I'm not sure why everybody is treating it like a given that Frank will show up and play on the franchise tag. His leadership is an important factor but if he skips the voluntary stuff then you have to question whether he'll report on time to training camp and leadership that doesn't show up doesn't provide benefit.
This is more of a philosophical stance but I also don't like need as an argument for overpaying a player. We have a fixed dollar amount to work with and the FO should be maximizing value at whatever positions they can. If we have a roster full of plus talent then it's on the coaching staff to scheme it up in a way that works, and I think even here people underrate Pete's defensive coaching ability.
The low hanging value will tend to be at positions where we are weakest, but if it isn't then don't force it. There's a good reason why the Patriots have bounced between great defense, the #1 offense, and even had balanced approaches at various times over the last two decades. It's true that prioritizing value over need can lead to spikier results, but as long-time fans we should welcome spiky outcomes (see: gladiator vs. brick-layer analogy, also: impact of first round bye).
The reason why I support Russ's contract is that there are a lot of bad contracts in the NFL and his isn't one of them. Last year we probably had something like $50 mil tied up in maybe $5 mil worth of production at best. Russ is unlikely to play much better than $140m over the next five years, but I also don't think he's going to play much worse than that.
Think of maximizing talent under the salary cap in terms of an investment portfolio, and if you have a big chunk of your cap tied up in a relatively stable investment that isn't a scary prospect at all. The key is what you do with the remainder. I'd rather load up on draft picks and rookie contracts where possible with the remainder going to worthwhile extensions and good bets made on veterans like we have done in the past.
