- 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
Saints to pursue Melvin Ingram and possible trade for Talib?
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:46 pm
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:46 pm
quote:
Saints expected active in FA. Targeting edge rusher (Melvin Ingram, Andre Branch) & CB. Heard interesting idea- Saints trade for Aqib Talib?
Could this board handle another Ingram on the team? Also rumors Talib may be cut and Saints could trade a low pick to get him before free agency.
Honestly I'm fine with whatever they do. Defense needs playmakers so badly.
14
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:48 pm to LSUZombie
Can we afford both?
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:48 pm to LSUZombie
Talib is a major a-hole, but he's a really good CB and if we're loading up for another run with Payton & Brees i'd have full confidence in him not to be a bust.
Ingram i'm less enamored with.
Ingram i'm less enamored with.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:50 pm to LSUZombie
Source?
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:58 pm to LSUZombie
Can we convince them to trade us CHJ?
Talib has always played injured even during his Bucs years. Big IF for him...but its us, he's going to be dead.
Personally, Branch will be cheaper than Ingram but I think with Branch you think Kikaha will be playing 30-40% of the snaps
Talib has always played injured even during his Bucs years. Big IF for him...but its us, he's going to be dead.
Personally, Branch will be cheaper than Ingram but I think with Branch you think Kikaha will be playing 30-40% of the snaps
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:05 pm to Zach Lee To Amp Hill
We need as many a holes as we can get on defense. As long as we can get him to reduce that cap hit and stay out of trouble go for it. He will disrupt and sometimes completely take out a teams biggest weapon.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:09 pm to 1BamaRTR
quote:
Can we afford both?
Easily, as well as a few more big names. We are actually starting well under the cap this year.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:13 pm to bonethug0108
The problem is that I don't think we are even in the top 15 in cap space. Lots of teams with way more money, many of them contenders.
It's a lot of money by our standards. But not by league standards
It's a lot of money by our standards. But not by league standards
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:40 pm to Fun Bunch
A lot of those teams with cap space ALWAYS have all that cap space because they never come close to maxing out (think teams like Oak, Cle, TB, Jax, etc.).
Plus we will give competitive offers because we always backload (which again is the smart thing to do).
Now we won't win every bidding war but we will win a few.
Plus we will give competitive offers because we always backload (which again is the smart thing to do).
Now we won't win every bidding war but we will win a few.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:45 pm to bonethug0108
Also we are 21st in current space, but are within $3 mil of the 16th place team.
The only real contenders ahead of us are the Pats, Packers, and Steelers, and of those only the Pats are truly far ahead of us (those frickers just won a SB and have $60 mil in space).
LINK
There's the link for it.
The Steelers in 15th place jump about $4 mil over 16th place. Then it's pretty even until the Panthers in 10th place with another $4 mil jump over 11th.
So only the top 10 are really in a spot to majorly outbid us, and of those only the Pats are clearly a better landing spot.
We'll be in a better position too as we won't sit at $30 mil under either, as there are a couple of automatic adjustments that will happen, as well as a couple of decisions on some players.
We're looking at being closer to $40 mil under, which would put us close to the top 10.
It also helps that we only have one big money FA to resign, whereas most of those other teams have several. So a lot of that cap space is because of players becoming FAs.
The only real contenders ahead of us are the Pats, Packers, and Steelers, and of those only the Pats are truly far ahead of us (those frickers just won a SB and have $60 mil in space).
LINK
There's the link for it.
The Steelers in 15th place jump about $4 mil over 16th place. Then it's pretty even until the Panthers in 10th place with another $4 mil jump over 11th.
So only the top 10 are really in a spot to majorly outbid us, and of those only the Pats are clearly a better landing spot.
We'll be in a better position too as we won't sit at $30 mil under either, as there are a couple of automatic adjustments that will happen, as well as a couple of decisions on some players.
We're looking at being closer to $40 mil under, which would put us close to the top 10.
It also helps that we only have one big money FA to resign, whereas most of those other teams have several. So a lot of that cap space is because of players becoming FAs.
This post was edited on 2/15/17 at 11:04 pm
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:33 pm to bonethug0108
The Pats may have 60mil, but how many are under contract next year?
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:40 pm to SaintEB
Haven't looked yet. I may do that tomorrow (glance at each team's FA list) and see how that compares to cap space. We are actually pretty well off in that sense.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:54 pm to LSUZombie
Talib is way too old. Would be a huge mistake. .
Posted on 2/16/17 at 12:18 am to SaintEB
On your Pats question, they currently have 49 players under contract, but they have:
Branch
Bennett
Long
Blount
Sheard
Hightower
Ryan
Butler
who all played key roles and are FAs. So yeah that $60 mil has to stretch a long way for them.
I'll check more teams tomorrow. Any requests?
Also back on the Saints, we have 65 players under contract, and as said only Fairley will cost much more than the minimum (really not sure any others will make more than the minimum tbh; maybe if another team nabs Kruger cause I doubt we overpay again).
We will be between $37-41 mil under depending on if we keep Strief and/or Byrd (we also save another $4.6 mil on Byrd after June 1st).
Armstead and Unger's contracts will auto convert their bonuses (saving $4 mil and $2.6ish mil respectively).
Strief saves about $1.5 mil if he stays (bonus conversion), and about $3 mil if cut.
Byrd saves $3.2 mil if cut (and another $4.6 mil after June 1st).
There are a couple of other contracts that can be played with but those are the quick savers.
Branch
Bennett
Long
Blount
Sheard
Hightower
Ryan
Butler
who all played key roles and are FAs. So yeah that $60 mil has to stretch a long way for them.
I'll check more teams tomorrow. Any requests?
Also back on the Saints, we have 65 players under contract, and as said only Fairley will cost much more than the minimum (really not sure any others will make more than the minimum tbh; maybe if another team nabs Kruger cause I doubt we overpay again).
We will be between $37-41 mil under depending on if we keep Strief and/or Byrd (we also save another $4.6 mil on Byrd after June 1st).
Armstead and Unger's contracts will auto convert their bonuses (saving $4 mil and $2.6ish mil respectively).
Strief saves about $1.5 mil if he stays (bonus conversion), and about $3 mil if cut.
Byrd saves $3.2 mil if cut (and another $4.6 mil after June 1st).
There are a couple of other contracts that can be played with but those are the quick savers.
This post was edited on 2/16/17 at 12:25 am
Posted on 2/16/17 at 12:33 am to LSUZombie
If anything, the only reason I'd want Talib is so we finally have some goddamn attitude on defense.
Posted on 2/16/17 at 6:07 am to knowingabyss
quote:
If anything, the only reason I'd want Talib is so we finally have some goddamn attitude on defense.
Not disagreeing with you about giving the defense an identity, but the last time we thought we were getting a CB with attitude, we ended up with Brandon f'n Browner.
Granted Talib >>>>> Browner, but I'm just gun shy after the Browner signing.
Posted on 2/16/17 at 8:19 am to LSUZombie
This is definitely something Loomis would do. Would LOVE if we grabbed both Ingram & Branch. I could go without Talib though (personally). He's a pick-6 machine, but I just have this fear with targeting older free agent DBs.
Posted on 2/16/17 at 8:42 am to LSUZombie
Talib due $30 million over the next 3 years ($22 million the next 2 years). I would wait until he was cut and negotiate a better deal if we are interested.
Posted on 2/16/17 at 9:12 am to NOSHAU
quote:
Talib due $30 million over the next 3 years ($22 million the next 2 years). I would wait until he was cut and negotiate a better deal if we are interested.
it'd basically be a year to year deal on his 3 years left. first year might be 11 million cap hit, all is 100% cap savings if we cut.
Posted on 2/16/17 at 9:13 am to NOSHAU
quote:
Talib due $30 million over the next 3 years ($22 million the next 2 years). I would wait until he was cut and negotiate a better deal if we are interested.
Yea, better not be for anything better than a 4th or worse
The advantage though, is that you can cut him with no penalty
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News