Week 9 of the Arizona Cardinals off season. 3/04/24-3/10/24

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,051
Reaction score
31,527
Location
Orange County, CA
Danielle Hunter had it in his contract that he couldn't be tagged this offseason. So he is available and I would throw $24M ish per year at him. Plus he played for JG when JG was coaching in Minn. so there is familiarity there.

On NFL.com he is listed as the #4 FA available now that the Franchise tags have been assigned:


I'm not sure why you don't consider him a proven pass rusher (27 sacks over the last two seasons)? Or why you wouldn't spend big money on him?

In my offseason plan I had the Cardinals signing him to a three year contract similar to this so his cap hit this season is very manageable:

Contract Projection: Three years, $72 million ($24 million per year), $36 million total guaranteed
Year SAL CAPHIT
2024 $1.5M $10.5M
2025 $16M $25M
2026 $18.5M $27.5M
2027 Void $9M
The more I think about it, the more I think Hunter should be the target.

There are a decent number of solid DTs in this FA class. Same with the draft.
 

Shane

Current STAR
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
66,247
Reaction score
32,482
Location
Las Vegas
This is why Budda didn't push to put himself to also be released this off season.

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Honestly that shouldn’t matter if he’s as good as many on THIS site claim he is. Should be able to go out and get paid no matter what. For his “leadership” and being a “tackling machine.” And of course being the “best S in the NFL” :)
 

Mulli

...
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Posts
52,412
Reaction score
4,355
Location
Generational
Honestly that shouldn’t matter if he’s as good as many on THIS site claim he is. Should be able to go out and get paid no matter what. For his “leadership” and being a “tackling machine.” And of course being the “best S in the NFL” :)
:koolaid:
 

daves

Keepin' it real!
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2003
Posts
3,350
Reaction score
6,519
Location
Orange County, CA
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Last year perhaps Baker had leverage over the Cardinals - if they cut him on the heels of a horrible season and an offseason that hadn't moved the needle in a positive way, it diminish optimism for the future.

But this season, given the glutted market for safeties, Baker's failure to be a difference maker in 2023, and the shift of emphasis on safeties around the league, the Cardinals have leverage. If they cut Baker now, there are a lot of other good safeties who could be had for less.

If they want to keep him since he's one of the few "faces of the franchise", and assuming that forcing him to take a pay cut a year after giving him a raise would set a sour tone entering free agency, perhaps they could "commit to him" by extending him at a much lower rate, to spread his salary cap hit over more years and lower his average. :shrug:
 

Proximo

ASFN Icon
Joined
Mar 8, 2015
Posts
12,088
Reaction score
9,804
Sounds like Chicago is likely to trade the number 1 pick and quite possibly pick MHJ ahead of us due to lack of interest in Fields.
 

daves

Keepin' it real!
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2003
Posts
3,350
Reaction score
6,519
Location
Orange County, CA
Sounds like Chicago is likely to trade the number 1 pick and quite possibly pick MHJ ahead of us due to lack of interest in Fields.
I'm sure they're hoping to maximize their return on Fields... but I doubt that whether the difference between getting a 2nd rounder for him or a 5th rounder factors AT ALL into their decision to move on and take a QB at the top of the draft.
 

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
16,544
Reaction score
13,011
Location
Modesto, California
I'm sure they're hoping to maximize their return on Fields... but I doubt that whether the difference between getting a 2nd rounder for him or a 5th rounder factors AT ALL into their decision to move on and take a QB at the top of the draft.
Agree. The price is high right now. It will drop quite a bit by draft weekend.
A third and a fifth seems fair. Bears just won't swallow it right now
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,051
Reaction score
31,527
Location
Orange County, CA
Last year perhaps Baker had leverage over the Cardinals - if they cut him on the heels of a horrible season and an offseason that hadn't moved the needle in a positive way, it diminish optimism for the future.

But this season, given the glutted market for safeties, Baker's failure to be a difference maker in 2023, and the shift of emphasis on safeties around the league, the Cardinals have leverage. If they cut Baker now, there are a lot of other good safeties who could be had for less.

If they want to keep him since he's one of the few "faces of the franchise", and assuming that forcing him to take a pay cut a year after giving him a raise would set a sour tone entering free agency, perhaps they could "commit to him" by extending him at a much lower rate, to spread his salary cap hit over more years and lower his average. :shrug:
Or take Baker's money and give it to Xavier McKinney who makes more splash plays.
 

Proximo

ASFN Icon
Joined
Mar 8, 2015
Posts
12,088
Reaction score
9,804
I'm sure they're hoping to maximize their return on Fields... but I doubt that whether the difference between getting a 2nd rounder for him or a 5th rounder factors AT ALL into their decision to move on and take a QB at the top of the draft.
It's all a matter of how they value players, supposedly they are being offered a kings ransom for the first pick already. If they feel Fields is good enough to win, they may very well think the trade is a good idea.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,658
Reaction score
61,409
Sounds like Chicago is likely to trade the number 1 pick and quite possibly pick MHJ ahead of us due to lack of interest in Fields.

yeah, the bears realized that Fields has little to no value, so they're going to keep the QB they don't want and the league doesn't value that much instead of taking the best QB in the draft.

that makes no sense, dude.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,658
Reaction score
61,409
It's all a matter of how they value players, supposedly they are being offered a kings ransom for the first pick already. If they feel Fields is good enough to win, they may very well think the trade is a good idea.
if they thought Fields was good enough to win, they wouldn't have put him on the market in the first place and would have made it clear that top bidder gets the first pick.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
45,811
Reaction score
11,109
if they thought Fields was good enough to win, they wouldn't have put him on the market in the first place and would have made it clear that top bidder gets the first pick.
I only partially agree here. I think the right move was putting him on the market, no matter what once they had the #1 pick. Maybe they didn't know what the price was and could get more than expected.

Besides, they traded #1 last year and it turned out to be an amazing decision. They can keep it if they want and get a QB much better than last year's class.
 

Proximo

ASFN Icon
Joined
Mar 8, 2015
Posts
12,088
Reaction score
9,804
if they thought Fields was good enough to win, they wouldn't have put him on the market in the first place and would have made it clear that top bidder gets the first pick.
Bull. If they think the rookie is possibly better they will take him - not to mention the financial benefits of a rookie contract. That does not mean they think Fields sucks, because he obviously doesn't.

I really don't like this black and white thinking.

Fields has a certain value, Caleb Williams has a certain value, and the picks they get for trading the number 1 pick has a value.

If Fields + the picks > Caleb to the Bears they will make the deal.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,051
Reaction score
31,527
Location
Orange County, CA
It's all a matter of how they value players, supposedly they are being offered a kings ransom for the first pick already. If they feel Fields is good enough to win, they may very well think the trade is a good idea.
Good enough to win isn't the bar you set at QB. We're not talking about a starting LG here.

The Bears absolutely see what we have seen with Justin Fields, and also see what the rest of us see with Caleb Williams. Fields' ceiling looks to be "adequate" passing QB, while Williams' ceiling looks to be top five at his position.

Fields is a sunk cost at this point, and a sunk cost that Ryan Poles wasn't responsible for. He has a great shot to have a good young QB on a cheap salary, or he could pay Fields and have an adequate QB on a fairly expensive contract.

Rich Eisen did a segment on combine rumors that the worst kept secret is that the Bears are drafting Caleb Williams and moving on from Fields. Any notion to the contrary is posturing; the Bears have to make it look like they aren't chomping at the bit to get rid of one of the worst passing QBs in the NFL.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
60,552
Reaction score
52,450
Location
SoCal
I only partially agree here. I think the right move was putting him on the market, no matter what once they had the #1 pick. Maybe they didn't know what the price was and could get more than expected.

Besides, they traded #1 last year and it turned out to be an amazing decision. They can keep it if they want and get a QB much better than last year's class.
Better than stroud? That’s a high bar for the mama’s boy.
 

RON_IN_OC

https://www.ronevansrealty.com
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Posts
25,773
Reaction score
32,539
Location
BirdGangThing
I was today years old when I figured out Monti is the GM of 2 AZ teams.

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
45,811
Reaction score
11,109
Better than stroud? That’s a high bar for the mama’s boy.
I meant as a prospect coming out before game play they ever snapped in the NFL.

I think that Caleb can become a better QB than Stroud, but I think Stroud is already top 7-8QB in the league so that would be hard to beat rigth away.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
537,472
Posts
5,270,894
Members
6,276
Latest member
ConpiracyCard
Top