Franchise Tag: To Tag or Not to Tag?

Mercury22 · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 12328 Location: the 50 yard line

So yesterday was the first day teams could officially name pending free agents with the franchise tag. The Dolphins have a ton of free agents and a ton of dollars (around a reported 44 million). The question becomes, who will they, or who should they use the franchise tag on, if anyone. Candidates include: Sean Smith, Jake Long, Randy Starks, Reggie Bush, Anthony Fasano, or Brian Hartline.

I've heard arguments made to keep many of these players and I've heard arguments made for Franchising Smith, Long, Bush and Starks.

My question to you. Do you use the franchise tag if you are the GM? If so, who are you going to tag?

Here is a list of what it would roughly cost to use the tag on each position:

CB: Franchise: $10.668

DE: Franchise: $10.984

DT: Franchise: $8.306

K/P: Franchise: $2.926

LB: Franchise: $9.455

OL: Franchise: $9.660

QB: Franchise: $14.642

RB: Franchise: $8.079

S: Franchise: $6.798

TE: Franchise: $5.962

WR: Franchise: $10.357

I'd use it on Jake Long. Its an easy way to put the decision about Long on hold one more year. It allows us to see what we have in Jonathan Martin for one more year, and it gives Long one more year to learn the ZBS. Worst case scenario we overspend on Long for one more year and then we are free to start Martin in the spot next season or draft someone to fill the LT spot. I know I am virtually alone with wanting to retain Long, but that's what I would do. How about you?
_________________
"22 players are involved in every football play. To value precisely the activity of one of them, it is first necessary to account for the actions of the other 21"

Mercury22 · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 12328 Location: the 50 yard line

Oh, and here is a blog by Salguero about the same issue:

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolphins_in_depth/2013/02/where-if-anywhere-the-miami-franchise-tag-belongs.html
_________________
"22 players are involved in every football play. To value precisely the activity of one of them, it is first necessary to account for the actions of the other 21"

stepover · Joined: 15 Nov 2007 Posts: 356 Location: London, England

But as Salguero explains the problem is Long is not a typical tag - the rules are that it's the greater of the average of top 5 at position OR 120% of last year's salary - in Jake's case cos his salary is already huge it means tagging him costs $13.5m for the year. You still sure you want to pay an injury prone player $13.5m for a year when this is a deep tackle draft class and you could lock one up for $1m per year and spend your dollars on weapons like Wallace, seam threat TE, FA corner etc?

If I tagged anyone it would be Starks for a reasonable $8m - Starks is turning 30 so we would get him for one more year at a premium and then next summer we would let him go when we've had his best years.

But personally I would NEVER use the franchise tag unless it was really an emergency and with $40m+ in cap and a slew of draft picks this doesn't strike me as an emergency.

Jaytotha · Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:32 pm Post subject:

Long will take around $15 million to tag so ill pass. I don't feel that there is anyone worth tagging because there is not much drop off. Starks is a guy that could be tagged but I think Odrick moving inside would produce the same if not grow into a better player. I say we roll without the tag
_________________

fishfan4life · Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:54 pm Post subject:

skatewood2 · Joined: 10 Feb 2007 Posts: 5543 Location: Kent, WA

I would not use the Franchise Tag this season. We do not have one player that is top of their position that we need to keep with the exception of Jake Long. JL will be extremely expensive for a player that doesn't fit in the scheme that we will be paying him to play in. I don't like giving Starks the Tag because I think Odrick will be just as good as him once he is moved inside. As for Sean Smith, he would be the only one that I would consider using the tag on but I still don't know if he is worth the amount of money the tag would require.

My vote is no, let's move on to FA and pick up the players we need and then draft the rest.
_________________

NFL - Miami Dolphins
College - THE Ohio State University Buckeyes

Mercury22 · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 12328 Location: the 50 yard line

Not using the franchise tag anywhere ensures more holes. We already have holes at DE, WR, TE, and S. If we lose all of our free agents we create needs at OT, CB, RB, WR and DL.

Truth is, all the franchise tag does is ensure we pay top dollar for a player and keep one hole from being created on our roster. So I get why not using the tag makes some sense. However, I don't see how we are going to fix all the holes we create each and every off season. We are perpetually in the bottom of the league, because we continually have more holes than we can fill. The cycle never seems to end and this season while we have more space and picks than virtually any year before, we also have more holes than ever before.
_________________
"22 players are involved in every football play. To value precisely the activity of one of them, it is first necessary to account for the actions of the other 21"

fishfan4life · Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:47 pm Post subject:

ovaw8lover · Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 8666 Location: Dolphins Stadium

There are not any franchise worthy players this year. Having said that, the Fins will tag Jake Long. Its the Paul Solai situation all over again.
_________________
"Yesterday Is History, Tomorrow Is A Mystery, And Today Is A Gift. That Is Why It Is Called The Present.""
— — Master Oogway from Kung Fu Panda

Dolphinemidget · Joined: 03 Jan 2008 Posts: 3233 Location: Florida

I think if we are using the Tag Long or Bush would probably be who I would use it on. Smith can be replaced as can almost anyone, wish we could bank it and use it maybe next year.lol
_________________

cddolphin · Joined: 23 Mar 2009 Posts: 4800 Location: Gainesville, FL

MAYBE I'd tag Smith but only since our CB depth is horrible.
_________________

Russ57 · Joined: 25 Aug 2008 Posts: 538

Nobody is worth tagging. The team will allow its FA's to discover this sad fact on their own. Smart move that keeps us from looking like that bad guys that low ball their players. Then we offer those we want fair contracts.

No doubt we will see a few go to other teams such as Long, Smith, and Bush. I think we will come to terms with Hartline and Fasano. I would try the hardest to keep Starks out of all of our guys. Personally I'd trade Odrick while his contract is team friendly. I see him best used as a 3-4 DE. I have even said I'd trade Solia as we don't need a NT as much as a disruptive, penetrating DT. I'll take a high to mid 2nd round pick for either (and I think they are easily worth that). This draft has some DE/DT talent.

Those that look at my posts will know I'm big on preaching fiscal responsibility. Right now the team has far too much money allocated to the defense. Therefore it makes more sense to let the defensive guys leave, draft defense, and fill our offensive needs with FA's. I know most will cringe at those words but it is the honest truth.

So I propose we sign a proven WR, TE, and OG/OT and draft CB/DE/DT/FS (not saying those should be our first four picks nor that we shouldn't draft any offensive guys). Consider if we were to resign Smith, and keep Patterson and Matthews, will would have like 18 million tied up in 3 CB's alone. That is crazy money for the skill levels involved. We "have" to get younger (as in cheaper) on the defense.

And to make you guys hate me even more....next year we need to replace Dansby and Burnett.

fishfan4life · Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:50 pm Post subject:

I actually wouldnt mind depending how everything turns out in free agency and rounds 1 and 2 is to draft a LB in round 3 for depth this season and to groom him to become a starter the following year. Misi is a free agent next year and dansby and burnett will be a year older

Maddogg · Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:56 pm Post subject:

Not one player in our free agency pool is worth a tag. So no Marco Polo coming from my lips.
_________________

JCool333 · Joined: 13 Mar 2005 Posts: 12679

While Long isn't worth it, I'd consider the tag just as an attempt to get some value for him and trade him. Worst case scenario, you're taking a chance on Long returning to form next season as a Dolphin (and overpaying by a good few mil, sure, but for a one year test-run contract). Best case scenario, some team trades a pick for Long.

We played the whole Long situation incorrectly, I think. I'm not sure it would work but the right play would have included Ireland saying every time that Long will definitely be a Dolphin, and pretending that we have no plans to see him go elsewhere. And leak that message to everyone. Then tag him right away and trade him while everyone thinks we still believe he has a lot of value.

Still, it may be too late now to actually attempt to get any trade value for Long. But I think that's always the case when we try and trade someone because we don't play our hand close enough to our chest.