I'd do a one year deal.
At this point, there aren't many teams that can go beyond that. At one year, your risk is limited. Also, he'd be playing for his last big deal somewhere starting in 2020.
I get the comparison to Harvin, but there are really important differences as I see it.
One, Harvin was brought in, and given long term security. Which he then promptly acted on. He hardly played and smartly from his perspective, hid his chronic hip issue.
AB doesn't have that. And even if he somehow does -- at one year deal it's something that wouldn't hurt us if it did.
Harvin -- because of the long term deal -- could be as cantankerous as he liked. AB is playing for a next deal.
The cost between the two isn't comparable. We traded for Harvin whereas AB comes with just a modest check.
It's really a no lose prospect for Seattle. If he remains the cancer he's been -- he's cut at no risk. If he doesn't and thrives -- then he signs elsewhere and we 'buy' a comp pick.
For me I make sure I'm in on the deal. Seattle has a very solid track record of taking guys looking to leverage a season for a big future payday.
Drama aside, there is no risk to simply letting him go mid season if it's unmanageable. I believe AB's antics were exclusively due to touching 'his money'. Well for us, there wouldn't be an issue with that because there wouldn't be any 'his money' to really touch.
I believe every diva issue is unique. And in this case AB has been consistent. It's always been about money. And in this landscape, cash isn't available leaguewide as teams have already spent their money. If one believes that his issues are money centric, then you're getting him as his *most compliant*. Playing for his last big deal.
