Mankins itching for a new deal

[pats1]

Mankins wants a new deal | ProFootballTalk.com

 

[Gwedd]

I hope he can get a good deal to stick around for awhile. The guys a solid, reliable player, a real mauler at his position. It'd be right nice to see him sewn up to a long-term deal.

 

[Simkin]

How bad is the probowl selection

Seriously, I ll resign him . For the right price, BTW .

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Definitely need to ink him and Wilfork.

Then Faulk, Guyton, and Ghostkowski(for the right price)

 

[DaBruinz]

Definitely need to ink him and Wilfork.

Then Faulk, Guyton, and Ghostkowski(for the right price)

Guyton, Gostkowski, and Mankins are all RFA for 2010. That puts the Pats in the driver's seat for negotiations. One can only hope that the Pats make them good long-term incentive laden contracts...

 

[RobertWeathers]

Guyton, Gostkowski, and Mankins are all RFA for 2010. That puts the Pats in the driver's seat for negotiations. One can only hope that the Pats make them good long-term incentive laden contracts...

Thats the key right there.........RFA. He has no leverage unless he pulls a Branch.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Guyton, Gostkowski, and Mankins are all RFA for 2010. That puts the Pats in the driver's seat for negotiations. One can only hope that the Pats make them good long-term incentive laden contracts...

Guyton's not even an RFA, he's an exclusive-rights FA (all the Pats need to do is offer him the minimum salary for a third-year player; he would have no negotiation rights).

 

[Fencer]

Mankins would like seriously multimillion dollar financial security, playing football for a great franchise where he feels at home.

This is news -- why?

 

[pats1]

Thats the key right there.........RFA. He has no leverage unless he pulls a Branch.

FWIW, Branch was under contract.

 

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

Of course I'd love to keep LoMan, but my real wish is that if BB decides not to, that he has someone cheaper and just as or at least almost as good to replace him with.

 

[RobertWeathers]

FWIW, Branch was under contract.

Of course. I'm on a Branch argument in another thread. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[mayoclinic]

The Globe had a follow up story on Mankins:

More on Mankins - Extra Points - Boston.com

Some very interesting quotes from Mankins' agent, Frank Bauer, who sounds very respectful of the Pats in general and Robert Kraft in particular: "They will renegotiate with Logan Mankins. They’re not going to let Logan Mankins get out of that place. Kraft is very involved in the National Football League. He’s not going to step on himself and do something foolish. It doesn’t bother them by waiting for so long. They’re going to either tender him or tag him. And they’ve got problems on both ends. They tender or tag him, and then we use our leverage."

The highest tender for RFAs last year was $2.562M, which would be cheap for a guard of Mankins' caliber, and would require a 1st and 3rd round pick as compensation if he signed an offer with another team and the Pats didn't match it.

 

[mgteich]

I do think that if Mankins really wants a deal, then Kraft will give him a good one. Offensive guard is a big hole in the team's future roster and Mankins is a perennial probowler.

If he doesn't want a deal, then he will get the highest tender and the team will have another year to negotiate with him.

 

[mayoclinic]

I do think that if Mankins really wants a deal, then Kraft will give him a good one. Offensive guard is a big hole in the team's future roster and Mankins is a perennial probowler.

If he doesn't want a deal, then he will get the highest tender and the team will have another year to negotiate with him.

It all depends on what your view of a "good deal" is.

The Pats have generally been willing to recognize and reward performance with long term deals if the player is willing. The money they have James Sanders and Nick Kaczur was quite a "good deal" given those players' performance and importance to the team. Mankins is more valuable by far, a top OG, and I'm sure the Pats would rather lock him up for the next 4-5 years than have him cheap for only 1 year. If, on the other hand, he is looking to "break the bank" and get absolute top dollar, then I suspect they'll tender him.

The biggest hurdle that I see is the large contracts which have been given to OGs recently, which the Globe article mentions. Alan Faneca, Derrick Dougherty, Leonard Davis and Steve Hutchinson all got enormous contracts. I don't see the Pats breaking their salary structure for any player.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The highest tender for RFAs last year was $2.562M, which would be cheap for a guard of Mankins' caliber, and would require a 1st and 3rd round pick as compensation if he signed an offer with another team and the Pats didn't match it.

FWIW, the 1+3 tender number in 2010 will be $3,043,000. Still a major bargain.

 

[MaxVonDoom]

Thats why the probowl sucks

 

[JoeShmoe]

This will be another 'how much does he want to stay' type contract

I hear he's good friends with other guys on the team (Koppen, Brady, Light etc) so who knows?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I think as long as the potential for a 2011 lockout remains high there will be no long term extensions that require substantial bonus or guaranteed money beyond TFB. The most likely of the RFA candidates to get extended for that reason will be Gostkowski because as a PK he won't require a double digit guarantee and like Brady his age beyond 2011 won't be a major concern strickly based on position (QB's and PK's play well longer on average).

I also think with Dante still on board and the draft picks they have stockpiled for 2010 and 2011 they won't pay a premium for Mankins. OL has become a very expensive proposition relative to FA while remaining a more predictable position to scout the college ranks for and transition to the NFL, and the draft is definitely the way to go unless guys are willing to play ball on long term deals.

In some respects finding Vollmer made it easier for NE to figure out what to do about Mankins. They don't necessarily have to pinch pennies because they have a LT in the pipeline through 2013 at least, but they will also have to be careful if they want to lock that guy up for beyond since any deal Mankins inks will impact what Vollmer expects in as little as two years down the line.

I think Neal will be resigned for depth and stability because his value here will be greater than anywhere else given his system experience/relevance and injury history. Kind of like the last time he was a FA coming off a SB and not yet 30 and he found no takers or leverage. And of course Light has a year left in which he could still play LT or move inside beside Vollmer while they hunt for a RT or LG with excellent upside in the second. And he too is more likely to find a short term extension here than anywhere given the variables including his being a 33 year old FA in 2011...

Wilfork and Mankins will be secondary priorities behind Brady whose deals are totally dependent on whether their assessment of value in a long term deal aligns with the organizations. The fact that both can be retained through 2010 or traded/signed away for substantial draft compensation dictates that approach play out on a scheme driven, fiscally responsible/conservative team that always balances short term impact against long term goals.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

I do think that if Mankins really wants a deal, then Kraft will give him a good one. Offensive guard is a big hole in the team's future roster and Mankins is a perennial probowler.

If he doesn't want a deal, then he will get the highest tender and the team will have another year to negotiate with him.

I do wonder if we have so many good pieces on the O-line why we can't run the ball very consistently. maybe we don't try. maybe we are seeing it no that Vollmer is back. maybe they haven't been healthy all at once.

is he a pro-bowl guard in the fact you can run behind him and you know you are going to pick up positive yardage.

 

[efin98]

I think as long as the potential for a 2011 lockout remains high there will be no long term extensions that require substantial bonus or guaranteed money beyond TFB. The most likely of the RFA candidates to get extended for that reason will be Gostkowski because as a PK he won't require a double digit guarantee and like Brady his age beyond 2011 won't be a major concern strickly based on position (QB's and PK's play well longer on average).

I also think with Dante still on board and the draft picks they have stockpiled for 2010 and 2011 they won't pay a premium for Mankins. OL has become a very expensive proposition relative to FA while remaining a more predictable position to scout the college ranks for and transition to the NFL, and the draft is definitely the way to go unless guys are willing to play ball on long term deals.

In some respects finding Vollmer made it easier for NE to figure out what to do about Mankins. They don't necessarily have to pinch pennies because they have a LT in the pipeline through 2013 at least, but they will also have to be careful if they want to lock that guy up for beyond since any deal Mankins inks will impact what Vollmer expects in as little as two years down the line.

I think Neal will be resigned for depth and stability because his value here will be greater than anywhere else given his system experience/relevance and injury history. Kind of like the last time he was a FA coming off a SB and not yet 30 and he found no takers or leverage. And of course Light has a year left in which he could still play LT or move inside beside Vollmer while they hunt for a RT or LG with excellent upside in the second. And he too is more likely to find a short term extension here than anywhere given the variables including his being a 33 year old FA in 2011...

Wilfork and Mankins will be secondary priorities behind Brady whose deals are totally dependent on whether their assessment of value in a long term deal aligns with the organizations. The fact that both can be retained through 2010 or traded/signed away for substantial draft compensation dictates that approach play out on a scheme driven, fiscally responsible/conservative team that always balances short term impact against long term goals.

This is why I believe it's a win-win for the Patriots no matter what happens with Mankins- a 1st and 3rd rounder as compensation can allow more movement among their multiple picks to allow them to get better talent in the draft in addition to finding his replacement.