- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Jets expected to try to trade Sheldon Richardson
Posted on 2/27/17 at 11:19 am
Posted on 2/27/17 at 11:19 am
4
Posted on 2/27/17 at 11:26 am to Chad504boy
Allow me
quote:
The Jets have spent plenty of draft and actual currency on defensive linemen lately, and they may be ready to divest.
According to Rich Cimini of ESPN.com, the Jets may be looking to trade Sheldon Richardson to clear up some of the financial and positional logjam.
With Muhammad Wilkerson early in his big deal, and Richardson working the fifth-year option of his rookie deal, and 2015 first-rounder Leonard Williams still cost-effective, the Jets have nearly 20 percent of their salary cap tied up in three linemen in a 3-4 front.
Richardson has also created some off-field distractions during his time with the Jets, which might make it easier for them to make a move.
So clearing out Richardson’s 8.1 million might be the solution, since it’s unlikely they’d commit to him long-term after this season, and would risk losing him for just a 2019 compensatory pick. While they’d certainly like a first-rounder (and some ice cream, I guess), they might take less before his salary is guaranteed on March 9.
He gets it too, admitting during last season he’s the “odd man out,” as it pertains to the future.
With Wilkerson and Williams and a cast of serviceable guys in the middle, it might make the most sense to move him now.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 11:36 am to geauxtigers87
I'm down with maybe 2 3's
Posted on 2/27/17 at 11:56 am to Chad504boy
Unless he is playing DT in our scheme it's a big no.
He's similar to Cam in his role but without nearly the production Cam has.
So if we get him to replace Fairley then yeah it could work. To play opposite of Cam? Nope.
He's similar to Cam in his role but without nearly the production Cam has.
So if we get him to replace Fairley then yeah it could work. To play opposite of Cam? Nope.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 11:58 am to Chad504boy
quote:
I'm down with maybe 2 3's
Way too high of a price
Posted on 2/27/17 at 12:00 pm to TigerBait1127
Would the Saints even have the cap room to give him a contact
Posted on 2/27/17 at 12:04 pm to geauxtigers87
They're gonna want too much for him. If they'd do just a 2nd or 3rd rounder for him, maybe but I expect they will want a few picks.
This post was edited on 2/27/17 at 12:05 pm
Posted on 2/27/17 at 12:06 pm to geauxtigers87
quote:
Would the Saints even have the cap room to give him a contact
Saints have plenty of cap space going forward
Posted on 2/27/17 at 12:07 pm to geauxtigers87
Yes. If we give him the money instead of Fairley. He would be a bad addition as a 4-3 DE though. Like really bad.
This post was edited on 2/27/17 at 12:09 pm
Posted on 2/27/17 at 12:33 pm to GMoney2600
I'd rather pay fairley
Posted on 2/27/17 at 12:37 pm to geauxtigers87
True cost of picks makes fairley even more valuable
Posted on 2/27/17 at 2:02 pm to Chad504boy
Hasn't this been the story with them the last three years trying to trade this guy?
Posted on 2/27/17 at 2:04 pm to Suntiger
quote:
Hasn't this been the story with them the last three years trying to trade this guy?
yes... if we resign Fairley, i'm not sure this is a need... but losing fairley Richardson can be a nice addition to this line.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 2:14 pm to Chad504boy
Fairley would cost just money, Richardson would cost picks and money. Sign Fairley.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 3:12 pm to The Sad Banana
Richardson is a very good player and younger than fairly and he def wouldn't be an end he would be a rush dt. I might do for a third rounder if we could get him to agree to a cheaper contract
Posted on 2/27/17 at 3:13 pm to Chalkywhite84
quote:
if we could get him to agree to a cheaper contract
he needs a long term deal negotiated, he's playing on that 5th year option
Posted on 2/28/17 at 1:01 pm to YellaPurp
Fairley.
Poe has the age advantage, but only by 2 years.
In almost the same exact amount of games played (78 to 77), but with Fairley getting about 30 less starts, he has put up 20.5 sacks to Poe's 13, and only has about 30 less tackles (again with about 30 less starts).
Plus we know Fairley loves it here amd will ball out for us (being his "hometown" team), and we have no idea how Poe will play in our system.
Plus Poe will likely be more expensive because of his age advantage.
Edit:
Forgot to add that Poe's numbers have trended down since 2013, while Fairley had arguably his best year last year.
Poe has the age advantage, but only by 2 years.
In almost the same exact amount of games played (78 to 77), but with Fairley getting about 30 less starts, he has put up 20.5 sacks to Poe's 13, and only has about 30 less tackles (again with about 30 less starts).
Plus we know Fairley loves it here amd will ball out for us (being his "hometown" team), and we have no idea how Poe will play in our system.
Plus Poe will likely be more expensive because of his age advantage.
Edit:
Forgot to add that Poe's numbers have trended down since 2013, while Fairley had arguably his best year last year.
This post was edited on 2/28/17 at 1:07 pm
Posted on 2/28/17 at 1:31 pm to bonethug0108
Poe is about to get paid and have a huge drop-off in production. Poe will be a bad signing for whichever team pulls the trigger.
Posted on 2/28/17 at 1:43 pm to C3W
Don't see how his production can drop much more than a sack and 30 tackles as a 16 game starter.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News