Back to the norm - Michael Johnson

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(11-15-2017, 10:33 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I would agree if he wasn't taking up $6.125 mill in cap next year. Unfortunately he is, but the team can save $5 mill from cutting him.
That's too much money to pay a below average player.

That's the crux of it right there......overpaying for subpar performance....yet again.  If the guy is more productive at DT, FFS leave him there.  I don't get these morons.....

[*Synric*]

If Michael Johnson and Pacman are cut they have to be replaced on the depth chart. I don't mean Chris Smith or William Jackson starting over them which I'd like to see, I mean as a defensive end and a Corner on the depth chart.

You can say they will just draft someone but that is two draft picks probably better spent else where (DT, OL).

Again I think WJ3 and Smith should be getting the bulk of the he snaps, but I wouldnt jump ahead and cut solid depth.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(11-15-2017, 11:01 AM)Synric Wrote: If Michael Johnson and Pacman are cut they have to be replaced on the depth chart. I don't mean Chris Smith or William Jackson starting over them which I'd like to see, I mean as a defensive end and a Corner on the depth chart.

You can say they will just draft someone but that is two draft picks probably better spent else where (DT, OL).

Again I think WJ3 and Smith should be getting the bulk of the he snaps, but I wouldnt jump ahead and cut solid depth.

.....then restructure the contract.  He makes too much money to be depth.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-15-2017, 11:01 AM)Synric Wrote: If Michael Johnson and Pacman are cut they have to be replaced on the depth chart. I don't mean Chris Smith or William Jackson starting over them which I'd like to see, I mean as a defensive end and a Corner on the depth chart.

You can say they will just draft someone but that is two draft picks probably better spent else where (DT, OL).

Again I think WJ3 and Smith should be getting the bulk of the he snaps, but I wouldnt jump ahead and cut solid depth.

The Bengals will likely get another CB and DE anyway since two DEs and two CBs are entering contract years, and that's assuming Jones and the Bengals pick up the mutual option for 2018.

On top of that, the Bengals will get a comp pick for Zeitler (expected 3rd) and Whitworth (expected 5th). They could get even more if they can trade one of their QBs.

[*Synric*]

(11-15-2017, 11:22 AM)ochocincos Wrote: The Bengals will likely get another CB and DE anyway since two DEs and two CBs are entering contract years, and that's assuming Jones and the Bengals pick up the mutual option for 2018.

On top of that, the Bengals will get a comp pick for Zeitler (expected 3rd) and Whitworth (expected 5th). They could get even more if they can trade one of their QBs.

That's only four picks in the first three rounds. 

They have a center in his contract year, two question marks at tackle, and a third question mark at right guard...and thats just the offensive line. They could use a safety, tight end, and an under tackle.


PS: If they trade Dalton or McCarron leaves (likely) they will need a quarterback either way.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-15-2017, 12:40 PM)Synric Wrote: That's only four picks in the first three rounds. 

They have a center in his contract year, two question marks at tackle, and a third question mark at right guard...and thats just the offensive line. They could use a safety, tight end, and an under tackle.


PS: If they trade Dalton or McCarron leaves (likely) they will need a quarterback either way.

IMO they don't need to invest in another TE, especially not early. Kroft is fine. Uzomah is a decent backup. And people forget about Mason Schreck who was put on IR.
In terms of safety, they have decent safety play and both Williams and Iloka are under contract through 2020. It's more reasonable to expect a mid-late round safety pick to add depth.
Alternatively, if the Bengals make some much needed cuts to some veteran players, they can bring in a quality interior OL via FA or even safety or TE.
That would remove one of those needs you speak of.

I'd like to see three OL selected within the first four rounds (five picks) and at least one DL (preferably DT). Save LB, DB, and offensive skill players to Round 5 or later.

[sandwedge]

(11-15-2017, 11:01 AM)Synric Wrote: If Michael Johnson and Pacman are cut they have to be replaced on the depth chart. I don't mean Chris Smith or William Jackson starting over them which I'd like to see, I mean as a defensive end and a Corner on the depth chart.

You can say they will just draft someone but that is two draft picks probably better spent else where (DT, OL).

Again I think WJ3 and Smith should be getting the bulk of the he snaps, but I wouldnt jump ahead and cut solid depth.

That is where FAs comes in... oh wait, what the hell am I talking....

[*Synric*]

(11-15-2017, 12:50 PM)ochocincos Wrote: IMO they don't need to invest in another TE, especially not early. Kroft is fine. Uzomah is a decent backup. And people forget about Mason Schreck who was put on IR.
In terms of safety, they have decent safety play and both Williams and Iloka are under contract through 2020. It's more reasonable to expect a mid-late round safety pick to add depth.
Alternatively, if the Bengals make some much needed cuts to some veteran players, they can bring in a quality interior OL via FA or even safety or TE.
That would remove one of those needs you speak of.

I'd like to see three OL selected within the first four rounds (five picks) and at least one DL (preferably DT). Save LB, DB, and offensive skill players to Round 5 or later.

I disagree about safety and TE. 

Kroft is a solid in line TE and is getting targets but he's not a receiver. I'm not sold on Uzomah I thought he was stiff in the draft and he hasn't don't anything to prove otherwise. 

(I wouldn't be upset if they resigned Eifert on the cheap. Eifert running those 5 and 10 yard outs against man coverage is ALOT different than Kroft.)

As for Safety they have Shaw as a tweener and Fej as the backup in the box safety. They lost Derron Smith as their backup centerfielder. Any way you slice it they have to draft a defensive back.

[*Synric*]

(11-15-2017, 11:14 AM)Wyche Wrote: .....then restructure the contract.  He makes too much money to be depth.

Johnson's contract is actually pretty cheap considering he's already made most of the guaranteed money. The rest is mostly escalators. 

[*ochocincos*]

(11-15-2017, 12:57 PM)Synric Wrote: I disagree about safety and TE. 

Kroft is a solid in line TE and is getting targets but he's not a receiver. I'm not sold on Uzomah I thought he was stiff in the draft and he hasn't don't anything to prove otherwise. 

(I wouldn't be upset if they resigned Eifert on the cheap. Eifert running those 5 and 10 yard outs against man coverage is ALOT different than Kroft.)

As for Safety they have Shaw as a tweener and Fej as the backup in the box safety. They lost Derron Smith as their backup centerfielder. Any way you slice it they have to draft a defensive back.

Well to follow your logic, you're wanting the following positions addressed in the first three rounds...
OT
G
C
S
TE
DT

That's too many positions to fill with even the first four rounds let alone first three rounds. You're going to have to take some positions on Day 3 and/or address in FA.

If you cut MJ and Jones, you don't have to replace them with picks in the first four rounds and you also save $11 mill of cap space that can be used toward a FA or two. Cut LaFell and that's another $4 mill saved.
For Jones, you have two CBs (more than) capable of filling his shoes in Dennard and WJ3. Jones not needed.
For MJ, you drafted two pass rushers last year who should already be playing more on the outside and if you draft a pass rushing DT early you fill the other role he was playing this year. Therefore, you no longer need MJ.
WR probably has the most uncertainty of those three positions with aging, underperforming vets and lack of confidence in their backups at this point. However, the Bengals also addressed WR twice last year to eventually replace LaFell.

Unless Eifert would sign for $4 mill or less and I was confident he could contribute for 12+ games a year, I'm not re-signing him. Too much risk involved with his health.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-15-2017, 01:02 PM)Synric Wrote: Johnson's contract is actually pretty cheap considering he's already made most of the guaranteed money. The rest is mostly escalators. 

False.
According to Spotrac, he's owed the following for 2018:
$4.55 mill in base salary
$1.125 mill in signing bonus
$200k for roster bonus
$250k for workout bonus
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cincinnati-bengals/michael-johnson-5560/

What are these escalators you speak of? Because it looks like he'd still get at minimum $5.675 mill with base salary and signing bonus. Too much for what contribution he gives.
If he's cut, the only dead cap is his signing bonus.

[*Synric*]

(11-15-2017, 01:09 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Well to follow your logic, you're wanting the following positions addressed in the first three rounds...
OT
G
C
S
TE
DT

That's too many positions to fill with even the first four rounds let alone first three rounds. You're going to have to take some positions on Day 3 and/or address in FA.

If you cut MJ and Jones, you don't have to replace them with picks in the first four rounds and you also save $11 mill of cap space that can be used toward a FA or two. Cut LaFell and that's another $4 mill saved.
For Jones, you have two CBs (more than) capable of filling his shoes in Dennard and WJ3. Jones not needed.
For MJ, you drafted two pass rushers last year who should already be playing more on the outside and if you draft a pass rushing DT early you fill the other role he was playing this year. Therefore, you no longer need MJ.
WR probably has the most uncertainty of those three positions with aging, underperforming vets and lack of confidence in their backups at this point. However, the Bengals also addressed WR twice last year to eventually replace LaFell.

Unless Eifert would sign for $4 mill or less and I was confident he could contribute for 12+ games a year, I'm not re-signing him. Too much risk involved with his health.

Would a 5th or 6th round defensive end be better than Johnson? Will there even be one available.

My point is you don't cut these guys until you see what you have at depth in training camp. Sure as hell not before the draft....Can't jump the gun.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-15-2017, 01:14 PM)Synric Wrote: Would a 5th or 6th round defensive end be better than Johnson? Will there even be one available.

My point is you don't cut these guys until you see what you have at depth in training camp. Sure as hell not before the draft....Can't jump the gun.

You consider Chris Smith better, right?
He was a 5th round pick, so yes a combo of an early round DT, giving Willis and Lawson most of MJ's snaps, re-signing Smith on the cheap, and 5th round pick could be better than MJ, yes.

And you say that your point is you don't cut these guys until you see what you have, but you never once stated that or hinted at that in any way. You said don't cut him.
But the problem with that philosophy is you cannot exceed the cap even in the offseason. So holding onto MJ means that much HAS to be reserved toward the cap.
Cutting him before the draft and FA allows that cap to free up to address another position that otherwise might not be able to be addressed in FA.

[*Synric*]

(11-15-2017, 01:20 PM)ochocincos Wrote: You consider Chris Smith better, right?
He was a 5th round pick, so yes a combo of an early round DT, giving Willis and Lawson most of MJ's snaps, re-signing Smith on the cheap, and 5th round pick could be better than MJ, yes.

And you say that your point is you don't cut these guys until you see what you have, but you never once stated that or hinted at that in any way. You said don't cut him.
But the problem with that philosophy is you cannot exceed the cap even in the offseason. So holding onto MJ means that much HAS to be reserved toward the cap.
Cutting him before the draft and FA allows that cap to free up to address another position that otherwise might not be able to be addressed in FA.

Look I see what your getting at but cutting players and expecting to find depth after the fact is a horrible idea.

That's like quitting your job before getting another one.

As for the salary cap I'm pretty sure the Bengals don't have a problem even getting close to going over lol.

[Shake n Blake]

(11-15-2017, 01:28 PM)Synric Wrote: Look I see what your getting at but cutting players and expecting to find depth after the fact is a horrible idea.

That's like quitting your job before getting another one.

As for the salary cap I'm pretty sure the Bengals don't have a problem even getting close to going over lol.

Have to disagree. Spending almost $6 million on an aging depth player is a far more horrible idea. 

Unfortunately, the Bengals are loyal to players who underperform their contracts as a means of making up for tiny guaranteed money.

[*Synric*]

(11-15-2017, 01:41 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Have to disagree. Spending almost $6 million on an aging depth player is a far more horrible idea. 

Unfortunately, the Bengals are loyal to players who underperform their contracts as a means of making up for tiny guaranteed money.

I pretty sure he's not gonna make near that much. 

Four years 20 million 4.5 million as a signing bonus and 7 milion escalators. He's probably gonna make around 3 million or less over the next two seasons. 

If they restructure to bring down the cap hit they have to likely give him more in guaranteed money. As of right now his cap hit looks bigger than what he will actually make the next two years as most of it has already been paid out.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-15-2017, 01:28 PM)Synric Wrote: Look I see what your getting at but cutting players and expecting to find depth after the fact is a horrible idea.

That's like quitting your job before getting another one.

As for the salary cap I'm pretty sure the Bengals don't have a problem even getting close to going over lol.

Holding onto aging under-performing vets with a decent cap chunk for insurance or fear of replacements not being as good or better can put teams in a worse position due to how the cap works right now.
The ONLY way I'm going to agree with you about holding onto MJ until after FA and draft are if one of two things happen:
1) MJ's contract is restructured so that he only counts no more than $3 mill toward the cap, thereby freeing up some cap regardless of whether he stays around or not
2) The NFL changes how salary cap spending works such that teams are permitted to exceeded the cap up until like the regular season starts or after TC or whatever

And you're right that the Bengals COULD still hold onto MJ, Jones, and LaFell and still have a bit of wiggle room within the cap, but that would leave practically no extra $$ for extension of Dunlap and/or Atkins or sign a starter from outside FA.

2018 Cap space = $13 mill
If the Bengals roll over cap, it would be ~$10 mill. That would bring the cap to $23 mill.
Some other players probably worth re-signing are Huber, Chris Smith, and Andre Smith with the uncertainty to Fisher and the state of the OTs in general.
That will probably take up ~$7-10 mill to re-sign those three.
If you re-sign Eifert, that's going to likely be another $5 mill at minimum.
That right there would take the cap down from $23 mill to $10 mill or less.
About $7-8 mill will be reserved for draft picks, and another $2-3 mill reserved for injuries.

You really think any team is going to start three (or more) rookies on the OL? Because from the above, the only way to upgrade LT, RG, and C would be through the draft since no more room for another FA.

I would rather cut at least two of MJ, Jones, and LaFell and go get a top-15 OL to solidify one of the OL spots. That would reduce the number of needed OL starters down to just 2 if you bring back Andre and bring in a new OL. And not re-sign Eifert in favor of extending proven studs Atkins and Dunlap.

And let's say these vets aren't cut until after TC or just before the season starts. Well then you have that freed up cap space but you likely missed your window to sign a quality FA or time to work out an extension with Dunlap or Atkins because the FO doesn't typically work on extensions once the season starts.