RFA/FT question in contract league

[HughHoney]

In a $400 salary cap league where we can franchise tag (FT) one player and assign another as a restricted free agent (RFA) with the option to match. FT gets a one year deal at average of 5 highest at the position. I’ve been considering Hopkins as a FT and Ronald Jones as a RFA (RB are thin). Now with Fournette resigning I’m thinking I’ll let Jones go (salary would be $23 minimum if no one bids). I’m also thinking maybe assigning Hopkins as RFA rather than FT. Could possibly get him cheaper (FT would be $71) and have the option to assign longer contract. And if I let him go I get a 2nd this year as compensation. Salary almost certainly won’t be much more than $71.

So what do others think about Jones prospects with Fournette resigning? And do I gamble on RFA rather than FT with Hopkins? I would almost surely lose him next year if I FT.

[Gator Sens]

I think Jones II takes a hit and his usage is capped and week to week could be a gamble on who is used more as the primary back. However, being thin at RB, I think he is worth holding. He will still put up points and should be involved at some level week to week and could be used in a bind. If you are contending/have a couple year window I think resigning Hopkins is the way to go. That way he is locked up on your roster for multiple runs. If you are not contending, I could see FT him and looking to trade if things don't go as planned.

[HughHoney]

Thanks Gator. Agree with your advice. Definitely a strong contender with Hill, DK, Ridley, and planning to keep Hopkins at WR. Some other good fill in pieces with Deebo, C Davis, Hardman, and Jakobi. Dak, Watson, and Goff at QB in SF. Have Henry and Andrews too. If I try to keep Jones though I have to FT Hopkins. Can only have one of each. Could do that and make a run at Hunt and let Jones go by not matching if I get him.

[zaner75]

You'd be using almost 25% of your cap on 2 players which seems pretty steep. I think I would RFA Hopkins in the the hopes of getting him cheaper then rolling savings into a better RB than Jones, if one is available.
If you think it is risky or unlikely that you get Hopkins cheaper than $71 and/or there is not going to be a better RB option than Jones or you think that bidding will be crazy on RBs, then you may have to FT Hopkins and at least you would have flexibility with the RFA tag on Jones to rescind it if needed.

[TheBelgian]

The RB situation in this league sounds realistically rough. So Ronald Jones at a little over 5% is not a bad price. As far as Hopkins, I’m in the group that believes that paying 17%+ (in this particular circumstance) is too much to pay for one player. I would heavily consider other options at WR.

[HughHoney]

These are all good points. What I failed to mention is I have a good team without either of these thanks to some nice contracts. Tyreek, DK, and Ridley are a combined $64. Watson and Goff in SF are $34 total. I have $133 to spend on 3 or more players. Will definitely spend a lot on an elite player and Hopkins is the best available.

[HughHoney]

UPDATE:

Wound up using the RFA on Hopkins and got him for $65 so saved $6 over the FT. Now have the option to match or let go and get the 2.05 pick as compensation. Planning to match. There are some good WR still available in the UFA auction but sometimes those are overpriced due to limited options and teams with some $$$ and I like Hopkins QB situation better.

So a follow-up question. How many years would you feel comfortable giving Nuk at that price? I’m thinking 2-3 right now. Three would be better given other contracts on my team. He would be 31 in that third year though. Should I be concerned about a drop in production making $65 a bad contract then?

[zaner75]

I would look at 2 years as that gives you some flexibility. If his production drops, then you walk him and use the cap elsewhere. If he is still good, you could use another tag (if possible) or try to re-sign for less as he would be older and maybe a less desirable target.

[abloom]

UPDATE:

Wound up using the RFA on Hopkins and got him for $65 so saved $6 over the FT. Now have the option to match or let go and get the 2.05 pick as compensation. Planning to match. There are some good WR still available in the UFA auction but sometimes those are overpriced due to limited options and teams with some $$$ and I like Hopkins QB situation better.

So a follow-up question. How many years would you feel comfortable giving Nuk at that price? I’m thinking 2-3 right now. Three would be better given other contracts on my team. He would be 31 in that third year though. Should I be concerned about a drop in production making $65 a bad contract then?

The big questions are, can you assign him the RFA tag again, Who else would be up for a potential RFA tag in those years?
Certainly if you can RFA him again in 2 years, and you have no one else that is obviously coming up on a RFA then, I think 2 years is easily the way to go, because he should be losing value during this time.
If you aren't able to resign him to an RFA in two years or you have someone else more likely to get that tag, I'm okay giving him 3 years if your cap situation looks manageable. While I don't think he will be as valuable in 3 years as 2 years, I think he'll produce fine. You may be overpaying that third year, but its probably fine.

[HughHoney]

UPDATE:

Wound up using the RFA on Hopkins and got him for $65 so saved $6 over the FT. Now have the option to match or let go and get the 2.05 pick as compensation. Planning to match. There are some good WR still available in the UFA auction but sometimes those are overpriced due to limited options and teams with some $$$ and I like Hopkins QB situation better.

So a follow-up question. How many years would you feel comfortable giving Nuk at that price? I’m thinking 2-3 right now. Three would be better given other contracts on my team. He would be 31 in that third year though. Should I be concerned about a drop in production making $65 a bad contract then?

The big questions are, can you assign him the RFA tag again, Who else would be up for a potential RFA tag in those years?
Certainly if you can RFA him again in 2 years, and you have no one else that is obviously coming up on a RFA then, I think 2 years is easily the way to go, because he should be losing value during this time.
If you aren't able to resign him to an RFA in two years or you have someone else more likely to get that tag, I'm okay giving him 3 years if your cap situation looks manageable. While I don't think he will be as valuable in 3 years as 2 years, I think he'll produce fine. You may be overpaying that third year, but its probably fine.

I completely agree and that’s what I meant when I said 3 would be better with my contracts. I could use the RFA again but will also have Ridley coming up in 2 years so more likely to use it on him. Year 3 no big contracts ending as of yet. Subject to change with UFA auction additions. Still think 2 years is the safer play. I’ve done well at avoiding cap penalties and tend to err on the conservative side.

[abloom]

UPDATE:

Wound up using the RFA on Hopkins and got him for $65 so saved $6 over the FT. Now have the option to match or let go and get the 2.05 pick as compensation. Planning to match. There are some good WR still available in the UFA auction but sometimes those are overpriced due to limited options and teams with some $$$ and I like Hopkins QB situation better.

So a follow-up question. How many years would you feel comfortable giving Nuk at that price? I’m thinking 2-3 right now. Three would be better given other contracts on my team. He would be 31 in that third year though. Should I be concerned about a drop in production making $65 a bad contract then?

The big questions are, can you assign him the RFA tag again, Who else would be up for a potential RFA tag in those years?
Certainly if you can RFA him again in 2 years, and you have no one else that is obviously coming up on a RFA then, I think 2 years is easily the way to go, because he should be losing value during this time.
If you aren't able to resign him to an RFA in two years or you have someone else more likely to get that tag, I'm okay giving him 3 years if your cap situation looks manageable. While I don't think he will be as valuable in 3 years as 2 years, I think he'll produce fine. You may be overpaying that third year, but its probably fine.

I completely agree and that’s what I meant when I said 3 would be better with my contracts. I could use the RFA again but will also have Ridley coming up in 2 years so more likely to use it on him. Year 3 no big contracts ending as of yet. Subject to change with UFA auction additions. Still think 2 years is the safer play. I’ve done well at avoiding cap penalties and tend to err on the conservative side.

Then keep rolling with what you've been doing. If you're comfortable with that method thats what you should do. The last thing you want to do is take a contract on that you don't like, and then feel like you have to make compromises later because of it.