The Mankins paradox

[BSR]

right, but just because the pats don't talk don't mean they don't have a sizeable hand in the problem.

I'm not fooled by anything. I don't believe mankins should be making half of what even has been 'turned down', but then again, I don't believe bob kraft should be charging half of what he charges to see a game.

all of it is about money. always has been. there's no golden boy in this, but if mankins is of dishonorable character, what the hell does that make belichik?

I really don't care. I watch for the football, not for the soap opera.

 

[IllegalContact]

Sign and Trade works out that issue Cousin.
DW Toys

nahh, it doesn't really. from the pats perspective, as long as the rules are the way they are, I would never let anyone shoot their way out of town in this way.

which is why I said that if I was his agent, I would have made this stink a year ago. it seems as though players have better leverage while under contract than as an RFA

 

[IllegalContact]

I really don't care. I watch for the football, not for the soap opera.

yah you care. otherwise you would not have responded to a post that wasn't intended for you.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

HOW do you know Mankins was offered a top 3 contract besides the fact that Pats camp keeps repeating it over and over????

Published reports are 35M over 5 years to start after the RFA year at 3M, which makes it a tad over 6M per year for 6 years, which isn't even top 10 guard money, especially 2 years from now.

There are many ways to measure a deal. Total average, new money average, fully guaranteed money, lately kinda guaranteed money and first three take.

Turns out Mangold is averaging $7.7M in new money and $7.17M in total contract value since he too, like Evans, was required to retain his remaining (or in Evans case RFA) year as part of the deal. Since you seem to think 400K constitutes a tad not even worth mentioning, I can't see why a $750K difference between what Mangold is getting and what Mankins was offered would be a big deal, especially if Mankins deal contained real guaranteed money as reports indicated and not any funny money.

Mangold got $22M in rolling not fully guaranteed guaranteed money, which means he really didn't get anything beyond his $6.3M signing bonus and $960K salary which is all he will see until "the next league year or before week 1 thereof". Evans got $19M fully guaranteed. Evans will see $25M over the first three. Mangold only that $22M or $7.3M per average. If they cut Mangold after 3 years they would have a $2.6M dead cap divided over 2 years.

That is where the new guaranteed language and lack of significant amortized signing bonus seperates the men from the boys. Wilfork got $20M guaranteed, half of his 5 year deal, and $18M of that was signing bonus that will amortize against our cap at $3.6M per for the next 5 years making it less likely Big Vince gets cut. I assume Mankins deal was similarly structured, with perhaps as much as $18M+ fully guaranteed, upwards of $15M+ in signing bonus or split fully guaranteed signing and option bonus and in excess of $20M in the first 3. Deals while slotted tend to follow a similar pattern here.

If he was offered more than Mangold in the first 3 and/or if his guaranteed money is fully guaranteed and if he received substantially more in signing or fully guaranteed bonus money then by some measures he may have gotten a better deal. The other deals may be longer and therefore larger in total value, in part because they are a couple of years younger, but there is no guarantee they ever see more than half of them because in each case the back end of the deal carries the player into his mid 30's and beyond a decade in the league and all their guaranteed money and any significant amortization is already accounted for. If Mankins deal was constructed with more signing bonus then it's highly likely he sees more than half of it because of the implied guarantee of substantial dead cap.

 

[BSR]

yah you care. otherwise you would not have responded to a post that wasn't intended for you.

The point is it doesn't matter "what it makes Belichick". As you continually state, we don't know what is happening behind closed doors and never will so what does it matter. It doesn't mean I don't care about the subject matter entirely.

 

[Off The Grid]

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.

Very good point. I have always LOVED Mankins, and his public stance ~ considering that the Pats seem to've made a VERY reasonable offer, when they COULD have gone all Lightning Bolts on him ~ is BEWILDERING.

 

[Off The Grid]

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.

BEAUTIFULLY put, sir.

Again: LOVE the guy. I just want him to come to his @#$%^&*ing SENSES.

 

[Off The Grid]

HOW do you know Mankins was offered a top 3 contract besides the fact that Pats camp keeps repeating it over and over????

Published reports are 35M over 5 years to start after the RFA year at 3M, which makes it a tad over 6M per year for 6 years, which isn't even top 10 guard money, especially 2 years from now.

That's a goofy premise, don't you think?

For obvious reasons.

 

[Miguel]

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..

Or maybe that he was misquoted by Mike Reiss who has admitted as much AND has corrected the original article.

 

[Richard Camembert]

2009 NFL Salaries for Offensive Linemen

This is a link to the 2009 salaries for all linemen, from the redzone.com (ther's one for guards if you click one more slot). Mediots? Perhaps. Inaccurate? Possibly. Posted previously and in a better manner? Almost assuredly. A jumping-off point? I say yes.

1) Damien Woody is well-paid at $5.8 M. D'Brick made $3.4M.

2) Mawae made $3M.

3) Bobby Gallery made almost $6M.

4)Some linemen are really well paid. Jake Grove, $14.2M (drafted after Mankins, a year earlier). Jake Long, $8M. Max Starks, $11.4M. There are others.

5) Meanwhile LM made $1.4M, while Jahiri Evans made $2.7M.

LM looks underpaid to me. And dudes are making more than $7M who aren't as good as he is. If it WAS about the money, and I know there's a salary cap and all, but if it WAS about the money, I could see it.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

2009 NFL Salaries for Offensive Linemen

This is a link to the 2009 salaries for all linemen, from the redzone.com (ther's one for guards if you click one more slot). Mediots? Perhaps. Inaccurate? Possibly. Posted previously and in a better manner? Almost assuredly. A jumping-off point? I say yes.

1) Damien Woody is well-paid at $5.8 M. D'Brick made $3.4M.

2) Mawae made $3M.

3) Bobby Gallery made almost $6M.

4)Some linemen are really well paid. Jake Grove, $14.2M (drafted after Mankins, a year earlier). Jake Long, $8M. Max Starks, $11.4M. There are others.

5) Meanwhile LM made $1.4M, while Jahiri Evans made $2.7M.

LM looks underpaid to me. And dudes are making more than $7M who aren't as good as he is. If it WAS about the money, and I know there's a salary cap and all, but if it WAS about the money, I could see it.

You have to know what you're looking at or you end up comparing apples and oranges. Mankins was playing out his rookie deal, and he was still making 3 times what Mangold was in salary that year. Mangold however had already made more than him because of where he was drafted. Older UFA were also making more on lucrative deals they got because they were FA. Jhari Evans was making more that year because he only got a 3 year deal as a 4th round draft choice in 2006 and he was a RFA in 2009 as well as again in 2010 before signing his new deal that was added on to his RFA year...

 

[Richard Camembert]

You have to know what you're looking at or you end up comparing apples and oranges. Mankins was playing out his rookie deal, and he was still making 3 times what Mangold was in salary that year. Mangold however had already made more than him because of where he was drafted. Older UFA were also making more on lucrative deals they got because they were FA. Jhari Evans was making more that year because he only got a 3 year deal as a 4th round draft choice in 2006 and he was a RFA in 2009 as well as again in 2010 before signing his new deal that was added on to his RFA year...

All true. And, of course, there are other factors, like position and talent. Consider some guys from the 2005 draft, when Mankins went 32. David Baas, currently a backup guard, was drafted with pick 33, 1 pick after Mankins, but made only $675K in '09. C Chris Spencer went six picks before LM and made $2.2M in '09. T Michael Roos went at 41 and made a cool $3M in '09. G Marcus Johnson was next next guard drafted after Baas, 17 picks after Mankins, and is out of the league. Roos, with 2 all-pro selections, is the only one of these dudes with a resume comparable to LM's; yet, because he's a tackle, he made twice what LM made that year.

Mangold, drafted in 2006 but already with 2 all-pros, made half of what Mankins made in '09, $700K vs. $1.4M. He might argue, like Mankins but more forcefully, that he has outplayed his contract.

Hmm. If one believes some of the rumors, Mankins was offered roughly twice what Roos, a slightly inferior but comparable player at a generally better paid position, got last year. Maybe he has no complaint after all.

 

[Joker]

I'm sorry...I did not want to go off topic here but it's been bugging me for the past few weeks...Richard Camembert = **** Cheese????

tell me I'm reading too much into this....

 

[DropKickFlutie]

2009 NFL Salaries for Offensive Linemen

This is a link to the 2009 salaries for all linemen, from the redzone.com (ther's one for guards if you click one more slot). Mediots? Perhaps. Inaccurate? Possibly. Posted previously and in a better manner? Almost assuredly. A jumping-off point? I say yes.

1) Damien Woody is well-paid at $5.8 M. D'Brick made $3.4M.

2) Mawae made $3M.

3) Bobby Gallery made almost $6M.

4)Some linemen are really well paid. Jake Grove, $14.2M (drafted after Mankins, a year earlier). Jake Long, $8M. Max Starks, $11.4M. There are others.

5) Meanwhile LM made $1.4M, while Jahiri Evans made $2.7M.

LM looks underpaid to me. And dudes are making more than $7M who aren't as good as he is. If it WAS about the money, and I know there's a salary cap and all, but if it WAS about the money, I could see it.

Good post.

Mankins was underpaid, and his supposed new offer also still makes him underpaid when you see what his counterparts are getting in the market.

I don't agree with how he has completely flipped out over this, but the Patriots *are* trying to give him what could be called a fair offer but still on the low side.

 

[MWPatsFan]

The name fails me, but one of the Saints O linemen just got a good-sized contract, like 7yr, 56mil or something. I'm just guessing Mankins is looking in that ballpark.

 

[RobertWeathers]

The name fails me, but one of the Saints O linemen just got a good-sized contract, like 7yr, 56mil or something. I'm just guessing Mankins is looking in that ballpark.

I assume the same thing. I'd like to think that he'd get less as I don't think hes as good, but who knows.