SectionC3 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 @mikerodak Bills lose some leverage but gain flexibility in declining Sammy Watkins 2018 option: http://www.espn.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/27898/bills-gain-flexibility-in-2018-by-declining-sammy-watkins-option @mikerodak If the Bills assign Sammy Watkins the franchise tag in 2018 (~$16-$17M), it will likely give him 2nd-highest cap #. Highest if Tyrod is cut. Rodak is wrong about the leverage. Sammy's injury history is the leverage. If Sammy has a great year he will get the tag and he will sign a long term deal. With that injury history (and the possibility he is one broken metatarsal away from irrelevancy) he highly likely to take the big guaranteed money as soon as he can get it. Another reason why this move by the bills is smart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Hopefully he stays on track. If I were OBD and he lights up training camp I either extend him a year for the 13 nil or do a new multiyear deal. Wanting to be sure he's OK is not a bad thing. Because he can easily say no. If we picked it up we have a minimum two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Not a knock against Sammy. But a year or so ago McCoy was our best and most talented player. And Dareus prior to his contract. And kyle Williams... etc Funny now the acclimation that Sammy is our best when 6 mos ago it was McCoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 It is simply that he is still hurt as evidenced by him not participating in OTAs. So why throw that hypothetical out there? If he had the flu would during OTAs would it be hypothetical to assume he might be ready for camp? There is a timeline for his return and that timeline is known to the Bills. In addition, there is an assessment as to whether we will be 100% at any point in the future. That assessment is known to the Bills. If it is a bad timeline/assessment then the Bills decision makes sense. If it is good, then the Bills made a mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Because he can easily say no. If we picked it up we have a minimum two years. Then he'll get tagged. But why assume the worst? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Rodak is wrong about the leverage. Sammy's injury history is the leverage. If Sammy has a great year he will get the tag and he will sign a long term deal. With that injury history (and the possibility he is one broken metatarsal away from irrelevancy) he highly likely to take the big guaranteed money as soon as he can get it. Another reason why this move by the bills is smart. LOL. 31 other teams can assess Sammy's "injury history" in any way they like if the Bills play hardball. They can do so a year earlier now. Do you think all 31 of them are looking out for the Bills salary cap? OMFG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Let me first say that you, unlike others, are using logic in your argument. Thank you. Again, assuming the foot is not seen by doctors as some sort of unfixable issue: Extending Sammy, is not really impacted too much in either scenario but this will force the process to happen sooner. None of the above delves into the psychological impact the decision could have on Sammy or others, but that landscape could change too. It might not change, but it might. Why mess with it? So either the foot is a known ongoing problem, or the Bills move made no sense. Reading it again, I dont think our positions are too far off. I think where we differ is in the value of the psychological effects. Up to this point, Sammy's effect on the team has been only game related. I havent yet seen or heard of him taking a leadership role in the locker room (ala KyleW). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Then he'll get tagged. But why assume the worst? Because is you picked up the option he can't say no. For two years. If you tag him he can say no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heitz Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Because is you picked up the option he can't say no. For two years. If you tag him he can say no. Sure "he can say no", but it's not an easy no. Signing the tag is easy, forcing a trade, or sitting out a season is NOT... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Not a knock against Sammy. But a year or so ago McCoy was our best and most talented player. And Dareus prior to his contract. And kyle Williams... etc Funny now the acclimation that Sammy is our best when 6 mos ago it was McCoy. IMHO, A healthy Watkins is more influential on the team's offensive production than McCoy. KyleW is just a hard worker who maximizes his talent on the field. Watkins just has an abundance of natural talent and plays a position which affects the teams performance a lot more. Dareus is a natural talent but singularly unfocused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 IMHO, A healthy Watkins is more influential on the team's offensive production than McCoy. KyleW is just a hard worker who maximizes his talent on the field. Watkins just has an abundance of natural talent and plays a position which affects the teams performance a lot more. Dareus is a natural talent but singularly unfocused. I don't disagree one bit. But i said it because of fan perspective Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Sure "he can say no", but it's not an easy no. Signing the tag is easy, forcing a trade, or sitting out a season is NOT...It's not easy normally. But I think because of the kind of guy McD is, and the culture change he is trying to install, it would be easy. McD would say I want people that want to be here. I'm not predicting this. What I predict is Sammy is going to be fine and have a monster year and the Bills will try to sign him to a huge extension. If we have a good passing game and they don't ignore him like they have before I think he will be happy. I just don't know at all what is in his head. Or what kind of year we are going to have on offense. If they do what they need to do to get him the ball. What picking up the option means is we don't have to worry about that for an extra year. What not picking it up means we have to worry about that now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 LOL. 31 other teams can assess Sammy's "injury history" in any way they like if the Bills play hardball. They can do so a year earlier now. Do you think all 31 of them are looking out for the Bills salary cap? OMFG. Think this through a little bit more. The upside to not picking up the option is that the bills aren't on the hook for $13m next year if sammy's foot explodes again this year. The downside to not picking up the option is that it waives a year of control over the player. But the bills still have two "tag" years for Sammy, meaning that he essentially would play year to year with relatively limited guaranteed money during such times. With his injury history, and with the massive contract he could command if he fulfills his potential, to not take the guaranteed money early would be an enormous (and incredibly stupid) risk. Mark my words - this is not a guy who will play under a tag for two years. Look at gronk taking guaranteed money early (albeit not under threat of a tag) if you need an illustration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Think this through a little bit more. The upside to not picking up the option is that the bills aren't on the hook for $13m next year if sammy's foot explodes again this year. The downside to not picking up the option is that it waives a year of control over the player. But the bills still have two "tag" years for Sammy, meaning that he essentially would play year to year with relatively limited guaranteed money during such times. With his injury history, and with the massive contract he could command if he fulfills his potential, to not take the guaranteed money early would be an enormous (and incredibly stupid) risk. Mark my words - this is not a guy who will play under a tag for two years. Look at gronk taking guaranteed money early (albeit not under threat of a tag) if you need an illustration. Two tag years would be about 35m guaranteed. Then a long term extension would be about 50m more guaranteed. So in three years, you would have 85m guaranteed. Relatively limited... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Two tag years would be about 35m guaranteed. Then a long term extension would be about 50m more guaranteed. So in three years, you would have 85m guaranteed. Relatively limited... Which means that your starting point for a contract extension post-2017 would be for $35M guaranteed. It would probably have to be something similar to AJ Green's 4-year, $60M deal with slightly more than Green's $32.5M gtd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Which means that your starting point for a contract extension post-2017 would be for $35M guaranteed. It would probably have to be something similar to AJ Green's 4-year, $60M deal with slightly more than Green's $32.5M gtd. He's young. A couple three years ago, Fitzgerald got 126m and Megatron 113 or so. Not sure how much guaranteed but it's going to go up. That's why I ballparked 50m more guaranteed. He's going to get a lot more than 4-60. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 He's young. A couple three years ago, Fitzgerald got 126m and Megatron 113 or so. Not sure how much guaranteed but it's going to go up. That's why I ballparked 50m more guaranteed. He's going to get a lot more than 4-60. Certainly could happen--you know for a fact that his agent will take the cumulative total of 2 years of franchise tags and use that as the bare minimum in guaranteed money in the first 2 years of the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Certainly could happen--you know for a fact that his agent will take the cumulative total of 2 years of franchise tags and use that as the bare minimum in guaranteed money in the first 2 years of the deal. No question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Two tag years would be about 35m guaranteed. Then a long term extension would be about 50m more guaranteed. So in three years, you would have 85m guaranteed. Relatively limited... You miss the point. You assume (among other things) that he a) doesn't suffer a debilitating injury in the next two years; and b) plays under the tag for two years. My point was (and remains) that this guy is not going to risk playing under the tag for two years b/c of his injury history and the risk that another injury renders him unable to perform at a level worthy of what you characterized as $50m guaranteed. In fact, the reference to the $50m illustrates the point. Even if Watkins plays under the tag twice, the guarantee on that contract is about 35% of your $50m figure in each "tag" year. I agree that it would be bad business to let him play into tag year 2 and then to sign him to a contract as you suggest. But the point is that he is unlikely to go that route because of his injury risk and, if he does, we get two more years of his prime at 70 cents on the guaranteed dollar without assuming what for him is enhanced risk of significant injury. At bottom, the bills gambled about 23% of next year's contract as a hedge against his health. Like it or not, it is smart (football) business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Hopefully he stays on track. If I were OBD and he lights up training camp I either extend him a year for the 13 nil or do a new multiyear deal. Wanting to be sure he's OK is not a bad thing. he won't sign a 1 year extension when he can become a free agent after this eason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts