Heresy in the age of Free Agency

[1maGoh]

Two things:

I think people keep thinking that I WANT this trade. That is totally incorrect. I was discussing a possible scenario in which AD and the Rams FO come to an impasse and rather than go through years of antipathy and expensive franchise tags, the Rams decide to move on.

It's possible. I would rather hope that the Rams and AD would come to some accord EARLY in the off-season and be done with this. My point is that none of us may have a choice. If AD requires language unacceptable to the Rams (apparently, they offered a package that would make him the richest defensive player in the NFL or super close), then what are the alternatives? Do a Cousins and have no plan once the Tags get too expensive? Point being that it's not an optimal scenario by any stretch, but it's possible that they never come to terms. Then what?

Secondly, Pittsburgh is very unlikely in that they have two relatively young DEs and they are actually something like $17M over the cap for 2018 with only 40 players signed. So they have some serious cap work to do this off-season. The first team I looked at was Pittsburgh. Unfortunately, it's literally the last place in the league where he could go unless he played for the minimum.

So, just to reiterate. This isn't a "suggestion" or what I'd like to see happen. It's a "what do we do IF we find that it's not a matter of money, but something else" thing.

I didn't think you did want to trade him. Heck I don't think anybody *wants* to trade him. Like you said, it may be unavoidable. And he may just wait it out until free agency and go to some East coast team. Philly, Baltimore, whatever, just to be closer to home.

 

[PhillyRam]

Neither were top players at their positions, none of them are traded with years remaining/still on their rookie deals, and they generally both guys that thrived in the Pats system. They trade guys who are going to be over-valued due to production rather than ability especially when they feel they have in house guys who can replace or improve upon that production.

A more reasonable comparison would be them Trading Brady or Gronk after one of their all-pro seasons. And Brady is a stretch since he is a good 15 years past what would have been the end of his"rookie deal.". We can look at the Logan Mankins deal since he was considered one of the best and he ended up only playing 2 more seasons. He was only moved in his mid 30s after playing into the middle of a deal which when signed made him the highest paid player at his position in the game.

The Rams have nobody in house that can come close to even resembling let along replacing AD. On top of that if you look at what the Pats got for those guys would you be happy trading the man for a Tim Wright and a mid round pick? Perhaps a Johnathan Cooper who is released a few games later and a conditional 3rd?

Point is never dump a player to just try to save money. Pay the man what he is worth, with a salary cap of over 160m a 20m/year deal is not backbreaking.

Not saying those players were as good as Donald, but they were top players who would overvalued.

As for Donald he to could be overvalued. That is the key. Do you pay a DT $20M or more year?

I am sayibg you can't do that without negatively impacting your team over the long haul, especially with Gurley's contract coming up and Goff a few years later among others.

 

[Mojo Ram]

See, if i was to trade AD......I want those premium picks AND an elite player in return. Even if its a slightly older(but not old) vet. Just a slew of picks doesn't get it done for me.

 

[dieterbrock]

Nah, it's a Pats move... Like recently trading Chandler Jones or Jamie Collins, top players at their positions that wanted huge deals. Similar to deals made over the past 15 years when they released or traded vet starters that were too expensive.

If the Pats traded Tom Brady, then it would b a Pats move

 

[Debacled]

Not saying those players were as good as Donald, but they were top players who would overvalued.

As for Donald he to could be overvalued. That is the key. Do you pay a DT $20M or more year?

I am sayibg you can't do that without negatively impacting your team over the long haul, especially with Gurley's contract coming up and Goff a few years later among others.

When you are talking about easily the best player at his position and arguably the best defensive player in the entire league making him the highest paid player at his position is a no brainer. Especially considering the man is only 26 and will likely command an even bigger contract after this next extension is played through. Using somewhere between 10-15% of the cap is a no brainer when it comes to a player the caliber of AD.

Is he a QB? No he isn't but dropping that kind of dime on him won't stop this team from keeping Goff when that time comes. The team has 53m in cap space without any cuts heading into next year, 90m in 2019, and a laughable 152m in 2020 which would be Goff's 5th year option year (which will likely cost somewhere between 25-30m for one year if QB contracts continue to rise).

I'm just saying if they are going to spend money somewhere AD would be the first place to spend it. He is easily the best player on the team and you could argue the best overall talent in the NFL, and at 26 should remain as that for a number of years to come.

EDIT: It would piss him off to no end, but I he is good enough to where I would consider tagging him for up to 3-4 years until an extension can be reached. Next year is still a 5th year option, the year after that would be first tag (around 14m), next would be 17m, and even the next after that would be 20m. Wouldn't be the best way to keep the man happy, but he would be getting paid a premium for what atleast I consider tolerable numbers.

 

[Mackeyser]

If he wants a long term deal, I wager he could get it done the minute the season is over.

If not, then we’ll only be able to wonder what happens next...

 

[PhillyRam]

If the Pats traded Tom Brady, then it would b a Pats move

Umm, if Tom Brady played DT or Donald played QB, then yeah I agree. C'mon... the issue that has been pointed out is the importance of a player/position. Again last week the loss of the 2nd and 3rd CB impacted the game more than anything Donald could do.

Had he dominated the Vikes and shut down their run game and sacked Keenum multiple times, and could do that every week then the DT position would hold that importance.

However since it is difficult for even the best player at that position to do that, it shows that the DT position is not as critical. Teams can scheme to control a dominant player at that position. However a DT is not as critical as a CB or even an OT who both can be exposed out on an island and certainly not as important as a QB.

 

[dieterbrock]

Umm, if Tom Brady played DT or Donald played QB, then yeah I agree. C'mon... the issue that has been pointed out is the importance of a player/position. Again last week the loss of the 2nd and 3rd CB impacted the game more than anything Donald could do.

Had he dominated the Vikes and shut down their run game and sacked Keenum multiple times, and could do that every week then the DT position would hold that importance.

However since it is difficult for even the best player at that position to do that, it shows that the DT position is not as critical. Teams can scheme to control a dominant player at that position. However a DT is not as critical as a CB or even an OT who both can be exposed out on an island and certainly not as important as a QB.

If you think Aaron Donald is just a DT then I don’t know what to say. He is the best player on the team, among the best players in the game period. Belichick never had a player like Donald in defense with the Pats. He would have never gotten rid of him some he same as the Giants wouldn’t have gotten rid of LT

 

[PARAM]

We're going to have to replace him in 10 years or so anyway!!

Anything is possible. I just don't think you trade a DT who is perceived by some experts and ex-NFLers to be the best PLAYER in the league. Pretty high praise given the number of excellent QBs. It's probably because he impacts a game in so many different ways, pressure, sacks, run defense, sliding blockers, etc. And we know that though the name of the game in the NFL is win the Superbowl, the more realistic name of the game is put butts in the seats. Trading Donald would take butts out of the seats and there's no guarantee the youngsters actually develop into true NFL stars or the guys you get in place of Donald put the team up on the float with the Lombardi.

 

[tempests]

You have to take emotion out of it and ask yourself if you would want to play a big game without one of these guys who would it be..... Goff, Gurley, Whitworth, Johnson, or Donald?

Donald is having a DPOY worthy season. He would be our biggest loss on defense. No other player is as disruptive or makes as many plays as he does. Hopefully we don't have to be without him for an extended period.

 

[tempests]

And it would be great to keep him, but is he worth 10-12% of your entire cap space?

If the Eagles can sign Fletcher Cox to that monster extension and be 9-1, surely the Rams can pay Aaron Donald. No reason why it should cripple their cap.

I can also ask is there one game this year that Donald wrecked all by himself? One gane that they don't win if he doesn't make a bunch of plays?

Donald is as much a factor in the Rams wins as any other player. Ws are a team effort and no one player(not even the QB) wins a game all on his own.

 

[tempests]

Notice that the other 4 guys on that list are on losing teams? So how important is that position?

Bengals went to the playoffs five straight years with Atkins as their DT.

We oughta know how important that position is. Rams were deficient there for so many years.

 

[LesBaker]

When you are talking about easily the best player at his position and arguably the best defensive player in the entire league making him the highest paid player at his position is a no brainer. Especially considering the man is only 26 and will likely command an even bigger contract after this next extension is played through. Using somewhere between 10-15% of the cap is a no brainer when it comes to a player the caliber of AD.

For a DT he wants too much versus his value or worth to the team. He's fantastic, probably an easy first ballot HOF player, at least he is on that trajectory anyway. But 24MIL on one position on the DL is too much money. It's just not a judicious use of funds.

But someone will pay it.

EDIT: It would tick him off to no end, but I he is good enough to where I would consider tagging him for up to 3-4 years until an extension can be reached. Next year is still a 5th year option, the year after that would be first tag (around 14m), next would be 17m, and even the next after that would be 20m. Wouldn't be the best way to keep the man happy, but he would be getting paid a premium for what atleast I consider tolerable numbers.

Third year tags are %120 of the average of the top 5 salaries in the NFL. So it will be close to 30MIL. No thanks. I'm not sure your first and second tag numbers are correct.

From the web......

First year franchise tag:

• 120% of the previous year's salary, or average of the top 5 salaries of everyone else playing that position, whichever is higher. The "average" is actually a percentage of the cap. It's calculated as follows: Take the franchise tag amounts for the position for each of the previous 5 years, add them all up. Divide them by the sum of the salary cap totals for each of the previous 5 years. Multiply that by the salary cap for this year. So if the five previous franchise amounts were $10M, $11M, $12M, $13M, $14M and the salary caps were $100M, $105M, $110M, $120M, $130M, and this year's salary cap is $140M, it'd be (10+11+12+13+14)/(100+105+110+120+130) = 10.69% of $140M, or $14.86M.

Second year of the franchise tag:

• Same thing. Unless the math gets really weird, the 120% increase is likely to be the higher amount.

Third year of the franchise tag:

• An average of the top 5 salaries at the highest paid position (likely QB). So if a WR's tag amount is $12M, but a QB's tag amount is $20M, a WR tagged a 3rd time will get the $20M. OR 120% of the average of the 5 largest prior year salaries at his position (so 120% of the 5 biggest WR contracts from the year before, in this case).OR 144% of the player's previous year's salary. Whichever is highest.

There's nothing in the CBA saying they can't be tagged a 4th time. I would assume a 4th year would have the same rules as a 3rd, which means the cost at that point would be pretty outrageous.

Also, of minor note: The player can choose to take the 120/144% increase over the average of the salaries if he wants, even if the 120/144% increase is the lower amount. Why he would take less money I don't know, but it's an option for him. The team is required to offer the higher of the two, but the player can opt to take the lower amount.

 

[LesBaker]

We oughta know how important that position is. Rams were deficient there for so many years.

No doubt they were for sure but I don't think throwing crazy money at AD is required.

What if there was a really good one available for half the amount?

 

[dieterbrock]

Now that we are a 3-4 does he get tagged as a DE or as a DT? I bet he argues he’s a DE which is about 3 mill more

 

[Mackeyser]

It really doesn't matter.

Point is that if Donald wants a deal, he'll have a deal.

If he wants language the Rams can't or won't agree to or simply an obscene amount of money...

then it's pretty simple... either he gets optioned and then tagged or they trade him.

It's going to be up to AD.

 

[Merlin]

Ideal offseason would include AD and the Rams coming to an agreement that makes sense for both sides. Then adding a good young edge OLB & a CB in the draft. If they hit on OLB and CB it is likely that we have an elite defense in 2018.

I hate the business side of the NFL but it's important if we want to see this team win long term. Fans will say things like "it's not your money why do you care" but the truth is it ends up affecting us in the form of a handcuffed front office down the road.

In AD's case the advantage is he is NOT the kind of guy who will quit after being paid. So for that reason I tend to think something will get done. And of course I hope something gets done because AD is going to be in the HoF and hopefully after a long career in horns. But if not, well, it's not the first time the business side dictated things.

Rams just cannot afford to be stupid. Breaking the bank on a DT with elite money cap hit would be just that.

 

[Mackeyser]

What we don't know is what does AD want?

Does AD want extreme money? Guarantees? Options to opt out after 3 years?

I dunno.

I think the extreme money or guarantees can be worked out, especially if they really front load it with things like roster bonuses so the cap hits are relatively manageable going forward. Heck, if they don't do a bunch of stuff in FA, they could put as much as $30+M towards next year's cap.

But yeah, no way do I sign up for constantly renegotiating the contract. If that's the case, I shrug and either do the tags until it's untenable or trade him.

The ONLY way for mega contracts to work is for fixed long terms to amortize the cap hit.

The potential cap hell inflicted by renegotiating a mega-deal halfway into it is potentially roster killing.

But ultimately, because both parties have not leaked, we just don't know what he wants.

Without that, all we have are hopes and potential scenarios.

 

[LesBaker]

What we don't know is what does AD want?

Does AD want extreme money? Guarantees? Options to opt out after 3 years?

I dunno.

I think the extreme money or guarantees can be worked out, especially if they really front load it with things like roster bonuses so the cap hits are relatively manageable going forward. Heck, if they don't do a bunch of stuff in FA, they could put as much as $30+M towards next year's cap.

But yeah, no way do I sign up for constantly renegotiating the contract. If that's the case, I shrug and either do the tags until it's untenable or trade him.

The ONLY way for mega contracts to work is for fixed long terms to amortize the cap hit.

The potential cap hell inflicted by renegotiating a mega-deal halfway into it is potentially roster killing.

But ultimately, because both parties have not leaked, we just don't know what he wants.

Without that, all we have are hopes and potential scenarios.

It doesn't have to be roster killing, it can just cost the team a free agent signing and that one guy could be enough to make a difference. Look at what the Whitworth signing did for the OL.

One key piece can hurt. Imagine our punting unit without Hekker.

AD is fantastic and I want him to stay with the Rams but not at a price that's going to imperil Snead and Demoff from being able to get other talent.

This team is SO close, they cannot afford to make a mistake and slow the progress.