Tagging and signing a long term deal is the best option but it'll take time. We need to bring our whole D-line back next year they earned the contracts and it won't cripple our cap space. If Mac doesn't want to tie that much cap space into the position another option is keeping Snacks, Williams and Leonard long term and to tag and trade Mo for the Falcons pick at 18 or Raiders at 14. Anything less than that value I'd just tag him and see how contract negotiations work themselves out over the summer.
I love Wilk. He is a unique talent and will be at his best the next 3-4 years from a physical standpoint. But looking at things on a balance sheets and purly from an asset/investment viewpoint it makes little sense to pay him more than 11-12 a year. We have multiple assets that are under contract and still 3-5 years younger than Mo. We have no way of knowing if these assets when fully mature will equal Mo but we also don't know if Mo starts to decline after we make a substantial investment. I personally would not try to retain Mo long term. My goal would be to maximize my return on him via trade. The Jets have way to many other holes to fill and can't tie up a third of the cap on the D-line. We need to continue to draft and develop that position similar to what the steelers seem to do at LB. continue to make that area of strength an identity for the Jets. But we will see turnover at that position so we can invest in other areas of need (LB, QB, RB, OT, C).
Mo is a good player but it is hard to call him unique when we have two other guys on the roster that could easily develop into a very similar player.
Mo had as good a regular season stat wise as Von Miller. Mo had 12 sacks, Miller had 11. Mo had 39 tackles, Miller had 30. Both guys are 26 years old. Is anyone saying Denver should let Von test free agency? No way... He was the Super Bowl MVP and is in his prime. I know it will hurt to pay Mo his money, but thats what good teams do. Pay their studs as they are reaching their prime. A quote from John Elway: “We’d much rather have the tough decisions than the easy decisions because if you have the tough decisions, you have a lot of great players," executive vice president of football operations/general manager John Elway said. “To try and keep this puzzle together is the challenge. It’s going to be hard, but we look forward to it and think we can do it.’’ Frankly I'd rather pay Mo, Franchise Snacks and let Sheldon test free agency. Who knows what shenanigans Shel will get himself into in the next year. Mo is a professional.
How is his leg healing? I don't see this as "Mo vs. Snacks" I think probably it's more like "Mo vs. Snacks and one/two other players", fighting for the same 16 mil. Can we find someone with 70+% of Mo's production, for 50-% of his money? Sheldon may be a meathead, but if he can stay on the field (out of jail/suspension ) along with Williams and an unknown 70% player, I don't see us paying Mo that kind of long term money. We still need to sign a lot of other players, money will be tight without keeping Mo, really tight with him. Trade for picks.
I love Wilk too, but like you, I don't think it makes much sense to pay him $14-$16 million per year. I agree with most of your post, except for the part about continuing to draft and develop the DE position. In time yes, but not now. The Jets have already expended too many draft picks on the DL over the last 5-6 years and ignored other position groups. The LBs, OL, WRs, and to a lesser extent, the secondary need some attention as well. Imo if they trade Mo, then they could draft another DE in a year or two (depending on what happens with Richardson). If he stays out of trouble, then they could possibly keep him and hold off on drafting another DE for another couple of years. If not, then they may need to draft one sooner, but hopefully they can find a gem in the 3rd or 4th round. They've used enough 1st round picks on the DL to last a decade or more. The DL isn't even the most important position group in our D.
We can't afford to lose both big Mo and Harrison this offseason..... We have to keep one. Keeping Mo long term sounds enticing but his contract demands are going to be very high, I mean veerrryy high and the fact of the matter is we have two players who are younger and have more upside than Mo and are playing on cheaper contracts. Tagging Mo is the right choice, can't let that type of talent walk out the door without at least trying to see if we can get him for a reasonable price, however I don't see that happening and I believe we should entertain trading him. He should bring in a nice haul of draft picks which can be vital for the long term success of the team. By freeing up the $15.5 million in cap space this should allow us to sign Harrison and Fitzmagic for around the same amount, give us some good draft picks, and still have some cap room to make some moves in free-agency.
There's no way the Jets would get anything even remotely of value for Richardson at this point. That makes no sense. He may be suspended again next season. He needs to stay out of trouble for at least a year and have a great season next season for the Jets to hope to be able to get anything out of him if they want to trade him.
Sheldon's stock is low due to his off-season antics. This is when you extend him, not when you trade him.
If we are keeping Mo (big if) do we take the youth movement a step further by cutting Brick and / or Mangold loose (trade value?).
Actually you don't do either, you wait till he proves himself both on and off the field for the remainder of his rookie contract. Unless he takes a contract with very low guarantees and high incentives. If he is a malcontent and doesn't sure up his act you trade him just to get him off your team.
First you ask them to take a pay cut and improve their cap number to a reasonable number. They are great veterans and long time Jets and deserve to be treated as so. Although getting some project players that can potentially take over for them at some point in the draft should be entertained.
We learned the hard way with Mo, if do not sign Sheldon to an extension this year the price goes way, way up. Otherwise, after Sheldon gets his $16 million franchise tag we will have no money left to sign anyone else.
Exactly. And if you have Mo, Williams, Sheldon, Mauldin, Harris and another high pick edge rusher TBD that is a very good to great core for your front seven.
I don't think the Jets could even possibly be thinking of cutting Mangold. I'll be surprised if they even approach him about taking a pay cut, but less so about restructuring his contract. Cutting Brick is not very likely because this isn't a good year for OTs. Neither of the top two (Tunsil or Stanley) will fall to us at #20. Based on my admittedly limited research, there's only one or two other OT who may project to LT (Le'Raven Clark and Jason Spriggs) and they may be good prospects, but either may need some work and may not be ready to start for a year. Chances that either would be there at the Jets' pick in the 2nd round are probably slim and none. They'd have to trade down from their 1st round pick to have any hopes to take either of them, and even then, what if both are a year away from being ready (if then). There aren't any good options in FA, either unless Joe Thomas is released by the Browns. They may (read hopefully) and possibly even probably will ask Brick to take a pay cut, but I hope they won't ask him to restructure. I don't think he should get any more money, and don't want any future dead money cap hits because of him.
Good point, but BleedGreen4ever has a valid point as well. The last thing you'd want to do is sign him to an extension and then have him get in trouble again and be suspended for 8-10 games if not an entire season. If I'm Mac, the only way I even consider extending Sheldon now is if the contract is incentive laden AND there is a clause or clauses that will protect the Jets if Richardson gets in trouble again, and the NFLPA may not allow that. I would want something where if he is suspended for a year, he is paid nothing and the Jets have the option to terminate the contract with no resulting cap hit. I would also want the incentives tied not only to on-field performance, but to off-field behavior.
