Originally Posted by Dante84:
If he's a rental and we let him walk, and he signs a big deal next year elsewhere, do we get a Comp for him, assuming we don't cancel it out with a splash signing of our own?
No.
A compensatory free agent must be someone who's contract expires, not one who's contract is terminated. Non-tendered free agents also can't qualify because the team in question had the ability to retain them and elected not to. They only count if they are free agents due to a complete lack of team control.
And as Adams is a rental in practice but not by contract, he'd end up getting cut and wouldn't be factored into the CFA figures. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DRM08:
Makes sense. He’s very expensive and he bad-mouthed Andy/Veach on his way out the door. Those guys had been very supportive of him in his career despite all of his self-inflicted baggage off the field. And he still had zero perspective or gratitude in the trade process.
I think the team is probably fine losing the 'personality' that comes with Tyreek Hill.
I could see him wearing thin unless he's just absolutely torching creation. And shit, he might do precisely that here.
But the team has moved beyond trying to keep him restrained and I don't know that they're super eager to get back on that train. Moreover, KEEPING someone reined in is a hell of a lot easier than actually reining someone in that's already gone off the rails a bit.
Tyreek's time in Miami has been...turbulent. And I think the Chiefs would have more difficulty than ever (especially now that he's gotten paid) in keeping him in check.
I just don't think that's a ride they're going to sign up for unless/until he's towards the back end of his career and has mellowed a bit. [Reply]
The Cheetah is owed 26-30 million per year in guaranteed money. And besides the high-end salary he's owed, the Dolphins are going to want draft capital. For a 30 year old receiver. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
No. He's still got 2 years after this. 36 million per though so he's getting cut by any team that doesn't work out an extension with him.
An extension is highly unlikely. They would need to completely tear up the existing deal, not add to it.
That’s going to be a major hurdle for teams like us, even in some world the Raiders would trade him to us. You are definitely only trading for a half a year with him. You’d essentially be cutting him after this season and giving him a new deal at 32 years old and we already know he’s going to the highest bidder.
The conversations of adding Adams or Tyreek shouldn’t be taken seriously. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I think the team is probably fine losing the 'personality' that comes with Tyreek Hill.
I could see him wearing thin unless he's just absolutely torching creation. And shit, he might do precisely that here.
But the team has moved beyond trying to keep him restrained and I don't know that they're super eager to get back on that train. Moreover, KEEPING someone reined in is a hell of a lot easier than actually reining someone in that's already gone off the rails a bit.
Tyreek's time in Miami has been...turbulent. And I think the Chiefs would have more difficulty than ever (especially now that he's gotten paid) in keeping him in check.
I just don't think that's a ride they're going to sign up for unless/until he's towards the back end of his career and has mellowed a bit.
This might be true but if it is then why did the Chiefs reportedly make an offer to re-sign him? [Reply]
There are people that think that Miami would sign Tyreek to a new 3/90 deal and a few months later trade him to their biggest rival for a late first and third.
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
Why? We won with Toney and Moore.
Razor thin margins. Just because things have happened doesn't mean they will continue to happen. We actually won because we got rid of Toney and Moore...and saw a bigger role for Rice. Now without him and Hollywood (unless some crazy good news) you work to improve your team. [Reply]