Pay Gronk?

[RayClay]

Let me know an owner who honors every long term contract. If Amendola can cash in near the end of his career, imagine what we would have had to match for gronk in his prime.

 

[maineman209]

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

The thing is that the Pats can extend Gronk two years without incurring much in real cost increases (and maybe none at all) while saving potentially significant amounts of cap space in both 2018 & 2019 via converting portions of his 2018 & 2019 salaries to signing bonus - basically the same thing they've done with Brady a few times.

This doesn't necessarily give Gronk "more money", it just gives him more cash up front.

 

[dafoe2016]

Gronk cant be covered he is more polarizing than Rice and has been as dominating as Randy Moss.
Moss had a few off seasons Gronk has dominated every year hes been on the field.

I don't think the word "polarize" means what you think it means. And I wouldn't quite put Gronk in Moss's league as far as ability to dominate when he is 100%.

 

[Jangles]

The most interesting part of this thread is OP not knowing what polarizing means

 

[mgteich]

The thing is that the Pats can extend Gronk two years without incurring much in real cost increases (and maybe none at all) while saving potentially significant amounts of cap space in both 2018 & 2019 via converting portions of his 2018 & 2019 salaries to signing bonus - basically the same thing they've done with Brady a few times.

This doesn't necessarily give Gronk "more money", it just gives him more cash up front.

Why would an extension not incur real cost increases? Are you suggesting the Gronk extend for lower than market rates? As far as the cap, I agree that a new contract can save 2018 cap money. I don't see how you save 2019 cap money, unless there is a 2019 bonus. In any case, if the contract calls for market rates, there will be very large cap hits in 2020 and 2021 or lots of dead money.

I presume the you are guaranteeing Gronk's 2018 and 2019 salaries.

Actually the dead money would be exactly equal to the cap savings if Gronk retires after the 2019 season.

 

[maineman209]

Actually the dead money would be exactly equal to the cap savings if Gronk retires after the 2019 season.

This.

Hypothetically, the Pats could structure the deal with high salaries for 2020 & 2021 that would raise the APY to "market rate" values for, say, a top-15 WR, but then never actually have to pay those salaries. At the same time, it's possible that the accelerated cap hit for the remaining new signing bonus would hit the 2020 cap for $10M or even a bit less.

Potential new cash for Gronk in 2018 wouldn't all need to be entirely in the form of a fully-guaranteed signing bonus.

 

[mgteich]

why would Gronk sign?

This.

Hypothetically, the Pats could structure the deal with high salaries for 2020 & 2021 that would raise the APY to "market rate" values for, say, a top-15 WR, but then never actually have to pay those salaries. At the same time, it's possible that the accelerated cap hit for the remaining new signing bonus would hit the 2020 cap for $10M or even a bit less.

Potential new cash for Gronk in 2018 wouldn't all need to be entirely in the form of a fully-guaranteed signing bonus.

 

[patfanken]

Why would an extension not incur real cost increases? Are you suggesting the Gronk extend for lower than market rates? As far as the cap, I agree that a new contract can save 2018 cap money. I don't see how you save 2019 cap money, unless there is a 2019 bonus. In any case, if the contract calls for market rates, there will be very large cap hits in 2020 and 2021 or lots of dead money.

I presume you are guaranteeing Gronk's 2018 and 2019 salaries.

Actually, the dead money would be exactly equal to the cap savings if Gronk retires after the 2019 season.

I think the Pats have 3 options any of which can fill the need DEPENDING on where they think Gronk's head is at.

1. If they believe that the Gronk rumors about him getting excited about his life after football are true, then give him a 2-year deal that gives him a raise of a million or two to his base and incentives that gets him close to where he wants to be, but he's got to EARN them. After that, I'd ride him hard this year and give him every opportunity to earn all his incentives and then trade him to a WC team in the offseason. The "a year too early than a year too late" rule applies here.

2. If all this talk truly IS a tempest in a teapot, then you sign him to a 4-year deal, give him a big signing bonus that is spread over the 4 years and hope he can give y0u 3 more solid years, and be happy to eat a year's dead money hit for 3 good years of Gronk

3. If reality is somewhere in between, then repeat plan 2 only make it 3 years and hope you get 2 good years out of the deal.

 

[maineman209]

why would Gronk sign?

Opportunity for accelerated cash. Maybe add some incentive bonuses. Seems to me that it should be possible to structure an extension to be attractive enough to Gronk without doing significant damage to future cap finances.