[Scalper]

Samuel Signing - B
He is McL 2.0. The question is whether you should have two smurfs as 1 and 2 WRs in today's NFL. It is an interesting question. More conventional wisdom, which is not always correct, says you need a tall, big, fast #1 WR. The only true #1 WRs in FA were both franchised. Not signing Golladay was right move, both because his price was punitive, and because he is really a #1.5 WR, a better version of but still similar to 3 guys we already have on our roster, namely Sims, Golden, Harmon. Bringing in a 4th WR similar to 3 guys we already have, long strider bigger possesion WRs without elite quickness, probably doesn't make sense even if price was right. There isn't a true #1 franchise WR, so what do you do? Sign another smurf burner I guess. I can't fault the approach, even though I'm not sure what the outcome will be.

$11M is no bargain for a solid second-tier receiver, but neither is it drastic overpay. Samuel has not been consistently good, his early career was a suckfest, and you wonder if, as with many college draft picks, if one great year an anomaly. Trust that RR knows what he is doing as he knows the player. This is not some top-tier player, nor a massive bargain, but it is a solid signing, a B.

A few other interesting observations. Our two main signings were young players in their prime, which I like, especially when contrasted as abysmal signings of past.

Lot of 3 year deals out there. Players expecting influx of new TV deal money? Regardless, one consequence is that we can draft a CB or WR high in draft this year or next, and about the time their contracts expire, Samuel and Jackson's expire too. Smart planning? Let's be optimistic and say yes. The downside is you haven't locked them in long term, but this downside more than offset by risk mitigation if players don't perform or younger replacements exist. FO is clearly and smartly avoiding the anchor of shit contracts like Smith, Collins, etc., moving forward, give them credit for that.

So we now have 2 legit burners, and best case scenario is we should be able to punish teams deep, assuming we have a QB to get them the ball. Neither Heinecke and Allen has great arm strength, and I can hear the Fitz chants already, but if we are going with more of a deep threat O, even at times, which I LOVE, we need a big armed QB. That is not Jones or many other QBs in draft.

So at WR in 3 sets you might expect, McL, Samuel slot, and Harmon/Golden/Sims on outside. It is hopefully not absurd to hope one of the three big guys becomes a viable #2, and perhaps use 2 of big guys in red zone or 3rd short situations. We now have 5 WRs that seem roster locks assuming no major ridiculousness, McL, Samuel, Harmon, Golden, Sims. Draft a 6th? Go with other Sims? Keep 5 WRs. I think they draft 1 more WR, just because an injury to McL or Samuel puts you right back where you started, and smaller WRs take a beating and Samuel has injury history. This means teams can no longer double McL all game without paying for it and should open up offense immensely.

We had to sign a WR, and a modest signing like this much better than breaking bank for guys that are not true #1s. We now have a #1.5WR in McL, a #1.5WR in Samuel, and 3 #2 or #2.5 in Golden, Harmon, Sims. That is respectable, but a true big and quick #1 would still be ideal. Maybe we draft that guy. Our WR unit went from a C or D to a B, but would need a true #1 to be ranked A. That being said, our offense should be exponentially better, and I still think we draft WR with one of first 5 picks.