BakoSaint

We have restructured a lot of deals recently, and we are getting compensatory picks for past free agent losses and could likely get some for losing Hendrickson. But I wonder if anyone is looking at the consequences of these restructuring agreements.

If a player is cut, they are not included in the formula for compensatory picks. If they leave as a free agent they are. Had Taysom Hill played out 2021 and left as a free agent, we might have gotten a 2nd-7th round pick depending on the deal. By adding fake $35 million salary years, we will now likely cut him after 2021, so if he leaves we don't get compensation. We also cannot franchise tag him. If he wins the starting job and becomes a star, I think we either have to pay him the $35 million (unless its voidable on his end too), or cut him and risk losing him for nothing.

The same applies to all these other restructurings. If we add fake years to the end of every contract, nobody ever becomes a free agent, they all get cut, so we never lose free agents we always lose cuts, and never get any compensatory picks. This applies to how past deals were structured too, maybe if we did not give extensions to push cap forward in the past, more of our cuts this year would be simple contract expirations where we get picks. Likewise if we had pushed Hendricksons cap forward last year by making him a $35 million year for 2021 and cutting him, instead of letting his contract expire, we would not have been in line for a possible 3rd round pick.

Maybe some moves don't have these ramifications. Converting money from salary to a bonus might be fine. I just think we should consider these factors. If you want to win the comp pick game, you have to sign cut players and let your own contracts end in expiration not cuts, and our cap crunch may be getting in the way of that.

Also, how does the Taysom Hill contract effect his future. Everyone says they are fake years, but if he somehow wins the job and performs well enough to be worth $25 million but not $35 million, we are in a hell of a position right? Maybe this means Winston is Plan A. Or maybe the $35 million year to year with no guarantees is actually more favorable to us than the franchise tag as its similar the first year but works year to year. Maybe what we gave up was placing some other kind of transition tag on Hill.

Rugby Saint II

Sometimes the bill comes due and you have to make some hard choices. Pay the rent or the electric? Dine or dash and dine? Which players do we keep? Tough calls all the way around. Incidentally, the only way I would dine and dash if I don't want to wash dishes.