quote:

---

quote:

---

Carr counts $12.7 million against the cap. If cut, the cap hit drops to $8 million.

The Brandon Carr Conundrum

---

So if $8M is gone anyway then a round about case can be made that it's actually a $4.7M cap hit.

I don't think he's as bad as a lot of people think, Did the Cowboys overpay? Yes but at the time most people saw it as a solid signing. Considering the team's injury luck I think you gota hold on to him another year.

---

That's not how I read it. It sounds like the $4.7 is simply the difference. He's a sizable hit anyway. It just frees up that $4.7 mil to be spent in free agency. That may have been what you were trying to say.

quote:

---

But you're also signed up to prolong the negative cap impact into 2017.

---

ahhh....true. didn't think of that. i'm unable to open that article for some reason. how much is the hit for 2017?

I think around $3MM. Not huge by any means, but still big enough to consider as a factor in the decision.

I'm also not sure that article's #'s are correct. I think his cap hit in 2016 if you keep him is about $13.8, while the cap hit for a release is $7.4. So it's more like a $6MM decision in 2016 vs. $4-5MM, along with the lingering $3MM in 2017.

quote:

---

quote:

---

But you're also signed up to prolong the negative cap impact into 2017.

---

ahhh....true. didn't think of that. i'm unable to open that article for some reason. how much is the hit for 2017?

---

Actually, that article I posted seems to be from 2015, so it's not really applicable. Therefore, ignore that math.

Sorry for the bad article, guys.

Ok, found the good math. Carr currently counts $13.8 mil against the cap. Dallas can create $6.8 if they cut him before June 1.

quote:

---

Ok, found the good math. Carr currently counts $13.8 mil against the cap. Dallas can create $6.8 if they cut him before June 1.

---

In that case, it really is something to think about either way. Problem is Scandrick is coming back from a major knee injury so that really complicates matter further.

quote:

---

Ok, found the good math. Carr currently counts $13.8 mil against the cap. Dallas can create $6.8 if they cut him before June 1.

---

Not defending Carr... But if we save 6.8 mil by cutting him, can we find a better CB to sign for 6.8 mil or less? Seems like decent free agent corner guards demand more than that.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Ok, found the good math. Carr currently counts $13.8 mil against the cap. Dallas can create $6.8 if they cut him before June 1.

---

Not defending Carr... But if we save 6.8 mil by cutting him, can we find a better CB to sign for 6.8 mil or less? Seems like decent free agent corner guards demand more than that.

---

That was the big deal last season as well (and that was before the Scandrick injury). Dallas is likely looking at at a Carr, Jones, Scandrick trio, which is by no means bad. What happens is Scandrick is coming off of a knee injury and who knows how well that will go. Carr isn't bad by any means, but he's not worth what they're paying him. On the FA list, there are guys like:

Antonio Cromartie (~$8 mil)
Cortland Finnegan ($745k)
Adam Jones ($1.6 mil)
Sterling Moore ($645k)


Those are just a few of the names. Cromartie is obviously a big fish that Dallas wouldn't want to pay. They have already been linked to Adam Jones, who at 33 is on the downswing and is average at best. At this point in their careers, Finnegan and Moore are nickel corners under the best of circumstances.

Corners in PFF's top 75 FA list:

Sean Smith
Casey Hayward
PacMan
Janoris Jenkins
Prince Amukamara
Patrick Robinson
Leon Hall
Brandon Boykin
Jeremy Lane


Several of those guys are slot only so you'd be pushing OScan to the outside full time. And I really think they'd prefer to move Jones to safety because the Church/Wilcox combo is average on their best day.

quote:

---

Corners in PFF's top 75 FA list:

Sean Smith
Casey Hayward
PacMan
Janoris Jenkins
Prince Amukamara
Patrick Robinson
Leon Hall
Brandon Boykin
Jeremy Lane


Several of those guys are slot only so you'd be pushing OScan to the outside full time. And I really think they'd prefer to move Jones to safety because the Church/Wilcox combo is average on their best day.

---

Yeah, I was just tossing some names out there with salary comparison.

Bet Claiborne would be pretty cheap.

quote:

---

Corners in PFF's top 75 FA list:

Sean Smith
Casey Hayward
PacMan
Janoris Jenkins
Prince Amukamara
Patrick Robinson
Leon Hall
Brandon Boykin
Jeremy Lane


Several of those guys are slot only so you'd be pushing OScan to the outside full time. And I really think they'd prefer to move Jones to safety because the Church/Wilcox combo is average on their best day.

---

You're being mighty generous on Church Wilcox being average at best. I think they are subpar at best and usually bad.

I will not pretend to act like Ive seen every Packer game so I could be wrong but Hayward last year seemed to be pretty solid up there.

I agree. One of those guys though who is best in the slot.

Wilcox is poor. Church is a rather good run defender and slightly below average against the pass. Church does his best work inside the box.

That's what she said...

Broaddus said his pick at #4 would be Elliott.

quote:

---

That's what she said...

Broaddus said his pick at #4 would be Elliott.

---

Saw Jean-Jacques say the same thing. Broaddus is good at what he does, but JJ knows less than the average bear.

The argument tends to be that if you're in "win now" mode, you need the player who best helps that. A case can be made that Elliott is the best option for that. The question then becomes do you really want to spend a top five pick on a guy who will, statistically, be done by the age of 30? There's a better than average chance that he will only have 6-8 years of good production, whereas the lifespan of a good quarterback or DE tends to be 10-15.

It's also an issue that Elliott is an extraordinary reach at #4, far more so than a quarterback or defensive tackle would be at that spot. The more stable option at that spot would be to take a defensive option.

Id rather have a QB at #4 than a RB

If you're absolutely hell bent on Elliot then see what you can get for a 3-4 spot trade down. Yes theres obviously risk there of him being taken but theres still good value. I actually really really like the 10-30 projections Im seeing now. Some great players will potentially be available. Just hesitant on using a 4 on him.

quote:

---

Wilcox is poor. Church is a rather good run defender and slightly below average against the pass. Church does his best work inside the box.

---

I agree. I think Church is a decent SS if you have a quality FS. The problem is that Wilcox can't cover any ground and takes some of the poorest angles I've ever seen.

Arian Foster was just released by Houston. He had six years of good production, but injuries and time caught him at the tender age of 29.

If I remember correctly, Sturm did a segment a while back saying that rubbings begin a downward slope around 29 years old on average.

quote:

---

If you're absolutely hell bent on Elliot then see what you can get for a 3-4 spot trade down. Yes theres obviously risk there of him being taken but theres still good value. I actually really really like the 10-30 projections Im seeing now. Some great players will potentially be available. Just hesitant on using a 4 on him.

---

I'm in the camp that I think Elliot is going to be a superstar. Having said that, I also agree that if the QB is there that you think is the guy for the next decade +, you have to take the QB.

I'd like to see them go get a DB in FA; either a FS like maybe Nelson, or a CB. Then they can address DB possibly in the 3rd.

I love to see something like this play out:

#4 - Goff
#34 - Vernon Butler - DT
#67 - Dixon - RB

quote:

---

quote:

---

Wilcox is poor. Church is a rather good run defender and slightly below average against the pass. Church does his best work inside the box.

---

I agree. I think Church is a decent SS if you have a quality FS. The problem is that Wilcox can't cover any ground and takes some of the poorest angles I've ever seen.

---

Wilcox was always a small school project. I don't even think safety was his natural position, although I could be wrong on that.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If you're absolutely hell bent on Elliot then see what you can get for a 3-4 spot trade down. Yes theres obviously risk there of him being taken but theres still good value. I actually really really like the 10-30 projections Im seeing now. Some great players will potentially be available. Just hesitant on using a 4 on him.

---

I'm in the camp that I think Elliot is going to be a superstar. Having said that, I also agree that if the QB is there that you think is the guy for the next decade +, you have to take the QB.

I'd like to see them go get a DB in FA; either a FS like maybe Nelson, or a CB. Then they can address DB possibly in the 3rd.

I love to see something like this play out:

#4 - Goff
#34 - Vernon Butler - DT
#67 - Dixon - RB

---

Gil Brandt saying that Jerry told him they are not taking a QB. Of course this could be smoke,but Brandt obviously has historical ties to the organization and often has scoop when it pertains to the team.

Think the Cowboys have been putting out smoke screens... They are setting up the trade down game.

Wilcox was a RB in college & they moved him to S his last year.

quote:

---

Think the Cowboys have been putting out smoke screens... They are setting up the trade down game.

Wilcox was a RB in college & they moved him to S his last year.

---

If they want to trade down, then they'd want to put up different smoke screens than they are currently. The smoke they're putting out seems to indicate that they're trying to keep anyone from jumping them; however it wouldn't be the first time that they've gone against general protocol.

If you want to trade down, you'd be full court pressing teams and broadcasting intentions, like SD is doing. If you have a guy in mind and you don't want someone to jump to #3, then you have to convince them that you're not interested in what they want. That's the way I'd do it, but I'm not Jerry.

I don't think we'll see any trades in the top 5. The QBs aren't high profile enough, and there isn't a DE that people are just drooling over to give up what these teams want to get into the top 5.

You heard QB early, Bosa, Ramsey, Jack.... Now they scream we aren't taking a QB.

You don't want a team to think they would have to jump you to get a player... If you want to trade down. Plus the guys mentioned are guys that have some question marks about being a top 5 pick. Don't think anyone will be trading up for the above guys.

Anyone see Karl Joseph? He's reminds me of Earl Thomas. The guy plays center field, can cover, can hit... hard!
If his knee tests OK I think he'd be worth a 2nd.

quote:

---

You heard QB early, Bosa, Ramsey, Jack.... Now they scream we aren't taking a QB.

You don't want a team to think they would have to jump you to get a player... If you want to trade down. Plus the guys mentioned are guys that have some question marks about being a top 5 pick. Don't think anyone will be trading up for the above guys.

---

I'm confused by what you are trying to say. If you are looking to trade down, then you do want teams thinking they have to jump you to get a player. Otherwise, if they don't think you will be picking their guy, they will just trade with the team picking after you.

Norm just had some theoretical talk.

- Jeff Bowers is reporting that Dallas is unwilling to meet Lamar Miller's $5-6 million/year demands, which Norm finds shocking. He believes you have an ability to shore up a major need with this signing in a way that opens the draft up for you to take more defensive players. Miller is apparently surprised by this as he wanted to come back to Dallas. He's now looking at trying to return to Miami.

- General wisdom says that there are only two backs worth taking in the first thirty-five picks (Henry, Elliott). If for some reason Henry isn't there when Dallas picks at #35, then Dallas could run into the same problems that they had last year when trying to draft a runner in that it kind of becomes a crapshoot to grab guys and you may not wind up with one. If Dallas is confident in not signing Miller, then they are really crossing their fingers and hoping that Henry is available in the 2nd or confident that someone will be available in 3 or 4.

- Signing a known quantity in Miller is far more comforting than drafting an unknown quantity out of college.

- If you sign Miller, you can then go draft defense and quarterback in whatever way you choose without having to worry about a runner.

- Thinks Dallas should pursue Casey Heyward from Green Bay. A Heyward, Church, Jones, Scandrick defensive backfield would be quite formidable and allow Church to do what he excels at, which is play inside the box and focus on stopping the run. If you draft Ramsey at #4, then all of sudden you have turned the defensive backfield into a position of strength commensurate to the Oline in one draft. .

That's all very interesting. I like the Hayward talk.

The Miller thing also makes it pretty clear that Stephen is running the $ and is not going to spend like JJ did in the past. I like that he first report is that Dallas did not 'meet his demands'.

I'm fine with not taking Miller if that money is instead being used to get a defense. McFadden + Dunbar + mid round pick OR Elliot is just fine with me.

I mentioned Hayward earlier in the thread and in the limited times I've seen him play he seems to always be around the ball and make some plays. Not elite by any means, but better than Claiborne and more trustworthy

It seems like with the growth in the cap limit this year more teams have spendable money in ***ency. I have a feeling we're going to see some crazy money thrown around the first few days and higher than expected per year amounts than expected in general. I can see Stephen totally just signing a couple of non elite type FAs and then looking to the draft for the rest of the needs to be filled.

quote:

---

quote:

---

You heard QB early, Bosa, Ramsey, Jack.... Now they scream we aren't taking a QB.

You don't want a team to think they would have to jump you to get a player... If you want to trade down. Plus the guys mentioned are guys that have some question marks about being a top 5 pick. Don't think anyone will be trading up for the above guys.

---

I'm confused by what you are trying to say. If you are looking to trade down, then you do want teams thinking they have to jump you to get a player. Otherwise, if they don't think you will be picking their guy, they will just trade with the team picking after you.

---

If a team wants a player they usually try to make a deal with the team in front of them that might not have that same player targeted.

#10 is the kid that ran the 4.19