WR salary cap numbers for Pats

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    I know money isn't everything but just saw Reese's breakdown of the Gaffney deal and started wondering about how the Salary Cap number for the receivers looked:
    Ocho: 2.6
    Lloyd: 2.0
    Slater: 1.5
    Gaffney: 1.4
    Branch: 1.3
    Gonzalez: 0.7
    Edelman: 0.6
    Stallworth: 0.6
    Britt: 0.5
    For these nine combined - 11.2M
    For Welker - 9.5M
    Those numbers are not the actual money being paid but the cap hit the team takes for each.
    Welker is a great player and is a huge asset to the team. And his numbers last year are far superior to any of the other WR on this list, but ... You look at guys like Gaffney and Lloyd who combined come in at a cost almost 2/3 less than Welker and you do begin to see where the Pats are coming from in negotiations.
    Not sure where the Pats would spend that money if not on Welker, but that is a significant 'opportunity' cost.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    Trade Welker and use that money to extend GRONK and YAC Man.  That's what I'd do.  No way I would let their rookie contract go into there final year.  Keep them happy and productive.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from FishTaco64. Show FishTaco64's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    To be fair, they have gotten Welker for spare change for the last 5 years.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaBlade. Show DaBlade's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    First... I AM SO SICK and TIRED of hearing,"Well Welker deserves the big contract because the Patriots got him on the cheap the past 5 years."  Lets get something straight yes they signed him to a below market deal but he SIGNED IT! NO one held a gun to his head.

    Second... the WR's they have here now are almost mind boggling. I see a break down of WR's this way...
    Lloyd, Gaffney, Gonzalez, Ocho, Edleman and Slater on the roster with Britt on the P.S.

    Third... The Patriots are Welkers best option if he wants to continue having the type of years he has had.  Conversely Welker is the best option for the Patriots if they want to maintain a high function offense. Caveat, This only works if Welker is reasonable and doesn't think he deserves the type of contract so far it seems he wants. Otherwise the patriots can trade him and move on without killing their offense. Sure they will miss him but not as much as hell miss them TRUST ME!

    If they do trade him look for the Patriots to use some of that money to resign a couple of the guys they need to keep long term coming up like Gronk and Hernandez.


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

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

     The Welker debate will rage on ...until it doesn't.

     Fair arguments to be made for keeping and trading .

     I admit that the more we pick up useful wr pieces -
    the more I'd be inclined to entertain offers .

    But right now for me I'm keepin him .

     Welkers on field and locker room stability / presence are intangibles that money cant buy .

     At any rate - the Pats are in no hurry to decide .

    They will let the camp wr battles play out .

    Unfortunately -
    Welkers best move ( besides juz signing for  lil less and continuing his Patriots Hall of fame career ) may be to sit out as long as possible and hope :
    A) The wrs dont mesh
    B) One or more get hurt
    C) Both of the above

    Knowing Wes -he'll be hopin' for juz option A .

        If I was close to Wes I'd advise him to look at and contrast the careers of two prominant Patriots wide recievers :

    Troy Brown & Deon Branch

    One guy stuck with the club and is now a local legend who'll soon be enshrined in the Pats Hall of Fame ... can't imagine TB ever havin to buy himself his own beer in beantown.
     The other could have easily followed the same path - but $trayed for greener pastures ( ugly lime green ) and now i , tho back in the fold - will never approach the adulation of Troy Brown .
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    In Response to WR salary cap numbers for Pats:
    Ocho: 2.6 Lloyd: 2.0 Slater: 1.5 Gaffney: 1.4 Branch: 1.3 Gonzalez: 0.7 Edelman: 0.6 Stallworth: 0.6 Britt: 0.5 For these nine combined - 11.2M For Welker - 9.5M
    Posted by mia76


    Take anyone in the 1.5 range out of the nine combined and Welker out performs the other 8 combined.

    That's the thing... There are 3-4 WR's there who are dead weight.  Get rid of them and pay Wes his money.  You guys seem to forget that Wes is the one who makes everything else go.  Take away Wes, sure you will still get production from the others stepping in to fill his role but when Championship time comes...they lose without him because nobody can play that position like WW. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    every day I read these forums and I cant believe how many folks are saying "trade Welker!" Yes I am as mad as anyone about the HUGE drop in the SB, but you cant just throw an Edelman, Gonazales or a rookie out there and expect to replace WW's numbers! Some say throw it more to the TE's. Well the TE's are open because WW is drawing the D's attention underneath. And now that I am on my soapbox, I got to say, Edelman has more drops in his career than he has receptions!! Why do some folks conveniently forget this?! The guys a good ST guy but will never be a starting reciever on a winning team. 9.5M alot of money for a slot reciever? Heck yes it is, but WW is what makes our offense go!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    They could immediately and drastically cut that figure next to Welker's name by giving him a real contract. 

    The drawback of the franchise tag is the the salary cap space needs to be cleared and open in the books regardless of whether the player signs the tender. They are forced to take a hit against dollars that might expire at the end of a longer deal. 

    In the end, I don't think he is going to pull down a yearly as high as 9.5. But he should come in closer to 6-7. I think, given his age, though, it is not the dollars holding this thing up, but the years. 

    The Pats really do need to be cagy about this, because you don't want to be paying the guy in a fourth year when he is a shell of himself. I don't see the salary cap increasing like it has in years past, so you can't count on that growth to essentially 'inflate' the problem away by devaluing the contract, at least not the way it happened between 99-2010 where max contracts weren't max for more than the season they were signed. 

    H3ck, look at Asante. He was the second highest paid CB when he was inked, and last year, on average salary, he was on the backside of the top ten.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    In Response to WR salary cap numbers for Pats:
    I know money isn't everything but just saw Reese's breakdown of the Gaffney deal and started wondering about how the Salary Cap number for the receivers looked: Ocho: 2.6 Lloyd: 2.0 Slater: 1.5 Gaffney: 1.4 Branch: 1.3 Gonzalez: 0.7 Edelman: 0.6 Stallworth: 0.6 Britt: 0.5 For these nine combined - 11.2M For Welker - 9.5M Those numbers are not the actual money being paid but the cap hit the team takes for each. Welker is a great player and is a huge asset to the team. And his numbers last year are far superior to any of the other WR on this list, but ... You look at guys like Gaffney and Lloyd who combined come in at a cost almost 2/3 less than Welker and you do begin to see where the Pats are coming from in negotiations. Not sure where the Pats would spend that money if not on Welker, but that is a significant 'opportunity' cost.
    Posted by mia76


    Also, these numbers are really low. No wonder the Pats haven't had a legitimate outside threat. This is cheap stuff.

    Let's hope Lloyd proves to be a steal, he could open this offense up. Maybe not as much as Moss, but then, when Moss opened the offense up, there wasn't nearly as much to be afraid of underneath.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    I think people are getting ahead of themselves. None of those guys outside of Welker are top level receivers. They may find a way to look good here next year but if you start naming the best receivers in the NFL you will get about 30 names out until you get to Lloyd. There is a reason all those guys are so cheap, and it has a lot to do with nobody being willing to pay them. 12 pretty good receivers don't make a great one, and only 2 will be on the field 90% of the time. Last year the complaint was the 3rd receiver, this year it's a stable of third receivers, let Welker go and we'll be saying "Who's the #1 and #2 receivers? No, I'm not convinced Lloyd will be great. Looking at his career I don't know how anyone could be.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    In Response to Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats:
    They could immediately and drastically cut that figure next to Welker's name by giving him a real contract.  The drawback of the franchise tag is the the salary cap space needs to be cleared and open in the books regardless of whether the player signs the tender. They are forced to take a hit against dollars that might expire at the end of a longer deal.  In the end, I don't think he is going to pull down a yearly as high as 9.5. But he should come in closer to 6-7. I think, given his age, though, it is not the dollars holding this thing up, but the years.  The Pats really do need to be cagy about this, because you don't want to be paying the guy in a fourth year when he is a shell of himself. I don't see the salary cap increasing like it has in years past, so you can't count on that growth to essentially 'inflate' the problem away by devaluing the contract, at least not the way it happened between 99-2010 where max contracts weren't max for more than the season they were signed.  H3ck, look at Asante. He was the second highest paid CB when he was inked, and last year, on average salary, he was on the backside of the top ten.
    Posted by zbellino

    Everything I have read is suggesting WW is looking at a minimum of 3/27M or 9M per. I think the Pats would sign a 3/21 deal without an issue including a big signing bonus to give him the 16M they already offered on a 2 year guaranteed deal. I just don't think they want to allocate 8-9M/year to the slot position for more than 2 years. I think that is their bottom line.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaBlade. Show DaBlade's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    mia76 is right the Patriots would be stupid to go more then 3 years at 24mil. in my book and guarantee 17 of it. Welker would likely be worth 7 million in the third year but beyond that you are looking at diminishing returns for a small slot WR that has the injury history he has with the way he plays his position he has taken a ton of hard hits.
    COLD HARD FACTS
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    Zbellino and Shenanigan make good points about the quality of this receiving corp generally matching its cost.  There are a lot of guys in the mix, some of whom have been good and even excellent at points in their careers, but none who is clearly a top WR in the league at this time. Even Welker, for all his skills and production, seems more a system guy.  Which gets me to another point--BB has a way of getting the most out of guys like these.  He knows how to put the right mix of people on the field to create match up problems--and he knows how to put players in situations where they can flourish, even if they don't have elite skills in everything normally required in their position.  Welker is a guy who did pretty good in Miami, but has been great in New England.  Welker deserves a lot of the credit for that, but I think so does BB, since it was BB who figured out how to utilize Welker in ways that allowed Welker to thrive where other coaches would have probably tried to fit him into a pre-existing mold which may not have suited his skills as well.

    As far as Welker's contract, there's a dilemma here.  The Pats probably can live with paying Welker the $9.5 million for one year as required by the franchise tag or about $16 million for two years (as I believe they've already offered), but Welker clearly wants a chance at a bigger deal (and I can't blame him--this could be his last chance to make big money, it being his third contract).  But a bigger deal will only be possible if it's for three, four, or even five years because a long deal is the only way to prevent a huge short-term salary cap hit. This is problematic if the Pats don't feel Welker will last that long.  My guess is the end result will be that Welker plays under the tag this year and then tries again for a long-term deal next year.  If the Pats still want him, they'll have to tag him again (probably at $10+ million) or offer him the long-term deal with the big signing bonus then.  If the Pats don't want him, he will be an unrestricted free agent and can try with another team.  So from Welker's point of view, there's very little advantage to signing a two-year $16 million deal.  It does provide a bit of security if all $16 million is guaranteed, but at the same time it probably diminishes his two-year earnings, since even playing under the tag two years in a row means more like $20 million.  



     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    The tag is either the average of the top 5 at your position or 120% of your last years salary - so if WW signs the tag this year at 9.5M the cost of the tag next year would be $11.4 M (9.5 M + 1.9 M) - I do not see that as a number the Pats would be willing to pay so he would be an URFA next year.
    If he is healthy, he probably has a higher market value at 32, than he would have if he signs a two year deal with the Pats and hits free agency at 33.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    In Response to Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats:
    The tag is either the average of the top 5 at your position or 120% of your last years salary - so if WW signs the tag this year at 9.5M the cost of the tag next year would be $11.4 M (9.5 M + 1.9 M) - I do not see that as a number the Pats would be willing to pay so he would be an URFA next year. If he is healthy, he probably has a higher market value at 32, than he would have if he signs a two year deal with the Pats and hits free agency at 33.
    Posted by mia76



    You're right, which is why Welker won't sign a two-year deal unless it's a very sweet one.  He's better off playing under the tag this year and then hitting the market next year (when he could potentially still get a big free agent deal) than locking himself up for two years at a good, but not great salary, and then having to try to get the big deal two years from now when he's another year older or maybe injured or starting to show a decline in productivity.  The two-year deal is good for the Pats, but not really good for Welker unless it is for a particularly high guaranteed amount. 


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

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    Not sure of the history here but have the Pats under BB every given a w/r a contract longer than 3 years?  I could be wrong but even if I am I doubt that they would in this case. 

    I also am inclined to agree with respect to the 'averageness' of the rest of the w/r corps.  Lloyd and Gaffney could have great years - or not.  Ocho has been a huge disappointment. Stallworth is aging and the rest are certainly not going to strike fear in the heart of any NFL D-coord.

    Agree, the Pats play their cards close to their vest and see if they can't sign Welker closer to their terms or just let the franchise tag do its thing this year.  I'm not sure I see a trade coming in Welker's case.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    In Response to Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats:
    Not sure of the history here but have the Pats under BB every given a w/r a contract longer than 3 years?  I could be wrong but even if I am I doubt that they would in this case.  I also am inclined to agree with respect to the 'averageness' of the rest of the w/r corps.  Lloyd and Gaffney could have great years - or not.  Ocho has been a huge disappointment. Stallworth is aging and the rest are certainly not going to strike fear in the heart of any NFL D-coord. Agree, the Pats play their cards close to their vest and see if they can't sign Welker closer to their terms or just let the franchise tag do its thing this year.  I'm not sure I see a trade coming in Welker's case.
    Posted by ATJ

    I think you are right on the 3 yr max at least in recent history - though WW is coming off a four or five year deal right now.
    On the averageness - I just checked and the wide-out combo of Branch, Ocho, Slater, and Underwood last year caught 70 balls. Not very impressive. Compare that to Lloyd and Gaffney at 70 and 68 respectively playing on crap offensives with crap QBs. Part of the reason WW had 120 catches last year is the quality of the other WR on the team. With Gaffeny and Lloyd, chances are his production drops significantly because those two would be open more often than an aging Branch (51 balls)and a non-existent third option (19 total.)
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    In Response to Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats:
    They could immediately and drastically cut that figure next to Welker's name by giving him a real contract.  The drawback of the franchise tag is the the salary cap space needs to be cleared and open in the books regardless of whether the player signs the tender. They are forced to take a hit against dollars that might expire at the end of a longer deal.  In the end, I don't think he is going to pull down a yearly as high as 9.5. But he should come in closer to 6-7. I think, given his age, though, it is not the dollars holding this thing up, but the years.  The Pats really do need to be cagy about this, because you don't want to be paying the guy in a fourth year when he is a shell of himself. I don't see the salary cap increasing like it has in years past, so you can't count on that growth to essentially 'inflate' the problem away by devaluing the contract, at least not the way it happened between 99-2010 where max contracts weren't max for more than the season they were signed.  H3ck, look at Asante. He was the second highest paid CB when he was inked, and last year, on average salary, he was on the backside of the top ten.
    Posted by zbellino



    i said elsewhere
    ww i believe is looking for 10 + per year and wants 5 yrs but will accept 4 years.

    my guess, 
    i believe his options are sign the tag
    take the 2 yr 16 (or 3-21) 
    or quietly ask for a trade

    how much leverage does brady have with bb. that is a huuuuge question.

    i hope ebert is ww 2, soon or later

    we'll see
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from LittleTimmy31. Show LittleTimmy31's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    WW has been a monster in the regular season. Can't say much about the playoffs though. Low production and key drops like the one last year in the SB.

    IMO, WW needs the Pats more than the Pats need him. Sign the tag and get on with life.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from GO47. Show GO47's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    In Response to Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats:
    I think people are getting ahead of themselves. None of those guys outside of Welker are top level receivers. They may find a way to look good here next year but if you start naming the best receivers in the NFL you will get about 30 names out until you get to Lloyd. There is a reason all those guys are so cheap, and it has a lot to do with nobody being willing to pay them. 12 pretty good receivers don't make a great one, and only 2 will be on the field 90% of the time. Last year the complaint was the 3rd receiver, this year it's a stable of third receivers, let Welker go and we'll be saying "Who's the #1 and #2 receivers? No, I'm not convinced Lloyd will be great. Looking at his career I don't know how anyone could be.
    Posted by shenanigan


    I think the question was not so much who was the #2 and #3 receivers but who was the wideout who could stretch the field and be a weapon inside and outside the hash marks? They didn't have one. This allowed defenses to stuff the middle and take away big plays from the existing receivers whether it was the wideouts, slots, or TEs. Defenses are very concerned about being able to cover the TEs and WW on this team and design their game plans to take out both. Lloyd, Gaffney, and Stallworth have all proven they can play in this system. Once you have all the receivers on the field on the same page it gives TB an option he hasn't had for several years making it even more difficult for defenses to defend. But you still need WW to make it all work.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    In Response to Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats:
    In Response to Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats : i said elsewhere ww i believe is looking for 10 + per year and wants 5 yrs but will accept 4 years. my guess,  i believe his options are sign the tag take the 2 yr 16 (or 3-21)  or quietly ask for a trade how much leverage does brady have with bb. that is a huuuuge question. i hope ebert is ww 2, soon or later we'll see
    Posted by bredbru

    I suspect he would take 9M for 4 years, but agree that he is looking for basically tag level $ on at least a 3 year deal with more than 20M guaranteed.
    I really wonder if the Pats went to him and said - here are three signed contracts 9.5M one year, 16M 2 yr, 21 M 3 yr all guaranteed. We will agree to pull the franchise tag if you give us a gentleman's agreement to give us a right of first refusal on any contract you can get, or you can sign any one of these and we agree not to use the franchise tag on you again. I know he is a great receiver and there are some desperate teams out there, but ... I just don't think the market is going to be that high and that the teams that might offer more would be much less attractive to him.
    Most analysts seem to believe that both Lloyd and Gaffney took significantly below their market price to play for the Pats. Same might be true of Stallworth, though I don't think he would have gotten much more than he did from the Pats. WW also has to consider the situation elsewhere and not just the $ figure.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: WR salary cap numbers for Pats

    I don't know what the exact figure is in Welker's mind, but I suspect guaranteed money is more important to Welker than length of contract.  The dilemma is that big guarantees only come with longer-term contracts because the team needs to spread the signing bonus (which is the major guarantee) over as many years as possible to reduce the cap hit. This is probably why Welker is looking for a longer term contract--not so much because he cares to be locked up for a lot of years but because it's the only way to get the truly large signing bonus.

    My take is he'll play under the tag this year and test the market next year.  That could result in him getting between 20 and 30 million over two years, depending on what kind of signing bonus he can negotiate next year as a free agent.  This would certainly be better for Welker than accepting the Pats 16 million all-guaranteed two-year offer. (Though it is also a tad riskier for Welker, since if he gets injured or his production really drops he may not be able to get a good contract a year from now and therefore will miss out on some portion of the additional $6.5 million that the Pat's offer gives him beyond the $9.5 million he's guaranteed under the tag.)

    As long as the guaranteed amount approaches 20 million, I'd guess the Pats probably could be able to sign Welker to a ~20 million two-year deal, a ~27 million three-year deal, a ~35 mil four-year deal, or a ~40 million five-year deal.  From a salary cap perspective, the longer term deal (even a five-year deal) may be better for the Pats if they expect to keep him at least three years.  My suspicion, though, is the Pats feel they may not want him more than two years, in which case the tag looks like a better solution for the Pats. 

    All in all, it seems like playing under the tag is going to be the best compromise for both.  At least that's how I see it. 
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share