Andy the Bear.

[muskiesfan]

If a team is only trying to acquire Dalton as a back up, then his contract is too big. If a team is looking to acquire him as their starter, he's pretty damn cheap.

Whether an option or not, there's no way the Bengals should offer to pay part of his contract to trade him. They can release him and it costs them absolutely nothing. So throwing in money to trade him would be a pretty dumb decision. Why lose any money when there's an option that would cost you zero money? I simply don't understand the that sort of thought process.

Additionally, if a team were willing to trade for Dalton but didn't want to pay him his cheap starting money there are other options. They could allow that team a window to try and work a deal with Dalton instead of just unnecessarily giving away money.

I understand that a lot of people cannot wait for Dalton to get out of town, but there's no reason to do dumb shit to make it happen.

[Schmitbuck]

(02-29-2020, 11:33 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Bears have already said Trubisky would be their starter next year.  Can't see them giving up a lot in trade in order to pay a back up QB $17 million.

I tend to agree with you on this. It's probably one of those 'watch what they do, not watch they say' situations. If they give up a 2nd or some kind of 3rd/4th round equivalent, it wouldn't be for Dalton to be a backup.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-29-2020, 01:24 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: If a team is only trying to acquire Dalton as a back up, then his contract is too big. If a team is looking to acquire him as their starter, he's pretty damn cheap.

Whether an option or not, there's no way the Bengals should offer to pay part of his contract to trade him. They can release him and it costs them absolutely nothing. So throwing in money to trade him would be a pretty dumb decision. Why lose any money when there's an option that would cost you zero money? I simply don't understand the that sort of thought process.

Additionally, if a team were willing to trade for Dalton but didn't want to pay him his cheap starting money there are other options. They could allow that team a window to try and work a deal with Dalton instead of just unnecessarily giving away money.

I understand that a lot of people cannot wait for Dalton to get out of town, but there's no reason to do dumb shit to make it happen.

It’s not “dumb shit” teams do it all the time in other sports. It’s about acquiring assets instead of getting nothing. Dalton would probably bring back at least something anyway, so he’s not the most ideal candidate, but what’s worth more to a rebuilding team, a higher pick like a 2nd while retaining part of his money, or potentially a 4th but his entire contract comes off? We’re not winning anything this season anyway, so I don’t really see what the big deal would be for one year. Especially if it helps move him, and we getter a better return.

[*Synric*]

The Bears only have 16mil in cap space so they would have to make cap space for Dalton and their draft picks not to mention for anyone they would like to sign in free agency.

A Dalton for Player trade would be more likely for the Bears...I would love to see Allen Robinson or Akiem Hicks but it would be more likely Leonard Floyd and say a 5th or 6th for Dalton. Floyd would free up 13 of the 17.7m needed for the Bears and give the Bengals another solid OLB for their hybrid 34.

[muskiesfan]

(02-29-2020, 01:54 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: It’s not “dumb shit” teams do it all the time in other sports. It’s about acquiring assets instead of getting nothing. Dalton would probably bring back at least something anyway, so he’s not the most ideal candidate, but what’s worth more to a rebuilding team, a higher pick like a 2nd while retaining part of his money, or potentially a 4th but his entire contract comes off? We’re not winning anything this season anyway, so I don’t really see what the big deal would be for one year. Especially if it helps move him, and we getter a better return.

It's completely dumb as shit. Why retain any of his money when there are so many needs? This is a team that's not known for addressing issues in free agency. Them eating part of his contract just builds in another excuse as to why they can't afford to bring in outside players. On another team with another front office, this may be something that could work. For the Bengals, it makes zero sense.

Whether we get a 4th or cut him, I'd rather have the extra $17m+ than get a second and pay half (just for example purposes) of his remaining money to make it a 2nd. That $8.5m or so could go a long way towards an extension, a LB, a G, or whatever else to help improve the team long term as opposed to paying $8.5m for a 2nd round pick.

While I agree that we're more than likely not going to be competitive this coming season, a full $17m and a lower draft pick makes much more sense to me than half of that and a higher draft pick. If it would net us another 1st, I could get behind that. Just trying to improve to a 2nd doesn't do it for me.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-29-2020, 03:24 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: It's completely dumb as shit. Why retain any of his money when there are so many needs? This is a team that's not known for addressing issues in free agency. Them eating part of his contract just builds in another excuse as to why they can't afford to bring in outside players. On another team with another front office, this may be something that could work. For the Bengals, it makes zero sense.

Whether we get a 4th or cut him, I'd rather have the extra $17m+ than get a second and pay half (just for example purposes) of his remaining money to make it a 2nd. That $8.5m or so could go a long way towards an extension, a LB, a G, or whatever else to help improve the team long term as opposed to paying $8.5m for a 2nd round pick.

While I agree that we're more than likely not going to be competitive this coming season, a full $17m and a lower draft pick makes much more sense to me than half of that and a higher draft pick. If it would net us another 1st, I could get behind that. Just trying to improve to a 2nd doesn't do it for me.

Very shortsighted way to look at it. One year of retaining some money on a contract means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.

It’s a moot point anyway though, because it’s the kind of thing teams do that put winning and improving for the future above money. So obviously not us.

But it will be kind of funny (not really) when Dalton’s money isn’t used for a decent FA anyway.

[BengalChris]

(02-29-2020, 11:24 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Never say never when it comes to the stupidity of GMs, but I assume asking for a 2nd is a "high ask" so they can haggle to something more reasonable for Dalton.  As bleh as Trubisky is he was better than Dalton statistically in 2019, he's 7 years younger, he's on a rookie contract, the Bears are already stuck with for him for free, and he came closer to lucking into a playoff win in 1 try than Dalton did in 4.

Basically, if the Bears need to evaluate if Dalton is worth a 2nd they should put Trubisky on the trade block for a 2nd round pick themselves and see how the response comes back.  I can see how the Titans bringing in Tannehill for a song and riding his hot streak to the championship game has teams thinking about competition for ho-hum starters, but a 2nd for one year of Dalton?  Ida know, even taking them having Lazor into account.


Also, Mike Brown saying a QB who won 2 games and had a bottom-tier stat line in 2019 is worth a 2nd round pick is tantamount to saying Dalton is way better than he looked last year...which would indicate that our team/coaching negatively impacted Dalton is quite a serious way.  But again, I guess this is just starting with a high opening price.

Coaching DID negatively impact Dalton and the entire team for that matter.

I'm expecting more of a 3rd or 4th round pick offer from the Bears. They have other options and the Bengals want shed that $18M salary.

 

[SadFaceBengal15]

Trade Dalton for Floyd trevethan or roquan smith

[Benton]

(02-29-2020, 02:11 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Can NFL trades do like MLB trades and the team trading away the player also pay some of the players salary?

Like could we trade the Bears Cordy and Dalton and instead of them taking on roughly 26 mil in cap hit (Cordy is about 9mil and Dalton about 17 I think) we say we will cover half?

Many trades already do if they end up with bonuses already paid, dead money hits, etc. The NFL doesn't trade players as much as mlb because the contracts are structured differently. 

[Hoofhearted]

(02-29-2020, 04:01 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Very shortsighted way to look at it. One year of retaining some money on a contract means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.

It’s a moot point anyway though, because it’s the kind of thing teams do that put winning and improving for the future above money. So obviously not us.

But it will be kind of funny (not really) when Dalton’s money isn’t used for a decent FA anyway.

They are saying Mixon and AJ are priorities, so you know the annual hobspin article will come out saying it’s going toward AJ and Mixon. I’m trying to believe they’ll be more aggressive filling holes with higher quality FA, because once they get Joe, they have a 5 year window basically to put together a competitive roster around him. This will be a telling offseason for sure

[NATI BENGALS]

(02-29-2020, 06:18 PM)Benton Wrote: Many trades already do if they end up with bonuses already paid, dead money hits, etc. The NFL doesn't trade players as much as mlb because the contracts are structured differently. 

Ah yea. Ok. So maybe that is part of us saying we will play nice with Dalton and help find a trade he likes. If we did happen to find a trade partner and salary was an issue. We could restructure his contract and pay him a roster bonus or something so he is still making the same this year. It’s just we pay some of it.

That would require a happy player willing to play nice. And a front office willing to get creative though. Not quite as easy as MLB.

[NATI BENGALS]

(02-29-2020, 01:24 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: If a team is only trying to acquire Dalton as a back up, then his contract is too big. If a team is looking to acquire him as their starter, he's pretty damn cheap.

Whether an option or not, there's no way the Bengals should offer to pay part of his contract to trade him. They can release him and it costs them absolutely nothing. So throwing in money to trade him would be a pretty dumb decision. Why lose any money when there's an option that would cost you zero money? I simply don't understand the that sort of thought process.

Additionally, if a team were willing to trade for Dalton but didn't want to pay him his cheap starting money there are other options. They could allow that team a window to try and work a deal with Dalton instead of just unnecessarily giving away money.

I understand that a lot of people cannot wait for Dalton to get out of town, but there's no reason to do dumb shit to make it happen.

Dumb shit like getting something instead of nothing?

Yea I’m not tracking your thought process. I would rather get a draft pick and have to pay a little than get no draft pick.

Hell IF we hit on a draft pick at damn near any position other than K or P and they turn into a stud you can pretend the money we ate in the trade is part of that rookies contract. And they are still coming at a discount compared to a stud vet who plays the same position and just got a 2nd contract.

[Benton]

(02-29-2020, 06:55 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Ah yea. Ok. So maybe that is part of us saying we will play nice with Dalton and help find a trade he likes. If we did happen to find a trade partner and salary was an issue. We could restructure his contract and pay him a roster bonus or something so he is still making the same this year. It’s just we pay some of it.

That would require a happy player willing to play nice. And a front office willing to get creative though. Not quite as easy as MLB.

I think usually the new team and player work out a contract as part of the process. It's safer for everyone. Its not good business to give up a second round pick on a guy who you only have under contract for one year; likewise, for the player, going somewhere for a season may not be in their best interest, especially for older players.

I don't think anything is owed on Dalton's though so 17$ million for a team in need of a starter is a team friendly deal. 

[Bengalitis]

(02-29-2020, 06:55 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Ah yea. Ok. So maybe that is part of us saying we will play nice with Dalton and help find a trade he likes. If we did happen to find a trade partner and salary was an issue. We could restructure his contract and pay him a roster bonus or something so he is still making the same this year. It’s just we pay some of it.

That would require a happy player willing to play nice. And a front office willing to get creative though. Not quite as easy as MLB.

Just get a reliable LB for Andy, and things will fall in place.

[muskiesfan]

(02-29-2020, 04:01 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Very shortsighted way to look at it. One year of retaining some money on a contract means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.

It’s a moot point anyway though, because it’s the kind of thing teams do that put winning and improving for the future above money. So obviously not us.

But it will be kind of funny (not really) when Dalton’s money isn’t used for a decent FA anyway.

I completely agree that winning franchises would play this differently. I honestly do not expect The Family to actually go after free agents that would be without a doubt improvements. However, if all of Dalton's money comes off the books, that potentially covers an AJ Green contract (first season) or the bulk of his franchise tag. It could completely cover a Mixon extension plus another extension. That money allows for a lot without even touching our current available cap.

What really hurt was not making the move and trading him before the deadline last year. Proclaiming that it's not our job to improve other teams and decide to vacation during the trade deadline is what has the team in this position. They could still be in luck and find a team that misses out on the QB musical chairs and is willing to trade. However, I still see no reason to eat part of the contract. Any trade compensation it better than none, but eating money to improve the draft pick just doesn't make sense to me.

[muskiesfan]

(02-29-2020, 07:01 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Dumb shit like getting something instead of nothing?

Yea I’m not tracking your thought process. I would rather get a draft pick and have to pay a little than get no draft pick.

Hell IF we hit on a draft pick at damn near any position other than K or P and they turn into a stud you can pretend the money we ate in the trade is part of that rookies contract. And they are still coming at a discount compared to a stud vet who plays the same position and just got a 2nd contract.

I'm not saying get nothing. I'm saying if they get offered a 4th, take it. I'm saying don't eat part of his contract to try and get a higher draft pick. I would much rather trade him than cut him, but competent ownership would've traded him at the deadline last season and not given up all of their leverage because they don't want to improve other teams.

The best thing about moving on from Dalton is the additional cap space. That almost entirely covers the franchise tag for AJ Green or year 1 of his new deal. Or that could be viewed as money that could do a Mixon extension plus another player without even touching our current available cap.

I would much prefer to get a draft pick for him, but The Family played this almost as poorly as they could. If the Bengals end up having to cut Dalton out right, that's their fault, not mine.

[*SHRacerX*]

(02-29-2020, 11:49 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: If we could we SHOULD. Without a doubt I would throw in cash considerations if it means we could get an early pick or two for some of these veterans.

That would greatly impair our ability to get a FA.  Not a smart move

[*SHRacerX*]

(02-29-2020, 11:33 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: article I just read: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/bengals-shouldn-t-hold-out-for-2nd-round-return-in-an-andy-dalton-trade/ar-BB10wBFk?ocid=hplocalnews

I saw the article, but the other QBs they list as FA are going to make a LOT more than 17 million per year.  Dalton has proven that with a decent line protecting him, he is a surgeon.  He has won a lot of games at the NFL level.  More than most of those QBs listed.  If the Bears want any of them, they have to give up on MB.  They can't afford both.  That makes Dalton a very logical choice.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(03-01-2020, 11:20 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: That would greatly impair our ability to get a FA.  Not a smart move

Not really. We have plenty of cap room, it’s just that Brown won’t spend what he could.

[*SHRacerX*]

(03-01-2020, 11:59 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Not really. We have plenty of cap room, it’s just that Brown won’t spend what he could.

Add up AJ on the franchise, extending Mixon, re-signing Billings, Eifert, and Vigil and you see the money will dry up quickly...You are talking about 7-8 million that could be spent on a FA.  No way in hell do I pay that...If I have to release, I would, but then the Bears have to sign Dalton to a deal...one that he will not accept 17 million for one year.