+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: Draft Central (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: Argument for and against Sewell. (/thread-25882.html)
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Nicomo Cosca - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 10:43 AM)ochocincos Wrote: True, but the Bengals don't typically like to do just a 1-year deal. They did it for Bynes, but he was always intended to be a transition player while the new LBs developed.
They more often prefer 2-year or 3-year deals.
Maybe that changes this offseason, but I would still expect the Bengals to get guys on 2-year contracts over 1-year contracts.
Alexander was a 1 year deal.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - ochocincos - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 10:56 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Alexander was a 1 year deal.
Oh yes, him too. So that's two guys.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Whatever - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 10:43 AM)ochocincos Wrote: True, but the Bengals don't typically like to do just a 1-year deal. They did it for Bynes, but he was always intended to be a transition player while the new LBs developed.
They more often prefer 2-year or 3-year deals.
Maybe that changes this offseason, but I would still expect the Bengals to get guys on 2-year contracts over 1-year contracts.
Bynes, Alexander, Sims, and Thomas were all 1 year deals this year. Not to mention all the emergency guys they signed.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Gdale_Bengal - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 10:56 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Alexander was a 1 year deal.
Byrnes was on a 1 year stop gap deal.
Alexander was a 1 year prove it deal, because of injuries. I think bones wont be resigned and Alexander will be.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - ochocincos - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 11:34 AM)Whatever Wrote: Bynes, Alexander, Sims, and Thomas were all 1 year deals this year. Not to mention all the emergency guys they signed.
I don't count the emergency guys, as they were not part of the plan going into the season.
Honestly didn't even look at Sims and Thomas since I didn't expect them to be a starter.
I'm more talking about guys who planned to contribute to offense/defense in a large capacity.
Sims and Thomas wouldn't have if not for injuries. Bynes and Alexander would have.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 10:41 AM)ochocincos Wrote: It would drop by at least $16 mill, which is the projected Year 1 franchise tag number. I haven't seen the numbers for being tagged 2 years in a row, but they are higher than the first year.
And AJ Green is not worth $16+ mill to the Bengals. Heck, he really isn't even worth half that.
Right.
My response was to Jpoore who claimed the Bengals have $0 to spend during free agency next year.
I don’t anticipate the Bengals using the franchise tag on Green again next year which gives the Bengals $18M in cap space next season. Or $18M more than $0 that Jpoore claimed.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - ochocincos - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 12:04 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Right.
My response was to Jpoore who claimed the Bengals have $0 to spend during free agency next year.
I don’t anticipate the Bengals using the franchise tag on Green again next year which gives the Bengals $18M in cap space next season. Or $18M more than $0 that Jpoore claimed.
Jpoore may be right if they prioritize signing most of their internal FAs, especially WJ3 and Lawson. If they allow Lawson and/or WJ3 to leave in favor of someone like Thuney who is expected to cost $14-15 mill a year, it essentially just closes one gap (OL) but creates another (CB/DL).
I would be surprised to see the Bengals spend $10+ mill a year on an IOL player, but maybe it happens. We have a young OL and are on the lower end of positional spending for OL, so it would make sense to spend on 1-2 OL.
Argument for and against Sewell. - BenZoo2 - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 12:17 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Jpoore may be right if they prioritize signing most of their internal FAs, especially WJ3 and Lawson. If they allow Lawson and/or WJ3 to leave in favor of someone like Thuney who is expected to cost $14-15 mill a year, it essentially just closes one gap (OL) but creates another (CB/DL).
I would be surprised to see the Bengals spend $10+ mill a year on an IOL player, but maybe it happens. We have a young OL and are on the lower end of positional spending for OL, so it would make sense to spend on 1-2 OL.
I would gladly take thuney and close that gap. Let Spain and xsf battle it out for the other starter/backup gig. Draft a de in round 2. Fill out the rest as you go. Now that burrow is here (and hurt) protecting him is even more critical.
Free agents this year are going to probably be in for a rude awakening. The very top guys will still likely get paid. There will be far more cuts than usual as teams have to get to the cap. Guys won’t want to be left without a chair when the music stops
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Synric - 12-03-2020
(12-02-2020, 11:21 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Oh, in the span of 10 hours the Bengals have gone from $0 cap space in 2021 to $41M. And $18M of that projected $41M comes from not using the franchise tag on Green. According to Over The Cap, there will only be 5 teams with more cap space than the Bengals.
No one knows anything about next year's salary cap right now.
Both top salary cap sites have different totalz for 2021 (Spotrac 41m, Over the Cap 45m). Also this doesn't include ending amounts on the roll over because player can lose or gain money during the year as bonuses.
Next years actually salary cap is in flux right now as well 175m is the floor but it's not set their it can just as easily be 185m which is a huge difference.
Trying to talk salary cap issues right is just guessing until March when the new season begins and everything is set.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Whatever - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 12:17 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Jpoore may be right if they prioritize signing most of their internal FAs, especially WJ3 and Lawson. If they allow Lawson and/or WJ3 to leave in favor of someone like Thuney who is expected to cost $14-15 mill a year, it essentially just closes one gap (OL) but creates another (CB/DL).
I would be surprised to see the Bengals spend $10+ mill a year on an IOL player, but maybe it happens. We have a young OL and are on the lower end of positional spending for OL, so it would make sense to spend on 1-2 OL.
Thing is, Lawson and WJIII are solid, but not great starters. Their PFF grades are 70.2 and 69.7, respectively. Lawson has 5 sacks and WJIII has 1 pick. These are not guys that we should break the bank to resign, but many are budgeting Pro Bowler type money to retain them.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - ochocincos - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 12:51 PM)Whatever Wrote: Thing is, Lawson and WJIII are solid, but not great starters. Their PFF grades are 70.2 and 69.7, respectively. Lawson has 5 sacks and WJIII has 1 pick. These are not guys that we should break the bank to resign, but many are budgeting Pro Bowler type money to retain them.
Yep that's completely accurate and fair.
Hypothetical for you:
Do you think the team is better with a FA haul like Thuney, Derek Wolfe, and Logan Ryan vs retaining WJ3 and Lawson?
I expect Lawson and WJ3 to probably cost a combined $25-30 mill APY, of which I think Thuney, Wolfe, and Ryan would cost about the same range.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Nicomo Cosca - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 12:59 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Yep that's completely accurate and fair.
Hypothetical for you:
Do you think the team is better with a FA haul like Thuney, Derek Wolfe, and Logan Ryan vs retaining WJ3 and Lawson?
I expect Lawson and WJ3 to probably cost a combined $25-30 mill APY, of which I think Thuney, Wolfe, and Ryan would cost about the same range.
The Thuney option AINEC. Burrow can keep us in games if he gets time. Even when the defense is sucking. If we can consistently score 30 points I like our chances against most teams.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - ochocincos - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 01:03 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: The Thuney option AINEC. Burrow can keep us in games if he gets time. Even when the defense is sucking. If we can consistently score 30 points I like our chances against most teams.
I totally get that POV.
My concern with that though is how many passes will Burrow have to do in order to win games?
The Bengals are averaging 40 passes per game this season.
Would it not be good for the defense to be better so that the Bengals don't have to pass as much, thus reducing Burrow's chances of getting injured?
Or maybe there's optimism that all the guys coming back from injury will turn this bottom-tier defense into a mid-tier defense. I don't have faith though, especially if they lose Lawson and WJ3.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Nicomo Cosca - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 01:11 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I totally get that POV.
My concern with that though is how many passes will Burrow have to do in order to win games?
The Bengals are averaging 40 passes per game this season.
Would it not be good for the defense to be better so that the Bengals don't have to pass as much, thus reducing Burrow's chances of getting injured?
Or maybe there's optimism that all the guys coming back from injury will turn this bottom-tier defense into a mid-tier defense. I don't have faith though, especially if they lose Lawson and WJ3.
Well, at some point Mixon needs to start earning that contract, too. Some semblance of a running game would be nice. And better OG’s would help with that.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Synric - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 01:11 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I totally get that POV.
My concern with that though is how many passes will Burrow have to do in order to win games?
The Bengals are averaging 40 passes per game this season.
Would it not be good for the defense to be better so that the Bengals don't have to pass as much, thus reducing Burrow's chances of getting injured?
Or maybe there's optimism that all the guys coming back from injury will turn this bottom-tier defense into a mid-tier defense. I don't have faith though, especially if they lose Lawson and WJ3.
Look at the Browns they are 7-3 mostly due to the strength of their offensive line.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Nicomo Cosca - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 01:19 PM)Synric Wrote: Look at the Browns they are 7-3 mostly due to the strength of their offensive line.
Yep. They’re even winning games without Garrett.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - ochocincos - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 01:19 PM)Synric Wrote: Look at the Browns they are 7-3 mostly due to the strength of their offensive line.
True, but they also have a quality pass rush. Garrett, Vernon, Richardson, and Clayborn all have as many sacks as the Bengals' leading sacker. Garrett has 9.5 by himself.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Nicomo Cosca - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 01:29 PM)ochocincos Wrote: True, but they also have a quality pass rush. Garrett, Vernon, Richardson, and Clayborn all have as many sacks as the Bengals' leading sacker. Garrett has 9.5 by himself.
They’ve won their last couple games without Garrett even playing.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Whatever - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 12:59 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Yep that's completely accurate and fair.I'd take Thuney, Wolfe, and Ryan, though Ryan wouldn't be my first choice at CB. I would rather sign an outside CB because Phillips has looked solid when asked to play the slot. I think that trio would also come cheaper than $25 mil since Wolfe and Ryan signed one year prove it deals this year after their respective markets were soft last year. I would personally not pay more than $8-9 mil a year for Lawson or WJIII.
Hypothetical for you:
Do you think the team is better with a FA haul like Thuney, Derek Wolfe, and Logan Ryan vs retaining WJ3 and Lawson?
I expect Lawson and WJ3 to probably cost a combined $25-30 mill APY, of which I think Thuney, Wolfe, and Ryan would cost about the same range.
RE: Argument for and against Sewell. - Synric - 12-03-2020
(12-03-2020, 01:29 PM)ochocincos Wrote: True, but they also have a quality pass rush. Garrett, Vernon, Richardson, and Clayborn all have as many sacks as the Bengals' leading sacker. Garrett has 9.5 by himself.
But still giving up points. They have given up 3 less points than the Bengals defense and .3 less per game.
It's the offensive line that's mostly winning games for the Browns.