Pay Gronk?

[RayClay]

Gronk in his prime hasn't been NEARLY as dominant as Rice or Moss in their primes. Not even close.

Apple, orange? Compare.

 

[RayClay]

Of course he's replaceable. NE won 3 SBs without him. Hell, they won a SB with Jerome Freaking Wiggins at TE.

Yes, he played 14 games last year, but he wasn't really very good for the first few. There's no way to spin Gronk as being particularly reliable in terms of missing games.

Travis Kelce has missed 1 game in his four year career. Greg Olsen played 9 straight seasons without missing a game. Jimmy Graham has missed 7 games in 8 seasons. Ben Watson has missed 10 games in the last 10 seasons. Gronk has missed 26 games in 8 seasons.

Addendum: He's under contract for two more seasons. Do you really see him lasting much beyond that?

We've stooped to comparing Wiggins and Gronk?

 

[RayClay]

How much a year are we paying a small, block only TE cause that's all we could find after Marty left? Poster~ "Greatest tight end in NFL history who has been way underpaid compared to market value? Nah, I'll pass. We might find a better one in the draft."

 

[RayClay]

By the way, I hope some player on a ten year contract demands his team "honors the contract" after he's cut in year three. He'll be laughed out of the building.

 

[Soliel]

I don't think paying Gronk more money is the answer.

This is true. There is a universal truth. You can’t purchase allegiance.

It’s like trying to pay someone to be jewish

 

[Gronk]

This is true. There is a universal truth. You can’t purchase allegiance.

It’s like trying to pay someone to be jewish

Tim Whatley converted just for the jokes

 

[Gronk]

Addendum: He's under contract for two more seasons. Do you really see him lasting much beyond that?

Probably not, given his apparent recent mulling of retirement. But as others mentioned that doesn’t mean converting some money to bonus, adding a year or two, and putting some money in his pocket now is a bad idea.

All the other comments about Gronk and other TEs are factually true, so I can’t argue that way. But all things are relative, and he is still the best at his position, can be for he next few years, and the team has a lot of question marks at WR and HB, so I think keeping Gronk (and by extension, Tom) happy with what they’re heading into 2018 with has some value.

 

[RobertWeathers]

This is true. There is a universal truth. You can’t purchase allegiance.

It’s like trying to pay someone to be jewish

My wife is a jew and you need to pay her to spend time with some of her relatives

 

[BUSTAMOVE]

Gronk's per game production has been consistently in the top ten among all receivers. Plus, he run-blocks on pulls and traps as well as some starting OG.

Meanwhile, over the past couple seasons, WRs who have been far less productive catching the ball (and who can't block like Gronk) have been getting contracts paying them up to 50% more than Gronk, with guaranteed cash averaging around $18M. Gronk has no further guaranteed cash coming to him on his current contract.

If Gronk and his agent are arguing for a restructure that increases his guaranteed cash, they have some pretty good justification.

I fully agree with his production and he is a great teammate. I was only suggesting that when a player with a injury past signs a contract for security. He must honor it. If he had an injured loss of season he sure as heck would not be giving money back. If we increase his pay this year through incentives or whatever I will lose no sleep. Love the guy. But you then have opened a can of worms for every player to play the same game with their contract.

 

[IllegalContact]

you try to fix the current ailment in a reasonable manner......if it's about money, you make an adjustment, guarantee a little more.......if it's more than that, you look into maximizing the return on your asset......but after moving cooks, if you move gronk, better draft a QB high because the day brady says 'F this, I am done' will be sooner rather than later.

replacing proven vets with draft picks are not what's going to keep brady in the game

either way, draft goedert or geisicki to cover your bets

 

[maineman209]

I don't think paying Gronk more money is the answer.

I don't even know for sure what the question is, anymore.

However, if the question is money related, then paying him roughly the same overall while increasing his guaranteed cash intake and providing incentives that could allow him to earn a bit more might be an answer.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don't even know for sure what the question is, anymore.

However, if the question is money related, then paying him roughly the same overall while increasing his guaranteed cash intake and providing incentives that could allow him to earn a bit more might be an answer.

Me neither.

I was essentially responding the speculation that Gronk is squawking about his contract and how his voice and brand is suppressed by the BB secret police.

If those are all true, I don't think throwing another $1m at him fixes it.

 

[maineman209]

But you then have opened a can of worms for every player to play the same game with their contract.

Many already have. For years.

And, the fact is that the Pats already added $5.5M in incentive bonuses to Gronk's $5M 2017 salary - incentives that he earned as "new cash".

Also, the Pats just recently surprised Chung with a 2-year extension that increased his guaranteed cash.

IOW, it's not unprecedented at all.

 

[maineman209]

Me neither.

I was essentially responding the speculation that Gronk is squawking about his contract and how his voice and brand is suppressed by the BB secret police.

If those are all true, I don't think throwing another $1m at him fixes it.

A repeat of the $5.5M in incentive bonuses the Pats gave him in 2017 might fix it.

There are a number of different ways that the Pats may be able to increase Gronk's pay to Gronk's satisfaction without crewing themselves in the process. And, it's not as if making such contract adjustments would be unprecedented for them.

 

[RobertWeathers]

A repeat of the $5.5M in incentive bonuses the Pats gave him in 2017 might fix it.

There are a number of different ways that the Pats may be able to increase Gronk's pay to Gronk's satisfaction without crewing themselves in the process. And, it's not as if making such contract adjustments would be unprecedented for them.

If money is the issue, i'm confident they can find a money figure which works for both sides.

I just don't think money is the only issue.

 

[mgteich]

Adding $1-1.5 for a 1 year extension would be great for the patriots. This would be done if both parties expect ground to retire after 2 years. Otherwise, this is nowhere near enough.
If Grnkhopes to play for 5 years like Brady, he'd want guaranteed market based 3rd year money.

Throwing him an extra 1-1.5m this year in exchange for adding on a year to the deal (making it 3 more seasons) shouldn’t be that big of a deal for a player who has the opportunity to go down as the best TE to ever play the game. This isn’t exactly rocket science.

To take it a step further, it’s instrumental in keeping a certain pissed off QB happy, and that goes a long way towards improving our odds over the next 2-3 years, too.

 

[maust]

Love the guy. But you then have opened a can of worms for every player to play the same game with their contract.

Gronk is not 'every player' and the other players knows it. Exceptions are made for exceptional players. To paraphrase Orwell "All players are created equal, some are just more equal than others."

 

[JarOfMayo51]

Giving Gronk more money would not be at the top of my priority list. They restructured him last year to add additional incentives and provide that added security he wanted after coming off of multiple years with injury

The ink is barely dry on that deal and we have other pressing needs all over the roster. We can circle back around to Gronk at a later date, the worst he can do is retire

 

[Soliel]

My wife is a jew and you need to pay her to spend time with some of her relatives

I hear ya. I have a doctor who’s Jewish. You can’t talk him into or out of anything

 

[RayClay]

I fully agree with his production and he is a great teammate. I was only suggesting that when a player with a injury past signs a contract for security. He must honor it. If he had an injured loss of season he sure as heck would not be giving money back. If we increase his pay this year through incentives or whatever I will lose no sleep. Love the guy. But you then have opened a can of worms for every player to play the same game with their contract.

But teams don't need to? I would say the Patriots got a great deal. He could have held the team up every 2-3 years too.