We should put the transition tag on Grant (1 Viewer)

Not sure about transition tags but franchise would cost the Saints in that $7 million a year range for Grant's service's. Question is: Is he worth that much?
 
didn't we pay around 10mil for howard when we franchised him?
 
Yea this is not ging to do any good because Grant will get overpaid by someone eventually and we will not match it. Franchise him or move on are the only likely options IMO.
 
Not sure about transition tags but franchise would cost the Saints in that $7 million a year range for Grant's service's. Question is: Is he worth that much?

He's worth it unless you have an alternative. I've said it before, but you have to have a good player opposite Will Smith or you neutralize your best defensive player because offenses can shift to Smith's side. If it's not Grant, they better not hope for the best with Ninkovich or Whitehead.
 
I saw a post somewhere actually claiming the cost to franchise a DE is around $8.5mm. That said, it may be worth it. Without Grant, we don't have anyone to fill in. If we lose Grant DE is our number 1 priority in both free agency or the draft (and possibly both.)
I don't like creating a new position of need on defense.

That said I don't think we should seriously overpay for his sevices. That's why I think we franchise him if we can't work something out. This will give us a chance to develop some other talent at DE (or atleast get some compensation for him.)
 
I think put the franchise or transition tag, or even to sign Grant to a long term contract will depend on the following:

I think that the front office will be able to make only one big signing during the offseason, while keeping our other free agents.

Loomis and coaching staff will have to think which position is more valuable to them: cornerback, linebacker or defensive end. Also what players are available on those positions, and finally, what of these positions is easier to fill or replace by free agency or the draft.

For that matter, signing Grant will depend on the chances of signing a big name corner, linebacker or defensive end.

If sign Clemments, Samuel, Briggs or Thomas, be certain we will not sign Grant, and eitherwise.

At the end, the front office has to ponder how to get more value on the money available to spend (that is not very much, even having a good cap number).
 
The defense has some holes to fill already, namely CB, MLB, and even DT. Why create another hole by allowing Grant to walk? Of course you don't want to overpay for him, who does? Franchising as a means to prevent the loss with no compensation seems to work against the Saints, particularly at that position; see Darren Howard. It makes no sense to me to not try and make him your #1 priority as far as resigning goes. IMHO, and I'll get flamed for this in some circles, use the money you were going to pay Horn his bonus to to help resign Grant. Joe has been great for the team and city but I think his age has caught up with him and we need to retain younger players like Grant, especially on the D which needs the most help.
 
He's worth it unless you have an alternative. I've said it before, but you have to have a good player opposite Will Smith or you neutralize your best defensive player because offenses can shift to Smith's side. If it's not Grant, they better not hope for the best with Ninkovich or Whitehead.

Exactly. So why go out and overspend on someone else or have to draft a DE? Grant is not only a leader on the defense, but the team as well. And his productivity well puts him in the top ten DEs in the league (at least).
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/b...on_2006&timeframe=All&sort=49&old_category=QB

This is a nobrainer.
 

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