Interesting from Mike Triplette:
"My understanding from sources on how Mark Ingram wound up leaving New Orleans for just a few extra $$ per year: Ingram was seeking a lot more than three years, $15 million from the Saints and never gave any indication he'd sign for that amount. And Saints felt they had to move on so they didn't miss out on Latavius Murray too. Would they have paid that much to keep Ingram? Maybe, maybe not. But they never got a counter-offer in that ballpark. Meanwhile, the Saints' best offer was four years, $17 million with only $5 million guaranteed, per source. And Baltimore offered more guaranteed money, in addition to a possible bigger role in the offense. Would Ingram have stayed in New Orleans for the same offer? Again — maybe, maybe not, but the Saints never offered as much. ... It's a shame we'll never find out, but it's also possible this ends in a win-win for both sides."
so ironically it looks like slow-playing this one ended up with us getting the player for cheap - we decided we could wait, the saints didnt so signed someone else which meant that we ended up leveraging more power and ingram couldnt use the saints to make us pay more or vice versa...
unless he flops then hose guarantees arent going to be a big difference
