Edelman's Numbers

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Edelman's Numbers

     

    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4760458/closer-look-at-edelmans-contract-2?ex_cid=espnapi_public

    Breaking down receiver Julian Edelman’s contract with the Patriots:

    Term: Four years
    Signing bonus: $5 million
    Maximum value: $19 million

    2014
    Base: $1 million (guaranteed)
    Roster bonus: $500,000 ($31,250 per game on 46-man roster)
    Incentives: Up to $500,000
    Cap: $2.75 million

    2015
    Base: $2.25 million ($2 million guaranteed for injury only, converts to skill guarantee in ’15)
    Roster bonus: $750,000 ($46,875 per game on 46-man roster)
    Incentives: Up to $500,000
    Cap: $4.25 million

    2016
    Base: $2.5 million
    Roster bonus: $750,000 ($46,875 per game on 46-man roster)
    Offseason workout: $250,000
    Incentives: Up to $500,000
    Cap: $4.75 million

    2017
    Base: $3 million
    Roster bonus: $750,000 ($46,875 per game on 46-man roster)
    Offseason workout: $250,000
    Incentives: Up to $500,000
    Cap: $5.25 million

    QUICK-HIT THOUGHTS: This is what we’d define as a “real” contract that gives Edelman a chance to earn all the money because there are no volatile spikes in future years to inflate the overall terms of the contract (in contrast to Darrelle Revis’ contract). In looking at the incentives, one thing that stood out was that one of them was for team wins, which was a different twist to tie the team’s success into a player’s earnings. There was interest in comparing this contract to what Danny Amendola signed last year, and the feeling here is that Edelman, while coming up a bit short of Amendola's guaranteed money, was simply hurt a bit by timing. Had he had a 105-catch season in 2012 and hit the market in 2013, he probably would have commanded more. But the market takes on a different shape each year and the overall receiver market was down in 2014 compared to last year. Thus, the feeling here is that Edelman did well given those circumstances, and the Patriots rewarded him fairly while navigating a tricky situation because of the Amendola deal.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    This is essentially a deal they can get out from after a single year if Edelman gets injured or the skill isn't there or after 2 years with minimal impact on dead money. It seems to shape up that after this year the way the contract is set up they can chose either Edelman or Amendola and cut the other and have similar dead money impact.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers


    Signing our own talent who just caught a 100 balls in our system for under 5 million per year for 4 years, with only 8 guaranteed and over half of that in the 1st year. Another great addition, and another great example of how well the GM played the market.

    What happened to signing all the big name free agents everybody said we needed? The Erick Deckers, the T.J Wards, the Jarius Byrds, the Dennis Pitas, the Jared Allens? This team can't win signing value free agents and risk players like Browner, Lafell, Jules and 1 year rental of a top CB in history....right?

    Btw from a front office perspective we will now have a top 5 CB on our team for the last 3 years at a total of 20 million in Revis and Talib for 2 years. Less then 7 per.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from joepatsfan111111. Show joepatsfan111111's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    Albert Breer@AlbertBreer 23m

    As a practical matter, Edelman's contract reads like a two-year, $9.5 million deal, with club options for '16 and '17.

     

     

    god yes BB.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What happened to signing all the big name free agents everybody said we needed? The Erick Deckers, the T.J Wards, the Jarius Byrds, the Dennis Pitas, the Jared Allens? This team can't win signing value free agents and risk players like Browner, Lafell, Jules and 1 year rental of a top CB in history....right?

    [/QUOTE]

    Because signing the top two press CB's in the league isn't signing big name FA's at all...... wow True you are melting down in spin control. Just face it BB tweeked his system and has a sense of urgency with Brady this year even looking into getting D. Jax. Much like he did in 07' which everyone agrees was a departure from the norm for the Pats. Maybe he put down the pipe and said "man Amendola, Jenkins, A. Wilson, and Jones I have to get some talent for this team instead of low balling FA's. Wait I gave Arrington how much?"

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Signing our own talent who just caught a 100 balls in our system for under 5 million per year for 4 years, with only 8 guaranteed and over half of that in the 1st year. Another great addition, and another great example of how well the GM played the market.

    What happened to signing all the big name free agents everybody said we needed? The Erick Deckers, the T.J Wards, the Jarius Byrds, the Dennis Pitas, the Jared Allens? This team can't win signing value free agents and risk players like Browner, Lafell, Jules and 1 year rental of a top CB in history....right?

    Btw from a front office perspective we will now have a top 5 CB on our team for the last 3 years at a total of 20 million in Revis and Talib for 2 years. Less then 7 per.

    [/QUOTE]


    Who is Brady throwing the ball to this year?

    Same guys as last year with the addition of one receiver who hasn't cracked 700 yards in a season.

    Decker would have been nice.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    Because signing the top two press CB's in the league isn't signing big name FA's at all...... wow True you are melting down in spin control. Just face it BB tweeked his system and has a sense of urgency with Brady this year even looking into getting D. Jax. Much like he did in 07' which everyone agrees was a departure from the norm for the Pats. Maybe he put down the pipe and said "man Amendola, Jenkins, A. Wilson, and Jones I have to get some talent for this team instead of low balling FA's. Wait I gave Arrington how much?"



    The Browner deal might be the most team friendly deal ever.  How many guys agree to that kind of deal in years past?  Only Revis was a bit outside the box and it was still only for one year.  Players like Revis usually aren't available in FA.  As for Arrington his price doesn't look so bad now that the top CB are getting 10 million per.  D Jax is all noise.  Never going to happen.  To me this isn't as big of a departure from the norm as everyone thinks.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:


    Who is Brady throwing the ball to this year?

    Same guys as last year with the addition of one receiver who hasn't cracked 700 yards in a season.



    We scored more points than all but two teams in the NFL last season.  Maybe we're not going to be far and away the best offense in the NFL like we have been in seasons past, but if the defense improves does that really matter?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We scored more points than all but two teams in the NFL last season.  Maybe we're not going to be far and away the best offense in the NFL like we have been in seasons past, but if the defense improves does that really matter?

    [/QUOTE]

    Not when it mattered most.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Signing our own talent who just caught a 100 balls in our system for under 5 million per year for 4 years, with only 8 guaranteed and over half of that in the 1st year. Another great addition, and another great example of how well the GM played the market.

    What happened to signing all the big name free agents everybody said we needed? The Erick Deckers, the T.J Wards, the Jarius Byrds, the Dennis Pitas, the Jared Allens? This team can't win signing value free agents and risk players like Browner, Lafell, Jules and 1 year rental of a top CB in history....right?

    Btw from a front office perspective we will now have a top 5 CB on our team for the last 3 years at a total of 20 million in Revis and Talib for 2 years. Less then 7 per.

    [/QUOTE]

    Good god man, why can't you just say it was a good signing and leave the rest of it out? You're dangerously close to rusty level of annoying this offseason...

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Because signing the top two press CB's in the league isn't signing big name FA's at all...... wow True you are melting down in spin control. Just face it BB tweeked his system and has a sense of urgency with Brady this year even looking into getting D. Jax. Much like he did in 07' which everyone agrees was a departure from the norm for the Pats. Maybe he put down the pipe and said "man Amendola, Jenkins, A. Wilson, and Jones I have to get some talent for this team instead of low balling FA's. Wait I gave Arrington how much?"

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The Browner deal might be the most team friendly deal ever.  How many guys agree to that kind of deal in years past?  Only Revis was a bit outside the box and it was still only for one year.  Players like Revis usually aren't available in FA.  As for Arrington his price doesn't look so bad now that the top CB are getting 10 million per.  D Jax is all noise.  Never going to happen.  To me this isn't as big of a departure from the norm as everyone thinks.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    One's that are 1 strike away from being out of the league but see the average annual value as being fair market. It's a good deal from both sides here, lets not act like Browner isn't getting good money to play.

    Arrington's a 5th CB right now. Go find another 5th CB out there making even half as much. You can't really compare #1 CB's to Arrington and say what a deal, sorry.

    How it's a departure from the norm. Before Revis the highest they ever paid any CB in BB tenure was Bodden as the 21st in the league. Now they have 2 contracts with average annual values in the top 20. Prior to 07' and post 07' they never paid a FA (not their own) an annual amount in the top 10 of their position. The last top 25 FA they signed was Thomas in 07' and none since. Going over the last 3 years they never paid a FA higher than top 6 on the team, Revis in what's essentially shattered that by being paid as the #2 highest on the team. Why is it every analysist, reporter, and former players all say this is different than any year but you guys say it's the same? Are those guys who get paid as experts and former players wrong in that statement? 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    One's that are 1 strike away from being out of the league but see the average annual value as being fair market. It's a good deal from both sides here, lets not act like Browner isn't getting good money to play.

    BB has no problem paying large money to players as long as he knows they will fit in the system (hence why we have made homegrown players some of the highest paid at their position over the years).  You can't know that with players from other teams which is why he usually shies away from paying them.  With Browner they get to "fly before they buy" because if he doesn't work they can cut ties with no consequence.  I guarantee you if BB could get other top FAs to sign contracts like that he would have.

    Arrington's a 5th CB right now. Go find another 5th CB out there making even half as much. You can't really compare #1 CB's to Arrington and say what a deal, sorry.

    Arrington when healthy is the top slot corner on this team.  That means he will play most of the snaps because we spend so much time in sub packages.  So you can keep repeating this nonsense about #5 CB, but it is false.  Despite his injury problems he still played the 2nd most snaps of all our corners this past year.  In addition he is getting some money because of his place on special teams which BB values more than a lot of other GMs. You spent all of last season telling us that Arrington was grossly overpaid because of the contracts handed out to corners last year (most of which btw were for one year).  Well the market has corrected itself and now Arrington's deal doesn't look so bad regardless of how you want to spin it particularly when you consider that some of the money he is getting paid is for his ST contributions.

    How it's a departure from the norm. Before Revis the highest they ever paid any CB in BB tenure was Bodden as the 21st in the league. Now they have 2 contracts with average annual values in the top 20. Prior to 07' and post 07' they never paid a FA (not their own) an annual amount in the top 10 of their position. The last top 25 FA they signed was Thomas in 07' and none since. Going over the last 3 years they never paid a FA higher than top 6 on the team, Revis in what's essentially shattered that by being paid as the #2 highest on the team. Why is it every analysist, reporter, and former players all say this is different than any year but you guys say it's the same? Are those guys who get paid as experts and former players wrong in that statement? 

    The fact is that both the Browner and Revis deals are very low risk (Revis because it is only one year and Browner because of the lack of guaranteed money).  In addition the Revis situation is unique because players' of Revis caliber are rarely allowed to test FA.  I maintain that if the Patriots could get premier free agents to agree to these kind of deals in the past they might have done it more, but these types of deals for top players are anomalies, not the norm.




     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    One's that are 1 strike away from being out of the league but see the average annual value as being fair market. It's a good deal from both sides here, lets not act like Browner isn't getting good money to play.

    BB has no problem paying large money to players as long as he knows they will fit in the system (hence why we have made homegrown players some of the highest paid at their position over the years).  You can't know that with players from other teams which is why he usually shies away from paying them.  With Browner they get to "fly before they buy" because if he doesn't work they can cut ties with no consequence.  I guarantee you if BB could get other top FAs to sign contracts like that he would have.

    The funny thing about your last statement is no other FA would take that type of deal and the only reason Browner did was because of the reason I stated

    Arrington's a 5th CB right now. Go find another 5th CB out there making even half as much. You can't really compare #1 CB's to Arrington and say what a deal, sorry.

    Arrington when healthy is the top slot corner on this team.  That means he will play most of the snaps because we spend so much time in sub packages.  So you can keep repeating this nonsense about #5 CB, but it is false.  Despite his injury problems he still played the 2nd most snaps of all our corners this past year.  In addition he is getting some money because of his place on special teams which BB values more than a lot of other GMs. You spent all of last season telling us that Arrington was grossly overpaid because of the contracts handed out to corners last year (most of which btw were for one year).  Well the market has corrected itself and now Arrington's deal doesn't look so bad regardless of how you want to spin it particularly when you consider that some of the money he is getting paid is for his ST contributions.

    He was so good Ryan replaced him at the end of the year. The reason he got the 2nd most snaps is because Talib was either out or wasn't nearly well enough to start for a 3rd of the season. Dennard also had his injury moments too. But if you don't think he's the 5th CB tell me, do you think he's better than Revis or Browner? Since Ryan was playing over Arrington by the end of the season and Arrington was benched multiple times for Ryan I wouldn't put Arrington above him. Also when Dennard was healthy Arrington was playing below him. That's 4 CB's above him he's the 5th CB on the team no matter how you try to justify it. It was just a bad contract and one I bet they rid themselves of next year once it saves them more to not have him on the team then it would cost to cut him.

    How it's a departure from the norm. Before Revis the highest they ever paid any CB in BB tenure was Bodden as the 21st in the league. Now they have 2 contracts with average annual values in the top 20. Prior to 07' and post 07' they never paid a FA (not their own) an annual amount in the top 10 of their position. The last top 25 FA they signed was Thomas in 07' and none since. Going over the last 3 years they never paid a FA higher than top 6 on the team, Revis in what's essentially shattered that by being paid as the #2 highest on the team. Why is it every analysist, reporter, and former players all say this is different than any year but you guys say it's the same? Are those guys who get paid as experts and former players wrong in that statement? 

    The fact is that both the Browner and Revis deals are very low risk (Revis because it is only one year and Browner because of the lack of guaranteed money).  In addition the Revis situation is unique because players' of Revis caliber are rarely allowed to test FA.  I maintain that if the Patriots could get premier free agents to agree to these kind of deals in the past they might have done it more, but these types of deals for top players are anomalies, not the norm.

    So, that the Pats did something they've never done before, unique situations, or not proves that this is the norm? How does that make sense. Since they've never done it before that inherently means it's different from what they've done before regardless of the circumstances.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    [/QUOTE]


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Signing our own talent who just caught a 100 balls in our system for under 5 million per year for 4 years, with only 8 guaranteed and over half of that in the 1st year. Another great addition, and another great example of how well the GM played the market.

    What happened to signing all the big name free agents everybody said we needed? The Erick Deckers, the T.J Wards, the Jarius Byrds, the Dennis Pitas, the Jared Allens? This team can't win signing value free agents and risk players like Browner, Lafell, Jules and 1 year rental of a top CB in history....right?

    Btw from a front office perspective we will now have a top 5 CB on our team for the last 3 years at a total of 20 million in Revis and Talib for 2 years. Less then 7 per.




    Who is Brady throwing the ball to this year?

    Same guys as last year with the addition of one receiver who hasn't cracked 700 yards in a season.

    Decker would have been nice.

    [/QUOTE]

    I know we'd all like to see a more exciting passing game, but, is there a caveat requiring the Pats to have more exciting receivers?  As long as the W's keep adding up, style points are only for the finicky.  

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    The funny thing about your last statement is no other FA would take that type of deal and the only reason Browner did was because of the reason I stated

    No kidding.  Which is why saying that the Pats suddenly changed the way they do FA is silly.  What changed was the players available and what kind of deals they were willing to take.

    He was so good Ryan replaced him at the end of the year. The reason he got the 2nd most snaps is because Talib was either out or wasn't nearly well enough to start for a 3rd of the season. Dennard also had his injury moments too. But if you don't think he's the 5th CB tell me, do you think he's better than Revis or Browner? Since Ryan was playing over Arrington by the end of the season and Arrington was benched multiple times for Ryan I wouldn't put Arrington above him. Also when Dennard was healthy Arrington was playing below him. That's 4 CB's above him he's the 5th CB on the team no matter how you try to justify it. It was just a bad contract and one I bet they rid themselves of next year once it saves them more to not have him on the team then it would cost to cut him.

    He just had groin surgery.  Maybe he wasn't healthy?  As I said before when healthy he is the top slot corner on this team meaning he will play more snaps than any other corner that isn't one of the top 2 outside guys.  In today's NFL the slot is a different position than outside.  It's like arguing that Mankins is overpaid because he's 3rd on the LT depth chart.  For the record I never said it was a great contract, but you spent most of last offseason and this past regular season ripping it because of some one year deals that a few guys took in a weird market for CBs last season.  That looks pretty foolish now regardless of how you want to spin it.  So yeah maybe Arrington isn't the best value in the NFL, but it is hardly as bad as you have been painting it to be for the past year.

    So, that the Pats did something they've never done before, unique situations, or not proves that this is the norm? How does that make sense. Since they've never done it before that inherently means it's different from what they've done before regardless of the circumstances.

    You seem to be conflating method and outcome which is wrong.  My claim is that the reason the Patriots don't usually sign big ticket free agents is because they don't like handing out onerous long term contracts to players they don't know.  That hasn't changed.  What has changed is that there were 2 big ticket FAs available that were willing to accept "low-risk" contracts which the Patriots have always been willing to give.  Most offseasons this isn't the case.

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    Paul Perillo from patriots.com has said that this is unlikely previous offseasons. Even he, a self called Patriot super homer, said this is different than what they typically do solely because of Revis and Browner this year. A guy that writes for the Patriots has said this is a different offseason than the Pats have normally done so I think I will trust him in saying it's different.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    We are just talking past each other at this point so I'm going to stop after this last post.  What I've maintained from the very beginning is that this offseason has been different in the sense that two top tier FAs from other teams signed with us.  What I'm disputing is that this is due to some wholesale philsophy change in the way the team approaches FA.  What I'm claiming is that what actually changed is the market which allowed the Patriots to sign two top tier FAs to "low-risk" contracts that are normally not sufficient to land these kind of FAs (hence why we haven't signed them with any regularity in the past).

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We are just talking past each other at this point so I'm going to stop after this last post.  What I've maintained from the very beginning is that this offseason has been different in the sense that two top tier FAs from other teams signed with us.  What I'm disputing is that this is due to some wholesale philsophy change in the way the team approaches FA.  What I'm claiming is that what actually changed is the market which allowed the Patriots to sign two top tier FAs to "low-risk" contracts that are normally not sufficient to land these kind of FAs (hence why we haven't signed them with any regularity in the past).

    [/QUOTE]

    And I've said from the beginning this isn't a whole sale shift in philosophy but a tweek that some of us wanted. By tweek I mean investing more into your upper half of the roster with younger durable player closer to their prime. This isn't a complete dump the system approach. I still like signings like LaFell and bringing Edelman back but this is the tweek some of us wanted which is different and not the norm from how the Pats normally handle things. Perillo sees it different and Zo who's the biggest Pat homer in NE has said the same as that it represented a tweek in offseason philosophy. That's all we're saying.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    I know we'd all like to see a more exciting passing game, but, is there a caveat requiring the Pats to have more exciting receivers?  As long as the W's keep adding up, style points are only for the finicky.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't care about the fun or excitement.  I care about the victories.  There were a lot of them in 2013, but how many were based on nothing more than magic?

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: Edelman's Numbers

    Good for BB fr not getting suckered into overpaying for Edelman. I called it, no more than 2.5 million.

     

Share