for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

A word of caution about reacting to initial contract numbers

jlukes : 3/11/2014 7:57 pm
Like Pat Kirwan says repeatedly this time of year, the initial contract numbers that come out when a player first signs are almost always leaked by the agent.

These numbers usually are the full value of the contract if the the player plays out the entire length of the contract and hits all incentives.

All that really matters is signing bonus and first year salary, and those numbers usually don't come out until the ink is dry (and the full details are released by the time).

So, in summary, stop overreacting to the initial contract numbers that are released when a player signs. Just like the Brandon Myers contract last year, most of 2 year contracts will have an escalated 2nd year salary and/or roster bonus due this time next year that will force the team to release the player or restructure/extend the player
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
You still don't get it  
Giants Fan in Steelers Land : 3/11/2014 8:57 pm : link
Micko said:
Quote:
However, now I know that I must wait for the details b/c they might be really complicated. Thanks everyone!


More details actually tell you what he will be paid. Would you bitch if he only gets 1-2 mil when its all said and done?

Based on your reaction you were going to flip out no matter what just because you have never heard of him
Micko you're doing a terrible job here  
mfsd : 3/11/2014 8:57 pm : link
just terrible.
Micko  
Wuphat : 3/11/2014 8:59 pm : link
If you loathe these threads, yet can't keep yourself from...

Quote:
And miss a Jlukes public service announcement?


...then you really have no one to blame but yourself. To lambaste jlukes for your lack of will power regarding these threads is a douche move, dude.

It's the same 20 people on every fucking thread  
djm : 3/11/2014 9:00 pm : link
20 or so of the dumbest most ridiculous posters on Bbi. Every year the posts are the same but the names change, sometimes. Something tells me the people haven't really changed even if the names have.



This is an inference on your part...  
Wuphat : 3/11/2014 9:01 pm : link
Quote:
Like or not your thread was condescending.


Condescension is a tonal quality. Tone is not transmitted through text. Any tone added to text is done so by the reader -- in this case, that would be you.

As I've also read the OP, I can assure you that, like it or not, I inferred no condescension in it.
mfsd  
Micko : 3/11/2014 9:01 pm : link
Thank you.
Micko  
djm : 3/11/2014 9:10 pm : link
You think a young player that has flashed pass rushing ability with some injury history, not recent injuries mind you, wouldn't get more than the vet minimum on the open market? First off he just got more than the vet minimum from a well run organization. And second pass rushers always get paid. Think pitching in baseball.

It's a reach but teams take chances like this all the time. Some bold moves for young ascending talent work out. See Robert Harris and Ron stone from way back when while some don't. The giants feel that this pass rusher can play at a high level and the contract he signed would be a bargain if he reaches his potential. It he fails he fails. It's a risk but you act like teams don't do this. They do quite often. And sometimes it pays off significantly.
Yeah fair enough  
Jerry in DC : 3/11/2014 9:12 pm : link
He obviously wasn't on too many radars prior to today. My perspective is that he's got some things about his profile that I find interesting, he's going to be in his physical prime, and I generally think it's fun to get new players.

The majority of people here seem to like the Schwartz signing and really I doubt there's more than a handful of people who really know anything about the guy.

There are some things I know (or think I know) and I'll offer opinions on those. There are some things I don't know (and both those guys fall into that category) which I'll generally be cautiously optimistic about unless it seems like there's something crazy about them (perhaps Schofield falls into this category, but I'd bet the money isn't as bad as it sounds). Of course if all of BBI adopted that attitude it would be a much less interesting place.

You guys think today is bad  
djm : 3/11/2014 9:23 pm : link
Wait until the draft. This place goes full fucking crazy for 3 days. Today is nothing.
Jerry  
Micko : 3/11/2014 9:23 pm : link
Agreed. I'm super hopeful about the guy - but, I'm still surprised by it. And of course, my feelings on the issue in no way matter b/c they are not educated. I never heard of the guy as he really has not track record in the NFL. Might turn out to be the steal of the century.
Well, normally I wouldn't read through all this bickering  
Boatie Warrant : 3/11/2014 9:26 pm : link
But I just couldn't help read this thread going down the crazy train.

I for one found the OP sensible, not condescending. Especially considering the tone of BBI around this time of year.
djm  
Micko : 3/11/2014 9:26 pm : link
I think you've got what I'm saying wrong - or of course perhaps I'm not being clear. I'm okay w/ the signing. The contract is just super surprising until we know the details. I'm more intrigued by the competition aspect b/c that's the only thing that could justify the contract. Otherwise, it would be just vet minimum / show-me type deal. That's gotta mean other teams wanted him. However, with so little to go on w/ his NFL resume I understand why fans are not able to process what just happened.
Micko, you and I have been good through the years, so there  
Big Blue '56 : 3/11/2014 9:34 pm : link
is nothing personal here. But I'm still trying to wrap my diminishing brain power around the "surprise" factor you keep alluding to?

If he was guaranteed the full amount we've seen, I'd not only be surprised, I'd be really pissed about that allocation of our rather limited resources..

But he might only have 1-2 million of the 8+ guaranteed. If that be the case, would you still be surprised? Or, did you simply take the 8+ at face value and that's where your surprise emanated from?

I know very little about the contract construct in the NFL, what I have learned the last bunch of years, is to immediately reserve my "knee-jerk" until I see how the contract is formulated. If I had ANY reaction to this signing at first blush, it was, "no way he's getting or guaranteed the full 8."
.....  
Micko : 3/11/2014 9:53 pm : link
I hope you know when I rank on your homerism it's largely tongue and cheek. It's just been my thing over the years. lol.

What can I say? I've never heard of him and he has a limited NFL resume. Anything above vet minimum is a surprise to me. Make is 2 year for 8 million (that's Osi money) and now I"m really surprised.

Sorry if I came off harsh.
Yawn  
Larry in Pencilvania : 3/11/2014 9:53 pm : link
,
.....  
Micko : 3/11/2014 9:55 pm : link
yet you took the time to read the whole thing. lol.
Larry  
gidiefor : Mod : 3/11/2014 9:58 pm : link
did you put sand in their vaginas?
Micko  
muhajir : 3/12/2014 5:39 am : link
Imo spot on with everything you wrote about the contract. Precisely why so many posters were initially shocked. Side note...really annoying when people write stuff like 'your embarrassing yourself' when the poster is making perfect sense.

As for jlukes post, it was a good reminder with regards to this and upcoming signings.
Amtoft  
muhajir : 3/12/2014 6:13 am : link
I think you're under the impression that us simpletons think that all contracts are fully guaranteed and equally divided over the life of the contract and that only you and a few of the chosen ones really understand otherwise.

Fyi, that isn't breaking news. As micko said... this player appears to be a vet minimum level player that got what's being reported as 8 mil over 2 yrs. That's very surprising bordering on shocking... simply what's being said.
Perfect  
Matt G : 3/12/2014 7:32 am : link
This thread has some real gold...

Appreciate your efforts jlukes...
man, andrew brandt is such a condescending jerk  
jlukes : 3/12/2014 8:42 am : link
Andrew Brandt ‏@adbrandt 1m
As always w/NFL contracts, pay no attention to total value. Guarantee usually contained in first two years. After that, we'll see.
https://twitter.com/adbrandt/status/443727949356072960 - ( New Window )
Micko is 100% right  
Mike in Long Beach : 3/12/2014 8:42 am : link
There is a difference between a knee-jerk reaction and making an initial judgment. If one feels that Schofield (sp?) only deserved a max salary of 4 million over 2 years, even with incentives, then why can't they be upset at a contract worth twice that?

I do agree with the sentiment behind the OP, but Micko didn't "swing and miss." Too many people were being unjustly lumped in with the assholes on this thread. We have a right to have opinions as long as we acknowledge they might be subject to change.
It is what it is.  
kmed : 3/12/2014 8:45 am : link
Clearly there are a large number of people that still don't understand how NFL contracts work, but this is like pissing into the wind. It will never change.
FEK you're full of it.  
Big Blue '56 : 3/12/2014 8:53 am : link
You have the right to your opinions as long as you ACKNOWLEDGE THEY MIGHT BE SUBJECT TO CHANGE?

You mean like this first post of yours?

Quote:
What the fuck?
Mike in Long Beach : 3/11/2014 4:58 pm : link : reply
There goes most of the newfound Snee capspace..

For this guy? wtf?


Again, he may have just 1-2 mil guaranteed and the other 6-7 not so. We don't know YET. Thus, it is not shocking or surprising until and when we see what the REAL story is..
Dude, you are going to pee all over yourself  
kmed : 3/12/2014 8:55 am : link
if you keep pissing into the wind!
generally true  
fkap : 3/12/2014 9:00 am : link
that signing bonus and 1st year salary are the important things to watch out for. However, there are a lot of games you can play. Just looking at Myers: last year, everyone was thrilled because of how low his first year hit was. However, there was a voidable year in there that came at a cost. There wasn't much of a chance that he was ever going to earn the second year salary, and it cost us a mil or two against this years cap when his contract was voided. According to the OP, this shouldn't matter, but it does. So, Meyers was quite expensive for us, but his first year figures don't reflect this.
The best case is that he gets every dime.  
Big Blue Blogger : 3/12/2014 9:09 am : link
That will mean he excelled in year one, and goes into 2015 as a valued asset. Actually, an even better case is that he plays so well that he gets a lucrative extension in 2015.

There are more important things than hoarding cap space. At some point, you want your players to play well. And if they play well, they get paid. If your cheap players remain cheap, it usually means they suck.
Let's see... Blast the OP as condescending...  
Matt G : 3/12/2014 9:17 am : link
Blast the OP for suggesting Schofield might be worth 2/8M (which he did not)... Then freely admit that he has never heard of nor seen Schofield play and therefore, anything above the veteran minimum is "shocking"...

Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion... And if you watched Schofield play and think he sucks or isn't a great fit for our defense, then voice your opinion and defend it... But most people criticizing this move have never seen the guy play a down, yet based on the very limited details surrounding the contract, somehow manage to opine this to be a terrible signing...

How is this not a knee-jerk reaction again?
Mike, you must have some serious issues  
jlukes : 3/12/2014 9:52 am : link
If you took the tone of my original post as condescending.


In most instances, but not all, the initial number isn't important  
Kyle : 3/12/2014 9:53 am : link
but if you sign a young player to a 5 year deal, there's a non-negligible chance that player plays the whole deal out, in which case the full value does matter.
RE: Mike, you must have some serious issues  
Mike in Long Beach : 3/12/2014 10:32 am : link
In comment 11553365 jlukes said:
Quote:
If you took the tone of my original post as condescending.



Lukes, here is my only post on this thread:

Quote:
Micko is 100% right
Mike in Long Beach : 8:42 am : link : reply
There is a difference between a knee-jerk reaction and making an initial judgment. If one feels that Schofield (sp?) only deserved a max salary of 4 million over 2 years, even with incentives, then why can't they be upset at a contract worth twice that?

I do agree with the sentiment behind the OP, but Micko didn't "swing and miss." Too many people were being unjustly lumped in with the assholes on this thread. We have a right to have opinions as long as we acknowledge they might be subject to change.


If you want to talk about serious issues, how about the issues of somebody that would blatantly fabricate something for no reason whatsoever. Where in my post did I say anything you said is condescending. I actually agreed with the sentiment of your post. That is literally an insane interpretation. You made it up.
And here is a concept that is oddly alluding some posters here who,  
Mike in Long Beach : 3/12/2014 10:37 am : link
while I don't always agree with, certainly are capable of math. So let's give this a shot:

What type of contract is likely to have more guaranteed money. One that is reported as 4 million or one that is reported as 8 million. Now let's not play stupid here and say "WE DON'T KNOW!" Of course we don't. But simple (very simple) logic would tell you that, chances are, the larger contract is more likely (though not definitely going) to have more guaranteed money. So when Giants fans hear that an unknown player as a chance to make 8 million dollars over the next tw seasons, it's going to be a head-scratcher. Because this also means that there's a decent chance he'll count against the cap in a higher capacity than we'd like.

We'll find out exactly what the numbers are, and then of course we can reassess. But this is a football message board. People are going to react to contract reports that puzzle them. Now if you want to tell others not reaction, I suppose you can, but it's just not going to happen.
And I apologize for typos in my post.  
Mike in Long Beach : 3/12/2014 10:42 am : link
I'm a bit scattered.

jlukes, I'd love to hear a response to what I said regarding your condescension comment when you get a chance.

The best thing I can come up with is that I agreed with Micko (who actually posted many posts on this thread), and since he happened to mention the word condescending, I must feel that you are as well.

Now I praised your initial post in my comment, so one would think you're smart enough to know I'm agreeing with Micko about his specific reaction and the fans' general right to react to Schofield signing and that I'm not making any comment about you (pretty easy deduction there). So again, I'm curious as to where on Earth you got me calling you condescending in a post where I never said the word and I even agreed with the sentiment behind your OP.
Point of order:  
Wuphat : 3/12/2014 10:45 am : link
Quote:
Now let's not play stupid here and say "WE DON'T KNOW!" Of course we don't.


If we, in fact, don't know, as you rightly state, then it is not stupid to acknowledge that fact. It would actually be stupid to do otherwise until such time that we do know.



Wuphat, give me a break.  
Mike in Long Beach : 3/12/2014 10:55 am : link
In fact, everyone... give me a break.

It's time to stop playing stupid and take off the blue-shaded glasses.



Now please tell me... does it not appear that we have given him a disproportionate contract compared to his previous earnings and, much more important, his previous production? If you don't think so, you're just being purposely dense.

If we gave C.C. Brown 4 years, 8 million and it was incentive-laden, would that be OK? You guys are trying to sound smarter than you are and it's not working out. Schofield could go ahead and pick up 100 tackles and 6 sacks next year and I'll of course be wrong, but that would only be with the benefit of hindsight. Given the current information we have, this is a puzzling contract. I, and anyone else who feels this way, is allowed to say so.
..................  
sphinx : 3/12/2014 10:58 am : link
Jordan Raanan ‏@JordanRaanan 1m
Of Peyton Hillis' 2-year, $1.8 million deal, the #giants only guaranteed him $100K. Obviously will have to earn his spot on roster.
Mike, read your initial post from my phone  
jlukes : 3/12/2014 11:00 am : link
And your first two sentences in the 2nd paragraph blended together for me. I read it as you saying that you agreed that my opening post was condescending

My apologies for the mix up
I've not come out in support of the signing  
Wuphat : 3/12/2014 11:02 am : link
In fact, I'm leaning more to the WTF side of it, so there's no blue in vision here.

Every contract is different. That Player X signed one deal has very little bearing on the details of Player Y's deal.

Which is why we wait and see what the details are until we make a judgement about whether or not we think they've overpaid.

If, for example, the contract includes a $5M roster bonus for March 1, 2015, then that $8M contract doesn't look so bad. If the contract has $6M guaranteed, then it does look bad.

Since we don't know which way it leans, it's stupid to get upset about it until we do know.

Saying "we don't know" isn't a position of waffling -- it's prudence and honest. Why? Because, at this point, we don't know.
Doin' the Lord's work  
wigs in nyc : 3/12/2014 11:02 am : link
Joe.
Ah OK, understood. No worries. Moving on then...  
Mike in Long Beach : 3/12/2014 11:03 am : link
.
Assuming the guaranteed money was low...  
Wuphat : 3/12/2014 11:05 am : link
Quote:
If we gave C.C. Brown 4 years, 8 million and it was incentive-laden, would that be OK?


...it could be, yes.

Because to earn that $8M he would have to hit production numbers he's unlikely to achieve so the money would probably not be at risk.

But, if he does hit those numbers, that means he would have overachieved as a player, meaning the Giants got more out of him than they expected -- which is what the fuck incentives are for in the first place -- to have some inflated measurement for a player to strive to in anticipation of extra compensation.
Wuphat  
Mike in Long Beach : 3/12/2014 11:11 am : link
If it's not clear already (and it might not be) the general purpose of my posts on this thread are directed at those who took issues with Micko's stance. If people are freaking out right now, that's stupid, yes.. and you're right, they shouldn't be because we don't know.

But Micko merely suggested he was surprised and it's a poor starting point considering what this player has done in the past. Considering how mediocre his NFL production has been, I don't think Schofield is going to need 100 tackles and 6 sacks to hit his incentive numbers. I think it's OK if a fan has fears about what is going to become of this contract considering the initial figures we've been presented.

He wasn't throwing a fit, he expressed concern.. and people jumped on him. That's why I chimed in.
I was reading the thread in real time last night  
Wuphat : 3/12/2014 11:14 am : link
Micko was being an ass to jlukes, and called the thread a "look at me" thread and that "like it or not" the thread was condescending.

Neither of these things are accurate.

That's why people were jumping on him.

Just a side note  
rich in DC : 3/12/2014 11:15 am : link
After the meltdowns over Steve Brown's reported 1 year $4M deal, it ends out that his base salary is $1.75M, with lots of incentives and bonuses.

Keep in mind that the Giants have a TON of experience in creatively structuring contracts after several years of being right at the cap, so they know how to do all the cap accounting tricks.

If the AGENT for Schofield is reporting 4 years $8M, I am almost certain that it is structured in a way that the cap hit for this is minimum salary for a vet this year, with team options to be exercised each year, much in the same way Myers' contract was structured.
IMHO  
Down With JPP : 3/12/2014 11:29 am : link
I think part of the Giants problems in the past were related to giving players 1 year deals. A few times those players played as well as hoped and they left the Giants for more lucrative deals. I would rather see the Giants enter into multi year incentive laden deals in order to benefit if those players reached their potential as the Giants hoped. But just my humble opinion....
RE: Amtoft  
Amtoft : 3/12/2014 1:25 pm : link
In comment 11552987 muhajir said:
Quote:
I think you're under the impression that us simpletons think that all contracts are fully guaranteed and equally divided over the life of the contract and that only you and a few of the chosen ones really understand otherwise.

Fyi, that isn't breaking news. As micko said... this player appears to be a vet minimum level player that got what's being reported as 8 mil over 2 yrs. That's very surprising bordering on shocking... simply what's being said.


No no no... I see where you are messing up. I think the few resides on your side of the simpletons that can't get the concept that that 2 years for 8 mil reported by the agent is going to be the maxed out dollars which is rarely achieved. Not to mention if he does earn the 8 mil it means he will be worth it. The actual contract is not known yet and could be substantially less, but with the chance to make a ton more due to his potential despite you and others not knowing him. Take for example the few that freaked over Brown's contract of 1 year 4 mil. What were people saying... It is for 1 year you can't prorate that out so it is 4 mil that is a huge over pay... Turns out it isn't even half that at 1.75 unless he plays up to the ability to earn the total 4 mil. That is a great contract for us.

As for a player that appears to be a vet minimum... Why because you have never heard of him? In limited time at OLB he had 4 sacks and then 4.5 sacks before last year. He hardly played last year behind a stacked line. He has shone pass rushing ability and I am sure this contract is probably incentive latent, but we don't know. Thus any judgement on your part or the part of others like you is just stupid and thus you are a... Hmmm your word... Simpleton.

Good day sir
Brown's  
pjcas18 : 3/12/2014 1:40 pm : link
cap hit is apparently 2.75M, which is really all that's relevant to us fans or what's most irrlevant

that 2.75 number impacts who they can or can't sign, so 1.75 is almost as irrelevant as 4M
2.75 mil...  
Amtoft : 3/12/2014 1:42 pm : link
roster 1mil of that as a roster bonus which is probably spread out for being active on Game day. You have to get into even more fine print to know the details of that.
.....  
Micko : 3/12/2014 4:38 pm : link
I have to say. I thoroughly enjoyed this thread. Haven't been in a good BBI scuffle for years. I re-read it today. Yeah, I was harsh at times but I stand by my premise. I appreciate the fact that a few actually understood the simplicity of my argument.
amtroft  
Micko : 3/12/2014 4:40 pm : link
Your argument is pure speculation regarding the value of this player which is no different than what anyone else is doing.
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner