The Mankins paradox

[patfanken]

I've been following this melodrama just like everyone else but there are 2 questions that I never see answered. I'd appreciate someone or everyone explaining it to me.

1. Mankins has stated he is all set with money. He has saved all his money from the first 5 years of his career (about $8MM IIRC), and doesn't need the money. YET, he's been offered about $7MM/yr and is pissed that it isn't $8.5MM. IF money doesn't matter, then why is he pissed?

2. In his own statement he claimed that the Pats promised to take care of him after the uncapped year. Yet "after the uncapped year" isn't until 2/11. So did he misspeak, or does he just not know what he is talking about. Because the Pats DID offer to take care of THIS off season to the tune of making him one of the top 3 OGs in the league.

3. Now we are starting to hear the the Pats promised to make him the TOP paid G in the league, yet no source has been mentioned on this. Is it true, or is it just another example of mediot speculation.

4. If Mankins is EVER going to get my respect back, he is going to have to make clear, EXACTLY what he thought the Pats promised and what they actually delivered. He is going to have to state for the record that he thinks he's the BEST OG in the league, and wants to be paid as the best. Anything less isn't going to do it. THEN I might disagree with this position, but at least I would know where he stands,and I can respect that.

 

[Gwedd]

As I have postulated before, I am convinced that the problem is with Mankins' agent. I don't think he's been up front with Mankins about what the Patriots have offered and/or he's withholding other information hoping to fatten his own wallet.

Mankins seems to me to be a straight-up guy, and the Patriots are square dealers. That. to me, says the problem is in the middle, and the middleman is Mankins' agent.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

1) To Mankins its not about the money,its about prestige for what he thinks is being the best OG in the NFL...Personally I do not feel he is #1..definately top 5 but not #1

3) The Patriots NEVER promise to pay any player the top salary in the league that is not how this team works or runs the show,I don't believe they ever told him he would be highest paid - he would be lying about that IMO.

 

[Willie55]

I'll take a stab at #1, I'm not sure about the other three. It's about the perceived respect he's getting, not about the money. Jahri Evans is being paid somewhere in the $8 million/year range by the Saints. Mankins thinks he the best guard in the NFL and shouldn't have to settle for less than what Evans got. And by the Pats not offering him more than Evans they have disrespected him and his ability.

In the words of Mo Vaughn - it isn't about the money.

 

[Wolfpack]

1. Mankins has stated he is all set with money. He has saved all his money from the first 5 years of his career (about $8MM IIRC), and doesn't need the money. YET, he's been offered about $7MM/yr and is pissed that it isn't $8.5MM. IF money doesn't matter, then why is he pissed?

+1.

2. In his own statement he claimed that the Pats promised to take care of him after the uncapped year. Yet "after the uncapped year" isn't until 2/11. So did he misspeak, or does he just not know what he is talking about. Because the Pats DID offer to take care of THIS off season to the tune of making him one of the top 3 OGs in the league.

My theory on this is pretty simple: First of all, I doubt the Patriots told Mankins much of anything directly. Any statements they made were undoubtedly made to Mankins' agent - and therein lies the problem. The agent is probably not exactly feeding Mankins information in a pure, unbiased, 100% accurate manner. He wants Mankins to see the Patriots as the villains.

So it's clear from Mankins' own statements that there is some confusion on his part. Mankins probably believes what he is saying, but that don't make it true.

 

[spacecrime]

1) To Mankins its not about the money,its about being paid for what he thinks is being the best OG in the NFL....

It's not about the money. It's about being paid more than everyone else. Okay.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

Bill Simmons' most recent article goes into why John Hannah held out before, because he was unhappy with his contract and felt its amount conveyed respect.

Back to Mankins. Published reports say he was offered 35M over 5 years, after the RFA year of about 3M. That puts him at basically 6M per year for 6 years, which doesn't even make him a top 10 paid guard. This was after Mankins played out his crappy 6 year deal, while others have held out and gotten paid before their rookie deals finished.

This isn't just Mankins, but Brady too, the Pats play hard ball with EVERYONE. The Pats even tried to get out of giving Brady a 20K bonus in his 2nd contract which he made them put back in their 3rd contract.

Last year with Wilfork the Pats played a similar game, leaking reports early in the season of what Wilfork supposedly turned down, to make him seem greedy.

 

[Patspsycho]

It's not about the money, it's about the respect. Mankins is very old school, and apparently feels disrespected because he believes the Patriots misled him. It apparently is a matter of honor to him.

 

[Patspsycho]

The Pats even tried to get out of giving Brady a 20K bonus in his 2nd contract which he made them put back in their 3rd contract.

That is a very very stupid thing to do. I have otherwise had high respect for what this organization has achieved, but this kind of move is completely boneheaded.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

That is a very very stupid thing to do. I have otherwise had high respect for what this organization has achieved, but this kind of move is completely boneheaded.

Exactly. And given even mild mannered Brady's negative reaction at the time it's not hard to see how a guy with less of a sense of humor (Logan) could get wicked pissed over perceived BS like that.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

One note in general about playing hard ball with everyone and trying to create a strong middle class on the team:
This strategy worked best in the early 2000's because many teams had cap trouble and there were a lot of quality guys let go into the free agent markets. A fiscally well managed team could then get a lot of bargains, which the Pats did from 2000-2004.

However, look at the avg player salaries from 2000 to now, compared with how fast the cap itself has grown from 2000 to now. The cap has far outpaced avg salary growth, by doubling since 2000 while salaries haven't caught up.

Most teams haven't had cap trouble for a long time now, and the same strategy that worked for the Pats before isn't really a big competitive advantage anymore. Since 2006 the Colts have won more in head to head matchups, and have won more with a totally different spending strategy.

In the current league, it makes sense to pay up and keep your top guys. There isn't anybody good in the free agent markets that one can get at a bargain anymore, it's more like one has to overpay for anybody with talent now.

 

[RayClay]

Bill Simmons' most recent article goes into why John Hannah held out before, because he was unhappy with his contract and felt its amount conveyed respect.

Except Simmons was wrong. Hannah insisted that he and Leon Gray negotiate as a team, hamstringing a football team well known to have financial troubles to spend a very high proportion of their total payroll on 2/5 of their line.

They finally did re$pect Hannah and managed to make do at tackle with a high draft pick (Holloway).

 

[Wolfpack]

In the current league, it makes sense to pay up and keep your top guys.

It does not make sense to cave in to every player under contract who wants more money than what he is due. Please note that when I say "under contract" I am including any player still playing under the terms of a deal he signed, or with the restrictions allowed by the CBA, such as restricted free agency, tender offers, franchising, etc.

Mankins seems to need it drilled into his head that he is not a free agent, and the Patriots are under no obligation whatsoever to treat him like one.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

It's not about the money. It's about being paid more than everyone else. Okay.

Correction...I meant prestige...a little error there on my part :bricks:

 

[DropKickFlutie]

Mankins seems to need it drilled into his head that he is not a free agent, and the Patriots are under no obligation whatsoever to treat him like one.

Actually even on the Patriots it has been shown that a player can force his way out of town and get a big payday.

Mankins seems exactly the type of guy who would not play at all, and it WILL negatively hurt the Patriots.

I would be pissed too if I played out a crappy 6 year deal (while players in the same cohort were re-signed earlier), then the team RFA'd me, then offered me something that two years from now won't even be top 10 guard money when you average it out over 6 years.

 

[crowell33]

I'll take a stab at #1, I'm not sure about the other three. It's about the perceived respect he's getting, not about the money. Jahri Evans is being paid somewhere in the $8 million/year range by the Saints. Mankins thinks he the best guard in the NFL and shouldn't have to settle for less than what Evans got. And by the Pats not offering him more than Evans they have disrespected him and his ability.

In the words of Mo Vaughn - it isn't about the money.

"Its always about the money, and even when its not about the money, its about the money"...........Tommy Caffee

 

[DropKickFlutie]

The Pats approach with Mankins has been similar to what they did with Vince Wilfork last year. They offered both less money than what the top 3 players at their position were offering, and leaked it early to the media that reasonable offers were made but the players were too greedy to accept it. It then gets fans on management's side, to demonize the player for holding out for an extra mill or two.

However, the reactions by Wilfork and Mankins have been totally opposite. Wilfork kept his cool, didn't really speak or comment, and it all ended up well. Brady is following a similar path. Mankins basically flipped out, but I can see where he's coming from.

 

[Garbanza]

I rather doubt he's going to throw away a year of service. I fully expect him to report week ten. That said - screw him! I would hate to see him come back week ten - not play - get his year of service. Go get your year of service elsewhere. I have a good feeling that the Pats are working diligently on a trade.

 

[RobertWeathers]

II have a good feeling that the Pats are working diligently on a trade.

Agree 100%. What would be interesting to know is the feedback the potential trade partners have on the Pats asking price and their corresponding counter-offers.

I'm certain that they went down the road of offering an Asante-type scenario and he said no (or vice-versa perhaps).

 

[Wolfpack]

Actually even on the Patriots it has been shown that a player can force his way out of town and get a big payday.

Oh yeah? Such as who? Please don't say Deion Branch. Ty Law tried to force his way out of town, and failed miserably. Richard Seymour got traded (which honestly is what wouldn't surprise me from Mankins) finshed out his old contract, and signed a 1 year deal (not exactly a big payday). Asante Samuel left after 1 year of being franchised so he essentially played out his rookie contract (plus 1 year) then left as a free agent.