Re: WFT Free Agency
 

Sims was garbage as a returner, his spot on the team is on very thin ice

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

[quote=mtk;1280701]sims was garbage as a returner, his spot on the team is on very thin ice[/quote]

✂️✂️✂️

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

[quote=Chief X_Phackter;1280370]Terry McLaurin isn't a #1 WR because of his size? Does that mean that Tyreek Hill isn't a #1 receiver too? Stefon Diggs, Amari Cooper, Justin Jefferson... They are all about the same size.

2000+ yards receiving and 11 TDs in two years without a clear #2, and six different starting QBs.

There's no question that TM is a #1 receiver.[/quote]

I'm building an ideal roster, and of course the real world is never ideal, I want the #1 WR I eventually pay almost $20M a year once his rookie contract expires to have it all: speed, quickness, size, route running, etc. I'm not hating on McL, but 1,000 yards a season in a 16 game season isn't mind blowing. He has been very solid, but not sure I would call him elite or a true #1 WR yet. Thus I put it at 1.5. He has been our most consistently productive offensive player since drafted, you have to resign him, but I can think of at least 20 WRs just as productive many who aren't #1s.

He's about 6 ft and runs a 4.3 40, would you trade him for a guy 6'4" runs a 4.5? Probably not, so perhaps you are right, and I'd say a #1.25WR. Interesting discussion anyway, the size vs. speed thing. In theory, speedsters rarer, and you want to take top off D. For years I've watched guys like Hill destroy Ds and wished we had such a player, and now we do.

Tyreek Hill only true smurf you listed. I don't love Diggs or Cooper. It is an interesting discussion, especially starting 2 or 3 small speed guys at WR, which we seem destined to try. I mean in theory you should just be able to torch people deep all day long, but this isn't the Raiders or Chargers Os of old, even in a pass happy league. it seems like the Os you see actually getting it done when it counts have some big WRs that can beat off the big zone corners and make the tough contested catches over middle or in end zone. The absence of size limits you, just like the absence of speed. There will also be some outliers, and we could argue how much you trade size for speed, but yeah, while there are outliers, a lack of size does prevent a great many WRs from being #1s.

What I think we all hope is that the O becomes consistently productive, especially in the 1st quarter. With more WRs, less balls for McL, but also increased aggregate O production, so you'd expect his production to increase, but perhaps not simplistically linearly. Whether he is a #1.25 or #1, I'm glad he is on our team, but I still think we have to have a big WR who can get it done at some point. It is really interesting to ask if you can put Samuels, Humphries, McL out at WR and go deep lots and lots and lots. One thing certain, if you do, you'd better be able to protect your QB on deep drop backs to give WRs time to get open deep. Perhaps a good argument for going LT early in draft.

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;1280380]so a 6'0" 210lb WR lacks size? Ok. I have heard it all now.[/quote]

Relative to what? You could argue he isn't small, but few people would call a 6 foot receiver big. These posts are hilarious.

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

Rivera said in the presser [URL="https://twitter.com/john_keim/status/1377647100897427458"]the team has had no contact with Scherff regarding a long term solution[/URL] ... If he's gone next year, tagging him really was a poor move cap wise.

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

[quote=Scalper;1280713]I'm building an ideal roster, and of course the real world is never ideal, I want the #1 WR I eventually pay almost $20M a year once his rookie contract expires to have it all: speed, quickness, size, route running, etc. I'm not [B]hating on McL, but 1,000 yards a season in a 16 game season isn't mind blowing[/B]. He has been very solid, but not sure I would call him elite or a true #1 WR yet. Thus I put it at 1.5. He has been our most consistently productive offensive player since drafted, you have to resign him, but I can think of at least 20 WRs just as productive many who aren't #1s.

He's about 6 ft and runs a 4.3 40, would you trade him for a guy 6'4" runs a 4.5? Probably not, so perhaps you are right, and I'd say a #1.25WR. Interesting discussion anyway, the size vs. speed thing. In theory, speedsters rarer, and you want to take top off D. For years I've watched guys like Hill destroy Ds and wished we had such a player, and now we do.

Tyreek Hill only true smurf you listed. I don't love Diggs or Cooper. It is an interesting discussion, especially starting 2 or 3 small speed guys at WR, which we seem destined to try. I mean in theory you should just be able to torch people deep all day long, but this isn't the Raiders or Chargers Os of old, even in a pass happy league. it seems like the Os you see actually getting it done when it counts have some big WRs that can beat off the big zone corners and make the tough contested catches over middle or in end zone. The absence of size limits you, just like the absence of speed. There will also be some outliers, and we could argue how much you trade size for speed, but yeah, while there are outliers, a lack of size does prevent a great many WRs from being #1s.

What I think we all hope is that the O becomes consistently productive, especially in the 1st quarter. With more WRs, less balls for McL, but also increased aggregate O production, so you'd expect his production to increase, but perhaps not simplistically linearly. Whether he is a #1.25 or #1, I'm glad he is on our team, but I still think we have to have a big WR who can get it done at some point. It is really interesting to ask if you can put Samuels, Humphries, McL out at WR and go deep lots and lots and lots. One thing certain, if you do, you'd better be able to protect your QB on deep drop backs to give WRs time to get open deep. Perhaps a good argument for going LT early in draft.[/quote]

Actually if you consider who was throwing the ball to him it was practically a HOF season

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

Washington Football Team
Multiple execs think Washington is on track to win the NFC East again after what appeared to be a solid free agency from a personnel standpoint. A year or two ago, who would have thought that possible for a team that targeted Ryan Fitzpatrick as its starting quarterback?

“Fitz gives them a legitimate chance,” an evaluator said. “He is a legitimate starter who will do on offense what the defensive end (Chase Young) does for them on defense from a leadership standpoint. That’s just the type of impact he has on a team when he’s the guy. They are getting someone who comes in and yells in your face and gets everyone amped. When have they had that guy?”

Alex Smith, Kirk Cousins and Robert Griffin III were not that guy from a temperament standpoint. Few quarterbacks are, and probably for good reason. But for a Washington team that is strongest on defense, Fitzpatrick could be an offensive leader to rally around, provided he does not revert to past turnover-prone ways.

“Curtis Samuel at $11.5 million is a good value for a solid second receiver, gadget guy,” an exec said. “Pairing him with his old college teammate (Terry McLaurin) gives them a formidable receiving corps. They have a lot more weapons than Fitzpatrick had in Miami. On defense, William Jackson is slightly better than Ronald Darby at corner, but also more expensive. We will see if they can get a quarterback for the future, but they are better and they are going to be a problem in the NFC East.”

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;1280750]Washington Football Team
Multiple execs think Washington is on track to win the NFC East again after what appeared to be a solid free agency from a personnel standpoint. A year or two ago, who would have thought that possible for a team that targeted Ryan Fitzpatrick as its starting quarterback?

“Fitz gives them a legitimate chance,” an evaluator said. “He is a legitimate starter who will do on offense what the defensive end (Chase Young) does for them on defense from a leadership standpoint. That’s just the type of impact he has on a team when he’s the guy. They are getting someone who comes in and yells in your face and gets everyone amped. When have they had that guy?”

Alex Smith, Kirk Cousins and Robert Griffin III were not that guy from a temperament standpoint. Few quarterbacks are, and probably for good reason. But for a Washington team that is strongest on defense, Fitzpatrick could be an offensive leader to rally around, provided he does not revert to past turnover-prone ways.

“Curtis Samuel at $11.5 million is a good value for a solid second receiver, gadget guy,” an exec said. “Pairing him with his old college teammate (Terry McLaurin) gives them a formidable receiving corps. They have a lot more weapons than Fitzpatrick had in Miami. On defense, William Jackson is slightly better than Ronald Darby at corner, but also more expensive. We will see if they can get a quarterback for the future, but they are better and they are going to be a problem in the NFC East.”[/quote]

So amped for this season, I think the last time I was this excited for a season was RGIII's rookie year.

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

Scalper your take lacks consideration of the context within which McLaurin plays. The QB play he’s gotten the last two season has been bottom five in the NFL by any measure, advanced or otherwise. And he has done it with very little help around him with respect to other skill position players drawing the attention of the defense.

When we got Fitz, Chad Johnson and Mike Tannenbaum both commented on how this puts Terry on a rocket trajectory to the top. He gets open better than almost any WR out there, that’s what separates him as a true number one. Jerry Rice, Steve Largent, these weren’t the biggest receivers either, but they’re in the HOF because they got open better than anybody.

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

Per Hogsheaven, Keim on his podcast said that WFT offered Scherff a contract that would have made him a highest paid guard and Scherff turned it down. While it's possible Scherff wants to stay with the team but wanted a higher amount of guaranteed money, but at this point I think I would try to see if anyone would trade for him.

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

[quote=GridIron26;1280828]Per Hogsheaven, Keim on his podcast said that WFT offered Scherff a contract that would have made him a highest paid guard and Scherff turned it down. While it's possible Scherff wants to stay with the team but wanted a higher amount of guaranteed money, but at this point I think I would try to see if anyone would trade for him.[/quote]

Boom outta here. Pull the tag off him or trade him now

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

He signed the tag. Don't think it can be rescinded now.

If that's the case, no one is going to trade for him. He'll play for the $18M and cash in somewhere else next year. The KC model.

At least we have a really good RG for one more year.

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

[quote=GridIron26;1280828]Per Hogsheaven, Keim on his podcast said that WFT offered Scherff a contract that would have made him a highest paid guard and Scherff turned it down. While it's possible Scherff wants to stay with the team but wanted a higher amount of guaranteed money, but at this point I think I would try to see if anyone would trade for him.[/quote]

If that offer was made before the tag... I really don't get tagging him... Unless it's a clear attempt at trading him to get some sort of value back.
Tagging him if you know your chances of signing him long term makes very little sense IMO.

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

There is no excuse to turn down highest paid guard in the league. Eff him

Re: WFT Free Agency
 

[QUOTE=Chief X_Phackter;1280838]He signed the tag. Don't think it can be rescinded now.

If that's the case, no one is going to trade for him. He'll play for the $18M and cash in somewhere else next year. The KC model.

At least we have a really good RG for one more year.[/QUOTE]


And he will have every incentive to play really, really well this season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk