Eagles reset RB market, extend Barkley.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

Just now, appoo said:

 

Which comes with a huge signing bonus for that to be effective, but that's actually what the Eagles and Beane do now. 

Eagles are on another level. Beane does do it but he needs to do it more aggressively starting this offseason.

[Magox]

18 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

It is a volatile subject.  I still think for the Bills POV it's $12.5M max.

The whole thing ends up how Cook reacts IF Beane doesn't sign him before camp.

I don't see a trade in the making right now.

I won’t try to convince you of the value he adds to the team other than he’s a playmaker and I hate to part ways with those kind of players.

 

But even if the Bills brought him back on an extended deal of 3 year $42m AAV of $14m,  his 2025 cap hit would be less than 1.5% of the cap, 2026 around 2.5% and 2027 of around 3.5% (if they use 2 voided years)

 

 

[ColoradoBills]

12 minutes ago, appoo said:

This is Cook's first eligible extension year, but he's got a year left before the franchise tag comes into play

 

My guess is if Cook doesn't get an extension he holds out

 

He can't hold out the whole year, that's for sure.

[Trust The Process]

Cook is a biproduct of defenses focusing on Allen which leads to light boxes for Cook. Let Cook sign elsewhere in free agency, we'll most likely get a comp pick. Davis can fill Cook's shoes for far less money.

[Florida Bills Fanatic]

8 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

They aren’t paying him Barkley money. That ship just sailed. That was yesterday’s argument. Barkley will now make a lot more than Cook, even at $15 million AAV.

They can because they won’t have a $30 million WR and won’t have one for years.

My point was that there is no need to pay Cook $15M when players with equivalent skills are not rare.  He is not great in pass protection, average as a receiver, and above average (not elite) as a runner.  He is also not the biggest guy that will stand up to the physical pounding of being a three down back.  I can't see paying high dollars to a guy that spends half of the offensive snaps on the sideline.

[ColoradoBills]

2 minutes ago, Magox said:

I won’t try to convince you of the value he adds to the team other than he’s a playmaker and I hate to part ways with those kind of players.

 

But even if the Bills brought him back on an extended deal of 3 year $42m AAV of $14m,  his 2025 cap hit would be less than 1.5% of the cap, 2026 around 2.5% and 2027 of around 3.5% (if they use 2 voided years)

 

 

 

I agree on how valuable he is.  I just don't know if Beane (who hasn't signed RBs) will do it for $14M AAV.

It will be interesting to see this  play out.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

1 minute ago, Florida Bills Fanatic said:

My point was that there is no need to pay Cook $15M when players with equivalent skills are not rare.  He is not great in pass protection, average as a receiver, and above average (not elite) as a runner.  He is also not the biggest guy that will stand up to the physical pounding of being a three down back.  I can't see paying high dollars to a guy that spends half of the offensive snaps on the sideline.

Don’t have him on the sidelines half of the offensive snaps. The GM literally said they drafted him for his receiving ability. Use it.

[Florida Bills Fanatic]

11 minutes ago, GASabresIUFan said:

Outside of your first line, this is a good post.  I don’t fully agree but it’s a reasonable way to handle keeping Cook.  That said, there aren’t players like Cook in every draft.  If there were every team would have a 1400 yard player.  It was so easy to get such a player it wouldn’t have been since 2007 (Lynch ) that we drafted as productive of a player.  How did letting him go work out?

Go back and look at where guys like Cook have gone in prior drafts.  Bad o-line play and bad offensive coaches have doomed runners with equivalent skills.  How good do think Cook would be with a bad o-line?  Etienne in Jacksonville is a good recent example.

[Mr. WEO]

Strange move for a guy they just signed.  Where was he going?

 

 

[appoo]

1 minute ago, Florida Bills Fanatic said:

Go back and look at where guys like Cook have gone in prior drafts.  Bad o-line play and bad offensive coaches have doomed runners with equivalent skills.  How good do think Cook would be with a bad o-line?  Etienne in Jacksonville is a good recent example.

Now there's a creative solution. Trade Cook for a 2nd. Trade a 5th for ETN

[GreenMtnBillsFan]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Don’t have him on the sidelines half of the offensive snaps. The GM literally said they drafted him for his receiving ability. Use it.

He'd have more opportunities to catch the ball if he was better at pass protection. Ty Johnson takes those snaps because he's a good receiver and also can help protect Josh on 3rd down when the defense might send more pressures. 

[HamptonBillsfan]

34 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

His value is somewhere around 4-5% of the cap. $14 million is probably the right answer.

Sounds exactly right but if they went 44 for 3 years with 36 guaranteed that would be fine.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

2 minutes ago, GreenMtnBillsFan said:

He'd have more opportunities to catch the ball if he was better at pass protection. Ty Johnson takes those snaps because he's a good receiver and also can help protect Josh on 3rd down when the defense might send more pressures. 

He’s not that much of a liability you’re making him out to be.

[Don Otreply]

49 minutes ago, Magox said:

I made this case multiple times that Running backs are undervalued and you will see those valuations increased.  Many disagreed.

 

They were wrong.

 

 

They will all see on average an increase in pay because of this, jmo. 

[Magox]

1 minute ago, Don Otreply said:

They will all see on average an increase in pay because of this, jmo. 

Without doubt!  That’s the nature of the NFL and it was overdue.   People have been mentally programmed to not value RB’s because that’s what the league had done.

 

But when you dive into the numbers and how much teams are running the ball (the most in the last 20 years) and that the best teams are almost all running the ball often and effectively it was only a matter of time before the contract valuations would catch up.

 

I created a thread on how WR valuations were overinflated and in that post I brought in some stats on why that is and why RB’s were undervalued 

[MJS]

That's silly money for a running back. Especially one with such a long injury history who has missed so many games in his career.

[Low Positive]

Just now, MJS said:

That's silly money for a running back. Especially one with such a long injury history who has missed so many games in his career.

I think Lurie and Roseman are not so subtly trolling the Giants.

[MJS]

1 hour ago, Magox said:

I made this case multiple times that Running backs are undervalued and you will see those valuations increased.  Many disagreed.

 

They were wrong.

The pendulum swings back and forth. It seems we are back in the overvalued territory for RBs. It'll swing back once everyone remembers why you don't pay running backs big money. They have a short shelf life, miss a lot of games, and it is too easy to find good production from young, cheap backs.

[H2o]

Good for Saquon. He is a perfect fit for that team and pretty much led them to a SB this year. 

 

But this puts Cook in the Twit-news again with his 👀 post. This guy is an absolute clown if he thinks he will get that kind of $$$. Personally, I'm good with trading him and drafting TreVeyon Henderson or Omarion Hampton. 

[Magox]

7 minutes ago, MJS said:

That's silly money for a running back. Especially one with such a long injury history who has missed so many games in his career.

You are stuck in the old way of thinking.  Teams are running more than they have in a long time and almost all the top offenses are run heavy teams.