$35.5M in cap space

[Chopper0080]

Same logic with a different position and we got the corpse of Zach Ertz, who held back our young talent at the position. The reasoning for overpaying that aging veteran was the need for leadership and the need for talent at the position. How'd that work out for the team?

If it is 5 mil, it doesn't matter (based upon current spending patterns).

 

[Chopper0080]

A primary rule of running a business well is when you have finite resources do not use them until you have to use them. No one is stealing Connor away from the cards at this stage of his careee with a multi-year deal. If it’s not a wise deal for other clubs it’s generally not a good deal for ours either. We can continue to do good one year deals with him until it’s no longer wise to do so.

I also kinda chuckle at the arguments that it’s smaller dollars so who cares? A mistake is a mistake. If it’s a smaller mistake that’s obviously better, but it’s still a mistake. Lots of small mistakes add up, so a good decisionmaker avoids them. This is a cost/benefit analysis and that favors one year contracts. You have to take the fanboi, homer, emotion out of the decision.

It is a small risk for a productive player at a key position for a player who is also a team leader. The offense is predicated on being a power rushing offense. I would rather pay Conner 5 mil on a short deal than pay a big name RB 10 mil on a longer deal. Ultimately this team needs production from the RB position. I would rather get it at mid point dollar perspective with shorter length. Right now, Conner is the only quality player in our backfield. Maybe that changes with Benson and maybe it doesn't. Either way we need two backs, and Conner has shown he can be one unless he prices himself out. If he does, bye.

 

[Krangodnzr]

A primary rule of running a business well is when you have finite resources do not use them until you have to use them. No one is stealing Connor away from the cards at this stage of his careee with a multi-year deal. If it’s not a wise deal for other clubs it’s generally not a good deal for ours either. We can continue to do good one year deals with him until it’s no longer wise to do so.

I also kinda chuckle at the arguments that it’s smaller dollars so who cares? A mistake is a mistake. If it’s a smaller mistake that’s obviously better, but it’s still a mistake. Lots of small mistakes add up, so a good decisionmaker avoids them. This is a cost/benefit analysis and that favors one year contracts. You have to take the fanboi, homer, emotion out of the decision.

I agree with most of what you are saying, but smaller deals generally have much less guaranteed money, so cutting loose from those contracts don't hurt like cutting loose the bigger contracts.

 

[Chopper0080]

Okay Keim.

This is the opposite. Keim would reward a veteran FA with a 2nd contract that was longer and higher per year. This would be offering a vet FA with a 2nd contract that is the same length or shorter at a lower amount.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

It is a small risk for a productive player at a key position for a player who is also a team leader. The offense is predicated on being a power rushing offense. I would rather pay Conner 5 mil on a short deal than pay a big name RB 10 mil on a longer deal. Ultimately this team needs production from the RB position. I would rather get it at mid point dollar perspective with shorter length. Right now, Conner is the only quality player in our backfield. Maybe that changes with Benson and maybe it doesn't. Either way we need two backs, and Conner has shown he can be one unless he prices himself out. If he does, bye.

But it’s not a necessary risk. We aren’t going to lose conner because we don’t do a two year contract. Why take on unnecessary risk, even if it’s low?

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I agree with most of what you are saying, but smaller deals generally have much less guaranteed money, so cutting loose from those contracts don't hurt like cutting loose the bigger contracts.

Yes I get that. But maybe I’m not making myself clear, I’m not talking small or big deal. I’m talking small (2 years) and smaller (1 year deals). He’s a good player but he’s 29 years old, has a history of injuries, and isn’t a breakaway speed back. I just don’t see teams lining up to outbid us. He likes it here, he fits the offense, we pay him fairly each season. Go to one year contract and eliminate risk.

 

[Stout]

Yes I get that. But maybe I’m not making myself clear, I’m not talking small or big deal. I’m talking small (2 years) and smaller (1 year deals). He’s a good player but he’s 29 years old, has a history of injuries, and isn’t a breakaway speed back. I just don’t see teams lining up to outbid us. He likes it here, he fits the offense, we pay him fairly each season. Go to one year contract and eliminate risk.

Right. We'd just be outbidding ourselves. Terrible business.

 

[CardNots]

He’s a good player but he’s 29 years old, has a history of injuries, and isn’t a breakaway speed back.

He has plenty of the breakaway part of the equation.

If we resign or extend him do it according to the RB market and no Monopoly money contract.

 

[Chopper0080]

But it’s not a necessary risk. We aren’t going to lose conner because we don’t do a two year contract. Why take on unnecessary risk, even if it’s low?

This is a fair point. I like roster stability as much as possible. I think chemistry matters. I think leadership matters. That is why I would take on a small amount of unnecessary risk. But again, valid point.

 

[Stout]

He has plenty of the breakaway part of the equation.

If we resign or extend him do it according to the RB market and no Monopoly money contract.

According to the RB market, guys his age don't get extensions.

I will relent, however. My feelings are known.

 

[Goldfield]

A primary rule of running a business well is when you have finite resources do not use them until you have to use them. No one is stealing Connor away from the cards at this stage of his careee with a multi-year deal. If it’s not a wise deal for other clubs it’s generally not a good deal for ours either. We can continue to do good one year deals with him until it’s no longer wise to do so.

I also kinda chuckle at the arguments that it’s smaller dollars so who cares? A mistake is a mistake. If it’s a smaller mistake that’s obviously better, but it’s still a mistake. Lots of small mistakes add up, so a good decisionmaker avoids them. This is a cost/benefit analysis and that favors one year contracts. You have to take the fanboi, homer, emotion out of the decision.

Like I said a 1 or 2 year deal. Until he shows signs of slowing down this isn’t even blip on the radar.

 

[Goldfield]

Yes I get that. But maybe I’m not making myself clear, I’m not talking small or big deal. I’m talking small (2 years) and smaller (1 year deals). He’s a good player but he’s 29 years old, has a history of injuries, and isn’t a breakaway speed back. I just don’t see teams lining up to outbid us. He likes it here, he fits the offense, we pay him fairly each season. Go to one year contract and eliminate risk.

I’m good with that that’s why I said only 1 or 2 years.

 

[oaken1]

It is a small risk for a productive player at a key position for a player who is also a team leader. The offense is predicated on being a power rushing offense. I would rather pay Conner 5 mil on a short deal than pay a big name RB 10 mil on a longer deal. Ultimately this team needs production from the RB position. I would rather get it at mid point dollar perspective with shorter length. Right now, Conner is the only quality player in our backfield. Maybe that changes with Benson and maybe it doesn't. Either way we need two backs, and Conner has shown he can be one unless he prices himself out. If he does, bye.

agree..seems to make sense to keep JC on the roster until we see if we have his replacement at least

 

[MadCardDisease]

According to the RB market, guys his age don't get extensions.

I will relent, however. My feelings are known.

Mosart(age 32) just signed a 2 year extension with the Dolphins for about $4M per year.

McCaffery(age 28) just signed a 4 year extension for around $19M per year.

 

[Krangodnzr]

This is a fair point. I like roster stability as much as possible. I think chemistry matters. I think leadership matters. That is why I would take on a small amount of unnecessary risk. But again, valid point.

This is why I want to keep him around.

We've all watched the Cardinals let a number of guys like Conner leave, only to see the team devoid of leadership.

 

[MadCardDisease]

Conner still looking strong running the ball!!! I’d like to keep him around for two more seasons.

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media