Jump to content

Unfounded rumor re: Edmunds Contract


jletha

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, harmonkillebrew said:

Edmund's isn't going anywhere. You could hear it in Beane's presser. They love the kid and he's grown tremendously and is still young

 

Probably true, but it's also possible they want to pump up his value to maximize the comp pick they get if he signs elsewhere.

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

1 minute ago, newcam2012 said:

Tagging him seems risky. You seem to have more knowledge in this area. What do you think?

It's an option, but an expensive one and risky as you said. They would have to find a suitor who wants him first, then the other team would probably try to low ball us on any draft picks included in the deal since they know our cap situation.  

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

Just now, The Jokeman said:

He meant NFL compensation when the league hands out picks for lost UFAs vs gained UFAs, you know when the Pats and Ravens gets loads of extra 3rd Round picks every year. 

Ah, gotcha.  Not sure why I was thinking UFA vs restricted FA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

I'm not sure I follow what you mean there, considering we arent in the old Cash to Cap days.

 

His first year is a Cap Hit of $9M. That is all that needs to be accounted for on the cap.

 

Numbers laid out below.

 

 


It has to do with the comment about getting out after three seasons and contract structure. Some contracts ramp up salaries and cash payouts over the course of the deal. Others give more cash up front or pay it out more evenly. The Roquon deal is very even and has an AAV of $20M. The three year out will be $60M. That’s a lot less palatable than a backloaded deal that ramps up where a three year payout could be closer to $50M.

 

Pretty much every 5 or 6 year deal will have relatively low cap hits the first two years, but everything paid (and guaranteed) still has to hit the cap eventually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:


It has to do with the comment about getting out after three seasons and contract structure. Some contracts ramp up salaries and cash payouts over the course of the deal. Others give more cash up front or pay it out more evenly. The Roquon deal is very even and has an AAV of $20M. The three year out will be $60M. That’s a lot less palatable than a backloaded deal that ramps up where a three year payout could be closer to $50M.

 

Pretty much every 5 or 6 year deal will have relatively low cap hits the first two years, but everything paid (and guaranteed) still has to hit the cap eventually.

 

Did you look at the detail of the Roquan deal I provided? I wouldnt say starting at $9M and $13M, and then ramping up to $27.5M at the back end is "even".

 

Nor am I understanding what you mean by "the 3 year out will be $60M"? It would be $60M total paid over 4 years for an average of $15M/yr hit, and that last $15M hitting in year 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said:

that's not a crazy deal if it's a 7 year contract

 

Edmunds is getting paid by someone. If we let him go then there's no chance we'll see any major investment in the offense in the draft. 

But! We have the great, Terrell Bernard just waiting in the wings!!

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

2 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

Why do you assume no extension by now is a data point that has any finality to it at all?

 

Because Beane never waits when he definitely wants someone back. White, Allen, Hyde, Dawkins - they all signed their 2nd contracts well before hitting free agency. Whereas Milano they were prepared to let walk if it came to that but he accepted a hometown discount to stay here so we got him signed at the last minute before free agency. It seems like that's the direction they're going with Edmunds. They'll bring him back for the right price but he isn't a priority. If he gets overpaid elsewhere they're willing to live with that. I'm actually hoping that's what happens and then we can invest in the offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Did you look at the detail of the Roquan deal I provided? I wouldnt say starting at $9M and $13M, and then ramping up to $27.5M at the back end is "even".

 

Nor am I understanding what you mean by "the 3 year out will be $60M"? It would be $60M total paid over 4 years for an average of $15M/yr hit, and that last $15M hitting in year 4.


No. Look at the details of the Roquon contract. He has guarantees for the first $60M, which is paid over the first three seasons. $15M of the $60M cap hit is delayed, but it is still on the books. If they part ways with him after the first three seasons that additional $15M hits the cap.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/baltimore-ravens/roquan-smith-25103/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:


No. Look at the details of the Roquon contract. He has guarantees for the first $60M, which is paid over the first three seasons. $15M of the $60M cap hit is delayed, but it is still on the books. If they part ways with him after the first three seasons that additional $15M hits the cap.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/baltimore-ravens/roquan-smith-25103/

 

That's Pegula's Cash that only matters to Terry. Not the Cap Hit number that affects what Beane can spend. I don't care about Pegula's cash. The Cap Hit and Dead Cap numbers are the only ones that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Because Beane never waits when he definitely wants someone back. White, Allen, Hyde, Dawkins - they all signed their 2nd contracts well before hitting free agency. Whereas Milano they were prepared to let walk if it came to that but he accepted a hometown discount to stay here so we got him signed at the last minute before free agency. It seems like that's the direction they're going with Edmunds. They'll bring him back for the right price but he isn't a priority. If he gets overpaid elsewhere they're willing to live with that. I'm actually hoping that's what happens and then we can invest in the offense.

We’re there any other players on the team drafted in the same year that might have taken precedence over Edmunds and altered the equation a bit?  Why did you seem so definitive in your first post only to use phrases like “seems like” now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, KzooMike said:

I what to talk about where my enthusiasm is regarding Tremaine Edmunds possible contract, but I don't feel this is the correct thread,   

We need an underground thread for Tremaine Edmunds fans. We can post it in another sub-forum and name it something misleading. 
 

Don’t mind me, I’ll just be heading over to the “Favorite Gluten-Free Bread” thread on the Anything But forum..

Edited by TheyCallMeAndy
  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheyCallMeAndy said:

Tremaine would be 31 after a 7 year contract.

 

THIRTY ONE

 

If 2022 was his floor, you sign him long term. He hasn’t peaked yet.

So Edmunds came into the NFL early, it doesn't make up for the fact he is slow to diagnose plays or often doesn't fill the right hole or seems to have tacklers bounce off him. He just flat out isn't good enough as a MLB, should we over pay him and hope he gets to be good as Roquan Smith or find someone cheaper that can offer more value? I say go with the latter. 

Edited by The Jokeman
  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 3
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

So Edmunds came into the early, it doesn't make up for the fact he is slow to diagnose plays or often doesn't fill the right hole or seems to have tacklers bounce off him. He just flat out isn't good enough as a MLB, should we over pay him and hope he gets to be good as Roquan Smith or find someone cheaper that can offer more value? I say go with the latter. 

He isn’t perfect, but he does more right than wrong. He was very good this year. 

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

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

120/6 would be Roquan money. I think that is too much.  120/7 comes in around $17m AAV. If that is well structured and moderate on guaranteed money I could get myself there. 

 

7 years with the first 4 years being in the neighborhood of $15M averaged per year with year 5 being the transition year is OK with me.

Similar to Josh's contract it's fair for both sides and gives Beane the most flexibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

That's Pegula's Cash that only matters to Terry. Not the Cap Hit number that affects what Beane can spend. I don't care about Pegula's cash. The Cap Hit and Dead Cap numbers are the only ones that matter.

Cash spent = Cap hit (sooner or later)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will people learn that the dollar amount isn’t important in these contracts? It’s only there to make the agent feel important.

 

Here is what is important:

- Guaranteed Money

- Signing Bonus and dead cap

- Ability to restructure 

 

You could sign a $120 million dollar contract that basically gives the team a free out after 3 years.

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

53 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Cash spent = Cap hit (sooner or later)

 

Ehh, well that's fine then.

 

For the record, I wasnt trying to be overly argumentative with you. I was genuinely curious if there was a part of the Cap stuff I wasnt understanding correctly since it's all smoke and mirrors and rainbows and magic.

 

I was a huge Edmunds detractor through last offseason, but if we could get him back on a long term deal structured like Smith's, then I'm all for it.

 

Beane needs to flip his usual script (Draft Defense/FA Offense), and re-sign Edmunds and spend the draft on OL and WR.

 

Go Bills!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

120/6 would be Roquan money. I think that is too much.  120/7 comes in around $17m AAV. If that is well structured and moderate on guaranteed money I could get myself there. 

Yes on a 7 year deal, with maybe around $60m of that guaranteed, that would work and would be a good deal for both sides.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we resign Edmunds I'll root for him to succeed, of course, but I won't love the financials at $120 million over seven years. Here's why:

Our cap situation is NOT a one-year 2023 challenge. With Josh's contract EVERY year will make it challenging to pay for a good O-line, offensive weapons, an effective D-line and corners needed in a passing league.

I don't see an MLB as being a cornerstone or essential part of an effective defense in today's passing league. Does it help? Sure. But it's not essential.


So paying Edmunds $17 million a year (120/7) means that money can't go elsewhere to another essential piece.

Sure the cap will rise each year, but young guys in essential positions will need to be extended, and you can bet that over time certain players will want to renegotiate their deals.

$17 million a year for Edmunds or $7 to $10 million for another MLB and $7 to $10 million EXTRA for the O-line. I'll go with the latter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...