Quote:
Originally Posted by albany ed
For me, both Kelly and Smith have become part time players, so they are the chief reason depth becomes more important. .
|
To me this is the biggest factor in letting them go as well. Even if both Kelly and Smith were playing at the level they were earlier in their careers you can't pay them like we have been if they're only gong to be available ~60% of the time.
Quote:
It borders on insanity to let Kelly walk and at the same time lose Braden Smith to either retirement or release.
Ballard did that once and we had our worst season since 2017. Who wants to live through that again.
If Smith retires, then resign Kelly. If Smith agrees to stay and restructure, then you consider letting Kelly walk.
|
The big difference between now and then is that Goncalves and Bortolini are far better than Pryor and an out of position Pinter.
Quote:
|
I agree that we have many holes to fill, which is why I would part ways with Smith. It's better to get out on a player a year early than a year late, and having Goncalves means we have a starting caliber RT at a fraction of the price, and the money saved can be reallocated to address some of those roster needs. Backup OT is also a much cheaper position to fill than starting RT. I'd be willing to draft a rookie and let he and Freeland battle it out for the swing tackle spot if it meant Jevon Holland and D.J. Reed/Charvarius Ward were shoring up the secondary.
|
Definitely agree with this. Of course this assumes that Ballard will take the additional salary cap space we'll get from releasing Smith and put it to good use rather than stick it in his next year(s) lock box. I know he said he is going to be more active in FA at his year end presser, but we've heard similar promises in the past where in the end he didn't do a single thing (improving the secondary in his post '23 season presser for example).