Free agent news - Dolphins and general NFL

mercury22nathan wrote:

JMP wrote:How is it "taking a risk"?  They tried to sign Wilkins - he didn't want to sign.  That's not a risk.

he didn't want to sign for what they were offering.  because they can't offer market value due to their salary commitments to previously signed FAs.

How do you know they didn't offer market value? If I had to guess, I'd suspect that's the issue - they did in fact offer market value for a player of his caliber, but he wants more. And again, I don't blame him.

The fact is, the Dolphins can offer Wilkins whatever they want to. The salary cap is not an issue after this season. But that doesn't mean they should make Wilkins one of the highest-paid DTs in the NFL if they don't want to.

JMP wrote:Or, they chose to use draft assets to add veteran talent.

you are absolutely correct. that is exactly what they have done. and when you do that, you forgo the opportunity for having a talented player on a team/cap friendly 4/5 year deal. it works for a few years, but then the bills come due as we are seeing now.

JMP wrote:How do you know they didn't offer market value?  If I had to guess, I'd suspect that's the issue - they did in fact offer market value for a player of his caliber, but he wants more.  And again, I don't blame him.

they could not have offered him market value. they don't currently have the salary cap room to make him an offer at all.

maybe that's it. they intended to offer him a value for a player of what they believe to be his caliber. its just that a good portion of the league might think he is better (and worth more) than they do. market value is what he can get on the open market - not what they think his value is.

mercury22nathan wrote:the bills come due as we are seeing now.

No "bill has come due". The Dolphins can offer Wilkins whatever they want to offer him, and there's nothing preventing them from making him the highest DT to ever play the game. I have no idea if that's what they want to do, but it's well within their means if that's what they choose. Any new deal will have a minimal cap hit this season, and cap space is not an issue at all moving forward.

mercury22nathan wrote:

they could not have offered him market value.  they don't currently have the salary cap room to make him an offer at all.

maybe that's it.  they intended to offer him a value for a player of what they believe to be his caliber.  its just that a good portion of the league might think he is better (and worth more) than they do.  market value is what he can get on the open market - not what they think his value is.

You and I have no idea what they offered him. Market value for a player like Wilkins is probably much less than he thinks he's worth. And cap space is irrelevant until the league season begins, and has no bearing on any new deal they can make with Wilkins, Hunt, etc. We'll be well under the cap before the deadline.

We also have no idea what the rest of the league thinks of Wilkins, although we do know that he's never made a Pro Bowl or been named All Pro. So maybe he is overestimating his own value? Who knows - but we'll find out soon enough.

JMP - No problem. I told myself the Phins probably were not going to re-sign Wilkins, but... Any way, this all might be an elaborate smokescreen to put some pressure on Wilkins!!! Right? RIGHT?  

I do think Wilkins is going to get an offer for more than Miami wants to pay.

Question - If you knew the Phins were going to draft Byron Murphy or Braden Fiske or Kris Jenkins in this draft, would you mind them letting Wilkins walk? And just for DF316, or even T'Vondre Sweat?  

finfanatic wrote:
Question - If you knew the Phins were going to draft Byron Murphy or Braden Fiske or Kris Jenkins in this draft, would you mind them letting Wilkins walk? And just for DF316, or even T'Vondre Sweat?  

My assumption would be that the Phins will add a draft pick at DT if Wilkins walks. But it is also possible that the Phins sign a starting-caliber DT in free agency.

I don't necessarily want to use a #1 on a DT, but any of those guys would certainly soften the blow of losing Wilkins.

How's that for avoiding the question?

DEVASTATING!!! HEARTBREAKING!!! UTTERLY SOUL CRUSHING!!!      

I might not be posting the rest of the week. My hands could be too cramped from me wringing them in abject despair 24/7.

I will say everybody in the thread raises good points even while disagreeing, which is why this is the best Fins forum on the internet and maybe even the best message board out there period. Seriously, you don't even wanna know what others are like.      

Cheer up, 316 - Wilkins isn't gone yet!

Turns out that this latest round of Wilkins debate was created by ESPN's Jeremy Fowler, who said that the Phins won't use the franchise tag on Wilkins, which of course means he'll get to test free agency if a deal isn't reached. There are two interesting things about this story: 1, Fowler has no ties at all to the Dolphins, and 2, it was already common knowledge (or, at least it should have been given the cap implications of the tag) that the Phins weren't using the franchise tag on Wilkins. So really, we're all in panic mode because of a tweet that provided no new info and told us what we already knew!

Like I said, a deal will be reached or it won't. But nothing is set in stone and we don't know what's happening behind the scenes. A lot will happen between now and March 13.

Part of me wonders if both sides are waiting to see what happens with Chris Jones. That is the contract that will set the market for DTs. And, love Wilkins as I do, he is not at Chris Jones level - at all.

JMP wrote:Like I said, a deal will be reached or it won't.  But nothing is set in stone and we don't know what's happening behind the scenes.

Part of me wonders if both sides are waiting to see what happens with Chris Jones.  That is the contract that will set the market for DTs. And, love Wilkins as I do, he is not at Chris Jones level - at all.

I have agreed with this from the start. But it's still sad

A lot will happen between now and March 13.

Tell me about it! I find myself holding my breath in suspense as to whether I personally will make it until that fateful day.    

What's obvious to me is that Wilkins did what every player in his position always does: declare in a passive-aggressive way he still wants to be with his current team while deliberately asking for more than they are willing or able to pay just to be able to play the "gee golly gosh, I WANTED to stay but dagnabit, they were just too darn cheap!" card.      

FYI here's a list of all DTs with double digit sack seasons since Wilkins was drafted (2019). Notice who's not on the list and more interestingly, who is...

https://stathead.com/tiny/UcOoI

That is interesting DF. In other words, we may have already locked up the DT we wanted to prioritize.

I will say, re-allocating some resources from DL to LB may not be a bad move. Space eaters are great, but a couple of dynamic linebackers can really transform a defense.

Its bad timing. We went and got high priced Free agents just before our own drafted guys were about to hit the market.

Wilkins, Tua, Holland, Waddle, and Philliips are all in that category. Granted they structured deals to get out of it which is sad because you once again set up for failur not success. Chubb had a great year coming from last year but he's eating a lot of cap space. Restructuring will get you relief but does it solve the issue down the road? Probably not. Wilkins is a good, maybe even better than good. But do you keep him or keep the QB? I for one don't think Tua is worth top dollar. But in the NFL, they overpay. But when you pay the QB what will no doubt be up there with Elite(contracts only) How do you fill the rest of the team?

Miami has missed in the most key elements in contructing your roster.....the 4th 5th and 6th rounds of the draft, when for years we used to get quite a bit. Van Ginkel is the only one in recent memory. These are the guys that can blossom in 3-4 years and not command a heft salary, after that there's no telling. But look whats come of Van Ginkel. How many have we missed in the first? Tunsil, Fitzpatrick, Tindall, Igbo, I mean the list goes on.

Yes, drafting well solves a lot of problems for the team in the current structure of the NFL. Without those talented, maybe starting, rookies playing on their first contract you have to go out and find (cheap) free agents. But the way the Dolphins are doing it, finding free agents and signing them to one year deals, there is going to be an endless roster rebuild every season.

THAT is why I say the way Grier has been building the team is not sustainable. Instead of having a drafted rookie playing for five or four years and developing while on that initial cheap contract, you are looking for another one year free agent.

All while losing players (maybe) like Wilkins, Hunt, etc...

You can never build a team built for long sustained winning IMO.

Grier made a comment that Merc posted IIRC about how you have to build through the draft, so maybe he has come around. We shall see this season I guess.

Using the nonexclusive franchise tag on Wilkins would have resulted in a 2024 cap hit and salary of $22.1 million for next season. Signing Wilkins to a long-term contract — which remains a possibility — likely would result in an annual salary in that range but could significantly lower his 2024 cap number depending on how the contract is structured.

One reason why using the franchise tag on Wilkins became unappealing for the team: the Dolphins are $31 million over the salary cap, per overthecap.com. That means they would need to clear out more than $70 million in cap space, over the next week, to not only get under the cap but also have the room to allocate the $22.1 million franchise tag for Wilkins and conduct other business early in free agency.

Miami will need to sign a veteran tackle to play alongside Zach Sieler, whether it’s Wilkins or a player from a fairly limited group of starting, affordable free agents defensive tackles.

https://www.miamiherald.com/sports/nfl/miami-dolphins/article286171411.html

Despite Grier only a week ago saying that in order to keep Wilkins all options were on the table – including various forms of the tag – Miami truly knew it could not afford Wilkins under a any kind of tag arrangement. Clearing out another $70M in space (they already got rid of Ogbah and Howard) just to get under the cap and tag Wilkins – and then not being able to do anything else – just wasn’t financially viable due to the cap constraints in which Miami has placed themselves with all the expensive FA signings.

However, if Miami really wanted Wilkins, they could’ve offered a competitive deal structured in a way that lowered his cap number this coming season. Miami (for now) has chosen not to do that. I can only conclude it boils down to one of two reasons (and maybe a little bit of both):

One, in looking at the current cap situation and the forecast of the future extensions (Tua, Waddle, Phillips, etc.) on the salary cap beyond 2024, Miami truly felt they could not afford the asking price Wilkins’ agent believes he’ll be able to get on the open market.

Or two, Miami does not believe Wilkins is truly deserving from a talent perspective of the value Wilkins’ agent believes he’ll likely be able to get on the open market.

They either can’t afford him or they think he is not worth it – and believe they can find a more affordable, middle-of-the-road DT talent that can fill his shoes without a significant drop off in performance. Or maybe he just doesn’t fit new D coordinator Weaver’s scheme?

finfanatic wrote:But the way the Dolphins are doing it, finding free agents and signing them to one year deals, there is going to be an endless roster rebuild every season.

But that's not the Dolphins way...it's the NFL's way. Those one-year deals are like gold: you get a good veteran player at a value price, and it doesn't wreck your cap. It's smart business. Sure, it can create roster holes - but if the player has a good season, you get first dibs on keeping him. And if he walks, you just pick up another player. I think it's a great strategy - it's almost like a loophole to get around cap issues. Of course, you're not going to do this with too many players - but it's an easy way to fill holes without wrecking the cap.

As an example, look at the Super Bowl rosters, where several key players were on one-year deals:
49ers: Jon Feliciano, Clelin Ferrell
Chiefs: Mike Edwards, Drue Tranquil, Richie James, Donovan Smith

(There may be more, but this was what I found in a quick search.)

Major roster rebuilds are now part of the NFL every season. As I posted elsewhere, most teams are going to experience 30-40% roster turnover each offseason. While not all of that includes starters, it does certainly include key players and positions on every team.

mercury22nathan wrote:

Using the nonexclusive franchise tag on Wilkins would have resulted in a 2024 cap hit and salary of $22.1 million for next season. Signing Wilkins to a long-term contract — which remains a possibility — likely would result in an annual salary in that range but could significantly lower his 2024 cap number depending on how the contract is structured.

One reason why using the franchise tag on Wilkins became unappealing for the team: the Dolphins are $31 million over the salary cap, per overthecap.com. That means they would need to clear out more than $70 million in cap space, over the next week, to not only get under the cap but also have the room to allocate the $22.1 million franchise tag for Wilkins and conduct other business early in free agency.

Miami will need to sign a veteran tackle to play alongside Zach Sieler, whether it’s Wilkins or a player from a fairly limited group of starting, affordable free agents defensive tackles.

https://www.miamiherald.com/sports/nfl/miami-dolphins/article286171411.html

Despite Grier only a week ago saying that in order to keep Wilkins all options were on the table – including various forms of the tag – Miami truly knew it could not afford Wilkins under a any kind of tag arrangement.  Clearing out another $70M in space (they already got rid of Ogbah and Howard) just to get under the cap and tag Wilkins – and then not being able to do anything else – just wasn’t financially viable due to the cap constraints in which Miami has placed themselves with all the expensive FA signings.

However, if Miami really wanted Wilkins, they could’ve offered a competitive deal structured in a way that lowered his cap number this coming season.  Miami (for now) has chosen not to do that.  I can only conclude it boils down to one of two reasons (and maybe a little bit of both):

One, in looking at the current cap situation and the forecast of the future extensions (Tua, Waddle, Phillips, etc.) on the salary cap beyond 2024, Miami truly felt they could not afford the asking price Wilkins’ agent believes he’ll be able to get on the open market.

Or two, Miami does not believe Wilkins is truly deserving from a talent perspective of the value Wilkins’ agent believes he’ll likely be able to get on the open market.

They either can’t afford him or they think he is not worth it – and believe they can find a more affordable, middle-of-the-road DT talent that can fill his shoes without a significant drop off in performance.  Or maybe he just doesn’t fit new D coordinator Weaver’s scheme?

The Dolphins can absolutely afford Wilkins. Cap space is not an issue moving forward, even with the other soon-to-be FAs on the roster.

I think the Dolphins have a max amount they're willing to pay at any position, and if a free agent wants more than that they are free to test the open market. That's the way most if not all teams operate.

You also have to wonder how smart it is to build your team around a $25+ million defensive tackle that's never sniffed a Pro Bowl or All Pro. Wilkins brings so much to the table, both on and off the field, but I'm just not sure making him one of the highest paid DTs in the NFL is the way to build a championship roster.

I don't know who will actually be available when all is said and done, but right now there are quite a few good DTs set to become unrestricted free agents: Javon Kinlaw, Sheldon Rankins, DJ Reader, Quinton Jefferson, Adam Butler, Grover Stewart, DaQuan Jones, Justin Jones...and of course, at the top of the list, Chris Jones and Justin Madubuike.

One, in looking at the current cap situation and the forecast of the future extensions (Tua, Waddle, Phillips, etc.) on the salary cap beyond 2024, Miami truly felt they could not afford the asking price Wilkins’ agent believes he’ll be able to get on the open market.

Or two, Miami does not believe Wilkins is truly deserving from a talent perspective of the value Wilkins’ agent believes he’ll likely be able to get on the open market.

They either can’t afford him or they think he is not worth it – and believe they can find a more affordable, middle-of-the-road DT talent that can fill his shoes without a significant drop off in performance. Or maybe he just doesn’t fit new D coordinator Weaver’s scheme?

Yes. I believe it is a blend of BOTH reasons you talked about in your post.

First of all, realize that Zach Sieler had statistically the same season in 2023 - for roughly half the market value being discussed for Wilkins. Why? And do you need both? The answer is probably not. Whether you get a space-eater late in the draft, or even UDFA, or you sign a journeyman at that position and pair them with Sieler, what kind of dropoff can we expect?

Now, your point about the upcoming FAs really resonates. Instead of paying one DT decent money, and a second DT a market-setting amount of money - is it smarter to double down on different roster positions instead? Actually, I think the answer is yes. I love the Sieler - Wilkins combo at DT. What's more important to me is keeping Chubb - Phillips together. Because they are talented pass rushers that opposing offenses must game plan for, and it's really hard to handle TWO elite edge rushers. Building on this approach, I would also rather have Hill - Waddle on high money deals. Why? Because it puts defenses in a tough position when they have to face two legitimate deep threats at WR. Especially since MOST defenses league wide have one really good corner. It's rare to have two like we did last season.

I was listening to a podcast last night and Omar made this point: If we had "tagged" Wilkins, the salary cap hit on the tag would basically wipe out the chance to sign about 4 veteran players to FA deals. You could essentially re-sign Connor Williams, Van Ginkel, Robert Hunt and a fourth random FA for the equivalent 2024 cap hit. In that scenario, yes I would much rather take the two interior OL who we know play very well in this system, as well as our backup pass rusher, and a fourth player over signing Wilkins to a market setting deal.

All in all I think the writing was on the wall last year when we signed Sieler after negotiations stalled with Wilkins. At that point signing him to an extension would have only been realistic had Wilkins had an average year, or a season representing some kind of regression in his performance. And if that had happened, would we really still want him?

I don't know who will actually be available when all is said and done, but right now there are quite a few good DTs set to become unrestricted free agents: Javon Kinlaw, Sheldon Rankins, DJ Reader, Quinton Jefferson, Adam Butler, Grover Stewart, DaQuan Jones, Justin Jones...and of course, at the top of the list, Chris Jones and Justin Madubuike.

I think I heard Leonard Williams is out there as well. Older player but can still be very effective, and won't be looking for a deal nearly what teams will throw at Wilkins...

Good call, white - Leonard Williams is a free agent too.

Good post about Wilkins as well. It is a lot to think about. On the one hand, you hate to lose homegrown talent. But as you point out, all the money Wilkins will get may very well be better spent at a variety of positions - so we can in theory improve several areas of the team instead of remaining status quo at one single position.

And another angle: this site lists the top 10 highest paid DTs entering the 2023 season - https://www.profootballnetwork.com/who-are-the-highest-paid-defensive-tackles-in-the-nfl-in-2023/. Note that of the top 10, only Aaron Donald, Jason Hargrave and Chris Jones were on playoff teams. It's difficult to pull anything definitive from this by itself, but it is interesting IMO.

Umix10 wrote:Its bad timing.  We went and got high priced Free agents just before our own drafted guys were about to hit the market.  

Wilkins, Tua, Holland, Waddle, and Philliips are all in that category.  Granted they structured deals to get out of it which is sad because you once again set up for failur not success.  Chubb had a great year coming from last year but he's eating a lot of cap space. Restructuring will get you relief but does it solve the issue down the road?  Probably not.  Wilkins is a good, maybe even better than good.  But do you keep him or keep the QB?  I for one don't think Tua is worth top dollar.  But in the NFL, they overpay.  But when you pay the QB what will no doubt be up there with Elite(contracts only)  How do you fill the rest of the team?

Miami has missed in the most key elements in contructing your roster.....the 4th 5th and 6th rounds of the draft, when for years we used to get quite a bit.  Van Ginkel is the only one in recent memory.   These are the guys that can blossom in 3-4 years and not command a heft salary, after that there's no telling.  But look whats come of Van Ginkel.  How many have we missed in the first?  Tunsil, Fitzpatrick, Tindall, Igbo, I mean the list goes on.

The good news is that the contracts Chubb, Hill and Ramsey signed were designed to be restructured, and we have the cap space in future years to do that without a problem.

The real issue with Wilkins is value. He will become one of the highest-paid DTs in the league wherever he signs, but is he worth it? Of course free agents always get overpaid - but do we really want to overpay a DT? Wilkins is one of my favorite Dolphins, and I was on board with keeping him - but the more I think about it the more I just don't think it makes sense.

And once Tua gets his deal, drafting becomes much more important. We'll need more draft classes like 2021 to remain competitive.

This one's for 316: The Panthers have used the franchise tag on Brian Burns.

Other news:

The Broncos are releasing QB Russell Wilson.
The Jets are releasing underwhelming TE C.J. Uzomah.
The Bears traded a 5th round pick to the Bills for backup OG Ryan Bates.

Yeah, once I heard Wilkins and his agent were pushing for top of the DT Market I knew it was all over. As much as Wilkins brings to the team, all the leadership and other intangibles, his and Sieler's camaraderie, he is asking to get paid like a DT who leads the league in sacks every year and makes the Pro Bowl repeatedly! As much as I like him, he is not that and may never be IMO.

Remember: Weaver came into his interview and laid out a plan to fix the defense that supposedly BLEW AWAY Grier and Co. Maybe this was the plan? Take the money you save by not re-signing Wilkins and re-sign some other key players and go get some free agents??

JMP - You only want to use the one year contracts to fill a few holes. What you really need are players who spend multiple years in the system and already know what to do. If you are rolling over 40% of you team year to year, you are losing a lot of that knowledge build up IMO.

Of course, the Phins could re-up for another year some of these one year guys I suppose. But in this case, the defense is going to be a whole new scheme anyway, but I do think that multiple years in the same scheme and with the same coaching staff is something the Phins should want.

Remember: Weaver came into his interview and laid out a plan to fix the defense that supposedly BLEW AWAY Grier and Co. Maybe this was the plan? Take the money you save by not re-signing Wilkins and re-sign some other key players and go get some free agents??

I remember this and it's in my mind also.

Here's my theory (well, more of a guess). Our linebackers, especially inside, aren't active enough in coverage and pass rush. Too much "run stop thumper" on the team. I believe Weaver is going to be fine with guys like Seiler on the line, but he's going to want more talent at the LB position.

Releasing Ogbah is an important piece of supporting evidence alongside the decision to let Wilkins hit free agency. I'm assuming Wilkins is gone, because as someone I was listening to on the radio said: in free agency, it's not a matter of if but when a team decides to not only overpay but "stupid overpay" the top guys. Wilkins will get more than he's asking for, I'm sure - especially based on last seasons performance.

So if I had to guess, this is what Weaver wants to do: value-priced journeymen or players on rookie contract in the trenches. Sieler may very well represent the "high water mark" on annual salary for these players. We've forgotten about Pili, but this is the kind of guy that might be called upon to at least contribute in rotational duty. Since we haven't seen him live in quite a while, only the team has a valid opinion on what he might be able to do this year. You could also add a mix of older vets who cannot demand big money, with UDFAs or low round draft choices as the roster is retooled.

The meat of the defense composed of a dynamic LB corps, with guys that can cover, rush the passer, and excel in run support. I believe he will run a variant of the 3-4, so we should have more LB than DL on the roster. Phillips and Chubb certainly would fit here. Riley is probably the right kind of player but maybe not talented enough. I don't know about Long and Baker. If this is the philosophy, I would expect the money to be spent here, or higher round draft choices.

A secondary with at least one elite CB and an elite Safety (I'm thinking Ramsey-Holland fit the bill here). The rest of the secondary probably plays zone with safety help rolling to the lesser talented side based on where Ramsey lines up. I expect both Ramsey and Holland to move around quite a bit - these are the "chess pieces" Weaver talked about in this press conference.

finfanatic wrote:
JMP - You only want to use the one year contracts to fill a few holes. What you really need are players who spend multiple years in the system and already know what to do. If you are rolling over 40% of you team year to year, you are losing a lot of that knowledge build up IMO.

Of course, the Phins could re-up for another year some of these one year guys I suppose. But in this case, the defense is going to be a whole new scheme anyway, but I do think that multiple years in the same scheme and with the same coaching staff is something the Phins should want.

Absolutely, but there's only so many draft picks. One-year deals become a key piece to the puzzle when it comes to roster-building.

On defense, for example, as I keep saying Ravens DE Brent Urban would be a prime target for me. He's an older rotational player and will probably play on a cheap one-year deal. He played under Weaver and knows what the coach expects, and I think he could be a smart pick-up to help implement the new scheme and get some meaningful snaps. This are the types of guys I'd be looking at with one-year deals: smart, savvy veterans that excel in what we want to do. WR Hunter Renfrow is another guy that fits the bill for a smart one-year deal IMO, if he gets cut as expected.