Granderson Signs 4 year, $52 Million Extension

AsylumGuido · 09-24-2023, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by BakoSaint

If we have a winning season and look on track to contend in 2024 this is good. There is some risk that he has past legal infractions and has never been a full time starter for a full season to prove his durability, but everything comes with risk and at least he has been healthy and kept his hands clean lately and has good size.

The problem will be if we have a losing season, which is still very possible with our wins coming by a total of 4 points over two losing teams so far. We are now $72 million over the 2024 salary cap. Can we get under it? Yes, easily, by restructuring all our big contracts which will put us in the same situation in 2025. The problem is that if we have a losing season, we might want to get out of one or two of our big contracts. But if we try to get out of a big contract we take a hit AND we can't restructure that contract instead to save money. So as we sign more of these deals with Granderson, Ruiz, etc, the problem is that if we decide to rebuild we literally can't anyway, it doesn't matter, because we will have no choice but to take every big contract we have in the 2024 offseason and restructure it to push money down the road, we won't be able to afford to cut or trade anyone big because the cap hit it would trigger would ruin our plan to shave $72 million off our cap. The more contracts we sign when we are already the most over the cap in the league for next year, the more we pile boulders onto the soap box car racing down the hill. If it all works out, we may get ahead in the race. If it doesn't, we are going to crash very very hard.

Personally, I would have waited a few more weeks even if we had to pay a little more. Granderson looked impressive in camp and has been impressive so far this season. But in camp he faced our oline. In preseason he faced some backups and lousy teams. So far this season he faced the Titans and Panthers olines which did not impress. If we waited until midseason we could make sure we are on track to win and that Granderson has been effective against a larger sample size of teams. If we struggle against better competition and might have to rebuild, it would then make more sense to let Granderson go and use the money to take some of the cap hits neccessary to rebuild such as moving on from Thomas, Kamara, Hill, and any other big contracts that struggle. Granderson may be a fine contract for a team with a normal cap situation, but with our cap situation of being extremely leveraged and our uncertain status as a contender vs rebuild for next offseason, I think I would have slightly preferred to be more cautious. Currently we are 2-0. But currently the Falcons are also 2-0. If we beat the Falcons twice and win the division, great. But if they beat us twice and win the division, they are a much younger team, and a rebuild in 2024 would be smarter than expecting a different result. But with the contracts we have done, it doesn't matter if a rebuild would be smarter, we simply wouldn't be able to start one until 2025 at the earliest even if we wanted to, because we can't afford to do anything but restructure all our expensive players.

SaintFanInATLHELL · 09-24-2023, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido

I am. Bako doesn't like kicking the can. He wants the ability to do a complete teardown of the team and start over.

The question is though can one win in the NFL starting from scratch on rookie contracts. Do you want an organization that would let folks like Lattimore, Jordan, Ram, and Kamara go after 7 years (4 years rookie, 5th year extension, and two franchise tags if possible) because the minute you sign anyone to a second contract, you then have to manage it?

Loomis and Harley are relying on the increasing salary cap. A number that's more reliable than the stock market, with exactly 1 down year in over 30 years. They manage it knowing that they will eventually have to pay at the end. But the team remains intact, the guys are satisfied and are still playing well, and it give enough flexibility that we can bring in new pieces.

It's been 3 years and folks are still complaining about letting Hedrickson go to free agency. But if the Saints had offered him a contract, it would have had to be managed just like all the others.

There's just no perfect way to do this. But the Saints' current method seems to be more sustainable than many of the others. Look at the Rams for example. Put all in to win a Super Bowl. Now back to mediocrity with no draft stock coming anytime soon.

SFIAH

SaintFanInATLHELL · 09-24-2023, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by BakoSaint

If we have a winning season and look on track to contend in 2024 this is good. There is some risk that he has past legal infractions and has never been a full time starter for a full season to prove his durability, but everything comes with risk and at least he has been healthy and kept his hands clean lately and has good size.

The problem will be if we have a losing season, which is still very possible with our wins coming by a total of 4 points over two losing teams so far. We are now $72 million over the 2024 salary cap. Can we get under it? Yes, easily, by restructuring all our big contracts which will put us in the same situation in 2025. The problem is that if we have a losing season, we might want to get out of one or two of our big contracts. But if we try to get out of a big contract we take a hit AND we can't restructure that contract instead to save money. So as we sign more of these deals with Granderson, Ruiz, etc, the problem is that if we decide to rebuild we literally can't anyway, it doesn't matter, because we will have no choice but to take every big contract we have in the 2024 offseason and restructure it to push money down the road, we won't be able to afford to cut or trade anyone big because the cap hit it would trigger would ruin our plan to shave $72 million off our cap. The more contracts we sign when we are already the most over the cap in the league for next year, the more we pile boulders onto the soap box car racing down the hill. If it all works out, we may get ahead in the race. If it doesn't, we are going to crash very very hard.

Personally, I would have waited a few more weeks even if we had to pay a little more. Granderson looked impressive in camp and has been impressive so far this season. But in camp he faced our oline. In preseason he faced some backups and lousy teams. So far this season he faced the Titans and Panthers olines which did not impress. If we waited until midseason we could make sure we are on track to win and that Granderson has been effective against a larger sample size of teams. If we struggle against better competition and might have to rebuild, it would then make more sense to let Granderson go and use the money to take some of the cap hits neccessary to rebuild such as moving on from Thomas, Kamara, Hill, and any other big contracts that struggle. Granderson may be a fine contract for a team with a normal cap situation, but with our cap situation of being extremely leveraged and our uncertain status as a contender vs rebuild for next offseason, I think I would have slightly preferred to be more cautious. Currently we are 2-0. But currently the Falcons are also 2-0. If we beat the Falcons twice and win the division, great. But if they beat us twice and win the division, they are a much younger team, and a rebuild in 2024 would be smarter than expecting a different result. But with the contracts we have done, it doesn't matter if a rebuild would be smarter, we simply wouldn't be able to start one until 2025 at the earliest even if we wanted to, because we can't afford to do anything but restructure all our expensive players.

The basic flaw in your argument is that this current methodology can possibly hamsting the team in some future financially. Or that something better might come along in the future and the team won't be able to afford it.

The problem with that approach is that the future is not guaranteed. Loomis has a 20 year track record of being about to manage personnel and contract, sustain the team, and to still have the ability to make moves when necessary. Even when your dystopia came during Covid and the salary cap crashed, the Saints were still able to navigate that hit.

The salary cap growing is the most reliable financial indicator in the NFL. Planning budgets around that growth is a solid strategy.

Sure you'll get a dud every once in a while (Gillette, Byrd, Peat). But even then most of the contracts are organized with huge future base salaries that are not guaranteed. That money only comes into play with sustained excellent play. The team can get rid of the duds if necessary.

As I keep telling my brother about Pete Carmichael "Why doesn't he run the damn ball?" this management style is deeply rooted in Saints culture now. Loomis has been doing it this way for over 20 years. Right or wrong, he's not going to change. It's going to take a change in leadership to get a style that you want. And as I'm sure you know, with the relationship Loomis has with Ms. Benson, the only way that will happen is when Loomis decides to leave, or when Ms. Benson no longer owns the team. And if Loomis leaves or is kicked upstairs, it's likely that Harley will take over and very little will change.

We get it. You don't like it. You're chicken little and worry that the sky is going to fall. But you can complain until the cows come home, but nothing is going to change.

SFIAH

AsylumGuido · 09-24-2023, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL

The basic flaw in your argument is that this current methodology can possibly hamsting the team in some future financially. Or that something better might come along in the future and the team won't be able to afford it.

The problem with that approach is that the future is not guaranteed. Loomis has a 20 year track record of being about to manage personnel and contract, sustain the team, and to still have the ability to make moves when necessary. Even when your dystopia came during Covid and the salary cap crashed, the Saints were still able to navigate that hit.

The salary cap growing is the most reliable financial indicator in the NFL. Planning budgets around that growth is a solid strategy.

Sure you'll get a dud every once in a while (Gillette, Byrd, Peat). But even then most of the contracts are organized with huge future base salaries that are not guaranteed. That money only comes into play with sustained excellent play. The team can get rid of the duds if necessary.

As I keep telling my brother about Pete Carmichael "Why doesn't he run the damn ball?" this management style is deeply rooted in Saints culture now. Loomis has been doing it this way for over 20 years. Right or wrong, he's not going to change. It's going to take a change in leadership to get a style that you want. And as I'm sure you know, with the relationship Loomis has with Ms. Benson, the only way that will happen is when Loomis decides to leave, or when Ms. Benson no longer owns the team. And if Loomis leaves or is kicked upstairs, it's likely that Harley will take over and very little will change.

We get it. You don't like it. You're chicken little and worry that the sky is going to fall. But you can complain until the cows come home, but nothing is going to change.

SFIAH

AsylumGuido · 09-24-2023, 10:58 AM

BakoSaint · 09-24-2023, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL

I am. Bako doesn't like kicking the can. He wants the ability to do a complete teardown of the team and start over.

The question is though can one win in the NFL starting from scratch on rookie contracts. Do you want an organization that would let folks like Lattimore, Jordan, Ram, and Kamara go after 7 years (4 years rookie, 5th year extension, and two franchise tags if possible) because the minute you sign anyone to a second contract, you then have to manage it?

Loomis and Harley are relying on the increasing salary cap. A number that's more reliable than the stock market, with exactly 1 down year in over 30 years. They manage it knowing that they will eventually have to pay at the end. But the team remains intact, the guys are satisfied and are still playing well, and it give enough flexibility that we can bring in new pieces.

It's been 3 years and folks are still complaining about letting Hedrickson go to free agency. But if the Saints had offered him a contract, it would have had to be managed just like all the others.

There's just no perfect way to do this. But the Saints' current method seems to be more sustainable than many of the others. Look at the Rams for example. Put all in to win a Super Bowl. Now back to mediocrity with no draft stock coming anytime soon.

SFIAH

Thanks for making a counter argument. Here is where I stand.

I don't hate this contract as much as many others we have signed and I think its smarter than signing Hendrickson, Armstead, Williams, or Davenport would have been BUT the problem is this contract adds to the total weight of all the others and I hate that. We were already the most leveraged team in the league. Now we are the most leveraged by a wider margin.

I don't want the ability to do a complete teardown. I want the ability to do any tearing down if needed. I believe we are so leveraged now that if even one of our contracts turned into another Galette or Byrd it wouldn't matter, we are in such a tight spot to get under the cap there is no way we could afford to cut or trade or waive such a player and take the immediate cap hit, we would have to annually restructure their contract where they remain for its entire length, then brag at the end when we sign them to an extension to defer the money further that they were generously willing to take a pay cut of half what they made before, even though its far more than any other team would ever offer.

Lets talk about the Rams mediocrity after their partial teardown, which is something I would like to do if we don't make noise in the playoffs. We are 2-0 with 4 PF-PA against two teams that were both 7-10 in 2022. The Rams are 1-1 with 10 PF-PA against two teams that were 13-4 and 9-8 in 2022. Honestly if you consider strength of opponents the Rams look better than us right now despite an extensive rebuild. There is no way that the performances we have displayed this year would have led to a victory against the 49ers, and we would have been lucky to keep it as close as the Rams did. Oh, and the no draft picks thing? The Rams traded back numerous times in the 2023 draft, made 14 picks, now sport a very young roster, and one of those mid-round picks became Puka Nacua, who is looking like a first round talent. And for 2024, the Rams have their own 1st-5th round picks.

The Bucs also did a partial teardown over the offseason and like us they are 2-0. The Falcons did a partial teardown in the previous offseason and finished with the same record as us in 2022 and have the same record as us now.

I think many of you overestimate the so called devastation and hopelessness that would result from making a few smart cuts or trades looking to the future. In fact there are many examples of teams that have done it and remained just as competitive as us, with more flexibility for the future.

The current methodology definitely hamstrings the franchise financially every year. We are able to get under the salary cap and avoid disqualification but the only big move signing a high dollar player we have managed is Derek Carr, who in the world of QBs is middle of the road. So far we have done well with Mathieu and Maye's contracts that were bargain bin due to age and legal troubles but that is playing with fire. It was pretty obvious we needed help at oline and a little better oline would make us a much better team, but we could not afford it, and instead had to extend Peat, who has been inactive, to avoid the dead cap hit if his contract expired.

I don't want to let everyone go, but for example history tells us that its very unlikely Alvin Kamara is not going to decline at this point. Taysom Hill just isn't effective against good defenses, or as a TE, and his main value is a wildcat QB racking up rushing yards against bad teams that requires taking our highest paid player off the field to put him in. That money could be better reallocated to other places like oline and secondary depth, but we can't reallocate money, because reallocating money involves taking what was planned to be a cap savior restructuring required to get under the cap, and turning it in to a short term cap hit. We can't afford that.

Look at what the Falcons did with moving on from Julio Jones and Matt Ryan. I am critical of many things the Falcons do. I think Pitts and Bijan were major draft mistakes in low value low durability positions. But you can't argue with the fact that their timing in moving on from Julio and Matt was impeccable. The same thing could happen to us with aging players, but it wouldn't matter, because honestly we don't have the financial flexibility to make that kind of move even if we travel to the future and know the timing would be perfect.

Loomis has one Superbowl in 20 years. This is not really above average. The decisions that led to that Superbowl were made 17 years ago, when he was a different person, and very possibly were made by Tom Benson or Sean Payton. In that time Jerry Reese won 2 super bowls as GM, was run out of the league, and can't seem to get another job. Many other franchises have won a Superbowl more recently than the Saints. Our cap management represents an extreme, and other GMs who have been more successful more recently are not going to that extreme. Even the ones who do seem to have a pattern of pumping the accelerator and then pumping the brakes, for example the Rams and Eagles successfully going through cycles of aggressive spending and spending cuts. I just don't like the extremes Loomis is going to. As all the contracts we have signed go, Granderson looks like a good one. I would rather take many of the other ones back. But given that the other contracts are already done, doing this one actually makes it harder to take the others back, and thats what I don't like.

BakoSaint · 09-24-2023, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido

https://twitter.com/john_siglerr/sta...58378574319891

What would happen if Carr's agent understands we HAVE TO restructure his contract, and the shoulder injury is significant and the agent is nervous about the future and demands Carr's 2025 salary and $20 million in 2026 be fully guaranteed in return for the restructure. Whats our move?

09-24-2023, 08:36 AM	#11
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 24,394	Re: Granderson Signs 4 year, $52 Million Extension Originally Posted by BakoSaint If we have a winning season and look on track to contend in 2024 this is good. There is some risk that he has past legal infractions and has never been a full time starter for a full season to prove his durability, but everything comes with risk and at least he has been healthy and kept his hands clean lately and has good size. The problem will be if we have a losing season, which is still very possible with our wins coming by a total of 4 points over two losing teams so far. We are now $72 million over the 2024 salary cap. Can we get under it? Yes, easily, by restructuring all our big contracts which will put us in the same situation in 2025. The problem is that if we have a losing season, we might want to get out of one or two of our big contracts. But if we try to get out of a big contract we take a hit AND we can't restructure that contract instead to save money. So as we sign more of these deals with Granderson, Ruiz, etc, the problem is that if we decide to rebuild we literally can't anyway, it doesn't matter, because we will have no choice but to take every big contract we have in the 2024 offseason and restructure it to push money down the road, we won't be able to afford to cut or trade anyone big because the cap hit it would trigger would ruin our plan to shave $72 million off our cap. The more contracts we sign when we are already the most over the cap in the league for next year, the more we pile boulders onto the soap box car racing down the hill. If it all works out, we may get ahead in the race. If it doesn't, we are going to crash very very hard. Personally, I would have waited a few more weeks even if we had to pay a little more. Granderson looked impressive in camp and has been impressive so far this season. But in camp he faced our oline. In preseason he faced some backups and lousy teams. So far this season he faced the Titans and Panthers olines which did not impress. If we waited until midseason we could make sure we are on track to win and that Granderson has been effective against a larger sample size of teams. If we struggle against better competition and might have to rebuild, it would then make more sense to let Granderson go and use the money to take some of the cap hits neccessary to rebuild such as moving on from Thomas, Kamara, Hill, and any other big contracts that struggle. Granderson may be a fine contract for a team with a normal cap situation, but with our cap situation of being extremely leveraged and our uncertain status as a contender vs rebuild for next offseason, I think I would have slightly preferred to be more cautious. Currently we are 2-0. But currently the Falcons are also 2-0. If we beat the Falcons twice and win the division, great. But if they beat us twice and win the division, they are a much younger team, and a rebuild in 2024 would be smarter than expecting a different result. But with the contracts we have done, it doesn't matter if a rebuild would be smarter, we simply wouldn't be able to start one until 2025 at the earliest even if we wanted to, because we can't afford to do anything but restructure all our expensive players.

09-24-2023, 09:26 AM	#12
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,647	Re: Granderson Signs 4 year, $52 Million Extension Originally Posted by AsylumGuido I am. Bako doesn't like kicking the can. He wants the ability to do a complete teardown of the team and start over. The question is though can one win in the NFL starting from scratch on rookie contracts. Do you want an organization that would let folks like Lattimore, Jordan, Ram, and Kamara go after 7 years (4 years rookie, 5th year extension, and two franchise tags if possible) because the minute you sign anyone to a second contract, you then have to manage it? Loomis and Harley are relying on the increasing salary cap. A number that's more reliable than the stock market, with exactly 1 down year in over 30 years. They manage it knowing that they will eventually have to pay at the end. But the team remains intact, the guys are satisfied and are still playing well, and it give enough flexibility that we can bring in new pieces. It's been 3 years and folks are still complaining about letting Hedrickson go to free agency. But if the Saints had offered him a contract, it would have had to be managed just like all the others. There's just no perfect way to do this. But the Saints' current method seems to be more sustainable than many of the others. Look at the Rams for example. Put all in to win a Super Bowl. Now back to mediocrity with no draft stock coming anytime soon. SFIAH AsylumGuido likes this.
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

09-24-2023, 09:43 AM	#13
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,647	Re: Granderson Signs 4 year, $52 Million Extension Originally Posted by BakoSaint If we have a winning season and look on track to contend in 2024 this is good. There is some risk that he has past legal infractions and has never been a full time starter for a full season to prove his durability, but everything comes with risk and at least he has been healthy and kept his hands clean lately and has good size. The problem will be if we have a losing season, which is still very possible with our wins coming by a total of 4 points over two losing teams so far. We are now $72 million over the 2024 salary cap. Can we get under it? Yes, easily, by restructuring all our big contracts which will put us in the same situation in 2025. The problem is that if we have a losing season, we might want to get out of one or two of our big contracts. But if we try to get out of a big contract we take a hit AND we can't restructure that contract instead to save money. So as we sign more of these deals with Granderson, Ruiz, etc, the problem is that if we decide to rebuild we literally can't anyway, it doesn't matter, because we will have no choice but to take every big contract we have in the 2024 offseason and restructure it to push money down the road, we won't be able to afford to cut or trade anyone big because the cap hit it would trigger would ruin our plan to shave $72 million off our cap. The more contracts we sign when we are already the most over the cap in the league for next year, the more we pile boulders onto the soap box car racing down the hill. If it all works out, we may get ahead in the race. If it doesn't, we are going to crash very very hard. Personally, I would have waited a few more weeks even if we had to pay a little more. Granderson looked impressive in camp and has been impressive so far this season. But in camp he faced our oline. In preseason he faced some backups and lousy teams. So far this season he faced the Titans and Panthers olines which did not impress. If we waited until midseason we could make sure we are on track to win and that Granderson has been effective against a larger sample size of teams. If we struggle against better competition and might have to rebuild, it would then make more sense to let Granderson go and use the money to take some of the cap hits neccessary to rebuild such as moving on from Thomas, Kamara, Hill, and any other big contracts that struggle. Granderson may be a fine contract for a team with a normal cap situation, but with our cap situation of being extremely leveraged and our uncertain status as a contender vs rebuild for next offseason, I think I would have slightly preferred to be more cautious. Currently we are 2-0. But currently the Falcons are also 2-0. If we beat the Falcons twice and win the division, great. But if they beat us twice and win the division, they are a much younger team, and a rebuild in 2024 would be smarter than expecting a different result. But with the contracts we have done, it doesn't matter if a rebuild would be smarter, we simply wouldn't be able to start one until 2025 at the earliest even if we wanted to, because we can't afford to do anything but restructure all our expensive players. The basic flaw in your argument is that this current methodology can possibly hamsting the team in some future financially. Or that something better might come along in the future and the team won't be able to afford it. The problem with that approach is that the future is not guaranteed. Loomis has a 20 year track record of being about to manage personnel and contract, sustain the team, and to still have the ability to make moves when necessary. Even when your dystopia came during Covid and the salary cap crashed, the Saints were still able to navigate that hit. The salary cap growing is the most reliable financial indicator in the NFL. Planning budgets around that growth is a solid strategy. Sure you'll get a dud every once in a while (Gillette, Byrd, Peat). But even then most of the contracts are organized with huge future base salaries that are not guaranteed. That money only comes into play with sustained excellent play. The team can get rid of the duds if necessary. As I keep telling my brother about Pete Carmichael "Why doesn't he run the damn ball?" this management style is deeply rooted in Saints culture now. Loomis has been doing it this way for over 20 years. Right or wrong, he's not going to change. It's going to take a change in leadership to get a style that you want. And as I'm sure you know, with the relationship Loomis has with Ms. Benson, the only way that will happen is when Loomis decides to leave, or when Ms. Benson no longer owns the team. And if Loomis leaves or is kicked upstairs, it's likely that Harley will take over and very little will change. We get it. You don't like it. You're chicken little and worry that the sky is going to fall. But you can complain until the cows come home, but nothing is going to change. SFIAH AsylumGuido and Rugby Saint II like this.
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

09-24-2023, 10:54 AM	#14
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 24,394	Re: Granderson Signs 4 year, $52 Million Extension Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL The basic flaw in your argument is that this current methodology can possibly hamsting the team in some future financially. Or that something better might come along in the future and the team won't be able to afford it. The problem with that approach is that the future is not guaranteed. Loomis has a 20 year track record of being about to manage personnel and contract, sustain the team, and to still have the ability to make moves when necessary. Even when your dystopia came during Covid and the salary cap crashed, the Saints were still able to navigate that hit. The salary cap growing is the most reliable financial indicator in the NFL. Planning budgets around that growth is a solid strategy. Sure you'll get a dud every once in a while (Gillette, Byrd, Peat). But even then most of the contracts are organized with huge future base salaries that are not guaranteed. That money only comes into play with sustained excellent play. The team can get rid of the duds if necessary. As I keep telling my brother about Pete Carmichael "Why doesn't he run the damn ball?" this management style is deeply rooted in Saints culture now. Loomis has been doing it this way for over 20 years. Right or wrong, he's not going to change. It's going to take a change in leadership to get a style that you want. And as I'm sure you know, with the relationship Loomis has with Ms. Benson, the only way that will happen is when Loomis decides to leave, or when Ms. Benson no longer owns the team. And if Loomis leaves or is kicked upstairs, it's likely that Harley will take over and very little will change. We get it. You don't like it. You're chicken little and worry that the sky is going to fall. But you can complain until the cows come home, but nothing is going to change. SFIAH

09-24-2023, 10:58 AM	#15
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 24,394	Re: Granderson Signs 4 year, $52 Million Extension Twitter

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

09-24-2023, 11:34 AM	#16
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 1,759	Re: Granderson Signs 4 year, $52 Million Extension Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL I am. Bako doesn't like kicking the can. He wants the ability to do a complete teardown of the team and start over. The question is though can one win in the NFL starting from scratch on rookie contracts. Do you want an organization that would let folks like Lattimore, Jordan, Ram, and Kamara go after 7 years (4 years rookie, 5th year extension, and two franchise tags if possible) because the minute you sign anyone to a second contract, you then have to manage it? Loomis and Harley are relying on the increasing salary cap. A number that's more reliable than the stock market, with exactly 1 down year in over 30 years. They manage it knowing that they will eventually have to pay at the end. But the team remains intact, the guys are satisfied and are still playing well, and it give enough flexibility that we can bring in new pieces. It's been 3 years and folks are still complaining about letting Hedrickson go to free agency. But if the Saints had offered him a contract, it would have had to be managed just like all the others. There's just no perfect way to do this. But the Saints' current method seems to be more sustainable than many of the others. Look at the Rams for example. Put all in to win a Super Bowl. Now back to mediocrity with no draft stock coming anytime soon. SFIAH Thanks for making a counter argument. Here is where I stand. I don't hate this contract as much as many others we have signed and I think its smarter than signing Hendrickson, Armstead, Williams, or Davenport would have been BUT the problem is this contract adds to the total weight of all the others and I hate that. We were already the most leveraged team in the league. Now we are the most leveraged by a wider margin. I don't want the ability to do a complete teardown. I want the ability to do any tearing down if needed. I believe we are so leveraged now that if even one of our contracts turned into another Galette or Byrd it wouldn't matter, we are in such a tight spot to get under the cap there is no way we could afford to cut or trade or waive such a player and take the immediate cap hit, we would have to annually restructure their contract where they remain for its entire length, then brag at the end when we sign them to an extension to defer the money further that they were generously willing to take a pay cut of half what they made before, even though its far more than any other team would ever offer. Lets talk about the Rams mediocrity after their partial teardown, which is something I would like to do if we don't make noise in the playoffs. We are 2-0 with 4 PF-PA against two teams that were both 7-10 in 2022. The Rams are 1-1 with 10 PF-PA against two teams that were 13-4 and 9-8 in 2022. Honestly if you consider strength of opponents the Rams look better than us right now despite an extensive rebuild. There is no way that the performances we have displayed this year would have led to a victory against the 49ers, and we would have been lucky to keep it as close as the Rams did. Oh, and the no draft picks thing? The Rams traded back numerous times in the 2023 draft, made 14 picks, now sport a very young roster, and one of those mid-round picks became Puka Nacua, who is looking like a first round talent. And for 2024, the Rams have their own 1st-5th round picks. The Bucs also did a partial teardown over the offseason and like us they are 2-0. The Falcons did a partial teardown in the previous offseason and finished with the same record as us in 2022 and have the same record as us now. I think many of you overestimate the so called devastation and hopelessness that would result from making a few smart cuts or trades looking to the future. In fact there are many examples of teams that have done it and remained just as competitive as us, with more flexibility for the future. The current methodology definitely hamstrings the franchise financially every year. We are able to get under the salary cap and avoid disqualification but the only big move signing a high dollar player we have managed is Derek Carr, who in the world of QBs is middle of the road. So far we have done well with Mathieu and Maye's contracts that were bargain bin due to age and legal troubles but that is playing with fire. It was pretty obvious we needed help at oline and a little better oline would make us a much better team, but we could not afford it, and instead had to extend Peat, who has been inactive, to avoid the dead cap hit if his contract expired. I don't want to let everyone go, but for example history tells us that its very unlikely Alvin Kamara is not going to decline at this point. Taysom Hill just isn't effective against good defenses, or as a TE, and his main value is a wildcat QB racking up rushing yards against bad teams that requires taking our highest paid player off the field to put him in. That money could be better reallocated to other places like oline and secondary depth, but we can't reallocate money, because reallocating money involves taking what was planned to be a cap savior restructuring required to get under the cap, and turning it in to a short term cap hit. We can't afford that. Look at what the Falcons did with moving on from Julio Jones and Matt Ryan. I am critical of many things the Falcons do. I think Pitts and Bijan were major draft mistakes in low value low durability positions. But you can't argue with the fact that their timing in moving on from Julio and Matt was impeccable. The same thing could happen to us with aging players, but it wouldn't matter, because honestly we don't have the financial flexibility to make that kind of move even if we travel to the future and know the timing would be perfect. Loomis has one Superbowl in 20 years. This is not really above average. The decisions that led to that Superbowl were made 17 years ago, when he was a different person, and very possibly were made by Tom Benson or Sean Payton. In that time Jerry Reese won 2 super bowls as GM, was run out of the league, and can't seem to get another job. Many other franchises have won a Superbowl more recently than the Saints. Our cap management represents an extreme, and other GMs who have been more successful more recently are not going to that extreme. Even the ones who do seem to have a pattern of pumping the accelerator and then pumping the brakes, for example the Rams and Eagles successfully going through cycles of aggressive spending and spending cuts. I just don't like the extremes Loomis is going to. As all the contracts we have signed go, Granderson looks like a good one. I would rather take many of the other ones back. But given that the other contracts are already done, doing this one actually makes it harder to take the others back, and thats what I don't like.
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 1,759

09-24-2023, 02:52 PM	#17
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 1,759	Re: Granderson Signs 4 year, $52 Million Extension Originally Posted by AsylumGuido https://twitter.com/john_siglerr/sta...58378574319891 What would happen if Carr's agent understands we HAVE TO restructure his contract, and the shoulder injury is significant and the agent is nervous about the future and demands Carr's 2025 salary and $20 million in 2026 be fully guaranteed in return for the restructure. Whats our move?
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 1,759