Jump to content

The issue of a small competing window due to a QB on a rookie deal- what’s your solution?


whatdrought

Recommended Posts

That’s a weird title, I know, but I didn’t want to be vague.

 

I’ve heard a lot lately about how team building is all about getting a good young QB, then surrounding him with pieces while you can before he commands an ungodly amount of money. The Seahawks, I think are an example bandied about. I had someone mention that Reid only has like 2 years left to figure out how to win in the playoffs before Mahomes is the million dollar man x200.

 

But this seems crazy to me to think that getting a good QB can actually become a crutch after a couple of years. I suppose this thought could be blown out of preportion, but it seems like there’s some truth to it.

 

All that to say- what would be your solution? You have a young QB whose playing great and you know in the next year or two you’re gonna have to pay him. How do you handle this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have Pat Mahomes that doesn't matter. If this year is anything to go by he will give you a chance to win. If you have Dak Prescott now you have an issue. I like Dak. He is a better Quarterback than many give credit for. He is a leader and a winner. Is he a guy who raises the level of everyone around him with his play? No. But you can't abandon him because the alternatives are a lot worse. So you end up overpaying for a guy who as you inevitably start taking other pieces away finds it harder and harder to get it done. That is the bind for the Cowboys. You already saw the effect on their offensive line a bit this year. They have drafted remarkably well though in the last 5 years. They have young talent almost everywhere so even if they pay Dak I think that extends their window by a couple of years.

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

If you have Pat Mahomes that doesn't matter. If this year is anything to go by he will give you a chance to win. If you have Dak Prescott now you have an issue. I like Dak. He is a better Quarterback than many give credit for. He is a leader and a winner. Is he a guy who raises the level of everyone around him with his play? No. But you can't abandon him because the alternatives are a lot worse. So you end up overpaying for a guy who as you inevitably start taking other pieces away finds it harder and harder to get it done. That is the bind for the Cowboys. You already saw the effect on their offensive line a bit this year. They have drafted remarkably well though in the last 5 years. They have young talent almost everywhere so even if they pay Dak I think that extends their window by a couple of years.

 

Good point on both ends, but either way, it still causes massive problems.

 

Mahomes can raise the level, but you can’t replace a Hill, Or a Kelce, or that offensive line with underpaid nobody’s and expect that much of a difference. They were a decent team with Smith last year. 

Only two players that I’ve ever seen play QB could truly hide all of the issues on a team- Manning and Brady. (And the argument could be made that Brady didn’t do that, but Bill did)

 

 

 

 

For me, it just doesn’t seem like the current explosion of QB salaries is a sustainable model. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Good point on both ends, but either way, it still causes massive problems.

 

Mahomes can raise the level, but you can’t replace a Hill, Or a Kelce, or that offensive line with underpaid nobody’s and expect that much of a difference. They were a decent team with Smith last year. 

Only two players that I’ve ever seen play QB could truly hide all of the issues on a team- Manning and Brady. (And the argument could be made that Brady didn’t do that, but Bill did)

 

 

 

 

For me, it just doesn’t seem like the current explosion of QB salaries is a sustainable model. 

 

You still have to put pieces around them. It is like the Drew Brees stat. If his defense is 26th or better he makes the playoffs. When his defense was 32nd in the league on  record breaking inept pace for two years as great as he is he couldn't carry them. But Drew doesn't need a good defense (though he has one at the moment) he just needs one that isn't ***** awful. 

 

The Chiefs offensive line isn't an expensive unit really either their left tackle is well paid but not as massively paid as he might be because he struggled his first 3 years. Mitchell Schwartz on the other side is well paid for a RT but then Morse was a mid round pick and is on a rookie deal, their left guard was on the scrap heap and their right guard was an UDFA cut by the Colts. You can't keep everybody but there is no law that you can't carry on drafting well and finding gems others have missed on the waiver wire. The pieces you have to let go are the bad apple cornerback and the luxury #2 receiver (looking at you Sammy). 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, the 'rookie deal window' strategy is foolish. Surround a rookie QB with a bunch of high-priced players and hope to get lucky before you see them all leave as FAs. That's how you pin your hopes on Blake Bortles.

 

In the past 20 years, I count (I eyeballed the list - correct me if I'm wrong) five QBs who won on their rookie deal. Brady, Rothlisberger, Eli, Wilson and Flacco. Four of those are going to the HOF, and Flacco played out of his mind. (They also all had top-tier coaches, but that's another argument for another time). 

 

Smart way to go is to build for long-term success. Good coaching, franchise quarterback, smart drafting, and you have a super bowl contender every year for the next decade. Not rubbing a rabbit's foot hoping to get lucky before the salary cap screws you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 Only giving the money to a franchise guy. 5yrs is enough to prove whether he’s your guy or not. And I’d even say 4 years. Give the 5th year option and trade him if it’s not working, but that money, if given, only goes to a guy who’s top-10 in the league.

 

2. Trade down down down. In the draft, look tot trade down and gain more picks, not every time, but I would say trade down twice for every time you trade up. 

 

3. Pass rushers on defense. That’s the biggest part of your defense. And elite pass rush makes everything a lot easier for the rest of the defense, pressure helps cause mistakes, and if you pay that money to your QB, he needs to be the kind of guy that can take advantage of those turnovers

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

That’s a weird title, I know, but I didn’t want to be vague.

 

I’ve heard a lot lately about how team building is all about getting a good young QB, then surrounding him with pieces while you can before he commands an ungodly amount of money. The Seahawks, I think are an example bandied about. I had someone mention that Reid only has like 2 years left to figure out how to win in the playoffs before Mahomes is the million dollar man x200.

 

But this seems crazy to me to think that getting a good QB can actually become a crutch after a couple of years. I suppose this thought could be blown out of preportion, but it seems like there’s some truth to it.

 

All that to say- what would be your solution? You have a young QB whose playing great and you know in the next year or two you’re gonna have to pay him. How do you handle this?

 

You still have a fantastic qb after, and if you nail a draft or two you can have a Michael Thomas and Kamara and... on rookie deals far below market.

 

but yes, having a an on one of those deals is the biggest savings possible and gives you a shot at the best 52 around him he will ever have. 

6 minutes ago, Dave Allen said:

To me, the 'rookie deal window' strategy is foolish. Surround a rookie QB with a bunch of high-priced players and hope to get lucky before you see them all leave as FAs. That's how you pin your hopes on Blake Bortles.

 

In the past 20 years, I count (I eyeballed the list - correct me if I'm wrong) five QBs who won on their rookie deal. Brady, Rothlisberger, Eli, Wilson and Flacco. Four of those are going to the HOF, and Flacco played out of his mind. (They also all had top-tier coaches, but that's another argument for another time). 

 

Smart way to go is to build for long-term success. Good coaching, franchise quarterback, smart drafting, and you have a super bowl contender every year for the next decade. Not rubbing a rabbit's foot hoping to get lucky before the salary cap screws you. 

 

The past 10 years simply hasn’t seen many franchise qbs come out. If Blake bortles was a great qb they’d be fine still but likely have a ring or two to boot. That he’s terrible and still came close says a ton about what that big discount does. A cheap qb is akin to like 2-3 other all pros on rookie deals as far as impact on capology 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Save 10m a season and keep rolling it over for the 5 years. Then put it all down in the 1st year of the new deal.

Example: we save 10M this year, and roll it over, then roll over 20m year 2,and 30M year 3....

After year 5 sign your superstar QB to a contract like 200m for 8 years. But put all that roll over money in the first year of the deal.

So  pay 70m year 1, then it turns into a 7 year 130m deal after that. 

If the qb sux, then you have a ton of $$ to put around the new QB you draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This speaks to overall cap management.

 

Let's take Josh for example.  His maximum cap hit on his rookie deal is $6.75 Million.  His second contract may be an average cap hit of $30 million, so where do you get the $24 Million more without having to trash the rest of the roster.

 

Here are my thoughts:

1) Accumulate a ton of room and don't spend it all so there is a $10-15 Million per year rollover budget- Bills can check this box

2) Put a coaching staff in place where you can grow your own - Jury still out

3) Build a class A pro and college scouting staff- there is no cap here-- load up on known scouting talent and pay them well-Pegula bucks allow this

4) Extend deals before the player has all the leverage at contract expiration - If they have good years in 2019 - Bills should begin to work on Milano, Jones, Dawkins, Phillips, Taron Johnson, Levi Wallace, and Robert Foster in the 19 offseason.  They will save money by extending early rather than waiting until the player has increased leverage.  

5) Sign on the rise free agents-(young but over the rookie "prove it" hump)-big established names cost big money and usually fall short of expectation.  Micah Hyde -- long-time starter; great reputation but not break the bank money would be the top level I would limit myself too; otherwise look for more Jordan Poyers while scouting...recoverable injury under the radar Free Agents and turn them into high contributing starters.

6) Sign Vets on their last contract for the Interior OL and Interior DL -- this is where you can find some quick fix bargains where the athleticism doesn't wane as quickly with age.  You get OG, Centers, and DTs at the end of their career that can still give you 2 or 3 years at a reduced price.  Look for that this year.

 

If you manage the system in this way--consuming Josh's second contract does not have to kill the roster.  Plus I think Josh will be fair.......he knows that if he takes up too much room -- it kills the rest of the roster.  He already shows signs of caring more about winning than an extra $3-4 million per year...but we will see.

 

Edited by JoeF
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, whatdrought said:

That’s a weird title, I know, but I didn’t want to be vague.

 

I’ve heard a lot lately about how team building is all about getting a good young QB, then surrounding him with pieces while you can before he commands an ungodly amount of money. The Seahawks, I think are an example bandied about. I had someone mention that Reid only has like 2 years left to figure out how to win in the playoffs before Mahomes is the million dollar man x200.

 

But this seems crazy to me to think that getting a good QB can actually become a crutch after a couple of years. I suppose this thought could be blown out of preportion, but it seems like there’s some truth to it.

 

All that to say- what would be your solution? You have a young QB whose playing great and you know in the next year or two you’re gonna have to pay him. How do you handle this?

Your business model has to be like the Patriots. You keep your QB, spend money on defense and then try to make chicken salad from chicken #$&# with the rest of the team. Unfortunately, you can’t have a balanced, stacked team once your QB passes his rookie contract in the salary can era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think there is alot of truth to this argument.  If your rookie QB is really good, pay them whatever they want to keep them. As was pointed out a guy like Prescott, if you pay him what he likely will want and can get on the open market you can easily find yourself in trouble with not enough $$ left to surround him with good enough players to compete at the highest level.  Guys like Tannerhill Flacco, maybe Daulton also fall into this bucket too.

 

Often when you get to the 3rd contract it sometimes gets a little easier as by then the QB has made enough money that he may take a little less to keep some other talented players around.

 

Could Allen fall into this boat, too good to let walk, but not quite good enough to go all the way with, likely will know in another year or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The entire premise of this line of thought is derived from the Seahawks run. It's a logical fallacy IMO. Many of the departed defensive players haven't done much elsewhere or retired. If Seattle had drafted well and didn't screw up the Jimmy Graham trade, they'd be in better shape. They also DID happen to make the playoffs.

 

The bottom line is you must pay your QB's top dollar and they're difficult to find. Many of the QB's people talk about are simply not elite. (Stafford, Cousins, Flacco to name a few).

 

If your QB is truly elite, it will work itself out.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, whatdrought said:

 

Good point on both ends, but either way, it still causes massive problems.

 

Mahomes can raise the level, but you can’t replace a Hill, Or a Kelce, or that offensive line with underpaid nobody’s and expect that much of a difference. They were a decent team with Smith last year. 

Only two players that I’ve ever seen play QB could truly hide all of the issues on a team- Manning and Brady. (And the argument could be made that Brady didn’t do that, but Bill did)

 

 

For me, it just doesn’t seem like the current explosion of QB salaries is a sustainable model. 

 

 

A well-paid QB makes it harder. But not impossible.

 

You can argue that Brady isn't highly paid compared to most QBs and you'd certainly be right, but he's still expensive. This year his cap hit is $22M, and next year $27 M. And the Pats seem to do OK. The Broncos won recently with a highly paid QB. The Giants and the Saints too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JoeF said:

This speaks to overall cap management.

 

Let's take Josh for example.  His maximum cap hit on his rookie deal is $6.75 Million.  His second contract may be an average cap hit of $30 million, so where do you get the $24 Million more without having to trash the rest of the roster.

 

Here are my thoughts:

1) Accumulate a ton of room and don't spend it all so there is a $10-15 Million per year rollover budget- Bills can check this box

2) Put a coaching staff in place where you can grow your own - Jury still out

3) Build a class A pro and college scouting staff- there is no cap here-- load up on known scouting talent and pay them well-Pegula bucks allow this

4) Extend deals before the player has all the leverage at contract expiration - If they have good years in 2019 - Bills should begin to work on Milano, Jones, Dawkins, Phillips, Taron Johnson, Levi Wallace, and Robert Foster in the 19 offseason.  They will save money by extending early rather than waiting until the player has increased leverage.  

5) Sign on the rise free agents-young but over the rookie prove it hump-big established names cost big money and usually all short of expectation.  Micah Hyde -- long-time starter; great reputation but not break the bank money would be the top level I would limit myself too; otherwise look for more Jordan Poyers while scouting...recoverable injury under the radar Free Agents and turn them into high contributing starters.

6) Sign Vets on their last contract for the Interior OL and Interior DL -- this is where you can find some quick fix bargains where the athleticism doesn't wane as quickly with age.  You get OG, Centers and DTs at the end of their career that can still give you 2 or 3 years at a reduced price.  Look for that this year.

 

If you manage the system in this way--consuming Josh's second contract does not have to kill the roster.  Plus I think Josh will be fair.......he knows that if he takes up too much room -- it kills the rest of the roster.  He already shows signs of caring more about winning than an extra $3-4 million per year...but we will see.

 

 

 

I like your post a lot.

 

Worth noting, though, that on guys like Taron Johnson and Phillips, you're not allowed to renegotiate before three years are finished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, whatdrought said:

That’s a weird title, I know, but I didn’t want to be vague.

 

I’ve heard a lot lately about how team building is all about getting a good young QB, then surrounding him with pieces while you can before he commands an ungodly amount of money. The Seahawks, I think are an example bandied about. I had someone mention that Reid only has like 2 years left to figure out how to win in the playoffs before Mahomes is the million dollar man x200.

 

But this seems crazy to me to think that getting a good QB can actually become a crutch after a couple of years. I suppose this thought could be blown out of preportion, but it seems like there’s some truth to it.

 

All that to say- what would be your solution? You have a young QB whose playing great and you know in the next year or two you’re gonna have to pay him. How do you handle this?

 

There is some truth to it because they take up a disproportionate amount of the salary cap.  Talking over $30 million a year now...so when you are only paying $3 or $4 million a year, you have lots of extra money to put towards other resources that you normally wouldn't have, while getting the same type of performance.

 

What happens is it starts eroding your depth...players that you could give an extra million or two to keep around no longer can be afforded due to the cap crunch you are in and you have to let them go.  Injuries can derail your season easier because the depth behind them is often untested.

 

Look at the teams in the Super Bowl the last 2 years...Philly/NE and LA/NE...

 

Philly and LA have QBs on rookie contracts(although Foles was the guy who won the SB, Wentz was the guy who got them to where they were) and Brady is taking far less than market value for various reasons giving New England an extra $15 million+ in cap space relief they shouldn't have.

4 hours ago, vincec said:

Your business model has to be like the Patriots. You keep your QB, spend money on defense and then try to make chicken salad from chicken #$&# with the rest of the team. Unfortunately, you can’t have a balanced, stacked team once your QB passes his rookie contract in the salary can era.

You forgot to mention:

 

Get your GOAT QB to take $15 million+ a year less than what he should for the past 12 years with a 'wink wink, nod nod' "side business deal" between the owner and the star QB's company---makes it a lot easier when you have an extra $15 million in cap space no other team in their situation has.

Edited by matter2003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JoeF said:

 

If you manage the system in this way--consuming Josh's second contract does not have to kill the roster.  Plus I think Josh will be fair.......he knows that if he takes up too much room -- it kills the rest of the roster.  He already shows signs of caring more about winning than an extra $3-4 million per year...but we will see.

 

I get the sense Josh would take a $1 contract if he were guaranteed a SB run.  His agent may not let him, but he would want to.  His family isn't Rosen rich, but they aint poor, and he's not in this for the money.  He wants to be a Sunday afternoon hero and he knows he needs a supporting cast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...