Pay Brees!

SaintFanInATLHELL · 08-14-2016, 05:22 PM

I know there are other responses that match this. I thought I had posted this before I left out. Posting anyway.

Originally Posted by burningmetal

I'm well aware of market value. It's been discussed for years and years, and is a secret to no one, at this point. But market "value" is mostly a residual consequence of teams being desperate and over paying. Once they over pay, the bar is set. And when that happens every decent QB, not just the elite, want to negotiate at or above that number, because the precedent is already set that teams will do anything to have stability at the QB position.

That coupled with the available pool of money is what defined the market.

Neither Drew nor any other of these guys with 100 million plus contracts have actually "earned" that money. Nothing they do is that important when you compare it to other jobs around the world. So I get highly annoyed by this idea that the team owes Drew something extra because market value has risen since his last deal. They don't owe him anything, he has made plenty. But I get it from his perspective that he can't just take a low ball offer when he could make more elsewhere. So I'm not gonna toilet paper his house if he should leave. It's business. But the Saints have to be reasonable. They can't pay a guy his age like he's 25.

I disagree about "earned". The value of any good or service is strictly defined by what people are willing to pay for it. It's the reason that the highest paid employee in virtually every state government is the high-profile football coach.

Brees does a job in a nearly $14 billion a year market that has less than 10,000 employees at a level that less than 5 people on this planet can do. Now is it fair that the NFL has that market size? Probably not. But has Brees earned his share of the market? Absolutely.

And you are asking the correct question. You have a guy that is far outproducing all the 25 year olds that are getting paid more than he is. The desperate teams in the market will pay to get the type of stability we've had at the QB position for the last decade.

I hear what you are saying about the cap rising, and I have heard that many times from people defending Loomis' tactics. You mentioned a couple players whom the team has signed, but the problem is it's always just a player here, and a player there, each year. I'll admit that I wanted Byrd before he came here, but when I actually saw the contract I was blown away. It was extremely ill-advised to put that much into one player with as many problems as they needed to address on defense.

So that's the value choice that each and every GM has to make. The system is set up with cost controls for the first 5 years of the contract after the draft and an open market afterwords. Players who are extremely productive before free agency build a potential value that can be tapped on the second contract. Teams always make the value proposition that the production will continue and match the value of the dollars. Sometimes it works (Brees, Jordan, Ingram) and sometimes it doesn't (Byrd, Gallette, up until now Spiller). And the Saints will have make more of these choices in the future (Cooks, Breaux). And sometimes I think the team just takes a flyer where the value of the contract doesn't match the previous production and there is a hope that the future production will in fact pan out. As of today I put Fleener in that category.

There never seems to be enough money to go around in free agency. And when they do sign people, it's usually a bad move. I think they over paid for Fleener, for example, but that's just my opinion. It's hard to build through the draft alone. There are so many busts. You need to have a few proven commodities. Many of the key players who were on the '09 team were not drafted by the Saints.

For the past several years Loomis has been deferring money, which has only served to keep the team out of the penalty. I don't consider that very smart business.

Deferring the money is the teams hedge against bad decisions in theory. All organizations are only on the hook for guaranteed money. So pushing a chunk of money in the future allows for further evaluation into the next contract as to make decision of whether to continue to pay or not.

It has to be balanced against players wanting their money up front. The NFL is the only pro league that has deferred non guaranteed contracts. When Lebron signed his 3 year $100 million contract this month, he's going to get that money whether or not he ever steps foot on the court for Cleveland ever again. It's all guaranteed. You can see the failures of that model with Kobe as an example. His last contract paid him I believe $24 million/year over a number of years, many of which he simply did not play. That contract in the NFL would be structured as up front guaranteed money, bonus payments contingent on being on the team, and unguaranteed salary, which simply isn't paid when the player is cut.

We'll see a sample of this with Byrd next year. He'll either restructure, or he will be cut because it'll cost the team more to keep him than to cut him.

But at the end of the day, this is the chess match of the NFL. Teams like the Patriots tend to cut most of their high profile people the year before they come into big money and continue their success with getting and developing young talent. Other clubs are a continual string of poor choices. The Saints have been hit and miss. But understand it's rare that someone becomes a Hall of Famer with their second or third club. Brees has been nothing but money since 2006. So my opinion is that the title of this thread is absolutely correct.

SFIAH

08-14-2016, 05:22 PM	#8
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,783	Re: Pay Brees! I know there are other responses that match this. I thought I had posted this before I left out. Posting anyway. Originally Posted by burningmetal I'm well aware of market value. It's been discussed for years and years, and is a secret to no one, at this point. But market "value" is mostly a residual consequence of teams being desperate and over paying. Once they over pay, the bar is set. And when that happens every decent QB, not just the elite, want to negotiate at or above that number, because the precedent is already set that teams will do anything to have stability at the QB position. That coupled with the available pool of money is what defined the market. Neither Drew nor any other of these guys with 100 million plus contracts have actually "earned" that money. Nothing they do is that important when you compare it to other jobs around the world. So I get highly annoyed by this idea that the team owes Drew something extra because market value has risen since his last deal. They don't owe him anything, he has made plenty. But I get it from his perspective that he can't just take a low ball offer when he could make more elsewhere. So I'm not gonna toilet paper his house if he should leave. It's business. But the Saints have to be reasonable. They can't pay a guy his age like he's 25. I disagree about "earned". The value of any good or service is strictly defined by what people are willing to pay for it. It's the reason that the highest paid employee in virtually every state government is the high-profile football coach. Brees does a job in a nearly $14 billion a year market that has less than 10,000 employees at a level that less than 5 people on this planet can do. Now is it fair that the NFL has that market size? Probably not. But has Brees earned his share of the market? Absolutely. And you are asking the correct question. You have a guy that is far outproducing all the 25 year olds that are getting paid more than he is. The desperate teams in the market will pay to get the type of stability we've had at the QB position for the last decade. I hear what you are saying about the cap rising, and I have heard that many times from people defending Loomis' tactics. You mentioned a couple players whom the team has signed, but the problem is it's always just a player here, and a player there, each year. I'll admit that I wanted Byrd before he came here, but when I actually saw the contract I was blown away. It was extremely ill-advised to put that much into one player with as many problems as they needed to address on defense. So that's the value choice that each and every GM has to make. The system is set up with cost controls for the first 5 years of the contract after the draft and an open market afterwords. Players who are extremely productive before free agency build a potential value that can be tapped on the second contract. Teams always make the value proposition that the production will continue and match the value of the dollars. Sometimes it works (Brees, Jordan, Ingram) and sometimes it doesn't (Byrd, Gallette, up until now Spiller). And the Saints will have make more of these choices in the future (Cooks, Breaux). And sometimes I think the team just takes a flyer where the value of the contract doesn't match the previous production and there is a hope that the future production will in fact pan out. As of today I put Fleener in that category. There never seems to be enough money to go around in free agency. And when they do sign people, it's usually a bad move. I think they over paid for Fleener, for example, but that's just my opinion. It's hard to build through the draft alone. There are so many busts. You need to have a few proven commodities. Many of the key players who were on the '09 team were not drafted by the Saints. For the past several years Loomis has been deferring money, which has only served to keep the team out of the penalty. I don't consider that very smart business. Deferring the money is the teams hedge against bad decisions in theory. All organizations are only on the hook for guaranteed money. So pushing a chunk of money in the future allows for further evaluation into the next contract as to make decision of whether to continue to pay or not. It has to be balanced against players wanting their money up front. The NFL is the only pro league that has deferred non guaranteed contracts. When Lebron signed his 3 year $100 million contract this month, he's going to get that money whether or not he ever steps foot on the court for Cleveland ever again. It's all guaranteed. You can see the failures of that model with Kobe as an example. His last contract paid him I believe $24 million/year over a number of years, many of which he simply did not play. That contract in the NFL would be structured as up front guaranteed money, bonus payments contingent on being on the team, and unguaranteed salary, which simply isn't paid when the player is cut. We'll see a sample of this with Byrd next year. He'll either restructure, or he will be cut because it'll cost the team more to keep him than to cut him. But at the end of the day, this is the chess match of the NFL. Teams like the Patriots tend to cut most of their high profile people the year before they come into big money and continue their success with getting and developing young talent. Other clubs are a continual string of poor choices. The Saints have been hit and miss. But understand it's rare that someone becomes a Hall of Famer with their second or third club. Brees has been nothing but money since 2006. So my opinion is that the title of this thread is absolutely correct. SFIAH spkb25 and AsylumGuido like this.
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/79204-pay-brees.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Pay Brees!	This thread	Refback	08-12-2016 01:01 PM	1
The Latest New Orleans Saints News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	08-12-2016 12:32 PM	6
The Latest NFL News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	08-12-2016 12:18 PM	1