Suh suitors

[mhughes0021]

these teams want him so bad can we trade him still? lol ill take a 3rd rd pick for his rights.

 

[LKP]

Can cut Tulloch (3.2), Bush(1.9), Jones(3.1 )and Broyles(.9) for 9.1 million in room.

We just signed 12 guys to reserve contracts so that is 6 million taken. (12 *500k)

Room for draft is needed. Another 5 million. Maybe 4 million since we are pick 23. So say 4.5

So we have 20 million (assuming 143 million cap) plus 9.2 million less 6 million and less 4.5 million (draft).

So that is 18.7 million in room. Plenty for a long term deal for Suh, real close for a franchise tag though. Simple restrucutre could get us there. Though the 4.5 million for draft doesn't count right now. We would need that later once they sign. So 23.2 million in room in March for tag.

And if you franchise him, that number only stays that way if he's on a franchise deal. If he signs long term the number drops drastically.

Could we temporarily get real close to the cap with a franchise tag. The answer is yes. But it's risky if he doesn't sign a long term deal as we would be screwed in July and forced to make a big restructure.

And if we tag him, we could trade him too. We would be real tight and lose Jones/Tulloch/Bush still but we would get lots in a trade. Our leverage is we could sign him to a long term deal. Some team might pony up.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Who cares if we could afford his tag number. You don't pay someone 27m for a year. Doesn't matter how good.

 

[everyoneneedsasmil]

Who cares if we could afford his tag number. You don't pay someone 27m for a year. Doesn't matter how good.

I don't think it is anyone goal to pay him 27 million next year just so he can walk again. The goal is to make sure he doesn't sign somewhere else and then work out a long term contract.

 

[zyxt9]

***Edited prior post to correct data, thought cap was upgraded to $133, but it is $143***

That's the whole point though...those Giants DLs were studs but none of them got paid like what Suh demands.

Consider that if he gets Tagged, he will:

1. Make more next year than the Lions paid all of their LBs and DBs this year...combined...with $5M to spare
2. Take up roughly 18.1% of cap by himself (new $143M cap, $26M to Suh)
3. CJ+Staff+Suh = approx. 44% of teams total cap

I'm not saying it is impossible to fill out a team in this way, but it is very tough to fill out a SB contending team. Now if they get him in a long term contract, that is obviously better...but only slightly as my guess is he will be paid minimum $17M per with whomever he signs, based on JJ Watt making $16.7 coupled with Suh's ego which will push him to desire more than JJ Watt. Since NFL is bumping cap $10M, this is much more workable...but other teams might use new cap to offer him $17.5M per. At what point does Detroit have to bow out of the bidding war? Especially considering potential for injury and suspension?

 

[johnny2x2x]

There's an opportunity cost you have to consider if you keep Suh too. What players in the FA market could we sign with his money? So if we keep him for a cap hit of ~$20 million do we lose Tulloch, one of the top 2 or 3 FA cornerbacks, and a mid tier DT?

IMO, you have to ask yourself what the top NFL teams would do. And they would all let him go. He's a tremendous talent, but you are limiting the talent you can put around him by signing him to a massive deal.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I don't think it is anyone goal to pay him 27 million next year just so he can walk again. The goal is to make sure he doesn't sign somewhere else and then work out a long term contract.

And if they tag him and he doesn't work out a deal? And you know the only way they can justify a tag for a year is to then sign him..Suh even has more of an upper hand. bad move. It's nice to say first priority is Suh, another one to realize unless Mayhew says it AND does it..just a rumor at that point.

 

[zyxt9]

Has Tampa been mentioned as a potential suitor for Suh yet? The total cap bump plus their available space, that might be something they are considering. That would be an impossible team to run against up the middle, and the pass rush up the middle would be unreal. That would be what we hoped Suh/Fairley would have become, potentially anyway.

 

[everyoneneedsasmil]

Someone asked earlier what would good teams do in this situation. I just did a quick look at the last 5 years to see if there were any similar situations where a team had an elite DT to extend and what happened. I came up with the following:

2013 - Geno Atkins gets 5 years, 55 million from 10-win Bengals. Result: Bengals win 11 and 10 games in the following years. Atkins tore his ACL in 2013, ending his season after October and limiting his play this year.

2011 - Haloti Ngata gets 5 years, 61 million from 12-win Ravens. Result: Ravens maintain 12 wins the following year, win the superbowl the year after that.

2010 - Vince Wilfork gets 5 years, 40 million from 10-win Patriots. Result: Patriots remain contenders throughout that contract. Wilfork is widely considered underpaid for much of his contract.

It seems like good teams actually lock up their players and remain good. The big cautionary tale of course is Albert Haynesworth, who signed for huge money in 2009. It should be note, though, that Tennessee (his former team) immediately declined and hasn't been as good since they had him. Also, while Haynesworth is the cautionary tale from a money perspective, his downfall was not about cost, it was about play. Haynesworth fell apart as a player almost immediately, which is why he is such a bust. Unless we have reason to believe Suh has a big decline coming up very soon, top DTs have proven to be worth the money even to good teams.

 

[tomdalton22]

2013 - Geno Atkins gets 5 years, 55 million

2011 - Haloti Ngata gets 5 years, 61 million

2015 - Suh signs a 6 year $100 million contract...hopefully with another team

 

[Mitchrapp]

Someone asked earlier what would good teams do in this situation. I just did a quick look at the last 5 years to see if there were any similar situations where a team had an elite DT to extend and what happened. I came up with the following:

2013 - Geno Atkins gets 5 years, 55 million from 10-win Bengals. Result: Bengals win 11 and 10 games in the following years. Atkins tore his ACL in 2013, ending his season after October and limiting his play this year.

2011 - Haloti Ngata gets 5 years, 61 million from 12-win Ravens. Result: Ravens maintain 12 wins the following year, win the superbowl the year after that.

2010 - Vince Wilfork gets 5 years, 40 million from 10-win Patriots. Result: Patriots remain contenders throughout that contract. Wilfork is widely considered underpaid for much of his contract.

It seems like good teams actually lock up their players and remain good. The big cautionary tale of course is Albert Haynesworth, who signed for huge money in 2009. It should be note, though, that Tennessee (his former team) immediately declined and hasn't been as good since they had him. Also, while Haynesworth is the cautionary tale from a money perspective, his downfall was not about cost, it was about play. Haynesworth fell apart as a player almost immediately, which is why he is such a bust. Unless we have reason to believe Suh has a big decline coming up very soon, top DTs have proven to be worth the money even to good teams.

You just listed 3 guys who on average would make 8m, 12m, and 11m. Noy 16m. And certainly not 27m for a year.

 

[everyoneneedsasmil]

You just listed 3 guys who on average would make 8m, 12m, and 11m. Noy 16m. And certainly not 27m for a year.

Suh is the best of that bunch, first off. Second, he lives in a world where he knows the cap is going up much faster than previous. 16 million now is not the same as 16 million years ago. The only player who realistically signed after the new TV deals were done was Atkins, who Suh is superior to anyway.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Suh is the best of that bunch, first off. Second, he lives in a world where he knows the cap is going up much faster than previous. 16 million now is not the same as 16 million years ago. The only player who realistically signed after the new TV deals were done was Atkins, who Suh is superior to anyway.

I didn't realize 2013 was years ago..Fact is he's not worth more than Watt.

 

[inkfreq]

I find it somewhat ironic that with so many people disliking Suh, it could be the only time in NFL history that a team has a chance to re-sign their own key player and it could be called a "re-tooling".

Get it? Cause people think he is a tool. And he... Yeah... I know... Not funny if you have to explain it.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I find it somewhat ironic that with so many people disliking Suh, it could be the only time in NFL history that a team has a chance to re-sign their own key player and it could be called a "re-tooling".

Get it? Cause people think he is a tool. And he... Yeah... I know... Not funny if you have to explain it.

He's a dumbass not a tool.

 

[detrisin]

Someone asked earlier what would good teams do in this situation. I just did a quick look at the last 5 years to see if there were any similar situations where a team had an elite DT to extend and what happened. I came up with the following:

2013 - Geno Atkins gets 5 years, 55 million from 10-win Bengals. Result: Bengals win 11 and 10 games in the following years. Atkins tore his ACL in 2013, ending his season after October and limiting his play this year.

2011 - Haloti Ngata gets 5 years, 61 million from 12-win Ravens. Result: Ravens maintain 12 wins the following year, win the superbowl the year after that.

2010 - Vince Wilfork gets 5 years, 40 million from 10-win Patriots. Result: Patriots remain contenders throughout that contract. Wilfork is widely considered underpaid for much of his contract.

It seems like good teams actually lock up their players and remain good. The big cautionary tale of course is Albert Haynesworth, who signed for huge money in 2009. It should be note, though, that Tennessee (his former team) immediately declined and hasn't been as good since they had him. Also, while Haynesworth is the cautionary tale from a money perspective, his downfall was not about cost, it was about play. Haynesworth fell apart as a player almost immediately, which is why he is such a bust. Unless we have reason to believe Suh has a big decline coming up very soon, top DTs have proven to be worth the money even to good teams.

Wasn't Haynesworth basically garbage until his contract year? He put up a monster season, got paid, and then returned to his previous dogshit years.

Wilfork, Ngata and Atkins were always producing...as is Suh. Sign him.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I'm curious what makes any of you think we can win with Suh? We haven't yet.

 

[inkfreq]

I'm curious what makes any of you think we can win with Suh? We haven't yet.

By that logic, we haven't won with Calvin either, and he's had even more years to notch some wins. Maybe we'd be better of without him, considering he's paid higher than any receiver in the league.

Hell, we didn't win with Bush, Tate, Tulloch, Ansah, Slay, Bell, Levy, Stafford, Fauria, Ebron, Pettigrew, Rieff, Sims, Warford, Fairley, Quinn, or Ihedigbo.

Let's dump everyone and get all new undrafted free agents.

Bear in mind, I agree with you, let the guy walk. That money can fill several roles and we'd be insane to pay a DT $27MM. It's just a crappy argument to say we haven't won with him. Any team that hasn't won a superbowl this millenium can say the same thing about every player they have.

 

[Mitchrapp]

By that logic, we haven't won with Calvin either, and he's had even more years to notch some wins. Maybe we'd be better of without him, considering he's paid higher than any receiver in the league.

Hell, we didn't win with Bush, Tate, Tulloch, Ansah, Slay, Bell, Levy, Stafford, Fauria, Ebron, Pettigrew, Rieff, Sims, Warford, Fairley, Quinn, or Ihedigbo.

Let's dump everyone and get all new undrafted free agents.

Bear in mind, I agree with you, let the guy walk. That money can fill several roles and we'd be insane to pay a DT $27MM. It's just a crappy argument to say we haven't won with him. Any team that hasn't won a superbowl this millenium can say the same thing about every player they have.

Exactly. I'm agreeing with that first statement. You know why I'm agreeing with you..because he's going to want a fortune to be here. Once CJ does, or maybe he already does..let him walk. Same with Stafford. But those other guys you listed aren't being paid a fortune. That's the difference..

You pay him as a DT, not a DE or more and you can keep him. No problem with that. That's why that argument fits..not a crappy one.

 

[inkfreq]

Exactly. I'm agreeing with that first statement. You know why I'm agreeing with you..because he's going to want a fortune to be here. Once CJ does, or maybe he already does..let him walk. Same with Stafford. But those other guys you listed aren't being paid a fortune. That's the difference..

You pay him as a DT, not a DE or more and you can keep him. No problem with that. That's why that argument fits..not a crappy one.

The argument doesn't fit, because you are arguing whether or not we've won with Suh. We haven't won with anyone. We didn't exactly win with Barry Sanders.

It's the NFL, there is no moneyball here. Someone, on every team, is getting paid bank. Usually more than one someone. The NFL not only has a salary cap now, but a salary floor. When you have nearly $150MM in payroll to meet, and 53 guys to pay, you can either have a team of $3MM players and be the worst team in the league or you can have a team full of $1.5MM and $2MM players, and a few superstars.

Again, not arguing that Suh can't be paid $27MM next season. He simply can't be. It's insane. I'm saying that you can never use the argument that "we haven't won with him" when it comes to teams that just don't win titles... Lions, Browns, etc...

We would have no players ever, because we don't win with anyone.