Why Doesn't...
 

otay, some of you might know i am a salary cap-bang for th buck preacher. wise or stupid signings can make or break a team. but on this point...

i looked up a couple from last year-
#3 larry fitzgerald 6 yrs/60mil, 20mil guaranteed, signing bonus unknown

#4 philip rivers 6 yrs/50mil, 14.25 mil signing bonus

#6 kellen winslow 6 yrs/29mil base to 40mil w/incentives, 16.5 mil signing bonus

year to year these stay about the same or nudge upward slightly. so the benchmarks for signing brown, cadillac, or benson should be 6yrs/ 30-60mil, 20-30mil guaranteed, and 14-17mil signing bonus.

current high rb\'s portis signed for 7yrs/51mil w/11.5mil signing bonus and tomlinson 8yrs/50mil. i assume those are backend loaded with much of that they will never see (the way most big contracts are now).

james seems to have a big head and try to demand towards that. alexander is a definite step down (even tho better production actually). i don\'t see a lot of difference in the vet mkt price of say 6yrs/50 mil and a 10-12mil bonus and a top 6 draft pick price of 6 yrs/45mil and a 15mil bonus.

you get a few more miles since james is 26 and alexander 28. you do get a proven product, alexander 5600 yds, 60tds, and a 4.4ypc the past 4 years. he hasn\'t ever missed a game.

help me, i cannot see a significant money difference for getting a sure thing. one of those teams could sign him for a 2nd (or less!) and then draft edwards or m. williams too. i do not overvlaue rb\'s. 1000yd backs are nothing special anymore. there is a lot more risk of a rookie taking the money and not running ala sullivan or just being a bust like curtis enis or ron dayne vs. getting a proven all-pro though.

Why Doesn't...
 

I see your point Kelley, but isn\'t it more widely accepted that rookie contracts are generally more tenable than veteran contracts? Take Rivers for example. How do the Chargers sign him, give LT a big contract, and franchise Brees and still be way way way under the cap? Something about a rookie contract makes it more feasible under the salary cap than a vet contract. Aren\'t NFL teams alotted a certain amount for rookie signing also? Does that count toward the cap or no? You are also getting into the mileage factor. Edge has been in the league what 5-6 years and has blown a knee and really just recovered last year. Alexander, although he has good numbers, is considered a bit of a soft runner and not very strong after contact, and is almost 30. Makes one of the young studs even more feasible IMO. But something about rookie contracts makes them more to the liking of GMs than vet contracts at the same position. Maybe you can help me out on that?

Why Doesn't...
 

no, I was asking for help cuz there must be something I\'m/we\'re not seeing. I can\'t see a big money diff and a proven product at 26-28 certainly have enough miles to sign for 3-4 real years of contract.

any capologists or contract guru\'s out there?

Why Doesn't...
 

Oh, I see what you are saying. Something about rookie contracts obviously makes them more appealing than vet contracts though. I don\'t understand the exact reasoning it is cause I have never broken down a rookie contract as opposed to a vet contract for the same position, but one of the reasons given by the articles I read for Edge and Shaun getting no play was that teams aren\'t interested in doling out the contract dollars they would want. Yet they had these same teams taking one of the stud RBs high. It is interesting.

Why Doesn't...
 

Market conditions hurting runners\' value
By Chris Mortensen
ESPN Insider
Archive

It\'s a remarkable development that is almost underplayed as we near the 2005 NFL draft.

Edgerrin James and Shaun Alexander, two of the NFL\'s top running backs, are available for trade and nobody wants them.

Even more remarkable is that the Colts and the Seahawks might not even demand a first-round pick in this month\'s draft to move them.

The Colts appear willing to move James for about the same price as when they moved Marshall Faulk to the St. Louis Rams in 1999 (second- and fifth-round draft picks). GM Bill Polian replaced Faulk with the team\'s first pick, when he astutely judged that James would be a better fit for the Colts than Ricky Williams.



Alexander has never had a cozy relationship with Seahawks coach Mike Holmgren, although the running back insists (he was emphatic to me during Pro Bowl week) that\'s a misimpression.
Yet, the Seahawks are dropping hints to teams that they, too, are willing to move Alexander for less than a first-rounder this year. New GM Tim Ruskell might even take a pick in next year\'s draft, according to league sources.

What gives? It\'s hard to make the argument that James and Alexander are on the downside of their careers. James is coming off a 2004 season in which he produced 2,031 total yards, rushing for 1,548 and receiving for 483. Alexander had his best year, running for 1,696 yards and scoring 20 touchdowns as a rusher (16) and receiver (4).

So, here\'s the deal, as explained by a few sources from teams that certainly could use a premier runner:

Franchise tag: James and Alexander have been blocked from free agency. It\'s a deterrent, a red flag that screams that James and Alexander want blockbuster money and the Colts and Seahawks want compensation.

\"When you sit and do your budget as a team before March 1 and you don\'t allow for a $12 million signing bonus like these guys undoubtedly want, it\'s just a tough, tough deal,\" said one team source. Character flaws: This is a funny one because other than relatively minor blips, neither James nor Alexander has done anything to truly embarrass himself or his organization.

\"True,\" said a coach, \"but for the amount of money and draft picks you\'re investing in them, you look for things and some of those things bother you. Alexander isn\'t as consistent as you want, so you wonder what that\'s all about, and then he made a stink at the end of the season about not getting the rushing title when his team is trying to win a division. If he\'s so wonderful, why don\'t the Seahawks want him?

\"James isn\'t an offseason guy. He\'s always doing his own thing. If he\'s producing, it sounds like nit-picking, but there are some things about team building that you get in the offseason. It\'s also a chance to work on putting in some new wrinkles before you get to training camp. He\'s never there for the Colts. There\'s a little of that malcontent image, and he\'s one of those guys that makes you think that he doesn\'t love the game, that he might even retire early on you.\"

Shelf life: Nobody is punished more than running backs. James is entering his seventh year in the NFL and Alexander his sixth.

\"James has already had one ACL surgery and it took him two years to get back,\" said another source. \"Alexander\'s been healthy, but these guys only have so many miles in their treads. And it takes a hungry, hungry back to run with the same intensity after he gets the big contract. Regardless of position, a lot of these guys don\'t perform at the same level once they get their big contract. There are some exceptions – Marshall Faulk got even better with the Rams, but he wasn\'t a free agent when he was traded. The money makes you hesitate.\"
Travis Henry: The Buffalo Bills back isn\'t of quite the same stature as James and Alexander, but he is available for a second-round pick and has a year left on his contract at modest money.

“ James has already had one ACL surgery and it took him two years to get back. Alexander\'s been healthy, but these guys only have so many miles in their treads. �
— NFL source

\"Here\'s a tough guy who has run for over 1,300 yards twice, so you feel like you can get value for at least a season,\" said a source. \"You probably can do a reasonable deal on an extension, although the Raiders didn\'t do anybody favors when they signed LaMont Jordan to that big contract. So even Henry isn\'t a hot item.\"

He\'s so lukewarm that only one team, the Cardinals, is in play at the moment. The Seahawks and Colts also could have interest if James and Alexander are moved at the last minute.

The draft: There are three highly rated backs available this year in Auburn\'s Carnell \"Cadillac\" Williams and Ronnie Brown and Cedric Benson of Texas.

\"You basically get fresher legs and while they\'ll be expensive, they won\'t cost as much as James and Alexander,\" said a source. \"Where did the Colts get James and where did the Seahawks get Alexander? In the draft. Get your own guys.\"

The Redskins factor: If only the Redskins and owner Daniel Snyder were in play, we\'d have a different picture. But the \'Skins struck for their back last year when they acquired Clinton Portis from the Broncos. This year, the market is not flooded with teams in search of a premier runner.

Of the 32 teams, you can count only three that appear in dire need of a back – Arizona, Miami and Tampa Bay. All three pick in the top eight, so they have a chance to fulfill their needs with Benson, Brown and Williams.

Even then, the Dolphins may be reluctant to take a back at No. 2 because of the price tag – as much as $15 million in guaranteed bonuses.

There is a second tier of teams that could use a back – the Eagles, Panthers, Bears and Titans. The Vikings wouldn\'t surprise me, either, if they grabbed one because Michael Bennett and Onterrio Smith have disappointed more than delivered.

Poker faces: Let\'s allow that we\'re playing a game of football poker and that draft day could still produce some drama in which James, Alexander and Henry are traded. Two teams come to mind.

If the Buccaneers surprise everyone by taking a quarterback, or even a receiver, they have a bundle (11) of draft picks to wheel and deal for one of the backs, not to mention the latitude of utilizing next year\'s draft picks. Bucs coach Jon Gruden always has shown a willingness to take on veteran players, even when their best years are behind them. What the Bucs don\'t have is salary-cap space to accommodate a large contract, not to mention the dubious task of signing a top-five pick.

The Eagles are really interesting. They have 13 picks in this draft and could collect another second- or third-rounder if they trade Corey Simon to Baltimore. Brian Westbrook is a productive back, but he\'s still not a classic feature back, and the Eagles have an underrated offensive line that will be even stronger in \'05 with last year\'s top choice, G-T Shawn Andrews, coming back from a preseason broken leg. The Eagles also have relatively good cap space and have never been shy to strike for a big-timer – Terrell Owens and Jevon Kearse being last season\'s acquisitions.

The Cardinals clearly are players, primarily for Henry. Cards coach Dennis Green is putting together an interesting puzzle that could surprise this season. If the Cards don\'t use the No. 8 overall pick on Benson, Brown or Williams, they will have to rethink their reluctance to swap second-round slots with the Bills in order to consummate a trade.

Don\'t fall asleep. That\'s when things happen.

Why Doesn't...
 

That\'s it in a nutshell. Times are changing in the NFL. Teams are getting smarter.

Why Doesn't...
 

thanks who \'n mort.

alexander is definitely more attractive for numbers and having been injury free. the seahags have some cap space. the comment i think most indicting is \"why don\'t they sign him longterm?\" the franchise tag is really a burn for players. it sounds like \"you are our most valued player\" but in reality it is \"you are the player we can hold over a barrel for our benefit\". if the guy suffers major injury while playing under a tag he is screwed bad. and in many cases the team can tag them year after year. how long for orlando pace, 4-5 years?

supply \'n demand is an issue too. i bet the raiders are wishing they wouldn\'t have jumped so quick. no dan snyder cash floating around for a rb this year either.

i hope everyone is picking up on these changing times. apply the same thing about howard. howard or erasmus james? we\'ll do good to get a straight 2nd for him. the horn contract seems fair enough for both sides. it will be a very monumental decision though if they wanna sign deuce to portis/tomlinson kinda cash or think about reggie bush next year.

Why Doesn't...
 

Please, please don\'t tease me about Reggie Bush. 4 words for that kid, phe-nom-e-nal.

Why Doesn't...
 

LK,

Fine question and interesting work.

My view is that teams SERIOUSLY overvalue draft picks. Every man and his dog wants a game changer - but they don\'t want just any game changer (like Edge), they want the next big game changer that has never been seen before.

As a result, FA isn\'t treated seriously enough, and a big stink is made out of draft picks.

Summary:
1. Draft Pick Value = probability player would be good + hope he will be a big deal
2. FA Value = probability player will be equally good on a new team (which is better known than the probability some draft pick will a big deal)

Analysis:
Draft picks aren\'t as valuable as people think they are.

Imperative:
Do better in FA and retain key players rather than bank on the draft.

Diagnosis:
Our FO isn\'t too hot.