Rice on the worst contract list

[brimsalabim]

Well Rice"s contract seems a whole heck of a lot better than Harvin's.

 

[SharkHawk]

"Bad Contracts" is subjective. Paying a given player more than any other on the roster not to play is what I would term a bad contract. Especially when the other said players are busting their collective asses to make something happen for the league minimum, a rookie contract, or short-term "prove it" deals. Personally, I think we got jobbed. The very good news is, we have a more than capable receiving core ready to pick up the slack.

New CBA doesn't let you pay rookie contracts more anymore though. That is what kind of makes the whole argument go away, which is what veteran players wanted, and that's why the union went on the attack on that fact. Rice's contract will be off the books when it needs to be, and the team can handle that to pay others. They have the spacing set up pretty well on the big deals they have signed. The only one that seems bad now is Harvin's, but he was a luxury this year because they had space. If he fails then they sign somebody else and release him and eat the remainder of the 25 million as a June 1 release I guess (I don't think there is any way in hell that happens, but in a worst case scenario, it is possible).

 

[Snohomie]

I don't see Rice as a bad contract at all.

Lets see... for ~10 million a year without a lot of guaranteed money, we got:

70/1000/15.0/10TDs. Good hands, makes more great catches than he drops. Runs a lot of routes downfield, which helps open up the underneath game and helps keep safeties honest vs the run.

That statline is what you get when you take the number of passes Seattle opponents threw (569 vs 405 for Seattle) and split them across our WRs proportionally. Rice had the 7th highest DVOA last year - another stat that basically says Rice was good with the opportunities he had.

We may end up releasing him before his contract is up because we have so many young players worth big paydays, but Rice's contract allows us to do just that, and we haven't really been hurting for cap space with Rice so far. Most importantly, it is hard to go out and find a WR that can take defenses deep, make difficult catches, and do it regularly. Plus, he doesn't seem to be the handful that a lot of WRs are.

Worst thing I can say about Rice (and it's a big issue) is that his health is always a problem. Very different player from Harvin, but he shares that statement.

 

[mikeak]

"Bad Contracts" is subjective. Paying a given player more than any other on the roster not to play is what I would term a bad contract. Especially when the other said players are busting their collective asses to make something happen for the league minimum, a rookie contract, or short-term "prove it" deals. Personally, I think we got jobbed. The very good news is, we have a more than capable receiving core ready to pick up the slack.

New CBA doesn't let you pay rookie contracts more anymore though. That is what kind of makes the whole argument go away, which is what veteran players wanted, and that's why the union went on the attack on that fact. Rice's contract will be off the books when it needs to be, and the team can handle that to pay others. They have the spacing set up pretty well on the big deals they have signed. The only one that seems bad now is Harvin's, but he was a luxury this year because they had space. If he fails then they sign somebody else and release him and eat the remainder of the 25 million as a June 1 release I guess (I don't think there is any way in hell that happens, but in a worst case scenario, it is possible).

You are ignoring the detail of rolling cap money. If we don't spend it this year we use it next year. Sure over a time period you have to spend X percentage of the cap but you can roll it from year to year. IF (and I am not saying he is) Rice is overpaid then that money could be spent elsewhere this / next year.

This is a cap league - every dollar spent somewhere comes out somewhere else. It is not true to say that his salary didnt affect other decisions / players being signed. Maybe we don't keep Browner next year. Maybe we cut Red, maybe we don't trade for X guy or sign a specific FA.....

 

[kearly]

How many of you actually read the article? It was awesome.

Rice is listed as a guy who got a big contract based on a single good year, the good season he had with Favre. How is that not true?

Barnwell was spot on.

Rice is overpaid about as much as Golden Tate is "over-rated." Rice can't control his targets in our offense, but when he's been targeted he's been very productive. Our offense is all about efficiency, and Rice just gets it done. I don't think we'd be talking about Rice's contract as a problem at all if we didn't have so many other bills to pay, especially at WR.

 

[PlinytheCenter]

"Bad Contracts" is subjective. Paying a given player more than any other on the roster not to play is what I would term a bad contract. Especially when the other said players are busting their collective asses to make something happen for the league minimum, a rookie contract, or short-term "prove it" deals. Personally, I think we got jobbed. The very good news is, we have a more than capable receiving core ready to pick up the slack.

New CBA doesn't let you pay rookie contracts more anymore though. That is what kind of makes the whole argument go away, which is what veteran players wanted, and that's why the union went on the attack on that fact. Rice's contract will be off the books when it needs to be, and the team can handle that to pay others. They have the spacing set up pretty well on the big deals they have signed. The only one that seems bad now is Harvin's, but he was a luxury this year because they had space. If he fails then they sign somebody else and release him and eat the remainder of the 25 million as a June 1 release I guess (I don't think there is any way in hell that happens, but in a worst case scenario, it is possible).

I guess I wasn't clear enough with my post; I was referring obliquely to Harvin, not Rice. Sidney has proven himself time and again.

 

[Scottemojo]

How many of you actually read the article? It was awesome.

Rice is listed as a guy who got a big contract based on a single good year, the good season he had with Favre. How is that not true?

Barnwell was spot on.

Rice is overpaid about as much as Golden Tate is "over-rated." Rice can't control his targets in our offense, but when he's been targeted he's been very productive. Our offense is all about efficiency, and Rice just gets it done. I don't think we'd be talking about Rice's contract as a problem at all if we didn't have so many other bills to pay, especially at WR.

Everyone here is rating him as a good deal based on last year, and last year alone. I for one did not appreciate his tenor the first half of last year, a struggling offense had him on the verge of meltdown, doing the I was open hissy fit a half dozen times a game. Add that that he signed that deal with two bad shoulders, probably should have been IR'ed to begin 2011, waited to get surgery on those shoulders and had to be babied through camp last year as a result, blocks like it makes him nauseous, doesn't do the scramble drill particularly well, and I think he is overpaid. There was acrimony in the locker room over the QB competition last year. I am willing to guess some of that was Rice supporting his guy Jackson. And I think it bled onto the field at the beginning of the year. My thinking he is overpaid isn't all about lowish numbers.

Snohomie is right about the low guaranteed money next year. A team friendly contract that will allow him to be cut with little consequence was smart GM skills.

Rice runs a good deep out. He can highpoint a ball. He throws a decent pass. He does good things for the Hawks. But not as many good things as the money he has gotten, that's all.

 

[kearly]

I read everything you said, and understand it. But to me, the yards per target and yards per catch pretty much cancel them out with room to spare.* I also really value Rice's dependability in the red zone and on 3rd downs. He comes down with the football every time. We've been spoiled a bit because Tate can do that too, but I honestly think if we cut Rice today our offense would suffer a body blow. Right now, I'd rather have Rice than the savings because I feel that's how much we rely on him. Maybe a year from now, that changes.

*One thing I've noticed, you tend to value the locker room stuff a lot more than I do. You are very quick to speculate on motives and conflicts, whereas I tend to be more relaxed in comparison (though we are probably on the same half of the spectrum- we are both detective wannabees). Not saying you are wrong, just pointing out that this is a factor in our evaluations.

 

[pehawk]

Scotte, you're spot on with Rice's hissy fits and locker room effect. It's not even a secret, really. Other Hawks WR's we're mocking Sidney's disdain for Wilson during the Pro Bowl last year.

It's not a secret, really.

 

[-The Glove-]

Scotte, you're spot on with Rice's hissy fits and locker room effect. It's not even a secret, really. Other Hawks WR's we're mocking Sidney's disdain for Wilson during the Pro Bowl last year.

It's not a secret, really.

Wait, what? Sarcasm?

 

[Scottemojo]

Scotte, you're spot on with Rice's hissy fits and locker room effect. It's not even a secret, really. Other Hawks WR's we're mocking Sidney's disdain for Wilson during the Pro Bowl last year.

It's not a secret, really.

I was guessing, I really don't know shit.

 

[pehawk]

No, not sarcasm.

I doubt its as strong of a dislike anymore, but its something Baldwin was mocking Sidney for during the PB.

 

[Scottemojo]

I was just basing it on his early season histrionics.

 

[pehawk]

I was just basing it on his early season histrionics.

Oh, I know. Late season too....he did it in DC as well.

My guess would be your guess is close to the truth.

 

[kearly]

Well I do think that Rice seemed pouty on the field. That much is beyond doubt. I don't know if I buy the Tjack-angst theory, but maybe he was annoyed by all those 40+ yard TDs he earned that Wilson didn't give him? I could definitely see that.

 

[Sarlacc83]

I was just basing it on his early season histrionics.

Oh, I know. Late season too....he did it in DC as well.

My guess would be your guess is close to the truth.

Yeah, I remember watching him throw up his arms when Wilson didn't seem him deep down the middle. It was one of those things I didn't understand then, but which makes sense if Scotte's guess is true. We'll see how he does this year. Hopefully he's aware of his tenuous position salary-wise.

 

[pehawk]

Baldwin tweeted "how you like that, Sidney....? That's our QB", Sidney replied "ARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!" to which Baldwin did a "LOL"

This was after Wilson did a scramble/improvisation play in the PB.

 

[RolandDeschain]

If Rice's potential issues with Wilson negatively affect so much as a single other receiver on our team, I have a problem with it; but if he's just being a fierce competitor and doesn't like not having the ball thrown his way when he gets open, (and really, what WR doesn't dislike that if they get open deep but don't get targeted?) and all the other receivers and Wilson are cool with it, then so am I.

I don't think there's any way for us to know at present if it's an issue or not, though.

Just my opinion.

 

[pehawk]

If Rice's potential issues with Wilson negatively affect so much as a single other receiver on our team, I have a problem with it; but if he's just being a fierce competitor and doesn't like not having the ball thrown his way when he gets open, (and really, what WR doesn't dislike that if they get open deep but don't get targeted?) and all the other receivers and Wilson are cool with it, then so am I.

I don't think there's any way for us to know at present if it's an issue or not, though.

Just my opinion.

Yup.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

Haha! A weaker QB might cave to Sidney's antics. To Wilson, he's just another blip on the radar. ..and sometimes not a blip at all when Wilson's 'to short' to see him.