Brady to Patriots: Signing No. 1 wideout critical

[upstater1]

The Pats are offering Branch 5 million per year (20 for 4) according to the article - not 6.33. That number comes from taking the current deal 1 yr/1m and comparing it to the offer 4yr/20m and getting the difference 3yr/19m.

I don't think 4 years 20 million with 4 million of the 20 as a signing bonus is a great offer for Branch that he should be jumping at. I don't think it is too insulting to counter either.

Uh, Branch already has a contract this year for 1 million. If he plays it out and goes into FA< guess what? No one is going to pay him $8 million to make up for the fact that he only made $1 million this year.

Essentially, the Patriots offered the guy $6.3 million for the years 2007-2009, a very good offer, one that he might not see on the open market.

 

[DaBruinz]

DHamz -
On another note about the 4 year deal you mentioned. One of the critical elements that Borges mentioned was that 9 million of the 18.75 would be in the last 2 years of the contract. If we look at that in terms of the contract, then that is 4.5 million over each of the last 2 years of Deion's contract and 9.75 over the 1st 2 years. The signing bonus was 4 million.

So, that would mean that Deion would make about 5 million this year and 6 million next year with the other 9 million coming in the last 2 years.

It gives Deion a 4.5 million pay raise this season (He was originally supposed to make a bit over 500K), and pays him well over the next 3 seasons. It may not be what he's looking for, but it is sure better than what he's making now, which is -14K a day. And its still better than the 1.025 million he's scheduled to make this year.

And, this still takes me back to the fact that his arrogant agent didn't bother to send a counter. He could have sent an offer back that could have been incentive laden or even, better, actually making some contract demands.

The offer the Pats sent is, most certainly, fair market value for a #1 WR who isn't in the top 15 WRs in the league (imo). A deal that averages 5 mill a year for a WR who is injury prone and hasn't (technically) broken 1000 yards in his career.

(C. Johnson, R. Wayne, Owens, Ward, Boldin, Fitzagerald, Steve Smith, Santana Moss, Torry Holt, Marvin Harrison, Joey Galloway, Derrick Mason, Randy Moss, Rod Smith, TJ Houshmandzedah).

 

[jimleehunt]

Thank you, Tom Brady. I can guarantee you that's what BB was saying to himself.(and not sarcastically). BB WANTS branch here. He also has to be thrilled when his qb shows ,once again, why he is the unquestioned best qb on the planet-because besides his football skills, he is the BEST leader of any team in the nfl. 180' different from peyton,(throwing his oline under the bus),or favre's stupid comments about walker. I just dont understand any pats fan not being thrilled with tom's comments. ive been WAITING for him to say something. But this was more than just great leadership-it was a classy way of telling kraft,pioli and bb how badly the pats need deion-and if theres thing ALL of us agree on-its that the pats need deion. this reminds me of kraft stepping into the seymour negotiations last year. Branch WILL be signed-and sooner than you think.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Not sure where Silver got all of his contract info - he did say Chayut didn't return a call to comment on the record for the piece. But if Borges had it right - and Chayut seemed to concur in that piece, the Pats offered him 2 deals with an average (in the teams opinion) of $6M+ per. A three or a five year deal. And in Chayut's opinion the five year deal averaged $5.6M I recall him complaining - so he was obviously averaging in this season on a potential 4 year extension. And according to Borges earlier article Deion was also offered an extension after the 2004 season that Chayut said is part of the problem today - that deal in his opinion was insulting.

As for Deion possibly wanting a longer term deal, then he can just wait until 2007 because the amortization max for 2006 deals is 5 years. It goes back up to 6 years for 2007 and 2008. No way they can give him a bigger signing bonus as part of a 7 year deal if they only have 5 to amortize it. And that doesn't even count the fact that he simply has not earned it.

And while the SI editors are trying to play this up as Brady being bs at this FO:

photo caption: "Tom Brady has been critical of the Patriots in the past for allowing veterans to leave via free agency."

the neglected to mention the fact that Tom is also on record many times pointedly commenting that guys who left here for more money oddly don't seem to be entirely happy with their decisions down the road.

 

[flutie2phelan]

.... But this was more than just great leadership-it was a classy way of telling kraft,pioli and bb how badly the pats need deion-....

I understand the Stands By His Teammates angle. That's good.

But "a classy way to tell Kraft, Pioli, and BB"
what they certainly know fully as well as Brady does ...
is to speed-dial them, or tell them so to their faces ...
not to bray it in a national publication read by millions.

 

[Patjew]

Maybe I'm wrong. I just put 2 and 2 together. Brady talks with SI reporter. SI article comes out Tuesday. How silly of me.

I was just joking, bro.

 

[Miguel]

Uh, Branch already has a contract this year for 1 million. If he plays it out and goes into FA< guess what? No one is going to pay him $8 million to make up for the fact that he only made $1 million this year.

If David Givens can get a $8 million signing bonus in 2006, Deion Branch who may be the best available offensive player available in free agency in 2007 will definitely get more than that.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

I was just joking, bro.

Sorry PatJew. Im just jealous you got the insiders tour of The Razor.

 

[Miguel]

The Pats are offering Branch 5 million per year (20 for 4) according to the article - not 6.33. That number comes from taking the current deal 1 yr/1m and comparing it to the offer 4yr/20m and getting the difference 3yr/19m.

I don't think 4 years 20 million with 4 million of the 20 as a signing bonus is a great offer for Branch that he should be jumping at. I don't think it is too insulting to counter either.

I'm with you. Branch's ACVPY (Average Cap Value Per Year) would be $4.75 million. David Givens' ACPY is $4.8 million.

Branch and his agent have to know that the 2007 FA class is looking pretty bare. Branch may be the best player available on the offensive side of the ball. They may be figuring after being underpaid for a couple of years during the rookie deal they can make it up by being overpaid during their 2nd contract.

 

[Patjew]

Sorry PatJew. Im just jealous you got the insiders tour of The Razor.

No problem! If it's any consolation, you were obviously 100% correct.

 

[Patjew]

I'm with you. Branch's ACVPY (Average Cap Value Per Year) would be $4.75 million. David Givens' ACPY is $4.8 million.

Branch and his agent have to know that the 2007 FA class is looking pretty bare. Branch may be the best player available on the offensive side of the ball. They may be figuring after being underpaid for a couple of years during the rookie deal they can make it up by being overpaid during their 2nd contract.

This is what I've been afraid of and now it's been confirmed by our Nostradamus. Thanks for nothing!

 

[spacecrime]

Branch and his agent have to know that the 2007 FA class is looking pretty bare. Branch may be the best player available on the offensive side of the ball. They may be figuring after being underpaid for a couple of years during the rookie deal they can make it up by being overpaid during their 2nd contract.

This makes sense to me, and FA in 2007 is the way Branch will make the most money. So then why isn't Branch in camp now, preparing to play out his last year in anticipation of a mega-payday? I guess that's one of the puzzling (to me) aspects.

 

[T-ShirtDynasty]

This makes sense to me, and FA in 2007 is the way Branch will make the most money. So then why isn't Branch in camp now, preparing to play out his last year in anticipation of a mega-payday? I guess that's one of the puzzling (to me) aspects.

Because the Grand Chayut Scheme for Maximum Moola goes down the drain if Branch is tagged. This hold-out is NOT about coming to an agreement on a "Patriots number" it's about coming to an agreement on NOT smacking the Franchise Tag on him. "He'll play if you agree not to tag him" NOT "He'll play if you meet our contract demands". At least that's the way it looks right now, I hope things change, but right now the signals that are being sent look an awful lot like Chayut (at least) doesn't particularly want his client playing for the Patriots next year, I assume because of the common perception that the biggest payday (ala Givens, Willie, etc) waits for your client after life in New England.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

If David Givens can get a $8 million signing bonus in 2006, Deion Branch who may be the best available offensive player available in free agency in 2007 will definitely get more than that.

Not necessarily. In fact if Givens struggles mightily with a QB not named Brady in 2006 teams may be weary of Brady raised WR's ability (or inability) to deliver when playing with flotsum and jetsum - which is often what teams who overpay for WR's have behind center.

Even Givens in a threadbare WR class this year only got limited interest at all. Houston offered $18.5M - which the Pats were willing to work at matching including incentives, before Tennessee made fools of themselves. The rationale for the Pats not paying David was setting the bar too high for Branch. The rationale for not paying Deion will be Belichick thinks he's overvalued himself to the team for whom he represents the greatest value. Other GM's will be aware of that when they think about Deion. I would imagine many would be reluctant to second gues BB and end up with very expensive FA egg on their face.

Deion's skill set is a little different, and it suits a cerebral QB like Brady. Not sure how much good he's going to do a gunslinger, or a QB who struggles with pre snap reads, or one prone to making poor decisions.

At the end of the day it may be that Chayut is simply intent on elevating Deion's profile. Like they say in Hollywood there is no such thing as bad press - attention is attention. If he does show up later on in camp it will be a big national story and all eyes will be on his client from week 1. And that may be why what Jason really wants from the Pats is not a contract at all, it is just the no tag provision, which the team will not give him. He wants the spotlight on his client in a contract season in anticipation of a 2007 FA season, and he doesn't want a tag and trade scenario to dampen that market.

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm with you. Branch's ACVPY (Average Cap Value Per Year) would be $4.75 million. David Givens' ACPY is $4.8 million.

Branch and his agent have to know that the 2007 FA class is looking pretty bare. Branch may be the best player available on the offensive side of the ball. They may be figuring after being underpaid for a couple of years during the rookie deal they can make it up by being overpaid during their 2nd contract.

Miguel -
I am not so sure that the Free Agent Class of 2007 will be so bare. First, and foremost, I think that we will see a lot more in the way of cap casualties because teams like the Colts overspent this year and won't be able to afford the increase in salaries they will have. Especially with the cap going up so little next year in comparison to this year.

Also, Branch stands to LOSE money if he gets hurt. Not to mention that I don't believe that the amount of money available next year will compare to this year for the exact reason that the cap will be going up so little.

 

[Pats726]

Because the Grand Chayut Scheme for Maximum Moola goes down the drain if Branch is tagged. This hold-out is NOT about coming to an agreement on a "Patriots number" it's about coming to an agreement on NOT smacking the Franchise Tag on him. "He'll play if you agree not to tag him" NOT "He'll play if you meet our contract demands". At least that's the way it looks right now, I hope things change, but right now the signals that are being sent look an awful lot like Chayut (at least) doesn't particularly want his client playing for the Patriots next year, I assume because of the common perception that the biggest payday (ala Givens, Willie, etc) waits for your client after life in New England.

maybe the scheme will go down the drain...

 

[MoLewisrocks]

PFW did an Ask PFW segment on the team website today. While I don't always agree with their opinions, they do appear to have better inside access/sources where the team is concerned due to their affiliation with the franchise. Andy Hart says his guess is Deion will return for the season but not sign a contract and is focused on being a FA in 2007.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

Not necessarily. In fact if Givens struggles mightily with a QB not named Brady in 2006 teams may be weary of Brady raised WR's ability (or inability) to deliver when playing with flotsum and jetsum - which is often what teams who overpay for WR's have behind center.

Even Givens in a threadbare WR class this year only got limited interest at all. Houston offered $18.5M - which the Pats were willing to work at matching including incentives, before Tennessee made fools of themselves. The rationale for the Pats not paying David was setting the bar too high for Branch. The rationale for not paying Deion will be Belichick thinks he's overvalued himself to the team for whom he represents the greatest value. Other GM's will be aware of that when they think about Deion. I would imagine many would be reluctant to second gues BB and end up with very expensive FA egg on their face.

Deion's skill set is a little different, and it suits a cerebral QB like Brady. Not sure how much good he's going to do a gunslinger, or a QB who struggles with pre snap reads, or one prone to making poor decisions.

At the end of the day it may be that Chayut is simply intent on elevating Deion's profile. Like they say in Hollywood there is no such thing as bad press - attention is attention. If he does show up later on in camp it will be a big national story and all eyes will be on his client from week 1. And that may be why what Jason really wants from the Pats is not a contract at all, it is just the no tag provision, which the team will not give him. He wants the spotlight on his client in a contract season in anticipation of a 2007 FA season, and he doesn't want a tag and trade scenario to dampen that market.

Well in that case it makes him the dumbest agent in history. If he's using this situation to boost his client's profile, with the intent of NOT getting a new deal what happens if Branch tears his ACL week 5? What's his market value as a 2007 FA then? Pretty big roll of the dice IMO.

 

[arrellbee]

Branch is not exactly the type of big receiver that can catch the ball from a lesser QB while being double teamed as a #1. Maybe he's even the smaller type of receiver that takes almost a Brady level QB to hit him on exact timing routes against cover corner single coverage.

However, there is always at least one team that will overpay no matter what. And all it takes is ONE team and most players are gone - and Branch seems to be showing strongly that he is that type of player to go for the most bucks - who would have figured.

 

[Miguel]

Even Givens in a threadbare WR class this year only got limited interest at all. Houston offered $18.5M - which the Pats were willing to work at matching including incentives, before Tennessee made fools of themselves.

That's your take. My take is that Givens had met with a couple of teams (IIRC, Miami and Houston) and then with Tennessee. Tennessee, unlike Houston and the Patriots, were willing to make Givens a #1 and were willing to pay hom #1 money. Once Givens got Tennessee's offer, Givens probably figured that it was the best that he was going to get so he accepted it.