YOU DON'T THINK HIS TRADE VALUE IS MUCH
That's nice. So what? As with Branch, the player's agent can be told the demands of the patriots and go out and get a 2nd or not. It may be appropriate to set an example and not allow Mankins to play anywhere else this year, and it may be right for the patriots to forgo compensation, but if the patriots are willing to take a 2nd or 3rd, there is an easy process to find out if such a pick is available. As with Branch, if they start the process, they would be obligated to take a pick if the agent get a deal that meets the patriot's demands.
MANKINS WILL BE AN UNDRAFTED FREE AGENT IN 2011 EVEN IF THE PATS STICK IT TO HIM
Mankins may or may not need to show up by Week 10 to guarantee his 2011 UFA status. In no case would he not show up and give the patriots rights to him for 2011.
THE CHOICES ARE SIMPLE
A) Stick it to Mankins and forgo any compensation except an end of 3rd 2012 pick.
B) Before the trade deadline, allow Mankins' lawyer to try to secure a 2011 second rounder; if that doesn't work try for a 3rd the second time around. A late July or early August effort would probably produce the best chance for a higher pick.
C) Believe that Mankins will come back with his tail between his legs begging for a long-term deal with the patriots.
THE BOTTOM LINE
Mankins does not belong to the patriots forever. The CBA gave the patriots an extra year. Other than fan arrogance, I see no reason why Mankins shoiuld sign a long-term deal with the patriots. The patriots gave it their best shot. The deal was deemed to be a non-starter by Mankins. That's his choice to make. All the tantrums in the world by patriot fans won't force Mankins to play for the patriots in 2011.
The patriots gained a year of value from the CBA clause regarding RFA extensions. Patriot management can decide how to maximize that value. As of now, patriot management seems to believe that the highest value is as a public example of how strong they are in negotiations. Personally, I don't think that this is really the stand of the patriots, no matter how much many fans here would like that.
I dont think the trade value is much. With his contract demands, he may be pricing himself out of the market. He is a G on a passing team after all.
Personally, I think the best message the Pats can send from the standpoint of future contract issues is to leak out what the offer on the table is, and let him sit home, absolutely refusing to trade him.
It is quite possible that the compensatory pick may be higher that what anyone will offer for the right to pay a G 8 mill or more a season, especially when they would be shelling out 20mill for one season with the possiblity of no football next year.
Whether or not Mankins likes it the Patriots are simply following the rules of the CBA. Demanding to be the highest paid player at your position when you are an RFA is really kind of ludicrous. I could understand Mankins feeling the system is screwing him, but to act as if he has leverage in his current situation is kind of ignorant.
Refusing to trade him and making him blink first may seem to some as a cruel strategy that could alienate players, but I think in the long run it helps the organization more than bending over and supporting the idea that good players 'deserve' new deals even when they have no leverage. Losing one player this way is preferable to having an entire team thinking their contract is meaningless and they should 'get theirs' because they had a good season. (See: Jets, NJ)
Jus my opinion, but I think a hard line (or even a by the book line) is best in the long run. If its my choice, Mankins either gets back to the negotiating table, signs the tender or sits. If I'm not mistaken the Patriots can put him on some type of list (reserve did not report?) that puts him out for the season and he oes back to the same situation next year. To me if he wants to say FU Pats, the Pats need to say FU Logan, and the team holds all of the cards right now.