As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to mia76's comment:

     

    With prorated bonus of 1M each year, the cost to cut is 2M - could be spread over 2013 and 2014. Hard to see them finding a better receiver (except by drafting) for 3.5M in FA which is the cap savings. He wasn't brilliant this year, but they have no one else under contract, and if Welker walks and they find a better WR I could see him taking on more of a slot role?

     



    This is incorrect. You cannot pro rate any money going forward if the player is cut. The team incurs dead money and negative cap savings. 

     

    2013

    Base salary-$1.9 mil

    pro rated bonus-$2.5 mmil workout bonus-$100k

    cap value-$4.5 mil. Dead money-$5 mil. Cap savings-($500k)

    2014

    Cap value-$5.5mil. Dead money-$2.5 mil. Cap savings-$3 mil

     

     



    You misunderstand what I was saying. My understanding is his bonus was 3 million, which for cap purposes would have been prorated to 1 million a year. If you cut him, the remaining two years of prorated bonus would be accelerated resulting in a cap hit (this year, assuming he's cut before July) of 2 million. 

     

    The numbers you quote are from jetscap.com, but i question their accuracy. The prorated bonus number of 2.5 million per year seems off, especially since even jetscap reports the signing bomus as 3 million. 

     



     

     



    That did not copy well, but Lloyd has a signing bonus due of $1 mil in 2013 and 2014 and misc bonus each year of $1.6 mil each year

     



    I went to the spotrac site. Their numbers are consistent with what I've read elsewhere.  They report his signing bonus as $3 million.  That would have been prorated (for cap purposes) at $1 million a year starting last year and continuing over the three years of his contract.  So so far, $1 million has been accounted for against the cap and the other $2 million are scheduled to be accounted for this year and next.  If you cut him now, though, the entire remaining $2 million of bonus that had not yet been accounted for against the cap would be accelerated and counted toward the cap this coming year. That $2 million would be the dead money this year. The only other way additional dead money could accrue is if something else (those miscellaneou bonuses or portions of his base salary) were guaranteed.  I haven't heard that any of those things are guaranteed, though. My understanding is the miscellaneous bonus was a roster bonus for making the team in the second year.  If they cut him, they don't have to pay that bonus and it won't count against their cap.  

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to mia76's comment:

     

    With prorated bonus of 1M each year, the cost to cut is 2M - could be spread over 2013 and 2014. Hard to see them finding a better receiver (except by drafting) for 3.5M in FA which is the cap savings. He wasn't brilliant this year, but they have no one else under contract, and if Welker walks and they find a better WR I could see him taking on more of a slot role?

     



    This is incorrect. You cannot pro rate any money going forward if the player is cut. The team incurs dead money and negative cap savings. 

     

    2013

    Base salary-$1.9 mil

    pro rated bonus-$2.5 mmil workout bonus-$100k

    cap value-$4.5 mil. Dead money-$5 mil. Cap savings-($500k)

    2014

    Cap value-$5.5mil. Dead money-$2.5 mil. Cap savings-$3 mil

     



    Guess it depends where you're getting your numbers from.  This is what I found (rotoworld):

    3/17/12: Signed a three-year, $12 million contract. The deal included a $3 million signing bonus,  Annual $100,000 workout bonuses are available throughout the contract's life. 2013: $1.9 million (+ $3 million option bonus), 2014: $2.9 million, 2015: Free Agent

    So, his contract was $6.3 mil in bonuses and $5.7 in salary. His '14 salary is $1.9 plus a $100K workout bonus = $2 mil and he also has a $3 mil option bonus so his cap hit would be either $5 mil or $3.5 mil depending on if the option bonus is prorated or not. And his dead money would be $2 mil if he's cut (the unamortized portion of his signing bonus), so the savings would be either $3 mil or $1.5 mil. I'm not sure how workout bonuses are treated, but they're not very significant.  

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to mia76's comment:

     

    With prorated bonus of 1M each year, the cost to cut is 2M - could be spread over 2013 and 2014. Hard to see them finding a better receiver (except by drafting) for 3.5M in FA which is the cap savings. He wasn't brilliant this year, but they have no one else under contract, and if Welker walks and they find a better WR I could see him taking on more of a slot role?

     



    This is incorrect. You cannot pro rate any money going forward if the player is cut. The team incurs dead money and negative cap savings. 

     

    2013

    Base salary-$1.9 mil

    pro rated bonus-$2.5 mmil workout bonus-$100k

    cap value-$4.5 mil. Dead money-$5 mil. Cap savings-($500k)

    2014

    Cap value-$5.5mil. Dead money-$2.5 mil. Cap savings-$3 mil

     

     



    Guess it depends where you're getting your numbers from.  This is what I found (rotoworld):

     

    3/17/12: Signed a three-year, $12 million contract. The deal included a $3 million signing bonus,  Annual $100,000 workout bonuses are available throughout the contract's life. 2013: $1.9 million (+ $3 million option bonus), 2014: $2.9 million, 2015: Free Agent

    So, his contract was $6.3 mil in bonuses and $5.7 in salary. His '14 salary is $1.9 plus a $100K workout bonus = $2 mil and he also has a $3 mil option bonus so his cap hit would be either $5 mil or $3.5 mil depending on if the option bonus is prorated or not. And his dead money would be $2 mil if he's cut (the unamortized portion of his signing bonus), so the savings would be either $3 mil or $1.5 mil. I'm not sure how workout bonuses are treated, but they're not very significant.  



    Muz, if that option bonus is paid, it would be prorated over the remaining life of the contract (so 1.5 million per year in 2013 and 2014).  If it is not paid because he's cut this spring, however, then it wouldn't count against the cap at all unless it is guaranteed.  I haven't heard it's guaranteed--in fact, the idea of guaranteeing an option bonus is a little weird, so I doubt it is a cap problem unless it ends up being paid before he's cut. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to mia76's comment:

     

    With prorated bonus of 1M each year, the cost to cut is 2M - could be spread over 2013 and 2014. Hard to see them finding a better receiver (except by drafting) for 3.5M in FA which is the cap savings. He wasn't brilliant this year, but they have no one else under contract, and if Welker walks and they find a better WR I could see him taking on more of a slot role?

     



    This is incorrect. You cannot pro rate any money going forward if the player is cut. The team incurs dead money and negative cap savings. 

     

    2013

    Base salary-$1.9 mil

    pro rated bonus-$2.5 mmil workout bonus-$100k

    cap value-$4.5 mil. Dead money-$5 mil. Cap savings-($500k)

    2014

    Cap value-$5.5mil. Dead money-$2.5 mil. Cap savings-$3 mil

     

     



    Guess it depends where you're getting your numbers from.  This is what I found (rotoworld):

     

    3/17/12: Signed a three-year, $12 million contract. The deal included a $3 million signing bonus,  Annual $100,000 workout bonuses are available throughout the contract's life. 2013: $1.9 million (+ $3 million option bonus), 2014: $2.9 million, 2015: Free Agent

    So, his contract was $6.3 mil in bonuses and $5.7 in salary. His '14 salary is $1.9 plus a $100K workout bonus = $2 mil and he also has a $3 mil option bonus so his cap hit would be either $5 mil or $3.5 mil depending on if the option bonus is prorated or not. And his dead money would be $2 mil if he's cut (the unamortized portion of his signing bonus), so the savings would be either $3 mil or $1.5 mil. I'm not sure how workout bonuses are treated, but they're not very significant.  

     



    Muz, if that option bonus is paid, it would be prorated over the remaining life of the contract (so 1.5 million per year in 2013 and 2014).  If it is not paid because he's cut this spring, however, then it wouldn't count against the cap at all unless it is guaranteed.  I haven't heard it's guaranteed--in fact, the idea of guaranteeing an option bonus is a little weird, so I doubt it is a cap problem unless it ends up being paid before he's cut. 

     



    That makes sense. So the savings this year would be $2 mil (salary + workout bonus) + $3 mil (option bonus) minus $2 mil (dead money) = $3 mil. Right?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    I just find it funny that this guy is perhaps the best free agent acquisition we've had in, what? Four years? And here we are discussing the benefits (and non benefits) of cutting him - that tells me two things...Lloyd isn't that great and our free agent signings have been abysmal over the last few years.

    I don't care that the Carter signing was solid for us for 10 games before he got his knee blown out and was never seen again. I don't care that Anderson had a nice 6 game stretch that he parlayed into a big payday in Buffalo (where he would go on to play one good game before getting hurt). Oh and I'm forgetting that guard that stayed home and sulked in hopes of getting more money. The truth is none of them made up for the free agent busts Fennene, Ocho, Haynesworth, Shaun Ellis, Fred Jackson, Gallery, Stallworth, Gonzalez, Gaffney, Addai, Gregory, Bodden, Galloway, or Banta Cain. What happened to the days when we would sign guys that were heading into their prime...not heading out? What happened to the days when we could sign a experienced vet without fear that he would make it ten yards into his conditioning run before retiring?

    We need this part of team building to work for us. We can't expect the draft to save us, or Tom Brady. Just keep Lloyd, he doesn't appear to be part of the problem. Now if they do cut him, that tells me the rumors of him be a lockeroom cancer and possibly being bipolar are true.  

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to mia76's comment:

     

    With prorated bonus of 1M each year, the cost to cut is 2M - could be spread over 2013 and 2014. Hard to see them finding a better receiver (except by drafting) for 3.5M in FA which is the cap savings. He wasn't brilliant this year, but they have no one else under contract, and if Welker walks and they find a better WR I could see him taking on more of a slot role?

     



    This is incorrect. You cannot pro rate any money going forward if the player is cut. The team incurs dead money and negative cap savings. 

     

    2013

    Base salary-$1.9 mil

    pro rated bonus-$2.5 mmil workout bonus-$100k

    cap value-$4.5 mil. Dead money-$5 mil. Cap savings-($500k)

    2014

    Cap value-$5.5mil. Dead money-$2.5 mil. Cap savings-$3 mil

     

     



    Guess it depends where you're getting your numbers from.  This is what I found (rotoworld):

     

    3/17/12: Signed a three-year, $12 million contract. The deal included a $3 million signing bonus,  Annual $100,000 workout bonuses are available throughout the contract's life. 2013: $1.9 million (+ $3 million option bonus), 2014: $2.9 million, 2015: Free Agent

    So, his contract was $6.3 mil in bonuses and $5.7 in salary. His '14 salary is $1.9 plus a $100K workout bonus = $2 mil and he also has a $3 mil option bonus so his cap hit would be either $5 mil or $3.5 mil depending on if the option bonus is prorated or not. And his dead money would be $2 mil if he's cut (the unamortized portion of his signing bonus), so the savings would be either $3 mil or $1.5 mil. I'm not sure how workout bonuses are treated, but they're not very significant.  

     



    Muz, if that option bonus is paid, it would be prorated over the remaining life of the contract (so 1.5 million per year in 2013 and 2014).  If it is not paid because he's cut this spring, however, then it wouldn't count against the cap at all unless it is guaranteed.  I haven't heard it's guaranteed--in fact, the idea of guaranteeing an option bonus is a little weird, so I doubt it is a cap problem unless it ends up being paid before he's cut. 

     

     



    That makes sense. So the savings this year would be $2 mil (salary + workout bonus) + $3 mil (option bonus) minus $2 mil (dead money) = $3 mil. Right?

     



    Yep, that's my understanding.  (Assuming, of course, all the reported numbers are correct, which I never fully feel confident about.) 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    Lloyd was a big disaapointment. I had a hard time liking. Dude was about the same as Branch.

    TB needs a better group of WRs, with at least 2 big fast and durable vertical guys. 

    Keep Wes (give him 5 million), Lloyd and Edelman for the slot

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    Lloyd was fine as a #2 or #3 receiver.  He was limited in what he could do and had too many drops, but defenses still had to worry about him because he also made some nice receptions.  I think he was a lot more effective than Branch has been over the past two years.  Still, he wasn't the downfield threat we really needed.  I'd keep him, get another downfield receiver, and figure out what to do with Welker/Edelman/etc in the slot.  I'd want to go into the season with a three-man rotation at the position, plus one or two depth guys, plus Slater (five to six roster spots).  

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan94. Show redsoxfan94's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    i guess none of you guys watched the afc title game closely.....lloyd was fantastic! he made great catch after great catch, and he had a good season. as a result, you want to cut him? i swear, if we had jerry rice, you people wouldnt be satisfied.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    The question disregarding his cap hit is why? You have no one signed that could play WR and he made some good catches. Do you go into the offense trying to find 4 new WR who don't know the system?

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

    i guess none of you guys watched the afc title game closely.....lloyd was fantastic! he made great catch after great catch, and he had a good season. as a result, you want to cut him? i swear, if we had jerry rice, you people wouldnt be satisfied.



    People think 75 reception WR grow on trees and cost nothing. Was he a savior or did he have a Randy Moss kind of first year - no. But he was a lot better than a lot of other options and his price was very reasonable (and continues to be.) And cutting him means you have to replace him with another player and you have at least 1M less in cap space to do it. Outside of rookie contracts there aren't a whole lot of brilliant WRs out there at 3.5M/yr.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

    i guess none of you guys watched the afc title game closely.....lloyd was fantastic! he made great catch after great catch, and he had a good season. as a result, you want to cut him? i swear, if we had jerry rice, you people wouldnt be satisfied.




    yeah, but that help us win? no. dude is acrobatic and can catch, but not the answer going forward.

    keep him for slot work, that's about it.

    BB needs to find a julio jones, roddy white , anquon boldin or torrey smith.

    better yet trade for larry fitzgerald, and sign dwayne bowe.

     

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to bobbysu's comment:

    My confusion is this. If you started this on another thread, and it was read and probably discussed, already many times. Why start another? Answer me this, please.



    if you dont like my posts/threads, you dont have to read or respond to them. i doubt you get paid to complain on bdc.

    i do not reply to this type of complaint, but i willmake an excpetion this once. after i wrote and many responded, mostly to disagree. thereafter i read mike reiss suggesting that it might be a possibility (ie dont be surprised)  if we need cap space (as my thought went).

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to mia76's comment:

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

     

    i guess none of you guys watched the afc title game closely.....lloyd was fantastic! he made great catch after great catch, and he had a good season. as a result, you want to cut him? i swear, if we had jerry rice, you people wouldnt be satisfied.

     



    People think 75 reception WR grow on trees and cost nothing. Was he a savior or did he have a Randy Moss kind of first year - no. But he was a lot better than a lot of other options and his price was very reasonable (and continues to be.) And cutting him means you have to replace him with another player and you have at least 1M less in cap space to do it. Outside of rookie contracts there aren't a whole lot of brilliant WRs out there at 3.5M/yr.

     



    hes ok aint the guy we need (to make the de cover all teh weapons

    the draft looks good for this

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Lloyd was fine as a #2 or #3 receiver.  He was limited in what he could do and had too many drops, but defenses still had to worry about him because he also made some nice receptions.  I think he was a lot more effective than Branch has been over the past two years.  Still, he wasn't the downfield threat we really needed.  I'd keep him, get another downfield receiver, and figure out what to do with Welker/Edelman/etc in the slot.  I'd want to go into the season with a three-man rotation at the position, plus one or two depth guys, plus Slater (five to six roster spots).  



    "get another downfield receiver"

    yes a #1 ouidside bg wr in draft

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    Just on the 'cap hit' part of this discussion - teams can designate a cut player as a June xx cut - not sure of the exact date, but it allows a team to spread dead money equally between the current year and the following year so yes dead money can be manipulated somewhat.

    I am not sure what the option bonus is and what kind of guarantees are in the contract (nor does any other source based on the widely different dead money numbers from different sites.) But, I do know this...

    There are no interesting FA WRs available that are looking for a contract in the 3.5M range which is the maximum available salary saving from cutting Lloyd. And a few facts:

    In comparison to Dieon Branch - his production in 2012 (first year with Brady) was better than any year Branch has produced since 2005 by a huge amount and comparable to Branch's 2005 numbers - after which Branch signed a huge contract in Seattle.

    In comparison to all receiver including TE, he ranked 28th in yds and 22 in catches. And most if not all of tthe receivers above him were either playing on rookie contracts or getting paid a heck of a lot more than he was.

    People here complain that the Pats pass too much and should run more. Not sure how many passes you want Brady to attempt, but given that the Pats offense was number one in yds and points and number 4 in passing, not sure how much more production you need. And when you have your other WR with 118 receptions, your TEs combining for over 110, and your RBs at over 50 have Lloyd come in with 74 seems pretty amazing!

    Finally - do not have the numbers to prove it, but it certainly seemed he got more production in the second half of the year than the first as he and TB got more comfortable with each other. Seems to me the Pats got pretty much what they expected from Lloyd. We could all hope he was a huge down field threat, but he never has been a Randy Moss type WR.

    And besides finding someone in the draft, I just don't see anyone in the same ball park on production available at his price. And as for current roster ... there are no WRs except Slater currently.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to mia76's comment:

    Just on the 'cap hit' part of this discussion - teams can designate a cut player as a June xx cut - not sure of the exact date, but it allows a team to spread dead money equally between the current year and the following year so yes dead money can be manipulated somewhat.

    I am not sure what the option bonus is and what kind of guarantees are in the contract (nor does any other source based on the widely different dead money numbers from different sites.) But, I do know this...

    There are no interesting FA WRs available that are looking for a contract in the 3.5M range which is the maximum available salary saving from cutting Lloyd. And a few facts:

    In comparison to Dieon Branch - his production in 2012 (first year with Brady) was better than any year Branch has produced since 2005 by a huge amount and comparable to Branch's 2005 numbers - after which Branch signed a huge contract in Seattle.

    In comparison to all receiver including TE, he ranked 28th in yds and 22 in catches. And most if not all of tthe receivers above him were either playing on rookie contracts or getting paid a heck of a lot more than he was.

    People here complain that the Pats pass too much and should run more. Not sure how many passes you want Brady to attempt, but given that the Pats offense was number one in yds and points and number 4 in passing, not sure how much more production you need. And when you have your other WR with 118 receptions, your TEs combining for over 110, and your RBs at over 50 have Lloyd come in with 74 seems pretty amazing!

    Finally - do not have the numbers to prove it, but it certainly seemed he got more production in the second half of the year than the first as he and TB got more comfortable with each other. Seems to me the Pats got pretty much what they expected from Lloyd. We could all hope he was a huge down field threat, but he never has been a Randy Moss type WR.

    And besides finding someone in the draft, I just don't see anyone in the same ball park on production available at his price. And as for current roster ... there are no WRs except Slater currently.



    "besides finding someone in the draft, I just don't see anyone in the same ball park on production available at his price"

    which is exactly what we should do: #1 big outside wr in draft. 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    Branch got cut during the season for a reason, he's done.  Early in the season Lloyd let up on a few routes, and Brady threw the perfect ball.   IMO it looked like Brady either didn't go to him as much anymore.  Looked like it cost them chemistry.  Keep Lloyd   Far as a wr, be nice to get one in the draft but there's a learning curve so you can expect he'd be ineffective for a good part of the season.  At least with a vet they know all the bs parts of the job. The travel , expenses, ect.  Like your job there's stuff it takes a while to learn when your new. 

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    Brebru - definitely on board with drafting a WR (though not in the 1st unless something crazy happens.) And depending on Welker situation I can see teh Pats looking at some of the better FA receivers - I figure they have 7M available for Welker or another WR option. I just don't see an option in the 3.5M range (savings from cutting Lloyd) that is likely to provide them with better production than him and they need a #2/3 WR.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: As i suggested in a another thread, it may be wise given the cap to drop lloyd, mike reiss speculates the same today

    In response to mia76's comment:

     

    Brebru - definitely on board with drafting a WR (though not in the 1st unless something crazy happens.) And depending on Welker situation I can see teh Pats looking at some of the better FA receivers - I figure they have 7M available for Welker or another WR option. I just don't see an option in the 3.5M range (savings from cutting Lloyd) that is likely to provide them with better production than him and they need a #2/3 WR.

     



    hey mia, yes cutting lloyd if need cap space is not specifically for a wide receiver, just $ if we need it.

     

    had my druthers keeping him and welker while having a #1 outside wr on the field virtually all game every game woudl be idea.

    yes i agree wr in rd 1 would be a reach with so  many othe=r needs we have. if we have fa pass rusher and safety, i like a cb there (best avail, rhodes ideaL) coudl also go best dt avail if we have a pass rsuher in fa., both cases wr in rd 2. ie woods perhaps.

    if no pass rusher in fa, i get the best pas rusher in rd 1. wr and in rd 2.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share