Russell Wilson and the 3 year, $45.5 million baseline

[theincrediblesok]

I'm surprised Anthony! is not here, i mean it has the word Russell Wilson in the subject line :snack:

 

[nrayorr]

This is a great thread. Lots of information for those who are FO challenged like myself. I know some things, but this was just what I needed to understand things from both sides. I do agree that all of this is speculative, but like someone in this thread mentioned, we shall see how it works out. All in all I just do want to see RW go. That's all I'm saying.

 

[mikehawks]

Before you give 20 million dollars a year to a quarterback that throws an interception to lose the Superbowl, look at Tom Brady's contract first. By the way, Brady has won four Superbowls...

Year---- Base Salary ---- Signing Bonus---- Cap Hit ---- Dead Cap
2015---- $8,000,000---- $6,000,000---- $14,000,000 -- $18,000,000
2016 --- $9,000,000 ----$6,000,000---- $15,000,000-- $12,000,000
2017--- $10,000,000 ---$6,000,000--- $16,000,000-- $6,000,000

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-england- ... tom-brady/

Sign up Wilson for 10-12 million dollars a year, if not next man up. The real strength of the Seahawks is the defense and Marshawn Lynch, not Russel Wilson. Wilson's fair value would be something more like Alex Smith's contract.

2014: $1 million
2015: $11.9 million
2016: $14.1 million
2017: $10.2 million (+ $2 million roster bonus)
2018: $14.5 million (+ $2 million roster bonus)

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2014/9/2/ ... ity-chiefs

Compare Alex Smith's stats, than compare Russell Wilson's stats.. Virtually the same. Why over pay?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... backRating

 

[Tical21]

Before you give 20 million dollars a year to a quarterback that throws an interception to lose the Superbowl, look at Tom Brady's contract first. By the way, Brady has won four Superbowls...

Year---- Base Salary ---- Signing Bonus---- Cap Hit ---- Dead Cap
2015---- $8,000,000---- $6,000,000---- $14,000,000 -- $18,000,000
2016 --- $9,000,000 ----$6,000,000---- $15,000,000-- $12,000,000
2017--- $10,000,000 ---$6,000,000--- $16,000,000-- $6,000,000

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-england- ... tom-brady/

Sign up Wilson for 10-12 million dollars a year, if not next man up. The real strength of the Seahawks is the defense and Marshawn Lynch, not Russel Wilson. Wilson's fair value would be something more like Alex Smith's contract.

2014: $1 million
2015: $11.9 million
2016: $14.1 million
2017: $10.2 million (+ $2 million roster bonus)
2018: $14.5 million (+ $2 million roster bonus)

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2014/9/2/ ... ity-chiefs

Compare Alex Smith's stats, than compare Russell Wilson's stats.. Virtually the same. Why over pay?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... backRating

Brady is different, he doesn't enter the equation. He has the richest spouse in the history of QB's and the money means zero to him at this point.

If Alex Smith had won a Super Bowl, I wouldn't mind that comparison too much. You know full well that Russell ain't signing for 10-12 million, when he could get twice that on the open market. I'd go a little higher than that I think.

 

[lukerguy]

Yup. I already made a post about it in the 16 pages thread which was similar.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Here is what Russell Wilson would make, if Seattle didn't sign him to a deal and franchised him in 2016 and 2017:

2015: $1.5 million
2016: $20 million (franchise tag - estimate*)
2017: $24 million (franchise tag - estimate x 1.20)

*(The 2013 QB tag number was $14.8 million, in 2014 it was $16.1 million, in 2015 it is $18.5 million. The 2016 number could be slightly over $20 million, but I figured I'd round it to 20 for the sake of keeping things clean and simple.)

All of this means that Russell Wilson is already effectively on a 3 year, $45.5 contract going forward. This is important information because GMs will almost always use existing numbers like these as the foundations for their offers in contract talks. After all, why make an offer that pays MORE than $45.5 million from 2015-2017 when you already have that deal in the bag?

Now, lets say you want to turn this 3 year baseline deal into a 4 year contract. You already have a 3 year deal in place. Lets say the one extra year we add would be around the rumored 'better than Aaron Rodgers' level AYP. Let's say $22.5 million. Doing that would make Wilson's 4 year contract look like this:

2015: $1.5 million
2016: $20 million
2017: $24 million
2018: $22.5 million

Total: 4 years, $68 million

Wasn't the rumored deal Seattle had on the table for 4 years, $80 million? Of course, we don't know if those are tack on years or a situation where they ripped up Wilson's last cheap year, but regardless, the total numbers are pretty close to that. Doesn't seem like much of an insult anymore does it?

For Wilson to get over the $100 million mark, he'd need to sign at least a six year deal. And that might not be in Wilson's best interests, as he'd want another bite at the apple sooner, not later.

I am all for the Seahawks paying Russell Wilson his money. And I think that, because of how NFL inflation works, it would be wiser to sign Wilson now than to do it in 2016, 2017 or 2018. But when you look at how little money the Seahawks can keep Wilson for over the next three years (3/45.5), it tells me that Seattle isn't lowballing Wilson at all, they are simply using their collectively bargained leverage correctly.

When you look at the baseline 3 year numbers and see how low they are, it's really just Wilson's last cheap year that is tanking his AYP. Suddenly these contract talks will take a very different tenor in 2016 when Wilson's 3/45.5 deal graduates to a 2/44 one. Consider too that NFL salary inflation has risen by about 10% to 15% per year over the past two decades... what is considered a $20 million AYP player today could be a $22-$23 million AYP player next year.

If Seattle and Wilson can't get it done in 2015, you very well might see them agreeing to a deal in 2016 for $110-$120 million over five years. It's amazing what happens when you take out the last cheap year and sprinkle in a little inflation.

Even if Wilson signed today for the aforementioned 4/68 number, he'd still make top money in all but his last rookie year, and then he'd get his next bite at the apple much sooner than in the latter scenario. It's possible he'd actually make more money in the long term signing a short deal right now.

I am not trying to besmirch Wilson, but no matter how I look at this, I see Wilson walking away from the NFL with hundreds of millions of dollars when it's all said and done. So why make a big deal about how big the final number is on his first deal? Is it a respect thing? Wilson wouldn't be the first QB to associate dollar signs with status and respect.

If it is indeed a Flacco Syndrome thing... if it's all about how big the total number is in order to gain stature and respect... I would not expect Wilson to sign in 2015 at all, but I would give him very good odds of signing a mega deal in 2016 once the last cheap year has expired. I suspect that for Wilson, total numbers might matter to him more than AYP does since it's the total number that most people associate with the stature of a QB.

Bottom line is, Wilson isn't going anywhere, and everyone knows it. We might have to wait a year for it to be official, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there is a gulf between the two sides or that things have gotten too personal. If Wilson isn't in the $100 million club this year, he will be by 2016. I think this is what Wilson wants, which is why he seems predisposed to play out the rest of his rookie deal before signing a new one. Maybe some of the talks have grated on his nerves a bit, maybe he's impatient, or maybe he's being unrealistic. But ultimately I see a lot less resistance to a new deal once that last low cost year is over and done with, and the total number ends up much closer to Wilson's expectation.

Awesome post!
You've said what I've been trying to say in the other thread, but said it so much better than I did.

 

[Hawkstorian]

NFL = Negotiation is a Function of Leverage

 

[Anthony!]

Before you give 20 million dollars a year to a quarterback that throws an interception to lose the Superbowl, look at Tom Brady's contract first. By the way, Brady has won four Superbowls...

Year---- Base Salary ---- Signing Bonus---- Cap Hit ---- Dead Cap
2015---- $8,000,000---- $6,000,000---- $14,000,000 -- $18,000,000
2016 --- $9,000,000 ----$6,000,000---- $15,000,000-- $12,000,000
2017--- $10,000,000 ---$6,000,000--- $16,000,000-- $6,000,000

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-england- ... tom-brady/

Sign up Wilson for 10-12 million dollars a year, if not next man up. The real strength of the Seahawks is the defense and Marshawn Lynch, not Russel Wilson. Wilson's fair value would be something more like Alex Smith's contract.

2014: $1 million
2015: $11.9 million
2016: $14.1 million
2017: $10.2 million (+ $2 million roster bonus)
2018: $14.5 million (+ $2 million roster bonus)

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2014/9/2/ ... ity-chiefs

Compare Alex Smith's stats, than compare Russell Wilson's stats.. Virtually the same. Why over pay?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... backRating

After reading the article on how fictitious all this media stuff is, I decided to lay low. However this post made me laugh to much to lay low.

Lets look at this

Smith 3519 total yards(passing and rushing), 19 tds, 65% compt on passing, 93 Qb rating, 7.04 yards pass avg, 5.2 ypa rushing. Playing in the AFC

Wilson 4324 total yards, 26 tds, 63% complt, 95 qb rating, 7.69 ypa pass, 7.2 ypa rush. Playing in the NFC West

So truthfully I do not need to go any further than yards 800 more, 7 more tds. Oh and Smith has been in the league 9 years to Wilsons 3. In 9 years Smith has 15 4tg qtr/ot comeback winning drives. Wilson has that in 3 years. Smith has a career 82 QB rating Wilson 98. Enough said

Sorry they are not even close to the same. Now I can go back to relaxing and waiting for something real to happen or be said instead of all this BS speculation, Wilson hating, and moronic any QB would do crap.

 

[kearly]

Second, I think if you are going down this road with Russell, he would begrudgingly hold out every year that he is franchised until the game checks come. He has to. He would hate doing it, and he would consider coming in anyways, but he doesn't really have a choice. That is really the only thing he can do to try to get the Seahawks to pay him a guaranteed contract. A corner, a left tackle, a running back, fine, you almost wish they would hold out of camp. But not your leader and quarterback. That guy is more important in camp than even Pete Carroll.

I can't even remember a tagged QB actually holding out to miss a game before. If there was one QB who has the personality for it, it's Drew Brees, and he actually was franchise tagged back in 2012. He threatened to hold out from training camp until a deal got done. And it got the Saints to cave within days. Brees and Wilson have fairly similar personalties, so I wouldn't put it past Wilson to use the unthinkable as leverage.

On the other hand, Brees didn't play for the current Seahawks. Wilson is our most valuable player, but without him Seattle can still win half their games. The entire Saints organization is built around Brees, so he very much had them by the short ones. If Wilson held out and missed games, what might happen if BJ Daniels got the start and played well? There is a lot of risk to holding out for Wilson and how it could impact the perception of his isolated value.

It would be nice if it never came to that, and history suggests it wouldn't.

 

[two dog]

Outstanding, excellent post !! Not often does a post examine an issue from
the perspective of both parties as well as apply logic to the discussion.

The follow up posts are, collectively, some of the best I have read in any thread.
There are a lot of very articulate people here.

 

[Tical21]

Second, I think if you are going down this road with Russell, he would begrudgingly hold out every year that he is franchised until the game checks come. He has to. He would hate doing it, and he would consider coming in anyways, but he doesn't really have a choice. That is really the only thing he can do to try to get the Seahawks to pay him a guaranteed contract. A corner, a left tackle, a running back, fine, you almost wish they would hold out of camp. But not your leader and quarterback. That guy is more important in camp than even Pete Carroll.

I can't even remember a tagged QB actually holding out to miss a game before. If there was one QB who has the personality for it, it's Drew Brees, and he actually was franchise tagged back in 2012. He threatened to hold out from training camp until a deal got done. And it got the Saints to cave within days. Brees and Wilson have fairly similar personalties, so I wouldn't put it past Wilson to use the unthinkable as leverage.

On the other hand, Brees didn't play for the current Seahawks. Wilson is our most valuable player, but without him Seattle can still win half their games. The entire Saints organization is built around Brees, so he very much had them by the short ones. If Wilson held out and missed games, what might happen if BJ Daniels got the start and played well? There is a lot of risk to holding out for Wilson and how it could impact the perception of his isolated value.

It would be nice if it never came to that, and history suggests it wouldn't.

He wouldn't miss any games, those are million dollar paychecks. You make a great point though. I don't even remember QB's holding out long enough to miss practices. I don't think Brees missed any either. The money is a lot different than it was even for QB's that got franchised five years ago, so I can see them holding out to get an extra 20 million over four years. Can you even imagine the circus if Russell didn't show up for the first day of camp?

You obviously think much more highly of BJ Daniels than I do. I can't think Russell would have any concern over losing his job. I think if BJ Daniels completed 70% of his passes throughout an entire preseason, he still wouldn't have a chance of taking Russell's job. Might make Russell concede a few dollars, but it would also work the other way if the QB's struggled mightily in Russ's absence.

I just can't see this getting there. This is too much of a Happy Path situation, unless one of the two sides has a vastly different opinion of Russell Wilson than the other does.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Second, I think if you are going down this road with Russell, he would begrudgingly hold out every year that he is franchised until the game checks come. He has to. He would hate doing it, and he would consider coming in anyways, but he doesn't really have a choice. That is really the only thing he can do to try to get the Seahawks to pay him a guaranteed contract. A corner, a left tackle, a running back, fine, you almost wish they would hold out of camp. But not your leader and quarterback. That guy is more important in camp than even Pete Carroll.

I can't even remember a tagged QB actually holding out to miss a game before. If there was one QB who has the personality for it, it's Drew Brees, and he actually was franchise tagged back in 2012. He threatened to hold out from training camp until a deal got done. And it got the Saints to cave within days. Brees and Wilson have fairly similar personalties, so I wouldn't put it past Wilson to use the unthinkable as leverage.

On the other hand, Brees didn't play for the current Seahawks. Wilson is our most valuable player, but without him Seattle can still win half their games. The entire Saints organization is built around Brees, so he very much had them by the short ones. If Wilson held out and missed games, what might happen if BJ Daniels got the start and played well? There is a lot of risk to holding out for Wilson and how it could impact the perception of his isolated value.

It would be nice if it never came to that, and history suggests it wouldn't.

I was kinda wondering this one about BJ myself. Wilson probably dont want this to happen. Just like Alex Smith did not want to let Kaep start.

 

[Northwest Seahawk]

You can look at this a ton of different ways the bottom line is BOTH sides will have to compromise to get a deal done.

 

[AVL]

Who actually franchises quarterbacks? It's nothing but an empty threat. Please point out successful examples of franchised quarterback seasons. I seem to have forgotten them.

 

[Tical21]

Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Mike Vick and a handful of others that I can't remember.

 

[LickMyNuts]

Kearly, great analysis.

I'm not concerned that RW is going to leave. However, I would like him to sign a contract before the Colts give Andrew Luck one of the planets.

 

[bmorepunk]

Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Mike Vick and a handful of others that I can't remember.

Manning got it four years ago from the Colts in February while they negotiated his contract, and he tried to get an exclusion from the league. Brees got his overturned (they still worked out a contract) with the Saints because of his previous tagging dating back to the Chargers (three is apparently a hard limit in a player's career).

The Patriots franchised Matt Cassel in 2009 in case Brady wasn't able to come back from his injury for the season.

I don't know of any team that has let a good to great young quarterback walk, particularly coming off their rookie contract. You can't replace these guys without a massive gamble. There are teams that haven't had a good quarterback for one or two decades (some of them have gotten a year or two out of one guy but just sit in turmoil).

 

[seedhawk]

Great read Kip. Another thought is, RW plays out his rook deal, like Flacco did, and then moves on. If the Hawks make it back to the bowl for 3 straight years with RW, Flacco money will probably look darn skimpy. Just the challenge RW would take.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Great read Kip. Another thought is, RW plays out his rook deal, like Flacco did, and then moves on. If the Hawks make it back to the bowl for 3 straight years with RW, Flacco money will probably look darn skimpy. Just the challenge RW would take.

He may very well play his rookie deal out but if he wins in Santa Clara in February he'll get his money and more. If he doesn't he'll get tagged for 2016-17 while we find his replacement. By the way you do know that latter scenerio is ridiculously unlikely?

It will get done and I think before this season ends given they don't want to let Luck set the market.

 

[bandiger]

Well Tannehill got his extension, 96 million for six years with 45 million guaranteed.