- Giants are open to re-signing Barkley for around 12 million -

[sxdxca38]

This is from Mike Garafolo, who is usually pretty spot on with NYG news.

"The Giants and Saquon Barkley's representatives did have contract talks during the bye week but they tabled them until the offseason. From what I gathered they were pretty good discussions and gave a good starting point for where these conversations are going to be in the offseason. If he thinks he's going to make Christian McCaffrey money upwards of $16 million a year it's not going to get done. But if he wants to get north of where Dalvin Cook is in the 12-range, a little bit above that, then yeah I think a deal gets done. These are the two guys with the Giants that have laid the ground work to be hold-overs from the previous regime that are going to get long term deals to remain Giants with the new regime."

Here is the link

Barkley

[AZGiantFan]

This is from Mike Garafolo, who is usually pretty spot on with NYG news.

"The Giants and Saquon Barkley's representatives did have contract talks during the bye week but they tabled them until the offseason. From what I gathered they were pretty good discussions and gave a good starting point for where these conversations are going to be in the offseason. If he thinks he's going to make Christian McCaffrey money upwards of $16 million a year it's not going to get done. But if he wants to get north of where Dalvin Cook is in the 12-range, a little bit above that, then yeah I think a deal gets done. These are the two guys with the Giants that have laid the ground work to be hold-overs from the previous regime that are going to get long term deals to remain Giants with the new regime."

Here is the link

Barkley

IMO, they should have traded him when his value was at its peak, right before the trading deadline.  And I personally think they would have done it but for the false promise of a 6-2 record, that could just as easily been 4-4 or worse.

[sxdxca38]

IMO, they should have traded him when his value was at its peak, right before the trading deadline.  And I personally think they would have done it but for the false promise of a 6-2 record, that could just as easily been 4-4 or worse.

Makes sense, but no one knows the future or what was going to happen.

Just to play devil's advocate, could you imagine what would have happened if the Giants traded Barkley away after starting the season 7-2?

The fan outrage would have been through the roof, and there may have been rioting on the streets.

I feel Daboll and JS made the right decision by retaining him, let's see how the rest of the season plays out

[Ed Vette]

Speculation on the amount.

[sxdxca38]

Speculation on the amount.

Hi Ed,

I don't understand, are you saying I'm speculating? or Garafolo is speculating?

In my title I said the Giants wanted to bring back Barkley for "around" 12 million.

This is what Garafolo said in the article "But if he wants to get north of where Dalvin Cook is in the 12-range, a little bit above that, then yeah I think a deal gets done."

I don't think Garafolo would have said that, if he didn't have information on the contract talks, so can you please clarify? Thanks

[B1GBLUE]

Makes sense, but no one knows the future or what was going to happen.

Just to play devil's advocate, could you imagine what would have happened if the Giants traded Barkley away after starting the season 7-2?

The fan outrage would have been through the roof, and there may have been rioting on the streets.

I feel Daboll and JS made the right decision by retaining him, let's see how the rest of the season plays out

agreed. even if it was the right move, the fanbase would have been livid. and he was the only thing we had going on offense.

[Ed Vette]

Hi Ed,

I don't understand, are you saying I'm speculating? or Garafolo is speculating?

In my title I said the Giants wanted to bring back Barkley for "around" 12 million.

This is what Garafolo said in the article "But if he wants to get north of where Dalvin Cook is in the 12-range, a little bit above that, then yeah I think a deal gets done."

I don't think Garafolo would have said that, if he didn't have information on the contract talks, so can you please clarify? Thanks

Garafolo is speculating and your title in this thread expresses it as fact.

[DaveBrown74]

If Barkley continues to look like what he has looked like in the last two games, then I don't want him for $12m or even $8m. If he hit a wall in week 10, then I have no reason to believe that won't continue to happen, and probably even sooner each year he gets older. Or, he will have to be used much more sparingly, which obviously also means he's not worth that much.

I think these remaining several games matter. He needs to show he can remain impactful and healthy for a full season. Would you really pay $12mm for an injury-prone RB who is good for the first half of the season and then bad in most of the second half?

[Ed Vette]

If Barkley continues to look like what he has looked like in the last two games, then I don't want him for $12m or even $8m. If he hit a wall in week 10, then I have no reason to believe that won't continue to happen, and probably even sooner each year he gets older. Or, he will have to be used much more sparingly, which obviously also means he's not worth that much.

I think these remaining several games matter. He needs to show he can remain impactful and healthy for a full season. Would you really pay $12mm for an injury-prone RB who is good for the first half of the season and then bad in most of the second half?

Of course not. That has to be taken into consideration as how he finishes the season is a big factor. My speculation with all due respect to Garafolo is that they offered him 8mm and a deal that won't kill them down the line if he gets injured again and loses another season.

[MightyGiants]

I wonder if that number has dropped based on Barkley's post-bye production

[DaveBrown74]

I wonder if that number has dropped based on Barkley's post-bye production

If it hasn't I'd be surprised. He was bad all last year and hurt the year before. This season needs to be looked at holistically, not just the first half. As much as I like Barkley, I wouldn't say he is a player I have a ton of trust in, and that sentiment has resurfaced for me over the past two weeks. It almost seems like the 35 attempts he had against Houston caused him to hit a wall of some sort. That's not ideal if you're talking about $12mm per for a position that you can get good ones of in the 2nd and 3rd round every year who will cost $1mm or so and be very good as rookies. I understand a healthy Barkley is better than almost any other RB, but there are still economic and relative value considerations here.

[uconnjack8]

I think that says to me there is negotiations happening and both sides are interested in getting something done. 

[Ed Vette]

I would be cautious about signing a  RB to a second contract on that basis alone. With all that's he's done this year, from my perspective he's not the same athlete he was in his rookie season. I know it's hard to tell but he's lost some. He has however gained in experience and is a better RB for it.

[DaveBrown74]

If I'm Schoen I'm seeing if he can pick his game up over these last six weeks. If not, I am probably not interested in anything material or anything at all with him.

If so, then I would still firmly stick to a maximum and be prepared to let him walk if he doesn't except it. I would not get bullied into overpaying for a RB on a second contract. You do that with elite QBs, franchise left tackles, stud D linemen, etc but not a RB. Especially one with highly questionable durability and limited at best blocking skills.

[Ed Vette]

Stamina may be affected by serious injuries. It's possible that he just hit a wall. Let's see how he does tomorrow and the rest of the season. Btw, I couldn't see Schoen signing him this season without seeing if he could make it through the schedule healthy.