Aaron Donald’s contract situation

[1maGoh]

Oh I know that. I'm just saying you can't assign value based solely on who touches the ball. I mean how often do guys like Khalil Mack or Calais Campbell or Von Miller touch the ball? You also can't use that 'ball toucher' metric to validate guys like Bradford getting a $70M blind contract, or giving huge sums of money to guys like Brock Osweiller - simply because they play important positions. It's all about fit and core players you can build around.

Ball toucher metric. I love it.

 

[Merlin]

Can anyone provide me with some examples of a team or teams under the current CBA that have been crippled by handing out too many fat contracts? Crippled as in having to let elite players walk in FA or get traded away for peanuts because they couldn't make it work?

I think the best example in my mind (aside from the current CBA thing) is the whiners' last dynasty. They spent themselves into cap hell, but of course extended their reign quite some time while doing so. Still, they never recovered.

I don't see AD getting signed as some sort of tipping point for us irt that btw. Obviously they need to get him signed. Even if it means playin hardball and nuking his wallet by making him pay those fines.

Tell him his life will be a living hell if he doesn't sign. That he can go on vacation for 3x years because he'll need to hold out that long. Then hopefully he'll see there's no benefit to it all and get his big payday.

 

[1maGoh]

Can anyone provide me with some examples of a team or teams under the current CBA that have been crippled by handing out too many fat contracts? Crippled as in having to let elite players walk in FA or get traded away for peanuts because they couldn't make it work?

Bring crippled would also include, and I had always assumed the mailing was primarily that they wouldn't be able to, sign meaningful FAs to the team sure to limited cap space.

I would also think that the answer to your specific question would be the "cap causalities" that are expected every year when teams let go of decent players because their cap hit is too high. I can't provide a specific example, and those usually aren't considered "Elite players" but every team needs solid players all over the roster. Having to let go of a good player because a mostly good player (or a "we're pretty sure he's mostly good" player) makes 3 million less and the team needs the space could directly be affected by the difference in a 21 or 25 million per year contract. That player could be the difference in making the playoffs or going from playoffs to super bowl.

All that to say, it's more likely to manifest itself in a large number of small moves that erode the quality of a team, rather than one large move that breaks the top ability of a team.

 

[-X-]

Ball toucher metric. I love it.

BTM is the next QBR.

 

[Akrasian]

BTM is the next QBR.

Can't be much worse.

 

[TSFH Fan]

Can anyone provide me with some examples of a team or teams under the current CBA that have been crippled by handing out too many fat contracts? Crippled as in having to let elite players walk in FA or get traded away for peanuts because they couldn't make it work?

It's weird, the "book response" has always been the Ravens after the Flacco contract, but I've never looked too deep into that. Then there's the Cowboys' release of DeMarcus Ware, but whether he was elite or not at the time of the release is a different matter.

Using the specified definition of "crippled" (and probably ignoring "too many fat contracts"), the right answer could actually be the Patriots. Grabapole, is elite to someone, somewhere, and he was let go for peanuts. Cooks wasn't let go for peanuts, but all reports was that he would've walked in FA. Solder, gone. Malcolm Butler had his fans around here. Unsubstantiated rumors were that they were looking to move Gronk (maybe for peanuts, maybe not).

Maybe a stretch, maybe not, but I just like to think of "Crippled" and "Patriots" together and if I haven't rained on your parade you don't need to rain on mine.

Edit: And I guess maybe the hidden take away is that yes, bad contracts can cripple a team, but also that the salary cap punishes success.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

A talking head bought up a good point about the Mack situation. He said the rams are cash rich, that Stan can write a cheque of any value needed. The raiders on the other hand are cash poor and will have difficulty handing out a large signing bonus. He expects the Donald deal to be done before the Mack deal.

.

 

[OldSchool]

The more resources you put into a player, the more devastating an injury is. If you have 13% or more of the cap tied up into one player, that can be crippling. If you instead use your resources to have a deeper team, injuries are nowhere near as bad.

If instead you use that money to sign 4 players and 3 of them bust and the 4th gets injured you're just as screwed if not more. Again, going into signing a contract with what if's. It makes no sense, you wouldn't sign any players to contracts or draft anybody.

 

[Akrasian]

If instead you use that money to sign 4 players and 3 of
them bust and the 4th gets injured you're just as screwed if not more. Again, going into signing a contract with what if's. It makes no sense, you wouldn't sign any players to contracts or draft anybody.

Yes, if you have a whole shitload of things go wrong, you can still be SOL. Which is more likely? That somebody rolls up the leg of one player, or of four players? If you are doing your homework (and yes, just as people who are advocating AD be signed regardless of cost are assuming intelligence in team building, I am assuming intelligence in using the resources to replaced AD), then it is very unlikely that the Rams don't get good production. Nobody is advocating trading AD for 6th round picks. Nobody is expecting Snead and McVie to suddenly start drafting players who are longshots - and if they were, you have to expect the same idiocy for the Rams trying to fill holes besides AD.

 

[HellRam]

.

A talking head bought up a good point about the Mack situation. He said the rams are cash rich, that Stan can write a cheque of any value needed. The raiders on the other hand are cash poor and will have difficulty handing out a large signing bonus. He expects the Donald deal to be done before the Mack deal.

.

Maybe the Raiders just plan on franchise tagging Mack. That could be why they haven't even bothered to contact him. If that information is correct.

 

[ReekofRams]

.

A talking head bought up a good point about the Mack situation. He said the rams are cash rich, that Stan can write a cheque of any value needed. The raiders on the other hand are cash poor and will have difficulty handing out a large signing bonus. He expects the Donald deal to be done before the Mack deal.

.

A talking head? That speaks? WOW!
Is this talking head of yours trustworthy? Is this someone we should take seriously?
Is this talking head actually your head?

 

[kurtfaulk]

A talking head? That speaks? WOW!
Is this talking head of yours trustworthy? Is this someone we should take seriously?
Is this talking head actually your head?

i don't remember, they all look the same to me. it wasn't the clown so it has a chance of being true. sounds about right anyway.

.

 

[snackdaddy]

.

A talking head bought up a good point about the Mack situation. He said the rams are cash rich, that Stan can write a cheque of any value needed. The raiders on the other hand are cash poor and will have difficulty handing out a large signing bonus. He expects the Donald deal to be done before the Mack deal.

.

Makes sense. But now begs the question. Is Donald waiting on Mack to reset the market? If so its going to be a long holdout.

 

[12intheBox]

Makes sense. But now begs the question. Is Donald waiting on Mack to reset the market? If so its going to be a long holdout.

If it is true that AD and Mack have the same agent, and if it’s true that Mack and the Raiders haven’t talked since Feb - that doesn’t seem to be the case.

 

[Merlin]

A talking head bought up a good point about the Mack situation. He said the rams are cash rich, that Stan can write a cheque of any value needed. The raiders on the other hand are cash poor and will have difficulty handing out a large signing bonus. He expects the Donald deal to be done before the Mack deal.

Yeah the Raiders' owner is strapped, in comparison to Enos. I think that does probably matter to some extent, although one would think with the Vegas stadium coming online and that sweetheart deal the Raiders got he'd be able to hold onto his franchise defender.

IMO they're going to wait for Donald to sign first. Probably have the "franchise tag" plan going right now, with thoughts to look at signing him next offseason, which is why they're not talking to his reps. Although given Chucky's comments in the media, it would not surprise me if they were to trade him; at some point those picks he'd get to help rebuild the roster might be attractive.

 

[Merlin]

https://www.mighty1090.com/episode/...onald-the-highest-paid-defensive-player-ever/

J.B. Long: “The Rams and Les Snead seem more than comfortable making Aaron Donald the highest paid defensive player ever”
Scott and BR - Interviews
July 30, 2018 | 0 Comments
Share

The Voice of the Rams J.B. Long joined Scott to talk about the Rams first days of training camp, Aaron Donald’s hold out and the addition of Brandin Cooks.


Subscribe: iTunes | Stitcher | Google Play

 

[lordbannon]

Can anyone provide me with some examples of a team or teams under the current CBA that have been crippled by handing out too many fat contracts? Crippled as in having to let elite players walk in FA or get traded away for peanuts because they couldn't make it work?

First thing that comes to mind is the Saints over the past few years. They weren't exactly crippled, but they were left in Jeff Fisher (7-9) land, while having an elite QB, because they handed out a bunch of contracts and kept needing to let talent walk. After 3 years, they rebounded, thanks to pulling a defense out of thin air and hitting big with Kamara.

 

[XXXIVwin]

So.... why do I keep clicking on this thread and actually expect some news..?

 

[Young Ram]

Donald talk starts at 13:50

Demoff said that they don't see eye to eye on how much Donald should be paid. Still trying to find a solution. Said that they want to preserve their young talent, mentioned Peters and Goff, that they want to build for the long term instead of the short term.

Doesn't sound too promising. I REALLY hope they find that solution.