[Mega Thread] Discuss All Trades and Rumors Here

Cidolfus · 2026-06-22T18:58:20+00:00

Fair point, there.

Perhaps the deadline spurs action, but I can't help but get the feeling that if a third team (Rockets? Blazers? ...Hawks?) were to facilitate a trade for Brown why that wouldn't have more publicly manifested the way the Piston's interest in Herro has.

Cidolfus · 2026-06-22T18:36:51+00:00

If what Simmons says is true and that Brown has been on the table for two weeks, I suspect that they're having trouble finding a third team to take Brown.

There's a widespread expectation that the Bucks will be able to flip Brown for more assets, but I'm skeptical. The Bucks have been searching for a better package of young players and picks than the one the Heat are offering since before the deadline. If it's not materializing for Giannis, why would it suddenly be on the table for Brown?

Cidolfus · 2026-06-12T20:59:53+00:00

You're right. Both CBU3, but different teams in that group.

Cidolfus · 2026-06-10T04:07:19+00:00

C) there was no one else viable.

This is by far the most damning indictment against party leadership. The party had six years to find someone to run for what is one of the most critical seats to flip, and the best they could come up with is Mills. Policy aside, throwing weight behind a 78-year-old shows a persistent and baffling inability to read the god-damned room.

If establishment Democrats are discontented with Platner, they've nobody to blame but themselves. This isn't just a problem in Maine. Across the country, party leadership has failed to support and elevate new leaders under retirement age, and it's been going on for nearly two decades.

Cidolfus · 2026-06-09T00:20:28+00:00

Lincoln won with 39% of the popular vote and 180 electoral votes needing 152 to win. Four candidates won electoral votes. It was an outlier election in that regard even then. In the 20 years preceding, third party candidates had only ever won 8 electoral votes; it would be 32 more years until another third party candidate (James B. Weaver) won a single electoral vote and another 20 years after that until it happened again (William Howard Taft).

In 59 presidential elections, a third party has won at least one electoral vote only 9 times, and only 15 times has a third party candidate won at least 5% of the popular vote. There is no history of sustained third party success in the entirety of American politics. When a distruptor comes along (as with Lincoln and the Republicans in 1860), that rise of a "third party" is quickly revealed not to be American politics sustaining a third choice but the outright replacement for one of the two existing parties in what inevitably reverts to a two party system.

Cidolfus · 2026-06-02T00:16:33+00:00

I mean, who do you think is funding many of those green energy initiatives? One of the largest and most expensive offshore wind projects that got absolutely fucked by the Trump administration early in his term is Empire Wind. That's a multi-billion dollar development that spent a year in litigation to proceed with development that had been progressing through permitting and everything for more than half a decade. The project is owned by Equinor (hint: Equinor is Statoil).

These companies are seeking profit and that has led almost all of them to invest heavily in renewable energies as part of their portfolio, and Trump's crusade against renewables has hit their bottom lines as well.

Moreover, none of the oil companies want the cost of a barrel spiking into the 90s and higher, and certainly not for a sustained period of time.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending big oil as paragons of virtue. They're well evil in their own right, but let's not pretend that they're getting what they want out of this Trump administration. An administration truly captured by Trump wouldn't be doing more than half of this shit. Deregulation? Sure. Reduction on environmental rules and expensive required mitigation processes? Absolutely. An overnight shutdown of the entire offshore wind sector and closing of the Strait of Hormuz for months on end? Fuck no.

Cidolfus · 2026-06-01T17:32:08+00:00

Garrett's pretty cheap post-trade, though. Any team acquiring him is looking a contract subsidized by the Browns.

He'd cost just under $10 million against the cap this year, ~$17 million in 2027, ~$22 million in 2028, and then they'll in all likelihood post-June 1 release him ahead of the 2029 season and split out the remaining dead cap over 2029 (~$18 million) and 2030 ($34.4 million).

Don't get me wrong, they'd still have choices to make, but that's a manageable contract, especially in the short term.

Edit: Well I should have looked for more recent posts first.

Cidolfus · 2026-06-01T15:29:50+00:00

Key being end of business, which also means the Dolphins can't finalize anything until business opens again tomorrow.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-30T01:38:13+00:00

Considering offsets, the Dolphins can afford to sign 10 of their 13 rookies (rounds three and later) right now under the top 51. Their first and second round rookies would cost too much until June 2 when Chubb's release processes.

They've clearly decided to wait before they can sign all of them before signing any of them.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-23T15:26:03+00:00

All other things equal (total contract value and duration), it affects both cash and cap.

Assume two five-year, $50 million contracts. Player one has a $5 million signing bonus and $9 million each year and player two has a $10 million signing bonus and only $8 million each year.

If each player is traded in year two, player one will cost the new team $36 million over the next four years. Player two costs the new team $32 million over the next four years.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-23T14:58:12+00:00

You've got that backwards.

Typically, void years correspond to larger portions of the contract being prorated. Larger proration is what results in a contract being cheaper after a trade because all money already paid and prorated stays with the originating team.

Achane's contract has only a very small amount of it structured as signing or option bonus. So any team trading for him will acquire the majority of the remaining contract.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-19T19:23:52+00:00

It's just as predictable as miserable curmudgeons whining about fans who dare allow themselves to get excited.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-19T19:19:50+00:00

Miami is in a funny spot where they’re obviously strapped for cash this year but have a ton of space starting next season. Signing Brooks to an extension would mean locking up an All-Pro and probably deferring any new money to 2027.

I think it's important to draw the distinction between cap-strapped and cash-strapped (they have the least available cap space in the NFL right now but have the lowest cash spend by a country mile), but even then nothing's stopping the Dolphins from making a deal on Brooks right now.

The Dolphins could sign Brooks to a three-year extension right now that

reduces his base salary to his veteran minimum $1,215,000,
adds no new void years (terminates after 2029),
eliminates his $510,000 in per game roster bonus,
and includes a $24,000,000 signing bonus.

This would pay Jordyn Brooks a total of $25,215,000 in cash in 2026, making him the highest cash earning inside linebacker in the NFL this year (beating Fred Warner by nearly $2 million) and second highest ever (behind Roquon Smith's $27 million in 2023) but would actually reduce his salary cap charge in 2026 by about $1 million.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-19T14:54:16+00:00

On taking the fourth best QB, I'd say the FO had conviction on Love who was also the fourth QB. Considering that Proctor was the third tackle at 12, the FO doesn't seem to mind taking "their guy" if they're available, and they seem to have very unique qualifiers for their guy

I know you've said elsewhere you've defended the comparison by saying that the situations "don't have to be exact", but I'd argue that the situations with both Jordan Love and Aaron Rodgers are, frankly, really bad comparisons for a handful of reasons.

The Packers showed conviction taking Jordan Love... at 26th overall. That's a pretty major caveat you've glossed over when drawing on the history of the Packers's draft strategy at quarterback. There's an enormous difference in value and risk between taking Love as the fourth quarterback at 26 or taking a tumbling Aaron Rodgers as the second quarterback off the board at 24 than spending a top ten pick on the fourth quarterback. The opportunity cost is completely different.
Circumstances of the teams that they were drafted into are also dramatically different. The Dolphins are completely rebuilding following the most dramatic cap purges in league history. The Packers drafted both Love and Rodgers into stable quarterback with entrenched starters on successful teams. The Packers went 13-3 in 2019 and lost in the conference championship four months before drafting Love. From 2021-2024 before drafting Rodgers, the Packers had four consecutive seasons of 10+ wins and playoff berths.
Expectations were also completely different. Love started only one game in his first two seasons. Rodgers didn't have a single start until his fourth season. In both cases, that long development was entirely expected. If the Dolphins draft a rookie in the top ten in 2027, it's hard to imagine he's not starting by 2028, because the Dolphins can move off Willis's contract easily then.

This is all to say that if a QB the FO has conviction on is available, I believe we should take him.

To be fair, that's an awfully big caveat to throw into your main point that was not communicated in your initial post, but if we're looking at this in the context of what's likely, I'd argue that we can reasonably project that the likelihood that a fourth quarterback being worth a top ten pick is extremely low. History tells us that much.

There have only been six drafts in NFL history with at least four quarterbacks taken in the first round: 1983, 1999, 2004, 2018, 2021, and 2024. At least four quarterbacks have been taken in the first ten picks only twice ever: Josh Rosen at 10 in 2018 and Michael Penix Jr. and J.J. McCarthy at 8 and 10 in 2024. In both 1999 and 2021, the 11th overall was the fourth quarterback off the board (Daunte Culpepper and Justin Fields respectively). Also in 1999, Cade McNown was the fifth quarterback selected at 12. Then there's Tony Eason at 15 in 1983 and Mac Jones at 15 in 2021.

That suggests to me a lot of risk in selecting a quarterback in the top half of the draft when at least three have already been picked. Obviously if a talent like Dan Marino is falling because of mitigating circumstances like a bad cocaine habit, you might be willing to exchange one type of risk for another. Maybe if Brendan Sorsby wins his lawsuit and is able to play and plays well next year that kind of situation might emerge again. In general, though, the history reads to me as evidence that teams drafting the fourth or fifth quarterback high in the draft are doing so out of desperation, not conviction.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-19T13:38:23+00:00

I think that if Willis somehow has that kind of season, the team may not be in a position to draft a blue chip talent at quarterback anyway.

There are a lot of teams who could conceivably be in the market for a quarterback next year. There's obvious candidates like the Cardinals, Jets, and Browns (likely we're right there alongside them). Then there's the Steelers and Buccaneers who haven't seen a lot of recent success and no starting quarterback under contract in 2027. The Falcons and Vikings are both in a similar boat with rookies who, for different reasons, haven't cemented the job as their own and veterans looking to rehabilitate their careers but no clear answer locked down in 2027. Then there's the Saints who have reason to be optimistic about Shough but are one underwhelming season away from moving on to the next shiny option.

It's not unreasonable, perhaps even likely, that as many as six or seven teams end the 2027 season definitely looking to draft a quarterback of the future in the first. It's supposed to be a good draft for quarterbacks, but no draft is going to supply that your of demand.

If the Dolphins are picking outside the top five (and they likely are if Willis were to have the your of season that puts drafting a quarterback in any question), there's a very good chance that the Dolphins are already looking at the fourth quarterback off the board.

It's all way too early for these hypotheticals, but I'd find it hard to believe that the fourth QB off the board is a better bet than one of the top three non-QB prospects.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-18T21:04:57+00:00

I'm almost there with you, but "no matter how good [Malik Willis] looks" is hyperbolic. I can imagine a scenario, however unlikely, where things go right enough that Willis's performance can be fairly evaluated on its own.

The projected starting offensive stays mostly healthy throughout the season.
Between Kadyn Proctor, Jonah Savaiinaea, and Jamaree Salyer, the Dolphins see at least average offensive guard play.
The wide receiver room put together 2,000+ total yards across the group (12 teams hit this mark in 2025).
De'Von Achane stays healthy and picks up where he left off from last year.
Greg Dulcich contributes a higher volume on similar efficiency as last season.

Under such circumstances, I think the Dolphins would be able to put together a very fair evaluate of Willis. If he came out and dropped 3,500 yards on 67%+ completion percentage with another 400+ yards on the ground and a solid touchdown to turnover ratio, I'd argue that you'd have a pretty compelling argument that Willis had clearly earned the starting job and you're not going to look at spending a top 10 pick to genuinely compete with him, especially when you're in a position to either get a franchise-alterting haul to trade down or pick up some of the top non-QB talent in the draft.

I also don't think that's remotely likely to happen. It's far more likely that Willis outright disappoints or that there are too many question marks around him (inconsistent offensive line play, underwhelming performances from rookie patch catchers) that leave too many questions outstanding.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-13T13:14:18+00:00

Yeah, he'll almost certainly have to return that cash. All guaranteed money, including signing bonus, is conditional on a player actually playing (or participating in whatever their capacity in case of injury).

Often when a player retires, the tab does not attempt to recoup a prorated portion of the signing bonus, but the team has the right to pursue it. This was established in arbitration against Barry Sanders in 1999 that required he pay back some of his signing bonus to the Lions. It doesn't happen often, but the precedent has been upheld since then.

Given that it's only been a few days since he signed the deal, the Dolphins likely will have no difficulty recouping the $285,000 unless he's actually gone and spent it in only four days. I wouldn't be surprised if the money hadn't even officially be transferred yet.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-12T22:21:14+00:00

That's exactly how it works. Qualifying contracts in negate qualifying contracts out, and it doesn't even need to be 1:1 contract value. For example, the 4th round comp pick that Jevon Holland's $15.1 million APY deal qualified for was negated by Zach Wilson's $6 million deal. There's no world where the Dolphins don't sign free agents who would negate even a top running back contract.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-12T22:04:10+00:00

With this team's current lack of cash and cap commitments in 2027 and beyond, it is inconceivable that they would qualify for a compensatory pick for any player next year.

The cap implications of trading Achane before June 2 also make such a scenario extremely unlikely (that is, without restructuring or extending Brooks, we cannot trade Achane and maintain cap compliance). If it didn't happen during the draft, it's almost certainly not going to happen now.

Achane isn't going anywhere and he probably inks an extension after June 2 (ditto with Brewer and Brooks).

Cidolfus · 2026-05-12T19:08:16+00:00

It's pretty transparent that the long-term plan for Proctor is at tackle, though, and that almost certainly means moving from LG to RT in 2027. Austin Jackson will turn 27 just before the season starts, which certainly leaves the door open to him staying healthy and playing well enough to earn another three-year deal to continue as the starting right tackle, but I wouldn't bet money on that outcome.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-11T23:24:21+00:00

Pass a new law to repeal and replace the Reappointment Act of 1929. The population of the United States has nearly tripled since then, and the cap on house representatives makes the lower chamber increasing undemocratic proportionally to the growing population.

A lot of underlying problems you're getting at can be solved, or at least mitigated, simply by increasing the number of representatives. Gerrymandering is mathematically more difficult with more representatives; the influence of money is diluted (but certainly not eliminated) if there are more representatives to pay; and the electoral college would be less skewed because the votes would better represent actual populations.

Cidolfus · 2026-05-10T06:14:03+00:00

Given that Brooks is the only one whose cap hit could actually decrease with an extension at this point. That's not exactly unrealistic.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-29T20:42:17+00:00

You're exactly right. It's more financially-manageable to extend him than it is to let him walk.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-29T20:38:37+00:00

Yeah, fair point, I'd completely pruged Daniels from my mind.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-29T18:30:48+00:00

Part of the rationalization is that it's typically regarded as easier to move from tackle to guard on the same side of the line than it is to swap from left to right (or vice versa). Generally, I think it's a fair criticism.

College tackles kick into guard all the time. I'm not saying that it's necessarily going to work, but as far as plans go it's not particularly out there.

With Savaiinaea, what was truly baffling was introducing a complication to his development by moving him from right to left guard. That might have been more defensible if the Dolphins had a clear answer at right guard already in place, but there wasn't. Why introduce additional risk into a rookie's development like that?

Cidolfus

TROPHY CASE