Value in signing Asante to a contract?

[pats63]

TAG AND TRADE!!!!It will be good for the team....More options for BB & SP to choose from....We will upgrade in DBs next season with or without Asante...I always love Asante,but it all about what is best way forward....Asante is want to "get paid".....He has only one chance to "get paid" all the power to him....Let just make where both sides make it to there advantage.....

 

[solman]

We all thought Branch didn't have the resume to survive a holdout - the player always has the upper hand. If they tag him to play, and he agrees to to sign the tag, they are on the hook for almost $8M. If he goes down, or gets dinged and is reluctant to play through it and risk further injury while playing under a tag, they are effectively screwed. If he sits out - which he could do as a franchise player because unlike Branch's situation the sit out gets him to UFA, they get nothing but a comp pick now in 2009. He won't come in in week 10 for $3M because that would allow them to rinse, spin and repeat the same cycle. Belichick wouldn't do that dance with Deion, and he isn't gonna do it with Asante. He will want value for him either on the roster or in trade.

If they can't get a deal done, and it's a good bet they can't given how far apart they were in November when the buzz on Asante was just a murmur, tag and trade him for what should be a pretty decent package of picks and use the $6-8M you don't have to spend on him to improve both the secondary and areas that take pressure off the secondary. That is the Belechick model.

First, If Asante gets tagged and doesn't play his best (even if due to injury), he will DESTROY his market value because in 2008, 2006 will appear simply to be an abberation. Given the tatoo, and all the quotes from Asante this year, I don't see how anybody can doubt that Asante understands the importance of playing well in a contract year. If we tag him, 2007 IS a contract year.

Second, Asante NEEDS the money. He has never had a season with a big payday. Considering his attitude, I'll be he's already spending his millions, if not in reality, then in his head. Its absurd to think that this guy will either sit out not give his all.

Bottom line: ASANTE SAMUEL CARES ABOUT THE MONEY. If he is franchised, the way for him to maximize his money is to give it his all.

 

[WhiZa]

After reading this article (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9992264) it would be in the Patriots best interest to franchise Samuel. Best case is signing him to a deal which is probably what the pats are working on right now. Worst case is you franchise him and a) trade him for more than he's worth b) Let him play one more year for $8 million which is pretty low considering what he may get on the open market. Also, the fact that the draft is pretty thin at CB will also help this decision.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

First, If Asante gets tagged and doesn't play his best (even if due to injury), he will DESTROY his market value because in 2008, 2006 will appear simply to be an abberation. Given the tatoo, and all the quotes from Asante this year, I don't see how anybody can doubt that Asante understands the importance of playing well in a contract year. If we tag him, 2007 IS a contract year.

Asante and his agent both understand this full well. They also understand that until he takes the field again 2006 is what he will be valued on. It may never get any better performance wise, and it could easily get a lot worse. That is ample reason not to take the field again without a long term deal from whomever.

Second, Asante NEEDS the money. He has never had a season with a big payday. Considering his attitude, I'll be he's already spending his millions, if not in reality, then in his head. Its absurd to think that this guy will either sit out not give his all.

How many of us said the same thing about Deion, including apparently our FO, only to find out that guys to whom the money matters can be just as entrenched and determined to win the contract battle as this FO is. And Asante now knows that BB isn't going to go into a season with a valuable asset sitting home doing nobody any good. Once he gave Deion the option that is Asante's by rule - finding a suitor - it was the end of the road for that player here. Asante will know exactly what his market value is once the FA period commences, if he doesn't already, and he is in the drivers seat because BB won't create bad blood and then force it into his locker room.

Bottom line: ASANTE SAMUEL CARES ABOUT THE MONEY. If he is franchised, the way for him to maximize his money is to give it his all.

If he is franchised the way for him to maximize his money is to quietly announce he will not play under the tag and request the team explore a trade for him from among the teams his agent has already elicited a desire to sign him long term to a deal of his liking. The only way he plays for the tag here is if we are all misreading his market and he doesn't get a long term offer at anything approaching tag money. And then we'd be fools to pay him that for even a year.

 

[patchick]

When you're sitting out to secure $20M+ implicitly guaranteed, sure you do.

...

They aren't going to jeopardize $20M+ for $7.8M

I see your point, but I think there's a key number missing from your equation. It's not just $7.8M vs $20M, there's also the guaranteed number that the Patriots are willing to offer in a long-term deal. Say the Pats offer includes $17M guaranteed while another team offers $20M. Do you sit out a year for that 15% difference? If you throw away a whole season's earnings in the very prime of your career, that's something you can never get back. And playing under the tag isn't all bad either: $8M in the bank, PLUS the opportunity remains to cash in with a long-term deal at the end of the year.

I understand the tag-and-trade impulse, but somebody has to actually play CB for this team next season. Neither the draft class nor the FA crop encourage me. If I'm the Patriots, I think I tag Samuel with the intent of seeing him on the field in a NE uniform.

Lots of players complain and agitate and skip mini-camps and try to maneuver to force a trade when they face a franchise tag. But they don't actually sit out the season.

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

How would the 2006 Pats have finished w/o Asante?

Who can replace him with? Randall Gay?

 

[solman]

If he is franchised the way for him to maximize his money is to quietly announce he will not play under the tag and request the team explore a trade for him from among the teams his agent has already elicited a desire to sign him long term to a deal of his liking. The only way he plays for the tag here is if we are all misreading his market and he doesn't get a long term offer at anything approaching tag money. And then we'd be fools to pay him that for even a year.

I think this is foolish. If he refuses to play, he loses $8M for not playing during the season, and probably loses substantially more than that off of his next long term contract, because he'll have been sitting on his butt for a year, instead of coming off of a career season. The Patriots would lose nothing (versus not tagging him).

If your theory is that BB will automatically cave just because a player threatens to hold out, I think that's insane. BB has proven that he won't be bullied by recalcitrant players, by how he handled the Deion Branch situation. [i.e. he'd only trade a player if he received substantially more than that player is worth].

I don't see any NFL player walking away from $8M and sitting out the season, much less Asante who has as much as said that he is all about the money, and who has received substantially less than that over the course of his entire career.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Yes he is worth it, he only led the leauge in interceptions this year, including the one in the postseason he had. Its that the answers are always the same. Whats so hard about going back and looking through the lists of posts and continue adding there. Thats what i do. Ill just bring back a post of the same topic that was already made. Then at least you already have everyones thoughts, and they dont have to write them over, over,over,over, and over again.

Okay, a couple of observations -
1) Interceptions are a Good Thing. They are not, however, what a cornerback does for his bread and butter. A good corner makes a receiver invisible. The very best corner just removes one half of the field from the QB's possibilities. Now I'm not saying anybody truly is that level of CB right now, and I'm not saying Samuel is "bad" at other coverage areas. I am just pointing out the overrated nature of interceptions as a measure of CB efficacy. If all he did was intercept a ball a little more than once every other game, there'd be little point to him being on the field at all.
2) Nevertheless, teams can very easily fall into the trap of magnifying interceptions in their evaluation of a CB. Whenever I hear someone is a "playmaker," I start worrying, because this sort of effect is being emphasized. Now again, I'll state that it's very likely that a guy with a lot of INTs will also likely cover pretty well. But if you're looking for the coverage skills, you have to just play tape over and over and over... something BB and staff are famous for -- studying tape til your eyes bleed, then studying it some more.
3) Given the overvaluation of "playmaker" stats like interceptions, and given the overvaluation of a player's performance in his contract year (an excellent year for Samuel,) it is likely Samuel will be very highly valued in the market.
4) Given his tattoo and his agent's attitude thus far, it seems Samuel is aware of this likelihood, and means to get the maximum possible effect from it, in monetary terms.
5) $11M is 1/10 of $110M. Let's talk single-year here; if Samuel wants really elite CB money, he could very well stake the claim that he should get $11M (on the high end, but not impossible). If you pay one player $11M, the rest of the team, on average, must make about 90% of average pay for their position. If you pay five players 1/10 each of $110M, the rest of the team, on average must make about 50% of average pay for the position. Now, you do have to adjust for the fact that every team has the same decision to make, and every team needs at least some special players. But even so, the model the Pats have won with says to make elite status a rarity - so far there are two in the club in New England, total. Think about all the Pats -- considering the "club" to be 2 right now, with perhaps 3 more possible add-ons between now and 2010 (and that is really stretching the model,) do you think Samuel is truly of that caliber? It works about the same way if you're coughing up $8M, by the way.
6) Countervailing point: We are in a period of rapid cap inflation. This militates for "do the deal now, before it costs even more." But you can use that cap inflation to work out other guys' deals now, before it gets too expensive. Or, you can just go shopping in the FA market, which may or may not adjust commensurate to the new numbers. Still, you are not obligated to look at the good value of "buy now" when inflation is high, and apply that at every position. You can still use the value rule at the overvalued position(s) and go middle class.

I know I go on and on... but I just don't see CB and WR getting the Pats' attention as they have the rest of the league. Does this mean mediocre secondary play? Yes... it means we can not expect the Pats to ever go to war with the kind of dominant team that just beats the crap out of everybody in their path.

We'll take a lot of good, tough, smart, versatile players with heart, and combine the skills each brings to the table, to create the best possible crew on the field for each game.

The Pats are the first team to realize that the guy with the most toys does not win in the NFL... I hope they do not lose sight of that (and I feel pretty secure they won't.)

PFnV