Do you want to pay Mankins big money?

[MoLewisrocks]

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

The whole offense has looked like crap any time Neal is out. That doesn't exclude Mankins regardless of payscale. Thing is we won two rings before Neal became a starter and three rings before Mankins graduated college... I guess where we differ is when push comes to shove I truly trust Bill to put a value on each of these players contributions in context with the entire team. If retaining an $8M LOG we haven't won a ring with impacts our ability to replace Neal shortly and Koppen and Light/or Kaczur if Vollmer slides over sooner than later or impacts our ability to get Brady signed long term, than sayonara Logan...

 

[Kontradiction]

The whole offense has looked like crap any time Neal is out. That doesn't exclude Mankins regardless of payscale. Thing is we won two rings before Neal became a starter and three rings before Mankins graduated college... I guess where we differ is when push comes to shove I truly trust Bill to put a value on each of these players contributions in context with the entire team. If retaining an $8M LOG we haven't won a ring with impacts our ability to replace Neal shortly and Koppen and Light/or Kaczur if Vollmer slides over sooner than later or impacts our ability to get Brady signed long term, than sayonara Logan...

If this is Mankins' last year, I would imagine/hope that Bill uses our Raiders first rounder on a top notch LG prospect capable of starting immediately. I can't, for the life of me, imagine that he'd be okay with Connolly as the starting LG going into 2011. If Brady signs long term, I'd imagine that he'd feel the same.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

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?

I think the most relevant guess we can make is that BB has a history of not overpaying ANYBODY, so Mankin won't be the first. If he gets a long term deal with the Pats, it is not going to be a world beater deal. It might look like it on paper but it will be a Pats friendly deal somehow, some way.

The problem is that the Pats would have to make an exception for everybody that helps the team win if they broke the bank for one player, and BB has managed not to do that in all these years.

I think they will try to pay him more money spread out over time to give the appearance of a rich contract. In the end he will have to earn every penny, which is the BB way.

 

[patsfan-1982]

he is one of the best G's in the NFL and by far the top G in the AFC 6 years and 48 million IMO is a small price to pay when it comes to keeping brady on he's feet

 

[BradyManny]

If this is Mankins' last year, I would imagine/hope that Bill uses our Raiders first rounder on a top notch LG prospect capable of starting immediately. I can't, for the life of me, imagine that he'd be okay with Connolly as the starting LG going into 2011. If Brady signs long term, I'd imagine that he'd feel the same.

We've taken an awful lot of mid-round OL in the last two years. I think the hope is some of it pans out this season. Neal was undrafted FA (who played another sport), Koppen was a late rounder, Kaczur was a comp-3rd rounder, Vollmer, Mankins, Light are all early round guys. Basically what I'm getting at is there's no one way to going about obtaining a quality starter along the O-line.

Plus, if Kaczur can transition from OT->OG, that changes a lot of things. As it is, he's an overpaid backup, but if he can provide starting quality depth at 4 OL positions, then he's going to end up getting his starts one way or another. Ideally - we turn him into the ultimate utility lineman and/or a potential answer at OG if Neal/Mankins aren't with us after this year.

 

[Synovia]

I think the most relevant guess we can make is that BB has a history of not overpaying ANYBODY, so Mankin won't be the first.

He does? How about Adalius Thomas? Or Chad Scott? Or Duane Starks?



Also, this isn't breaking the bank. Its pretty much going rate for an FA guard who doesn't suck ass.

 

[Deus Irae]

The whole offense has looked like crap any time Neal is out. That doesn't exclude Mankins regardless of payscale. Thing is we won two rings before Neal became a starter and three rings before Mankins graduated college...

Different offense with different requirements of the O-line. You know this, Mo.

I guess where we differ is when push comes to shove I truly trust Bill to put a value on each of these players contributions in context with the entire team. If retaining an $8M LOG we haven't won a ring with impacts our ability to replace Neal shortly and Koppen and Light/or Kaczur if Vollmer slides over sooner than later or impacts our ability to get Brady signed long term, than sayonara Logan...

1.) I never stated my position on this poll question.

2.) If you let Mankins go, you don't have to just find Neal's replacement. You also have to find the Mankins replacement. If the backups can't replace one guard, they surely can't replace two. On the other hand, if Kaczur can replace Neal, then the line would probably be getting cheaper to pay in upcoming years. Light will either move on or take a favorable salary to stay. Kaczur's money is already on the books. Koppen's replacement would likely come from the draft and cost less as a result. Vollmer will be a starter for comparative pennies. Spending the cash on Mankins at that point would not have made for any significant issues under the last CBA cap. As for a potential future issue...

3.) I agree that you have to be careful about dollar amounts paid under a cap system. Perhaps this discussion should be tabled until such a system is in place in the NFL.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

If this is Mankins' last year, I would imagine/hope that Bill uses our Raiders first rounder on a top notch LG prospect capable of starting immediately. I can't, for the life of me, imagine that he'd be okay with Connolly as the starting LG going into 2011. If Brady signs long term, I'd imagine that he'd feel the same.

We got Mankins with the 32nd pick in the first round, and he was projected as a second or prior to the combine third rounder and said to be a reach there... We can use our own first or a second on a OG. Or we can develop another UDFA wrestler, or we can pick up a veteran with a little gas left or slide one of our own over, there are options. Our LT for the last decade came out of the second round and started. And his replacement or Kaczur's was recently plucked out of the tail end of the second round as well... Our Center was located in the fifth and started out of the gate. Big uglies don't have to cost big bucks right off the bat or eat up top ten draft picks. They tend to project easier and transition better from college to the pros.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Different offense with different requirements of the O-line. You know this, Mo.




1.) I never stated my position on this poll question.

2.) If you let Mankins go, you don't have to just find Neal's replacement. You also have to find the Mankins replacement. If the backups can't replace one guard, they surely can't replace two. On the other hand, if Kaczur can replace Neal, then the line would probably be getting cheaper to pay in upcoming years. Light will either move on or take a favorable salary to stay. Kaczur's money is already on the books. Koppen's replacement would likely come from the draft and cost less as a result. Vollmer will be a starter for comparative pennies. Spending the cash on Mankins at that point would not have made for any significant issues under the last CBA cap. As for a potential future issue...

3.) I agree that you have to be careful about dollar amounts paid under a cap system. Perhaps this discussion should be tabled until such a system is in place in the NFL.

And who is to say it won't be different yet again going forward. Only Bill knows what he's planning on doing going forward. And he has a five year plan working at all times. You not only have to be careful under a cap system, you have to be really careful going forward under an uncertain cap system. And I have no doubt there will not be a CBA absent one. Fixed costs allow for good business management. And you have to remain mindful of your internal salary structure regardless of cap system if you intend to run your football operation like a smart business. They don't collect talent here, they build teams and the do it by layering talent throughout versatility and budgeting units and spreading big ticket committments across the roster and across seasons to avoid epic disaster.

 

[Deus Irae]

And who is to say it won't be different yet again going forward.

Certainly not me, as I think my point #3 made pretty clear.

Fixed costs allow for good business management.

Fixed costs also allow for poor business management.

And you have to remain mindful of your internal salary structure regardless of cap system if you intend to run your football operation like a smart business.

Salary structure is far less important without a salary cap.

They don't collect talent here, they build teams and the do it by layering talent throughout versatility and budgeting units and spreading big ticket committments across the roster and across seasons to avoid epic disaster.

Of course they collect talent there. As a matter of fact, it's precisely the deterioration of that talent without adequate replacement that's been on full display over the past 2 seasons. The notion that the Patriots aren't about collecting talent is absurd.

 

[RayClay]

When did the league run out of guards? If we pay a guard that much, how much do we pay Vollmer?

Then, having invested that much on two linemen, what's that do to our teams salary scale?

Of course, this contract is entirely hypothetical, but you can't make every player on your team tops at their position, so you have to make decisions.

 

[JMarr]

Can you change the poll and put "F*** NO!" as an option, if in fact Mankins is now asking for a trade?

 

[Synovia]

When did the league run out of guards? If we pay a guard that much, how much do we pay Vollmer?

Then, having invested that much on two linemen, what's that do to our teams salary scale?

When did people forget that, were there a cap this year, it would be in excess of $150M?

Good free agent tackles get a lot bigger deals than 6/$48.



Jason Peters got $10M/per ($42M!!! of which is in the first 3 years). Plenty of guys are in the $9-10M/per range. Tackles are big money.

 

[Deus Irae]

When did the league run out of guards? If we pay a guard that much, how much do we pay Vollmer?

Then, having invested that much on two linemen, what's that do to our teams salary scale?

Of course, this contract is entirely hypothetical, but you can't make every player on your team tops at their position, so you have to make decisions.

Vollmer's contract keeps him in New England for years. By the time his deal is up, money will have been freed from larger contracts, and the cycle will repeat.

 

[RayClay]

Vollmer's contract keeps him in New England for years. By the time his deal is up, money will have been freed from larger contracts, and the cycle will repeat.

Nevertheless, a guard not named Hannah isn't worth breaking the bank over. to compare his replacement value to Wilfork's is absurd, but we're talking almost the same contract.

All those receivers and defenders will want to get paid too. Just look at the teams that make headlines with the big contracts and where they end up. We spent and got great value on Wilfork and Bodden. If Mankins
wants to overplay his hand, we could easily pick up a vet guard, as we've done before and bring along the handful of draft picks and free agents already in the corral.

When has a Belichick team ever worried about what the top player at a position was getting? lol

 

[Synovia]

Nevertheless, a guard not named Hannah isn't worth breaking the bank over. to compare his replacement value to Wilfork's is absurd, but we're talking almost the same contract.l

And again, $6/48 IS NOT BREAKING THE BANK. IT IS AVERAGE PAY FOR A FREE AGENT STARTING GUARD.

This is a smaller deal than what the Jets gave Faneca, the Saints gave Evans, Steinbech, Huchinsons, even Leonard Davis got more money than this.


You have no idea what players in the NFL actually make.

 

[Synovia]

Just look at the teams that make headlines with the big contracts and where they end up.

Every team gives out big contracts. Including the Saints, Colts, Patriots, Steelers, etc.


The saints just gave a guard a 7 year 57M contract thats much more front loaded than Mankins offer.

 

[Deus Irae]

Nevertheless, a guard not named Hannah isn't worth breaking the bank over. to compare his replacement value to Wilfork's is absurd, but we're talking almost the same contract.

Wilfork's numbers are irrelevant. Hannah is irrelevant. The significant question is about the relevance of Evans and his contract.

All those receivers and defenders will want to get paid too. Just look at the teams that make headlines with the big contracts and where they end up. We spent and got great value on Wilfork and Bodden.

Everyone wants to get paid. Mankins is just another in the line. Bodden wasn't great value. Also, Wilfork was paid top dollar for his position, so I'm not sure why you would bring that up.

If Mankins wants to overplay his hand, we could easily pick up a vet guard, as we've done before and bring along the handful of draft picks and free agents already in the corral.

How many times do we have to go over this before you people will stop with this sort of nonsense? You can't just plug-n-play. The past couple of seasons should have demonstrated that more than clearly enough, particularly to yourself, given your frequent ranting about the linebacker situation.

When has a Belichick team ever worried about what the top player at a position was getting? lol

Probably every single time one signs or a contract comes due. BB's too smart not to think about it.

 

[JMarr]

Every team gives out big contracts. Including the Saints, Colts, Patriots, Steelers, etc.


The saints just gave a guard a 7 year 57M contract thats much more front loaded than Mankins offer.

To me it doesn't really matter what other teams do. Teams that give out $100M contracts for overrated DTs usually are in a perpetual state of SUCK.

Look what Vince and Bodden (both arguably much more important to this team) ended up taking. Mankins has been around long enough to know how the Pats operate and and if he wants no part of NE anymore, maybe they could trade him to the Wyoming Bison of the CFL. Screw Mankins and his agent.

 

[Synovia]

To me it doesn't really matter what other teams do. Teams that give out $100M contracts for overrated DTs usually are in a perpetual state of SUCK.

You do realize that the team that won the superbowl just gave a guard a $50M contract, right?


And I'm sorry, I'll buy Wilfork, but there's no way in hell Bodden is more important than Mankins.