Not to rain on your parades here RE:Suh...but I have heard that he is looking at either New York, Dallas and one other major market team. He is represented by Jay-Z.

Suh is a well known ******* in the bars around Omaha. He still comes to town fairly regularly. He has gone as far as saying that he would knock out the next white guy who looked at him. I've heard many stories like this from too many sources to not believe it.

 

Harvin was well liked too. Boom, Super Bowl anyway.

 

I think he is going to be a Raider.

They have a lot of cap space and he is perfect for the Raider legacy.

 

Dallas?????? What a freakin joke. They can't afford toilet paper with their salary cap situation.

I was under the impression that Suh wasn't even trying to hide the fact that he will go with the biggest offer.

 

There are so many problems with keeping Mike Wallace that it's difficult to give a **** what Branden Albert thinks. This shouldn't even be a matter of consideration. It falls somewhere between "decreased tax revenue for the state of Florida" and "Mike Wallace having to move would increase his carbon footprint" in terms of impact.

 

It's too bad the criteria for being Branden Albert's "guy" don't revolve more around the ratio of a player's production to his salary cap hit.

Certainly Branden Albert himself is showing up a great deal more in that regard.

 

And then you'd have the wide receiver who counts more against his team's salary cap than any other in football (Wallace), and, what, another one?

Wallace was supposed to be the receiver you're talking about. He's paid like one. We should be talking about how Wallace's presence has upped the production of other players since his arrival, like you're talking about, rather than needing additional players to up Wallace's production.

 

A rookie WR is relatively cheap...get a good one in the first round, and be set to jettison Wallace in a year or two.

Unless, of course, Tannehill and Wallace are able to get over their dysfunction and start connecting with each other on deep balls.

 

If Mike Wallace is well-liked in the locker room, that says more about the locker room than it does about Wallace. If a team wants to win, its first order of business should be expecting its veteran players' productivity to be highly correlated with their salary cap hits. Wallace is a league outlier in the wrong direction in that regard.

 

The future most certainly involves a consideration of how to use the team's limited cap money.

 

Exactly, and it would be stupid to effect your cap this year and next while creating a huge hole at WR. Once Hartline is jettisoned and Gibson aswell you start to free up some space AND can replace that productivity at worst with Rishard Matthews even.

 

Never in the history of this site has anyone wasted their time in a post more than you typing this. It has zero chance of penetrating anyone's brain that disagrees with you.

Waste of substance.

 

Albert knows what anyone with eyes should, the offense is MUCH better with Wallace on the field and he'll be even more productive next near, if Albert plays a full season and we add a Mark Ingram type to go with Miller at RB.

 

Rich guys tend to stick together.

 

Brian Hartline didn't get the memo.

 

You dont get rid of Wallace without replacing him with a legitimate threat... The receivers that should be let go is Hartline and Gibson... If we let go of wallace and keep either of those two other scrubs... i dont even know

 

Hartline has to go first... If we get a #1 that can run every route it will make Wallace a better weapon in the offense.

 

He talks a good game and has seemingly made a lot of friends, but in the grand scheme of things that does sweet **** all for the team when his work ethic and attitude suck in terms of things that matter for the team.

You can replace 2014 Mike Wallace for cheaper than what you're paying him, even in a best-case, romanticized scenario. You can replace 2013 Mike Wallace with a moldy ham sandwich. Odds are pretty like you'll be getting somewhere between the two, rather than some fantasy ideal of 2011 Mike Wallace coming back for pretty much anyone.

 

Honestly, I don't get the dislike of Wallace anymore.

While I do believe a large part of the deep ball issues are on his tiny catch radius, I think he blossomed last year into a more complete WR and turned in the best year any WR as turned in since Marino was chucking it.

Year before? Yes, he was a major problem. This past year? A surprising find.

The problem lies opposite the field of him and that's Hartline. While Hartline is certainly better than he showed this year, we know its not that much better because we've seen the best he's got and its.....pedestrian. Plus, we've heard grumblings he's got a bit of the douche in his blood. He eats up too much cap space for the paltry production he puts out.

 

Brian Hartline is not in the same strata as Wallace and Albert financially.

 

On a dollar for dollar basis Wallace is earning his money more than Hartline his.

 

He put together a mediocre year for a starting wide receiver in any context.

The sole, singular exception to that is touchdowns, and even then it's not that impressive unless you somehow act as if he generated them whole cloth out of the ether. In reality, he was a pretty good red zone threat with an emerging quarterback and an offensive coordinator whom did a good job of putting his team into position to convert these opportunities- With or without Wallace.

Brian Hartline is a straw man at this point. No one is arguing Hartline should be kept on this team, and it has nothing to do with Wallace.

 

There were 31 receivers in the league who had more yards per target than Wallace, and none of those receivers had a bigger cap hit for his team. Wallace was 21st in the league in Defense-Adjusted Yards Above Replacement (DYAR), and 19th in the league in DVOA. Despite his 10 touchdowns, he was a mere 28th in the league in expected points added per play.

These aren't the sorts of contributions a team should expect from a player who is counting more against its cap than any other player on the team, and any other player in the league at his position. If the team is prepared to settle for that sort of thing, then it should also be prepared to lose.

 

I'd like to see you try to support that statistically.

 

Mike Wallace wasn't making the same money back then. Right now he's accounting for the biggest cap hit on the team, and his production should match that.

 

Sure, but how does that percentage of misses compare to the league norm for downfield receivers and their quarterbacks?

 

I've love to see you come up with a measure where you could find this reasonably close to being true.

 

Childs play. ;)

Hartline - $5.9M.
Wallace - $9.85M.

Wallace makes 66.9% more in pay, give or take.

Wallace has 81% more yards. 500% touchdowns. 114 qb rating when throwing to Wallace, vs. 91 to Hartline.

Did I mention 500% more touchdowns? Hartline reverted back to what he was, when there is an alpha WR here. and Wallace isn't even as alpha as Brandon Marshall (but he was better this year than last).

I think Wallace is overpaid. I think Hartline is OBSCENELY overpaid.

 

Wallace's cap hit in 2014 was $17.25 million. Hartline's was $6.21 million.

 

What are you doing there? 2014 production vs. 2015 base salary? Both of the players have multiple years of performance under their current contract, and both have multiple years left on their theoretical contracts(That neither will be seeing)

If you're going to get contrived, why not do "Touchdowns you think were left on the field"/"Workout Bonus Money"

 

Hartline will be gone and Wallace will be retained, we may aswell move on to what we are going to use that free 7M we will save by dumping Brian "don't call me Riley Cooper" Hartline.