Patriots offered Mankins Top 3 Guard Pay

[upstater1]

What's the difference between #32 and #45?

Why does that matter? If Mankins was not drafted by the Pats at 32, he would have went to the 49ers at 33.



What is it about Mankins' play on the field that is not Pro-Bowl/All-Pro level/Top 5 level?[/QUOTE]

You're putting an awful lot of emphasis on a newspaper draft report. We hear and see these things all the time.

The point is, the original post I responded to reiterated that almost everyone else thought he was a reach. I put no credence in these alternative draft scenarios. I'm only responding to the original post, and I believe that the poster is correct that Mankins was considered a reach. Almost everyone else didn't have him at 32 or 33. But hey, maybe some other team had Darius Heyward-Bey at 8 or 9.

 

[Ring 6]

When a team leaks details of their offers to Breer, they, IMO, are negotiating through the media.

Isnt th team leaking the details to Breer an assumption without evidence to support?
The Breer article does not mention the Patriots FO at all. In fact he reports on the letter by asking if it was received by the player/agent not asking if it was sent. I would assume if his facts were coming from Foxboro, he would have reported that.
All he said was 'my understanding' in an article full of quotes from the agent. I think its quite stretch to assume his understanding comes from the team leaking information.

Unless there is a different source you are using.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Under "current" rules, the franchise number would include tackle salaries.

I like Mankins, I think he has been a very nice presence on that oline from day 1. But if it is true they offered him top 3 money, I feel like the organization did make a nice try at it.
If he he is looking to be the top paid guard than he should be talking to another team. The money he is looking for should be reserved for a guard of the caliber of Steve Hutchinson>in his prime.

Mankins is not that player so if it is true and the offer was made and he has no intention of signing they should do a sign and trade and move on. We got too many other players with contracts coming up.

 

[Ring 6]

Why does that matter? If Mankins was not drafted by the Pats at 32, he would have went to the 49ers at 33.



What is it about Mankins' play on the field that is not Pro-Bowl/All-Pro level/Top 5 level?

You're putting an awful lot of emphasis on a newspaper draft report. We hear and see these things all the time.

The point is, the original post I responded to reiterated that almost everyone else thought he was a reach. I put no credence in these alternative draft scenarios. I'm only responding to the original post, and I believe that the poster is correct that Mankins was considered a reach. Almost everyone else didn't have him at 32 or 33. But hey, maybe some other team had Darius Heyward-Bey at 8 or 9.[/quote]
I'm missing what his draft position has to do with this discussion.
But I will add that while some had him at 32-33 and others didnt, the ones who did were right and the ones who did not were wrong. I find that he was worth the pick, if fact more than worth 32 more important than guessing at which teams foresaw that or not.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

Once again, the real issue is that Mankins committed an unpardonable act when he held a press conference to slam Kraft.

Mankins created a no win situation with zero potential to resolve it other than a sincere Mankins apology, or simply trading him to another team.

Kraft would certainly accept Mankins back into the fold IMHO if Mankins gets his head out of his agent's ass and simply apologizes. Then the negotiations can continue.

I do believe that this is a case of a really crappy agent whispering some really crappy advise into Mankin's ear, knowing that Mankins would be driven to distraction and lash out. Unfortunately this ended up being a DEAD ON ARRIVAL type ploy which simply will never work, ever.

Kraft has no room for flexibility on this issue, because you don't let your employees call you a scumbag. You just plain don't.

 

[Ring 6]

Once again, the real issue is that Mankins committed an unpardonable act when he held a press conference to slam Kraft.

Mankins created a no win situation with zero potential to resolve it other than a sincere Mankins apology, or simply trading him to another team.

Kraft would certainly accept Mankins back into the fold IMHO if Mankins gets his head out of his agent's ass and simply apologizes. Then the negotiations can continue.

I do believe that this is a case of a really crappy agent whispering some really crappy advise into Mankin's ear, knowing that Mankins would be driven to distraction and lash out. Unfortunately this ended up being a DEAD ON ARRIVAL type ploy which simply will never work, ever.

Kraft has no room for flexibility on this issue, because you don't let your employees call you a scumbag. You just plain don't.

I disagree. If Mankins calls and says I want to sit down and workout a deal, they will sit down with him.
Kraft is bigger than requiring a player who's feelings are hurt to issue him an apology.

 

[Miguel]

Isnt th team leaking the details to Breer an assumption without evidence to support?
The Breer article does not mention the Patriots FO at all. In fact he reports on the letter by asking if it was received by the player/agent not asking if it was sent. I would assume if his facts were coming from Foxboro, he would have reported that.
All he said was 'my understanding' in an article full of quotes from the agent. I think its quite stretch to assume his understanding comes from the team leaking information.

Unless there is a different source you are using.

Breer has used the term "league source" which I am presuming to be someone within the Patriots front office.

 

[Deus Irae]

Once again, the real issue is that Mankins committed an unpardonable act when he held a press conference to slam Kraft.

Mankins created a no win situation with zero potential to resolve it other than a sincere Mankins apology, or simply trading him to another team.

Kraft would certainly accept Mankins back into the fold IMHO if Mankins gets his head out of his agent's ass and simply apologizes. Then the negotiations can continue.

I do believe that this is a case of a really crappy agent whispering some really crappy advise into Mankin's ear, knowing that Mankins would be driven to distraction and lash out. Unfortunately this ended up being a DEAD ON ARRIVAL type ploy which simply will never work, ever.

Kraft has no room for flexibility on this issue, because you don't let your employees call you a scumbag. You just plain don't.

Law called Belichick a liar. The Patriots still tried to get him back with the team.

 

[Miguel]

You're putting an awful lot of emphasis on a newspaper draft report. We hear and see these things all the time.

The point is, the original post I responded to reiterated that almost everyone else thought he was a reach. I put no credence in these alternative draft scenarios. I'm only responding to the original post, and I believe that the poster is correct that Mankins was considered a reach. Almost everyone else didn't have him at 32 or 33. But hey, maybe some other team had Darius Heyward-Bey at 8 or 9.

Who consider Mankins a reach? Fans or front offices?

A reach would be if Mankins was widely considered to have 3rd round value. He was not. He was considered to be a low round 1st round to mid-round value.

 

[Ring 6]

Breer has used the term "league source" which I am presuming to be someone within the Patriots front office.

In which article. I was reading the one posted a day or so ago.

 

[DaBruinz]

Deion Branch says hi.

Yes, it worked so well for Deion. He's become the posterboy for OVERPAID injury riddled receivers who you SHOULDN'T pay big money for.

If you think that Deion got the better of the Patriots in that deal, you're delusional.

 

[DaBruinz]

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Under the Cap: Top Ten Guards and Centers

That would mean that Mankins was offered a 6-year contract that averaged more than $7.1 million.

The media (it may have been Breer) said that the Patriots offered Mankins a 5-year $35 million deal. If you add the $3,268,000 RFA tender to $35 million you get $38.268 million. Divide $38.628 million by 6 years and you get an average of $6,438,000, which is probably Top 10 money. I do not see how that is Top 3 money.

Miquel - could you please provide a sample contract of where the Patriots have rolled the RFA tender into the long term contract that a player has signed for them? I ask because I don't remember then ever doing this. That have done straight extensions based off the end of the rookie contract, but I don't know of them having ever incorporated the RFA tender into a contract.

With that in mind, you're making a big assumption that they did roll the tender in. If they didn't, and I've not seen anything that said they did, then the contract would average 7 million a year. Which would be top 3 money.

 

[DaBruinz]

THANK YOU!!!!

The media spin going on with Mankins right now, reminds me of the same racket the Red Sox have going in with the media in demonizing Nomar, Pedro, Manny, Jason Bay, or any other player they want to start a smear campaign for.

Why are you thanking him? His entire post is based on the assumption that the Pats included the RFA tender as part of the contract. Something that he offers up no support for.

Is it a possibility? Sure. Anything's possible. Is it probable? Not from what I've seen over the past 10 years with the Pats signing their RFAs to long term deals.

 

[Ring 6]

Miquel - could you please provide a sample contract of where the Patriots have rolled the RFA tender into the long term contract that a player has signed for them? I ask because I don't remember then ever doing this. That have done straight extensions based off the end of the rookie contract, but I don't know of them having ever incorporated the RFA tender into a contract.

With that in mind, you're making a big assumption that they did roll the tender in. If they didn't, and I've not seen anything that said they did, then the contract would average 7 million a year. Which would be top 3 money.

I think that Breer quoted the agent as saying there was never a 5 year deal and suggested that may have meant it was an extension on top of the RFA tender. I have not seen it reported as a known fact. But then again I am not following it closely, so my questions in this thread are asking for information not implying anyone is right or wrong.

 

[DaBruinz]

See, here's what I'm talking about. You're making a claim. It's not factual. The Patriots, if Reiss is right, clearly did not "address the contract" for this year, since the "new" contract wouldn't take place until next year and the RFA tender would be in place for this year.

The RFA Tender IS a new contract. Furthermore, even if the other 5 years were an extension, if it was signed this year, then he'd get his SB this year or whenever the pay schedule was set up. Bumping him from 1.5 million to 3.5 million is a huge bump.

There are a lot of "IFS". However, the one thing that is NOT at issue is whether the Patriots offered him a contract. THEY DID. So that means they didn't go back on their word. They tried to "take care of him," and Mankins and his agent have turned down MULTIPLE Contract offers from the Pats.

I've remained steadfast in my position too. That doesn't differentiate us at all.



Except that I've not claimed either side right or wrong, and the people bashing Mankins have chosen sides without knowing what the hell they've been talking about, since we haven't had enough information on the subject. How that's supposed to be a 'divide' I leave for you.

Most people are taking issue with Mankins making the claims that the Pats didn't "take care of him". Clearly, they've tried and he's rebuffed their efforts. So, for Mankins to have said that they lied is BS.

 

[DaBruinz]

THANK YOU, again.

As you noted on a prior page, all the reports are that they offered a 5 year/35M deal, for after the RFA year where he would play at 3.5M, ultimately making it 6 years for 6.4M per year at average. That would only make him paid like a top 10 guard, not the top 3 guard as widely reported. It's the same smear campaign that Wilfork experienced last year mid-season, when pre-emptive reports came out (who knows if they were true) that Wilfork was offered X dollars and didn't re-sign to paint him as the bad guy if he didn't re-sign.

If you're Logan Mankins and unlike a lot of other players from your class, you played out the entirety of your long, crappy underpaid rookie deal, and expected to get re-upped without playing the RFA offer. Then, you find out that the team expects you to play one more year way underpaid again, and after that to get offered a salary 1/5 below that of where you think you are worth.

I think a lot of people here would completely change their positions if they were actually Logan Mankins.

Hmm.. Sure looks to me like Mankins ( who is NOT a top 3 guard, but is top 10) was given a contract offer in an attempt to "take care of him".

Could you explain how this is a "lie"? Because it sure doesn't look like it.

 

[Ring 6]

The RFA Tender IS a new contract. Furthermore, even if the other 5 years were an extension, if it was signed this year, then he'd get his SB this year or whenever the pay schedule was set up. Bumping him from 1.5 million to 3.5 million is a huge bump.

There are a lot of "IFS". However, the one thing that is NOT at issue is whether the Patriots offered him a contract. THEY DID. So that means they didn't go back on their word. They tried to "take care of him," and Mankins and his agent have turned down MULTIPLE Contract offers from the Pats.





Most people are taking issue with Mankins making the claims that the Pats didn't "take care of him". Clearly, they've tried and he's rebuffed their efforts. So, for Mankins to have said that they lied is BS.

Of course its bs. The versions that both sides are communicating to whoever will listen are both bs, because they are simply subterfuge to negotiations.
If you really think that either side is going to give an unbiased even-handed synopsis, you are totally naive. Listen to the NFL and NFLPA. They narrow their discussion to what makes them sound good, and sound like the offended party. They don't believe it, but accepting the other sides claims becomes a step toward concession. NFL contracts are judged many different ways, total value, guarenteed amount, first 3, average per year, etc, etc. Most contracts look better in some ways than others.
The Patriots feel it was a good offer, Mankins feels it was not.
Of course the Patriots would call it 'top 3' if one of those terms in 'top 3' and Mankins agent will call it 20% lower than Evans if one of those terms is. They will use whatever math suits them. Not to be dishonest but to NEGOTIATE.
Nothing that has been said means anything. When Mankins decides it is time to get back to football and realizes that his trade ploy fell on deaf ears, he will come back to the table. They will start at the same point they would have if it was never mentioned in the media.

 

[upstater1]

I'm missing what his draft position has to do with this discussion.
But I will add that while some had him at 32-33 and others didnt, the ones who did were right and the ones who did not were wrong. I find that he was worth the pick, if fact more than worth 32 more important than guessing at which teams foresaw that or not.

I was responding to another poster who pointed out that Mankins was luckily drafted earlier than projected by the premier franchise in football, who happened to have a stellar passing game and QB. That's all. I think it's a solid argument to say that were he drafted by a team in the top of the 2nd round instead (a struggling team, no doubt) he would probably not be in the position he is.

 

[upstater1]

Who consider Mankins a reach? Fans or front offices?

A reach would be if Mankins was widely considered to have 3rd round value. He was not. He was considered to be a low round 1st round to mid-round value.

I have no idea. I'm just going by the consensus at the time. Are you disputing that? Are you saying I'm making this up?

 

[patriot lifer]

Who consider Mankins a reach? Fans or front offices?

A reach would be if Mankins was widely considered to have 3rd round value. He was not. He was considered to be a low round 1st round to mid-round value.

SI.com - 2005 NFL Draft - Logan Mankins

plenty of people thought he was a mid-third rounder (see bottom of link as one example). Espn said the same thing after we drafted him.