IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Hot Reads ...In the Bullseye > The Texans
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-16-2012, 03:08 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,149
Default

Mario's worth more than a low first (besides, we already have a low first). But a mid-to-high first plus future picks or a player that meets a need (WR or secondary, principally) and I think it's a win/win.

Besides, if we get back someone like Landry who was himself a high first, that offsets some of the cost to the new team for Mario's contract which means we should be getting back a premium player, not a fringe or washed-up player.

Any team that gets Mario is getting a Pro Bowler in the prime of his career. His knees and ankles are sound and he is still a mismatch freak. They OUGHT to be paying a high price for him, just as they would a top QB, DT or LT. That means two #1s or some equivalent (look at what Denver got for Jay Cutler who was drafted in the same draft at #11).

And if you consider we are offering a proven product while saving a team the expense of paying an unproven #1 draft choice and a premium player, it can make economic sense for a club that lacks a pass rush and desperately wants one.

Also remember that Mario was not a senior when we drafted him. He wasn't the child that Okoye was but he was still younger than your typical draft pick so he ought to be in his prime right now.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-16-2012, 03:29 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
Mario's worth more than a low first (besides, we already have a low first). But a mid-to-high first plus future picks or a player that meets a need (WR or secondary, principally) and I think it's a win/win.

Besides, if we get back someone like Landry who was himself a high first, that offsets some of the cost to the new team for Mario's contract which means we should be getting back a premium player, not a fringe or washed-up player.

Any team that gets Mario is getting a Pro Bowler in the prime of his career. His knees and ankles are sound and he is still a mismatch freak. They OUGHT to be paying a high price for him, just as they would a top QB, DT or LT. That means two #1s or some equivalent (look at what Denver got for Jay Cutler who was drafted in the same draft at #11).

And if you consider we are offering a proven product while saving a team the expense of paying an unproven #1 draft choice and a premium player, it can make economic sense for a club that lacks a pass rush and desperately wants one.

Also remember that Mario was not a senior when we drafted him. He wasn't the child that Okoye was but he was still younger than your typical draft pick so he ought to be in his prime right now.
That is a compelling case.

Now what if somebody else had a great but not game changing DE who was approaching 30 and had a history of injury concerns and wanted your next two #1 picks?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-16-2012, 03:56 PM
cadams cadams is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
Mario's worth more than a low first (besides, we already have a low first). But a mid-to-high first plus future picks or a player that meets a need (WR or secondary, principally) and I think it's a win/win.

Besides, if we get back someone like Landry who was himself a high first, that offsets some of the cost to the new team for Mario's contract which means we should be getting back a premium player, not a fringe or washed-up player.

Any team that gets Mario is getting a Pro Bowler in the prime of his career. His knees and ankles are sound and he is still a mismatch freak. They OUGHT to be paying a high price for him, just as they would a top QB, DT or LT. That means two #1s or some equivalent (look at what Denver got for Jay Cutler who was drafted in the same draft at #11).

And if you consider we are offering a proven product while saving a team the expense of paying an unproven #1 draft choice and a premium player, it can make economic sense for a club that lacks a pass rush and desperately wants one.

Also remember that Mario was not a senior when we drafted him. He wasn't the child that Okoye was but he was still younger than your typical draft pick so he ought to be in his prime right now.
1. a pro bowler in the prime of his career that has been placed on IR both of the last two years with season ending injuries.

2. unproven rookies will cost A LOT less than mario under the new salary cap system.

3. resigning mario will likely mean they have to put the restricted tag on foster (after smith told him last year they would get him a new contract if he had another good year) and could lead to a holdout. (foster is way more valuable than mario)

4. denver got that for cutler because quarterbacks are more valuable than any other position.

i hope i am wrong (because pass rushing ends are very valuable) and they can get a couple of picks for him, anything is possible (see palmer deal this year.), but i think that unless mario is willing to have a VERY reasonable contract he won't be back. they are too close to the cap and signing myers and foster have to be priorities. if the texans can even get a 1st round pick between 15 and 25 i would take it. that would allow them to get a receiver and cb in the first round, and them pick up a speed rusher at OLB with a later pick.

and while snyder has done some odd things, so anything is possible, i don't think there is any way they give up the #6 pick AND landry for mario.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-16-2012, 05:56 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,149
Default

Mario turns 27 later this month. And many sack leaders were effective well into their 30s.

Turns out Landry is approaching free agency himself:

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...laron-landry/1

He was IR'd with an achilles injury.

Last edited by HPF Bob; 01-16-2012 at 06:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-16-2012, 06:14 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

That really is younger than I thought and changes the game some.

But for fun...what if somebody else had a great but not game changing DE who was 27, would require a huge extension after the trade, and had a history of injury concerns, and they wanted your next two #1 picks? What do you say?

Just because we can create a scenario where we think he is worth this does not mean it will happen. When was the last time a DL was traded for two first round picks or something comparable? Richard Seymour was two years older, without the health concerns, and every bit the impact player and he only got one 1st round pick, and the raiders had to be involved for that to happen.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-16-2012, 06:37 PM
chuck chuck is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

All I know is I certainly am glad that Charley Casserly will have nothing to do with this.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-18-2012, 11:39 AM
NBT NBT is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: S.E. Texas Coast
Posts: 1,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
All I know is I certainly am glad that Charley Casserly will have nothing to do with this.
Con-Cur! The most know nothing, do nothing I have ever seen, who would like us to believe he is an expert.
__________________
NBT - Elder statesman. Wisdom comes with age - Now if i could remember what it was!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-16-2012, 06:37 PM
WMH WMH is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,795
Default

You can never really buy too much in what coaches say, but Kubiak sure didn't sound like someone who did not want Mario back on his radio show today. He said something to the effect of, "man, I can't wait to see what he could do with a whole season in this system."

Facts are facts, the cap is what it is, but it wouldn't surprise me at all to see them legitimately try to work a deal out.
__________________
In B'OB we trust, until he pisses us off!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-16-2012, 06:44 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

The overriding factor for me is that Mario is much better individually than Barwin or Reed. I know those guys played great the 2nd half of the year and the drop off is not that large, but there is a drop off. Mario is our best pass rusher.

No matter how it happens, if we can keep Mario without losing Foster I am for it. Any long term deal should give him a lower cap number than last year. If it comes down to Demeco/Walter/JJ being cut, I am fine with that. If we need to ask Schaub for a restructured deal, I'm okay with that too. If it removes us as a player in FA I am for that too. To win a superbowl we will likely have to beat Tom Brady and maybe Rodgers or Brees or a Manning. Watch the NYG and you know the best/only way to do that is with pass rush. There is no coverage to stop those guys.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-16-2012, 06:47 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Which of these do you choose?

(worst case financial scenario)
Mario
Rookie WR #2
Restructured Walter/Bryant Johnson/cheap FA/low round Rookie WR #3
Dobbins/Sharpton MLB #2

or (best case financial scenario)

no mario
Wayne
Walter/JJ #3
Demeco


I would personally prefer to spend my money on the best pass rusher our team has than some of the other less important positions on the team.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-16-2012, 06:49 PM
Nconroe Nconroe is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lake Conroe
Posts: 2,897
Default

Adding to the radio interview comments, I thought I heard Kubiak say signing Mario to a new deal was no. 1 priority this off season. And further said that Mario really wants to stay here.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-16-2012, 08:36 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,149
Default

Kubiak is not going to say anything other than Mario is a great player and he really wants him. If he doesn't say that and Mario stays, Mario doubts whether the coach has his back. If he doesn't say that and Mario goes, it might have reduced our trade leverage.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.