WFT Free Agency

[SunnySide]

We could have had

TE Hunter Henry
G Thuney or Zeitler or Trai Turner or many other starting level Gs
3r comp

Instead we get an injury prone G who is taking up 18M in cap space all in 1 year

I understand you dont let high level homegrown players walk ... but Scherff is like maybe the 6th or 7th best G in the game and fuck him if he wants to over value himself

We are letting a G dictate to us.

Hes a guard. If we knew he wasnt going to resign with us .. then let him walk now vs next year.

[Scalper]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

We could have had

TE Hunter Henry
G Thuney or Zeitler or Trai Turner or many other starting level Gs
3r comp

Instead we get an injury prone G who is taking up 18M in cap space all in 1 year

I understand you dont let high level homegrown players walk ... but Scherff is like maybe the 6th or 7th best G in the game and fuck him if he wants to over value himself

We are letting a G dictate to us.

Hes a guard. If we knew he wasnt going to resign with us .. then let him walk now vs next year.

Yup. And we could start C we signed or Charles at G for no add'l money. Horrible decision. RG is lowest leverage position of entire starting 22. I still say in a draft deep with Ts smart play would have been let Scherff walk and draft a mauler T that you plug to G right away. Except I think our FO may be drafting 1-2 LBs with first 4 picks.

And I still say it was about the guarantees, overall and injury, rather than the total contract value. Scherff knows he can't stay healthy and wants a sucker to be on the hook for guaranteed money if he's injured.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

We could have had

TE Hunter Henry
G Thuney or Zeitler or Trai Turner or many other starting level Gs
3r comp

Instead we get an injury prone G who is taking up 18M in cap space all in 1 year

I understand you dont let high level homegrown players walk ... but Scherff is like maybe the 6th or 7th best G in the game and fuck him if he wants to over value himself

We are letting a G dictate to us.

Hes a guard. If we knew he wasnt going to resign with us .. then let him walk now vs next year.

Hunter Henry is way more injury prone than Scherff is

[Scalper]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

Hunter Henry is way more injury prone than Scherff is

Reed 2.0. We've seen that show.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

We could have had



TE Hunter Henry

G Thuney or Zeitler or Trai Turner or many other starting level Gs

3r comp



Instead we get an injury prone G who is taking up 18M in cap space all in 1 year



I understand you dont let high level homegrown players walk ... but Scherff is like maybe the 6th or 7th best G in the game and fuck him if he wants to over value himself



We are letting a G dictate to us.



Hes a guard. If we knew he wasnt going to resign with us .. then let him walk now vs next year.

How is he the 6th or 7th best yet first team all pro. People so underestimate Scherff because he is on our team already and we see his faults more clearly.

It's a shame he doesn't want a long term deal but the difference in salary cap vs quality of next man up was not enough for this FO to justify letting him go yet. Given he is a staple to our offense and they inherited his situation, I get them not wanting to just cut ties.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

How is he the 6th or 7th best yet first team all pro. People so underestimate Scherff because he is on our team already and we see his faults more clearly.

It's a shame he doesn't want a long term deal but the difference in salary cap vs quality of next man up was not enough for this FO to justify letting him go yet. Given he is a staple to our offense and they inherited his situation, I get them not wanting to just cut ties.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Agreed.

[Scalper]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

How is he the 6th or 7th best yet first team all pro. People so underestimate Scherff because he is on our team already and we see his faults more clearly.

It's a shame he doesn't want a long term deal but the difference in salary cap vs quality of next man up was not enough for this FO to justify letting him go yet. Given he is a staple to our offense and they inherited his situation, I get them not wanting to just cut ties.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

All-Pro team selected by journalists, not GMs or players or other people actually playing the game or building teams. Grades by groups like PFF often diverge sharply from All-Pro selections. All-Pro is a vanity entertainment award, not an analytic. So saying Scherff All-Pro doesn't mean he is necessarily top-2 at position, especially not in eyes of professional evaluators.

Next man up is $17M a year less. Yeah, they inherited, that doesn't mean they managed it properly.

Let's say he's 2nd best. No way is he better than Quenton Nelson, who is an absolute beast. I would not call it absurd to put him past 6th, he is a mauler run game, good moving in space to run block, but gets blown up on pass protection WAY too much--reason he was moved to G in first place, and there are LOTs of good mauling run blocker Gs. But again, let's even suppose he is better than Quenton Nelson or as good, which he isn't. Nelson has been in league 3 years, has been a 1st team All-Pro all three years, Pro Bowl all three years, and started all 48 games. Hasn't missed a single game. When his rookie deal expires he'll be in prime, having been absolute best at his position every year, with no injuries--maybe you pay him $18M, I wouldn't, but it is at least a sensible proposition. No way you pay that much to guard turning 30 who can't stay healthy or pass block. You CAN find a G 3rd-5th round who can't pass block well but who is a mauler in run game. I'll take a G 75% as good as Scherff for $17M a year less in a heartbeat and our FO should have too.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Scalper

All-Pro team selected by journalists, not GMs or players or other people actually playing the game or building teams. Grades by groups like PFF often diverge sharply from All-Pro selections. All-Pro is a vanity entertainment award, not an analytic. So saying Scherff All-Pro doesn't mean he is necessarily top-2 at position, especially not in eyes of professional evaluators.



Next man up is $17M a year less. Yeah, they inherited, that doesn't mean they managed it properly.



Let's say he's 2nd best. No way is he better than Quenton Nelson, who is an absolute beast. I would not call it absurd to put him past 6th, he is a mauler run game, good moving in space to run block, but gets blown up on pass protection WAY too much--reason he was moved to G in first place, and there are LOTs of good mauling run blocker Gs. But again, let's even suppose he is better than Quenton Nelson or as good, which he isn't. Nelson has been in league 3 years, has been a 1st team All-Pro all three years, Pro Bowl all three years, and started all 48 games. Hasn't missed a single game. When his rookie deal expires he'll be in prime, having been absolute best at his position every year, with no injuries--maybe you pay him $18M, I wouldn't, but it is at least a sensible proposition. No way you pay that much to guard turning 30 who can't stay healthy or pass block. You CAN find a G 3rd-5th round who can't pass block well but who is a mauler in run game. I'll take a G 75% as good as Scherff for $17M a year less in a heartbeat and our FO should have too.

First, while AP teams are selected by journalists, they are not like the pro bowl selections and are highly regarded as accurate reflections. But since you mention PFF, they have him as 4th, with 2 AFC and 1 NFC guards. Guess what. That is the same as the AP selections. He also was voted to the pro bowl (which i despise referring to) which is voted on by gms, players, and fans - i am also guessing WFT fans didn't flood the ballot box for Scherff. So the only group out there saying he is anything other than a top 5 G is internet mafia types.

Second, next man up isn't both 1M/year and 75% better. Erick Flowers and Justin Pugh are 10 and 8m respectively and maybe are hit that 3/4 mark. $1M for a guard this year (non draft) gets you a guard in the 50 to 60th best slot.

Third, I love when rookie salaries are brought into discussion but that is only part of why your QNelson comment is a strawman fallacy. I don't pay for pff so i could only look at this year, but hear is a cbs note

One of the most dependable guards in the league, Scherff has never posted a PFF grade below 72.5 in his six-year NFL career.*Over the last three seasons, Scherff ranks among the league’s best guards in nearly every key metric, including a 97th percentile ranking on*true pass sets*and 90th percentile ranking in percentage of positively graded plays. Both numbers are among the most important when projecting interior offensive linemen from year to year.

. The bold is mine. You are simply wrong about Scherff in pass blocking and value overall. As for QNelson, whenever he hits FA I guarantee 17m per year will be the starting point.

Finally, yes you can get a mauler in the draft in the 3rd thru 5th round, and I expect the WFT will draft with that in mind but you don't let the strength of your OL walk first when you can afford not to.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Scalper]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

First, while AP teams are selected by journalists, they are not like the pro bowl selections and are highly regarded as accurate reflections. But since you mention PFF, they have him as 4th, with 2 AFC and 1 NFC guards. Guess what. That is the same as the AP selections. He also was voted to the pro bowl (which i despise referring to) which is voted on by gms, players, and fans - i am also guessing WFT fans didn't flood the ballot box for Scherff. So the only group out there saying he is anything other than a top 5 G is internet mafia types.

PFF had him ranked 6th best overall G as of week 15 of NFL season. https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-top-25-...hrough-week-15
So you are plain wrong. Their season ending rankings had him lower. Internet mafia smear ignored. Broader point is, even if he is 5th best G, or 3rd, not worth the money he wants. Even his past production not worth what he wants, over whole tenure not just most recent year, and the classic mistake of past was overpaying for past production which declined in future. There are very few examples of injury prone players magically becoming healthier in their 30s, this alone is reason not to resign, instead of being duped by the glitter of All Pro selection.

Second, next man up isn't both 1M/year and 75% better. Erick Flowers and Justin Pugh are 10 and 8m respectively and maybe are hit that 3/4 mark. $1M for a guard this year (non draft) gets you a guard in the 50 to 60th best slot.

75% as good, not better. I would slide Charles, or Martin, or Larsen in at RG, accept a significant but not ruinous drop-off, and save a PILE. You don't have to spend $10M on a serviceable, above-average guard, just look at Schweitzer. Lots of teams draft solid but not elite starting Gs and have stud Ts and C.


Third, I love when rookie salaries are brought into discussion but that is only part of why your QNelson comment is a strawman fallacy. I don't pay for pff so i could only look at this year, but hear is a cbs note . The bold is mine. You are simply wrong about Scherff in pass blocking and value overall. As for QNelson, whenever he hits FA I guarantee 17m per year will be the starting point.


Salaries matter. All teams have finite number of players they can give $15M+ deals to. The decision to replace a high-priced veteran who is never consistently healthy with a much lower priced rookie player is not absurd. It is the reality of NFL economics. So rookie salaries compared to veteran salaries are not absurd, they are part of NFL dynamic. I want to look at this team in 2 years and see McL, entire DL, etc., locked up, not lose our best young players to make room for a 32-year old G on IR making $18M a year with $20M+ dead cap if we cut him. The question is not can we afford Scherff this year, but whether he is the optimal use of resources long term. The answer is no. RG is the lowest leverage position of the entire starting 22, you don't pay a RG who is never healthy $18M.

Nelson not a strawman fallacy. The crux is whether Scherff is worth what we are paying him and what he wants for a long-term deal. This is the crux of argument, not a refutation that distracts from argument as you mistakenly think. You ascertain value, in economics, via market pricing, and opportunity cost, cost of opportunities forsaken or parity products; we have no free market pricing as Scherff not URFA. Nelson, a G much more easy to argue worth $18M, is younger, consistently healthier than Scherff, and consistently better. Example of player perhaps worth what Scherff wants, with traits Scherff lacks.

Finally, yes you can get a mauler in the draft in the 3rd thru 5th round, and I expect the WFT will draft with that in mind but you don't let the strength of your OL walk first when you can afford not to.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

When the strength of OL is RG you have problems. Build it the right way, Ts and C, then Gs.

Scherff is okay in pass blocking when he gets his hands on people, but there are far too many plays where people blow by him untouched, pass rushers. He is naturally a slow-footed power blocker. This doesn't mean he sucks, but when you are talking about $18M for a G he should be total package. Scherff is not, especially not consistently year after year.

He has missed almost a third of games due to injury. In his prime. It is not absurd to think that climbs to 50% or higher in his 30s. Even if the pass blocking limitations don't concern you, he has strengths, the injury risk is too great to justify a fully guaranteed one-year deal (franchise) or a long term deal for tons of guaranteed money and injury guarantees. I don't hate Scherff, he is good, but not worth the price he is commanding. The smart choice is to be the Belicheat of old, let an aging injury risk walk, and let some other chump team overpay him to be on IR.

[Chief X_Phackter]

I love how we always hear the mantra "we have to keep/pay our own", but now that this team is close to being a true contender (and they are), they should just let their best offensive lineman walk because he's too expensive.

Sorry folks, that is his market value. Every position has a market value. It may seem silly or not feel right to pay a guard that much, but get used to it if you want an elite one.

Maybe in the future that price point comes down a bit like it did for RBs, but I'm not holding my breath.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

I love how we always hear the mantra "we have to keep/pay our own", but now that this team is close to being a true contender (and they are), they should just let their best offensive lineman walk because he's too expensive.



Sorry folks, that is his market value. Every position has a market value. It may seem silly or not feel right to pay a guard that much, but get used to it if you want an elite one.



Maybe in the future that price point comes down a bit like it did for RBs, but I'm not holding my breath.

I agree with you with a slight divergence. I do think we overpaid a bit. Any time you use the second tag you are overpaying the market. But the concept of keeping our own elite player outweighs the small percentage of cap that we overpaid by.

We could, of course, cut our own guy and overpay another guy that someone else let walk - remember Adam Archuleta?



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I agree with you with a slight divergence. I do think we overpaid a bit. Any time you use the second tag you are overpaying the market. But the concept of keeping our own elite player outweighs the small percentage of cap that we overpaid by.

We could, of course, cut our own guy and overpay another guy that someone else let walk - remember Adam Archuleta?



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Depends on how you look at it.

The Chiefs gave Joe Thuney ~$32M guaranteed when he signed, with a potential out after 2023. His cap number is $17.8M in 2022, $18.9M in 2023, and $19.4M in 2024-2025.

WFT paid Brandon Scherff $33M over the last two years, and owe him nothing more, unless he signs long term.

Once Thuney signed his deal, the market for an elite guard became at least $18M/yr.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

Depends on how you look at it.



The Chiefs gave Joe Thuney ~$32M guaranteed when he signed, with a potential out after 2023. His cap number is $17.8M in 2022, $18.9M in 2023, and $19.4M in 2024-2025.



WFT paid Brandon Scherff $33M over the last two years, and owe him nothing more, unless he signs long term.



Once Thuney signed his deal, the market for an elite guard became at least $18M/yr.

Good point.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I agree with you with a slight divergence. I do think we overpaid a bit. Any time you use the second tag you are overpaying the market. But the concept of keeping our own elite player outweighs the small percentage of cap that we overpaid by.

We could, of course, cut our own guy and overpay another guy that someone else let walk - remember Adam Archuleta?



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

I guess I look at it as you are only overpaying if it hinders your ability to sign other talent. We have plenty of space so the tag didn't really cost us this year. If a long term deal gets done that could be a different story though because as you said that second tag will drive up the price a bit.

[sdskinsfan2001]

I don't look at the franchise tag as keeping our own. It's more like hiring a mercenary. He clearly won't be re-signed here. We could have used that money to sign a guard that wouldn't be as good AND fill one or 2 other holes on the roster. So we might drop a bit at G, but improve more than enough elsewhere to make up the difference then sum. Or not sigh a G and sign guys at different positions, then draft 1. But the same thing would still apply.