mediocre draft if you don't count the hits.

In fact, if you don't count the hits I think every team has a poor draft history.

(07-17-2019, 06:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Every team in the league has a mediocre draft if you don't count the hits.

In fact, if you don't count the hits I think every team has a poor draft history.

If you don't count the Lennon/McCartney and Harrison songs, what did the Beatles really do?

(07-17-2019, 06:12 PM)samhain Wrote: Yeah, the cap isn't much of an issue.  They are well under.  

I doubt that Williams is the kind of player he was talking about, but Lapham did say he thought that it was likely that they'd trade for an OT before the season starts (mention in the Boling retirement article).

In the rare event of a player for player trade, who would you imagine the Bengals being able to sacrifice, in order to land a capable swing Tackle?

(yes, I realize that most trades involve one team looking to jettison salary toward the cap, as well as gain some draft capitol, but sometimes player for player still happens)

(07-17-2019, 10:00 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: In the rare event of a player for player trade, who would you imagine the Bengals being able to sacrifice, in order to land a capable swing Tackle?

(yes, I realize that most trades involve one team looking to jettison salary toward the cap, as well as gain some draft capitol, but sometimes player for player still happens)

Dennard could potentially be trade bait, in my mind.  We're pretty deep at CB, he's been recovering from injury during OTA's, and he's only on a one year deal.

(07-17-2019, 10:13 PM)Whatever Wrote: Dennard could potentially be trade bait, in my mind.  We're pretty deep at CB, he's been recovering from injury during OTA's, and he's only on a one year deal.

That's a pretty good selection.  The team that get's him, could give him shot at boundary corner, and always have his slot corner skills as a backup plan. If he works out, they could give him a nice deal. If not, he can try the market. About the same as he would be facing here.

(07-17-2019, 10:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That's a pretty good selection.  The team that get's him, could give him shot at boundary corner, and always have his slot corner skills as a backup plan.  If he works out, they could give him a nice deal.  If not, he can try the market.  About the same as he would be facing here.

It depends on what you're trading for.  If you're trading for a backup OT, the DD is an overpay IMO.  He's a starter for all practical purposes.  

If you're trying to trade for a starter, I think you're up a creek.  There are just too few of them around and the price will be high.  You're likely going to be sifting through the scrap heap.  That's not a big issue for the Bengals right now, because their OTs behind Glenn aren't much better than trash anyway.

(07-17-2019, 11:14 PM)samhain Wrote: It depends on what you're trading for.  If you're trading for a backup OT, the DD is an overpay IMO.  He's a starter for all practical purposes.  

If you're trying to trade for a starter, I think you're up a creek.  There are just too few of them around and the price will be high.  You're likely going to be sifting through the scrap heap.  That's not a big issue for the Bengals right now, because their OTs behind Glenn aren't much better than trash anyway.

The reason Dennard is still a Bengal is the FA market for him was extremely tepid.  I think with him, it would likely be a case of a playoff team losing a CB in TC and making the move for stopgap.  I would say Dennard for a quality backup T is probably fair.  I'm not even convinced he can hold off Webb for the nickel job.

(07-18-2019, 11:18 AM)Whatever Wrote: The reason Dennard is still a Bengal is the FA market for him was extremely tepid.  I think with him, it would likely be a case of a playoff team losing a CB in TC and making the move for stopgap.  I would say Dennard for a quality backup T is probably fair.  I'm not even convinced he can hold off Webb for the nickel job.

Regardless of why Dennard is still a Bengal doesn't mean quite as much, in our hypothetical scenario.  As I recall, back during the time leading up to free agency and the then upcoming (now recent) draft, Dennard was on pretty much everyone's list of Bengals who could be cut in order to free up cap space.

(07-17-2019, 05:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Paying someone like Trent would be acceptable for a 2-3 year contract.

The money will still be there for AJ and Boyd next year.
AJ's money is on the books right now for $15 mil. So giving him a few more will be easy.
Boyd's money will come from Cordy Glenn's $9.5 mil contract expiring and then a little extra needed.

Then next year there is also Dennard's $4.5 mil back in the fold if we elect to not retain him.
Also another $4.5 mil in dead money comes back into the fold (Burfict $1.8 mil, Iloka $1.2 mil, Walton $.5 mil)
And there should be another increase I in the Annual Salary Cap.

So the money is not the Issue. If we signed Trent to a nice deal we still have enough left to keep both WR's.
Also Trent would be the LT for 2-3 Years and Jonah would become the RT and move to LT when Trent's contract is up, buying us time to draft a RT and develop him.

It's not a move that would save the year, but it would setup the next few years for OL Stability. And again, not having the money is not the issue, it's getting MB to part with that money and a pick that is the issue.

You can't punt Boyd's contract to next year.  He will sign for much cheaper this year due to the fact that he hasn't made monster money yet and doesn't have financial security if he gets injured this year.  He will cost a lot more if he tests the open market after having another great year.  Also, Glenn is still under contract next year.

The killer though is Andy, Mixon, and WJIII are all in contract years next year, and will need extensions.  If Andy isn't the future, then you need draft capital to move up and get your next QB, so you can't deal premium picks for a 31 year old T, especially when you just drafted your franchise LT.

(07-18-2019, 02:08 PM)Whatever Wrote: You can't punt Boyd's contract to next year.  He will sign for much cheaper this year due to the fact that he hasn't made monster money yet and doesn't have financial security if he gets injured this year.  He will cost a lot more if he tests the open market after having another great year.  Also, Glenn is still under contract next year.

The killer though is Andy, Mixon, and WJIII are all in contract years next year, and will need extensions.  If Andy isn't the future, then you need draft capital to move up and get your next QB, so you can't deal premium picks for a 31 year old T, especially when you just drafted your franchise LT.

Add in Carl Lawson, Ryan Glasgow. Not to mention Andrew Billings and Nick Vigil who will both be URFA after 2019.