Details behind the Tag numbers

[Miguel]

http://www.nflpa.org/pdfs/NewsAndEvents/HotTopics/FranchiseAndTransition_2007.pdf

 

[PrairiePat]

1. We can no longer label Brady as 'underpaid' or 'taking a hometown discount'.

2. How does AV's deal not make the top 10 kicker salaries? I assume it's either end-loaded or the signing bonus changes the math?

 

[upstater1]

1. We can no longer label Brady as 'underpaid' or 'taking a hometown discount'.

Why not? Surely you can't look at one season of a long contract and assume anything about what the player is worth. After all, Rosevelt Colvin is slated to ear, what, $8 million this year. That really doesn't tell us anything.

Unless I'm wrong, Brady is averaging $10 million a year for the life of his contract. If you ask me, he's earning $3 million a year less than he should.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

you have to figure that with the change in the salary cap that the pats need to tweak, slightly adjust their value philosophy of paying players.

It's gonna be an extremely interesting offseason.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

1. We can no longer label Brady as 'underpaid' or 'taking a hometown discount'.

2. How does AV's deal not make the top 10 kicker salaries? I assume it's either end-loaded or the signing bonus changes the math?

Your assumption about Brady (which is incorrect) answers your question about Adam. These numbers are basically cap numbers - salary plus any non converted bonus plus the pro rated share of amortized bonus. Brady's deal is front loaded (and also includes the remainder of his earlier amortized bonus from his 2002 extension). It averages $10M per and actually finishes in sub double digit range cap wise. Mannings had no leftover amortization and is backloaded with salary and a signing bonus that was 25% higher and dotted with roster bonuses that are twice the size of any in Brady's out years. The annual average value of Mannings is $14M per but it finishes out unless extended in the $20M per cap range. And if you just look at them as 3 year net deals for comparison purposes, I believe Brady's averages about $13M vs. Manning's at just over $15M.

Adam's deal was structured with backloaded salary and a large signing bonus/minimal first year salary so his cap hit in the first season was just $1.5M or so. Those cap hits will be almost $3M at the back end as a result. But the deal overall averages around $2.5M.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Your assumption about Brady (which is incorrect) answers your question about Adam. These numbers are basically cap numbers - salary plus any non converted bonus plus the pro rated share of amortized bonus. Brady's deal is front loaded (and also includes the remainder of his earlier amortized bonus from his 2002 extension). It averages $10M per and actually finishes in sub double digit range cap wise. Mannings had no leftover amortization and is backloaded with salary and a signing bonus that was 25% higher and dotted with roster bonuses that are twice the size of any in Brady's out years. The annual average value of Mannings is $14M per but it finishes out unless extended in the $20M per cap range. And if you just look at them as 3 year net deals for comparison purposes, I believe Brady's averages about $13M vs. Manning's at just over $15M.

Adam's deal was structured with backloaded salary and a large signing bonus/minimal first year salary so his cap hit in the first season was just $1.5M or so. Those cap hits will be almost $3M at the back end as a result. But the deal overall averages around $2.5M.

What Mo did not feel it necessary to say is: "For a freakin KICKER?!?!?!?!"

There, I said it.

PFnV

 

[MoLewisrocks]

What Mo did not feel it necessary to say is: "For a freakin KICKER?!?!?!?!"

There, I said it.

PFnV

Don't put words in my mouth bucko...:nono:

I would have paid Adam, and so would Belioli had they been given the one last chance. I wouldn't have let it come to that. The kid kicker is working out pretty well, thankfully, but I would have been a bit more selective about picking my battles because there are plenty more of them out there. Particularly full well understanding that if the kid is nearly the kicker he's being asked to replace he'll be looking for his PDQ.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

To rephrase:

What Mo had no intention of saying was that thing about "for a freakin KICKER!" That part was all me.

At any rate - is the kid (Gost) on a 4 year rookie deal? 3? Well, yikes, I hate to say it, but by the time his bill comes due, we have a number of way, way bigger issues. By then, we might be looking around for the latest spawn of the Grammatica subspecies, actually... because that's right around the window where we have Brady to lock down again, and we have to think about getting Sey done again. For all we know we're talking about the Age of Cassel by then, though from what I know thus far (and more importantly what we know of Brady), I really really hope not.

I certainly think the "Pay AV" crowd can point to this year w/the Colts as a reason to still think of him as worth it, but I think the "Replace AV" crowd (or more accurately, "Accept his replacement,") has just as much reason to say, "See? You can get another."

Time will tell... 3 more years, in Gost's case.

PFnV

Edit -- ps, I know the point of the previous post could be "anti-brinksmanship," not "pro-AV," i.e., don't let it get to that point, and you don't have an issue. There's a lot to be said for that viewpoint, when you know the outcome you want anyway (i.e., keep AV), but evidently the goal was not "keep AV for what he wants to be paid".... but when all was said and done, dontcha hateit... it looks like the cold calculating brain trust was right. (Pending game-winning kicks in SB XLII, XLIII, XLIV, and XLV, by Gost, one would hope.)

 

[MoLewisrocks]

To rephrase:

What Mo had no intention of saying was that thing about "for a freakin KICKER!" That part was all me.

At any rate - is the kid (Gost) on a 4 year rookie deal? 3? Well, yikes, I hate to say it, but by the time his bill comes due, we have a number of way, way bigger issues. By then, we might be looking around for the latest spawn of the Grammatica subspecies, actually... because that's right around the window where we have Brady to lock down again, and we have to think about getting Sey done again. For all we know we're talking about the Age of Cassel by then, though from what I know thus far (and more importantly what we know of Brady), I really really hope not.

Brady is signed through 2010, although he will likely be extended by 2008 because even Tom can't be expected to work for backend peanuts. As for Cassel, he's is gone after 2008 if not sooner in trade unless he inexplicably decides he likes life as a backup and one shot at a set for life starters deal isn't appealing...or Tommy Boy suddenly developes a preference for cold hard cash over statuary and jewelry and legacy - either of which I doubt will happen.


As for the other, I believe the goal was (and perhaps too often is) keep them for what we have to but don't let them know it unless we have a gun to our heads. It's a strategy that doesn't always play well for the sensitive types, but then BB prefers to coach players he doesn't have to spend a lot of time coach hugging (except after big wins).

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Brady is signed through 2010, although he will likely be extended by 2008 because even Tom can't be expected to work for backend peanuts. As for Cassel, he's is gone after 2008 if not sooner in trade unless he inexplicably decides he likes life as a backup and one shot at a set for life starters deal isn't appealing...or Tommy Boy suddenly developes a preference for cold hard cash over statuary and jewelry and legacy - either of which I doubt will happen.


As for the other, I believe the goal was (and perhaps too often is) keep them for what we have to but don't let them know it unless we have a gun to our heads. It's a strategy that doesn't always play well for the sensitive types, but then BB prefers to coach players he doesn't have to spend a lot of time coach hugging (except after big wins).

If we take the Pats' model on purely business terms, much of their success was in basically saying "it is what it is" in regard to free agency and the cap. We can use words like "cap discipline" but what it really means is, with 32 teams and very few "advantages" for the team trying to retain the player, it is most likely that he has a higher value for somebody else. In most cases, then, the Patriots recognize the better value is in letting the free agent go, if that player is driven purely by his business sense.

As a fan I thank God for guys like Bruschi and Troy Brown, either of whom could have made much, much more elsewhere at one time or another, but made it clear they suffer from good old-fashioned team love (in Brown's case, his kids made it clear.) I thank God that Brady, while making a mint, recognizes there is only so much overkill in terms of income that he actually desires or needs.

But during the offseason it is always painful, as I realize that the big names come with big name price tags in most cases. No salivating over plugging in this guy here or that guy there... the extent of my imagination's reach is a Donnie Edwards to add to Junior, Rodney, and Reche in the "Chargers Recycling Program." Adalius Thomas? Would love to see it.... don't think it will happen.

But that's the beauty of living around DC -- Washington is "going to the super bowl" every off season. "Just look at [_____________]! You add him to ___________ and ________ and how can you lose!?!?" Anyone disgusted with the Patriots Way (not saying you, Mo, just rambling...) just needs to read the Washington Post sports page in say, late August.

Winning the new way (the Patriots way) ain't glitzy. It makes the offseason harder to follow. And the "favorite player" gets overwhelmed by the "favorite team." But it works.

[Ramblematic disengaged]

PFnV

 

[PatsFanSince74]

http://www.nflpa.org/pdfs/NewsAndEvents/HotTopics/FranchiseAndTransition_2007.pdf[/QUOTE

Miguel: I see how the Transition number is calculated (10% of the total) but the Franchise number doesn't bear any consistent relationship to the total (goes from 10.8% to over 12). How is it calculated? Thanks!!!

 

[Jimke]

The franchise numbers are the average of the top five salaries at each

position.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Ho lee crap. I had no idea what "top" offensive linemen make.

On the bright side, if we wanna safety, we can buy a safety. (Of course, this does not help us in our little cornerback quandary.)

PFnV

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Don't put words in my mouth bucko...:nono:

I would have paid Adam, and so would Belioli had they been given the one last chance. I wouldn't have let it come to that. The kid kicker is working out pretty well, thankfully, but I would have been a bit more selective about picking my battles because there are plenty more of them out there. Particularly full well understanding that if the kid is nearly the kicker he's being asked to replace he'll be looking for his PDQ.

That's why I'm hoping the Pats will extend Gostkowski at the first opportunity (not erasing his rookie deal, of course), for another five or six years (or 15, if that were possible. . . . ). It "works" for the Iggles.

 

[cstjohn17]

Warren and Wilfork are going to make serious coin...

Robertson, Dewayne DT $9,417,760
Henderson, John DT $6,836,500
Williams, Jamal DT $6,650,000
Sapp, Warren DT $5,997,000
Pickett, Ryan DT $4,975,000
Hampton, Casey DT $4,793,750
Coleman, Roderick DT $4,447,500
Stroud, Marcus DT $4,385,000
Dockett, Darnell DT $4,115,000
Payne, Seth DT $3,925,000
DT Total $55,542,510 $6,775,000 $5,554,000

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

Warren and Wilfork are going to make serious coin...

Robertson, Dewayne DT $9,417,760
Henderson, John DT $6,836,500
Williams, Jamal DT $6,650,000
Sapp, Warren DT $5,997,000
Pickett, Ryan DT $4,975,000
Hampton, Casey DT $4,793,750
Coleman, Roderick DT $4,447,500
Stroud, Marcus DT $4,385,000
Dockett, Darnell DT $4,115,000
Payne, Seth DT $3,925,000
DT Total $55,542,510 $6,775,000 $5,554,000

thats why BB drafts not always looking at need

I wouldn't be suprised if BB drafts a replacement to Hill this year.

 

[Miguel]

http://www.nflpa.org/pdfs/NewsAndEvents/HotTopics/FranchiseAndTransition_2007.pdf[/QUOTE

Miguel: I see how the Transition number is calculated (10% of the total) but the Franchise number doesn't bear any consistent relationship to the total (goes from 10.8% to over 12). How is it calculated? Thanks!!!

The transition number is the average of the ten numbers.

 

[Miguel]

Warren and Wilfork are going to make serious coin...

Robertson, Dewayne DT $9,417,760
Henderson, John DT $6,836,500
Williams, Jamal DT $6,650,000
Sapp, Warren DT $5,997,000
Pickett, Ryan DT $4,975,000
Hampton, Casey DT $4,793,750
Coleman, Roderick DT $4,447,500
Stroud, Marcus DT $4,385,000
Dockett, Darnell DT $4,115,000
Payne, Seth DT $3,925,000
DT Total $55,542,510 $6,775,000 $5,554,000

Warren would be considered a DE just like Seymour.

Jason Taylor Miami $9,464,625
Simeon Rice Tampa Bay $9,200,000
Richard Seymour New England $8,979,000
Bryant Young San Francisco $7,878,551
Darren Howard Philadelphia $7,700,000
Julius Peppers Carolina $7,617,500
Michael Strahan NY Giants $7,228,284
Shaun Ellis NY Jets $6,433,333
Dwight Freeney Indianapolis $6,180,715
Leonard Little St. Louis $5,664,285

$8,644,000 Franchise number
$7,635,000 Transistion number

 

[PATSNUTme]

The transition number is the average of the ten numbers.

Questions. Do we have to use the fanchise tag before we use the transistion tag?

If not why can't we transition Graham if we reach a deal with Samuels?

 

[Miguel]

Questions. Do we have to use the fanchise tag before we use the transistion tag?

No. A team can use either but not both in a capped year.

If not why can't we transition Graham if we reach a deal with Samuels?

No reason but Steve Hutchinson situation practically render the transition tag useless.