Jacksonville Jaguar Arik Armstead-DT Thread

DL thinks we'll take a lower cap hit than the $14.3M this year on a LT deal with Buckner. I thinks he's going to require a $17.1M APY deal but it does give them extra freedom to spread it out...push down the line in order to secure AA. That said, realistically, I don't know how much lower they can drop Buckner's cap this year.

Originally posted by NCommand:
DL thinks we'll take a lower cap hit than the $14.3M this year on a LT deal with Buckner. I thinks he's going to require a $17.1M APY deal but it does give them extra freedom to spread it out...push down the line in order to secure AA. That said, realistically, I don't know how much lower they can drop Buckner's cap this year.

Basically. One-year options push everything into the season at hand. A long-term deal will spread things out. By executing it the 49ers will have some creativity to shuffle money around that they currently don't have https://t.co/cZrWtViT4G

— David Lombardi (@LombardiHimself) February 27, 2020

1) I don't believe Lynch regarding restructures. He's being semantically correct. They will be extensions and cuts.
2) Buckner, Kittle, Armstead can all easily be done with a few targeted extensions and cuts.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Haha. I don't mind. Every team loses at least one player to FA every year. Playoff teams lose even more d/t players being overvalued. It's just the landscape of the NFL in a salary cap era. That said, the cap is still a myth. It's a speed bump IMHO. It'll slow you down but it isn't going to do any real damage unless you drive over it at 100mph.

Same here. This FO could still, even at only $12M make this work, but it's probably not worth going to that extreme in the long term and hit that speed bump at 50mph with the baby in the backseat.

To me losing a 26 year old guy coming into his prime (you can throw losing sanders, maybe Ward in here as well) isn't really a speed bump. That coupled with a lot of what you are hearing now from the FO regarding contracts, no restructures, and how it all pertains to the future says the salary cap is a very real thing.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Haha. I don't mind. Every team loses at least one player to FA every year. Playoff teams lose even more d/t players being overvalued. It's just the landscape of the NFL in a salary cap era. That said, the cap is still a myth. It's a speed bump IMHO. It'll slow you down but it isn't going to do any real damage unless you drive over it at 100mph.

Same here. This FO could still, even at only $12M make this work, but it's probably not worth going to that extreme in the long term and hit that speed bump at 50mph with the baby in the backseat.

To me losing a 26 year old guy coming into his prime (you can throw losing sanders, maybe Ward in here as well) isn't really a speed bump. That coupled with a lot of what you are hearing now from the FO regarding contracts, no restructures, and how it all pertains to the future says the salary cap is a very real thing.

It still can be done though. That's my original point. Every single team will lose somebody they don't want too for a variety of reasons. Here's more on it.

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by NCommand:

DL thinks we'll take a lower cap hit than the $14.3M this year on a LT deal with Buckner. I thinks he's going to require a $17.1M APY deal but it does give them extra freedom to spread it out...push down the line in order to secure AA. That said, realistically, I don't know how much lower they can drop Buckner's cap this year.

Basically. One-year options push everything into the season at hand. A long-term deal will spread things out. By executing it the 49ers will have some creativity to shuffle money around that they currently don't have https://t.co/cZrWtViT4G

— David Lombardi (@LombardiHimself) February 27, 2020

1) I don't believe Lynch regarding restructures. He's being semantically correct. They will be extensions and cuts.
2) Buckner, Kittle, Armstead can all easily be done with a few targeted extensions and cuts.

Agree, Buck, Kittle and AA aren''t going anywhere.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Haha. I don't mind. Every team loses at least one player to FA every year. Playoff teams lose even more d/t players being overvalued. It's just the landscape of the NFL in a salary cap era. That said, the cap is still a myth. It's a speed bump IMHO. It'll slow you down but it isn't going to do any real damage unless you drive over it at 100mph.

Same here. This FO could still, even at only $12M make this work, but it's probably not worth going to that extreme in the long term and hit that speed bump at 50mph with the baby in the backseat.

To me losing a 26 year old guy coming into his prime (you can throw losing sanders, maybe Ward in here as well) isn't really a speed bump. That coupled with a lot of what you are hearing now from the FO regarding contracts, no restructures, and how it all pertains to the future says the salary cap is a very real thing.

It still can be done though. That's my original point. Every single team will lose somebody they don't want too for a variety of reasons. Here's more on it.

(MINI THREAD STARTS HERE) Been doing some research into the Armstead tag & trade theories. Per OTC, the DE franchise tag value could be $19.3 million. That's what AA will likely be tagged at - played about 60% of his snaps at DE in 2019 (1/?)

— Scott Geelan (@Scott_Geelan) February 26, 2020

Yeah, agree various things go into it, but if they lose a guy like AA, that is a direct result of the salary cap, and nothing else.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Yeah, agree various things go into it, but if they lose a guy like AA, that is a direct result of the salary cap, and nothing else.

No, it's a direct result of this FO and their priorities and them weighing what "they" think the key factors are now and going forward (long term effects).

But to your point, now that we're at the cap, these kinds of decisions will be real every year going forward.

Like ED says, the cap is nothing more than a built-in excuse not to have to pay a guy. LOL.

Your team will always lose 1 or 2 key players to free agency every year whether there's a cap or not. So does it really exist? If a tree falls in the forest...

Haha

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Yeah, agree various things go into it, but if they lose a guy like AA, that is a direct result of the salary cap, and nothing else.

No, it's a direct result of this FO and their priorities and them weighing what "they" think the key factors are now and going forward (long term effects).

But to your point, now that we're at the cap, these kinds of decisions will be real every year going forward.

You don't think a 26 year old multi faceted sack leader who played a HUGE role in how they play their D and coming into his prime would be their priority?
And what do you think those long term effects are that they are factoring in? It is directly tied to financial flexibility and not mortgaging the future.
I thought for sure he'd be back with the cap going up, now I'm 50/50. We shall see. But clearly the salary cap is dictating their thought process right now. They are outright saying it.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Yeah, agree various things go into it, but if they lose a guy like AA, that is a direct result of the salary cap, and nothing else.

No, it's a direct result of this FO and their priorities and them weighing what "they" think the key factors are now and going forward (long term effects).

But to your point, now that we're at the cap, these kinds of decisions will be real every year going forward.

You don't think a 26 year old multi faceted sack leader who played a HUGE role in how they play their D and coming into his prime would be their priority?
And what do you think those long term effects are that they are factoring in? It is directly tied to financial flexibility and not mortgaging the future.
I thought for sure he'd be back with the cap going up, now I'm 50/50. We shall see. But clearly the salary cap is dictating their thought process right now. They are outright saying it.

"I" do but I'm just a fan. The cap affects their parameters of thinking but ultimately it's up to them and there's a ton of things built in to the cap structure to go either direction, no matter "their" ultimate decision. But it's not stopping them. That's for sure. It's just a parameter.

If they don't resign him, don't blame the cap. Blame the decision makers.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Yeah, agree various things go into it, but if they lose a guy like AA, that is a direct result of the salary cap, and nothing else.

No, it's a direct result of this FO and their priorities and them weighing what "they" think the key factors are now and going forward (long term effects).

But to your point, now that we're at the cap, these kinds of decisions will be real every year going forward.

You don't think a 26 year old multi faceted sack leader who played a HUGE role in how they play their D and coming into his prime would be their priority?
And what do you think those long term effects are that they are factoring in? It is directly tied to financial flexibility and not mortgaging the future.
I thought for sure he'd be back with the cap going up, now I'm 50/50. We shall see. But clearly the salary cap is dictating their thought process right now. They are outright saying it.

"I" do but I'm just a fan. The cap affects their parameters of thinking but ultimately it's up to them and there's a ton of things built in to the cap structure to go either direction, no matter "their" ultimate decision. But it's not stopping them. That's for sure. It's just a parameter.

If they don't resign him, don't blame the cap. Blame the decision makers.

Not blaming the cap or the decision makers. The cap is what it is and impacts every team and the decision makers must try and navigate the cap Prudently. Sometimes they can do it, other times it comes back to bite them in the ass. At this very moment, the cap is stopping them, but that could change. It is up to them now to see if they can make things work without screwing themselves Financially down the line. It's not about not wanting to pay someone, it's about being smart. If there was no cap you can best bet AA would be locked up and this we wouldn't be having this conversation. That's all I am saying, it's not a myth and it certainly can stop teams from doing things.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Not blaming the cap or the decision makers. The cap is what it is and impacts every team and the decision makers must try and navigate the cap Prudently. Sometimes they can do it, other times it comes back to bite them in the ass. At this very moment, the cap is stopping them, but that could change. It is up to them now to see if they can make things work without screwing themselves Financially down the line. It's not about not wanting to pay someone, it's about being smart. If there was no cap you can best bet AA would be locked up and this we wouldn't be having this conversation. That's all I am saying, it's not a myth and it certainly can stop teams from doing things.

Totally fair. I disagree a bit but it's all good. I just want them all back (possible too...but Lynch said he's done restructuring so that "choice" makes it far more difficult going forward and brings the "cap" much more into play).

If we lose a guy like AA, now we have to use another resource to TRY and find his replacement that's playing at a similar level...not easy.

Originally posted by NinerGM:
So in reality from the Twitter thread, we either keep or let walk. Tag and trade doesn't seem realistic and he's going to want to see what he can get in the open market. Let's be real, however, AA is not a true pass-rushing DE.

From what I've read (straight from AA and Lynch), both sides are open to the franchise tag.
and yes, sucks that he may get tagged as a pass rushing DE

Originally posted by susweel:

3 sacks in college lol.


f**k you baalke

Leads the NFL San Francisco 49ers in sacks.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
So in reality from the Twitter thread, we either keep or let walk. Tag and trade doesn't seem realistic and he's going to want to see what he can get in the open market. Let's be real, however, AA is not a true pass-rushing DE.

From what I've read (straight from AA and Lynch), both sides are open to the franchise tag.
and yes, sucks that he may get tagged as a pass rushing DE

So Hoov do you think that makes extending Buck into anything reasonable possible? I mean wow, Buck can then ask to be highest paid DT in the NFL.

AA being tagged as a DE is only a couple million more than the DT tag, and he played about 60% of his snaps at DE so it goes off of that.

I don't think it's effects Buckner.

Originally posted by AB81Rules:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
So in reality from the Twitter thread, we either keep or let walk. Tag and trade doesn't seem realistic and he's going to want to see what he can get in the open market. Let's be real, however, AA is not a true pass-rushing DE.

From what I've read (straight from AA and Lynch), both sides are open to the franchise tag.
and yes, sucks that he may get tagged as a pass rushing DE

So Hoov do you think that makes extending Buck into anything reasonable possible? I mean wow, Buck can then ask to be highest paid DT in the NFL.

AA being tagged as a DE is only a couple million more than the DT tag, and he played about 60% of his snaps at DE so it goes off of that.

I don't think it's effects Buckner.

I was thinking it would be much higher but i forgot about Aaron Donald's deal. That probably closed the gap some between the positions. I dont' think it effects Buckner either. They can comprehend that AA is getting this amount due to being franchised. I wouldn't think that Buck and his agent would demand to be paid more than AA's franchise tag number. Now if it were a long term deal then i could see Buck and his agent asking for more than AA.