38 minutes ago, paco said:

I'm a bit doped up on dayquil, so I probably could have explained what I was thinking a bit better.

 

A future pick is devalued only if used as part of a trade for a current year.  First pick of the 3rd round this year is worth 265.  First pick of the 3rd round next year is worth 96 points if used as part of a trade this year. (38 points for the first pick of the 3rd round in 2026, which is what Sheil was saying)  If not, that 2025 pick is worth 265 when the draft comes around again.

 

So if the intent is that the Eagles are hoarding picks to load up on young, inexpensive talent to remake the roster (I.E. use that pick in 2026), it is not devalued.  If they use it as part of a trade in 2024 or 2025, then the criticism is valid IMO.

 

 

 

Also, I was looking at our list of FA's next year.  I see a lot of holes to fill and very few people who would actually net us comp picks, so its possible we get 0 comp picks since we will likely need to sign a lot of people.  Given that, trading Reddick now and locking in that pick makes more sense IMO.  Now we just got to pray he meets the requirements this year AND the jets blow majorly next year.

 

 

Yup, agreed.  That's kind of what I was trying to say.  Until we know the intent, it's not worth getting worked up about from the devaluation perspective.

 

You explained it just fine the first time. I was just using your post as a jumping in point in terms of how future picks are far too devalued as an asset. 

3 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Whatever point he tried to make, it was a dumb one. The idea of a 2026 3 = 2024 5 is absurd. Of course the 2026 3 is significantly more valuable, and I don’t care what any chart says. 

I agree that I can’t view it as the same. If they traded for a 5th I’d be infinitely more annoyed. But if Sheil’s point was that the Eagles should’ve gotten more for Reddick and the return was disappointing, I agree with that too.

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

You explained it just fine the first time. I was just using your post as a jumping in point in terms of how future picks are far too devalued as an asset. 

It's disingenuous for folks to try to diminish the trade by saying the Eagles got a 5th round pick in value.  That's like saying if the Eagles had gotten a 2026 first round pick that it's actually the value of a 3rd round pick.  For all anyone knows, such a pick could end up being a top 5 overall pick -- not 3rd round value in any practical measure.

Although very unlikely, the pick for Reddick could end up being a high 2nd round pick in 2026.  More likely, it will be a top-half 3rd round pick at minimum.

On 3/31/2024 at 9:43 AM, greendestiny27 said:

We did trade McNabb on Easter Sunday 

I was literally in a cave when that happened  

On 3/31/2024 at 11:11 AM, ManuManu said:

 

Hollywood Brown just jumped up on my draft sheet  

1 hour ago, brkmsn said:

Reddick isn't the only player in the NFL with an agent. I have no problem with the business side of football. But as a player, when you start to use "malcontent" as a weapon for negotiations as opposed to using free agency, there's a bit of a red flag. It's better to part ways.

The Eagles didn't appear opposed to extending Reddick or giving him a raise. The two sides just weren't close enough together to get there. Playing out the current contract is the best move for Reddick. Free agency will drive up his price if he continues to perform at his current level. Waiting another year will only see the bar go up. If he were extended now, in two seasons he'd be in the same boat.

Reddick is just screwed. His best hope was an extension with the Eagles for another decent pay day. They tried. Eagles were like nope...and he's like well F you. No loyalty to me no loyalty to you I'm taking my 10+ sack talents elsewhere. Prove it deal being another year into 30 isn't going to yield much. That bar doesn't go up much in the 30s.

18 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

I didn't hear anything in this video that assumes he will improve even more.  The narrator even says it remains to be seen if his efficiency will stay as high with increased reps.  He said his effectiveness should continue, even with increased reps.  

Are you looking for efficiency, or production?  The top 10 players in sacks last season all played anywhere between 65-95% of the defensive snaps:

Maxx Crosby -- 1,081 snaps (95.41%)

Danielle Hunter -- 1,006 snaps (88.95%)

TJ Watt -- 931 snaps (82.46%)

Khalil Mack -- 934 snaps (81.08%)

Micah Parsons -- 864 snaps (80.75%)

Josh Allen -- 880 snaps (79.14%)

Myles Garrett -- 812 snaps (76.46%)

Montez Sweat -- 763 snaps (68.50%)

Trey Hendrickson -- 744 snaps (67.82%)

Justin Madubuike -- 757 snaps (65.43%)

 

Reddick played 862 snaps last season, which was 74.18% of the Eagles defensive snaps.  With what Huff is being paid, it can be assumed he'll get a similar workload.  Most of the expectations will center around productivity -- and, as I said yesterday on here -- if Huff and Sweat are able to get double-digit sacks, then what are the Eagles really missing by not paying Reddick $20M+ as he likely demanded?  

That's a big IF given what we saw last year from this defense.

 

 

20 hours ago, T-1000 said:

1 sacks in the first four games, 2.5 sacks over the last six games of the season

So 3.5 sacks total over 10 games (59%) to start and end the season but nah he wasn't invisible for most of the season, lol. 

I don't know whether to laugh or feel sorry for people when they are in denial this badly.

This post made me wonder during that 7 game span where he got 8.5 sacks, how each offensive line ranked.  Was he feasting on a stretch of poor O-Lines.  Per PFF (I know) and the sack total in ()

3 KC (1)
6 DAL (1)
27 WSH (1)
20 MIA (0)
23 NYJ (2.5)
28 LAR (2)
27 WSH (1)

 

The answer is, sort of.  Get got 1 each against 2 top 6 O-lines but also got 6.5 in 4 games against lines in the bottom 10.

55 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

oh this is terrific! Theyre going all the way this year!

2nd round or bust

35 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

You explained it just fine the first time. I was just using your post as a jumping in point in terms of how future picks are far too devalued as an asset. 

Gotcha.  Sorry, medicine head today.

18 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

No cap savings but we won't have to decide on the 5th year op.....  wait a minute!!!!!!

26 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

 

46 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

You explained it just fine the first time. I was just using your post as a jumping in point in terms of how future picks are far too devalued as an asset. 

Depends on the job security of the GM, Howie can take the long view b/c he's not going anywhere. Other GMs know they may not be around to use that 2026 pick!

1 hour ago, wussbasket said:

The best explanation I saw broke it down something like this:

The Eagles have a potential 2025 dead cap problem they need to navigate this offseason. Dead cap hits with Cox, Kelce, Graham, Reddick/Sweat

• If Reddick played for the Eagles in 2024, he would have a 2025 dead cap between $13.5 - $14.7mm (And the possibility of getting a 3rd round comp pick in 2026)
  • Trade before 6/1 - Saves $2.2mm in cap space in 2024 AND no dead cap 2025 (They ended up paying the roster bonus, so I think this is down to $1.2mm in cap savings for 2024)
  • Trade post 6/1 - Saves $15.9mm in cap space in 2024, BUT $13.5 - $14.7mm dead cap 2025 (
  • Extend - Allows them to spread out the dead cap in 2025 to future seasons.

Basically Howie looked at this and saw Reddick/Sweat can save dead cap AND potentially recuperate draft capital. He needs to cut the dead cap hits down for 2025, might as well get a pick in return for doing so. Sweat agreed to the restructure, Reddick wanted more money, Eagles needed to get 2025 dead cap off the books, Reddicks gone.

Plus Reddick was replaced by the Nolan Smith selection last year.  Sweat replacement is Huff.  

37 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

They could have used someone else to make it more believable lol because there's no way in hell we trade Smith

38 minutes ago, judunno said:

That's a big IF given what we saw last year from this defense.

From a personnel and salary cap management standpoint, it appears to me they're still trying to build a top 5 offense and a middle-tier defense, with hopes that Fangio can make mid-tier talent into a top 10 unit.

Their back 7 on defense is still extremely uninspiring; I assume they're hoping for one more good year out of Slay, some sort of rebound season from Bradberry, a healthy season from Nakobe Dean, a resurgence from Devin White .... on the surface it looks much more like wishing than planning.  If it was me making the draft picks, I'd make #22, 50 and 53 a concerted effort to infuse some real talent to the LB and DB group -- but we'll see what Howie has in mind.  

1 minute ago, Alphagrand said:

From a personnel and salary cap management standpoint, it appears to me they're still trying to build a top 5 offense and a middle-tier defense, with hopes that Fangio can make mid-tier talent into a top 10 unit.

Their back 7 on defense is still extremely uninspiring; I assume they're hoping for one more good year out of Slay, some sort of rebound season from Bradberry, a healthy season from Nakobe Dean, a resurgence from Devin White .... on the surface it looks much more like wishing than planning.  If it was me making the draft picks, I'd make #22, 50 and 53 a concerted effort to infuse some real talent to the LB and DB group -- but we'll see what Howie has in mind.  

Yeah I think your spot on with the plan that they're attempting to implement. Just hate that brand of football for an Eagles defense. Looks like a rebuild on that side of the ball but doesn't look like they're rebuilding with urgency. Hanging their hopes on the offense carrying them and bending more than breaking on D.

8 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

They could have used someone else to make it more believable lol because there's no way in hell we trade Smith

Trading for Dak would be more believable.

1 hour ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Damn you.  That did get my pulse up for a second.  

Until I read the bit about 28 years  ... to troll and April fools on the same post.  *Chef's Kiss*

 

 

48 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Plus Reddick was replaced by the Nolan Smith selection last year.  Sweat replacement is Huff.  

Smith replaces Reddick ON PAPER, we have yet to see that translate to ON THE FIELD.   In fact, it might very well be because Smith hasn't shown that he is capable of replacing Reddick ON THE FIELD, that they went and signed Huff.   I don't see Huff as a Sweat replacement... unless they plan to eliminate any type of a hand in the ground DE from the defensive alignment.   I don't think Huff played with his hand in the ground at any point with the Jets.  I think the plan long term might be to have 2 stand up EDGE LBs... and either one or both could rush the passer, or drop into coverage.  

 

But, while they still have Sweat, dropping him into coverage would be more ludicrous than dropping Reddick into coverage.   Sweat can't run at all.

 

Anyone who applies "time value of money" to NFL draft capital should not be listened to. They don't understand finance, nor do they understand the economic arguments around discounting future picks. 

To put it into perspective, I hope everyone enjoys our 4th rounder from the Saints this year. Sure it's the 50th overall pick, but it's actually a 4th round pick because the Eagles got it in a trade 2 years ago. 

Sheil wasn't really saying that though. It was just a roundabout way of saying the Eagles didn't get very much trade value wise for Haason Reddick. He wasn't diminishing the value of the pick itself to the Eagles when they use it.

It's just a fact that 2026 picks are less valuable than 2024 picks and 2025 picks, and he was just kinda spitballing in real time with the equivalence in the trade value. He didn't come out and say "The Eagles basically got a 5th for Haason Reddick."

Bo said he'd be pretty blown away if the Eagles went edge in round 1. He said the Eagles have so many other issues to address, and one of the "benefits" to trading Reddick is they only have so many snaps to go around at edge as it is, guys would be unhappy with their snaps, so trading Reddick and then adding an edge doesn't really make a whole lot of sense.And Zach added that it's a weak edge class and they'd be taking the 4th-ish best edge in a weak edge class, doesn't think it's a good investment with your first rounder.

Zach doesn't think they will go edge at 22 either.

1 minute ago, Sack that QB said:

It's just a fact that 2026 picks are less valuable than 2024 picks and 2025 picks, and he was just kinda spitballing in real time with the equivalence in the trade value. He didn't come out and say "The Eagles basically got a 5th for Haason Reddick."

This is only true for GMs who have to worry about job security. 

In practice, this is not true because not all NFL drafts are equal and not everyone's teams are equal.

Imagine you are the Arizona Cardinals. You are offered 11 and 23 from the Vikings to move off #4 overall. You are then offered #12 and a 2025 1st from Denver to move down. The logical move is to take Denver's picks because they will likely be drafting in the top 10 against next year, but if you go by the chart Arizona should take the Vikings' offer. The public charts are not equipped to handle future projections. That's not what they were designed to do.