06-05-2023, 01:28 PM
(06-05-2023, 10:59 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I was in another thread that ended up talking about rookie Battle potentially making his way into some significant reps or possibly starter role this year.
I then starting wondering, "Had Bengals not invested $4 mill APY into Nick Scott and used that plus Irv Smith's $1.75 mill to put toward a better caliber TE, who would have been around that budget?"
It looks like Hurst signed both the highest overall amount and APY for all FA TEs this past offseason - 3 years for $21.75 mill ($7.25 mill APY)
Josh Oliver - 3 years, $21 mill ($7 mill APY)
Schultz - $6.25 mill (1 year only)
Then all other TEs were $4.5 mill APY or under.
Here are all the potential starters who signed just 1-year deals, and could thus be back on the market next year:
Schultz
Gesicki
Hooper
Tonyan
Smith
Unfortunately, what's done is done at this point when it comes to FA TEs, but next year looks to have a really good crop (age when they hit FA).
Guys who fit the preferred age for Bengals and I think could be fits offense-wise in bold.
Henry (29)
Engram (29)
Higbee (31)
Schultz (27)
Everett (29)
Hockenson (26)
Gesicki (28)
Fant (26)
Hooper (29)
Tonyan (29)
Kmet (25)
Smith (25) - If he plays well for Bengals, I'm ok keeping him
Thoughts on this?
Were you surprised to see FA TEs get pretty mediocre contracts overall?
Are there any of the names above that you really want Bengals to target next year?
I do not see us spending significant $$$ on a TE in FA. Just, organizationally, I think that is a direction we do not want to go in. We are not going to spend big at TE, RB, OG, S, or LB while we absorb the cap increases for Burrow, Higgins, Wilson, & Chase.
There may be exceptions. We paid Pratt decent money. Wilson likely, too. It is a puzzle, not absolutes. Depending on how other stuff breaks, maybe we spend more at sub premium positions. But I think a draft pick and/or bargain vet/ring chaser is more likely. Now, how high is the number we'd be willing to go? And for who, IDK?
