Wilfork wants Seymour money

[DaBruinz]

Tonight on Comcast Sportsnet,, Michael Felger in discussing the Patriots OTA's with Tom Curran of NBC Sports claimed that Wilfork wants Seymour money. Wilfork, who is a regular on the show, communicated to Gary Tanguay, another anchor on the show, that he wanted $32 million over 4 years including $24 million in guaranteed money, according to Felger. With a DT franchise number of $6.0 million per, and Wilfork only being a two down player, Vince and the Pats are at an impasse.

Might explain why BB drafted (3) NT's this year.

Except that BB didn't draft 3 NT's this year. He drafted 2. Darryl Richard, at 6'3 and 303 lbs is a 3-4 DE, not a 3-4 NT.

Personally, I think that Felger and Tanguay are clueless about the contract negotiations..

 

[condon84]

I agree. Wilfork is more valuable to the patriots than anyone not named Brady, by far.

Everyone is replaceable. I love Wilfork, but is Bill really going to invest that type of money on a two-down player? This could get ugly. If we do end up losing him, I hope it's via trade and we get some draft picks.

 

[DaBruinz]

I'd take Moss or Welker over Wilfork. I love Wilfork but he's not a factor against the pass and as great as he is against the run you can find guys to get the job done; not as well as Wilfork but a big dude run stopper can be found more easily than a Moss or Welker.

I think that you underestimate Wilfork's success against the pass on early downs.. In fact, I'd say that he's the biggest factor for Seymour getting free so much.

As for taking Moss or Welker, its neither here nor there. There are no Moss' or Welker's on the market so there is o ned to wory about that. I also question the idea that you can easily find a guy to get the job done at NT. In 2001, the Pats were using the 4-3 as their base because they didn't have a NT. In 2002, they attempted to put Steve Martin (no, not the comedian) into the spot and he was an epic fail. It wasn't until 2003 when the Pats traded for Washington that the NT position was settled down. And in 2004, the Pats used Traylor and Wilfork in combination.

I think that the ELITE players are always hard to find and we all should be happy when our team has them and when our team keeps them beyond 1-2 years.

 

[DaBruinz]

Something for everyone to think about.

Seymour is just as much of a 2 down player as Wilfork. Seymour, Wilfork, and Warren all come off on 3rd downs with Green and Wright usually going in as part of the Nickel package they use.

So, if BB was willing to pay Seymour what amounted to almost $10 mill a year, then I see no reason not to pay Wilfork $8 million a year. In fact, Wilfork at $8 million is probably better value.

 

[Synovia]

Something for everyone to think about.

Seymour is just as much of a 2 down player as Wilfork. Seymour, Wilfork, and Warren all come off on 3rd downs with Green and Wright usually going in as part of the Nickel package they use.

So, if BB was willing to pay Seymour what amounted to almost $10 mill a year, then I see no reason not to pay Wilfork $8 million a year. In fact, Wilfork at $8 million is probably better value.

While I agree DaBruinz, Seymour saw a lot more 3rd down last year than he had in a while. I think the swapping has more to do with Green and Wright keeping Seymour and Warren fresh than any knock on Seymour as a player.

 

[DaBruinz]

While I agree DaBruinz, Seymour saw a lot more 3rd down last year than he had in a while. I think the swapping has more to do with Green and Wright keeping Seymour and Warren fresh than any knock on Seymour as a player.

My comments weren't a knock on Seymour as a player. I think that, just like Seymour, Wilfork is pulled off on 3rd downs to keep him fresh since the Pats have not had a legitimate back-up to Wilfork since Keith Traylor was released.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Something for everyone to think about.

Seymour is just as much of a 2 down player as Wilfork. Seymour, Wilfork, and Warren all come off on 3rd downs with Green and Wright usually going in as part of the Nickel package they use.

So, if BB was willing to pay Seymour what amounted to almost $10 mill a year, then I see no reason not to pay Wilfork $8 million a year. In fact, Wilfork at $8 million is probably better value.

this is not true.....seymour moves inside on 3rd downs....he may come off when he's not 100%

 

[RayClay]

I don't understand this 2 down player logic. If you want your defensive players to play more downs, just remove an effective NT.

The Pats played plenty of extra downs with Steve Martin at the nose.

I'd be happy to have my nose tackle sit down at 3rd and long all day, what's the problem with that?

 

[tanked_as_usual]

The Pats are sticklers for having players complete their rookie contracts.

The Pats would gladly pay Wilfork 4 years for 32 million provided the four

years commenced in 2010. What they will not do is tear up the last

year of a rookie contract like Deon Branch's agent demanded. Seattle

did exactly that after they traded for Branch.

they did for seymour......they did for warren

 

[Don_the_patfan]

Everyone is replaceable. I love Wilfork, but is Bill really going to invest that type of money on a two-down player? This could get ugly. If we do end up losing him, I hope it's via trade and we get some draft picks.

That is a great idea. I say lets trade Brady, Moss, Welker for picks because everyone is replacable. It worked with Asante's replacement right? Who needs superstars lets just get every JAG available off the street playing here ..Super Bowl here we come.

I mean seriously you got to be choking on cool aid and taking Homerism to a whole new level to think that. You cant just replace players of that caliber. Wilfork is the Brady of our D, Pay the man. I am all for homerism and I trust BB but some of you here have some blind faith.

 

[letekro]

That is a great idea. I say lets trade Brady, Moss, Welker for picks because everyone is replacable. It worked with Asante's replacement right? Who needs superstars lets just get every JAG available off the street playing here ..Super Bowl here we come.

I mean seriously you got to be choking on cool aid and taking Homerism to a whole new level to think that. You cant just replace players of that caliber. Wilfork is the Brady of our D, Pay the man. I am all for homerism and I trust BB but some of you here have some blind faith.

Wouldn't it be prudent to see what Brace can do this year before shoveling out $30M for Wilfork? Vince is a great player, but if Brace can be 80% of Wilfork at 15% of the cost, I'm thinking BB we would consider letting VW walk...

 

[PatsChowder]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

I've never understood why we criticize these players for holding out? We don't criticize the veterans who made their money up front and then take pay cuts to go to a winning franchise. Winning first and getting paid second is unacceptable by the masses.

That beind said, I want Vince in a Pats uniform for a very long time. I'll be interested to see how this one turns out.

 

[Synovia]

In fact, Wilfork at $8 million is probably better value.

8M may be cheap.


The tag last year was just a tad over 6M.

Harris
6.03M -> 9.09M

Stroud (5.6M) -> Jenkins (6.4M)

Hampton
5.18M -> 6.6M

Haynesworth
7.25M-> 8.8M

Griffin (6.1M) -> P.Williams (8.4M)

So, assuming my math is right, and no one else jumped up into the range, the tag is going up about a million and a half, to 7.6



Great DTs cost LOTS of money.

 

[Synovia]

Wouldn't it be prudent to see what Brace can do this year before shoveling out $30M for Wilfork? Vince is a great player, but if Brace can be 80% of Wilfork at 15% of the cost, I'm thinking BB we would consider letting VW walk...

Talent is harder to find than cap space. ALL of the value is at the margin. So no, 80% of Wilfork at 15% of the cost may not be a better value. 95% at 15%, yeah. But Brace most likely isn't going to be 95% of Wilfork.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

If Wilfork wants $8 million a year, that is fine. Except that Seymour got over $10 million a year and until Haynesworth's new deal was the highest paid defensive player in the league on a per year basis (it was made to look lower since part of the agreement was that he fulfilled the final year of his rookie deal for immediate bonus money). In fact, Seymour is making more per year than Brady when you factor it in being a 3 year deal rather than a 4 year deal as it is portrayed.

I think Wilfork is a very valuable part of this defense, but I don't know if he is worth $10.5 million a year especially if the cap increases slow down in the next CBA. That is the biggest worry is how the cap will increase if there is a new CBA. I do think the Pats should pay Wilfork, but there is a limit where you gotta consider going elsewhere.

The Pats do have the franchise tag in their back pocket. Even with Haynesworth's deal, I think the tender number will be lower than $10 million for him, but I could be wrong. This offseason the franchise tender for DTs was $6 million. If it is, the Pats do have the leverage since Wilfork going into a season only with $6-8 million guaranteed for one year next year is a dangerous proposition considering he is looking at around $20 million guaranteed even in a modest deal. With the history of NTs breaking down later in their career, that is a risky proposition for Wilfork.

League sources told ESPN's Chris Mortensen that a $29 million "poison pill" in the fifth year of Haynesworth's contract effectively makes it a four-year deal worth $48 million. The Redskins would owe Haynesworth a lump sum of $29 million in salary and bonuses in 2013, the fifth year of the deal. It is unlikely the team will pay the full commitment of $100 million over seven years unless the contract is re-negotiated. Haynesworth will receive $41 million in guaranteed money. He will see $32M in the first 13 months.

What matters in these deals is guaranteed (including implicitly) money and the first 3 seasons. Seymour got $19M guaranteed (via option bonus language) on a 3 year $30M extension, Brady got $26.5M in signing and option bonus in the first two and took home $32M in the first 3 (vs. Seymour seeing that in 4 years). If Vince wants $24M guaranteed on an $8M average that's not an unreasonable deal depending on structure. AD essentially got that. Aside from cap space, the team would likely prefer that any Wilfork extension cover 5 years for amortization purposes.

But reading through this thread alone is the reason I cringed at what Reiss did yesterday. Might as well waive a red flag at the fickle masses. Not a fair approach to take vs. a good natured guy who has pretty much behaved as a team player in this situation.

 

[Wretch]

Wouldn't it be prudent to see what Brace can do this year before shoveling out $30M for Wilfork? Vince is a great player, but if Brace can be 80% of Wilfork at 15% of the cost, I'm thinking BB we would consider letting VW walk...

I agree 100%. Winning in the salary cap era requires a strong middle class core of players not superstars at 1 or 2 position then JAGS everywhere else(see the Redskins or Cowboys).

I am not saying I don't want them to resign VW, but someone with more football smarts than me, BB, needs to make a value assessment of VW versus the alternates, Ron Brace.

 

[letekro]

Talent is harder to find than cap space. ALL of the value is at the margin. So no, 80% of Wilfork at 15% of the cost may not be a better value. 95% at 15%, yeah. But Brace most likely isn't going to be 95% of Wilfork.

You're getting caught up in the percentages I used - my point is, you've just drafted a big body who was productive in college - you only have to pay him peanuts over the next four years - don't you want to see what he can do before you shell out huge money to a guy that plays the same position? Whatever the tipping point is - 80%, 95%, it's worth seeing if Brace can perform at that level. What do you lose by doing this? So VW will sulk for a while and miss OTAs, who cares? He will play this year and at a very high level, new contract or not.

 

[Jimke]

they did for seymour......they did for warren

Warren was re-signed early to a contract below market value. After

boycotting training camp for a couple of weeks, Seymour's contract

was sweetened by 1.7 million dollars. He was later given a three year

extension. I wonder if the extension was tied in with a written

promise not to franchise him when his contract was up?

 

[cartmen]

who says Vince is a 2 down player? He is at least a 3 down player and avg 5 takles a game for a system that doesnt reward its DL with stats. Seymour money is more than worth it and maybe the Pats are just waiting to see how these rooks work out in TC

 

[Don_the_patfan]

Wouldn't it be prudent to see what Brace can do this year before shoveling out $30M for Wilfork? Vince is a great player, but if Brace can be 80% of Wilfork at 15% of the cost, I'm thinking BB we would consider letting VW walk...

There is a flipside to that. What if Brace isn't it and Wilfork has one of his best seasons do you think he'll sign here for what he wants now or would $$ go up? If that is the case wouldn't it be prudent to sign him for less now?