Saints Trade Graham
 

Only on a day like today.

The Saints offseason took an unexpected turn as the team has decided to ship Jimmy Graham off to Oakland for the Raiders’ 1st, 3rd and 7th round picks in 2014. Wow. Word is the Saints will now make Eric Ebron, tight end out of North Carolina, a drafting priority come May. Graham continued to insist on “Megatron” type money and the Raiders have rewarded him with a 6 year contract for $92.5 million with $40 million guaranteed. That’s an astronomical figure that the Saints were never going to come close to paying. The contract makes Graham the highest paid tight end in history by almost $5 million per year. That is an astronomical contract for Graham and the Raiders also gave up the 5th overall pick to get him. It remains to be seen who the Saints will get with that 5th pick but there are lots of difference making options.


APRIL FOOL’S!!!


http://cdn.bloguin.com/wp-content/up...28-593x356.jpg
BREAKING NEWS: Jimmy Graham traded to Raiders for 3 draft picks | The Saints Nation

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

At least the comments below the article are funny...

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

If they had any sense they would have set the story as team x have offered Jimmy a contract in the region of 6 years/$12ml a year snd the Saints have 7 days to match it.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

"trade" - story fail
"picks other than 2x First round" - story fail
"astronomical" twice in the same paragraph.. fail lol:dunce:

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

Even know we could get a lot more this would not make me upset. JG is a stud but the Saints were great without him and we could add 3 more pieces and free up cap space......

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

No way this happens but I wouldn't mind them listening to offers at least

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

WE CANNOT TRADE HIM WITHOUT EATING THE WHOLE OF HIS TAG MONEY WHEN HE SIGNS IT. WE CANNOT TRADE SOMEBODY NOT UNDER A CONTRACT.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

***** lmao you got me

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

He has not signed his contract.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

Party Pooper.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

ok one more time.

Oakland calls and wants the trade.
Oakland calls Jimmy agent and a contract agreement can be reached
the saints the agent and the raiders sit down
jimmy is packing his bags and he is out of here

It can be done - it has been done and it will continue to be done.

we do not need to eat anything

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

The only thing that eases the stress from this thread is Oak's avatar.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

I'd take that deal in a split second if 2 of those picks were a first and the 3rd a second.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

Then you have nothing to trade. The Saints do not have any ownership in Jimmy Graham right now, they just have an option to match a contract with another team.

I will try to make this very simple.

Jimmy Graham is a Free Agent 1st with a Non-Exclusive Franchise Tag 2nd.
We have absolutely nothing to trade until Jimmy Graham Signs something.
All the Non-Exclusive Franchise Tag does is allow the Saints the option to match any offer that Jimmy graham and another team agree upon.

The Saints, Saints Front Office, Mickey Loomis, Sean Payton, Drew Brees, no one with in the Saints organization is or will be involved with any agreement between Jimmy Graham and another team UNTIL Jimmy signs an offer sheet.

Once the sheet is signed the Saints either match it or wait for the league to give them 2 First Round Draft picks.

In order for the Saints to have anything to trade Jimmy has to sign his FT or a contract of some sort. A FT will come with 7m in dead money to trade and a long term deal will come with a whole lot more dead money, because Jimmy isnt signing a long term deal unless it has a nice signing bonus.

BTW.. I am not picking on you, your post was the one at the bottom when i decided to reply.

To show you what interest the Saints own in Jimmy Graham right now, if the season starts when I click post, Jimmy Graham could not take the field for the Saints. He is not under any contract.:saintsfan:

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

No Sir. The Saints are not involved in any table meeting between Jimmy Graham and Oakland.. I stated that when you tried the scenario with Houston.

It has NEVER been done with a player not under contract.
The Saints have nothing to trade as there is no contract between the Saints and Jimmy Graham presently

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

I actually tried to erase the title with a pencil when I saw it

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

LOL.
I knew immediately, pretty much, but then, you did make me look.
fun stuff!

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

This was the point I was making. I was just too lazy to go into detail.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

April's Fools stopped being clever of funny once I turned 11.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

need you forget the power of the tag

sign the tag and play or sit out for a year.

If the two sides are threatening each other with extremes and a third party intervenes and makes an offer to appease both parties it can be done. it has been done.

I will spell it out for you so you understand what happens when all three parties sit at the table.

Parties one and two do you have and agreement?
Parties two and three do you have an agreement?

if the answer to both questions is YES they go to the next step

The issue of the tag. it is unsigned which is a good thing because it makes it a whole lot easier. less paper work

they take the picks jimmy signs and the tag is removed.

HE DOES NOT NEED TO SIGN THE TAG !!!!!!!!

All the tag does is guarantee you picks for your best player thats it. The picks limit the options out there.
He gets traded
or signs at fair dollar value
or sits out for a year.

ok i will force feed you some more

Section 14(a)

Section 14(a) states that, if a transition player hasn’t signed a contract by July 22, only the player’s current club may negotiate or sign him thereafter.

Section 15(a) contains no similar deadline for franchise players, stating only that, if the player hasn’t signed a contract with “a Club” by the Tuesday following the 10th week of the regular season, the player can’t play for any team that year.

Read together, these provisions imply that an unsigned, non-exclusive franchise player can be signed to an offer sheet up until the Tuesday following the ninth week of the regular season, since the prior club must have one week to match before the contract is finalized.

The only potential caveat to this approach comes from the July 16 deadline restricting the prior team’s ability to sign a franchise player to a multi-year deal. The correct interpretation of the CBA could be that matching the offer is different from signing the player to a multi-year deal. Otherwise, the CBA as a practical matter allows a team to sign a non-exclusive franchise player to an offer sheet after July 16, with the player’s prior team having no ability to match.

Confused?

The point is that unsigned, non-exclusive franchise players remain fair game

-if any team decides for whatever reason that it’s not happy with its current depth chart and an unsigned, non-exclusive franchise player is the answer that team can still make a run at that player
- prior club must have one week to match before the contract is finalized.
- prior club gets two first-round pick

Look as long as he is unsigned he can talk to any club he wants. those clubs would know his cost is two #1's and his contract. There is no mention in the CBA that a franchise player must sign the tag prior to trading.

all we get is one week to match.

So stop jumping me every time i bring it up. you are wrong

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

If he signs elsewhere he hasn't been traded just moved as a FA because the Saints refused to match the deal. The picks received are compensation picks. Its not like Loomis teading him for a 1st/2nd and third this year.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

agreed but with any player movement were a team receives compensation for the player lost from the other team is basically a trade. i know that falls into nit picking.

but in principle by the saints not agreeing to match is basically approving a trade.

The main point is we can get our picks and not sign Jimmy and have no dead money.

including the saints was polite business practice on my part. something that is second nature to me.

Saints Trade Graham
 

Brother there is no need to get defensive, no one is "jumping you", we are trying to help you get your head wrapped around a few things is all. As frustrated with this as you may be I am willing to bet that there are at least a half a dozen members of this forum that have learned a crap load about the CBA/Tag/ Contracting process just by reading our discussions. Isn't that one of the great things about B&G? Members can come here and learn about things in layman terms that they may not have the time to go through the entire CBA to learn? The term "trade" is not semantics, it is specific and a completely different approach to the Non-Exclusive Franchise Tag.



I am not going to give up on you so I will try a different approach and explanations as to why your approach has a few misunderstandings . No need to start yelling.:bng:



1. Three parties do not sit down in this case. Keep in mind the difference between a trade and a Non-Exclusive Franchise tag.

Trade - The player has no say so or involvement (Sproles), its between two teams.

Non-Exclusive Franchise Tag - The tagging team has no say so in anything until the player signs an offer sheet from another team or signs the contract that is associated with the Non-Exclusive Franchise tag. Why would the Saints not be at that table? Because.... Jimmy Graham has no contract with any team, and the CBA forbids it.



2. The quoted text above. That is correct, there is no mention because there is no need for it, its moot. The CBA recognizes the fact that until a players Signs the contract that accompanies the Tag the player is not owned by any team, meaning no team owns the rights to trade him.



Look at the Non-Exclusive Franchise Tag as a rebate coupon for an auction - An opposing team makes a bid on Jimmy, the Saints can match the bid or not and get 2 draft picks via the Coupon. The key is that the Saints only have a coupon, they have zero ownership in the item being auctioned, until a contract is signed with the Saints.



3. If you are going to attempt to "force feed" me (which is fairly aggressive and caustic), then do not muddle separate and distinct items, which actually caused you to confuse your self. So in answer to your question, no brother, I am not confused. It's crystal clear for me. Sections 14 (a) and 15 (a), they are both (a's) for a reason, they are not combined. Section 14 governs "Transition Players" and section 15 governs "Franchise Players". They are not the same, they are two of the three types of Tags.



In your "read together", you stated the "ninth week", and in your caveat you state "July 16".



Look at it this way - Jimmy Graham is not a player in the last year of his contract with the Saints and we are trying to get something for him. Jimmy Grahams contract with the Saints ended on the last day of the 2013 season, and all the Saints did was slap a tag on him that gives them the Right of First Refusal.. Not ownership.



Curious as to why Loomis would not be at any table where Jimmy Graham is negotiating with another team?



Two Distinct Reasons

1. Theoretically Jimmy can sit down and negotiate with 31 teams and Loomis has more important things to do with his time than sit in a negotiation where he has zero say-so.



2. Most important... The CBA, page 39 covers the Right of First Refusal process. On page 40 section 3(h) there is specific language that states there shall be No Consideration Between Clubs, that is called collusion. This prevents both clubs from being present so there is never a question of influence in one way or another. It also clearly outlines that before any trade can happen the NFLPA must approve in advance any such trade that takes place. Also that any such trade can not happen for a year unless the player agrees to it...



So I ask... Why would Jimmy have to agree to a trade to a new club if he already has an agreed upon offer letter with that club? He wouldn't, the only way Jimmy would have to agree to any part of a trade is if he signed a tender with the Saints to give them something to trade. [U]


You may also notice that sometimes I quote someone that I agree with and go into detail so other people can understand a little more.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

after that happened K&B changed it's official color from Purple to Green!

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

as long as jimmy is not signed he can talk to whoever he wants/ the only issue is the time frame. after a certain date it appears the saints would lose the option of matching. no one is sure how that will work out in the CBA since it has not happened. language is not clear on the issue. confused? we all are

lmao ass off at collusion. that only applies if the player is getting the short end of the stick.

Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties, sometimes illegal and therefore secretive, to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair advantage. It is an agreement among firms or individuals to divide a market, set prices, limit production or limit opportunities.[1] It can involve "wage fixing, kickbacks, or misrepresenting the independence of the relationship between the colluding parties".[2] In legal terms, all acts effected by collusion are considered

Collusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Collusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Collusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

saints have a long history for most part of being overly generous and loyal since Benson took over. so the idea of Collusion would shock the saints nation and the nfl as a whole. hell bounty gate was never proven. all they really got on us was untimely answered email. we are a clean organization.

what do you think goes on at winter meeting and all during the off season. teams talk players and their agents talk , they all talk

in no way do i think the saints would be dirty and under handed in any move concerning ripping a player off during contract talks with another club.

A call between teams is good business relations just giving a heads up that there are talking to a player.

Of course Jimmy would get an offer sheet he wants and feels is fair before doing anything.

the sit down is simple. saints decide to match or not. notify all parties involved and it a done deal either way. either across the table via conference call what ever the media you pick. I am old school and would think the news would be face to face in this matter. but thats just me. shake hands and seal the deal our part ways but do it like men eye to eye.

OLD school business ethic still do go on between teams. rare in today's cut throat and do not care who you hurt business world we have today. maybe i should have left that ideology out of my statements

as for the bit about

Trade - The player has no say so or involvement (Sproles), its between two teams.

plenty of trades have gone down in the past were teams have made deals that the players opinion is weighed in the matter. so there are exceptions.

I am sure Darren was very happy with eagles vs a franchise in the toilet. I would like to think the saints ignored a few teams to get darren a better landing spot without giving him away.

then again old school rose color glasses

"But look, I'm sensitive to how personal these things are to players. I get that. I respect Darren. A lot. He's done a lot for us. When we had the opportunity to trade him, I spoke with his representation a number of times. I wanted to put him in a place where he felt good about going, and yet I've got to consider the team's best interest first."

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/team-re...0221--nfl.html

looks like i picked the right shades after all

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

April Fools ! really ?

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

+1 on the sense of humor, I sincerely hope it is still intact after reading my reply.

Collusion - The anti-collusion language in the CBA is not there to protect players, that is the agents job; it is also not there to protect either team from a bad deal, that is the job of the Director of Player personnel/ EVP-General Manager, Ryan Pace/Mickey Loomis in regards to the Saints.

The anti-collusion language is in the CBA to prevent impropriety and preserve the integrity of the CBA, Salary Cap, and in this case Franchise Tags. If Jimmy signs a long term deal it will certainly be one large enough to effect the Tight End franchise tag for the next 5 years. Re-read the definition of collusion you quoted and pay particular attention to it defining it as an agreement between 2-3 parties that has an impact on others, "others" being people that are not sitting at that table. It is far reaching in its implications.

OLD School - I see you use that term heavily to describe your self. Exactly how "OLD School" are you? Are we talking Beaver pelts on the banks of the mighty Missisip, or trading stone on the banks of the Nile River? In all of my years of hiring and being hired I have never come across a situation where a previous employer is given a call or sits in on a hiring interview/compensation negotiation. I have seen it where a spouse sits in and it never ends well, I have also had guardians of minors sit in when hiring someone under 18 years old at my request, simply because I want their guardian to understand my expectations and for me to understand theirs. But hey... If you want your old boss sitting in on your hiring process at a new employer, what ever floats your boat.

The reason a prospective employer would not call a current employer and give them a heads up is rather simple in concept. In this scenario, the new team doesn't want to have Loomis cave to Jimmy just to keep him as that would mean Loomis could either give Jimmy what ever he wants to prevent the meeting, or Loomis could jack his offer a little just enough to cause the new team to have to pay more. Jimmy Graham doesn't want both teams at the table either. Its poker and its hard to not tip your hand when someone os there that could inadvertently express approval or disapproval at an offer a third party made to him.

Cut throat business - I do agree that its not a good business practice because there is always the opportunity to have it done to you in return. It is a very haphazard business practice to not evaluate all of the possible ways you could get your throat cut before, during, and after negotiations. Entering into a deal of any sort with nothing but blind faith is a very risky proposition and will sooner or later end up in a bad deal. Trust no one in a multimillion dollar business deal and you will come out a heck of a lot better; just because I can see all of the ways I could get screwed, doesn't mean I am screwing anyone. When millions of dollars are on the table body language is read and everyone is under the looking glass.

Sproles - Sproles wish was to be released, not traded, so it was ignored.

Loomis's quote - '"Anytime you're in a good place and you've had success, which he's had with us, it's definitely painful to have the team say, 'We don't want you anymore,'" Loomis said. "But I'm not in the business of consulting players on the moves we make in management." The rule is the rule and exceptions are not the rule.

Mickey Loomis - I also believe his integrity is in tact. Loomis recognizes that neither the players or opposing teams are his enemy, his enemy is the CBA and Salary Cap. Loomis is good at his job, which is not to interpret the CBA and cap rules in a transparent, "spirit of", fashion. It is his job to find the holes in it, and exploit those holes to make it work for his employer.... Which sort of flys in the face of "old school", above board, transparent business practices that you have associated your self with.

The NFL is not one big happy family as you see it. It is a beast with multiple layers, and each layer has to watch out for it self.
Owners - They have yet to close the double-dip loop hole which allows a player to be paid by two teams in the same season.
NFLPA - Entered into the present CBA only looking at $ and never at the language that allowed Roger Goodell to act as appellate of his own rulings. Would never bring up the above Double-dip, they are fighting for players.
Agents - Out to reap from everyone.
Players - All want to get paid.

But I digress... The Saints have nothing to trade, once they do, there will be dead money associated. Loomis would not be at the table or on speaker phone if Graham negotiates with another team.

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

for the love of god and all that is holy

tag sets a trade value for a player and indicates how serious a team is at keeping that player

the only twist is a player has the right to seek out teams.

the team tagging decides to match or not.

thats is it.

as long as he is unsigned it is really that simple.

once he signs then comes all the other crap.

there is no reason for sneaking and hiding behind close doors. it is out there for the world to see from day one

shame you never experienced business with common courtesy call involved. i have and it makes dealing with people in the future much easier. it sets a level of trust

as for darren i want this
team thats cool but we are offered this
let us reach a middle ground.

nothing in life is so cut and dry

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

I know how to settle this once and for all
POLL: WHAT IF? Graham could be traded?

Side POLL: How long is a piece of string?

This should be good for at least a couple of more pages!

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

How long is it? :p
http://www.polyvore.com/cgi/img-thin...l&tid=22877893

Re: Saints Trade Graham
 

Ya just have to love April 1st.