I was interested to read this on ESPN. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/19705736/what-every-nfl-starting-quarterback-makes-2017 The article puts Tannehill at equal 11th (with Alex Smith) on guaranteed money. He is 14th on average yearly salary. It's also important to note that Tom Brady is playing for far below his market value in his quest to be the goatiest goat, so if not for that Tannehill would by 12th and 15th respectively. Tannehill's pay is definitely in the lower half of the non-rookie scale bona fide starter pay level. If you want a significantly cheaper non-rookie contract QB you're looking at Tyrod Taylor and Andy Dalton as the only viable QBs. Other than that you're getting into Brian Hoyer territory.
He's also tied for 6th in NFL QBs with Aaron Rodgers with a 2017 cap hit of $20,300,000 http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/cap-hit/quarterback/
Derek Carr just got a nice, fat contract. Wait until other rookies get their new contracts. Tannehill will fall further down the list.
Play better and we'll pay better? I'm pretty sure T-Hill and Mrs. Hottie T-Hill are VERY happy. I would all but guarantee that Brady has TONS of bonuses in his contract.
Thank, Pauly! By this point next year, RT's cap number will be between the 16th to 20th highest in the league, he'll still have three years left on his deal, and his numbers won't be really going up. I don't see how anyone can complain about it, but some do.
What would Aaron Rodgers get on a deal today, though? I would imagine he'd be significantly more than Tannehill.
Absolutely. He's the best QB in the league and has been for a couple years. Should get like 60 million guaranteed and a platinum wrestling belt.
A good read on other upcoming QB deals. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/06/22/looking-at-the-coming-waves-of-quarterback-deals/
I don't place too much on cap hit. Mainly because players are interested in the Benjamins, but teams are interested in managing cap hits. Often player contracts get odd bulges or tightening in their cap hit because the team is massaging other player's contracts. IMO Cap hit is more important in working out who will get cut to fit under the cap, or who will get an extension.
Thats why i DO only really care about tye cap hit though. I could really give a squawk whats important to the player, lol. I only care about who we can fit onto the team, and who other teams may have to let go.
Looking at a single season "cap hit" is akin to seeing Jessica Alba in a turtle neck and jeans and then claiming you've seen her in the nude.
Hey, I'd take watching her in a turtle neck and jeans for a little while. A woman that fine doesn't have to be naked to make me look twice. Would she have boots though? Because you started building the whole fantasy thing and I was like, on man, let her have those long boots on with the jeans...
It depends on the player and how his contract is structured. Looking at any one year COULD be misleading. RT's cap hits don't change much from here on out: 2017: 20.3m 2018: 19.8m 2019: 21.1m 2020: 19.5m But Suh's jump around quite a bit, for example. 2017: 19.1m 2018: 26.1m 2019: 28.1m 2020: 22.4m Carr's contract is actually a bit interesting to me, in that it jumps around a bit at the start, then stabalizes in a few years a lot like RTs. But also like RT, the Raiders could actually walk away from the contract in a few seasons should they feel he isn't living up to it, and that was surprising. The cap hits are also generally much lower than Luck's.
This isn't really relevant to my comment though, Miamiron did not make up a lie, as Dan's analogy indicated.
Well, I might be misunderstanding the discussion, but are you asserting that looking at any one year cap hit of a player's contract, out of context, is an important and valid way to frame an argument?
EH. You've got better in you than that one. Try again. Use a zany work like ukulele or cellophane unitard.
I was simply stating that Dan's was a flawed analogy, Miamiron did not purposefully lie as Dan's analogy suggested.
You know exactly the point he was making, but in an effort to disregard it, you're steering the discussion a different way.
This is not true, I'm not steering anything in any direction, I just pointed out that it was a flawed analogy, Miamiron did not lie, that is a fact, and the analogy painted him as a liar, and imo, that's just wrong, so I politely pointed it out. I know that Dan was trying to say it's misleading, but the analogy he used was of a lie. This has nothing to do with the topic, which is why I say I'm not steering anything, this is just about the flawed analogy, Miamiron did not "make up a lie" as the analogy suggests.
...and we now return to our regularly scheduled programming of envisioning Jessica Alba naked in a turtleneck. Sorry, I just couldn't resist.
Maybe it was a bad analogy, but I wasn't calling him a liar. I meant looking at Jessica Alba in jeans and a turtleneck is not seeing the "entire" picture. It's still nice to look at her in jeans and turtleneck, but if you want an honest opinion of her, uh, body of work, you'd have to strip her down. The same with RT's contract. Looking at any 1 year of his won't give all the facts.
Right. I mean, if you look at the weather forecast, and its going to be 90 on Monday, but 70 every other day, then you can't tell people to focus just on Monday and insist that its too hot. You have to look at all of the information.
I know you weren't calling him a liar Dan, I mentioned in a comment that I know you were just trying to say that it was misleading, but the analogy is calling out a liar, which I just thought was a little unfair is all. I think we're all guilty of it at times, and I see a lot of arguments start based on what amounts to just a misunderstanding.
But it's gonna be damn hot on Monday. So when we talk about how hot it's gonna be on Monday, the weather every other day isn't all too important.
If I'm comparing Summer weather in Madison, WI to Summer weather in Yuma, AZ I'm not going to look at one day in Madison that happens to be 90 degrees and one day in Yuma that happens to be 90 degrees and then proclaim they have similar Summer weather. Summer in Yuma is Hell on Earth and Madison Summer's are very pleasant.
If youre deciding which one you're going to visit for one day, you don't care what the weather is the Day after or the week after. The whether last year and every year is irrelevant. Hell the weather yesterday is irrelevant. There is value in all the data. Just depends on what you plan to do with it.
So you're suggesting teams just sign QB's to one year deals? There is not value in all data because some data is not complete and you really can't do anything with it. Example: 2+_ = There's some data. Do something with it.
No. Sometimes teams will make a decision based on one year of salary. What happened before is a sunk cost. If there is a balloon payment in the middle of a 5 year contract, and he's played out years 1-2, they wouldn't say, well if you average year 1,2,3 together it's a decent average salary. Naw, they're gonna look at that balloon payment and ask if the player is good enough for them to bend over and grab their ankles for a year, extend and restructure it, etc. Maybe they can release the player without a big hit and do so. Release and resign etc. If you're Drew Brees or Larry Fitzgerald (both who had stupid salaries for one year) they work it out. If you're Brock Osweiler you don't. Fitz signed an 8 year deal in 2011 and there was a huge cap hit in 2015 that had to be addressed. The cap hit didn't come later. It came that's year. And it was too much to be left alone. They rest of the contract would have been fine. But they had that hump I won't even address your formula. Because it's not even analogous (like your Alba one).