Dom McRaven
Hall of Famer
Meanwhile we have Von Miller saying that D-Hop told him he wants to be a Bill. Honestly, I'm just trying to ignore all of this until things come into fruition.
-
Welcome to PurpleFlock! Be sure to sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.
Lamar Jackson
- Thread starter Ice Bowl
- Start date
gtalk12
Ravens Ring of Honor
Why would signing 2 years ago change anything? All those deals are extensions meaning the rookie deal would still be played out. If Lamar signed a 6 year extension 2 years ago, there would still be 6 years left on it today.
RaineV1
Ravens Ring of Honor
The smart thing would be to have not signed a six year deal. Get a good four or five year deal with a big guarantee, and then be near the end and ready for a third, bigger contract before hitting thirty. Get the deals done quickly or structured well and he could potentially hit a fourth contract before retiring. The trick to getting the most career money isn't one big contract. It's many contracts. You sooner to sign a new one the sooner you can get another one.
Because wanting more bites of the apple requires you to take a bite in the first place. Him waiting until now (or even later more realistically) to sign is doing the complete opposite of what Josina opines that he wants
Let’s say it’s a 4 year deal like what Dak signed. If he signed it today there would be 4 years left on the deal. If he signed a 4 year deal 2 years ago, then there are still 4 years left on the deal today. He gets the same number of bites at the apple.
The only way he loses money is by not signing a deal and instead playing on the tag. Whether he signs it now or 2 years ago is immaterial in terms of how many deals you can get.
rmcjacket23
Ravens Ring of Honor
Right but he also "lost money" by playing the last 2-3 years at below market value, which he did. More bites at the apple means you want more chances to bite the apple. In this case, he's gotten less chances, because he's literally in year 6 and hasn't bitten the apple once yet.
The other reason this "report" doesn't make a lot of sense is that IF Lamar's desire is short term deals, and IF you believe what Lamar is saying is gospel, he turned down 3/133, fully gtd, already. So he was offered a short term at a very fair price, and turned it down.
I don't think there's a person on the planet at this point that thinks if he was offered 3/150, fully gtd, today, that he takes it. And if he's not taking that, then its clearly not about "shorter terms" or "more bites".
One other thing to note about the contract lengths is there's nothing that says Lamar had to sign a 4,5,6 year extension two years ago. Could have been a 2-3 year extension, which would make him a UFA in 2025-2026 timeframe. In which cases, he'd be significantly richer than he is now, he'd be a UFA in as little as 2-3 years, and frankly, by 2024/2025, he'd be back negotiating another extension at new market prices anyway. So he'd be in the same spot he's in next year (i.e. negotiating a market-rate contract), with more $ in his pocket already.
Except he lost $0 playing on his current deal because that deal would have happened regardless. Now you could argue that he lost some money in terms of interest because had he signed a new deal some of the signing bonus would have paid out now but that is more than cancelled out by the increased value of the deal 2 years later.
Also I was pretty sure the 3 years 133 was part of a 6 year 290-295m deal with the 133 guaranteed being the guaranteed dollars that are paid out in years 1-3.
Finally the point I was making seems to be one you missed. I was saying that if he were interested in shorter term deals it does NOT matter when he signed it. If he wanted a 3 year deal now or 2 years ago then there would be no added motivation to sign it 2 years ago. The idea that a shorter term deal is only good 2 years ago just does not make sense as the deal would end at the same point regardless of if he signed it 2 years ago or now.
And how are there 4 more years left on a deal signed 2 years ago? Because he took another bite of the apple. Money gets moved around and it’s more in his pocket.
drjohnnyfever
Pro Bowler
I think that right there is the crux of the whole thing.
We've said since the beginning that he probably wanted to best at least two of the three parts of DoucheWatson's deal. That 3/150 would have tied the yearly pay rate, but lost on duration and total guarantee. So I think the reality is that he wanted 5/250 guaranteed all along two years ago and he's been trying to up that unsuccessfully over the past two years despite not finishing either year. That 5/25+ is a cap killer contract, imo. Anything about "bites at the apple" is total subterfuge at this point, because he has utterly failed at that strategy; and looks even more amateurish if that IS what he's been attempting.
My only real question at this point is can we trade him if he hasn't signed his franchise tender? If we CAN, then we should; take the picks and let the other team try to work this debacle out with him. Time to wash our hands of it.
rmcjacket23
Ravens Ring of Honor
If he signed a four year extension in 2021, he would be under contract through 2026. The extension kicks in after the rookie deal expires, which was at the end of 2022.
Jalen Hurts' five year extension he just signed keeps him under contract for six years (through 2028). Because the extension technically doesn't kick in until 2024, which is after his rookie contract expires.
if there is an extension it would replace the 5th year option, that being said, he should have done his contract at the same time Josh Allen signed his. Of course you need two to tango.
gtalk12
Ravens Ring of Honor
A 3 year 150 fully guaranteed sounds nice af to me if he wanted to take more bites
No guarantee that's how it would have worked. There are many deals where the final year(s) get ripped up in favor of the new money.
It never has replaced the 5th year option before. It did not replace Josh Allen's 5th year option just as an easy to cite example as he is still under contract for 6 seasons, and he signed a 6 year extension 2 years ago. They usually just adjust the cap numbers on the 5th year option while doing the extension to make the cap hits easier.
Edit: I feel less safe saying never as we have seen deals, such as what AB got for his extensions or Watson's extension, ripped up and replaced with new extensions but I cant think of a 5th year option that has had that happen
rmcjacket23
Ravens Ring of Honor
Right but the rookie deal is the MINIMUM amount of $ he can make during that time. It's not the maximum.
Pretty easy example.
Say in preseason 2021, he signs a 2 year extension. Keeps him under team control through 2024.
And lets say that 2 year extension was worth $90M. And for shits lets say it was fully guaranteed.
Regardless of how its structured in terms of bonuses (he'd get $ sooner in this scenario, which is kind of the whole point, since he would have made a hell of a lot more than $1.7M in 2021), from 2021-2024, he would have made $114.7M. That's the $24.7M he was always going to make in '21-'22, plus the $90M he'd get in '23-'24. Again, that can be spread out unevenly across the years, but the total over that period is the same.
If he plays out '23 and '24 on franchise tags, he won't come close to making the same $114.7M. He'll be at least $10-15M off that. The non-exclusive tag in '24 will likely be ~$40M, meaning he'll have made $72.4M instead of $90M.
Scenario B he's poorer, AND, he's a UFA in the exact same year. The only "benefit" he really gets is that he's a true UFA in 2025, as opposed to in scenario A he could be FT. But then again, the FT, even non-exclusive, in 2025, could easily be $50M. In which case he'll be playing at pretty close to market value anyway.
rmcjacket23
Ravens Ring of Honor
Actually they never really do. They just convert salaries to bonuses and spread it out, or give signing bonuses up front.
Feel free to show me an example of one of those deals.
Even the Flacco second contract wasn't a toss away and redo. It was just taking non-guaranteed Salary, converting it to a bonus, paying it out earlier, and then adding more base salary years on the back end.
That's how teams manage to keep the salary cap so low in earlier years.
I thought it did. I stand corrected.
That is why my premise is so long as he does not play on the franchise tag it does not matter WHEN he signs the contract. If he signed it after year 3 or signs it tomorrow he gets the same amount of money. If he is playing on the tag than that is an entirely different premise because now he is playing on different deals (ie a series of 1 year franchise tag deals at below market value). It is in his best interest to avoid that but outside of that there is no incentive to sign the deal year 3 versus at the end of year 5.