Webster and Aiken contract details from Reiss

[ctpatsfan77]

A few contract follow-ups on players signed by the Patriots:

* CB Jason Webster signed a one-year deal worth $730,000. There is no signing bonus, but $130,000 of the contract is guaranteed. There is a $70,000 workout bonus. Webster will also earn a $12,500 roster bonus at an undisclosed date.

* WR Sam Aiken inked a two-year contract with base salaries of $605,000 in 2008 and $645,000 in 2009. The contract includes a $225,000 signing bonus and workout bonuses of $40,000 in each year.

Two key points:
(1) Aiken's bonus definitely does not count for the vet minimum, since it's a two-year deal. I believe that because of the large workout bonus, and the guarantee of $130,000 (huh?), Webster's contract does not count either. These lead me to believe that the Pats felt they had some competition for these players' services.

(2) Somewhat more worryingly, it is possible--not guaranteed, but possible--that these contracts could qualify as "UFAs signed" for determining comp picks (in 2007, $740K + significant playing time counted). This is important, because right now the Pats will earn a third-round comp pick for Asante if they have a net loss of UFAs. If they sign as many as they lose, then they get only a single seventh-round comp pick.

 

[patsgo]

Two key points:
(1) Aiken's bonus definitely does not count for the vet minimum, since it's a two-year deal. I believe that because of the large workout bonus, and the guarantee of $130,000 (huh?), Webster's contract does not count either. These lead me to believe that the Pats felt they had some competition for these players' services.

(2) Somewhat more worryingly, it is possible--not guaranteed, but possible--that these contracts could qualify as "UFAs signed" for determining comp picks (in 2007, $740K + significant playing time counted). This is important, because right now the Pats will earn a third-round comp pick for Asante if they have a net loss of UFAs. If they sign as many as they lose, then they get only a single seventh-round comp pick.

you cant worry about comp picks when your team building your roster, what ever happens happens

 

[ctpatsfan77]

you cant worry about comp picks when your team building your roster, what ever happens happens

Jonathan Kraft has stated that it's a factor. Needless to say, it's not the deciding factor, but it's not one that can be completely ignored.

 

[BelichickFan]

(2) Somewhat more worryingly, it is possible--not guaranteed, but possible--that these contracts could qualify as "UFAs signed" for determining comp picks (in 2007, $740K + significant playing time counted). This is important, because right now the Pats will earn a third-round comp pick for Asante if they have a net loss of UFAs. If they sign as many as they lose, then they get only a single seventh-round comp pick.

Do we know if Stallworth qualifies based on that quirky contract ? Does not picking up his option count as a cut or his contract running out ?

 

[patchick]

you cant worry about comp picks when your team building your roster, what ever happens happens

That's a tough one. You can't make it too much of a focus, but consider how many people here are upset at the prospect of giving up a low 5th for Seward! Or to put it another way, if an FA signing is going to cost you a 3rd-round comp, it should be for a player you'd consider trading a low 3rd for too begin with.

 

[Jimke]

Two key points:
(1) Aiken's bonus definitely does not count for the vet minimum, since it's a two-year deal. I believe that because of the large workout bonus, and the guarantee of $130,000 (huh?), Webster's contract does not count either. These lead me to believe that the Pats felt they had some competition for these players' services.

(2) Somewhat more worryingly, it is possible--not guaranteed, but possible--that these contracts could qualify as "UFAs signed" for determining comp picks (in 2007, $740K + significant playing time counted). This is important, because right now the Pats will earn a third-round comp pick for Asante if they have a net loss of UFAs. If they sign as many as they lose, then they get only a single seventh-round comp pick.

By 2009, the $740K may have increased to the point where the

contracts no longer qualify.

 

[captain stone]

I really hope that the NEP don't lose a comp pick this year (or is it in '09?) because of Sam Aiken, who brings absolutely nothing to the party that Kelley Washington doesn't already provide. He is a waste of money and, like Washington, a liability/unknown as a receiver.

Moss - Welker - Gaffney
Chad Jackson - Washington? - Aiken??

Where's our backup slot WR? Could he be...Troy Brown?

 

[signbabybrady]

I really hope that the NEP don't lose a comp pick this year (or is it in '09?) because of Sam Aiken, who brings absolutely nothing to the party that Kelley Washington doesn't already provide. He is a waste of money and, like Washington, a liability/unknown as a receiver.

Moss - Welker - Gaffney
Chad Jackson - Washington? - Aiken??

Where's our backup slot WR? Could he be...Troy Brown?

I for one think Troy comes back. The way the roster is currently set up I think he has a spot too. Once the draft is over and once free agency has run its course their may not be as much room for him but we will see.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I really hope that the NEP don't lose a comp pick this year (or is it in '09?) because of Sam Aiken, who brings absolutely nothing to the party that Kelley Washington doesn't already provide.

'09. The SS No NEP Comp Picks in 2008 ship sailed a long time ago.

And I didn't say he would count, only that he might--and that's only if he sticks with the team. If they cut him in TC or early in the season, he doesn't count.

 

[patsox23]

comp picks are not just a matter of number signed. It's one aspect of the calculation - and arguably one of the lesser ones.

 

[captain stone]

You are so incredibly wrong. Aiken is a special teams demon. BB was not satisfied with ST last season. He and Washington together would be nasty.

FYI, it doesn't matter if you claim he is a waste. BB/SP signed him anyway without your permission.

FYI, it doesn't matter what you think, either.

 

[captain stone]

'09. The SS No NEP Comp Picks in 2008 ship sailed a long time ago.

And I didn't say he would count, only that he might--and that's only if he sticks with the team. If they cut him in TC or early in the season, he doesn't count.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

comp picks are not just a matter of number signed. It's one aspect of the calculation - and arguably one of the lesser ones.

No, it's actually the most important one: no team has ever gotten a comp pick in a season in which they signed more qualifying UFAs than they lost, no matter the difference between the gains and losses.

 

[kas]

No, it's actually the most important one: no team has ever gotten a comp pick in a season in which they signed more qualifying UFAs than they lost, no matter the difference between the gains and losses.

Interesting stuff. I was under the impression that the biggest factor was contract size followed by games played.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Interesting stuff. I was under the impression that the biggest factor was contract size followed by games played.

Those are the factors that determine what round the picks are in, but first a team has to qualify to receive picks, period, and # of FAs lost/gained determines that. (As an example: let's assume no one but Webster qualifies as a UFA signing against the Pats, and that Stallworth, Gay, and Samuel all count as UFA losses for the Pats. The Webster signing is closest to the Gay signing, and therefore should cancel it out. The Pats would still receive a third for Samuel, based on salary, and--IIRC--a fourth for Stallworth.)

 

[DaBruinz]

No, it's actually the most important one: no team has ever gotten a comp pick in a season in which they signed more qualifying UFAs than they lost, no matter the difference between the gains and losses.

The clarifier there is QUALIFYING. From what I've read, neither Webster's nor Aiken's contracts will get them close to the qualifying number. The lowest signed player last year who qualified for a compensatory pick was Mike Doss. He signed a contract for 900K. You can figure that this year's will be higher than than.

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=208336

 

[DaBruinz]

Those are the factors that determine what round the picks are in, but first a team has to qualify to receive picks, period, and # of FAs lost/gained determines that. (As an example: let's assume no one but Webster qualifies as a UFA signing against the Pats, and that Stallworth, Gay, and Samuel all count as UFA losses for the Pats. The Webster signing is closest to the Gay signing, and therefore should cancel it out. The Pats would still receive a third for Samuel, based on salary, and--IIRC--a fourth for Stallworth.)

The FIRST qualifier is the number of QUALIFYING players lost vs. Qualifying players gained. NOT total players lost vs. total players gained.

Also, The Webster signing (700K) would NOT cancel out a 4 million signing. Not to mention that you still have Eugene Wilson amongst others who are still free agents.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The clarifier there is QUALIFYING. From what I've read, neither Webster's nor Aiken's contracts will get them close to the qualifying number. The lowest signed player last year who qualified for a compensatory pick was Mike Doss. He signed a contract for 900K. You can figure that this year's will be higher than than.

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=208336

Read it again. Qualifying refers to whether or not the player qualifies as a FA gained or a FA lost. Doss was merely the lowest-salaried player whose loss actually results in a comp pick in his projection; Chris Liewinski (at $740K) was the lowest-salaried player whom Adamjt13 counted as a "qualifying" UFA.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The FIRST qualifier is the number of QUALIFYING players lost vs. Qualifying players gained. NOT total players lost vs. total players gained.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on that, but that was what I was trying to say--if those low-value contracts were enough to qualify, then they would cost the Pats comp picks. But as long as the amount is over the minimum for that year, it doesn't matter whether it's $10M or $1M, as far as determining the number of picks.

Also, The Webster signing (700K) would NOT cancel out a 4 million signing. Not to mention that you still have Eugene Wilson amongst others who are still free agents.

Until Wilson signs a contract with another team, though, the Pats can't get a pick for him. And, as Adamjt13 has noted in his projections, at the moment, three bare-minimum-to-qualify contracts would cancel out Gay, Stallworth, and Samuel.

As for the $2.2M number, I conflated some of the numbers I saw on Reiss' blog; I apologize for that.

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on that, but that was what I was trying to say--if those low-value contracts were enough to qualify, then they would cost the Pats comp picks. But as long as the amount is over the minimum for that year, it doesn't matter whether it's $10M or $1M, as far as determining the number of picks.



Until Wilson signs a contract with another team, though, the Pats can't get a pick for him. And, as Adamjt13 has noted in his projections, at the moment, three bare-minimum-to-qualify contracts would cancel out Gay, Stallworth, and Samuel.

As for the $2.2M number, I conflated some of the numbers I saw on Reiss' blog; I apologize for that.

Well, we already KNOW that the Pats don't have ANY qualifying free agents signed. So the point is MOOT. None of Webster, Lewis, or Aiken signed contracts whose single year value is over 900K. Williams is the one who is a question mark now. He could have a contract worth more than 900K.