Saints release G Larry Warford

[Luvnit2]

This is the kind of move the Bengals need to win back the fan base. They could sign him to a 3 or 4 year deal and lessen the cap hit to 8 to 10 million in year #1 if they were creative.

It always amazes me the Ravens never have any cap money, yet they always seem to grab some vet after the draft. Time Katie gets creative and takes a lesson from the Ravens.

Get er done Katie.

Update, just read he only was due around 8 million in 2020 so no reason we can't afford him.

[kalibengal]

(05-09-2020, 11:45 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: This is the kind of move the Bengals need to win back the fan base. They could sign him to a 3 or 4 year deal and lessen the cap hit to 8 to 10 million in year #1 if they were creative.

It always amazes me the Ravens never have any cap money, yet they always seem to grab some vet after the draft. Time Katie gets creative and takes a lesson from the Ravens.

Get er done Katie.

Update, just read he only was due around 8 million in 2020 so no reason we can't afford him.

would be nice but Im more concerned at RT than Guard at this point. Hoping Fred Johnson keeps up the good work and continues to improve his game.  

[Geno_Can_Dunk]

(05-09-2020, 11:45 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: This is the kind of move the Bengals need to win back the fan base. They could sign him to a 3 or 4 year deal and lessen the cap hit to 8 to 10 million in year #1 if they were creative.

It always amazes me the Ravens never have any cap money, yet they always seem to grab some vet after the draft. Time Katie gets creative and takes a lesson from the Ravens.

Get er done Katie.

Update, just read he only was due around 8 million in 2020 so no reason we can't afford him.

For a guy blaming Katie Blackburn for everything, you're vastly overshooting the mark on how much we should offer him. He was due 7.75m, but the Saints already paid 750k of that, so any team could've traded for him for 7m. But nobody did, suggesting that as the ceiling on his FA market. But you want to give him at least 24m over the next three years? 

More like one year, 4-5 million. He was cut because Payton wasn't happy that he couldn't keep his weight down. He made the pro bowl on reputation. I'm all in favor of bringing him in, but the worst way to do that would be to give him a multi-year deal. A one year deal incentivizes him to stay in shape (if he can't keep in shape during normal conditions what does quarantine do) to set himself up for the future. 

Criticize management all you want but at least know what you're talking about! 

[SadFaceBengal15]

Sign him to a 1 year 5 mil a year deal. Warford with Jonah and Fred Johnson trey Hopkins and Jordan or price I could live with. I think that could be a good offensive line

[Luvnit2]

(05-09-2020, 12:35 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: For a guy blaming Katie Blackburn for everything, you're vastly overshooting the mark on how much we should offer him. He was due 7.75m, but the Saints already paid 750k of that, so any team could've traded for him for 7m. But nobody did, suggesting that as the ceiling on his FA market. But you want to give him at least 24m over the next three years? 

More like one year, 4-5 million. He was cut because Payton wasn't happy that he couldn't keep his weight down. He made the pro bowl on reputation. I'm all in favor of bringing him in, but the worst way to do that would be to give him a multi-year deal. A one year deal incentivizes him to stay in shape (if he can't keep in shape during normal conditions what does quarantine do) to set himself up for the future. 

Criticize management all you want but at least know what you're talking about! 

Why attack me? 

I agree with you and was saying his cost was not 12 million plus I thought others had mentioned in this thread, but unlike you I can admit my mistakes. What are your credentials again to evaluate an OG and make a definitive statement the guy has regressed and not deserving. What are hos PFF scores last 3 years compared to our starting OG's?

Please show me one time the Bengals FO has been creative with cap space to add an all pro after the draft. I will wait.

[Fan_in_Kettering]

Yes please! Larry Warford is better than any current guard on the Bengals’ roster; he’s an instant upgrade.

[Geno_Can_Dunk]

(05-09-2020, 01:50 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Why attack me? 

I agree with you and was saying his cost was not 12 million plus I thought others had mentioned in this thread, but unlike you I can admit my mistakes. What are your credentials again to evaluate an OG and make a definitive statement the guy has regressed and not deserving. What are hos PFF scores last 3 years compared to our starting OG's?

Please show me one time the Bengals FO has been creative with cap space to add an all pro after the draft. I will wait.

There's no reason why "after the draft" is some criteria for creative front office work. We have been creative with Reader and Waynes (going cash over cap). And Warford is not an all pro. He was an alternate to the pro bowl. Guys get that one reputation all the time (even Geno did frankly). 

I'm not basing anything on my credentials, but on Sean Payton's, who has been openly critical of Warford's performance this year. I'll take that over PFF any day. This is all out there - even Katherine Terrell, who used to be the Bengals ESPN reporter, has written about this. They had other ways of getting under the cap, but Payton was tiring of his weight battles. 

I just find it humorous when people "attack" (your word) Katie Blackburn for not doing a deal that would a terrible deal. 

I didn't "attack" you. It's an internet message board, we come here to discuss, debate, and often disagree. You say something way off base, you're going to get called out for it. 

As far as how he compares to our current guards, well yes, I want to sign him. 1 year, 5 mil, with a couple million in incentives so he can make up the whole 7m he lost. 

[Isaac Curtis: The Real #85]

I would be against a long-term, big money deal.

OK with a short term, incentive laden, modest deal, IF he fits our scheme.

NO letting him go and drafting a rookie to replace him while in win-now mode is a red flag for me.

[RunKijanaRun]

Giants and Texans are in the running.

When you have as much talent on the OL as we do, no sense in gilding the lily.

[Shake n Blake]

(05-09-2020, 09:25 AM)yellowxdiscipline Wrote: They should, but I think they honestly feel like they are good on the offensive line, which is kinda scary.

Both Taylor and Callahan were asked if they were approving of the current line by passing on linemen in the draft and neither of them really stepped up and backed the o-line. They just said that's the way things fell. They could've easily said "we're happy with the guys we have", but they didn't.

Then again, all of their actions to this point have suggested they're very content. Or someone is.

To the OP, yes I'd love if we signed Warford. That almost goes without saying. I'm sure Burrow would love having a former Saints pro-bowler protecting him as well.

[Geno_Can_Dunk]

(05-09-2020, 06:48 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Both Taylor and Callahan were asked if they were approving of the current line by passing on linemen in the draft and neither of them really stepped up and backed the o-line. They just said that's the way things fell. They could've easily said "we're happy with the guys we have", but they didn't.

Then again, all of their actions to this point have suggested they're very content. Or someone is.

I noticed that as well. In fact ZT has even mentioned that they'd consider other options that came along, and qualified his support of the OL by saying he recognizes that improvement is needed on the OL. Whether he meant players need to develop or the team needs new players was a bit vague. Callahan too seemed really unconvinced as he talked up the OL. 

And to your latter point, a guy like Warford would probably have both detractors and supporters in our front office, any front office. The fact that the Saints gave him a 750k bonus earlier in the offseason and then cut him suggests to me that their lack of support for him was far from unanimous. Point being there are likely diverse opinions in any front office. 

[Shake n Blake]

(05-09-2020, 06:59 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: I noticed that as well. In fact ZT has even mentioned that they'd consider other options that came along, and qualified his support of the OL by saying he recognizes that improvement is needed on the OL. Whether he meant players need to develop or the team needs new players was a bit vague. Callahan too seemed really unconvinced as he talked up the OL. 

And to your latter point, a guy like Warford would probably have both detractors and supporters in our front office, any front office. The fact that the Saints gave him a 750k bonus earlier in the offseason and then cut him suggests to me that their lack of support for him was far from unanimous. Point being there are likely diverse opinions in any front office. 

In the end, the opinions of the people up top are all that matters, and if Mikey and co aren't interested in investing serious coin into the line, then no other opinion matters. Not saying it's Mike, but who knows? I do know he's made it clear over the years that he doesn't like spending much on interior linemen.

[Geno_Can_Dunk]

(05-09-2020, 07:45 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: In the end, the opinions of the people up top are all that matters, and if Mikey and co aren't interested in investing serious coin into the line, then no other opinion matters. Not saying it's Mike, but who knows? I do know he's made it clear over the years that he doesn't like spending much on interior linemen.

I do believe they listen to input from coaches and try to work toward consensus when possible. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(05-09-2020, 01:50 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Why attack me? 

I agree with you and was saying his cost was not 12 million plus I thought others had mentioned in this thread, but unlike you I can admit my mistakes. What are your credentials again to evaluate an OG and make a definitive statement the guy has regressed and not deserving. What are hos PFF scores last 3 years compared to our starting OG's?

Please show me one time the Bengals FO has been creative with cap space to add an all pro after the draft. I will wait.

He’s never been All Pro.

[Luvnit2]

(05-09-2020, 09:22 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: He’s never been All Pro.

???????

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29151914/saints-cut-guard-larry-warford-3-pro-bowl-seasons

[SunsetBengal]

(05-10-2020, 09:36 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: ???????

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29151914/saints-cut-guard-larry-warford-3-pro-bowl-seasons

Pro Bowl is a popularity contest, All-Pro is a true, highest honor.

[Luvnit2]

(05-10-2020, 09:51 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Pro Bowl is a popularity contest, All-Pro is a true, highest honor.

Nice opinion, but not factual

[Isaac Curtis: The Real #85]

(05-10-2020, 11:08 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Nice opinion, but not factual

Wrong.

All-Pro is more elite than Pro-Bowl. That is a fact.

The Pro-Bowl roster had 44 guys, from the AFC alone, in it. That is 88 total, before injury replacements come in. It is a top 90 club.

Further, it IS a popularty contest, as fans have gotten a vote. Since 1995 anyway. Fans, coaches, and players each get 33% of the vote.

The all-pro team is MUCH more select. One player at each spot. And some flex spots/specialists, depending on the outlet. These are media selections (AP, Sporting News, PFWA). AP has a second team, but even then, we are talking half the size of a Pro-Bowl team.

Warford has never made All-Pro, but has been a Pro-Bowler, last year as a replacement.

Last 3 PFF grades: 73.1 (2019), 66.5 (2018), 69.7 (2017).

Our guys last year: 

Jordan 43.7 (though I read somewhere he graded out at 35 in games 1-8 and over 70 in 9-16: playing more games in the first half); 

Hopkins: 62.4
Su'a-Filo: 60.1
Redmond: 50.6
Price: 41.8
(Miller: 58.6)

At tackle:
J. Williams (no rating)
Hart: 57.7
F. Johnson: 62.6 (basically 1 game)
(Glenn: 68.4)
(Jerry: 55.6)
(Smith 51.0)
Jason Peters 82.4

[fredtoast]

(05-08-2020, 10:58 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: Yeah, we start at that number from over the cap, which is like $24 million. Then we have to sign the rookies, which is like $11 million plus. But it is not a straight subtraction. When you sign a rookie it is bumping someone else OFF the roster who currently counts vs the cap. Accounting for this displacement effect, the rooks only cost us $7 million or so vs the cap.ht now. He and an extension for Mixon means we are likely right up against the cap.

(05-08-2020, 11:27 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: I think this is exactly right. I had forgotten about the displacement effect. 

I am pretty sure the $11 million estimate for rookies already takes into account the salaries replaced.

I know Sportec came up with about $11 million for rookies and that included a $610 saving for every player replaced.

[Isaac Curtis: The Real #85]

More on Warford:

https://www.battleredblog.com/2020-nfl-free-agency/2020/5/8/21252864/2020-nfl-free-agency-rumors-texans-reportedly-interested-in-larry-warford

Apparently, he graded out as an excellent run blocker, 7th among all qualified guards. But also allowed a team high 32 QB pressures.