Mike Wallace to be Tendered, not tagged (2 Viewers)

[eakfootball]

What if Houston tried to make a splash and sign him?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

If Pittsburgh was 100% committed to keeping him they would of franchised him.

Pittsburgh is 100% committed to getting the best out of the situation.Be that keeping Wallace or letting him sign with another team.But, they can sign or match almost any offer if they wanted. They wont be Al Davis or Daniel Snyder foolish though.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

He isn't going anywhere. I find it hard to believe that somebody will sign him to a big enough contract that Pittsburgh won't match and give up a first round draft pick. I like Wallace a lot, but no way is he worth both huge money and a first round pick.

Sure he is. He's an upper tier talent and a sure-thing. Late 1st rounders bust all the time. He's absolutely worth it IMO, though if Pitt wants him back they'll beat any offer.

How is it so easy for Pitt to "beat any offer" if they are in cap hell, which they are?

@EdBouchette: #steelers create about $9.7 M in cap room in two days: Chris K 3.6. Aaron Smith 2.1, Hines Ward 4, less their replacements on top 51

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Pittsburgh homers.....what would you say Wallace's strengths and weaknesses are?

 

[loose circuits]

any team that signs Wallace to a deal would basically be doing Pitt's negotiating for them. They will make sure they keep him. If that means cutting both Farrior and Foote as well, then it will be done.

Why do people keep saying 1st and 3rd, that was before the new CBA, right? It's now just a 1st...

 

[The Hank]

What if Houston tried to make a splash and sign him?

Houston needs to sign Arian Foster and Mario Williams and are not in a great cap situation either.

 

[Hoosier16]

Especially a big contract to a WR. Historically, that has been short-sighted and bad business...

Two traits at which the Bengals excel . . .

 

[cobalt_27]

If he leaves, what does that do to his value?

Obviously depends on what team. New England it moves him to Calvin tier, 49ers and he plummets.

Not really. Let's not go overboard here. If there wasn't Welker, Gronk, Hernandez, I still wouldn't put him in Calvin's tier. The presence of all those options puts his ceiling for receptions south of 70. Touchdown opportunities reduced, as well.

 

[cstu]

any team that signs Wallace to a deal would basically be doing Pitt's negotiating for them. They will make sure they keep him. If that means cutting both Farrior and Foote as well, then it will be done.Why do people keep saying 1st and 3rd, that was before the new CBA, right? It's now just a 1st...

This is assuming that Wallace wants to stay a Steeler. Also, even if he does want to stay it will tough for the Steelers to give him terms as good as what he will likely be offered.

 

[Shutout]

He isn't going anywhere. I find it hard to believe that somebody will sign him to a big enough contract that Pittsburgh won't match and give up a first round draft pick. I like Wallace a lot, but no way is he worth both huge money and a first round pick.

Sure he is. He's an upper tier talent and a sure-thing. Late 1st rounders bust all the time. He's absolutely worth it IMO, though if Pitt wants him back they'll beat any offer.

How is it so easy for Pitt to "beat any offer" if they are in cap hell, which they are?

I didn't say it would be easy. But if Pitt genuinely wants him back they'll make every effort to match or beat offers. If they don't want him back he'll leave.

If they genuinely want him back, they would have tagged him or worked out a deal because the offer coming from another team is an unknown. For example, if they could have tagged him at 10M, that would have been more managaeable than if some team said "we will give you $13M for one year plus incentives (all that stuff that makes it hard for a cap-strapped team to respond to).

 

[Shutout]

Steelers fans having difficulty coming to grips here. If another team signs him (and I HIGHLY expect they will), Pittsburgh has the right to match, but is going to find it next to impossible to do so. Any team that signs him will know Pittsburgh's cap situation, and will structure the guaranteed money in such a way that PIT literally won't be able to afford to match.

Agreed. Lots of denial by Steelers fans here. If Pittsburgh was 100% committed to keeping him they would of franchised him. But it appears to me that their cap situation is so bad they can't or don't want to do that.This seems like a longshot gamble by Pittsburgh. It looks like they're hoping a robust FA WR market will result in no team wanting to forfeit a 1st round pick for Wallace, so he stays with Pittsburgh at an affordale $2.3 million or whatever this season.

I am sure that other team's will know what Pitt's cap situation is at that moment if they try to pry Wallace away. Now. If Pitt was really serious about keeping Wallace - they would also have a "cushion" of players, maybe 2-3 that they may still have on the roster, but have already decided when push comes to shove, they might have to release these guys if an offer comes in (which is likely). So if a team really really wants him, they are really gonna have to shoot the moon to ensure they can actually grab him. While they probably should have franchised him, I think this might be the smart move to make.

There is a guy employed by every team whose job it is to manage the team's cap as well as know (or quickly nail down) the situation of other teams who may be trading partner candidates or for situations like this. Pat Kirwin has talked about it at length several times over the years on Sirius and has given examples of just like this. Years ago, teams would do the poison pill to make it work but in recent times, its just a matter of finances. They scout the market to see what other teams may offer a guy, they look at the guy's current team and assess that team's ability to likely match what is going to be offered and they do their own assessment of themselves and use all this info in determining if they can make an offer and about what that offer should be. After all, they do not want to pay more than they need to in order to get the services either.So, yeah, I bet any team that makes an offer to Wallace will know pretty danged close how to push Pitt to the edge.

 

[Godsbrother]

He isn't going anywhere. I find it hard to believe that somebody will sign him to a big enough contract that Pittsburgh won't match and give up a first round draft pick. I like Wallace a lot, but no way is he worth both huge money and a first round pick.

Sure he is. He's an upper tier talent and a sure-thing. Late 1st rounders bust all the time. He's absolutely worth it IMO, though if Pitt wants him back they'll beat any offer.

How is it so easy for Pitt to "beat any offer" if they are in cap hell, which they are?

I didn't say it would be easy. But if Pitt genuinely wants him back they'll make every effort to match or beat offers. If they don't want him back he'll leave.

If they genuinely want him back, they would have tagged him or worked out a deal because the offer coming from another team is an unknown. For example, if they could have tagged him at 10M, that would have been more managaeable than if some team said "we will give you $13M for one year plus incentives (all that stuff that makes it hard for a cap-strapped team to respond to).

The Steelers are no longer cap-strapped (and there still is at least one or two pricey veterans that are going to be cut). If the Steelers felt Wallace was worth $9 million they would have franchised him. If someone comes along with a $13 million offer they'll let him walk and take the #1 draft pick in compensation (and get another $3 million back in cap space due to Wallace's departure).

Someone else said it but they are basically letting other NFL teams do their negotiating for them. They'll see what Wallace gets on the open market and then make their decision.

The one plus for the Steelers is that any other team that wants Wallace has to both outspend the Steelers AND give up a 1st round pick.

 

[Shutout]

He isn't going anywhere. I find it hard to believe that somebody will sign him to a big enough contract that Pittsburgh won't match and give up a first round draft pick. I like Wallace a lot, but no way is he worth both huge money and a first round pick.

Sure he is. He's an upper tier talent and a sure-thing. Late 1st rounders bust all the time. He's absolutely worth it IMO, though if Pitt wants him back they'll beat any offer.

How is it so easy for Pitt to "beat any offer" if they are in cap hell, which they are?

I didn't say it would be easy. But if Pitt genuinely wants him back they'll make every effort to match or beat offers. If they don't want him back he'll leave.

If they genuinely want him back, they would have tagged him or worked out a deal because the offer coming from another team is an unknown. For example, if they could have tagged him at 10M, that would have been more managaeable than if some team said "we will give you $13M for one year plus incentives (all that stuff that makes it hard for a cap-strapped team to respond to).

The Steelers are no longer cap-strapped (and there still is at least one or two pricey veterans that are going to be cut). If the Steelers felt Wallace was worth $9 million they would have franchised him. If someone comes along with a $13 million offer they'll let him walk and take the #1 draft pick in compensation (and get another $3 million back in cap space due to Wallace's departure).

Someone else said it but they are basically letting other NFL teams do their negotiating for them. They'll see what Wallace gets on the open market and then make their decision.

The one plus for the Steelers is that any other team that wants Wallace has to both outspend the Steelers AND give up a 1st round pick.

For the folks saying the Steelers are "letting other teams set the market", I think those folks have their eyes behind black and gold colored glasses.That is the type of tactic teams employ when it is obvious to everyone that you have a player who thinks their value is Waaaay out of line with what they can actually make. And its a tactic you see a lot when players are aging or coming off injury and their is uncertainty.

Or its a tactic teams emply when they have more players needing tagged than tags (I can't tag Brees and Colston, so I have to let one explore..or I have to get a deal done quick).

But its not a tactic teams use on young dynamic players that are entering their prime. Come on. Be reasonable. Would calvin johnson ever get tendered, not tagged?

And its obvious the Steelers are making multiple restructures and cuts right now. One of the first teams to be so active. Its because they HAVE to. Steelers fans, of all people, should know what Wallace has done for the team; what he means to them. Isn't he tied or right ahead of DJAX in terms of leading the NFL in big plays of 20+ yards over the past three seasons? That's improtant to teams. Important enough that the Eagles HAVE tagged their guy DJAX, despite him being 10 times the knucklehead/risk Wallace ever has been.

People should face it that this is being done out of necessity, not genius and that there IS a big risk. The Steelers could very well end up in a situation where they pay him MORE than the franchise tag to keep him and then have to get back into this boat WITH Antonio Brown next year or they could just outright lose him. If they lose him, say what you want about "shaking his hand" and wishing him well and laughing all the way to picking up an additional pick, etc. If the Steelers lose Wallace, there are going to be a lot Steelers fans bemoaning the season in 2012. You WILL regret losing him.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

@jimwexell: According to SCI capologist Ian Whetstone, Steelers about $10-11M under cap: Can afford draft picks, RFA tenders, insurance vs. offer to MW.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

Who said they'd be "laughing all the way to picking up an additional pick?" If you were talking about me, all I meant was that they'll just take the pick and move on if they decide they won't match an offer to him. With Colbert's record with #1's, they likely will feel pretty good about turning that into a valuable player.

This is how the Steelers work. They place a value on a player and they won't exceed it. They have done this many times over the years, for much bigger names than Mike Wallace(Rod Woodson, Carnell Lake, Kirkland, Chad Brown, Kevin Green, Leon Searcy, et al). As mentioned above, they really aren't that cap strapped after the last 48 hours and could probably slap the tag on him right now if they wanted to. If not now, soon since they have a couple other vets that are prime targets for The Turk. The fact they haven't tagged him yet tells us they probably don't feel he's worth 9+million. Gun to my head, I am not sure they are wrong.

It is not "genius" that they are doing this, and it will hurt losing him if they don't replace the dynamic he brings, but they have lost similar/higher quality players before, had fans of other teams proclaim them dead/whatever....and have kept on winning. I'm not going to wring my hands over the situation when losing Wallace does not preclude them from bringing in an equally talented WR to replace him, which apparently everyone has already decided is how this goes down. "Steelers lose Wallace and insert Tyler Grisham into the starting lineup in his place." That's just ######ed.

 

[Godsbrother]

For the folks saying the Steelers are "letting other teams set the market", I think those folks have their eyes behind black and gold colored glasses.That is the type of tactic teams employ when it is obvious to everyone that you have a player who thinks their value is Waaaay out of line with what they can actually make. And its a tactic you see a lot when players are aging or coming off injury and their is uncertainty.Or its a tactic teams emply when they have more players needing tagged than tags (I can't tag Brees and Colston, so I have to let one explore..or I have to get a deal done quick).But its not a tactic teams use on young dynamic players that are entering their prime. Come on. Be reasonable. Would calvin johnson ever get tendered, not tagged? And its obvious the Steelers are making multiple restructures and cuts right now. One of the first teams to be so active. Its because they HAVE to. Steelers fans, of all people, should know what Wallace has done for the team; what he means to them. Isn't he tied or right ahead of DJAX in terms of leading the NFL in big plays of 20+ yards over the past three seasons? That's improtant to teams. Important enough that the Eagles HAVE tagged their guy DJAX, despite him being 10 times the knucklehead/risk Wallace ever has been. People should face it that this is being done out of necessity, not genius and that there IS a big risk. The Steelers could very well end up in a situation where they pay him MORE than the franchise tag to keep him and then have to get back into this boat WITH Antonio Brown next year or they could just outright lose him. If they lose him, say what you want about "shaking his hand" and wishing him well and laughing all the way to picking up an additional pick, etc. If the Steelers lose Wallace, there are going to be a lot Steelers fans bemoaning the season in 2012. You WILL regret losing him.

I already regret losing him and he isn't even gone yet!I understand that he is a great young player but each team must set a dollar value on what they think each player is worth. I guarantee the Steelers have a top figure of what they are willing to pay him. Apparently the figure is not more than $9 million/year or they would have franchised him. You, and quite possibly some NFL teams, may put his value at higher than that. If that is the case the Steelers will let him walk. They don't want him to leave but they won't overpay (in their minds) for him either.No one is saying that the Steelers' strategy is brilliant. In fact it is really simple -- if someone offers him a contract worth more than the Steelers feels he is worth then he is gone. It sucks to lose him but at least in this case there is a consolation prize.Now the discussion we really should be having is how much do other NFL teams think Wallace is worth.

 

[B-Deep]

I am curious, do Steelers fans here think Deshawn Jackson is better than Mike Wallce? Or do they think the steelers are just more savy than the Eagles?

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

I am curious, do Steelers fans here think Deshawn Jackson is better than Mike Wallce? Or do they think the steelers are just more savy than the Eagles?

Desean Jackson is a UFA that will leave without compensation if the Eagles don't tag him. Mike Wallace is a RFA. Using that RFA designation will cost the Steelers $7 million less than a franchise tag. The high RFA tender also allows the Steelers time to match an offer or receive a 1st round pick. Totally different situations.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

All the reports are is that Steelers plan to only tender Wallace, not use the Tag.

I know. And I think the fact that they won't franchise tells us how much they think he is really worth: less than the tag amount(which I think is 9.6 mil).

I think Steelers will have the ability to match any deal that comes out if they really wanted to; whether they actually do or not remains to be seen (depending on the severity of the front loaded contract).

This is pretty much exactly what I was trying to point out, I just did it windier. The Steelers will probably have the ability to do whatever they want with Wallace from a monatery standpoint. I think they want to keep Mike....but they aren't keeping him at over 9 million. If a team offers that, they'll let take the pick, shake his hand and let him walk.

Yep.I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

It's really almost a no lose situation for them. I think the tender option was the way to go.

 

[B-Deep]

I am curious, do Steelers fans here think Deshawn Jackson is better than Mike Wallce? Or do they think the steelers are just more savy than the Eagles?

Desean Jackson is a UFA that will leave without compensation if the Eagles don't tag him. Mike Wallace is a RFA. Using that RFA designation will cost the Steelers $7 million less than a franchise tag. The high RFA tender also allows the Steelers time to match an offer or receive a 1st round pick. Totally different situations.

fair enoughquestion withdrawn

 

[Evilgrin 72]

He isn't going anywhere. I find it hard to believe that somebody will sign him to a big enough contract that Pittsburgh won't match and give up a first round draft pick. I like Wallace a lot, but no way is he worth both huge money and a first round pick.

Sure he is. He's an upper tier talent and a sure-thing. Late 1st rounders bust all the time. He's absolutely worth it IMO, though if Pitt wants him back they'll beat any offer.

How is it so easy for Pitt to "beat any offer" if they are in cap hell, which they are?

With Wards release they are around $3-4 million UNDER the cap.

According to FBG Mobile news the Steelers are almost $8 million under the cap right now.

Rookies + filling out roster=5 million probably. Wallace will cost at least 7 million a season.

Kemoeatu and either Foote or Farrior will be cut shortly. That will put them somewhere around 14-15 million under. if rookies + filling out roster = 5 million, that would leave them 9-10 million to sign Wallace. If NE or Baltimore want to sign him to a deal that's going to pay him over 10 million a year and are surrendering a 1st round pick as well, then I say Happy Trails, Mike. He's fast, but he's a flawed receiver and doesn't have great hands. He's very valuable, but not as valuable as a 1st round pick and 11 million in cap space. I'd rather package the 2 first rounders to move up and draft David DeCastro and use the cap space to sign Vincent Jackson or another FA receiver. That makes the Steelers a better team than Wallace and whoever's there for the OL at #24.ETA : See Kemo was already cut. That was inevitable.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

The one plus for the Steelers is that any other team that wants Wallace has to both outspend the Steelers AND give up a 1st round pick.

The one minus, is teams interested in Wallace will most likely be at or near the bottom of the round.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

The one plus for the Steelers is that any other team that wants Wallace has to both outspend the Steelers AND give up a 1st round pick.

The one minus, is teams interested in willing to sacrifice their first round pick for Wallace will most likely be at or near the bottom of the round.

Fixed.

 

[RUSF18]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

No, the worst case scenario is that the Steelers walk away from Wallace, whiff on the 1st round pick, and fill the WR spot with someone who is inadequate to do the job and it negatively impacts the 2012 season and beyond. Is all of that probable? Most likely not, but that would certainly be worse than what is outlined above.

 

[bucsbaby]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

No, the worst case scenario is that the Steelers walk away from Wallace, whiff on the 1st round pick, and fill the WR spot with someone who is inadequate to do the job and it negatively impacts the 2012 season and beyond. Is all of that probable? Most likely not, but that would certainly be worse than what is outlined above.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

No, the worst case scenario is that the Steelers walk away from Wallace, whiff on the 1st round pick, and fill the WR spot with someone who is inadequate to do the job and it negatively impacts the 2012 season and beyond. Is all of that probable? Most likely not, but that would certainly be worse than what is outlined above.

What Finkle outlined is the worst-case end result. You can play that game all day - what if Antonio Brown and Emmanuel Sanders both tear their ACLs in training camp and can't play all year? Then they'll wish they had Wallace back ! Of course.... but in regards to what we're discussing, the Steelers are either going to re-sign Wallace and he'll be with the team for at least this year, or they'll end up with somewhere between 7-11 million in additional cap space and 2 1st round picks in the upcoming draft. You can decide for yourself which of these is the "worst case scenario." From there, who knows what will happen? If they match an offer for Wallace or re-sign him for one season at $10m and he blows out his knee in the 2nd preseason game and has to be put on IR, then will they wish they'd let him go? Because IMO, THAT would be the worst-case scenario.

 

[Dexter Manley]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

Yea, but what kind of quality wr (or other position player) are they going to sign for under 2 million? The RFA tender for Wallace is what, 2.7 million? Assuming only teams in the bottom 1/3 of the draft will sign Wallace, after accounting for the cap space that extra 1st round pick will eat up, the Steelers will have an additional million and change in cap space, or around a little over 1% of the expected cap. That's not enough cap space to sign any quality FA outside of a special teams player. The best type of wr they could sign with that $$$ would probably be a guy like Lee Evans.There's only 2 realistic outcomes that will occur here, imo. Some team in the bottom 1/3 of the draft signs Wallace, Pittsburgh doesn't match and gets an extra 1st round pick and a little over 1% of extra cap space. Or no team signs Wallace and the Steelers retain him for this season at an uber friendly cap # of 2.7 million (or whatever it is).

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

Yea, but what kind of quality wr (or other position player) are they going to sign for under 2 million? The RFA tender for Wallace is what, 2.7 million? Assuming only teams in the bottom 1/3 of the draft will sign Wallace, after accounting for the cap space that extra 1st round pick will eat up, the Steelers will have an additional million and change in cap space, or around a little over 1% of the expected cap. That's not enough cap space to sign any quality FA outside of a special teams player. The best type of wr they could sign with that $$$ would probably be a guy like Lee Evans.

But what if they've cleared 10+ million in cap space in order to re-sign Wallace, and then he signs elsewhere (hint : they have already done this)? They don't have 2.7M in cap space with which to sign a receiver, they have 10-11 million. They can then elect to go after a V-Jax or someone like that - or they can sign a complementary receiver, elevate Antonio Brown to the #1 role, and use the balance of that to shore up the OL or the secondary.

 

[RUSF18]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

No, the worst case scenario is that the Steelers walk away from Wallace, whiff on the 1st round pick, and fill the WR spot with someone who is inadequate to do the job and it negatively impacts the 2012 season and beyond. Is all of that probable? Most likely not, but that would certainly be worse than what is outlined above.

What Finkle outlined is the worst-case end result. You can play that game all day - what if Antonio Brown and Emmanuel Sanders both tear their ACLs in training camp and can't play all year? Then they'll wish they had Wallace back ! Of course.... but in regards to what we're discussing, the Steelers are either going to re-sign Wallace and he'll be with the team for at least this year, or they'll end up with somewhere between 7-11 million in additional cap space and 2 1st round picks in the upcoming draft. You can decide for yourself which of these is the "worst case scenario." From there, who knows what will happen? If they match an offer for Wallace or re-sign him for one season at $10m and he blows out his knee in the 2nd preseason game and has to be put on IR, then will they wish they'd let him go? Because IMO, THAT would be the worst-case scenario.

He's the one who said worst case "scenario" which allows for things to be played out. If you're only going to hold yourself to the two options (sign him or let him walk and take whatever benefit you could get), would you similarly describe the Saints' worst case as either signing Drew Brees or letting him go and, oh well, at least you have that $100 million that you were planning on spending on Brees available to spend on other players?

 

[Bossman]

If he leaves, what does that do to his value?

Obviously depends on what team. New England it moves him to Calvin tier, 49ers and he plummets.

I dont think Brady can throw it that far.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

No, the worst case scenario is that the Steelers walk away from Wallace, whiff on the 1st round pick, and fill the WR spot with someone who is inadequate to do the job and it negatively impacts the 2012 season and beyond. Is all of that probable? Most likely not, but that would certainly be worse than what is outlined above.

What Finkle outlined is the worst-case end result. You can play that game all day - what if Antonio Brown and Emmanuel Sanders both tear their ACLs in training camp and can't play all year? Then they'll wish they had Wallace back ! Of course.... but in regards to what we're discussing, the Steelers are either going to re-sign Wallace and he'll be with the team for at least this year, or they'll end up with somewhere between 7-11 million in additional cap space and 2 1st round picks in the upcoming draft. You can decide for yourself which of these is the "worst case scenario." From there, who knows what will happen? If they match an offer for Wallace or re-sign him for one season at $10m and he blows out his knee in the 2nd preseason game and has to be put on IR, then will they wish they'd let him go? Because IMO, THAT would be the worst-case scenario.

He's the one who said worst case "scenario" which allows for things to be played out. If you're only going to hold yourself to the two options (sign him or let him walk and take whatever benefit you could get), would you similarly describe the Saints' worst case as either signing Drew Brees or letting him go and, oh well, at least you have that $100 million that you were planning on spending on Brees available to spend on other players?

Yeah, pretty much. Those are the two possible scenarios that would result from that decision. Where it goes from there has infinite possibilities, you can sit around all day saying "what if this" and "what if that." I assume by your question, you're insinuating that letting Brees walk would be the doomsday scenario for New Orleans, but wouldn't the real worst case be signing Brees to a 6-year $125 million dollar contract with $80 million guaranteed and then having him suffer a Theismann-esque career-ending leg break on his first snap from center? Because that seemingly would hurt the franchise a lot more than his signing elsewhere and them using the cap space to grab a replacement QB and several other players as well.

 

[RUSF18]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

No, the worst case scenario is that the Steelers walk away from Wallace, whiff on the 1st round pick, and fill the WR spot with someone who is inadequate to do the job and it negatively impacts the 2012 season and beyond. Is all of that probable? Most likely not, but that would certainly be worse than what is outlined above.

What Finkle outlined is the worst-case end result. You can play that game all day - what if Antonio Brown and Emmanuel Sanders both tear their ACLs in training camp and can't play all year? Then they'll wish they had Wallace back ! Of course.... but in regards to what we're discussing, the Steelers are either going to re-sign Wallace and he'll be with the team for at least this year, or they'll end up with somewhere between 7-11 million in additional cap space and 2 1st round picks in the upcoming draft. You can decide for yourself which of these is the "worst case scenario." From there, who knows what will happen? If they match an offer for Wallace or re-sign him for one season at $10m and he blows out his knee in the 2nd preseason game and has to be put on IR, then will they wish they'd let him go? Because IMO, THAT would be the worst-case scenario.

He's the one who said worst case "scenario" which allows for things to be played out. If you're only going to hold yourself to the two options (sign him or let him walk and take whatever benefit you could get), would you similarly describe the Saints' worst case as either signing Drew Brees or letting him go and, oh well, at least you have that $100 million that you were planning on spending on Brees available to spend on other players?

Yeah, pretty much. Those are the two possible scenarios that would result from that decision. Where it goes from there has infinite possibilities, you can sit around all day saying "what if this" and "what if that." I assume by your question, you're insinuating that letting Brees walk would be the doomsday scenario for New Orleans, but wouldn't the real worst case be signing Brees to a 6-year $125 million dollar contract with $80 million guaranteed and then having him suffer a Theismann-esque career-ending leg break on his first snap from center? Because that seemingly would hurt the franchise a lot more than his signing elsewhere and them using the cap space to grab a replacement QB and several other players as well.

My point was that the original statement was an overly simplistic way to look at team and asset management. Quibble if you want.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

No, the worst case scenario is that the Steelers walk away from Wallace, whiff on the 1st round pick, and fill the WR spot with someone who is inadequate to do the job and it negatively impacts the 2012 season and beyond. Is all of that probable? Most likely not, but that would certainly be worse than what is outlined above.

What Finkle outlined is the worst-case end result. You can play that game all day - what if Antonio Brown and Emmanuel Sanders both tear their ACLs in training camp and can't play all year? Then they'll wish they had Wallace back ! Of course.... but in regards to what we're discussing, the Steelers are either going to re-sign Wallace and he'll be with the team for at least this year, or they'll end up with somewhere between 7-11 million in additional cap space and 2 1st round picks in the upcoming draft. You can decide for yourself which of these is the "worst case scenario." From there, who knows what will happen? If they match an offer for Wallace or re-sign him for one season at $10m and he blows out his knee in the 2nd preseason game and has to be put on IR, then will they wish they'd let him go? Because IMO, THAT would be the worst-case scenario.

He's the one who said worst case "scenario" which allows for things to be played out. If you're only going to hold yourself to the two options (sign him or let him walk and take whatever benefit you could get), would you similarly describe the Saints' worst case as either signing Drew Brees or letting him go and, oh well, at least you have that $100 million that you were planning on spending on Brees available to spend on other players?

Yeah, pretty much. Those are the two possible scenarios that would result from that decision. Where it goes from there has infinite possibilities, you can sit around all day saying "what if this" and "what if that." I assume by your question, you're insinuating that letting Brees walk would be the doomsday scenario for New Orleans, but wouldn't the real worst case be signing Brees to a 6-year $125 million dollar contract with $80 million guaranteed and then having him suffer a Theismann-esque career-ending leg break on his first snap from center? Because that seemingly would hurt the franchise a lot more than his signing elsewhere and them using the cap space to grab a replacement QB and several other players as well.

My point was that the original statement was an overly simplistic way to look at team and asset management. Quibble if you want.

I'm not quibbling. The original statement Finkle made was dead-on. People are discussing this as "the Steelers may lose Wallace" as if he's going to walk as a UFA. What Finkle was pointing out was that they're not "losing" him, the worst thing that would happen is that he leaves, but they get cap space and a 1st round pick in return. It's more like a trade than a free agent waltzing off for greener pastures. That was the point of the original statement, and it's 100% accurate. Going on about what then might result from each of these scenarios playing out like you guys are is getting into "Sliding Doors" territory.

 

[Dexter Manley]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

Yea, but what kind of quality wr (or other position player) are they going to sign for under 2 million? The RFA tender for Wallace is what, 2.7 million? Assuming only teams in the bottom 1/3 of the draft will sign Wallace, after accounting for the cap space that extra 1st round pick will eat up, the Steelers will have an additional million and change in cap space, or around a little over 1% of the expected cap. That's not enough cap space to sign any quality FA outside of a special teams player. The best type of wr they could sign with that $$$ would probably be a guy like Lee Evans.

But what if they've cleared 10+ million in cap space in order to re-sign Wallace, and then he signs elsewhere (hint : they have already done this)? They don't have 2.7M in cap space with which to sign a receiver, they have 10-11 million. They can then elect to go after a V-Jax or someone like that - or they can sign a complementary receiver, elevate Antonio Brown to the #1 role, and use the balance of that to shore up the OL or the secondary.

I know they've cleared cap space already, but I think it's clear that they didn't do it to sign Wallace to a long term deal or they would have franchised him. I'm sure they have a plan with what they're going to do with the extra cap space, but it appears it doesn't entail spending more than 2.7 million of it on Wallace. I think letting Wallace go and signing VJax or some other big ticket FA wr makes zero sense when they have a 25 yo stud in his prime who has been in the system for 3 years and has excellent chemistry with Big Ben. Also, VJax doesn't seem like the type of guy the Steelers would sign due to his dui history.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I think the point people are missing is that in a worst case scenario, the Steelers walk away with an extra first round pick and some cap space to either add a FA WR or fill some other hole.

That is exactly the point a lot of people are missing.

No, the worst case scenario is that the Steelers walk away from Wallace, whiff on the 1st round pick, and fill the WR spot with someone who is inadequate to do the job and it negatively impacts the 2012 season and beyond. Is all of that probable? Most likely not, but that would certainly be worse than what is outlined above.

Actually the worst case scenario is their first training camp meal is poisoned and the entire team dies.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

I know they've cleared cap space already, but I think it's clear that they didn't do it to sign Wallace to a long term deal or they would have franchised him.

I don't think that's clear at all. The only thing that is clear from my point of view is that the Steelers don't think Wallace is worth over 9 million dollars per annum. That, IMO, is why he hasn't(and won't) be tagged. The Steelers are going to let the market set his price. You can argue over whether that is/isn't a worthy gamble, but that is precisely what it looks like they are doing to me. They are taking that angle of "Why pay him a guaranteed near 10 million when the RFA tag may scare off everybody anyway and we can then attempt to negotiate our own long-term deal, at a more agreeable salary, with the fallback being keeping him for one season at around 3 million and starting the merry-go-round next year again when he's a UFA(which I would fully expect them to then tag/watch him go if it came to that)?"GMs are miserly with first round picks, even late ones. I think for the massess to glibly state "Oh, well Team X will just flip their pick at #X for him easy!" is silly. It's not just a first rounder. It's a first rounder....and probably 10-12 million dollars. So, it's potentially a first rounder and a veteran or two that you now can't sign for one wideout, albeit a pretty good one.

My point was that the original statement was an overly simplistic way to look at team and asset management. Quibble if you want.

It isn't overly simplistic at all from where I'm sitting. Overly simplistic is the idea, that apparently many seem to share, that there are only two outcomes here: a)Wallace gets tagged at 9+ million in an attempt to keep him or b)Wallace is lost for certain.There aren't only two outcomes here and the fact that Wallace is restricted puts the Steelers front office in control off all of outcomes regardless. Again, one can easily argue whether or not the tactic they are taking here is a worthy gamble or not(and I'm not arguing for or against that), but the tactic doesn't tie their hands with Wallace in the least. They're either getting him for what they want(the RFA amount or a long-term deal that they feel good about), getting an option to match whatever offer he may receive on the open market, or choosing to not match an outside offer and be able to then have a sizable amount of FA dollars free to try and address the position with another player and get a second 1st rounder for making that choice.

He's the one who said worst case "scenario" which allows for things to be played out.

Actually, I didn't say that. I did agree with someone who did though.Upon reflection, EG's "worst case scenario" is, well, worse. So, I was probably wrong there. Mea culpa.

 

[travdogg]

I realize it is somewhat of a fantasy football mindset in a way, but why any team with a WR need and even a mediocre amount of cap room wouldn't offer Wallace a large front loaded contract ($12-14 million this year) is beyond me. Especially someone like San Fra,where speed WR is their biggest need, or New England, who needs a deep threat and can hurt a rival in the process, plus they have 2 1st rounders anyway.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

I'm not quibbling. The original statement Finkle made was dead-on. People are discussing this as "the Steelers may lose Wallace" as if he's going to walk as a UFA. What Finkle was pointing out was that they're not "losing" him, the worst thing that would happen is that he leaves, but they get cap space and a 1st round pick in return. It's more like a trade than a free agent waltzing off for greener pastures. That was the point of the original statement, and it's 100% accurate. Going on about what then might result from each of these scenarios playing out like you guys are is getting into "Sliding Doors" territory.

*bro hug*EG gets it.

 

[Dexter Manley]

I know they've cleared cap space already, but I think it's clear that they didn't do it to sign Wallace to a long term deal or they would have franchised him.

I don't think that's clear at all. The only thing that is clear from my point of view is that the Steelers don't think Wallace is worth over 9 million dollars per annum. That, IMO, is why he hasn't(and won't) be tagged. The Steelers are going to let the market set his price. You can argue over whether that is/isn't a worthy gamble, but that is precisely what it looks like they are doing to me. They are taking that angle of "Why pay him a guaranteed near 10 million when the RFA tag may scare off everybody anyway and we can then attempt to negotiate our own long-term deal, at a more agreeable salary, with the fallback being keeping him for one season at around 3 million and starting the merry-go-round next year again when he's a UFA(which I would fully expect them to then tag/watch him go if it came to that)?"GMs are miserly with first round picks, even late ones. I think for the massess to glibly state "Oh, well Team X will just flip their pick at #X for him easy!" is silly. It's not just a first rounder. It's a first rounder....and probably 10-12 million dollars. So, it's potentially a first rounder and a veteran or two that you now can't sign for one wideout, albeit a pretty good one.

I agree with most of what you wrote except for the "steelers are going to let the market set his price" stuff. That's not what they're doing or why they tendered him as a RFA. I'm sure they already have a pretty good idea what the market is willing to pay him. If he was an UFA, he would be the #1 wr on most teams' boards, imo. If the Steelers were willing/able to pay that price, they would of franchised him. This seems pretty obvious to me because if any team signs him, they are almost certainly going to put together a deal for Wallace that Pittsburgh won't/can't match. What the Steelers are doing is simple - they're taking a calculated risk. If no other team bites on Wallace, then they keep him for a great value this season at 2.7 million and have the option to franchise him next season. They can also work on a long term deal in the future. If another team works out a contract with Wallace and signs him, the Steelers won't/can't match and will get a low 1st round pick as compensation.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

That is almost exactly what I have been saying, over and over again. You can have a bro hug too.And they are totally "letting the market set his price", in my mind. They may already believe it is going to be "Insert X Million Here", but they aren't going to be the first team to offer it to him and start bidding against themselves.

If another team works out a contract with Wallace and signs him, the Steelers won't/can't match and will get a low 1st round pick as compensation...

A low first round pick....and probably upwards of 10 million dollars in cap space to maneuver for other players with. That is the crux of my point: They aren't losing Wallace for "just a low first round pick/nothing" if they don't match.

 

[fatness]

The RFA tender for Wallace is what, 2.7 million? Assuming only teams in the bottom 1/3 of the draft will sign Wallace, after accounting for the cap space that extra 1st round pick will eat up, the Steelers will have an additional million and change in cap space, or around a little over 1% of the expected cap.

A low first round pick....and probably upwards of 10 million dollars in cap space to maneuver for other players with. That is the crux of my point: They aren't losing Wallace for "just a low first round pick/nothing" if they don't match.

Which is it?

 

[Premier]

I don't get the no-lose situation logic here. Losing a really good player is not a good thing. Even for the 28th pick, or whatever they'll end up with.

People get too hung up on the magic of draft picks. He's already likely a better player than you'll ever get with that pick.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I don't get the no-lose situation logic here.

It certainly is not a "no lose" situation. It is about getting the best of the situation that you can.

 

[Sinrman]

I would be shocked if a team didn't swoop him up, not just to improve their team, but to hurt the Steelers. Hell, I REALLY wish Detroit would grab him. Calvin + Wallace?

But it won't happen...

 

[apalmer]

The RFA tender for Wallace is what, 2.7 million? Assuming only teams in the bottom 1/3 of the draft will sign Wallace, after accounting for the cap space that extra 1st round pick will eat up, the Steelers will have an additional million and change in cap space, or around a little over 1% of the expected cap.

A low first round pick....and probably upwards of 10 million dollars in cap space to maneuver for other players with. That is the crux of my point: They aren't losing Wallace for "just a low first round pick/nothing" if they don't match.

Which is it?

It's what 5-ish says.The 2.7 mil is irrelevant. It's merely the amount they have to tender to make sure they get the 1st rounder if he walks. They know other teams are likeiy to offer more. Can someone offer him Fitz/Megatron money? Sure, but the Steelers don't think he's worth that, so they didn't use the franchise tag which would have cost them nearly 10 mil for one year AND put them in the position of having to negotiate with him next year presumably starting at that number (while also having to deal with AB who will be an RFA). Instead, they chose to free up cap space and see what he's offered. If it's a number they can live with, they can match it. Even if it's frontloaded, so that it's 10+ mil this year with a drop off after that, it's a better deal for them than paying the 10 mil now and not having anything next year, because he's then affordable in those future years so they have money to spend on AB. If somebody offers him Fitz money for an extended period, that they can't (or won't) match, it's not the 2.7 mil they're saving, it's the franchise amount of 10 mil that it would have cost to keep him for one year.

 

[Grid71]

The RFA tender for Wallace is what, 2.7 million? Assuming only teams in the bottom 1/3 of the draft will sign Wallace, after accounting for the cap space that extra 1st round pick will eat up, the Steelers will have an additional million and change in cap space, or around a little over 1% of the expected cap.

A low first round pick....and probably upwards of 10 million dollars in cap space to maneuver for other players with. That is the crux of my point: They aren't losing Wallace for "just a low first round pick/nothing" if they don't match.

Which is it?

It's what 5-ish says.The 2.7 mil is irrelevant. It's merely the amount they have to tender to make sure they get the 1st rounder if he walks. They know other teams are likeiy to offer more. Can someone offer him Fitz/Megatron money? Sure, but the Steelers don't think he's worth that, so they didn't use the franchise tag which would have cost them nearly 10 mil for one year AND put them in the position of having to negotiate with him next year presumably starting at that number (while also having to deal with AB who will be an RFA). Instead, they chose to free up cap space and see what he's offered. If it's a number they can live with, they can match it. Even if it's frontloaded, so that it's 10+ mil this year with a drop off after that, it's a better deal for them than paying the 10 mil now and not having anything next year, because he's then affordable in those future years so they have money to spend on AB. If somebody offers him Fitz money for an extended period, that they can't (or won't) match, it's not the 2.7 mil they're saving, it's the franchise amount of 10 mil that it would have cost to keep him for one year.

 

[pghrob]

The RFA tender for Wallace is what, 2.7 million? Assuming only teams in the bottom 1/3 of the draft will sign Wallace, after accounting for the cap space that extra 1st round pick will eat up, the Steelers will have an additional million and change in cap space, or around a little over 1% of the expected cap.

A low first round pick....and probably upwards of 10 million dollars in cap space to maneuver for other players with. That is the crux of my point: They aren't losing Wallace for "just a low first round pick/nothing" if they don't match.

Which is it?

It's what 5-ish says.The 2.7 mil is irrelevant. It's merely the amount they have to tender to make sure they get the 1st rounder if he walks. They know other teams are likeiy to offer more. Can someone offer him Fitz/Megatron money? Sure, but the Steelers don't think he's worth that, so they didn't use the franchise tag which would have cost them nearly 10 mil for one year AND put them in the position of having to negotiate with him next year presumably starting at that number (while also having to deal with AB who will be an RFA). Instead, they chose to free up cap space and see what he's offered. If it's a number they can live with, they can match it. Even if it's frontloaded, so that it's 10+ mil this year with a drop off after that, it's a better deal for them than paying the 10 mil now and not having anything next year, because he's then affordable in those future years so they have money to spend on AB. If somebody offers him Fitz money for an extended period, that they can't (or won't) match, it's not the 2.7 mil they're saving, it's the franchise amount of 10 mil that it would have cost to keep him for one year.

Explained as though you are capologist.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

I don't get the no-lose situation logic here. Losing a really good player is not a good thing. Even for the 28th pick, or whatever they'll end up with. People get too hung up on the magic of draft picks. He's already likely a better player than you'll ever get with that pick.

They don't just get a pick. They get a pick plus cap room.

 

[inzanitee]

I don't get the no-lose situation logic here. Losing a really good player is not a good thing. Even for the 28th pick, or whatever they'll end up with. People get too hung up on the magic of draft picks. He's already likely a better player than you'll ever get with that pick.

They don't just get a pick. They get a pick plus cap room.

True, but there's a good chance they get a lesser talent at WR to replace Wallace, which hurts their chances at gunning for another SB. It's definitely not a "no-lose" situation. They may not lose, but if the pick busts and their WR corps is worse, then what?