Reiss: Mankins demands trade, will not sign RFA tender

[Mike the Brit]

They made that mistake with Deion, not gonna happen again. Because once you give that permission to the player you are essentially bound to trade him regardless of compensation or suitability of destination. Tannenbaum could offer a 4th...and a phony one year deal that would bridge the gap from Faneca to Ducasse and when we said no way Mankins could file a grievance... Had Seattle not stepped up Branch was going to NY. Facing a potential lockout in 2011, not sure the offers would be paletable. Belichick was trying to force Branch in, and he ended up handing him his ticket out of town. They are more likely therefore to play this out realizing he has to show up at some point and there is always the possibility they can tag and trade him absent or following a lockout in 2011 because if they get Brady extended they have no one else to tag.

I surely hope so -- for EXACTLY the reasons you state.

 

[Calciumee]

Is Mankins a good player? Yes.

Is Mankins irreplaceable? No.

I don't think Mankins acting like a d**k, and wanting to leave, will affect us that much. He was a mean and aggressive player, but I am sure BB knows what to do.

 

[plk]

If (1) Logan Mankins pushed to negotiate a long-term contract a year ago when he expected to be a free agent at this point, (2) he was put off and reassured by Kraft that the long-term contract would happen this year, and (3) the Patriots are using the fact that he is now a RFA in the negotiations, then I don't blame Mankins for being very angry and feeling that Kraft behaved dishonestly.

I would be very disappointed in the Patriots organization and Kraft if the above is an accurate representation of the situation.

 

[Fencer]

If (1) Logan Mankins pushed to negotiate a long-term contract a year ago when he expected to be a free agent at this point, (2) was put off and reassured by Kraft that the long-term contract would happen this year, and (3) the Patriots are using the fact that he is now a RFA in the negotiations, then I don't blame Mankins for being very angry and feeling that Kraft behaved dishonestly.

I would be very disappointed in the Patriots organization and Kraft if the above is an accurate representation of the situation.

I'm not disappointed at all. The CBA rules are what they are.

Mankins was offered many millions of dollars. If he's unlucky under the terms of a collective bargaining agreement that he's party to that he didn't get even a few more millions, boo hoo hoo hoo.

 

[Deus Irae]

No it wouldn't.. His status is determined by this CBA, not the new one. Since he doesn't get credit for the year if he holds out beyond week 10, then he'd still be considered an RFA.

Yes, it would. Now, do we keep playing this game of back and forth?

 

[plk]

I'm not disappointed at all. The CBA rules are what they are.

Mankins was offered many millions of dollars. If he's unlucky under the terms of a collective bargaining agreement that he's party to that he didn't get even a few more millions, boo hoo hoo hoo.

The point is that Kraft may have given Mankins the clear impression that it would not be to Mankins disadvantage to wait.

The Patriots have negotiated long-term contracts a year early for other players. If Mankins was put off simply so that he would be at a disadvantage, he has very good reason to be angry particularly if he was given the opposite impression.

 

[mgcolby]

Is it a coincidence that over the past two days we have seen a few "new" members all of whom are anti-Pats FO and pro-Mankins?

Illegal Contact and now PLK? What do moron trolls get out of this BS?

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

If (1) Logan Mankins pushed to negotiate a long-term contract a year ago when he expected to be a free agent at this point, (2) was put off and reassured by Kraft that the long-term contract would happen this year, and (3) the Patriots are using the fact that he is now a RFA in the negotiations, then I don't blame Mankins for being very angry and feeling that Kraft behaved dishonestly.

I would be very disappointed in the Patriots organization and Kraft if the above is an accurate representation of the situation.

I would be disappointed if Mankins or his agent isn't bright enough to see the situation for what it is.

Despite the trend of escalating salaries at Guard in the NFL the last few years, He was NEVER gonna get "highest paid" at this position in NE. We won SB(s) with jag's at this position in Andruzzi and Compton. It traditionally isn't a super value position here. It's nice to have a good one in Mankins, but he's not good enough to break the bank on. He HAS to know that.

He was given (what seems) like a very respectable offer at that position (on the order of 7M a year). Barring the details coming out that its was less then reasonably structures, that is offering more than what this franchise has traditionally assigned the value to that position. High end (top 5) $$ in the league.

Mankins is nuts if he thinks that he has "out-played" his rookie contract to the level Evans did. He was a first rounder that was EXPECTED to play and develop as he did. Evans was taken as a prospect flyer in the 4th and he's developed into every bit as good a Mankins (even better actually). It's unrealistic to expect an inflated contract from us to the extend that Evans got in NO where he actually FAR outplayed his contract.

You don't think EVERY other team doesn't know this. Mankins grandstanding, whining and trade demands are doing him no favors. Teams will toss low-ball offers out there like "2018 2nd rounder and a bag of footballs", simply because that is the position he forced us into. It's fine if he wants to enter the "feed my family" club of ex-Patriots that have gone on to mediocracy on other teams, but he's doing NOTHING for his reputation by acting like a D!CK now (when he never has before).

Patriots are smart not to blow there wad on a "quality" guard, because they have FAR MORE important "Franchise" needs to address at higher valued positions.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Wilfork is arguably the best NT in the NFL. Mankins isn't the best guard in the NFL (although probably top 5). You'd assume you'd pay them accordingly and what the market is set at. 7 mil per seems very fair and reasonable (given the 8.1 mil per ceiling) if reported as true.

I look at this differently. They had to find a way to keep this guy; the OL is already old by NFL standards and Mankins was an anchor for the next several seasons. We're all just debating numbers that reporters are providing, but, if those numbers are right, my own view is that this was important enough for the Pats to figure out how to work with that extra million, or part of it.

We don't know what happened here. Mankins is young and aggressive; he clearly said some things that he shouldn't have, but we've all been young and I at least will confess to saying some things about my work environment when I was in my 20's that I certainly wouldn't say today if I had to do it over.

I just don't see how this works out well for the Pats right now.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Is it a coincidence that over the past two days we have seen a few "new" members all of whom are anti-Pats FO and pro-Mankins?

Illegal Contact and now PLK? What do moron trolls get out of this BS?

Attention like that?

 

[TBradyOwnsYou]

I'm sad we couldn't come to an agreement, but I am somewhat disgusted by Mankin's apparent attitude towards it. The best I hope for now is we can trade him soon for something of value and move on.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

They did. He wanted more than Wilfork. Not gonna happen... And a market isn't a market unless you are a UFA, and even then you don't overpay based on what the market has done. Haynesworth is living proof of that. Not all position players are equal or play equally significant positions based on surrounding talent and scheme. It took a couple of seasons for NO to build an offense that could maximize Brees skills while minimizing his lack of ideal stature. Maybe there the LG was the lynchpin. Mankins has been a solid contributor here, but he's isn't a difference maker. Brady won with less talent, and while he set records on Mankins watch those had a lot more to do with Moss stunning the league on arrival coming off a lackluster couple of seasons than dramatically better blocking all of a sudden. In fact blocking was an issue at the end of that season and it's remaind issue due to maddening inconsistency throughout Mankins tenure here. You can blame that on Neal's durability, but if Mankins success is tied to Neal's availability to play what does that tell you...

All fair points. But I don't want to find out the answer to some of them the hard way.

At the end of the day, if we're thinking about another run while Tommy is still healthy and on the right side of 35 (and how I wish I still were ), I'm concerned that Mankins is just too important a piece of the puzzle.

I hope I'm wrong. TB was sacked just 16 times last year; of the elite qb's, only Manning went down less often (10). Brees was sacked 20 times, Warner 24, Eli (ok, "quasi elite"), 30, Favre 34. I know that there are different Offenses, yada, yada, but, after "that" SB and the Pollard hit, the line was told to protect the Franchise last year and it did the job with Mankins taking his blind side.

Sometimes I think the "at risk" has to play a role in and even drive how we evaluate a player or situation. This is one of them.

 

[plk]

Is it a coincidence that over the past two days we have seen a few "new" members all of whom are anti-Pats FO and pro-Mankins?

Illegal Contact and now PLK? What do moron trolls get out of this BS?

For the record, I am not a new member. I don't post very often because the quality of the discussions is such that I would in general rather not be part of them. This opinion is in the process of being strongly reinforced.

I am a big admirer of the Patriots organization, and I believe that they try to treat their players fairly. I am routinely exasperated by the people who pick at every decision that BB makes and who claim that the Patriots are cheap. That is why I am upset at the "possibility" that Mankins response was justified.

Actually, as usual, we don't really know anything about what has happened. That does not, however, slow the discussion down.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

I look at this differently. They had to find a way to keep this guy; the OL is already old by NFL standards and Mankins was an anchor for the next several seasons. We're all just debating numbers that reporters are providing, but, if those numbers are right, my own view is that this was important enough for the Pats to figure out how to work with that extra million, or part of it.

We don't know what happened here. Mankins is young and aggressive; he clearly said some things that he shouldn't have, but we've all been young and I at least will confess to saying some things about my work environment when I was in my 20's that I certainly wouldn't say today if I had to do it over.

I just don't see how this works out well for the Pats right now.

The Pats will be fine. Mankins gets hurt if anyone.

I think Kazur moving over will work. He has power, but lack athleticism to be really good at T in this scheme, but G demands less, so it might work. Plus, lots of things to do scheme wise to help out. A nice stable of TE in-house should compliment this. I think the FO might be a little prepared for this by now.

Mankins is young and aggressive and that is one of my biggest complaints as a player. For an inside linemen, he gets nabbed for far to many "holding" calls. It might have hurt him here now too.

The grandstanding and huffing and puffing will really do nothing for him. Do you really think that teams are gonna line up to break the bank on a good, but not great, Guard? No chance. Not in this atmosphere.

I hope I'm wrong. TB was sacked just 16 times last year; of the elite qb's, only Manning went down less often (10). Brees was sacked 20 times, Warner 24, Eli (ok, "quasi elite"), 30, Favre 34. I know that there are different Offenses, yada, yada, but, after "that" SB and the Pollard hit, the line was told to protect the Franchise last year and it did the job with Mankins taking his blind side..

Ummm, lets credit QB. Sacks are at least 50/50. TB was really limited with what he could do last year and poor line play had alot to do with that. Mankins too. He got more then his fair share of steamrollings.

 

[Deus Irae]

For the record, I am not a new member. I don't post very often because the quality of the discussions is such that I would in general rather not be part of them. This opinion is in the process of being strongly reinforced.

I am a big admirer of the Patriots organization, and I believe that they try to treat their players fairly. I am routinely exasperated by the people who pick at every decision that BB makes and who claim that the Patriots are cheap. That is why I am upset at the "possibility" that Mankins response was justified.

Actually, as usual, we don't really know anything about what has happened. That does not, however, slow the discussion down.

I've been trying to get that point across. Unfortunately, the groupthink's got way too much group, and not enough think, going on right now.

 

[TriplecHamp]

I say he's worth a first.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

If (1) Logan Mankins pushed to negotiate a long-term contract a year ago when he expected to be a free agent at this point, (2) was put off and reassured by Kraft that the long-term contract would happen this year, and (3) the Patriots are using the fact that he is now a RFA in the negotiations, then I don't blame Mankins for being very angry and feeling that Kraft behaved dishonestly.

I would be very disappointed in the Patriots organization and Kraft if the above is an accurate representation of the situation.

For the record, I am not a new member. I don't post very often because the quality of the discussions is such that I would in general rather not be part of them. This opinion is in the process of being strongly reinforced.

I am a big admirer of the Patriots organization, and I believe that they try to treat their players fairly. I am routinely exasperated by the people who pick at every decision that BB makes and who claim that the Patriots are cheap. That is why I am upset at the "possibility" that Mankins response was justified.

Actually, as usual, we don't really know anything about what has happened. That does not, however, slow the discussion down.

That's absolutely true....... But this IS an discussion board. Speculation without the facts, both reasoned and unreasoned, is what any discussion board is about. If you don't think that the quality of a particular discussion is particularly good or bad don't participate in it.

Now, addressing your first comment. I think that your 1, 2 don't equal 3.

The Patriots are under no obligation to extend a player just cuz he want's it. He wanted it, and Kraft put him off and said it'd be addressed this year....... and that was in the works, with what looks like a fair to very fair deal for him (yeah, I know the details aren't all out, but still). 7M ave. over the long term is probably slightly higher then the FO values that position (G), or at least have in the past. So for them, they are offering good money (top 5) to a player they value.

The entire marketplace changed with the Evans deal tho. The Patriots have been in the 7M range from the start and taking the Evans deal out of the equation, it's certainly not a "disrespectful" contract. It's prolly worth more then I think he is worth. I don't think they are working the RFA angle to hard against him. They assigned a value to Mankins, the his position as it relates to the organization and determined it was worth what appears to be a long-term, extension fitting of an elite (top 5) Guard in this league. What's dishonest about that?

The Evans deal came along and effed it all up. You can't blame NE FO for not changing there value system and organizational priorities because NO decided to give an inflated extension to Evans that fits there organizational structure and value system. Teams have different priorities and values.

Why should the front office "re-access" their current valuations of player and position to accommodate Mankins? They haven't in the past and no reasonable expectation they would here.

 

[condon84]

I doubt anyone's gonna give up their first round pick for him. He's good, but I think some overate him quite a bit. When Stephen Neal is healthy, I think he's a better guard (not that that is a detriment to Mankins). I'll be happy with a second round pick.

 

[plk]

That's absolutely true....... But this IS an discussion board. Speculation without the facts, both reasoned and unreasoned, is what any discussion board is about. If you don't think that the quality of a particular discussion is particularly good or bad don't participate in it.

What you say about discussion boards is unfortunately true. I keep hoping to run across one with a different attitude.

You have hit the nail on the head about why I don't post very often.

By the way, the boldface was added by another poster. Not that I object to it.

 

[DefenseRules]

I have refrained from involving myself in this discussion, but I have enjoyed the back and forth arguements that I've read. This entire thing confuses me.
The Pats made an offer, DURING THE UNCAPPED YEAR, as they told him. Mankins himself stated that was what he was told by the team. So, what exactly is he upset about? That is the missing piece? There is more to the story, IMO. He has publicly accused the team of lying to him. What did they lie about? Something had to have been said to make him so angry. There is no replacement on the roster for Mankins. WE NEED HIM! Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail.