PDA

View Full Version : What Kind Of Deal Could Steelers Do With Hampton?



flippy
01-28-2010, 09:05 AM
The franchise tag for Casey would be ~$6M. That'd be fine for the Steelers. But Casey doesn't want to be franchise because of his age/weight and this could be his last opportunity at a deal.

So would Casey be willing to sign for less than $6M per year to get a longer deal. Where's the tradeoff line that makes sense for both sides?

Could it be $4-5M/year?

Could 3 year $15M work?

or 4 year $16-18M work?

Heck, there could be a lot of risk for the Steelers in those numbers.

Could they even make 3 year and $12M work? or 4 year and $15M work?

Whatever number it is, it seems like it should be far less than $6M per year that would be fair and balanced to both sides.

But the fair number will probably be a blow to Hampton's ego.

Oviedo
01-28-2010, 09:15 AM
I think the Steelers are between a rock and a hard place with Hampton and will have to go with a 4 year $16-18M contract unless they just franchise tag him for this upcoming season. This is the problem with the 3-4 defense I have harped about for over a year now--it is too hard to replenish the talent on the DL. But alas it is what we seem to be are stuck with so we have to pay the heavy price.

Personally, I would tag Hampton with the franchise tag and draft a replacement in Rounds 3 or 4. This way we don't tie up dollars long term that will be essential to resign Colon, Woodley, Timmons and Holmes all of whom are more important that Hampton to our long term success.

papillon
01-28-2010, 09:17 AM
The franchise tag for Casey would be ~$6M. That'd be fine for the Steelers. But Casey doesn't want to be franchise because of his age/weight and this could be his last opportunity at a deal.

So would Casey be willing to sign for less than $6M per year to get a longer deal. Where's the tradeoff line that makes sense for both sides?

Could it be $4-5M/year?

Could 3 year $15M work?

or 4 year $16-18M work?

Heck, there could be a lot of risk for the Steelers in those numbers.

Could they even make 3 year and $12M work? or 4 year and $15M work?

Whatever number it is, it seems like it should be far less than $6M per year that would be fair and balanced to both sides.

But the fair number will probably be a blow to Hampton's ego.

The first I would do under a franchise or non-exclusive tag is tell Hampton that training camp is optional, show up in Pittsburgh after the team breaks camp. Most veterans hold out simply to skip training camp.

The non-exclusive tag seems to be the best option; since the Steelers would receive a couple first round picks I believe if he is signed by another team and the Steelers don't match the offer. That would pay him around 7 million per year (I think). I'm sure that Hampton isn't going to sit out and walk away from that kind of coin.

If he wants a long term deal then he'll have to bend a bit on his salary demands and as we all know it's the guaranteed money that counts and not the salary. He'll probably want a 4 year deal and the Steelers will probably want a three year deal. I'm not sure what would be fair guaranteed money for an over 30 pro bowl NT. But, any long term deal will have to have substantial guaranteed money.

Wilfork is 28 and looking for a huge payday, so, chances are he's going to be the NT getting major coin this off season. If the Steelers have time to wait and see where Wilfork falls in the pay scale then that may help them in negotiations with Hampton.

Pappy

RuthlessBurgher
01-28-2010, 10:10 AM
Wilfork is 28 and looking for a huge payday, so, chances are he's going to be the NT getting major coin this off season. If the Steelers have time to wait and see where Wilfork falls in the pay scale then that may help them in negotiations with Hampton.

I disagree totally. If they wait and let Wilfork's huge deal to get done first, that will only drive up the market. I'm hoping that Wilfork gets tagged, pouts about it, and holds out. In the mean time, we can sign Hampton to a reasonable deal. If Wilfork gets big dollars, then Hampton will want big dollars too. That's not good.

As an example, I was glad that we got James Harrison's deal done before the Ravens gave big dollars to Terrell Suggs. If Suggs' contract was done first, that would have only increased Harrison's asking price.

Lebsteel
01-28-2010, 10:18 AM
Wilfork is 28 and looking for a huge payday, so, chances are he's going to be the NT getting major coin this off season. If the Steelers have time to wait and see where Wilfork falls in the pay scale then that may help them in negotiations with Hampton.

I disagree totally. If they wait and let Wilfork's huge deal to get done first, that will only drive up the market. I'm hoping that Wilfork gets tagged, pouts about it, and holds out. In the mean time, we can sign Hampton to a reasonable deal. If Wilfork gets big dollars, then Hampton will want big dollars too. That's not good.

As an example, I was glad that we got James Harrison's deal done before the Ravens gave big dollars to Terrell Suggs. If Suggs' contract was done first, that would have only increased Harrison's asking price.

Yes, get the deal done with Hampton ASAP before the Wilfork deal is made. Even though Wilfork is four years younger than Hampton and so their contracts can't really be equally compared, he will want at least $8 mil per year, so the quicker Hampton agrees the better. If we don't want to resign Hampton, then we'd better hope that Dan Williams is still available when we pick.

phillyesq
01-28-2010, 03:19 PM
I think the Steelers are between a rock and a hard place with Hampton and will have to go with a 4 year $16-18M contract unless they just franchise tag him for this upcoming season. This is the problem with the 3-4 defense I have harped about for over a year now--it is too hard to replenish the talent on the DL. But alas it is what we seem to be are stuck with so we have to pay the heavy price.


Since 1993, the Steelers have had Joel Steed, Kemo and Hampton as their starter at NT. That really doesn't seem to indicate that there is a lot of turnover at the position, nor does it indicate that filling positions on the DL make the 3-4 unfeasible.

If you play a 4-3, you need at least two good DTs to succeed, not just one. There is a lot of risk drafting DTs -- there seem to be more DTs that end up busts than almost any position. If anything, I think having to fill the roster with fewer DL is a benefit of the 3-4, not a drawback.