Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 131

Thread: Watt deal done

  1. #51
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    How many teams win SuperBowls as a result of overpaying players?

    I don’t think anyones being irrational in the discussion. No one has any issue with Watt as a player. Although your argument about him not smoking blounts is very compelling.

    Seriously though, why not pay him $100m / year? There has to be some price where everyone would question is the price worth it? At some point the contract size impedes our ability to compete.

    Maybe he got a fair market deal and many are ok with that. But in general, no one gets rich by overpaying for stuff.

    Sometimes the market is irrational. Loads of people thought Enron was a good investment at one point and time. Many of those folks ended up broke.

    There’s a fine line in this league. And a couple players not playing to the value in their contracts can be the difference.

    Either way, I’m rooting for TJ and the Steelers to win SuperBowls together.

    So far they couldn’t make it happen on his rookie contract. Now we’ve got a lot more invested in him with a lot bigger expectations.
    My guess is that a Edge rusher that a team with one edge rusher @$28M and another who's on a rookie deal showing promise at <$1M with a primary backup that makes just over $1M will get better overall performance than a team that has 3 edge rushers each making $10M.

    But I don't know.

    And GMs don't get to make hypothetical rosters. They have to make decisions on the players they have in front of them.

    And walking away from an elite player in his prime doesn't seem like good asset management.

    Taking his deal down to the wire to get the deal as low as possible seems like a good play in this case. That's probably part of the reason that you feel like you're not "overpaying" but paying "market value".

    I think part of the problem we have as fans (speaking for myself at least) is that we look at this philosophically, or sometimes about the player in isolation. GMs have to look at the whole roster as it is and at their plans for the roster in the next 3 - 5 years or whatever.

    This deal would have been a lot harder to do (or even like) if we were also paying market value for an above average QB over the course of the contract.

  2. #52
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Northern_Blitz View Post
    My guess is that a Edge rusher that a team with one edge rusher @$28M and another who's on a rookie deal showing promise at <$1M with a primary backup that makes just over $1M will get better overall performance than a team that has 3 edge rushers each making $10M.

    But I don't know.

    And GMs don't get to make hypothetical rosters. They have to make decisions on the players they have in front of them.

    And walking away from an elite player in his prime doesn't seem like good asset management.

    Taking his deal down to the wire to get the deal as low as possible seems like a good play in this case. That's probably part of the reason that you feel like you're not "overpaying" but paying "market value".

    I think part of the problem we have as fans (speaking for myself at least) is that we look at this philosophically, or sometimes about the player in isolation. GMs have to look at the whole roster as it is and at their plans for the roster in the next 3 - 5 years or whatever.

    This deal would have been a lot harder to do (or even like) if we were also paying market value for an above average QB over the course of the contract.
    I agree that none of us can know all that went into the decision on the value of the contract and how the Steelers weíre thinking about it in the context of the team for the next 5 years.

    All we see is what we see. Both sides drug it out til the end. A number of $30m got floated around so we can feel like the team won. The story about TJ making the call that the deal is done can make people feel good about his character. And on and on.

    We all got fed a story that was likely controlled by the team. Ultimately the Steelers care how the player comes out of this too because he makes them money. For all we know, this was the deal from day 1 and the Steelers told Watt to wait til the deadline to sign it to make the whole perception of everything look good to the fans.

    We now live in a world where conspiracy theories come true and none of this really matters on some level.

  3. #53
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Northern_Blitz View Post
    I think he'll play the whole thing baring big injury. Or maybe they extend him early (which I hope we don't do).

    Those last 2 years will end up being pretty cheap compared to prices in those years IMO.

    I'd prefer play out the contract and a franchise tag or two. I don't like the idea of big 3rd contracts (although Cam played well last year).
    I like the structure of the cap hit being fairly static and actually going down the last couple of years. As the cap continues to rise (unless there is a 12th wave) then the static hit is actually relatively lower year over year.

    I don't like the total amount, but I do believe that it is the "fair market value". The question is whether Edge is a position that should be paid FMV and if the FO can draft at other high ticket positions (OT, CB, QB) the next few years to help with the overall cap.

  4. #54
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by feltdizz View Post
    I watched the Tampa game last night. Not one edge rusher put a hand on Brady.

    I think 28 mill is too much for a defender but Watt will have a chance to prove me wrong.
    I think that this is something to keep an eye on. If Watt is a guy who can get to the QB while other QBs are able to go untouched, then there is huge value for that guy. If the league continues down the path of allowing Olinemen to hold and do whatever they can to protect the QBs, and no defender is able to get through, then there is no value in an elite Edge rusher.

  5. #55
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    Seriously though, why not pay him $100m / year? There has to be some price where everyone would question is the price worth it? At some point the contract size impedes our ability to compete.

    Maybe he got a fair market deal and many are ok with that. But in general, no one gets rich by overpaying for stuff.
    A big difference between the Bell and Watt negotiations is how they finished.

    By every metric, Watt's deal is around the FMV. Whether or not we agree with paying an Edge rusher that amount, versus paying another position, it is FMV.

    Watt is in the elite class of Edge rushers. The last few elite players received a little bit less, Watt was next and received a tad more guaranteed and AAV. I posted something yesterday before the signing by Sportrac (who does this kind of thing) and they guaged his market value right around where it ended up.

    Bell was trying to reset the RB market. He was not taking other RB signings as his guide, and even when his agent and family told him that he should sign because the contract was of fair value, Bell balked and wanted more. I had no problem with his not signing at the time because he was not under contract, but his mindset in what he was looking for was not the same as Watt, despite only being about half the guarantee and AAV.

  6. #56
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Northern_Blitz View Post
    Taking his deal down to the wire to get the deal as low as possible seems like a good play in this case. That's probably part of the reason that you feel like you're not "overpaying" but paying "market value".
    I don't think there is a question of whether we paid market value. I think the true question is whether or not the team has a better chance of winning with a market value, second contract OLB, or spending that money elsewhere.

    I have often mentioned the Faneca story when it comes to signing a top player to a big market value deal. The Steelers determined what they were planning on spending on Faneca, and that was in the same neighborhood as Steve Hutchinson. Then the Bills and Browns signed lesser guards to big contracts, and "fair" value for a player of Faneca's caliber suddenly rose before they got to the table. The Steelers let Faneca go because the new value did not fit into their structure, despite the fact that he was one of the top two guards in the game and the new asking price was fair. However, do you really want to do business based on what the Browns and Bills (of the early 2000s) do?

  7. #57
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    For all we know, this was the deal from day 1 and the Steelers told Watt to wait til the deadline to sign it to make the whole perception of everything look good to the fans.

    We now live in a world where conspiracy theories come true and none of this really matters on some level.
    Actually, at one point I suggested that it was so that the team could avoid dealing with extending Haden. Haden's camp even said that they knew that Watt had to be dealt with first. Although, I would have thought that after Haden's camp recently came out and said that he will play out the year and enter FA (instead of seek a deal with a FO who was not willing to negotiate) that Watt would have been done sooner.

  8. #58
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by steeler_fan_in_t.o. View Post
    I don't think there is a question of whether we paid market value. I think the true question is whether or not the team has a better chance of winning with a market value, second contract OLB, or spending that money elsewhere.

    I have often mentioned the Faneca story when it comes to signing a top player to a big market value deal. The Steelers determined what they were planning on spending on Faneca, and that was in the same neighborhood as Steve Hutchinson. Then the Bills and Browns signed lesser guards to big contracts, and "fair" value for a player of Faneca's caliber suddenly rose before they got to the table. The Steelers let Faneca go because the new value did not fit into their structure, despite the fact that he was one of the top two guards in the game and the new asking price was fair. However, do you really want to do business based on what the Browns and Bills (of the early 2000s) do?
    I think this is the right way to frame the question. And I don't know the answer. But I do think the answer is different is you have a market level QB vs. if you don't.

    Just like I would have felt better about a big Bell contract if we weren't expected to have Bell for the majority of the time. Although I did believe he was declining after the 20% drop in YPC.

    These are both probably luxury deals. And not having a QB means you can strengthen the rest of the team.

    I think we should be doing what we can to try to have an elite defense at the same time we have an above average QB on a rookie deal. Not keeping Watt (or stringing him out on options and tags) runs counter to that strategy.

    I agree that we don't know if that strategy is the "best one" or if keeping an elite edge is the "best" way of implementing that strategy. I think it would be even better if we had two good CBs on rookie deals (like both the Chiefs and Bucks had last year). But you can only retain the players you have.

  9. #59
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    How many teams win SuperBowls as a result of overpaying players?

    I donít think anyones being irrational in the discussion. No one has any issue with Watt as a player. Although your argument about him not smoking blounts is very compelling.

    Seriously though, why not pay him $100m / year? There has to be some price where everyone would question is the price worth it? At some point the contract size impedes our ability to compete.

    Maybe he got a fair market deal and many are ok with that. But in general, no one gets rich by overpaying for stuff.

    Sometimes the market is irrational. Loads of people thought Enron was a good investment at one point and time. Many of those folks ended up broke.

    Thereís a fine line in this league. And a couple players not playing to the value in their contracts can be the difference.

    Either way, Iím rooting for TJ and the Steelers to win SuperBowls together.

    So far they couldnít make it happen on his rookie contract. Now weíve got a lot more invested in him with a lot bigger expectations.
    Exactly. It's weird to try and shame people for discussing Watts contract situation like it isn't what we do when there is a big contract negotiation.

    What we say has no impact on the team.

    Anyway... our results with Watt on a rookie contract definitely concern me now that he is making $28 mill per. His production deserves a healthy compensation but will we be rewarded for our investment?

    Time will tell.
    Tomlinís coming back so what can you do?


  10. #60
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    I really don’t get some of this thinking about watt.

    his production is fine. Anyone giving you the production of a top 3 defensive player is doing his job and then some. We probably got more bang for the buck the last 4 years with TJ then any team in the league has with Any player.

    the problem is the rest of the guys on the defense/team/and yes coaching.
    I’m not saying no one else lived up to expectations and their salary but there are many I would love to see similar production from.
    some were even drafted right around the same spot as Him

    the rams pay Aaron Donald a lot of money and he’s the best d player in the league.
    they also haven’t won a SB.
    Have they made a mistake in signing him to that contract??

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •