Do you want to pay Mankins big money?

[BradyManny]

Reiss in his blog today came up with a 6 year 48 milli contract that he thought was good middle ground for both Mankins and the Pats.

I think he's right on for the number, in terms of Mankins value and public perception of him. Unfortunately, I think we'd be insane to pay him that. I take all metrics with a grain of salt, but I've yet to see one that shows Mankins as an elite guard - and most, in fact, show Neal as a more effective player, when he is healthy. I'd throw this out the window if it weren't backed up with my own eyes. Add to that, it also seems to be the prevailing wisdom of scouts anytime they offer up their opinion. He's not an elite pass blocker, and he was destroyed in SB42, despite apparently being our best O-Linemen. That game turned when Neal went out, and the O-Line couldn't quite make up for his absence, as has been the case many times.

Don't get me wrong. Mankins is a good player. But if he hadn't been a 1st round guard, and started a fad of taking guards in the 1st round, I don't think he'd have been to a Pro-Bowl yet, and I think we'd be talking about a Koppen-like extension rather than a record-setting guard type extension. He's one of the few players on the Patriots - or maybe the only - who I would categorize as "overhyped". The 1st round label gave him name recognition - and he's played well, but guards playing just as well can go largely unnoticed.

I don't want to see us break the bank for this guy. Save the $$ for Brady, try and re-sign Moss. Those are bigger priorities. We can get a comparable level of play for a fraction of the price.

 

[Kontradiction]

Your looking too much at the total dollar amount. Look at the year by year base salaries...

2010: $3.2 million; 2011: 3.5 million; 2012: $3.5 million; 2013: $5.5 million; 2014: $6.75 million; 2015: $8.75 million

By 2013, he'll be 30 years old. He doesn't see the big money per year until 2014-2015 according to this sample contract. The team could let him go in 2014 (typically the point in which offensive linemen show signs of decline) and not be on the hook for those last two years.

 

[Synovia]

6-48 isn't all that much money for a great guard.


Steve Hutchinson got 7-49 in 2006. Average guards are getting this sort of money now.

 

[Bostonian1962]

Reiss in his blog today came up with a 6 year 48 milli contract that he thought was good middle ground for both Mankins and the Pats.

I think he's right on for the number, in terms of Mankins value and public perception of him. Unfortunately, I think we'd be insane to pay him that. I take all metrics with a grain of salt, but I've yet to see one that shows Mankins as an elite guard - and most, in fact, show Neal as a more effective player, when he is healthy. I'd throw this out the window if it weren't backed up with my own eyes. Add to that, it also seems to be the prevailing wisdom of scouts anytime they offer up their opinion. He's not an elite pass blocker, and he was destroyed in SB42, despite apparently being our best O-Linemen. That game turned when Neal went out, and the O-Line couldn't quite make up for his absence, as has been the case many times.

Don't get me wrong. Mankins is a good player. But if he hadn't been a 1st round guard, and started a fad of taking guards in the 1st round, I don't think he'd have been to a Pro-Bowl yet, and I think we'd be talking about a Koppen-like extension rather than a record-setting guard type extension. He's one of the few players on the Patriots - or maybe the only - who I would categorize as "overhyped". The 1st round label gave him name recognition - and he's played well, but guards playing just as well can go largely unnoticed.

I don't want to see us break the bank for this guy. Save the $$ for Brady, try and re-sign Moss. Those are bigger priorities. We can get a comparable level of play for a fraction of the price.

I don't want to break the bank for any interior lineman. Mankins needs to be thankful there was one team out there willing to take him in the first round.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

It's not my money and I have a deep philosophical aversion to spending someone else's money, but I'll play this game. Reiss proposed what seems to me (someone ignorant of NFL contracts, unlike Miguel) an equitable contract for a star lineperson. If the Pats FO agrees that Mankins is of that caliber, they should offer something resembling that. Walk away only if Logan wants millions more per year.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Your looking too much at the total dollar amount. Look at the year by year base salaries...

2010: $3.2 million; 2011: 3.5 million; 2012: $3.5 million; 2013: $5.5 million; 2014: $6.75 million; 2015: $8.75 million

By 2013, he'll be 30 years old. He doesn't see the big money per year until 2014-2015 according to this sample contract. The team could let him go in 2014 (typically the point in which offensive linemen show signs of decline) and not be on the hook for those last two years.

He's be getting $27M in the first three seasons...an average of $9M per. He "sees" $20M in the first season. There is a reason Mike Reiss works for ESPN and not in the FO of the NEP...

FWIW that exceeds the first year and first three years take of Wilfork's 2010 deal...

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Relative to the rest of the league, this is an aging OL. Mankins is an anchor of its future, as far as I can see. Unless, there's a credible Plan B, I think the Pats have to pay him his market value and I'll trust Reiss to know more about that than I would.

 

[InRodWeRust]

He needs to sign this chicken tender.

Sorry. This is what I think of every time I hear someone talks about signing the tender


And on a serious note to Kontra . .

2010: $3.2 million; 2011: 3.5 million; 2012: $3.5 million; 2013: $5.5 million; 2014: $6.75 million; 2015: $8.75 million = $31.2 million and not $48 million. What am I missing?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

He needs to sign this chicken tender.

Sorry. This is what I think of every time I hear someone talks about signing the tender


And on a serious note to Kontra . .

2010: $3.2 million; 2011: 3.5 million; 2012: $3.5 million; 2013: $5.5 million; 2014: $6.75 million; 2015: $8.75 million = $31.2 million and not $48 million. What am I missing?

The $17M signing bonus...

 

[BradyManny]

I'm not too worried about the specifics of Reiss' deal - I'm looking at it more generally. I don't think Mankins is worth what he'll likely end up getting.

Of course, I said that about Wilfork and Bodden, and both end up signing for pretty reasonable deals - so maybe that's how it plays out here, too. But, specific to Mankins, I'd be curious if the team views him as a perennial Pro Bowler he thinks himself as. I just think his play is - at least - a little bit overrated.

Is he a real game-changer? Does he strengthen this line that much? Not enough to overcome Stephen Neal's injury problems. Not enough to make it a dominant run blocking group on the leftside. Not enough to be considered an elite (or even more than above-average) pass blocker. So why shell out a chunk of $$ for him?

 

[chevss454]

Mankins' value has been set by the Evans signing. If he chooses to take the "home town discount" he may sign for a little less to stay. OTOH, the other 31 teams know what Mankins brings and they also know his value. 7M+ is a lot to spend on an OL who is not your LT and paying it to Mankins would create an impossible pay scale imbalance for the Pats. Unfortunately, I don't see any way the Pats sign Mankins long term unless he is willing to take a sizable discount; his holdout tells me that is unlikely as he is trying to force the issue. He wants to be paid now. Looking at the current salaries for the OL, it's easy to see how idiotic and what a poor value it would be to pay Mankins 7M+.

Salaries per Miguel for 2010, including amortized signing bonus:
Light = 4.5M
Koppen = 4.5M
Kaczur= 3.57M
Mankins = 3.3M (at his current tender) and Evans made his value 7M+.
Neal = 1.5M (a bargain, imo)
Vollmer = 725K (a huge bargain)

So how do the Pats handle this to make lemonade out of a lemon? The options (if he doesn't sign his tender) seem to be to 1) retender him and a) play him in 2010 at the higher tendered price of 3.5M and then franchise him for 2011 which may be a lockout year. Or, b) trade him for good value with his current contract and let his next team worry about resigning him.

If "a" above, some might say to pay him at 10% above last year's salary which would be @ 2M, and Mankins would be insulted and even more angry and determined than ever. Not a good thing and he may just hold out as long as possible and miss 10 games of this season. If he is franchised for 2011, that takes the franchise option away from the Pats to use on TB while a new contract is forged with TB. It seems that if the Pats want to keep Mankins (and thereby create a payscale imbalance), signing TB to a contract is paramount, especially in this uncapped year when any contract could be front loaded.

[If I'm Kraft, however, I'm saying to myself "TB is under contract this year and 2011 is likely to be a lockout year, so why should I give TB 20-30M of my money in signing bonus this year and only get 1 year of play from him of the next 2?" Kraft knows he will have time at the end of the season to sign TB or he could then franchise him with the understanding he will be signed later. By then there should be more info regarding the CBA and a potential lockout. Manning may also be signed by then which would be a gamble as it could be good news or bad news for the Pats.]

There is much to think about before acting hastily.

The other option for the Pats is to simply trade Mankins for as much value as they can get and do it before risking injury at camp. I understand how good Mankins is and how well he is regarded, but Mankins has pushed the Pats into a corner with few options.

Hopefully the 2 sides will keep an open dialogue and work to getting a 'happy' Mankins into camp for this year with either a deal or at least an understanding both sides can live with. If he continues to push the issue, imo, he's gone.

From Breer today(6/14):

If you keep reading, the scout advances two methods prevalent over the last decade or so in building an offensive line -- a) you pay up, make one side of the line dominant and fill in the blanks with young players or b) stockpile good, not great players and emphasize balance.

The Patriots are caught in the middle on a couple counts on this.

They've long built their lines on the "balance" model, but now one of their own has cracked the elite category. And also, while they do emphasize that "team" play, their offense does ask a lot of players at the guard position.

It's a sticky one, to be sure, and the Jahri Evans deal didn't make things easier on the team. The Saints Pro Bowler got a seven-year, $56.7 million contract, and the reason why is simple.

"Evans is one of the rarer offensive linemen in the league," said the scout. "He's a guy that has the athletic ability to move and get to the second level, but he can still take you on at the point of attack. I can't disagree with the (Saints') decision.

"So is it worth it? Yeah, if you can solidify one side. You don't want to pay astronomical money, though, to your left guard if your left tackle and center are (crap)."

The scout said that he'd always seen New England's line as one that thrived on its balance and not just one player or another. And so that makes this decision a very, very intersting one.

Why break the bank for a guard? - Extra Points - Boston.com

This next article makes the point that Mankins is a very good OG who suits the Pats very well but that there are some other more effective ways for the Pats to spend 8M/year on a player. I agree.

News.WBRU | Logan’s run is done: Why Mankins should find his way out of NE

 

[Kontradiction]

He's be getting $27M in the first three seasons...an average of $9M per. He "sees" $20M in the first season. There is a reason Mike Reiss works for ESPN and not in the FO of the NEP...

FWIW that exceeds the first year and first three years take of Wilfork's 2010 deal...

I might be wrong (contract details aren't my strongsuit), but isn't the signing bonus to be paid out in the first year of the new contract?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I might be wrong (contract details aren't my strongsuit), but isn't the signing bonus to be paid out in the first year of the new contract?

Yup, which means he sees $20M this year (more than Wilfork who gets $18M in his signing bonus and a SIX figure salary only. First three year take home is the gold standard for measuring contracts (unless a lot more than that is ultimately guaranteed) and Reiss proposed deal for Mankins would pay him more in the first three than Wilfork is scheduled to receive even IF he makes all his weight and attendance incentives.

Mankins - an OG - isn't ever going to be the second highest contract player on this team. (And I'm not including Moss in that calculation because even if he remains his deal won't top $8M going forward.) Tom will always top the roster, and likely be followed by a DE/DT/somebody on the defense...unless there is another Moss on the horizen. The sides are said to be far apart on a long term deal which tells me the team sees him in the 6M+ to maybe it looks like $7M range with approprioate spin while he and his agent are likely looking for something in the upper $7's that can be spun above $8M... Length is likely also an issue since it impacts signing bonus, guarantees and total value. He's 28 and they likely aren't comfortable extending him beyond 5 years tops. They would probably be more comfortable with 4 because it would lower their guaranteed committment. He's probably not buying the retain a shot for a second bite at the apple rationale...

 

[BelizePats]

This is a complicated contract situation, even more so than the current lack of CBA dictates.
Mankins is a good guard and he's not missed a start in 5 years. His consistency is attractive! But is he an elite game changer? No!
That said, the Pats have an aging Oline and Mankins best years are still ahead of him as he plays on his upcoming contract.
Also, what does it say to the rest of the team that we won't pay a guy going forward who we drafted, who has made the Pro Bowl twice, never missed a start, and never had any kind of off field issues?

I can't imagine paying a guard 8 million a year. But, if we have the money and it does not screw us over in terms of our future ability to allocate money where needed, maybe we have to, given the current state of the Oline and market for interior line men.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Good article in the NFP by Andew Brandt this AM. Upshaw was a snake oil salesman who convinced his constituents that uncapped was a panacea... Turns out owners aren't quite the dolts their employees are. Uncapped turned out to be a panacea for them. Bob was right in stating ownership welcomed it. And not simply to facilitate a frontrunning frontloading frenzy. If anything it resulted in just the opposite, ownership finally getting a grip on it's dark side. That the Haynesworth deal signed on the eve of the uncapped season turned out to be such a debaucle (not to mention the trade and extend deal the Bears invested preemptively in) was just the frosting on their cake.

Restricted free agents truly restricted | National Football Post

 

[Brady2Welker]

They always say you dont miss an elite olinemen till hes gone. This is one of those scenarios. Wed have to compare our team with or without him. But one things for certain, I want the best boys available guarding our franchise (#12)

 

[MoLewisrocks]

They always say you dont miss an elite olinemen till hes gone. This is one of those scenarios. Wed have to compare our team with or without him. But one things for certain, I want the best boys available guarding our franchise (#12)

We all want that, but at what price? I want a solid front 5 across the board and dependable backups, too. I also want a top flight D and better weapons for the franchise. Unfortunately you can't have them all on top 5 deals - as Pioli used to remind us regularly. And as Bill often reiterates, you can have anything you want, but it always comes at a cost.

 

[Brady2Welker]

We all want that, but at what price? I want a solid front 5 across the board and dependable backups, too. I also want a top flight D and better weapons for the franchise. Unfortunately you can't have them all on top 5 deals - as Pioli used to remind us regularly. And as Bill often reiterates, you can have anything you want, but it always comes at a cost.

That is the issue. I'd love to see how our other G's look like, that would make this question a lot easier. If we've got no one else to put in there, I wouldn't mind paying Mankins the Reiss-esque contract. I just dont want to let him walk cause of money and be completely screwed like we are at our RDE position right now.

 

[Deus Irae]

That is the issue. I'd love to see how our other G's look like, that would make this question a lot easier. If we've got no one else to put in there, I wouldn't mind paying Mankins the Reiss-esque contract. I just dont want to let him walk cause of money and be completely screwed like we are at our RDE position right now.

Those other guards looked like crap when they tried to fill in for Neal.

 

[Kontradiction]

Those other guards looked like crap when they tried to fill in for Neal.

"Crap" would be a compliment compared to how they actually looked.