- Thread starter
- #1
briwas101
New Member
- 38
- 0
- 0
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2013
- Hoopla Cash
- $ 1,000.00
- Fav. Team #1
- Fav. Team #2
- Fav. Team #3
This is an honest analysis of what the Hawks have done, and how that combines with human nature to create a situation that is most likely not as rosy as many would like to believe. This is not a troll post, so any trolling going on is not being done by me.
Many people have been postulating about potential hometown discounts for our players who will soon be eligible for extensions or FA, and using that as a way to stay under the salary cap in the future.
In fact some people have gotten the idea (or just hope?) that MOST of them will take a small discount so they can all stay together on the Hawks as one big happy family.
While that may be a nice thought and it may help you sleep at night, it conflicts with both the business side of football AND human nature.
Guys like Earl Thomas, Richard Sherman, Golden Tate, and Doug Baldwin are all up for their payday SOON. For Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin, here are their stats from 2011-2013 so far:
Doug Baldwin: 41 games, 116 rec, 1740 yards, 10 TD
Golden Tate: 53 games, 143 rec, 1897 yards, 14 TD
Here are the stats for Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin from 2011-2013 (so far):
Percy Harvin: 26 games, 150 rec, 1661 yards, 9 TD
Sidney Rice: 33 games, 97 rec, 1463 yards, 12 TD
Looking at those numbers there are two things that jump out:
1. The players the Hawks drafted have stayed healthier than the former Vikings, and have put up better total numbers from 2011-2013.
2. The Vikings put up better stats per game than the Hawks draft picks (Sidney by a little, Harvin by about 20 yards per game) but miss enough games that they end up producing less overall.
Based on the stats i just gave you, i would rank the players in terms of total effectiveness (meaning ability to ACTUALLY get on the field matters!) as :
1. Tate
2. Baldwin
3. Harvin
4. Rice
When it comes time to negotiate an extension with Tate, why would Tate accept a discount when Rice and Harvin were GREATLY OVERPAID and they had not even played a single down for the Hawks when they received their payday?
Why would tate agree to a discount so that the Hawks can afford to overpay a different WR who has done nothing for the Hawks?
This is human nature, folks. Why would Tate and Baldwin accept discounts so the Hawks can keep paying other players who have been less effective and done less for the team?
Why would the guys who have been here from the beginning of the Pete/John era accept less than their fair value from a team that has shown it doesn't mind paying people double/triple/quadruple what they are worth?
The Hawks went out and OVERSPENT on players who had no affiliation with the seahawks.
When it comes time to negotiate, i guarantee you Thomas/Sherman/Tate/Baldwin's agent will bring up the same point that i just made. Loyalty works both ways.
Im sure the players on the Hawks love playing for Seattle, but when it is time for a new contract and the team says, "Sorry, we have to ask you to give us a discount because we spent part of your raise on injured players" then it is completely understandable if the business side wins out.
Also, something that NO ONE but me would even think to bring up is HOW do the Hawks determine the "fair" value that then has a discount taken off and why would the agents accept that?
Example, if the Hawks say Baldwin is worth $2.5m per season and they want him to accept less than that, WHY would he automatically accept the "fair value" that the Hawks placed on him? What if there is a team out there that thinks he is worth $3.5m per year? Shouldn't the "discount" come off of the $3.5m?
If the Seahawks hope to get discounts from the players, I expect at least a couple of them (Baldwin and Sherman come to mind as actual Stanford-educated grads) to tell the Hawks that they want to wait until they are FA and test the FA market and then come back to the Hawks to see if a small discount can be worked out.
Many people have been postulating about potential hometown discounts for our players who will soon be eligible for extensions or FA, and using that as a way to stay under the salary cap in the future.
In fact some people have gotten the idea (or just hope?) that MOST of them will take a small discount so they can all stay together on the Hawks as one big happy family.
While that may be a nice thought and it may help you sleep at night, it conflicts with both the business side of football AND human nature.
Guys like Earl Thomas, Richard Sherman, Golden Tate, and Doug Baldwin are all up for their payday SOON. For Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin, here are their stats from 2011-2013 so far:
Doug Baldwin: 41 games, 116 rec, 1740 yards, 10 TD
Golden Tate: 53 games, 143 rec, 1897 yards, 14 TD
Here are the stats for Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin from 2011-2013 (so far):
Percy Harvin: 26 games, 150 rec, 1661 yards, 9 TD
Sidney Rice: 33 games, 97 rec, 1463 yards, 12 TD
Looking at those numbers there are two things that jump out:
1. The players the Hawks drafted have stayed healthier than the former Vikings, and have put up better total numbers from 2011-2013.
2. The Vikings put up better stats per game than the Hawks draft picks (Sidney by a little, Harvin by about 20 yards per game) but miss enough games that they end up producing less overall.
Based on the stats i just gave you, i would rank the players in terms of total effectiveness (meaning ability to ACTUALLY get on the field matters!) as :
1. Tate
2. Baldwin
3. Harvin
4. Rice
When it comes time to negotiate an extension with Tate, why would Tate accept a discount when Rice and Harvin were GREATLY OVERPAID and they had not even played a single down for the Hawks when they received their payday?
Why would tate agree to a discount so that the Hawks can afford to overpay a different WR who has done nothing for the Hawks?
This is human nature, folks. Why would Tate and Baldwin accept discounts so the Hawks can keep paying other players who have been less effective and done less for the team?
Why would the guys who have been here from the beginning of the Pete/John era accept less than their fair value from a team that has shown it doesn't mind paying people double/triple/quadruple what they are worth?
The Hawks went out and OVERSPENT on players who had no affiliation with the seahawks.
When it comes time to negotiate, i guarantee you Thomas/Sherman/Tate/Baldwin's agent will bring up the same point that i just made. Loyalty works both ways.
Im sure the players on the Hawks love playing for Seattle, but when it is time for a new contract and the team says, "Sorry, we have to ask you to give us a discount because we spent part of your raise on injured players" then it is completely understandable if the business side wins out.
Also, something that NO ONE but me would even think to bring up is HOW do the Hawks determine the "fair" value that then has a discount taken off and why would the agents accept that?
Example, if the Hawks say Baldwin is worth $2.5m per season and they want him to accept less than that, WHY would he automatically accept the "fair value" that the Hawks placed on him? What if there is a team out there that thinks he is worth $3.5m per year? Shouldn't the "discount" come off of the $3.5m?
If the Seahawks hope to get discounts from the players, I expect at least a couple of them (Baldwin and Sherman come to mind as actual Stanford-educated grads) to tell the Hawks that they want to wait until they are FA and test the FA market and then come back to the Hawks to see if a small discount can be worked out.
