Ozzie losing at the poker table with Suggs?

[B-more Ravor]

Suggs would be an idiot to do anything but play under a contract that pays him $17MM for a year. His trade value would be crushed by the size of the contract, cause whoever takes him on would likely either have to pay him $17MM+ next year, then pay him a $30MM+ bonus the following season, or would have to pay him around a $40MM bonus next season.

Perhaps, but just because the Franchise tender calls for a $17M one year salary, that doesn't mean that a new long term contract would require a yearly salary of $17M.

And, it's unlikely that anyone would pay him $17M for even one year, so, in theory at least, they would have him find a team, agree to a deal and then work out a trade with that team. He'd then sign the tender and once the trade is completed, sign his new deal that he had already agreed to.

Maybe, it wouldn't work, but I think they've got to at least explore the option before just simply letting him walk for nothing.

[srobert96]

The only one at risk here is Suggs. After this year he will have made 19mil over two years. If he were to take the contract with the 31mill guaranteed he would have made no less than 40 mill. If he blows out a knee or has any other type of serious injury he is going to lose out on a minimum of 20 mil.

The Ravens do have all of the cards in this situation because as it stands next year is going to be an uncapped year. The Ravens will definitely Franchise him next year. They can try and trade him or keep him suck up the extra cost as it wont affect them signing any other players because there will be no salary cap.

The only way Suggs gets the leverage is if by some miracle the there is a labor agreement with a cap prior to next season.

[jonboy79]

Perhaps, but just because the Franchise tender calls for a $17M one year salary, that doesn't mean that a new long term contract would require a yearly salary of $17M.

And, it's unlikely that anyone would pay him $17M for even one year, so, in theory at least, they would have him find a team, agree to a deal and then work out a trade with that team. He'd then sign the tender and once the trade is completed, sign his new deal that he had already agreed to.

Maybe, it wouldn't work, but I think they've got to at least explore the option before just simply letting him walk for nothing.

I see what you are saying, but... Once you tag someone at a number, it seems that you agree they are worth that in a one year type of situation, and by extension, his agent will be using that as leverage for his long term deal.
I think this is part of why Suggs was chosen to be tagged this year. $10m for him on an annual basis is reasonable, where as Brown for $8m and RayLew at $11m were not. I'm sure there are other reasons as well, but it seems to me the team would not be intersted in either of those players at an average contract value equal to the tag, where with Suggs they might be.

So, no, it does not mean they would have to pay him $17m per year on a contract extension, but it seems liek ti would be hard to get him to accept much less once you have already agreed he is worth keeping at that number, if only for a year.

[B-more Ravor]

So, no, it does not mean they would have to pay him $17m per year on a contract extension, but it seems liek ti would be hard to get him to accept much less once you have already agreed he is worth keeping at that number, if only for a year.

When the average salaries for the position are in line with the tag - like the examples you mentioned, I would agree. However, $17M is a totally unrealistic average salary for a OLB/DE (is it realistic for any position?).

As such, unless we're talking about the Skins, I don't see anyone paying that.

It would all then depend on whether Suggs wants to play chicken and risk injury versus a long term deal. So far - for one season, at least - it's worked out for him.

[jonboy79]

When the average salaries for the position are in line with the tag - like the examples you mentioned, I would agree. However, $17M is a totally unrealistic average salary for a OLB/DE (is it realistic for any position?).

As such, unless we're talking about the Skins, I don't see anyone paying that.

It would all then depend on whether Suggs wants to play chicken and risk injury versus a long term deal. So far - for one season, at least - it's worked out for him.

Peppers, Cassell.... both getting paid that this year...

Unrealistic or not, once you pony that money up(or at least place a tag so that you are bound to paying it, if the player so desires to stick it to you) and your negotiation power is gone.

Honestly, if he won't sign a reasonable deal before July 15th, I'd let him go at the end of the season, with no tag, no negotiations, and simply accept our 3rd comp the following year. Suggs is "BARELY" worth $10m, if that. He's a good starter, not much more then that. Harrison has been a significantly better player goign on two years now, and signed a far smaller deal then Suggs was reportedly offerred. He does not want to be a Raven. Not with that attitude.

[purplepoe]

Peppers, Cassell.... both getting paid that this year...

Unrealistic or not, once you pony that money up(or at least place a tag so that you are bound to paying it, if the player so desires to stick it to you) and your negotiation power is gone.

Honestly, if he won't sign a reasonable deal before July 15th, I'd let him go at the end of the season, with no tag, no negotiations, and simply accept our 3rd comp the following year. Suggs is "BARELY" worth $10m, if that. He's a good starter, not much more then that. Harrison has been a significantly better player goign on two years now, and signed a far smaller deal then Suggs was reportedly offerred. He does not want to be a Raven. Not with that attitude.

Peppers and Cassel are getting 17 and almost 15, respectively, because they are franchised. Neither is on a long term deal at an annual salary at those numbers.

It was "reported" awhile ago that Cassel was about to sign a 6 yr/36 million deal. He won't sniff 15 million a year on a long term deal.

If Suggs somehow gets franchised again next year at 17 million, I fail to see how that translates into him thinking he would get a long term deal at 17 million a year. Being tagged for a 3rd year straight would be a first and in turn would skew the one year tender value big time.

PP

[B-more Ravor]

Peppers and Cassel are getting 17 and almost 15, respectively, because they are franchised. Neither is on a long term deal at an annual salary at those numbers.

It was "reported" awhile ago that Cassel was about to sign a 6 yr/36 million deal. He won't sniff 15 million a year on a long term deal.

If Suggs somehow gets franchised again next year at 17 million, I fail to see how that translates into him thinking he would get a long term deal at 17 million a year. Being tagged for a 3rd year straight would be a first and in turn would skew the one year tender value big time.

PP

What he said....... :D

[jonboy79]

Peppers and Cassel are getting 17 and almost 15, respectively, because they are franchised. Neither is on a long term deal at an annual salary at those numbers.

It was "reported" awhile ago that Cassel was about to sign a 6 yr/36 million deal. He won't sniff 15 million a year on a long term deal.

If Suggs somehow gets franchised again next year at 17 million, I fail to see how that translates into him thinking he would get a long term deal at 17 million a year. Being tagged for a 3rd year straight would be a first and in turn would skew the one year tender value big time.

PP

Except that Cassell and Peppers haven't signed deals, I am speculating, that at least PART of that reason is the fact that the player KNOWS that the team values them an obscene ammount of money this year. If the team did not feel they were worth that dollar figure, they shouldn't have tagged them.
These players have no incentive to accept reasonable long term deals. Once they were tendered at obscene levels, they have all the juice. They now have an agreed upon value from which to start.

[purplepoe]

Except that Cassell and Peppers haven't signed deals, I am speculating, that at least PART of that reason is the fact that the player KNOWS that the team values them an obscene ammount of money this year. If the team did not feel they were worth that dollar figure, they shouldn't have tagged them.
These players have no incentive to accept reasonable long term deals. Once they were tendered at obscene levels, they have all the juice. They now have an agreed upon value from which to start.

If they don't tag them the guy can walk.

Franchising a guy doesn't mean you value him at that dollar value. It's about keeping a player that won't agree to whatever long term deal you offer.

Nobody is saying Suggs is gonna accept a "reasonable" long term deal if you mean something under market value as he's viewed as a high priced guy. However, what I am saying is that the franchise tender number isn't a barometer or starting point for negotiating a deal with a franchised player. They are separate entities IMO. Do you really think Cassel's agent is even thinking about asking for a long term deal at 15 million a year?

But what he is probably asking for (and Peppers for sure is asking for) is more than those numbers in terms of a bonus along with the security of a long term deal.

And when you are a guy like Suggs who could potentially be franchised for a 3rd year at 18 million, you are in a whole new realm. Just because the CBA has those provisions built in to say a player franchised for the 3rd year gets that high a tender doesn't mean an agent or player can dictate that that is where negotiations start.

Not IMO anyway.

PP

[psuasskicker]

If we don't sign him by the July deadline I wouldn't be opposed to a trade with Carolina for Peppers.

Any team who we traded him to would have a long term extension already agreed upon with Suggs, they wouldn't be keeping him under the franchise tag for that year.

That wouldn't change his contract demands.

Perhaps, but just because the Franchise tender calls for a $17M one year salary, that doesn't mean that a new long term contract would require a yearly salary of $17M.

I didn't say it would. The point is, Suggs can get $17MM for signing the tender and staying with the Ravens and then sign a $31MM bonus deal for around $10MM a year in total compensation, or sign a $31MM bonus deal for around $10MM a year in total compensation that day. Which is [obviously] much better for him?

If he's willing to risk a long term deal for $10MM this season, why on earth would he sign a long term deal when he can get $17MM next year? Unless he can get a shit-ton more money signing the long term than he would the following season?

Point being, I highly doubt we'll franchise him next year, and if we do, I highly doubt he'll sign a long term deal rather than play for the $17MM. That would make him near impossible to trade.

- C -

[B-more Ravor]

I didn't say it would. The point is, Suggs can get $17MM for signing the tender and staying with the Ravens and then sign a $31MM bonus deal for around $10MM a year in total compensation, or sign a $31MM bonus deal for around $10MM a year in total compensation that day. Which is [obviously] much better for him?

If he's willing to risk a long term deal for $10MM this season, why on earth would he sign a long term deal when he can get $17MM next year? Unless he can get a shit-ton more money signing the long term than he would the following season?

Perhaps, but I guess it all comes down to how much Suggs is willing to risk.

A long term deal brings with it more than just the guaranteed money because - actually, because of that guaranteed money - the player is virtually uncuttable (see McGahee, Willis) which guarantees that a lot of the contract will have to be fulfilled, otherwise the acceleration of bonus money would be just too much for the team to take. In the past, we've already seen where they weren't willing or able to release players like McGahee or, for injury reasons, McCrary and Boulware, and continued to pay them because their contract were such that it was cheaper to keep them.

With a bonus of $30M+ over 6 or 7 years, it's going to be a long time before a team could part ways with Suggs, thereby essentially guaranteeing a lot of his base salaries as well.

But, in the end, I guess it will all come down to Suggs' risk tolerance.....

[jonboy79]

If they don't tag them the guy can walk.

Franchising a guy doesn't mean you value him at that dollar value. It's about keeping a player that won't agree to whatever long term deal you offer.

Nobody is saying Suggs is gonna accept a "reasonable" long term deal if you mean something under market value as he's viewed as a high priced guy. However, what I am saying is that the franchise tender number isn't a barometer or starting point for negotiating a deal with a franchised player. They are separate entities IMO. Do you really think Cassel's agent is even thinking about asking for a long term deal at 15 million a year?

But what he is probably asking for (and Peppers for sure is asking for) is more than those numbers in terms of a bonus along with the security of a long term deal.

And when you are a guy like Suggs who could potentially be franchised for a 3rd year at 18 million, you are in a whole new realm. Just because the CBA has those provisions built in to say a player franchised for the 3rd year gets that high a tender doesn't mean an agent or player can dictate that that is where negotiations start.

Not IMO anyway.

PP

Then let him walk, that's why they have comp picks.
Yes it does. It means you are willing to pay that player that ammount for a one year deal. How does it mean anythign besides that? If you weren't willing to pay that much, you would not slap the tag on him.
Reasonable to me, is below what he has reportedly been offerred and turned down. He is simply NOT the player that Jared Allen is, and turned down that kind of money. WOW.
I absolutely, positively think that the tag has a LOT to do with why Cassel is nto signed. Noone is goign to sign him to Romo type deal yet, heck his tagged salary is likely higher then you would want to give him in bonus, but again, you have traded for him at that number, so you are stuck with the fact that the player knows you will pay him that to play on eyear. He'd be an absolute MORON to sign a deal for under 10-12m per year with under $30 in guaranteed money. As a team, they are stupid for being in the position they are, as I wouldn't have guaranteed the guy mroe then $10m on a 5-6 year deal, but they are stuck getting a one year tryout due to the stupid tag.

Suggs is OBVIOUSLY asking for Haynesworth money as it is($14m per year three year average) if he has a good year again, and gets tagged at $17m, and there is no cap, what makes you think he would ask for any less then %17m per?

The tag number absolutely plays into negotiations. I don't understand how you think it can't?