PDA

View Full Version : Predictions on Mike Wallace Contract?



flippy
06-01-2012, 01:50 PM
Any one have a prediction on what will happen?

Will he sign? For how much?

If he signs the tender, the Steelers can have him for $2.7M this year and $9.4M+ for the next couple of years by franchising him. So up until 6/15, we can have him for the next 3 years for $21.5M with no guarateed money.

After 6/15, we can have him for about $19.5M with no upfront/guaranteed money.

So let's say the Steelers use that as the starting point. To lock in some of those dollars now, the Steelers probably want more than 3 years. Those are big numbers, so let's say 5 or 6 years. And we're probably looking at 5 years and $40M.

Given that Desean Jackson did 5 years for $50M, that seems about fair. Remember Desean had the $9.4M franchise contract vs Wallace's $2.7M contract.

Now at 5 years, he probably only deserves the $2.7M upfront relative to Desean's contract.

So the Steelers probably would need another year to justify a bigger guaranteed money. An extra year might justify an extra $10M.

So let's say 6 years - $50M with $12M guaranteed. That seems reasonable, but it might be a little high to spend on 1 WR given that we've got other talented WRs that we're gonna have to pay.

So the Steelers should probably try to scale it back a little. Because if we just go the franchise route, we can see how the other WRs develop and Wallace becomes less valuable over time and a year to year contract may even be a better route.

So I say drop it to 6 years, $42M with $12M guaranteed.

Crash
06-01-2012, 01:52 PM
Whoa....if he signs the franchise tender and they cut him after one game? You must pay him. So basically that money would be guaranteed, no?

flippy
06-01-2012, 02:00 PM
Whoa....if he signs the franchise tender and they cut him after one game? You must pay him. So basically that money would be guaranteed, no?

That's why I gave him the $12M guaranteed in my final number vs Desean's $10M. I'd justify it as $9.4M for the extra year + $2.7M for this year's tender.

I was trying to say there'd be no upfront money for Wallace if he signs the tender.

Oviedo
06-01-2012, 02:01 PM
Any one have a prediction on what will happen?

Will he sign? For how much?

If he signs the tender, the Steelers can have him for $2.7M this year and $9.4M+ for the next couple of years by franchising him. So up until 6/15, we can have him for the next 3 years for $21.5M with no guarateed money.

After 6/15, we can have him for about $19.5M with no upfront/guaranteed money.

So let's say the Steelers use that as the starting point. To lock in some of those dollars now, the Steelers probably want more than 3 years. Those are big numbers, so let's say 5 or 6 years. And we're probably looking at 5 years and $40M.

Given that Desean Jackson did 5 years for $50M, that seems about fair. Remember Desean had the $9.4M franchise contract vs Wallace's $2.7M contract.

Now at 5 years, he probably only deserves the $2.7M upfront relative to Desean's contract.

So the Steelers probably would need another year to justify a bigger guaranteed money. An extra year might justify an extra $10M.

So let's say 6 years - $50M with $12M guaranteed. That seems reasonable, but it might be a little high to spend on 1 WR given that we've got other talented WRs that we're gonna have to pay.

So the Steelers should probably try to scale it back a little. Because if we just go the franchise route, we can see how the other WRs develop and Wallace becomes less valuable over time and a year to year contract may even be a better route.

So I say drop it to 6 years, $42M with $12M guaranteed.

The numbers you recommend all but guarantees to lose Brown and/or Sanders. Not worth it. If over $7.5M per year it is better some other team pays it.

I would offer 5 years/$30M with $15M guaranteed. It's about the guaranteed money not the total value. Give him more guaranteed in exchange for a smaller annual cap hit.

RuthlessBurgher
06-01-2012, 04:09 PM
Give him more guaranteed in exchange for a smaller annual cap hit.

The team would rather not guarantee half of his total contact from the start if they could avoid it...I'd rather a larger base salary and less guaranteed dollars (but Mike would prefer the opposite, obviously)...remember, you can always restructure his contact in the future like they did with Ben and others recently...those guys got exactly what you said by restructuring...more guaranteed in exchange for a smaller annual cap hit.

hawaiiansteel
06-01-2012, 04:32 PM
I would offer 5 years/$30M with $15M guaranteed.


you can offer Wallace that but he's not going to accept it, those numbers aren't even in the ball park of what Wallace will settle for.

Crash
06-01-2012, 04:39 PM
If he signs I say 5 years $42 mil $20 mil guaranteed.

It's not going to be cheap.

MeetJoeGreene
06-01-2012, 05:12 PM
I personally think he won't sign for less than 50 mill total.
6 years.
20-25 guaranteed

phillyesq
06-01-2012, 05:33 PM
If he signs I say 5 years $42 mil $20 mil guaranteed.

It's not going to be cheap.

That's actually a pretty good ballpark.

Steve Johnson: 5 years, $36.5 million, $19.5 million guaranteed
DeSean Jackson: 5 years, $ 51 million, $15 million guaranteed

Both these guys have one more year of service time, and thus more leverage.

The Woodley and Timmons deals may also be points of negotiation if you are Wallace's agent.

I'll go out on a limb and say something like 6 years, 60 million, with maybe $15-20 million guaranteed, and the last year being a dummy year at $15 million (and making the real value of the deal 5 years, 45 million).

pittpete
06-01-2012, 06:08 PM
Wallace signs his tender and has a sub-par year.
(Even Ben says we are going to run the ball more):o
The Steelers realize Wallace is just a 1-trick pony,dont franchise him and some other team overpays him next year.
Brown and Sanders sign long term deals for a lot less $$$$ and have long productive careers as Steelers

hawaiiansteel
06-01-2012, 09:01 PM
So I say drop it to 6 years, $42M with $12M guaranteed.


here are Larry Fitzgerald's contract terms:


8 years / $120,000,000 - Guaranteed Money $50,000,000

since Wallace wants Larry Fitzgerald $, what makes you think Wallace would ever accept only $12 million in guaranteed money?

RuthlessBurgher
06-01-2012, 09:10 PM
The Steelers decide that they don't want to pay Wallace Fitz-money...Wallace signs his RFA tender so he can be traded to a team that will. After trading away Brandon Marshall, the Dolphins starting wideouts are Devone Bess and Brian Hartline, and his shiny new QB toy Ryan Tannehill needs a new toy to play with. Miami owner Stephen Ross cares about his team's profile more than winning, so wants to bring in an exciting player to profile on Hard Knocks (speed is sexy for TV...big uglies like Long and Pouncey are not sexy...they are just darn good football players). Jake Long's contract is up after this year...is Ross willing to pay top dollar to keep his Pro Bowl LT when he could spend big money for a more explosive type of player instead? He just drafted Stanford LT Jonathan Martin in the second round, who could replace Long. The Steelers trade Mike Wallace, Mike Adams, Willie Colon, and Doug Legursky to Miami for Jake Long and Mike Pouncey. The Dolphins pay Wallace Fitz-money. The Steelers pay Long Fitz-money. :D

Steelers OL: Long-Pouncey-Pouncey-DeCastro-Gilbert
Steelers WR: Brown-Sanders-Cotchery

Dolphins OL: Martin-Incognito-Legursky-Colon-Adams
Dolphins WR: Wallace-Bess-Hartline

squidkid
06-01-2012, 10:11 PM
Wallace signs his tender and has a sub-par year.
(Even Ben says we are going to run the ball more):o
The Steelers realize Wallace is just a 1-trick pony,dont franchise him and some other team overpays him next year.
Brown and Sanders sign long term deals for a lot less $$$$ and have long productive careers as Steelers

add in that we dont even miss him................ala burress and holmes

flippy
06-01-2012, 10:23 PM
here are Larry Fitzgerald's contract terms:


8 years / $120,000,000 - Guaranteed Money $50,000,000

since Wallace wants Larry Fitzgerald $, what makes you think Wallace would ever accept only $12 million in guaranteed money?

It's as much as he'd get this year + franchised next year, so that's where I'd cap it. And even that might be high. So Wallace can wait for his money or to be traded.

It'd be a great deal to get some money now. Plus the Steelers have the upper hand with Brown, Cotchery, Sanders, and Heath as receiving options. They don't need to blow their wad on Wallace.

So I'd see this offer as overpaying and being more than fair to Wallace. If he can get more, good for him. I just don't see why the Steelers would do it.

papillon
06-02-2012, 06:34 AM
The Steelers decide that they don't want to pay Wallace Fitz-money...Wallace signs his RFA tender so he can be traded to a team that will. After trading away Brandon Marshall, the Dolphins starting wideouts are Devone Bess and Brian Hartline, and his shiny new QB toy Ryan Tannehill needs a new toy to play with. Miami owner Stephen Ross cares about his team's profile more than winning, so wants to bring in an exciting player to profile on Hard Knocks (speed is sexy for TV...big uglies like Long and Pouncey are not sexy...they are just darn good football players). Jake Long's contract is up after this year...is Ross willing to pay top dollar to keep his Pro Bowl LT when he could spend big money for a more explosive type of player instead? He just drafted Stanford LT Jonathan Martin in the second round, who could replace Long. The Steelers trade Mike Wallace, Mike Adams, Willie Colon, and Doug Legursky to Miami for Jake Long and Mike Pouncey. The Dolphins pay Wallace Fitz-money. The Steelers pay Long Fitz-money. :D

Steelers OL: Long-Pouncey-Pouncey-DeCastro-Gilbert
Steelers WR: Brown-Sanders-Cotchery

Dolphins OL: Martin-Incognito-Legursky-Colon-Adams
Dolphins WR: Wallace-Bess-Hartline

This would be fine by me for sure, highly unlikely, but would work for both teams. Wallace is (IMO) over estimating his worth based on his three seasons playing with a future HOF quarterback. Ben made Wallace better, not vice versa. Fitz would make an already very good Ben into the most dangerous quarterback in the league with his ability to go up and catch passes in traffic. Wallace will cause Tannehill's career to be short.

Pappy

JDSteeler
06-02-2012, 10:23 AM
The Steelers decide that they don't want to pay Wallace Fitz-money...Wallace signs his RFA tender so he can be traded to a team that will. After trading away Brandon Marshall, the Dolphins starting wideouts are Devone Bess and Brian Hartline, and his shiny new QB toy Ryan Tannehill needs a new toy to play with. Miami owner Stephen Ross cares about his team's profile more than winning, so wants to bring in an exciting player to profile on Hard Knocks (speed is sexy for TV...big uglies like Long and Pouncey are not sexy...they are just darn good football players). Jake Long's contract is up after this year...is Ross willing to pay top dollar to keep his Pro Bowl LT when he could spend big money for a more explosive type of player instead? He just drafted Stanford LT Jonathan Martin in the second round, who could replace Long. The Steelers trade Mike Wallace, Mike Adams, Willie Colon, and Doug Legursky to Miami for Jake Long and Mike Pouncey. The Dolphins pay Wallace Fitz-money. The Steelers pay Long Fitz-money. :D

Steelers OL: Long-Pouncey-Pouncey-DeCastro-Gilbert
Steelers WR: Brown-Sanders-Cotchery

Dolphins OL: Martin-Incognito-Legursky-Colon-Adams
Dolphins WR: Wallace-Bess-Hartline

C"mon, that has as much chance of happening as me beconing the Steelers starting QB this season....

JD

RuthlessBurgher
06-02-2012, 02:27 PM
C"mon, that has as much chance of happening as me beconing the Steelers starting QB this season....

JD

Sure, but it's fun to think about anyway, no?

Would you trade Wallace and Ryan Clark to the Seahawks for Earl Thomas and Doug Baldwin?

Imagine our defensive backfield with Troy Polamalu at SS and Earl Thomas at FS...safety is the one place where we have no young quality depth, and Thomas may be the best young FS in the league (Eric Berry is a strong safety).

The Seahawks would then have Sidney Rice, Mike Wallace, and Mike Williams at receiver, and we'd have Brown, Sanders, Baldwin, and Cotchery...

hawaiiansteel
06-05-2012, 02:39 AM
my prediction for Wallace's eventual contract terms:

5 years, $45 million with $25 million guaranteed

Oviedo
06-05-2012, 09:48 AM
my prediction for Wallace's eventual contract terms:

5 years, $45 million with $25 million guaranteed

Then say good bye to Antonio Brown because I predict he will have a better season this year than Wallace. We can't pay two receivers $9M per year.

RuthlessBurgher
06-05-2012, 12:31 PM
Then say good bye to Antonio Brown because I predict he will have a better season this year than Wallace. We can't pay two receivers $9M per year.

Wallace has 24 TD receptions in 3 seasons. Brown has 2 TD receptions in 2 seasons.

While Wallace might get $8-9 million, I can't see Brown commanding anything more than $5-6 million at this point.

hawaiiansteel
06-11-2012, 03:11 AM
Steelers Not Lowering Mike Wallace Tender: Smart Move?

Jun 10th, 2012 by CraigSteelers

Several reports have come from NFL.com, Yahoo! Sports, and some other outlets confirming that the Steelers have no intention of lowering Mike Wallace’s tender of $2.7 million come June 15th should the two side not come to an agreement. The Steelers have the option of lowering his tender to just below $600,000 if Wallace (and more likely his agent Bus Cook) digs his heels in and does not sign.

I’ve argued several times that the Steelers are well within their right to do so and should. The team is in no real danger should Wallace not return to the starting lineup before November. November is the final key date in the Wallace saga – if he wants to play at all in 2012, he will need to sign by then no matter the price tag from the team. Fans must understand that Wallace is in danger of really screwing himself and his career should he hold out. The Steelers have all the power.

So, by stating that they do not intend to lower the tender after June 14th, are we to interpret this as an olive branch from the team to Wallace? The Steelers, as the classiest organization to ever grace the NFL, have decided to not punish their speedster for catching a case of the crazies for demanding too much money. Smart move? Too gracious? It’s a tough call in my corner – it is a gracious move by the Steelers which is good and expected, but I have no reservations when it comes to not putting up with players’ B.S. and money. I think it’s a good move by the Steelers. It doesn’t totally disrespect a receiver that the do indeed covet. However, it still shows (that by stating this now and not at the end of the week) that the Steelers favor the tender over whatever current demand is on the table. Perhaps it shows us that the two sides are not so far from reaching an agreement – less of a Grand Canyon and more like the width of the Mon River at The Point.

http://nicepickcowher.com/2012/06/10/steelers-not-lowering-mike-wallace-tender-smart-move/

RuthlessBurgher
06-11-2012, 09:34 AM
I predict a 10 year, $90 million contract signed on July 1...no...wait...that's what I predict for Sidney Crosby. :p

steelz09
06-11-2012, 09:47 AM
I would say 5 years 45 mil

RuthlessBurgher
06-11-2012, 10:15 AM
I would say 5 years 45 mil

Same average per year as the Crosby rumblings...of course, hockey contracts are guaranteed...Wallace's deal will hinge highly on the amount of the signing bonus and other guarantees.

Slapstick
06-11-2012, 10:18 AM
I predict that Wallace will play this year under the RFA tender for the full season...

I think that he will enter free agency next year...given the salary cap space and the need to retain Brown and Sanders, I think that the Steelers will decline to franchise him and take the 3rd round comp pick for the huge contract he will undoubtedly sign...

I think that Wallace will have his opportunities this season, but the offense will not emphasize the deep ball over everything else as it did with Arians...

Oviedo
06-11-2012, 05:19 PM
I predict that Wallace will play this year under the RFA tender for the full season...

I think that he will enter free agency next year...given the salary cap space and the need to retain Brown and Sanders, I think that the Steelers will decline to franchise him and take the 3rd round comp pick for the huge contract he will undoubtedly sign...

I think that Wallace will have his opportunities this season, but the offense will not emphasize the deep ball over everything else as it did with Arians...

If Wallace wants more than $7M per year then I agree with you. The Steelers will be worried about signing three WRs not just one. The reality is that they may be able to sign both Brown and Sanders for just a little more than Wallace is reputed to be looking for just himself.

Sugar
06-11-2012, 05:26 PM
If Wallace wants more than $7M per year then I agree with you. The Steelers will be worried about signing three WRs not just one. The reality is that they may be able to sign both Brown and Sanders for just a little more than Wallace is reputed to be looking for just himself.

Not if Brown and Sanders have the big years so many are predicting.

RuthlessBurgher
06-12-2012, 10:21 AM
If Wallace wants more than $7M per year then I agree with you. The Steelers will be worried about signing three WRs not just one. The reality is that they may be able to sign both Brown and Sanders for just a little more than Wallace is reputed to be looking for just himself.

Four seasons worth of Sanders and Brown:

ES 2010: 28-376-2
AB 2010: 16-167-0
ES 2011: 22-288-2
AB 2011: 69-1108-2

4 year total: 135-1939-6

Three seasons worth of Mike Wallace:

MW 2009: 39-756-6
MW 2010: 60-1257-10
MW 2011: 72-1193-8

3 year total: 171-3206-24

Between them, Brown and Sanders have had 1 quality season out of four combined seasons in the NFL.

Mike Wallace has had a quality season every year since he has been in the NFL.

The total number of TD catches for Sanders and Brown in their four combined seasons in the NFL is equal to the TD catches Mike Wallace had in his rookie season alone (which was the lowest total of his career).

Mike Wallace has 4 times as many TD catches in 3 seasons (24) than Brown and Sanders have in 4 combined seasons (6).

I think that the same people who constantly underrate Mike Wallace also overrate Sanders and Brown.

Sanders and Brown have potential...I like both of them...but the fact remains that Wallace has a proven track record of success.

People tend to focus on a poor second half of 2011 (29-393-3 in games 9-16) for Wallace following an awesome first half of 2011 in which he was averaging 100 receiving yards per game (43-800-5 in games 1-8).

Well, the second half of Mike Wallace's 2011 season (29-393-3) was still better than either of Emmanuel Sanders full seasons (28-376-2 and 22-288-2) and Antonio Brown's full 2010 season (16-167-0).

D Rock
06-12-2012, 11:00 AM
Four seasons worth of Sanders and Brown:

ES 2010: 28-376-2
AB 2010: 16-167-0
ES 2011: 22-288-2
AB 2011: 69-1108-2

4 year total: 135-1939-6

Three seasons worth of Mike Wallace:

MW 2009: 39-756-6
MW 2010: 60-1257-10
MW 2011: 72-1193-8

3 year total: 171-3206-24

Between them, Brown and Sanders have had 1 quality season out of four combined seasons in the NFL.

Mike Wallace has had a quality season every year since he has been in the NFL.

The total number of TD catches for Sanders and Brown in their four combined seasons in the NFL is equal to the TD catches Mike Wallace had in his rookie season alone (which was the lowest total of his career).

Mike Wallace has 4 times as many TD catches in 3 seasons (24) than Brown and Sanders have in 4 combined seasons (6).

I think that the same people who constantly underrate Mike Wallace also overrate Sanders and Brown.

Sanders and Brown have potential...I like both of them...but the fact remains that Wallace has a proven track record of success.

People tend to focus on a poor second half of 2011 (29-393-3 in games 9-16) for Wallace following an awesome first half of 2011 in which he was averaging 100 receiving yards per game (43-800-5 in games 1-8).

Well, the second half of Mike Wallace's 2011 season (29-393-3) was still better than either of Emmanuel Sanders full seasons (28-376-2 and 22-288-2) and Antonio Brown's full 2010 season (16-167-0).


nice review Ruthless. I certainly agree. The grumblings tend to be that AB is going to need a contract like the one Mike Wallace signs? Why??? He's not nearly the threat Wallace has been, even if he has shown to be a very good receiver. As for Sanders...sure he could be good to have, but from what he has done so far he is a 2M a year player maybe. Cotchery is more valuable that Sanders.


I would pay Wallace up to 9M/yr just because the top end of the market has been set there and he has shown to be in that top tier.

AB may be worth about 4.5M/yr, if that. Not nearly as much as many make it out to be. Yeah, top end WRs sign huge contracts, but the middle of the pack guys don't, and that's what AB is.

Slapstick
06-12-2012, 01:46 PM
nice review Ruthless. I certainly agree. The grumblings tend to be that AB is going to need a contract like the one Mike Wallace signs? Why??? He's not nearly the threat Wallace has been, even if he has shown to be a very good receiver. As for Sanders...sure he could be good to have, but from what he has done so far he is a 2M a year player maybe. Cotchery is more valuable that Sanders.


I would pay Wallace up to 9M/yr just because the top end of the market has been set there and he has shown to be in that top tier.

AB may be worth about 4.5M/yr, if that. Not nearly as much as many make it out to be. Yeah, top end WRs sign huge contracts, but the middle of the pack guys don't, and that's what AB is.

By that same token, I don't think that Mike Wallace has shown himself to be in that top tier...

Mike Wallace: 4 playoff games - 16 catches - 141 yards - 1 TD (and 1 rushing TD as well)

Antonio Brown: 4 playoff games - 10 catches - 160 yards - 0 TDs

Emmanuel Sanders: 4 playoff games - 13 catches - 172 yards - 0 TDs

If the Steelers are going to pay a guy $9 mil a year, he had better dominate in the playoffs instead of disappearing...as it stands now, his numbers in the postseason are comparable to Brown and Sanders, and that's with Sanders breaking his foot in the SB...

D Rock
06-12-2012, 01:57 PM
By that same token, I don't think that Mike Wallace has shown himself to be in that top tier...

Mike Wallace: 4 playoff games - 16 catches - 141 yards - 1 TD (and 1 rushing TD as well)

Antonio Brown: 4 playoff games - 10 catches - 160 yards - 0 TDs

Emmanuel Sanders: 4 playoff games - 13 catches - 172 yards - 0 TDs

If the Steelers are going to pay a guy $9 mil a year, he had better dominate in the playoffs instead of disappearing...as it stands now, his numbers in the postseason are comparable to Brown and Sanders, and that's with Sanders breaking his foot in the SB...

I'd be willing to bet that the incline in production from AB and especially Sanders has a whole lot to do with teams doing everything they can to shut down Mike Wallace in the playoffs.

Slapstick
06-12-2012, 02:13 PM
I'd be willing to bet that the incline in production from AB and especially Sanders has a whole lot to do with teams doing everything they can to shut down Mike Wallace in the playoffs.

And being really successful...

Crash
06-12-2012, 02:16 PM
We don't need Wallace if we are going back to 55% runs. Let him go after his rookie deal expires.

Ditto for Sanders and Brown.

Slapstick
06-12-2012, 02:18 PM
We don't need Wallace if we are going back to 55% runs. Let him go after his rookie deal expires.

Ditto for Sanders and Brown.

Thak goodness we aren't doing that...

Crash
06-12-2012, 02:22 PM
Thak goodness we aren't doing that...

If we don't throw the ball at least 55%? Let Wallace walk.

papillon
06-12-2012, 02:24 PM
We don't need Wallace if we are going back to 55% runs. Let him go after his rookie deal expires.

Ditto for Sanders and Brown.

The GD horse is dead, find another horse to beat to death or bang a different drum please.

Pappy

D Rock
06-12-2012, 02:58 PM
And being really successful...


I went back to the box scores for these 4 games....nothing really stands out as great offensively, although there is a good bit of bad.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore?gid=20110115023

The Baltimore game was won because the defense got 3rd quarter turnovers and gave the offense a very short field to work with. Overall it was a mediocre day for the the offense. AB and Sanders both had breakout games sort of, but being the 4th and 5th options in the passing game can give you some pretty good matchups to work with.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore?gid=20110123023

the Jets game was pitiful for the passing game but the running game carried the load. Perfect example of why you don't label yourself as a passing or a running team...you just do what you need to do in order to win the game.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore?gid=20110206009

The Super Bowl against GB was a good example of our offense trying to win games in the mold of a shoot out offense. As we all know, it wasn't exactly the outcome we wanted to see. Mike Wallace had a pretty darn good day though with 9 rec for 89 yards and 1 TD as a 2nd year player being the focus of the passing game.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore?gid=20120108007

Last years game against the Broncos was a loss that can be pinned on the defense. The offense ran the ball really well but also needed to pass a lot to play catch up. Mike Wallace went MIA, but AB, Sanders, and Heath Miller all had pretty good games. This is probably the best example of the 4 games of Mike "The Decoy" Wallace. It's not the role I prefer to see him in, but when a defense commits to taking away a player and leaves 3 other guys to pick up the numbers that AB, Sanders, and Miller did (not to mention the running game being wide open for Redman)....well I'm okay with seeing that happen here and there.

Slapstick
06-12-2012, 03:01 PM
I want Mike Wallace to stay in Pittsburgh.

But, if the Steelers are going to pay top dollar to a WR, that guy needs to play lights out and dominate in the playoffs...

The true, elite players that are worth that kind of coin (Fitzgerald, Megatron) can't be taken out of those playoff games...

hawaiiansteel
06-12-2012, 03:29 PM
The GD horse is dead, find another horse to beat to death

http://katdish.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/beating-a-dead-horse-horse-demotivational-poster-1267844749.jpg

Oviedo
06-12-2012, 03:46 PM
Four seasons worth of Sanders and Brown:

ES 2010: 28-376-2
AB 2010: 16-167-0
ES 2011: 22-288-2
AB 2011: 69-1108-2

4 year total: 135-1939-6

Three seasons worth of Mike Wallace:

MW 2009: 39-756-6
MW 2010: 60-1257-10
MW 2011: 72-1193-8

3 year total: 171-3206-24

Between them, Brown and Sanders have had 1 quality season out of four combined seasons in the NFL.

Mike Wallace has had a quality season every year since he has been in the NFL.

The total number of TD catches for Sanders and Brown in their four combined seasons in the NFL is equal to the TD catches Mike Wallace had in his rookie season alone (which was the lowest total of his career).

Mike Wallace has 4 times as many TD catches in 3 seasons (24) than Brown and Sanders have in 4 combined seasons (6).

I think that the same people who constantly underrate Mike Wallace also overrate Sanders and Brown.

Sanders and Brown have potential...I like both of them...but the fact remains that Wallace has a proven track record of success.

People tend to focus on a poor second half of 2011 (29-393-3 in games 9-16) for Wallace following an awesome first half of 2011 in which he was averaging 100 receiving yards per game (43-800-5 in games 1-8).

Well, the second half of Mike Wallace's 2011 season (29-393-3) was still better than either of Emmanuel Sanders full seasons (28-376-2 and 22-288-2) and Antonio Brown's full 2010 season (16-167-0).


One might argue that maybe Wallace has plateaued, i.e. less yards, less TDs, vanished second half of last season and Brown is on the rise.

That is why I said this year is critical and I would not rush to sign Wallace to a big contract until we can evaluate the performance of all three of our top recivers to dtermine who it best to keep.

D Rock
06-12-2012, 03:53 PM
I want Mike Wallace to stay in Pittsburgh.

But, if the Steelers are going to pay top dollar to a WR, that guy needs to play lights out and dominate in the playoffs...

The true, elite players that are worth that kind of coin (Fitzgerald, Megatron) can't be taken out of those playoff games...

I agree that top players need to have big games on the biggest stages. Wallace sort of did it in the Super Bowl, but that is certainly not the strength of his game right now though.


Clearly Megatron is on a different level, as is evidenced by the fact that he signed a contract with more guaranteed money that the total value of most other WR contracts. Ditto for Fitz.

Wallace deserves to fit in there somewhere around the likes of Vincent and Desean Jackson though, and the market for players of that caliber has been set. I think VJax has been overpaid which is really the big issue. He's getting an average of 11M/year which is just too much, but 9M/year is reasonable for Wallace IMO.

papillon
06-12-2012, 04:44 PM
My question is with the evolution of offense in the NFL to a more pass heavy offense and teams needing 3, 4 or 5 competent receivers can you afford to pay a receiver like Fitz, Johnson & Johnson (had to do that), etc? That's a lot of scratch to wrap up in a player that touches the ball 10-15 times on great days. The quarterback handles the rock on every snap. You need good receivers form top to bottom and colleges are now turning out more and more quality receivers because of the shift in offensive philosophy. If I had my choice right now I'd rather 4 or 5 good receivers than Wallace and 3 or 4 other average receivers. Until one of these teams with the superstar receiver wins a Super Bowl I'm going with a lot of good receivers in the 4-7 million per year range than a guy like Fitz at 14 million per and 4 Limas Sweeds.

Pappy