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

Archived Thread

OL Nick Gates signs a somewhat significant extension

Anakim : 8/1/2020 11:11 am
Mike Garafolo
@MikeGarafolo
The #Giants have agreed to a two-year extension with OL Nick Gates, who started three games last year. The deal has a base value of $6.825 million and could max out at $10.325 million. A former undrafted free agent who spent his first year on IR, Gates cashes in.



A bit much...that's starter money...
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 <<Prev | Show All |  Next>>
...  
christian : 8/4/2020 5:17 pm : link
It’s pretty silly to for either side to jump to a definitive conclusion on the prudence of the extension without the most germane facts: what are the incentives.

If the incentives are such that the compensation only hits the ceiling if he performs like a decent starter, sweet. Good, savvy contract.

If the incentives are such that the compensation hits the ceiling if he suits and up and sucks 16 games next year, not a savvy contract.

What’s the point of view you think I am trying to contradict?
Lou you are the one dancing around the relevant facts here  
NoGainDayne : 8/4/2020 5:57 pm : link
And they are:

1) Solder opting out makes cutting him next year more costly to the team than if he played out this season

2) The contract is on the books for a year later than it was before he did

What pulls us even further away from the point I was making while you accuse me of distracting is that I joined this thread asking for the logic of the timing of the signing.

For the timing to make logical sense to sign an extension wouldn't you want more potential cap room next year? That would provide the logic for this move I was asking for. Whatever you want to say about the opt out it certainly doesn't provide the Giants with more room next year so why would that be a good catalyst to extend someone?

It really highlights the problematic thinking of some here that those that are asking for the logic behind moves are told they have an agenda for pointing out that this might not be a good move and we need more facts. I came here asking for facts, asking if other teams were making moves like this given the uncertain financial future of the league. Doesn't it show much more of an agenda that there are many on this thread that essentially want to say that no one could possibly see fault in this before we even know the full terms of the deal?

You even rob yourself of the ability for your opinion to matter once the full terms are disclosed because you made up your mind before you had all the information.

My conclusion is that at its peak  
UConn4523 : 8/4/2020 6:02 pm : link
it’s a bargain unless he absolutely stinks which likely means he won’t get the full amount and we can cut him. This isn’t a fully guaranteed contract, there’s almost no downside here.

What am I missing?
RE: My conclusion is that at its peak  
christian : 8/4/2020 6:27 pm : link
In comment 14943910 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
it’s a bargain unless he absolutely stinks which likely means he won’t get the full amount and we can cut him. This isn’t a fully guaranteed contract, there’s almost no downside here.

What am I missing?


As of now:

- 2021 ~5M cap hit would be 15th among centers
- 2022 ~5M cap hit would be 11th among centers

I’d argue the contract would be fair, but not a bargain. Especially if the cap shrinks.

What we don’t know is what the incentive escalators are. We don’t know what becomes guaranteed in the contract and why. The downside is if an easy to reach incentive in 2020 does in fact guarantee a lot of his 2021 salary.

Again, this isn’t a tragedy, but there are some minor details that could make this look less savvy.
It's also this idea that some want to hold  
NoGainDayne : 8/4/2020 6:50 pm : link
that we should assume it is a savvy move because the Giants did it. When the Giants have made many head scratching moves that seemed unwise at the moment they happened.

Resources are finite and given that the team had the most dead money in the league the last few years wouldn't you want to see them handing out less bonus money, especially to a player that has started 3 games? Especially with a potentially declining cap and a chunk of anticipated dead money on the OL already next year?

It is quite reasonable to point out a flaw in analysis of many on this board that they want to declare the deal a good value before even seeing the terms of the deal. It's not really sound analysis to do that generally but in light of the record of this front office in FA it isn't outlandish at all to suggest that it would be nice to have more apparent logic in moves that are made.

"It's not a big deal if we are wrong" is not a super great reason to do something.

There are good systems in place that a lot of teams use. What would be wrong with letting him play the season and tendering him at the 2nd round level of $2.914 next year?

You can let him see what the market is and how he fits in your system.

Let's say he's coming off two good years instead after this contract and he's a UFA you actually lose the leverage of him being restricted that way.

The point is there are a lot of unknowns here. And it seems many the Giants included are in the habit of acting like they have all the answers before they've even allowed themselves to get the best information.

You constantly hear about the LW thing and people making "too big of a deal" of something.

Expecting something to go well shouldn't require an assumption that people know things you don't, plenty of decisions make lots of sense with small or large amounts of information on them.

LOL...  
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/4/2020 7:36 pm : link
Quote:
It's also this idea that some want to hold
NoGainDayne : 6:50 pm : link : reply
that we should assume it is a savvy move because the Giants did it. When the Giants have made many head scratching moves that seemed unwise at the moment they happened.


Isn't the exact opposite thing happening on this thread? A select few are questioning the move because the Giants made it, even though there's very little downside to it.

In fact, the most germane question continually asked on this thread is by UConn - "What is the downside?"

It shouldn't take a multi-paragraph load of bullshit talking about "good systems" and other vapid lines of nothingness to answer that.
And if this..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/4/2020 7:38 pm : link
isn't the epitome of irony, I don't know what is:

Quote:
The point is there are a lot of unknowns here. And it seems many the Giants included are in the habit of acting like they have all the answers before they've even allowed themselves to get the best information.


Acting like having the answers before having information?? Too fucking rich.
The downside is the dead money potential from the signing bonus  
NoGainDayne : 8/4/2020 8:22 pm : link
added to his contract after 3 starts, which seems like unnecessary risk given how much that player has proven.

One side is insisting it is a good move before seeing the terms of the deal. And pointing out there is a lot of uncertainty right now that may affect if it is a good deal.

The other side is basically saying the only possible way to view this move is that it is a good move before they have all the facts.


Exactly FMIC - nobody is fitting Gates for a gold jacket  
Eric on Li : 8/4/2020 8:23 pm : link
just saying a $1.5m signing bonus is so insignificant regardless of how he plays there's no risk. They literally have enough cap room right now to sign/extend 15 more Nick Gates and cut all of them tomorrow. Though it certainly doesn't hurt that there's also optimism re: Gates on the field from a diversity of fans/writers outside of NYG HQ, along with the promising highlights and stats (1 sack allowed, 0 penalties in 290 snaps last year per PFF).

And as Uconn has pointed out re: Christians point, he will only see those higher AAV's if he is hitting his incentives. We may not know the specifics yet but they are unlikely to be "Nick Gates gets $5m if he sucks so bad everyone wishes we didn't sign him in the first place".
RE: The downside is the dead money potential from the signing bonus  
Eric on Li : 8/4/2020 8:26 pm : link
In comment 14943962 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
added to his contract after 3 starts, which seems like unnecessary risk given how much that player has proven.

One side is insisting it is a good move before seeing the terms of the deal. And pointing out there is a lot of uncertainty right now that may affect if it is a good deal.

The other side is basically saying the only possible way to view this move is that it is a good move before they have all the facts.



There is seemingly 0 uncertainty that he only got $1.5m guaranteed.

Kevin Abrams is likely more worried about getting struck by lightning than being handcuffed by dead money from this contract.
Gates will be retired by the time this silly debate over  
chick310 : 8/4/2020 8:35 pm : link
his contract is finished. He may not have played many games yet to ensure his value but neither has most of guys on the OL depth chart.

And not for nothing but if Gates becomes a starter, it is far more likely at Right Tackle versus Center.

RE: The downside is the dead money potential from the signing bonus  
Milton : 8/4/2020 8:59 pm : link
In comment 14943962 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
added to his contract after 3 starts, which seems like unnecessary risk given how much that player has proven.
Wow, you must be truly outraged by the contract they gave Andrew Thomas! Think of all that dead money potential for a guy who's never played a down against NFL competition.
It's an extension  
NoGainDayne : 8/4/2020 9:06 pm : link
vs. a rookie deal for a 4th pick. Surely you understand the difference?
I also think it's pretty ignorant  
NoGainDayne : 8/4/2020 9:20 pm : link
to act like we shouldn't be concerned around accumulating dead money when we've lead the league over the last 3 years.

Har har har Kevin Abrams joke. He's been here as the cap guy for every one of those contracts.

Risk should be managed at all sizes of contracts. Is the supposition as long as a signing bonus is $1.5M it really doesn't matter who you give it to? Hey, just cut them if they don't pan out right?
So..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/4/2020 9:27 pm : link
I'm guessing the answer to what the downside is will be left hanging in the air....
The signing bonus as dead money is the downside  
NoGainDayne : 8/4/2020 9:32 pm : link
...

Perhaps you'd like to give an example of another NFL team handing out a contract like this right now?
If the downside is considered..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/4/2020 9:44 pm : link
the downside of this, you will have a problem with almost all contracts. And for some reason, you keep trying to tie having dead money in past years to this move, where it is a very reasonable contract.

I'm not really sure I understand the question about who else is getting contracts like this. I mean, you can look at Keith Smith a FB for the Falcons. Matthew Slater, a career ST'er for the Pats, Zach Wood, a LS for the Saints or the contracts for 14 other reserve players that SPORTRAC is showing happened.
looking at the roster  
bc4life : 8/4/2020 9:52 pm : link
as it stands right now - he's the swing OT who can also play guard?
...  
christian : 8/4/2020 10:57 pm : link
From my view:

- the upside scenario is he performs at or above league average at center,(or guard or tackle, that would awesome) reaches the incentives and earns ~11M over the next 3 years

- the neutral scenario is he doesn’t play league average or above starter and is relegated to backup “something” and earns ~5-7M the next 2 or 3 years

- downside scenarios, he is cut after next year, or reaches the incentives to be paid the full amount, but isn’t all that good — for instance if the incentives are around starts or snaps

Food for thought Halopio started 15 games and 95% of snaps. If those are the parameters to up the cost, and he plays as bad that would suck.
RE: I also think it's pretty ignorant  
Eric on Li : 8/4/2020 10:59 pm : link
In comment 14943994 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
to act like we shouldn't be concerned around accumulating dead money when we've lead the league over the last 3 years.

Har har har Kevin Abrams joke. He's been here as the cap guy for every one of those contracts.

Risk should be managed at all sizes of contracts. Is the supposition as long as a signing bonus is $1.5M it really doesn't matter who you give it to? Hey, just cut them if they don't pan out right?


Kevin Abrams made the FA decisions in 2016 or the decisions to resign + trade JPP/Beckham? Pretty sure they led the league in dead money because the of $200m guaranteed the respective GMs gave those guys, not because Abrams did a poor job structuring the contracts and certainly not because they gave a some back roster players like Keenan Robinson or Will Johnson less than 1% of the guaranteed money they gave those guys.

Being an aficionado on dead money you probably already know this but it surprised me just now to see that at the moment the NYG are actually about $4m better than the league average. Somehow I missed all the positive posts on this trend from the dead money enthusiast sub-community. So they could cut Nick Gates twice tomorrow and eat the entire dead cap hit twice while still being below the league average because it's that inconsequential an amount of money.
RE: looking at the roster  
Eric on Li : 8/4/2020 11:02 pm : link
In comment 14944015 bc4life said:
Quote:
as it stands right now - he's the swing OT who can also play guard?


I think he's probably the top contender at either RT or C - whichever he's better at and/or the 2nd option is worse at. At C that could be Pulley or Lemiux, at RT it could be either Flemming or Peart.

C is probably the best position for his skill set but also the bigger unknown since he's never played there and never snapped.
It is..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/4/2020 11:19 pm : link
much easier to just throw out the pithy line that we led the league in dead money the past two years:

Quote:
Being an aficionado on dead money you probably already know this but it surprised me just now to see that at the moment the NYG are actually about $4m better than the league average. Somehow I missed all the positive posts on this trend from the dead money enthusiast sub-community.


recognizing improvement takes away a key narrative they want to keep ramrodded down on the board.
I’ll take the $1.5m in dead money risk for a potentially starting  
UConn4523 : 8/4/2020 11:21 pm : link
caliber OL. Stop acting like this handcuffs the team. It’s a savvy move because the risk is so low, doesn’t matter which team handed out the contract.
RE: RE: looking at the roster  
LBH15 : 8/4/2020 11:38 pm : link
In comment 14944082 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 14944015 bc4life said:


Quote:


as it stands right now - he's the swing OT who can also play guard?



I think he's probably the top contender at either RT or C - whichever he's better at and/or the 2nd option is worse at. At C that could be Pulley or Lemiux, at RT it could be either Flemming or Peart.

C is probably the best position for his skill set but also the bigger unknown since he's never played there and never snapped.


Center is his best position and yet he has never played there? Ever.

I think we need to take DG’s comments with a grain of salt, particularly since he hasn’t seemed to be able to find this team an adequate Center as of yet. It could be a pipe dream for all we know.
i'd also contend you don't see too many deals like this bc it's a shit  
Eric on Li : 8/4/2020 11:50 pm : link
deal for the player. Let's for a second put ourselves in Nick Gates' shoes - pretend we believe in ourselves and feel good about this situation competing for 2 open starting spots. Which would you rather:

'20 - play this year on your base
'21 - get tendered at either $2.1m or $3.2m in March or hit UFA ($2m tender = de facto FA, if $3m you're a UFA in '22)
'22 - UFA

'20 - play this year on your base and get $1.5m check
'21 - make between $2-4m next year depending on incentives or get cut
'22 - make between $2-4m the year depending on incentives or get cut

This is one that will take more detailed analysis once the full contract is available but I suspect the salaries are close to similar in either scenario and both would be non-guaranteed.

So I think this decision basically boils down to a choice between $1.5m check today or reaching UFA 1 or 2 years earlier. That $1.5m just sees really light considering even Spencer Pulley got more guaranteed money a few years ago and as an observer I'd easily prefer Gates > Pulley. But obviously who knows what Gates' personal situation is and how to factor in the uncertainty of C19.
Finish reading the sentence next time LBH  
Eric on Li : 8/4/2020 11:55 pm : link
In comment 14944101 LBH15 said:
Quote:
In comment 14944082 Eric on Li said:

I think he's probably the top contender at either RT or C - whichever he's better at and/or the 2nd option is worse at. At C that could be Pulley or Lemiux, at RT it could be either Flemming or Peart.

C is probably the best position for his skill set but also the bigger unknown since he's never played there and never snapped.



Center is his best position and yet he has never played there? Ever.

I think we need to take DG’s comments with a grain of salt, particularly since he hasn’t seemed to be able to find this team an adequate Center as of yet. It could be a pipe dream for all we know.


And skillset does not always equal best position. But his strength seems to be his mobility and movement which would probably translate better on the interior than at T at his size, but who knows. Maybe he's Bakhtiari II.
RE: I’ll take the $1.5m in dead money risk for a potentially starting  
Big Blue '56 : 8/5/2020 6:42 am : link
In comment 14944090 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
caliber OL. Stop acting like this handcuffs the team. It’s a savvy move because the risk is so low, doesn’t matter which team handed out the contract.


This.

We can move on now
RE: Finish reading the sentence next time LBH  
LBH15 : 8/5/2020 8:48 am : link
In comment 14944108 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 14944101 LBH15 said:


Quote:


In comment 14944082 Eric on Li said:

I think he's probably the top contender at either RT or C - whichever he's better at and/or the 2nd option is worse at. At C that could be Pulley or Lemiux, at RT it could be either Flemming or Peart.

C is probably the best position for his skill set but also the bigger unknown since he's never played there and never snapped.



Center is his best position and yet he has never played there? Ever.

I think we need to take DG’s comments with a grain of salt, particularly since he hasn’t seemed to be able to find this team an adequate Center as of yet. It could be a pipe dream for all we know.



And skillset does not always equal best position. But his strength seems to be his mobility and movement which would probably translate better on the interior than at T at his size, but who knows. Maybe he's Bakhtiari II.


Eric I read the whole sentence and you went several bridges too far. His skills have been presented in exactly 3 whole starts and all at different positions than the one you said he probably is best skilled at. Nowhere near enough to make such an assessment for a coach no less a fan poster.

Look, I am sure we all we would like Gates to be a contributor and maybe even a solid guy somewhere on the line. Obviously DG sees something in him hence the nice extension. But seems like we should wait to see if hikes the football over Daniel Jones head too much before we call Center his best position.

RE: It's an extension  
Milton : 8/5/2020 9:10 am : link
In comment 14943985 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
vs. a rookie deal for a 4th pick. Surely you understand the difference?
Yeah, the difference is that with an extension you have much greater knowledge of the individual and his ability against NFL level competition. Much less risk in extending a player on your roster than committing $32M to a prospect that's never played a down of football.
RE: RE: Finish reading the sentence next time LBH  
Eric on Li : 8/5/2020 10:13 am : link
In comment 14944146 LBH15 said:
Quote:



Eric I read the whole sentence and you went several bridges too far. His skills have been presented in exactly 3 whole starts and all at different positions than the one you said he probably is best skilled at. Nowhere near enough to make such an assessment for a coach no less a fan poster.

Look, I am sure we all we would like Gates to be a contributor and maybe even a solid guy somewhere on the line. Obviously DG sees something in him hence the nice extension. But seems like we should wait to see if hikes the football over Daniel Jones head too much before we call Center his best position.


A bridge too far by saying his skillset may be best at center vs. RT while clearly pointing out the obvious unknown that he has never in fact played center? Someone call the hyperbole police.

Surely you realize just about every scouting report entering the NFL projected him moving inside from tackle right to the point where he was labeled a guard at the combine? I wasn't making a suggestion out of thin air based on last year - just restating the conventional wisdom that generally undersized UDFA's with short arms project as interior lineman rather than tackles, and as it happens we only have 1 open interior position right now at C. Whether he can snap or handle the additional mental aspects of the center position is an unknown - as was clearly stated in the same sentence you took issue with.
Ok, so now using  
chick310 : 8/5/2020 10:46 am : link
I will notify the police to stand down. :-)

And really not unusual all for college Tackles to project to Guard in the NFL, but moving to Center is a whole different deal with several distinct skill sets. So best not to just bunch them up all up as interior lineman in this comparison.

Real simply, Gates doesn't have any live snaps at the Center position in his career to even rely upon to make the statement what he is best at. I hope he is a superstar at Tackle, Guard and Center, but at this stage would be satisfied if he can do one of them reasonably well after the coaches develop him moreso and figure out how he can be a contributor.

Oh, and don't call me Shirley.
RE: Ok, so now using may be instead of probably  
chick310 : 8/5/2020 10:47 am : link
In comment 14944215 chick310 said:
Quote:
I will notify the police to stand down. :-)

And really not unusual all for college Tackles to project to Guard in the NFL, but moving to Center is a whole different deal with several distinct skill sets. So best not to just bunch them up all up as interior lineman in this comparison.

Real simply, Gates doesn't have any live snaps at the Center position in his career to even rely upon to make the statement what he is best at. I hope he is a superstar at Tackle, Guard and Center, but at this stage would be satisfied if he can do one of them reasonably well after the coaches develop him moreso and figure out how he can be a contributor.

Oh, and don't call me Shirley.
dupe says  
YAJ2112 : 8/5/2020 10:54 am : link
what?
RE: RE: RE: Finish reading the sentence next time LBH  
LBH15 : 8/5/2020 10:57 am : link
In comment 14944193 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 14944146 LBH15 said:


Quote:





Eric I read the whole sentence and you went several bridges too far. His skills have been presented in exactly 3 whole starts and all at different positions than the one you said he probably is best skilled at. Nowhere near enough to make such an assessment for a coach no less a fan poster.

Look, I am sure we all we would like Gates to be a contributor and maybe even a solid guy somewhere on the line. Obviously DG sees something in him hence the nice extension. But seems like we should wait to see if hikes the football over Daniel Jones head too much before we call Center his best position.




A bridge too far by saying his skillset may be best at center vs. RT while clearly pointing out the obvious unknown that he has never in fact played center? Someone call the hyperbole police.

Surely you realize just about every scouting report entering the NFL projected him moving inside from tackle right to the point where he was labeled a guard at the combine? I wasn't making a suggestion out of thin air based on last year - just restating the conventional wisdom that generally undersized UDFA's with short arms project as interior lineman rather than tackles, and as it happens we only have 1 open interior position right now at C. Whether he can snap or handle the additional mental aspects of the center position is an unknown - as was clearly stated in the same sentence you took issue with.


Agree with above generally. Mostly concerned about the team trying to push square pegs in round holes versus just getting professional Center in place. Again, I think Gates might be the starting Right Tackle based upon events of the past month.

I don't disagree - I'd have Justin Britt's agent on speed dial  
Eric on Li : 8/5/2020 11:37 am : link
because it is important to put guys in positions to succeed. A good center will help the guards play better, the guards playing better helps the tackles play better, everyone playing better allows the whole offense to go better. So if there's not a competent center on the roster they need to get one. Starting Pulley should not be an option unless he found some really good PEDs this offseason.

On the flip side however we have seen both Seubert and Boothe each as individuals likely best suited to be guards, kick in to play center effectively. Brandon Linder had a similar physical profile to Gates and he moved to center in the NFL after playing a bunch of different positions at Miami. So we aren't talking about a rare feat like turning a TE into an OT or a WR into a DB. If Gates is good on the mental side I think it's likely he might have the best long term potential at C of any player on the roster currently. I don't think the same is true of him at RT (bc of Peart) though he may be the best option right now and anything is possible.

And regardless of what happens this year, his most ideal long term spot may be RG once Zeitler moves on.

Judge says they will try guys at different places and see what sticks so I guess we will all just have to wait and see what they decide to do. But Gates being perhaps the best option for both of the currently open spots is a big reason why I think this was a really smart contract. If he ends being the solution at either open starting spot it will be a very below market value.
Yeah, posted before that the starting Center  
chick310 : 8/5/2020 11:42 am : link
may not be on the roster just yet.

Not an ideal preseason to bring someone into the mix late though...pandemic constraints, limited practices and games, new offense, etc. Not sure if feasible.
RE: I don't disagree - I'd have Justin Britt's agent on speed dial  
christian : 8/5/2020 11:55 am : link
In comment 14944254 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
If he ends being the solution at either open starting spot it will be a very below market value.


Eric - this is where the details on the contract become quite important. If he earns ~5M/YR in 21/22 as a center -- it's not below market value. It's mid-market value.

If he cracks the lineup as a starting guard or tackle, that's awesome.

As I posted above -- based on current contracts (and a presumably shrinking cap) -- a 5M AAV center would slot depending on the year at 11th or 15th.

If the contract rewards him at the top end by some measure that indicates he play well, again awesome. If the contract rewards for simply playing, not awesome.

Again, as I posted above, a guy like Halopio played 95% of snaps and started 15 games -- I hope simple measures like that aren't the incentives.
that's just factually incorrect in a few ways  
Eric on Li : 8/5/2020 12:29 pm : link
#1 - his AAV isn't $5m. The max of the contract is supposedly 3 years ~10m which would be an AAV just north of $3m even with all incentives hit. I suppose the floor would be around $2m AAV if none of the incentives hit.

#2 - even aside from #1, if we were to cherry pick your $5m number instead of AAV, that would slot in as the 19th highest among all centers 1 spot behind Nick Eason and 1 spot ahead of BJ Finney (so below average). The $3m AAV is only a few spots behind that so for ranking purposes it's not all that different. $2m would take him out of the top 32 centers - so the base of the contract is as a backup.

But again, this is all willfully ignorant of the fact that his AAV cost next year was either going to be the tender at $2.1m or $3.2m - and if it was 2.1m tender he would have been a defacto FA (original rd compensation for a UDFA). Whenever the official details get published do you think his cap # pre-incentives will be pretty close to $3.2m which was his likely '21 destiny? Because I do.
AAV for centers - ( New Window )
Gates extension per Spotrac  
LBH15 : 8/5/2020 1:01 pm : link
Nick Gates signed a 2 year, $10,325,000 contract with the New York Giants, including an average annual salary of $5,162,500.

In 2020, Gates will earn a base salary of $675,000, while carrying a cap hit of $676,668.
RE: Gates extension per Spotrac  
YAJ2112 : 8/5/2020 1:21 pm : link
In comment 14944333 LBH15 said:
Quote:
Nick Gates signed a 2 year, $10,325,000 contract with the New York Giants, including an average annual salary of $5,162,500.

In 2020, Gates will earn a base salary of $675,000, while carrying a cap hit of $676,668.


They don't have the details yet and are just putting in placeholders.
...  
christian : 8/5/2020 1:33 pm : link
Eric -- the extension is beyond 2020 (21,22), and those are the years I was clearly addressing (and noted).

Presumably his 2020 compensation is his current ~675K salary + plus a portion (500K) of his new signing bonus. 2020 is a low salary now and before. All good.

Moving forward is the key issue, and where I don't believe "below market" applies, especially if the incentives are easy to earn. If the incentives are commensurate with playing well, all good too!

If he were to be paid ~5M in 2021 he would be the 16th most costly center, and in 2022 would be 12th most costly.
RE: ...  
YAJ2112 : 8/5/2020 1:37 pm : link
In comment 14944354 christian said:
Quote:
Eric -- the extension is beyond 2020 (21,22), and those are the years I was clearly addressing (and noted).

Presumably his 2020 compensation is his current ~675K salary + plus a portion (500K) of his new signing bonus. 2020 is a low salary now and before. All good.

Moving forward is the key issue, and where I don't believe "below market" applies, especially if the incentives are easy to earn. If the incentives are commensurate with playing well, all good too!

If he were to be paid ~5M in 2021 he would be the 16th most costly center, and in 2022 would be 12th most costly.


Given the 1.5 million signing bonus, his cap hits at most would be 4.6 million in 21/22 even with hitting all incentives (assuming they are all LTBE and spread evenly along with salary).
RE: RE: ...  
YAJ2112 : 8/5/2020 1:41 pm : link
In comment 14944359 YAJ2112 said:
Quote:
In comment 14944354 christian said:


Quote:


Eric -- the extension is beyond 2020 (21,22), and those are the years I was clearly addressing (and noted).

Doh, it would be 4.8 million. Forgot I should have only pulled out 500k not 1 million.

Presumably his 2020 compensation is his current ~675K salary + plus a portion (500K) of his new signing bonus. 2020 is a low salary now and before. All good.

Moving forward is the key issue, and where I don't believe "below market" applies, especially if the incentives are easy to earn. If the incentives are commensurate with playing well, all good too!

If he were to be paid ~5M in 2021 he would be the 16th most costly center, and in 2022 would be 12th most costly.



Given the 1.5 million signing bonus, his cap hits at most would be 4.6 million in 21/22 even with hitting all incentives (assuming they are all LTBE and spread evenly along with salary).
Here's what we know from the Ranaan article on pg 1 w/ some projection  
Eric on Li : 8/5/2020 1:44 pm : link
Per Ranaan (and many others):

Quote:
The deal is for two additional years and $6.8 million, and can be worth a potential $10.3 million, a source told ESPN. Gates, who has a chance to be a regular starter this season, was scheduled to make $660,000 this year. Instead, he also gets a $1.5 million signing bonus, the source said.


So here goes nothing. Start with:

$10.3m reported maximum
minus $1.5m reported new SB
=$8.8m max salaries w/ all incentives

minus $660k year 1 salary ('20 salary remaining the same per Pat T.)

= $8.14m non-gtd max salary w/ incentives in years 2 + 3 (4.57m max AAV for those 2 years including prorated SB)

Now if we want to speculate on the yet to be confirmed non-gtd base salaries in years 2+3, I'd guess it's:
$6.8m (reported new money in 2 year extension)
- $1.5m SB
= $5.3m ($2.65m AAV for those 2 seasons, which also happens to split the difference of what the original round tender and the 2nd round RFA tender would have been next year if they were the same as this year).

That's all obviously rough based off the limited info we know - but I don't think the exact details need to be confirmed when we know there's only $1.5m guaranteed and the max value is $10.3m over these 3 years (Max AAV $3.43m).
It's pretty..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/5/2020 1:49 pm : link
clear why the $5M is being used. Without exaggeration, there is no argument to stand on.
or what YAJ said  
Eric on Li : 8/5/2020 1:49 pm : link
if the 2nd and 3rd years are unbalanced there could be a single year of the deal over $5m but there is no way to stretch an AAV over $5m based on what we've seen reported so far.

The simplest read on the contract is this - 3 years, $7.5m, with $1.5m of that being SB. $2.5m AAV. With about $1m in TBD incentives per year beyond that. Slightly backloaded since they kept year 1 salary the same but how much more beyond that remains to be seen.
And let's keep in mind...  
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/5/2020 1:54 pm : link
even at max incentives, it is still less than $5M. And if he hits that, it is more than likely there is above average to excellent performance.

I mean speculating that the incentives are just for playing time is a whole lot of fun here, but that isn't very realistic. At least some portion (usually a significant portion) of incentives are tied to measures of good play - not just starts.

But again - without trying to speculate that the majority of the incentives MAY be just for playing, the argument falls flat.

See the trend here? The argument falls flat without wild speculation and exaggeration.
RE: It's pretty..  
Eric on Li : 8/5/2020 1:55 pm : link
In comment 14944374 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
clear why the $5M is being used. Without exaggeration, there is no argument to stand on.


yeah I mean this is 100x more clear cut than the Pulley extension, which looks Dennis Rodman controversial in comparison.

Gates gave them 1 extra year in return for a $1.5m check right now and a potentially lower salary than he'd have gotten next year. Call me crazy but in normal times where there's no uncertainty I don't think any player does that when they are 1 year from FA.
RE: or what YAJ said  
LBH15 : 8/5/2020 1:57 pm : link
In comment 14944375 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
if the 2nd and 3rd years are unbalanced there could be a single year of the deal over $5m but there is no way to stretch an AAV over $5m based on what we've seen reported so far.

The simplest read on the contract is this - 3 years, $7.5m, with $1.5m of that being SB. $2.5m AAV. With about $1m in TBD incentives per year beyond that. Slightly backloaded since they kept year 1 salary the same but how much more beyond that remains to be seen.


Got it. And if doesn't hold up this year the team is really only out the $660K salary plus the $1.5M bonus for his services.
He hasn't been out there often, but when he was he played well. I'm  
Ira : 8/5/2020 2:02 pm : link
glad we tied him up.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 <<Prev | Show All |  Next>>
Back to the Corner