Rumor: Seahawks talking to Giants about Kam trade

[hawknation2015]

I cut down the quote without altering the meaning (at least that is not my intention) but I want to zero in on these two things

1) It is not 2 years later. It is one played season under that contract. He has played one out of four years. 25%

He agreed to a $5million signing bonus - they forget about that money later

It is 2 years later. Look it up. Sherm and Earl got paid last season, Kam got paid the season before that. He has been playing under it for 2 seasons.

Russell Wilson is in the last year of his rookie deal. His 4 year extension doesn't start until next year. Players agree to this so they can get their money now via signing bonus and not wait for their rookie contracts to expire. The proration of that signing bonus kicks in immediately on the last year of the rookie deal.(That is probably what is confusing you.)

Bobbie, Kam, & Sherm, all were extended in similar fashion. Earl was a year later because of his old CBA rookie 1st round contract (5 years). Okung's was 6 which he is in the last year of it.

*edit* just to detail it out

Kam

2010 yr 1

2011 yr 2

2012 yr 3

2013 yr 4 + proration of signing bonus extension

2014 yr 1 of extension

-------------------- Kam is here. He has only played 1 year of his extension.

2015 yr 2 of extension

2016 yr 3 of extension

2017 yr 4 of extension

I appreciate your thought out answer, but its incorrect. His contract was signed a year previous and his rookie contract was torn up. Do you think he signed a contract 2 years ago that started last year? Nope.

He did sign the extension before the final year of his rookie deal in 2013, but no part of his rookie contract was "torn up." They merely added the prorated portion of the signing bonus onto the final year of that deal.

 

[DavidSeven]

As Fade stated, they added money to Kam's 2013 base to spread some of the money around. That money came out of the $28 million extension he signed, so I don't think it's entirely accurate to say they ripped up his rookie contract, as the Seahawks never negotiate that way. That was just some bookkeeping that was done after the fact.

 

[Cartire]

Just to touch on something that was mentioned earlier in this thread... Do you guys think that Kam would be inclined to come back if the Hawks struggle and lose games? Also on the flip side, do you think if we play excellent and win games, if he'd miss the team/playing ball and just decide to end the holdout? I mean, I don't know if Kam is really thinking with his emotions right now but at some point once the season officially starts, you have to wonder how it could effect him when he's at home watching his team winning... or possibly struggling.

And this is honestly why I keep falling back to, "its an injury."

I think its an undisclosed injury. I dont think the team knows or realized how much it has effected Kam. But Kam does. He made a quick decision to holdout, knowing that he probably wouldnt be able to play up to the standards of his 2016 cap hits. And knew he would be cut with no guarantees at the end of this season. I mean, there is no reason to think the team is going to fold here, AND KAM HAS TO KNOW THAT! Which means, hes hurt enough that he cant risk going back for the checks and has to play this one out till the end.

I dont know what else it could be. I truly dont believe Kam is this dumb.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Explain RW's contract to me please.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... ll-wilson/

You can find that information the same place as Chancellor's. I accept your apology.

 

[ImTheScientist]

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... hancellor/

 

[hawknation2015]

He did sign the extension before the final year of his rookie deal in 2013, but no part of his rookie contract was "torn up." They merely added the prorated portion of the signing bonus onto the final year of that deal.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... hancellor/

Correct, we're looking at the same information.

 

[JAGHAWK]

Just to touch on something that was mentioned earlier in this thread... Do you guys think that Kam would be inclined to come back if the Hawks struggle and lose games? Also on the flip side, do you think if we play excellent and win games, if he'd miss the team/playing ball and just decide to end the holdout? I mean, I don't know if Kam is really thinking with his emotions right now but at some point once the season officially starts, you have to wonder how it could effect him when he's at home watching his team winning... or possibly struggling.

I don't have an answer but I'm curious how the team would feel or react, especially Earl and Sherm, if we were to lose a couple of close games early on because of some poor plays by Bailey. Would they still understand where Kam is coming from or would they start resenting his behavior?

Good point... how would the guys feel knowing that the loss may have been different if had been there. That's what makes it so hard to imagine how this doesn't hurt the team, even if he does comes back. Do you just shrug it off and move on? There could be some animosity after he returns. These guys play with a lot of emotion. I'd hate to see it kill the morale and letting Kam going be inevitable, for the locker room.

 

[ImTheScientist]

He did sign the extension before the final year of his rookie deal in 2013, but no part of his rookie contract was "torn up." They merely added the prorated portion of the signing bonus onto the final year of that deal.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... hancellor/

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/92005 ... e-seahawks

See the new contract that started in 2013. 2014 was not the 1st year of his new deal. There is clear evidence online. Anyone arguing against those two links is being silly.

If you can show me where it says last year was the first year of his new deal I'll listen. Here Im showing you and yet you are not willing to listen. :*(

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/27/kam- ... ahawks-nfl

The Kam Chancellor holdout in Seattle is a clear illustration of a contract negotiation that appeared to be “win-win” at the time turning into “lose-lose” just two short years later.

2...not 1.

 

[Basis4day]

Just to touch on something that was mentioned earlier in this thread... Do you guys think that Kam would be inclined to come back if the Hawks struggle and lose games? Also on the flip side, do you think if we play excellent and win games, if he'd miss the team/playing ball and just decide to end the holdout? I mean, I don't know if Kam is really thinking with his emotions right now but at some point once the season officially starts, you have to wonder how it could effect him when he's at home watching his team winning... or possibly struggling.

And this is honestly why I keep falling back to, "its an injury."

I think its an undisclosed injury. I dont think the team knows or realized how much it has affected Kam. But Kam does. He made a quick decision to holdout, knowing that he probably wouldnt be able to play up to the standards of his 2016 cap hits. And knew he would be cut with no guarantees at the end of this season. I mean, there is no reason to think the team is going to fold here, AND KAM HAS TO KNOW THAT! Which means, hes hurt enough that he cant risk going back for the checks and has to play this one out till the end.

I dont know what else it could be. I truly dont believe Kam is this dumb.

So, based on your theory, he is worried about not getting any money past this season so he sits out to never receive money again because he knows he won't pass a physical?

 

[JAGHAWK]

Just to touch on something that was mentioned earlier in this thread... Do you guys think that Kam would be inclined to come back if the Hawks struggle and lose games? Also on the flip side, do you think if we play excellent and win games, if he'd miss the team/playing ball and just decide to end the holdout? I mean, I don't know if Kam is really thinking with his emotions right now but at some point once the season officially starts, you have to wonder how it could effect him when he's at home watching his team winning... or possibly struggling.

And this is honestly why I keep falling back to, "its an injury."

I think its an undisclosed injury. I dont think the team knows or realized how much it has effected Kam. But Kam does. He made a quick decision to holdout, knowing that he probably wouldnt be able to play up to the standards of his 2016 cap hits. And knew he would be cut with no guarantees at the end of this season. I mean, there is no reason to think the team is going to fold here, AND KAM HAS TO KNOW THAT! Which means, hes hurt enough that he cant risk going back for the checks and has to play this one out till the end.

I don't know what else it could be. I truly don't believe Kam is this dumb.

It's the only that truly makes sense after all this time. Could he really have the heart to watch his team lose over and over while he happily sits at home.... waiting for more money? That would be a true test to who Kam is as an individual. I just hope none of this matters and they play well without him. Or he comes back. *crosses fingers*

 

[ImTheScientist]

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... hancellor/

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/92005 ... e-seahawks

See the new contract that started in 2013. 2014 was not the 1st year of his new deal. There is clear evidence online. Anyone arguing against those two links is being silly.

If you can show me where it says last year was the first year of his new deal I'll listen. Here Im showing you and yet you are not willing to listen. :*(

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/27/kam- ... ahawks-nfl

The Kam Chancellor holdout in Seattle is a clear illustration of a contract negotiation that appeared to be “win-win” at the time turning into “lose-lose” just two short years later.

2...not 1.

Hi Fade,

This post should be helpful to you. :th2thumbs:

 

[Sgt. Largent]

It's the only that truly makes sense after all this time. Could he really have the heart to watch his team lose over and over while he happily sits at home.... waiting for more money? That would be a true test to who Kam is as an individual. I just hope none of this matters and they play well without him. Or he comes back. *crosses fingers*

That's what makes all this so confusing.

Of all the Hawk players, I would put Kam in the top 5 players that would never be doing what he's doing. Team leader, tone setter, first guy to stand up and be held accountable after losses, man of integrity and honor, on and on.

Why? Why risk your rep and place on this great team as THE leader in a fight you cannot, and will not win?

 

[hawknation2015]

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... hancellor/

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/92005 ... e-seahawks

See the new contract that started in 2013. 2014 was not the 1st year of his new deal. There is clear evidence online. Anyone arguing against those two links is being silly.

If you can show me where it says last year was the first year of his new deal I'll listen. Here Im showing you and yet you are not willing to listen. :*(

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/27/kam- ... ahawks-nfl

The Kam Chancellor holdout in Seattle is a clear illustration of a contract negotiation that appeared to be “win-win” at the time turning into “lose-lose” just two short years later.

2...not 1.

Hi Fade,

This post should be helpful to you. :th2thumbs:

I think we all know the contract was signed two years ago . . . LOL.

The question was whether the terms of the final year of his rookie included the 4 yr(s)/$28 million included 2013 or whether they simply added the $1 million prorated portion of his signing bonus onto the final year of the rookie deal to make it more cap-friendly going forward.

From what I remember, and what I can see now, the 4 yr(s)/$28 million did not include 2013. It was an extension for the four seasons from 2014-17, with the base salary in 2013 being left unchanged. That is the point I think you were missing.

 

[Fade]

Explain RW's contract to me please.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... ll-wilson/

You can find that information the same place as Chancellor's. I accept your apology.

So you are saying both Kam & RW had the last year of their rookie contracts ripped up and they signed 5 year extensions?

Kam's APY drops to 5.91 @ 5 years.
RW's APY drops to 17.86 @ 5 years.

Sorry bud, you're wrong. They got 4 year extensions with the proration spread on to the final year of the rookie deal. With tweaks to their base salaries to adjust for current and short term salary cap needs.

 

[ImTheScientist]

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... hancellor/

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/92005 ... e-seahawks

See the new contract that started in 2013. 2014 was not the 1st year of his new deal. There is clear evidence online. Anyone arguing against those two links is being silly.

If you can show me where it says last year was the first year of his new deal I'll listen. Here Im showing you and yet you are not willing to listen. :*(

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/27/kam- ... ahawks-nfl

The Kam Chancellor holdout in Seattle is a clear illustration of a contract negotiation that appeared to be “win-win” at the time turning into “lose-lose” just two short years later.

2...not 1.

Hi Fade,

This post should be helpful to you. :th2thumbs:

I think we all know the contract was signed two years ago . . . LOL.

The question was whether the terms of the final year of his rookie deal changed, i.e. whether 4 yr(s)/$28 million included 2013, or whether they simply added the $1 million prorated portion of his signing bonus onto the final year of the rookie deal to make it more cap-friendly going forward.

From what I remember, and what I can see now, the 4 yr(s)/$28 million did not include 2013. It was an extension for the four seasons from 2014-17, with the base salary in 2013 being left unchanged. That is the point I think you were missing.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... hancellor/

No need to guess. It shows it here. I think you are missing the point.

 

[drdiags]

I wonder what happened to the motto about protecting the team? Fans can disparage Kam, but not sure I like the unamed player in this report:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13607128/seattle-seahawks-set-move-holdout-kam-chancellor

Said a teammate: "We will win without him, and it will hit him."

Smacks of the gossip about Wilson not being black enough. No need for this type of stuff leaking out of the locker room.

I don't get that correlation at all. The only thing it smacks of is a team confident in it's ability to win even though they be a man down. I want my players to feel that way! I know Pete does, he's said as much.

Topic of a leak from the inner workings of the locker room isn't the point in my eyes. Whether players are pro/anti Kam's stance, to let that outside the locker room has no value. I thought Pete's 3 rules covered protecting the team, which as a player means keeping team business inside the team locker room. If others think it is just small issue, get back to me when/if Kam reports. If our local media is worth a darn we will see how smoothly this little comment played in the locker room.

If the team could keep the Harvin punch out of Tate quiet, seems like they could have sat on any opinion on a team mates absence until further down the road. And as David Seven points out, this all could just be made up stuff. But I wanted to answer your question on how I see this.

On this I think we can agree, I think it shows bad from if true, you and others feel it isn't any big deal and is only the players competitive nature and willingness to speak their mind.

Back on topic: Trade deadline is the next milestone before this potential outcome is put to bed. I don't trade him because doing so rewards him.

 

[Fade]

@ The Scientist
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/kam-chancellor/
in that link you provided it says

Contract: 4 yr(s) / $28,002,008 Signing Bonus $5,000,000 Average Salary$7,000,502

2014
---------------------KAM is here. He has only played 1 year of his extension.
2015

2016

2017

would be the 4 years.

 

[Cartire]

Just to touch on something that was mentioned earlier in this thread... Do you guys think that Kam would be inclined to come back if the Hawks struggle and lose games? Also on the flip side, do you think if we play excellent and win games, if he'd miss the team/playing ball and just decide to end the holdout? I mean, I don't know if Kam is really thinking with his emotions right now but at some point once the season officially starts, you have to wonder how it could effect him when he's at home watching his team winning... or possibly struggling.

And this is honestly why I keep falling back to, "its an injury."

I think its an undisclosed injury. I dont think the team knows or realized how much it has affected Kam. But Kam does. He made a quick decision to holdout, knowing that he probably wouldnt be able to play up to the standards of his 2016 cap hits. And knew he would be cut with no guarantees at the end of this season. I mean, there is no reason to think the team is going to fold here, AND KAM HAS TO KNOW THAT! Which means, hes hurt enough that he cant risk going back for the checks and has to play this one out till the end.

I dont know what else it could be. I truly dont believe Kam is this dumb.

So, based on your theory, he is worried about not getting any money past this season so he sits out to never receive money again because he knows he won't pass a physical?

I dont think its about passing a physical. I dont think the injury is sidelining him, but I think its gotta be bad enough that he knows he lost a major step. Enough to risk a move like this.

 

[TwistedHusky]

According to the recent FG article - it isn't that Kam has the best deal anyway.

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2015/9/8/9274 ... ney-doofus

Is it really true that his contract has no/few performance incentives?? (Or am I reading that wrong?)

It also should be pointed out that contracts (AGAIN) that contracts are one way. Everyone freaks out when a player does not honor a contract, but when they do what they did to Zach Miller, nobody bats an eye. I didn't hear "But he has a contract!!" from all the Seahawk fans that were aghast when the Seahawks forced Miller to take a pay reduction, because of performance #s he did not hit primarily because we forced him to stay in and block instead of catch the ball.

And finally, SS is apparently undervalued by the NFL. Not sure that is validation that it should be. Our team RELIES on safeties as the advantage, just like it relies on the Running game...also undervalued by other teams.

Kam has every right to be upset when he is clearly as important as Earl, Lynch, Wilson and Sherman in impact on our success, but has a deal that does not compensate him in a way that assures we won't Zach Miller him if we get the chance. I can understand wanting the assurance.

Considering what he brought to the table for this team and how key he has been to attending 2 SBs and winning one, we should be happy to get him however we can. Without Kam we don't win that SF game that sent up to the SB and then certainly do not beat Carolina or even GB last year.

 

[Hasselbeck]

According to the recent FG article - it isn't that Kam has the best deal anyway.

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2015/9/8/9274 ... ney-doofus

Is it really true that his contract has no/few performance incentives?? (Or am I reading that wrong?)

It also should be pointed out that contracts (AGAIN) that contracts are one way. Everyone freaks out when a player does not honor a contract, but when they do what they did to Zach Miller, nobody bats an eye. I didn't hear "But he has a contract!!" from all the Seahawk fans that were aghast when the Seahawks forced Miller to take a pay reduction, because of performance #s he did not hit primarily because we forced him to stay in and block instead of catch the ball.

And finally, SS is apparently undervalued by the NFL. Not sure that is validation that it should be. Our team RELIES on safeties as the advantage, just like it relies on the Running game...also undervalued by other teams.

Kam has every right to be upset when he is clearly as important as Earl, Lynch, Wilson and Sherman in impact on our success, but has a deal that does not compensate him in a way that assures we won't Zach Miller him if we get the chance. I can understand wanting the assurance.

Considering what he brought to the table for this team and how key he has been to attending 2 SBs and winning one, we should be happy to get him however we can. Without Kam we don't win that SF game that sent up to the SB and then certainly do not beat Carolina or even GB last year.

And yet.. none of that can be your basis for setting an awful precedence with the rest of the team, especially a guy like Michael Bennett who wants more money but still put in all the offseason work, still suited up for preseason games, and will play Sunday.

If you paid players based on the handful of games they really stood out in, you'd be tearing up contracts every few weeks. He's paid more than fair. And honestly, if we did cut him, why would that bother him? Not like there wouldn't be an interest elsewhere for his services. These players know what they are signing up for when they take these deals. He has played ONE year of his new deal. ONE. Instead of being upset at the team, he should be upset at his agent for selling him on a contract that's apparently not good enough.