This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Carolina has never really been the kind of team that ships off there talent at the RB position. And usually a rbbc team. It wouldn't surprise me if Deangelo finished off his career here like so many Carolina backs before him.
the real issue will likely be- can they get him signed before the draft? If they go into the draft with him unsigned they may (will given their history) take a RB they like and that could be it.Holy Schneikes said:
That last part is another key factor that I think should be emphasized, and is one the main reasons I have hope as an owner that he will be moving on.He may not be greedy, and he may be a little different than the average player/back, but this will likely be his only opportunity for a big payday, and he hasn't made a ton of money in his career as a low first round pick. And this is a guy who currently holds one of the highest career rushing averages in NFL history.He's played the good solider and not batted an eye at the lack of an extension offer by the team, playing out his full 5 year rookie contract (which very few successful players do these days, let alone "studs"). Given all of that, I wouldn't expect him to just totally roll over on the money issue. So it boils down to whether the Panthers will give it to him, or he goes somewhere else to get it. He certainly doesn't owe the Panthers any favors at this point. If anything, it's the other way around.
I'm not convinced there will be a franchise tag to use, or if there is, it may look considerably different than it does right now. The players seem to HATE the franchise tag (even though in some cases it seems to me to be not that bad a deal for them), and I could easily see the owners letting that one go in favor of other factors more important to them. Half the time, teams are using their tags on kickers or TEs (just because they are cheaper) anyway.If I'm an owner, I gladly give that up for any one of several other issues on the table. JMO.
I agree with this completely. Franchising a RB like Deangelo seems like a no-brainer move. He's quite worthy of being paid top 5 at his position, and offering him a 5-year deal will lead to possibly diminishing returns near the end. Perfect candidate for a franchise tag.
If they have a season next year (knock on wood) and the CBA is similar to what it was (franchise tags, transition tags, etc), AND Fox returns, he will be back.The Panthers can't rely on Stewart, yet, he hasn't shown the ability to carry the load over a whole season (or half a season, or longer than 4 games, for that matter). Until they see that they can rely on him to be healthy and get the regular workload of a Car RB1 under Fox (15+ carries/game), they will want to hold onto Williams. Furthermore, if the new CBA contains the same kind of franchise and transition tags, it will not be incredibily expensive for Carolina to keep Williams, even if they can't come to terms on a long-term contract.Now, if the new CBA doesn't contain those options, or if Fox is gone after this year, or if Stewart (finally) shows the ability to hold up to significant carries over the course of more than 2-3 games, that could change.unc22x said:
Because Michael Turner was a free agent when he left, Stewart has several years left on his contract, while Williams is going to be a FA next year?
Over the last two seasons, who has missed more games?Stewart - 0, Williams - 3
Oh, you're only counting missed regular season games. Gotcha.
You play in leagues that give points for the preseason?Or do you think the next CBA will have preseason games have postseason implications?Oh, you're only counting missed regular season games. Gotcha.
Over the last 3 off-season, who has been unable to do just about anything with the team b/c of injuries?Over the last two seasons, who has been listed on the injury report more?Jayrod said:
Many of your concerns are legitimate reasons to remain skeptical about Stewart until he proves that he can stay healthy. On the flip side, the bolded is a bit silly - you realize that Stewart has been playing behind an ultra-talented, highly productive RB, right? He was never "called upon to be the guy" because a) Deangelo Willams is a beast, b) John Fox loves veteran RBs, and c) Stewart hasn't been healthy. In that order.Plenty of talented RBs don't get the chance to be "the man" right away - case in point, Michael Turner. He never carried the ball more than 80 times in a season his first 4 years in the league. Why? Because he played behind LT. In his first 2 seasons, Larry Johnson carried the ball a total of 140 times, because he was behind Priest Holmes.
No, I play in leagues that only give points for the yards a RB gets, not the ones he won't be getting because he's dinged up and a healthier RB on the team is getting the lion's share of carries.Looking at missed games doesn't fully address the issue when I say Stewart seems to be dinged up all the time. Look at how often he's been limited in both practices and games over the past two years. Then go count how many of DeAngelo's games were actually starter worthy even with the three missed games and compare them to the startable games for Stewart even though he technically didn't miss as many games as DeAngelo. Then go draft Stewart as your RB2 and start him every week.BTW, where in my post did I reference pre-season games? Jump to conclusions much?OddibeMcD said:You play in leagues that give points for the preseason?Or do you think the next CBA will have preseason games have postseason implications?Mr.Underhill said:Oh, you're only counting missed regular season games. Gotcha.Jayrod said:
But he can't be franchised if there is a lockout; in that case he is definitely gone. If there isn't a lockout, he could be franchised, but usually teams do that and then trade the player. Players don't like to be franchised and I agree that Williams has been a good soldier to date and he deserves his pay day and I doubt he would welcome a franchise if they didn't trade him.
I think saying that if DeAngelo can't be franchised "he is definitely gone" is a pretty extreme conclusion. He and Stewart seem to be happy with the work-share and success it provieds the running game. They are great friends. This wouldn't be true for a lot of job shares, but seems to be here. I think CAR gets at least a slight hometown discount from DWill if he hits the market and post-Peppers, they don't have a huge cap problem. And the Panthers know what an unusual and incredibly strong running situation these two backs and a top notch OL give them. Consider too that 28 year old RBs aren't usually big winners on the open market. IO agree that Williams could well sign elsewhere for a knockout offer, but to jump to the conclusion that free agency means he is definitely gone ... just, IMO, isn't a correct statement.
There is some debate about that I believe. I think teams may still view the franchise tag as a viable option going into the lockout, but the NFLPA doesn't hold that same view. It would probably end up in court if a team even tried it. Who knows what would happen in that scenario.Anyway, the point is that I don't think the franchise tag is a particularly likely outcome for Williams given all of the shenanigans going on right now. There is definitely some doubt as to whether it can be applied this season, and there is even more doubt (in my mind) whether it's going to work the same way in future seasons. Is Carolina really going to go through all that trouble to keep Williams in the fold rather than just sign him? I don't think so, particularly in Williams' case where he's been very accommodating already. They will either pay him close to what he could get on the open market, or they will let him go.
I made this point in another thread, but the franchise tag for RBs in 2010 is over $8 million. If the tag still exists in 2011, it should be at least that, or higher. So, if Carolina franchises Williams, he is getting over $8 million in guarantees. If he becomes a FA then in 2012, it would be reasonable to assume that he will get a contract with $5-7 million in guarantees (LT got $5 million guaranteed, I think, and Chester Taylor got $7 million). That would be between $13 million and $15 million in guaranteed money for Williams over those 2 contracts. I doubt he'd get much more if they let him become a FA in 2011. I wouldn't see why he'd be upset with that.
Chester Taylor and LT (at this point in his career) aren't remotely close comparisons to DeAngelo Williams. Chester is essentially a 30 year old career backup, and LT was/is generally regarded by the league as toast.MJD signed a 5 year deal worth $31M and 17.5 guaranteed last year. Steven Jackson is on a $45M deal with 20.5 guaranteed signed a couple of years ago (gotta think about inflation). Barber got a $45M contract in 2008 with $16M guaranteed. Barber Reggie Bush is making $10.5M this year alone. Portis signed a $50M contact with over 20M guaranteed back in '04. Peterson will probably make $13M this year with bonuses. Most of these are 2nd contracts (after rookie deals) just like Williams' would be.Williams at 27 years old is way more in line with these guys than with Chester Taylor or LT. There is ZERO chance he would command only 5-7M in guarantees on a four or five year deal on the open market. And at 27, that four or five year deal is EXACTLY what he would be looking for (and would get). He'd be looking at a minimum of $15M guaranteed, which is a lot more than $8M.I'm not saying the tag is always a horrible deal for the player (it isn't), but it's fairly obvious that Williams would do better on a new contract - at least in terms of overall financial security.Edit:Besides, none of this addresses the CBA issues with using the tag in the first place.
MJD was 24 years old last year. Barber was 25 years old in 2008. Steven Jackson was 25 when he signed his contract extension.Deangelo will be 28 years old next year when his contract expires. I'm not sure why you are comparing the prospects of a 28 year old RB to those of a bunch of 24-25 year old guys entering their prime.
He'll be on his 2nd contract, just like all of the rest of those guys. The extra year or two age difference is just a by-product of him sticking out his full 5 year rookie deal, which most players these days don't do (he also had a little later start than some of those guys). There really aren't too many absolutely perfect comparisons for that reason, but those guys are the closest in age and talent that we have available.Of course you are kind of faking the extra year difference too, by using Williams' age NEXT year (when his "deal expires", which I think actually expires at the end of this playing year, when he will still be 27 - he just turned in April) but using the age of the other guys when they actually signed their contract. Let's be consistent at least. Either use Williams' 27, or add an extra year to all of the other guys too.But yes, he's a little older than several of the guys I mentioned, but those guys are LOT closer than Taylor or Tomlinson in terms of what he should expect, and there is NFL-inflation at work as well. He's still in his prime (Tomlinson is certainly not), and should be for a while. He should be very effective for the next three years unless there are health issues.It's not like a fantasy dynasty league where you are looking at total career years left (in which case, there should be some value deduction). NFL GMs are looking at about next three years in most cases (regardless of contract length - the end years are often bogus from both sides of the deal).I just don't think it's realistic at all to think that Williams is going to command anything close to what Tomlinson at age 31 coming off of a season where he ran for 3.3 average and had his team (who he will probably represent in the hall of fame) cut him commanded.
I am torn. DeAngelo Leaves arguments:
