Using Transition Tag on Vollmer or Talib

[1%er]

The market for Vollmer is very hard to gauge because he has a long history of injuries and Patriots OL are sometimes considered a product of the system on the open market.

The market for Talib is also very hard to gauge because of off the field problems, inconsistencies in performance and his inability to stay healthy.

My thought is to use the transition tag on one of these players. This would allows us to have a chance to match an offer and potentially scare away other teams from even considering one of them. If nobody reaches a contract with them we could retain Vollmer for 1 yr $8.560M or Talib for 1 yr $8.939M.

• A transition player designation gives the club a first-refusal right to match within seven days an offer sheet given to the player by another club after his contract expires. If the club matches, it retains the player. If it does not match, it receives no compensation. Transition players can be signed from March 3 through July 22."

• A transition player has received a minimum offer of the average of the top 10 salaries of last season at the player's position or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater.

 

[Gronkandez]

I would definitely transition tag Talib. Don't want to commit long-term to him but would definitely like him back on a one-year deal.

Can you use the Transition Tag and the Franchise Tag in the same season? I know there are some restrictions on the T.T. but I can't remember what they are.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

It does have the potential to let them test their market without allowing them to simply choose to relocate. On the other hand it sets a bar the team may not want to approach and it eliminates any compensation in trade possibility. Not sure the million dollar difference in Vollmer's case is worth the tradeoff, especially not if someone is interested in him as a LT. Don't see anyone offering Talib a long term deal absent protective language and inventivization. Maybe even a prove it deal with an option. If he's offered a straight up deal we would probably not match. And while it's still steeper than he's probably worth it's a substantial savings over the tag ($1.67M). Thing is Bill just gave up a 4th for him so it would likely sting to have that have been the price of a 5 and less than a quarter game rental in a season that ended in disappointment.

I think the better approach is to dangle a market deal to both that is option (prove it) driven right out of the gate. Sets up better against the flat cap (hits don't come until 2015 and beyond when cap will begin rising substantially and by then Mankins could be facing serious restructure or departing).

If you transition tag them your option to keep them is limited to exactly matching whatever terms they've been offered. If some team with a boatload of cap and little cash constructs a deal that is light on bonus money and heavily guaranteed or front loaded, no way you can match it even if the average isn't daunting. Frontloading or guarantees could in that way legally replace the poison pill clauses.

Teams also don't tend to want to get into it with transition guys unless they are pretty sure they can land or retain them. Otherwise you're left holding an empty bag for several days while other options come off the board. And in a way the same thing happens to the original team only they have no way of knowing if they will lose the player as late as July with no draft or FA options remaining to replace him.

With the franchise tag the player is either yours or he's gone on your terms (be that the prescribed ones or something less but still to your liking).

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I would definitely transition tag Talib. Don't want to commit long-term to him but would definitely like him back on a one-year deal.

Can you use the Transition Tag and the Franchise Tag in the same season? I know there are some restrictions on the T.T. but I can't remember what they are.

There were exceptions in the uncapped year, but those are gone. You can only tag one player be it franchize or transition. Transition tagging either doesn't remotely guarantee you a one year deal. Both will certainly see longer term offers and whether they are to their liking or not would be the issue. And if they were they would likely be deals you'd opt not to match. What the transition tag would do is tie up your cap perhaps for months with the possibility remaining you lose the player anyway after any other FA options or even the draft are long gone. At least with the franchize tag that really can't happen unless you are amenable to it happening.

 

[mayoclinic]

I think the transition tag is relatively worthless. It precludes you from using the franchise tag, it doesn't guarantee you any compensation if the player signs with another team, and only gives you the right to match, while still requiring a very hefty cap hit. Not worth it.

 

[PatsFan2]

With this overrated regular season Offense we have to let Vollmer walk. Vollmer's $$$ should go towards a legit outside threat.

 

[UofApatsfan]

There will definitely be a market for Vollmer. Unfortunately the more I look at it the more likely it is Vollmer walks. Regardless of his injury issues, there are several teams entering free agency with a lot of cap space and offensive lines that were a total abomination this year. The elite tackles like Clady and Long will get franchise tagged and be off the market which will put the 2nd tier ones like Vollmer at a premium.

 

[Sciz]

No point.

If a team doesn't make an offer to either, then the Pats are stuck overpaying a guy.
If a team does make an offer, then the Pats either have to let him go or be stuck overpaying.

 

[Gronkandez]

No point.

If a team doesn't make an offer to either, then the Pats are stuck overpaying a guy.
If a team does make an offer, then the Pats either have to let him go or be stuck overpaying.

I disagree. If you give Talib the Transition Tag, wouldn't it take a 1st rounder as compensation? (I think it used to be a 1st and a 3rd). I wouldn't mind overpaying Talib for one year. It's better than committing to him long term and I'd also be glad to get a 1st rounder for him

 

[Sciz]

I disagree. If you give Talib the Transition Tag, wouldn't it take a 1st rounder as compensation? (I think it used to be a 1st and a 3rd). I wouldn't mind overpaying Talib for one year. It's better than committing to him long term and I'd also be glad to get a 1st rounder for him

The transition tag gives no compensation, just the right to match an offer. The franchise tag requires giving up two firsts to sign a player, but I don't believe that's ever happened.

 

[Gronkandez]

The transition tag gives no compensation, just the right to match an offer. The franchise tag requires giving up two firsts to sign a player, but I don't believe that's ever happened.

Oh, well then I agree that it's pointless.

I believe I was thinking of the RFA tenders. Like the tender (2nd round?) that Hoyer got...before getting cut.

 

[goheels22002]

I think the transition tag is relatively worthless. It precludes you from using the franchise tag, it doesn't guarantee you any compensation if the player signs with another team, and only gives you the right to match, while still requiring a very hefty cap hit. Not worth it.

It really depends on the specific situation. The transition tag gives the team an opportunity to see what the market would pay and buy time before the signing deadline to either match or work out a longer term deal.

The transition tag would be interesting with Welker. You know they'll take a big cap hit if they re-sign him, but instead of bargaining with an agent, the Patriots would be playing chicken with other teams.

Two features I love about this tag are that the team can pull it back with no penalty if there are no offers in a reasonable amount of time, and the team that holds the rights to the player has to respond within 7 days to either match the offer or let the player go. That means that the offer has to be credible and something that the new team must be willing to take onto their salary cap.

Welker is perfect for the transition tag. The Patriots should tag him at the earliest possible date and give Welker ten days to go out and get a big offer for three or more years. If no one bites, they can make an offer based on the lack of market for his services. If a team makes an offer, the market sets his value. The Patriots meanwhile can set their limits in money and years, and match or walk away. Maybe they get Welker for less than they budgeted.

The transition tag is a much better system than the franchise tag which sets a number for one season that is definitely a budget-buster and puts you back in the same situation next year. With the transition, multi-year deals are possible.

 

[Deus Irae]

The transition tag gives no compensation, just the right to match an offer. The franchise tag requires giving up two firsts to sign a player, but I don't believe that's ever happened.

I agree with your position on the transition tag, but the franchise tag price has been paid before. Sean Gilbert and Joey Galloway spring to mind....

 

[goheels22002]

Teams also don't tend to want to get into it with transition guys unless they are pretty sure they can land or retain them. Otherwise you're left holding an empty bag for several days while other options come off the board. And in a way the same thing happens to the original team only they have no way of knowing if they will lose the player as late as July with no draft or FA options remaining to replace him.

The difference with the transition tag is that you're only left holding the bag for 7 days. The team with the rights to the player has to respond within a week. the other thing is the team with the rights can pull the transition tag back if there are no offers. If a player cannot get a decent offer within your time frame, he's forced to the negotiating table.