Aiyuk tells Jayden 49ers don't want him back.

[kbso83432]

To be clear, I am in no way saying the Skins should go all.in on Aiyuk. I just think they should explore what it would cost. If Peters passes on trading for Aiyuk.....I'll trust it.

If I'm the 49ers I'm not trading him.

 

[skinsdad62]

So you think Peters trades for Aiyuk without assurances. I dont.

he wont trade for him and no one can give any assurances that can stick . if i am BA's agent i wont do that unless you blow me away with a contract and 30 mil is market value . we would have to grossly overpay for that thats why its foolish . stay put , wait till free agency next year and keep the draft capitol and resources

out of maybe 300 franchise tagged guys in history maybe 10 got traded on the tag and stayed with the team that traded for him

 

[skinsdad62]

if i am the 49ers i am not trading him because i am 4 pts away from winning a superbowl with him . what i am saying is i have explored the option and i find it way too risky and impatient . simply wait and use the draft to fill more holes

pretty soon wr will be the new RB , a dime a dozen , so why pay big money ?

 

[kbso83432]

if i am the 49ers i am not trading him because i am 4 pts away from winning a superbowl with him . what i am saying is i have explored the option and i find it way too risky and impatient . simply wait and use the draft to fill more holes

pretty soon wr will be the new RB , a dime a dozen , so why pay big money ?

I'd love to go into next year's draft with WR checked off the list already. #1 Corner #2 Left Tackle. If by some small chance Peters and the 49ers made the trade, I would fully expect the framework of a LTD to already be in place. I hear ya though.

 

[gkekoa]

For the team trading the player, a trade is pretty much treated the same as the release of a player – the team is relieved of paying all future base salaries, but still must account for the bonus money that has already been paid to the player.

this is why there are no sign and trades in the NFL . the trading team must sign the player "in good faith " and as such any bonus money the team trading him is on the hook for that bonus . for that year . as a dead cap hit

I think you misunderstand this.

There is no bonus money in the tag. The salary is guaranteed. If traded, the salary ships to the new team.

From there, teams frequently work out a new deal prior to trading for a franchised player. The player takes the new deal because it is more lucrative in guarantees and annual base salary than the one year cap.

 

[kbso83432]

 

[kbso83432]

I'd do it for a 2. Anything more, I pass.

 

[kbso83432]

no he isnt he is on a tag, and thats why a i keep mentioning one year rental . the comparison you need to make is sweat and chase one worked one didnt

Aiyuk is on his 5th year option. He's not in the tag.

 

[redskinsfan1963]

So you think Peters trades for Aiyuk without assurances. I dont.

he does,nt seem that dumb to me to do that.but nothing shocks me anymore.

 

[countryroads316]

You keep comparing the possible Aiyuk trade to the Sweat and Young trade everyone knew Sweat would probably work out for Chicago and Young I knew wasn't going to work for the 49ers he is lazy and has his head up his ass

 

[kbso83432]

49ers "absolutely want Aiyuk."

~Shefter

 

[skinsdad62]

I think you misunderstand this.

There is no bonus money in the tag. The salary is guaranteed. If traded, the salary ships to the new team.

From there, teams frequently work out a new deal prior to trading for a franchised player. The player takes the new deal because it is more lucrative in guarantees and annual base salary than the one year cap.

a sign and trade by definition is when say the bengals or 49ers sign their player to a contract , not a tag , but sign them to a new contract or extension . again not a tag . then they trade said player to someone else . that means they are on the hook for the guaranteed signing bonus which is counted on the following years cap as dead space all at once . this is why you do not see sign and trades in the NFL becuase the CBA , as written doesnt lend itself to it . the NBA has a different set of rules which makes it easier for team A to sign player A then trade player A to team B without a cap penalty .

you can trade a tagged player without penalty but team B is at risk of losing player A if he doesnt sign an extension . CY didnt , adams and sweat did but the risk is there . the 49ers gave up a 3rd round pick for a half year rental . the bears and raiders won their gamble

and again out of the 2-300 tagged players in history only about 10 signed with team B . the rest either got the extension from team A or they signed with team C (another team ) 10 out of 2-300 hardly qualifies as frequently in my book

now i wrote this down in another thread (higgins thread ? ) based from the CBA and over the cap

 

[skinsdad62]

Aiyuk is on his 5th year option. He's not in the tag.

you are correct and i am wrong .

 

[skinsdad62]

that being said the skins could trade for him and hope they dont have to franchise tag him to keep him . if the 49ers sign him to an extension then trade him they would be on the hook for the guaranteed bonus , that doesnt mean all guaranteed money but the bonus

 

[skinsdad62]

You keep comparing the possible Aiyuk trade to the Sweat and Young trade everyone knew Sweat would probably work out for Chicago and Young I knew wasn't going to work for the 49ers he is lazy and has his head up his ass

in any case my point stands if you trade for a franchise tagged player you risk losing the player after one year. now auyik is on a 5th year option which is different and my argument doesnt apply

 

[kbso83432]

you are correct and i am wrong .

All good skinsdad62

 

[Stymietee]

again you cant build through the draft if you dont have picks . also wrs are becoming the new RB . a dime a dozen . 3rd why are we hell bent on giving draft picks up for potential one year rentals ? either daniels can hit mccaffery or he cant , if mccaffery botches it its on him not daniels . so how are we wasting anything ? sorry but i can get the asset next year without giving up resources .

No team in the history of the modern league has ever, not once built themselves exclusively via the draft.
1. They may someday become a"dime a dozen," but we're still not there yet.
2. Why are you insisting upon using "one year rental" when you already know that isn't true? Both of these guys want new contracts and any deal for them will include an agreement on the same. It's bad business to do otherwise.
3. Again hope is a wonderful thing, but any addition (Aiyuk, or Higgins) makes them instantly better and moreso if Dotson and McCaffery also become reliable.
4. Finally... you hope to get the asset next year, because they both will be in high demand on the free agent market. Think of it this way... if I offered everyone here a opportunity to upgrade their current rides, and I'm making that decision between now and this time next year. Ten of you needed that upgrade but only 3 immediately (you're one of the 3), would you go for it now or when at least 7 others joined in the bidding a year from now?

 

[gkekoa]

a sign and trade by definition is when say the bengals or 49ers sign their player to a contract , not a tag , but sign them to a new contract or extension . again not a tag . then they trade said player to someone else . that means they are on the hook for the guaranteed signing bonus which is counted on the following years cap as dead space all at once . this is why you do not see sign and trades in the NFL becuase the CBA , as written doesnt lend itself to it . the NBA has a different set of rules which makes it easier for team A to sign player A then trade player A to team B without a cap penalty .

you can trade a tagged player without penalty but team B is at risk of losing player A if he doesnt sign an extension . CY didnt , adams and sweat did but the risk is there . the 49ers gave up a 3rd round pick for a half year rental . the bears and raiders won their gamble

and again out of the 2-300 tagged players in history only about 10 signed with team B . the rest either got the extension from team A or they signed with team C (another team ) 10 out of 2-300 hardly qualifies as frequently in my book

now i wrote this down in another thread (higgins thread ? ) based from the CBA and over the cap

Not a single person on here suggested what you are describing. Every single one said we work out a deal with him.

Frequently is not based on percentage…it is based on sheer number. From there, we are not talking about people who signed with their original team…we are talking people who went to another team while on the tag.

 

[skinsdad62]

No team in the history of the modern league has ever, not once built themselves exclusively via the draft.
1. They may someday become a"dime a dozen," but we're still not there yet.
2. Why are you insisting upon using "one year rental" when you already know that isn't true? Both of these guys want new contracts and any deal for them will include an agreement on the same. It's bad business to do otherwise.
3. Again hope is a wonderful thing, but any addition (Aiyuk, or Higgins) makes them instantly better and moreso if Dotson and McCaffery also become reliable.
4. Finally... you hope to get the asset next year, because they both will be in high demand on the free agent market. Think of it this way... if I offered everyone here a opportunity to upgrade their current rides, and I'm making that decision between now and this time next year. Ten of you needed that upgrade but only 3 immediately (you're one of the 3), would you go for it now or when at least 7 others joined in the bidding a year from now?

i have posted the rules of the CBA sty . in BA's case we can trade for him and then franchise him at least 2x at great cost 3x is untenable

i am not advocating solely build through the draft however i do believe you draft your own guys for your scheme and when the team is close to being a superbowl contender you get the guys to put you over the top

instantly better but what gage ? 2 more wins ? 3rd place in the NFC east ? 2nd WC ? . does that justify giving away draft picks for guys you can sign anyway ?

we dont know what this team is right now and what needs will be priority next season .

they might be a dime a dozen right now as the packers have shown and what the strengths of the last 2 drafts indicate


how many times do i have to see " sign the big name FA who will solve our problems " only to see it fizzle ? maybe 50% of the fa's we sign do well for us

i dont see BA and TH as being guys i gotta have at all costs at this time . we need to assess what we have then target what we need after prioritizing the needs

 

[kbso83432]