Results 1 to 12 of 71
Thread: $10 million a Year for Kruger
Hybrid View
-
$10 million a Year for Kruger
Jason Cole who is one of the better NFL media guys out there thinks Kruger will get the $9 to $10 million a year he's looking for. It won't be the Ravens signing him either. Not anything we weren't expecting but it's interesting to hear it from a reliable source.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...ive-for-ravens
On the other hand, it's become evident that Kruger will be wearing another uniform as one of the top pass rushers on the open market.
According to Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports, Kruger's contract will likely "blow past" $9 million per season and could clear $10 million annually.
Possible landing spots for Kruger include the division-rival Browns, seeking an edge rusher for Ray Horton's 3-4 defense, as well as the Colts. Former Ravens defensive coordinator Chuck Pagano could view Kruger as Dwight Freeney's successor opposite Robert Mathis. Either way, Kruger is going to land too much money to return to Baltimore.
https://twitter.com/JasonColeYahoo/s...06262081871872
Jason Cole
@JasonColeYahoo
I didn't believe this couple of weeks ago, but do now: LB/DE Paul Kruger looks like he's going to blow past $9m per, could get over $10m per
-
03-04-2013, 10:27 AM #2Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Pasadena
- Posts
- 14,123
- Blog Entries
- 4
Re: $10 million a Year for Kruger
The Bills are very interested in Kruger according to some reports.
-
Re: $10 million a Year for Kruger
That's an unwarranted amount of money. Kruger was in the NFL for four years and really only during one 10 games stretch did he ever show an ability to be anywhere near that type of player. IMO he's a 4 year/$25m type player, not a 5 year/$50 million type player.
And you wonder why the Bills suck every year....
-
-
Re: $10 million a Year for Kruger
Kruger gave us a really good year, but has priced him self out of Bmore sadly. Had we seen this production earlier from him, we may have even had him under contract by now, or he may have been seen as a more serious franchise tag candidate, and Upshaw probably wouldn't have been drafted.
-
03-04-2013, 12:28 PM #6
-
03-04-2013, 01:14 PM #7Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
- Posts
- 493
Re: $10 million a Year for Kruger
If we were to decided that we need to retain Kruger, given the money he'll likely be offered, I think our best bet would be to pin him with the non-exclusive franchise tag. That way we can pay him for a year with a total that would likely probably be less than $10m (I'm guessing, I don't know what that tag on an outside linebacker would be this year), and then we can use 2013 to see whether he builds on 2012 or reverts to the mean. What we don't want to do is hand him a 4-5 year contract with a big bonus that averages $10m a year.
So, my guess would be that by the time the franchise tags are all applied or not applied, we'll pretty much know if Kruger is coming back next year, barring the market for him inexplicably collapsing. The non-exclusive franchise tag here is a big advantage for us if want to keep him and are able to pay him anything near market value.
If we don't feel we can, then we won't, and once he hits the open market, a team with tons of cap room will sign him, and it won't necessarily be a bad move for said team. Some of these teams are $30-40m beneath the cap and need to hit at least the payroll floor. So a long-term deal for a guy who is relatively young coming off a big season isn't as big of a risk for them as it is for a team like Baltimore with less cap space. To the Clevelands of the world, they might be $35m under, sign Kruger and be $25m under, and even if he takes a step backwards they at least have a solid outside linebacker and plenty of cap room, it's not financially crippling to them at all, and the upside is that they might have one of the league's premiere pass rushers if Kruger picks up where he left off this past season or gets better.
I mean, it's something like this. If your personal finances are tight, buying even a DVD player or something might be a big deal that you have to look at your budget and weigh against other things. If you're a billionaire, you might go out and buy three Internet connected Blu-Ray players just because without a second thought. Right now, the Ravens' finances are tight. The Browns and other teams have tons of money to play with. There are deals that are not going to make sense for us that'll be excellent deals for them.Last edited by CharmCityCrab; 03-04-2013 at 04:41 PM.
-
03-04-2013, 10:34 AM #8Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Pasadena
- Posts
- 14,123
- Blog Entries
- 4
Re: $10 million a Year for Kruger
That's free agency for you... Good quote from the 49'ers chief operating officer:
"We have the most expensive defense in the league on an average per year basis and that is not sustainable over time," Marathe said. "Becuase of the cap, if every veteran on the team took a 15 percent discount on their market value, you couldn't field that team still under the cap because the difference between wholesale (draft) and retail (free agency) is so wide.
"You have to figure out which players to keep and which players to let move on and churn out. Because you have to continue to replenish the system."
-
Re: $10 million a Year for Kruger
Two words:
Courtney Upshaw
Kruger did a lot for us, but without Suggs on the other side he is average, there is now way in hell I pay him that.
-
03-04-2013, 10:47 AM #10
Re: $10 million a Year for Kruger
"The Ravens are not taking Jimmy Smith at 26!" -- Me, the day before the 2011 Draft
"On their way to the podium, the Ravens FO is going to collectively step over my dead body and select...Breshad Perriman." -- Me, the day before the 2015 Draft
Missed it by That Much: The story of 'Get Smart' and the modern day Baltimore Ravens
@BigPlayReceiver
-
03-04-2013, 11:24 AM #11Hall Of Fame Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 6,040
Re: $10 million a Year for Kruger
I don't disagree that Upshaw is the future and Kruger is likely gone from Baltimore, but the notion that Suggs' return played a role in Kruger's breakout is totally wrong.
I understand that Kruger posted more sacks/game after Suggs returned, but correlation does not equal causation. Suggs' return and Kruger's "rise" (which wasn't really a rise because he was pressuring the QB at the same rate overall the entire season, he just got more sacks in the latter half) happened at the same time but had nothing to do with one another.
If you go back and watch the tape teams were not doubling, chipping, or otherwise scheming around Suggs at all. In fact, Suggs was a complete nonfactor as a pass rusher outside of the Houston and Denver games this year. Kruger was our only legit edge rushing option whether Suggs was in the lineup or not.
I'm not saying this to bash Suggs but merely to point out that Kruger's production wasn't due to anything other than him playing at a high level. Wave your hand at it and call it "easily replaced" as much as you want but if it could be so easily replaced one would think pass rushers would be as cheap as kickers or punters.
-
03-04-2013, 11:31 AM #12
Bookmarks