Saints signing Chiefs DT Khalen Saunders (3yrs/12.3M) (1 Viewer)

You keep repeating these same lines as if i'm confused about anything. I'm not. Its crazy, people can be both educated and have a different opinion (you know not pump sunshine non stop) about our cap issues. Our cap status now and in the future is not ideal and it is a bit cumbersome to manage. They are and will have to continue making very prudent cap decisions. There are decisions in the past that are hurting us right now.

Just state you don't have any actual argument when you resort to this use of general slang terminology in regards to paying in the future.
 

Attachments

  • FDDF3D56-197B-473B-A170-20D2444AF2F7.jpeg
    FDDF3D56-197B-473B-A170-20D2444AF2F7.jpeg
    59.3 KB · Views: 1
I’m not excited about the signings as much as relieved. We got a couple of veterans to fill the gap in the middle, but if we’re honest we know better options were out there. Neither of them has played a lot of snaps with their former teams, so we still need to continue to add to the interior with a 1-2 vet minimum guys and a draft pick. Hopefully they continue to build on their careers with a big leap in 2023.
Yeah, I think that’s a good way to put it.

I guess it’s more that we replaced players who underperformed with players who may perform similarly, but did so on cheaper deals.

Now we need to look to truly upgrade. Either through the draft, a trade or one more FA move.
 
It’s funny. Some posters act like we are the only team who has players sign elsewhere.

Every team sets price points. We replaced underperforming players with potentially equal or better players on cheaper contracts.
Loomis has always been about fielding a competent team, not a high priced one.
 
Nobody is actually complaining about anything. Its just certain people using signings to say "GOTCHA SEE WE DON'T HAVE ANY CAP ISSUES WHATSOEVER". That is the singular event happening here.
It's not a singular event. The converse event is happening in equal proportions. There's just as many people that use the Saints losing players to say "GOTCHA SEE WE CAN'T AFFORD TO RE-SIGN ANY OF OUR PLAYERS BECAUSE WE HAVE CAP ISSUES."
 
He's 26 and the DL, especially the interior, tends to get better with age more than other positions....I hate relying on rooks because they just need those old man muscles to really compete there. KC matured thus guy and now we get the benefits.
 
Yeah, I think that’s a good way to put it.

I guess it’s more that we replaced players who underperformed with players who may perform similarly, but did so on cheaper deals.

Now we need to look to truly upgrade. Either through the draft, a trade or one more FA move.
We’ll find out next year how much we miss Onyemata, everyone else we lost at this point has to be considered replaceable. I get the feeling Davenport will have a big year, but as I said in another thread, it was time to let someone else buy that lottery ticket. As for Tuttle, he probably has more value as a DE in Carolina’s scheme, so his market value there exceeded his market value here.
 
YOu used the credit card analogy. It's nothing like that. You're showing that you don't understand the cap. Spreading out bonuses over cap years actually lessens each players cap percentage with time allowing the team to have a more talented over all roster than teams that take the cap hit immediately.
But we're doing it in large part to be able to field a team. We're doing it out of necessity and desperation to large degrees. It is not ideal and i would look for them to lessen the usage as best as possible over the next few years.
 
We’ll find out next year how much we miss Onyemata, everyone else we lost at this point has to be considered replaceable. I get the feeling Davenport will have a big year, but as I said in another thread, it was time to let someone else buy that lottery ticket. As for Tuttle, he probably has more value as a DE in Carolina’s scheme, so his market value there exceeded his market value here.

I won't feel bad about losing Davenport until he has multiple big years. The worst thing that could've happened was us bring him back, he has a big year, we give him a fortune and he goes back to his old ways.
 
But we're doing it in large part to be able to field a team. We're doing it out of necessity and desperation to large degrees. It is not ideal and i would look for them to lessen the usage as best as possible over the next few years.
We did it to sign the top available player who hit FA at the most important position in the sport.

That’s not just “fielding a team” lol. You make it sound like we were in danger of forfeiting.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom