Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Trade Watson?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Magooch" data-source="post: 1095043" data-attributes="member: 17987"><p>Yep I think this needs reiterated. The bottom line is that in this league a new contract is going to be worth more than an old contract and there's often some wide discrepancies between "top players" and "top paid players". At the end of the day it's totally commonplace to see a "worse" player on a new contract making appreciably more than a "better" or even an "elite" player on an older contract, it's just how it is.</p><p></p><p>I also have said it before but I think it's easy to get hung up on the literal dollar number we assign for the AAV when in reality this number is basically imaginary. Not least of which as you point out that the contract structuring can be maneuvered around that one way or the other, but also because this "number" is only relevant when viewed as a function of the overall cap. So maybe it's nitpicking but we really should not be asking "Are we okay with paying Watson 30m a year" but instead "Are we okay with paying Watson (#)% of our cap each year?".</p><p></p><p>Or to put it even more simply, top WRs in the league for ages now have been accounting for somewhere like 8% of the cap, give or take a little. And so regardless of what the contract number itself works out to be, that's about how much you can expect to go to a top WR. So we should really just simply be asking ourselves, are we willing to pay Watson at a rate that is in-line with other top WRs or not? </p><p></p><p>If the answer is Yes, we do think Watson is a top WR and should be paid accordingly, then that 30m number (or wherever it settles) is immaterial. And if we don't think Watson is a top WR and/or don't think he should be paid like one, then again, the actual number is immaterial, unless you think you can get him to accept a massive discount to stay</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Magooch, post: 1095043, member: 17987"] Yep I think this needs reiterated. The bottom line is that in this league a new contract is going to be worth more than an old contract and there's often some wide discrepancies between "top players" and "top paid players". At the end of the day it's totally commonplace to see a "worse" player on a new contract making appreciably more than a "better" or even an "elite" player on an older contract, it's just how it is. I also have said it before but I think it's easy to get hung up on the literal dollar number we assign for the AAV when in reality this number is basically imaginary. Not least of which as you point out that the contract structuring can be maneuvered around that one way or the other, but also because this "number" is only relevant when viewed as a function of the overall cap. So maybe it's nitpicking but we really should not be asking "Are we okay with paying Watson 30m a year" but instead "Are we okay with paying Watson (#)% of our cap each year?". Or to put it even more simply, top WRs in the league for ages now have been accounting for somewhere like 8% of the cap, give or take a little. And so regardless of what the contract number itself works out to be, that's about how much you can expect to go to a top WR. So we should really just simply be asking ourselves, are we willing to pay Watson at a rate that is in-line with other top WRs or not? If the answer is Yes, we do think Watson is a top WR and should be paid accordingly, then that 30m number (or wherever it settles) is immaterial. And if we don't think Watson is a top WR and/or don't think he should be paid like one, then again, the actual number is immaterial, unless you think you can get him to accept a massive discount to stay [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
CarryTheG14
Half Empty
Latest posts
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
45 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: Heyjoe4
54 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: Heyjoe4
55 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 7:44 AM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Valuation of NFL Teams
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 7:40 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Trade Watson?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
