DrDawkinstein

You ok dude?

Edwards has been discussed here as the one player on the OL who will likely leave well before these Cook talks ever started. So I dont see it as "paying Cook made us lose Edwards". Theres been a lot of talk about Alec Anderson being groomed to take his place after his contract is up. Again, all independent of the Cook situation. Point is, I think we'll be ok if Edwards is the one OL we lose.

Great post, and I dont mean to dismiss it by chopping so much out. Rather, this is the one point I want to add to... Given Beane's track record on early extensions, it can be assumed we'll get some discount and not full market value. For the rest of it, we'll all hope that streaming money keeps flowing in.

They wont hit FA. Beane will have McGovern and Torrence extended before they hit FA. Its already been reported that talks with McGovern have started.

I'm not a big void year guy either. But it is a tool that can be used, and Beane has used it before on even greater risk players (an injured Hyde at the end of his career, for example). But like we've said, even just 1 year changes the numbers significantly. And lets us pay him his desired "15 mil year", while the average and cap hit is more like $11M.

Should be able to keep them all together. Cook is looking to make about as much as we just paid Shakir. We do not have a top WR who will command $20-30M. Knox will be coming off the books soon too. So we have Josh as the big money. Re-sign most of the OL (I think Edwards may walk either way), and keep our valued skill-position difference makers in the $12-15M range. All doable. Especially with streaming money hitting the cap increase every year.

You're going to love my posts that followed the one you quoted. I said pretty much the same thing wrt averaging in the last rookie year. And even tacking on 1 void year to bring it to about $11M/yr even with the "$15M average" on the new deal. The best part is, Beane knows all this better than even we do.

I dont think there's any other option at this point, no matter which side anyone is on. I doubt a deal gets done this summer. But Beane has mentioned numerous times the possibility of getting one done in-season or before next offseason. And as someone on the pro-Cook side, I'm fine with that too. The only bad part about it is it means these posts/conversations will continue to drag for 9 more months.

The best point youve made so far.

Ty Johnson is a ONE down back!

Literally no one is trying to justify that. My post you quoted in this shows how we get his average down to under $11M/yr. A 4/$60M extension means we have him at 5/$65, so at worst $13M/yr. Add on even 1 void year, and it goes down to 6/$65M, or $10.8M/yr. Right where everyone wants to pay him. edit: also, you re off on his age. He will be 25 at the start of next season, and turn 26 around week 3. Pay him now and we have him locked in until he is 29, so through what should be his prime. Then we let him walk.

The Bengals playoff game is an anomaly from a crazy season. The better, or more accurate question, would be: Do we beat the Chiefs in the AFC Championship last year if we continue to feed Cook who was having a great game instead of getting too cute and relying too much on Josh to make magic happen? There was no reason to get away from Cook other than "coach's decided to". So while nothing is guaranteed in our hindsight, the trend and evidence is there to make a good argument.

Folks harp on snap count, yet he has had significantly more attempts/carries than ANY other RB in the McD era. He has helped transition our Offense away from forcing Josh to be the primary driver of our run game. Which will only protect Josh and extend his career.

Tack on even 1 void year (Philly has 4 on Barkley's new deal) and we're already down to $65M spread over 6 years, with cap hits around $5M-6M this year and next. Cook is not an Edmunds/Gabe Davis/Shaq Lawson. He is a very good/great player who happens to play a position thats market is in flux so folks have biases against the justifiable spend.

Lot of good stuff in these posts, but too much for me to go line by line to discuss so excuse the brevity... I think we would absolutely see a drop off with another back even behind the same OL. Even if the average is similar, we NEED those explosive runs. They are really our only explosive plays outside of Josh pulling magic out of his butt. They instantly change games and put us in control. I would take Cook over Bosa every day. I'll guarantee Cook ends up far more productive than what we get out of Bosa this year. As far as being a "part time player", that is more on our coaches than Cook. If our OL is so good they are responsible for Cook's success, then why are we worried about keeping an RB in to block on 3rd down? More often than not, Johnson left the backfield and became a receiver anyways. Cook can do that. Pay him and put it on McD/Brady to get the value out of him since he CAN do it.