Russell Wilson to Giants? - NBC Sports comentary

[mrt144]

I didn't make the point to suggest Russell could, should, would do the same as Brady. I made the point to suggest the correlation between what you pay your QB, the level you receive from that player, and the high end winning probability.

It's a fundamental philosophical question we are discussing. Can you pay your elite QB $30 Million a year and win a SB in years 1-3? I would say no. You give yourself a window.. The window is at the tail end of the contract when it (hopefully ) equalizes down with inflation and cap increases.

If you sign Wilson, you likely make the playoffs for the next 3-4 years while losing in the first or second round. Hey, playoffs are good. I'm not complaining.

Then you give yourself a window (if all other things align.. aka pete doesn't retire, defense still progresses...etc... that the 30 Million becomes the 15th lowest contract in 8 years and gives you an opportunity to win with a relatively lower figure.

A fundamental philosophical question that ends in a binary conclusion is more than likely just an opinion. I don't think anyone disagrees with you for saying the Seahawks are less likely to win a Superbowl paying Russ 30m+ than if they paid him 20m. But is it reasonable to assume that Russell would make a Brady level concession to help the Seahawks compete; no. So what's the alternative of discussing that hypothetical? In some peoples eyes, it lends it'self to the implication of moving on from Russ, which obviously will lead to a polarizing reaction, whether intended or not.

In my personal opinion, there are far too many variables to ascribe a probability of winning a Superbowl to the amount a QB makes. It definitely plays a role, but Brady is the outlier and not indicative of a viable model of long term success in the NFL.

And the last sentence has to be actualized in thought - we can't point to one exception, voluntarily taking less than he COULD, to buttress an instructive point about what the Hawks and RW should do. Singularly unique exceptions lead to incoherent arguments.

 

[AgentDib]

There are a few here who don't seem to understand the purpose of a negotiated position. Everything has a price and the question is seldom whether to offer a player a contract or extension but instead whether both sides can agree on a dollar value.

Russell Wilson's agent job is to make it a difficult decision for the Seahawks to decide to extend the contract. If the answer is easy for the FO to sign the extension then Russ's agent is not asking for enough money. The FO's job is to make it a difficult decision for Russ to decide to extend the contract. If the obvious answer for Russ is to sign the extension then the Seahawks are offering too much money. The third option of paying Russ under the table for a sports therapy center appears to only be an option for the Patriots.

At the end of the day, if both sides are doing their job well, a middle ground will be achieved where both sides are making a compromise and neither is completely happy. At a superficial level this indicates that maybe fans shouldn't argue that the decision is cut and dry in either direction unless they have a reason to believe that one side is incompetent.

However, this really matters because negotiated bargaining completely explains why teams do not consistently get plus value out of free agent contracts or extensions. Hitting on draft picks has always been the main source of value in the NFL. Russ will end up being paid fairly wherever he plays his next contract and the success of that team will be mainly dependent on how many hits that team has had in the draft who are still playing on cheap rookie contracts.

 

[DomeHawk]

The NFL should institute a separate cap space for QB's that doesn't affect the rest of the roster.

Even the playing field.

 

[lukerguy]

I didn't make the point to suggest Russell could, should, would do the same as Brady. I made the point to suggest the correlation between what you pay your QB, the level you receive from that player, and the high end winning probability.

It's a fundamental philosophical question we are discussing. Can you pay your elite QB $30 Million a year and win a SB in years 1-3? I would say no. You give yourself a window.. The window is at the tail end of the contract when it (hopefully ) equalizes down with inflation and cap increases.

If you sign Wilson, you likely make the playoffs for the next 3-4 years while losing in the first or second round. Hey, playoffs are good. I'm not complaining.

Then you give yourself a window (if all other things align.. aka pete doesn't retire, defense still progresses...etc... that the 30 Million becomes the 15th lowest contract in 8 years and gives you an opportunity to win with a relatively lower figure.

A fundamental philosophical question that ends in a binary conclusion is more than likely just an opinion. I don't think anyone disagrees with you for saying the Seahawks are less likely to win a Superbowl paying Russ 30m+ than if they paid him 20m. But is it reasonable to assume that Russell would make a Brady level concession to help the Seahawks compete; no. So what's the alternative of discussing that hypothetical? In some peoples eyes, it lends it'self to the implication of moving on from Russ, which obviously will lead to a polarizing reaction, whether intended or not.

In my personal opinion, there are far too many variables to ascribe a probability of winning a Superbowl to the amount a QB makes. It definitely plays a role, but Brady is the outlier and not indicative of a viable model of long term success in the NFL.

The point of the discussion I raised is to say this: let's look at the Superbowl winners since the new CBA. Has any team won a SB with a star QB who just entered the first years of a new record setting contract? No. There are two models thus far since the new CBA for winning 1) Rookie contract QB 2) QB making half of market value due to extenuating circumstances.

Teams that fit into category 1:
-2018 Eagles Wentz (rookie deal)
-2014 Seahawks Wilson (rookie deal)
2013- Ravens Flacco (Rookie deal)
2011- Packers Rodgers (Rookie deal)

Teams that fit into category 2:
2019- Pats Brady
2017- Pats Brady
2015- Pats Brady

For the most part, the teams who lost the SB that year, also fit this model.

So what about 2012/2016?
The 2012 Giants SB Manning was the 10th highest paid QB, and in 2016 Manning was on the last year of his deal which made him outside of the top 5 money makers.. So the next potential window would be in a few years once Russell's big contract has normalized.

Is there a correlation between what you pay your QB and winning? Absolutely. So what am I saying? The Seahawks should consider trading Wilson if they feel they can get a rookie QB who is a good but lessor version of Wilson in the draft while stockpiling picks. Otherwise, there is a very unlikely chance the Hawks will be winning a SB in the next 3 years. However, they'd likely make the playoffs and have another window open up in 2023 assuming all other pieces remaining (aka Pete and ownership).

 

[TwistedHusky]

When you are rolling out offenses where your QB passes for 60 yds in the half and maybe 200 in the whole game...not sure who the QB is matters that much.

That is an extreme example but based on last year, not entirely rare either.

 

[mrt144]

There are a few here who don't seem to understand the purpose of a negotiated position. Everything has a price and the question is seldom whether to offer a player a contract or extension but instead whether both sides can agree on a dollar value.

Russell Wilson's agent job is to make it a difficult decision for the Seahawks to decide to extend the contract. If the answer is easy for the FO to sign the extension then Russ's agent is not asking for enough money. The FO's job is to make it a difficult decision for Russ to decide to extend the contract. If the obvious answer for Russ is to sign the extension then the Seahawks are offering too much money. The third option of paying Russ under the table for a sports therapy center appears to only be an option for the Patriots.

At the end of the day, if both sides are doing their job well, a middle ground will be achieved where both sides are making a compromise and neither is completely happy. At a superficial level this indicates that maybe fans shouldn't argue that the decision is cut and dry in either direction unless they have a reason to believe that one side is incompetent.

However, this really matters because negotiated bargaining completely explains why teams do not consistently get plus value out of free agent contracts or extensions. Hitting on draft picks has always been the main source of value in the NFL. Russ will end up being paid fairly wherever he plays his next contract and the success of that team will be mainly dependent on how many hits that team has had in the draft who are still playing on cheap rookie contracts.

Sing it high, sing it low! This is exactly the conversation about team building that QB contracts excuses. No matter how much you pay your QB, high or low, and no matter how integral a QB is to aggregate team success, you can't bork the draft repeatedly and expect a QB to cover for it over and over again.

 

[lukerguy]

Good point. The Hawks haven't drafted well since Scot McCoulghan era. It likely doesn't matter what they do with Wilson if they can't hit on draft picks.

 

[oldhawkfan]

Not spoiled but at the end of the day anything short of a Superbowl Championship sucks and if we havent even been to a NFC Championship game then were really not that close. Personally i'd rather win 1 championship and miss the playoffs for 9 years then make the playoffs 10 years straight and not win a Superbowl.[/quote]

This doesn’t even make sense considering we were witnesses to a Super Bowl championship 5 years ago and were oh so close 4 years ago and have only missed the playoffs once in the last 9 years.

 

[mrt144]

Good point. The Hawks haven't drafted well since Scot McCoulghan era. It likely doesn't matter what they do with Wilson if they can't hit on draft picks.

And here's a nuanced point - Hawks may have not even drafted that poorly. Average even. High variance with booms and busts even. The margins might be 1 or 2 high level players missed in 2015's draft that could have been part of better 2016-2018 campaigns. It's seriously hard to know for certain because other teams don't provide a reference point.

 

[Northwest Seahawk]

Well the contract negotiations just got more complicated. Wilson said on the Jimmy Fallon show that they are in New York and the possibility of being the highest paid QB is a possibility said Wilson. So is this just contract talk or real talk i think it's both . I also think an extension this season is going to be unlikely at this point. Is he worth the 37-40 million a year i don't think he is .

 

[UK_Seahawk]

I say this as a huge rw3 fan. I think it's time to consider trading him.

 

[John63]

Well the contract negotiations just got more complicated. Wilson said on the Jimmy Fallon show that they are in New York and the possibility of being the highest paid QB is a possibility said Wilson. So is this just contract talk or real talk i think it's both . I also think an extension this season is going to be unlikely at this point. Is he worth the 37-40 million a year i don't think he is .

Hmm left out a lot of info there, let me help some.

https://sports.yahoo.com/russell-wi...snt-envision-himself-playing-new-york-giants/

So yeah no unless the Hawks choose to do it, which would be stupid as heck, he is not going anyplace. Though I would love to see him on a team that builds around and for him to include the game plan. However my love of the Hawks and desire to see them win is higher and with Wilson, we are a playoff team every year and once in anything can happen, Without him, we are 5+ years from it.

 

[A-Dog]

I like how we're now presuming that Russ is going to bank $40M a year when the current highest-paid QB, Aaron Rodgers, who clearly and objectively has better credentials than Russ, is only making $33.5.

 

[knownone]

I like how we're now presuming that Russ is going to bank $40M a year when the current highest-paid QB, Aaron Rodgers, who clearly and objectively has better credentials than Russ, is only making $33.5.

It's more complicated than that. The Franchise tag in 2020 will pay him 30M, in 2021 it would pay him close to 36M, in 2022 he'd be looking at somewhere around 42M. So if Russ and his agent want the most money possible they are starting the negotiations at 36M, and likely asking for 38-42M. This has a lot to do with what he'd earn on the open market if he's not franchised in each successive season.

If it was as simple as giving him more than Rodgers, the deal would have been done already.

 

[A-Dog]

I like how we're now presuming that Russ is going to bank $40M a year when the current highest-paid QB, Aaron Rodgers, who clearly and objectively has better credentials than Russ, is only making $33.5.

It's more complicated than that. The Franchise tag in 2020 will pay him 30M, in 2021 it would pay him close to 36M, in 2022 he'd be looking at somewhere around 42M. So if Russ and his agent want the most money possible they are starting the negotiations at 36M, and likely asking for 38-42M. This has a lot to do with what he'd earn on the open market if he's not franchised in each successive season.

If it was as simple as giving him more than Rodgers, the deal would have been done already.

I don't see it that way.

If the Seahawks max out the Franchise tag, that means they can have Russ for the next four seasons for an average of ~$33M APY (including his $25M cap hit this year) with no long-term liability should Russ get a severe injury or have a big dip in productivity. Russ would end that fourth year at 35 years old.

If I'm the Seahawks and I want to pay the least money possible, I'm looking at that $33M APY as the ceiling on a 3-year extension. Sure, Russ could hold out to gain leverage a la Walter Jones, but that would undoubtedly hurt his performance on the field which will hurt his value (QB takes a lot more preparation than LT) and his legacy. The tag gives the Seahawks a big advantage.

If I'm Russ in that situation I'm willing to take a lot less than $42M APY in exchange for long-term stability and security. If I'm the Seahawks in that situation I'm willing to pay a bit more than the minimum in exchange for stability at QB and not having to worry about holdouts and the drama that comes with it.

Happy medium IMO would be ~$35M a year over 5 years (4-year extension) that would take them through the 2023 season, after which Russ would be 36 years old. He'd be the highest paid player in league history, at least for a little while.

 

[TreeRon]

Whatever RW gets in this next contract, within a year or two he'll be 4th or 5th highest paid.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Exactly, you'd think people would put 2 and 2 together after his current contract. People freaked out, now it looks like a bargain vs. what other guys are getting. Guys who are not near the level of Russ.

 

[Seymour]

Any news here? Is Russ still with us? Is Ciara moving to New York yet? :roll:

 

[knownone]

I like how we're now presuming that Russ is going to bank $40M a year when the current highest-paid QB, Aaron Rodgers, who clearly and objectively has better credentials than Russ, is only making $33.5.

It's more complicated than that. The Franchise tag in 2020 will pay him 30M, in 2021 it would pay him close to 36M, in 2022 he'd be looking at somewhere around 42M. So if Russ and his agent want the most money possible they are starting the negotiations at 36M, and likely asking for 38-42M. This has a lot to do with what he'd earn on the open market if he's not franchised in each successive season.

If it was as simple as giving him more than Rodgers, the deal would have been done already.

I don't see it that way.

If the Seahawks max out the Franchise tag, that means they can have Russ for the next four seasons for an average of ~$33M APY (including his $25M cap hit this year) with no long-term liability should Russ get a severe injury or have a big dip in productivity. Russ would end that fourth year at 35 years old.

If I'm the Seahawks and I want to pay the least money possible, I'm looking at that $33M APY as the ceiling on a 3-year extension. Sure, Russ could hold out to gain leverage a la Walter Jones, but that would undoubtedly hurt his performance on the field which will hurt his value (QB takes a lot more preparation than LT) and his legacy. The tag gives the Seahawks a big advantage.

If I'm Russ in that situation I'm willing to take a lot less than $42M APY in exchange for long-term stability and security. If I'm the Seahawks in that situation I'm willing to pay a bit more than the minimum in exchange for stability at QB and not having to worry about holdouts and the drama that comes with it.

Happy medium IMO would be ~$35M a year over 5 years (4-year extension) that would take them through the 2023 season, after which Russ would be 36 years old. He'd be the highest paid player in league history, at least for a little while.

Look, I've got numerous posts explaining why I don't think playing the franchise tag game is smart for Russell. We mostly agree on that front.

However, I think it's important for you to realize that your issue with the 40M/Year figure is entirely in how it is represented. People who are using the 40M/Year figure are doing so when talking about new money. Your 33M figure includes his previous contract in the equation. Factor out his previous contract and 3 years on the franchise tag is 36M/Year in new money.

For example, if we apply your contract of 35M/Year over 5 years and only look at new money: (25+x)/5=35; the total value of new money is 150M/4Y which is 37.5M or .5M less than the starting point of the negotiations that I suggested. Keep in mind, that is your happy medium and I was speaking entirely from Russell's agent's perspective, in my last post.

Rodgers is not a good comparison for Russ. Rodgers was 35 in the first year of his contract, he was coming off a season in which he missed 9 games, and he'd played through significant injuries in each of the previous 4 seasons. Russell is coming off a 4-year stretch where he's arguably been better than Rodgers in 3/4 seasons, he'll be 4 years younger, and his teams have had more success.

 

[thegreeninyoureye]

The NFL should institute a separate cap space for QB's that doesn't affect the rest of the roster.

Even the playing field.

I wast thinking the exact same thing! Qb prices r out of control but I would suspect the other positional players would not be happy. Then again there would b mo money for them too cuz u wouldn't have to factor in the qb part of the pie interesting thought to say the least.