Donnie Edwards

It's what the market will bear. And until you get in front of a GM, you go with what the market's borne. Age or not, he's better than Witherspoon. IMO, he's more valuable than Witherspoon. And while he doesn't have the Pro Bowl cred he probably deserves, he's going to look to be paid like one.
And considering how much LB prices have risen since 2002, he's going to be looking for a total contract value and a yearly value that's at very minimum 15-20% more than that. Hell, the cap's risen more than that.

Witherspoon got $5.5 mil. Morgan got $5.6 million. Pierce got $6 mil. Arrington got $7 million and he's got injury issues. These guys are younger, sure. 33 at Edwards' experience and relative lack of injuries doesn't suggest 7 years, but that's never stopped the NFL from giving deals that last more than what you'd initially expect a player to last.

 

I'm not going to lie. I'd love it, strictly from a field standpoint.

But there's obviously so much more to it than that.

A draft pick, and tons of money to a player older than we've been acquiring, without a specific need to do so?

That and the depth I've lauded both in this conversation and all preseason, that can do much more than an adequate job.

Edwards is a ridiculous player. Guys like that rarely hit the open market. But I wouldn't make that trade. And I wouldn't sign him to a deal of what he's worth.

 

do it, use him til he breaks down while grooming the LB of the future. It's a stopgap measure, just like Diggs and Adams. Better quality player = higher cost. Pretty simple. 3rd round picks are a crap shoot anyway, you might end up with a Steve Smith, or you might end up with a Mike Seidman. The pick is a non-issue, you know that Donnie Edwards for a 3rd is a good deal, considering that even 2nd round picks (Shelton) aren't a lock to make the team.

 

Magnus, when you lie about things like this you only make yourself look less mature and less respectable. You clearly have been trying to pick a fight over this, evidenced by your use of terms like "fanboy" and "whine," etc.

It bothers me both because it's a petty, transparent tactic that you know to be false because you use it to cover arguments that you're losing, and because you're such a stunning hypocrite in your behavior. I'm ok with you using insults and starting fights as long as you don't turn right around and then complain about how I somehow start fights with you and hurt your feelings when I use insults.

Here is another example of you stating something you know to be false simply because you feel like you're losing the argument. Players certainly know that their age impacts the amount of money they can get, which is why Edwards started pushing for a new contract three years ago. Do teams give 33 year old LBs the same amount as 26 year old LBs? No. Do you they do so for RBs or any other position? No. Players, agents, and teams all know that someone at age 33 won't get a contract as long or as expensive as someone who is much younger.

And again you are being intentionally deceptive in order to make it look like you aren't losing this argument badly. If a player has base salaries of $525k, $975k, $2.85m, $3m, and $3.55m, how does that not represent a progression in payment? Edwards didn't make $3.8 million the year he started asking for a new contract, he made $975k (or about $1.5m if you pro-rate the signing bonus). You don't get paid the same thing through the life of a contract, as you generally get significantly more the longer the contract goes along.

I told you, and showed with links, this is also about an extension. Smith refused to give Edwards an extension even at his present salary.

Creating a thread about a subject and then suggesting that we shouldn't talk about it because it probably won't happen, isn't odd? It isn't strange that you would suddenly come to this decision when you suddenly decided you were against the move? It's just bizarre for someone who started a thread to discuss a topic then turns around and says it isn't worth discussing.

Yes, because it's about an e-x-t-e-n-s-i-o-n.

Gah, this is what I mean. You pretend like it's not even a possibility when it certainly is. If we were giving up a first round pick, sure, it would be insane to do that for one year of any player, rather than getting an extension done beforehand. But with a third, and one at the bottom of the round at that, it's perfectly reasonable to bring a guy in for one year in an attempt to win a Super Bowl, and let him walk or stay depending upon his contract demands after the season.

I was trying to point out, correctly, that I know more about Edwards than you do.

It's frustrating to even speak with you when you become petulant like this. You are the one who is taking a firm stand that we should not trade for Edwards. I'm certainly not fiercely suggesting that we should. I've consistently said that I like him as a player, but that I'm unsure whether or not I'd be willing to give up the draft pick. Meanwhile you seize on things like the Brooks comparison because you're scared of people siding against you. There is no other explanation for so strenuously objecting to what is a perfectly valid comparison. No one else seems to have a problem with it, and Purr has defended it. So why do you think you're not being unreasonable in obsessing over that?

Sure, there is no reason for my anger. You obviously haven't been picking a fight with me, insulting me, or making false statements about my opinions. There isn't any reason that you're as widely despised on this board as I am, magnus. No reason at all.

I favored the Mangold pick, yes. You opposed it and you initially tried to "win" the argument by saying he wasn't good enough to be considered in the late first, then abandoned that when you saw you were wrong about that. You then argued that rookie centers shouldn't handle the line calls on good teams, only for me to point out that Dan Koppen was a rookie the year the Patriots beat us in the Super Bowl. So then you moved on to making fun of the guy's name in an attempt to make it seem like people were unreasonable in how much they liked him, only NFL teams proved to be equal in favoring Mangold. Why is it that anyone who likes a player you don't like deserves derision when no logical reasons for being against that player are given by you? Why is it that you can become obsessed with particular players in the draft and yet you don't deserve the same kind of mocking?

Possible, sure, except I'm not the one of us with demonstrated extreme biases. I'm not the one who loved Seifert and would defend him no matter the evidence that he wasn't coaching well for us. I'm not the one who hated Henning and would attack him no matter what the statistics said. There are countless other examples of you ignoring reality to be strongly for or against other players and coaches as well. I didn't have a "mancrush" on Clemens, I evaluated his talents and found them to be far better than you thought them to be. Remember? You said that Clemens would not get selected in the second round. Care to remember who was correct? You also did not think that Mangold was worth a late first rounder. Judging by where he was drafted, who was correct?

Having a "mancrush" or being a "fanboy" means being like you, magnus, and making irrational statements for or against someone because you have personal feelings involved. Anyone can tell you that I'm a coldly analytical son of bitch when it comes to evaluating players. I don't cut breaks for guys that I like, even ones whose jerseys I own, and I don't hype players more than their talent and abilities merit. You are the one who is known for your biases, magnus. I am the one who is known for being brutally fair.

Sure, just like you so easily dismiss the times where I insult you, right? You never react poorly or go on for pages if I say something about you that you don't agree with, right? Seriously, magnus, stop these infantile justifications. Me objecting to being called a "fanboy" is certainly not evidence that I am a fanboy, just as you objecting to me calling you a "coward" before was not evidence that you actually were a "coward."

I am doing you a favor and you know it. Arguing with you becomes one more stress I don't need, because you will stubbornly defend yourself in a losing battle for pages on end, while other people tend to just get pissed and walk away. You tend to lose those battles too, don't forget (although not always, re: TD/SLB). Stress is something I don't want, but I'm a hell of a lot better at fighting and insults than you are, so it's odd that you would try and draw me into another fight here.

 

Is there a Threads gone bad version for football

 

Or a magnus vs. Collin forum. Threads become pretty much worthless when we go at it for pages, which is why I find it odd that magnus intentionally started another fight when we've had relative peace for a good while now.

 

or both of you needing the last word

 

I do not. :supergrin

 

I'm cutting out all the personal bullshit you've written since it really doesn't merit discussion. I'm not looking for any sort of "favors" from you, and I'm sorry you don't have the ability to be both real and reasonable at the same time. And as I noted, it's ridiculous to talk about "not fighting" and then sling shit all day. You want to be mad, be mad. I'm neither mad nor concerned.

And yet he's been noted as believing himself as a top tier player. You agree with him, certainly.

He's not going to take less money than last time. He's probably not looking to take an equal amount as last time, by the natural order of league and cap growth. Therefore it's natural for him to expect more money, and that leaves you complaining because I said "$5 million" a year, when it's almost guaranteed he'll be getting a fair raise from what he had - which is somewhere between $4.5-5.3 million.

Remember, this is over money. Edwards isn't going to settle for the first deal that comes across, and I'm guessing a deal will never get done since money is the big problem.

Cut the bullshit already. I'm not being intentionally deceptive. I'm talking in the same terms the agents do. His salaries being progressive are a natural fact of almost every contract in the league. Contract value is what these guys are after. He knows, you know, I know that if he signs a new deal he'll be making under $1 million in base salary this season.

There's nothing deceptive about that at all. And you can "win" or "lose" this argument without having to stoop to pretending I'm being deceptive.

That's the thing, I never said "don't talk about it." Never. And I never said it "wasn't worth discussing." All I said is "I wouldn't do it based on the cost and our available talent."

Or are you suggesting that, because you're in favor of it, suddenly I was against it? Go ahead and say it. It doesn't make it true, and it's funny in the matter of the way you always suggest I"m exaggerating things "when I'm getting whipped" and all that, but you've just put a number of things directly in my mouth that I never said, and don't mean.
And all over the fact that I started this topic,

Yes. A firm stand, and nothing more. I don't believe we need to do this. That's my opinion. Is that a problem? If it is, why?

Not at all. People side for or against arguments I take a stand on, all the time. If I couldn't handle that, I wouldn't state my position.

My problem with Brooks is simple. Besides that Brooks is a perennial All-Pro and was actually voted POTY in 2002, and that would mean that a group of voters suggested Brooks was the pinnacle of his sport at one time, here's the equation you set out.


Brooks for a third.

If you want to equate Brooks = Edwards, then that's one thing. I know a lot of people don't watch west coast football, so they wouldn't know the guy.

Here's the actual equation.

Edwards + 3.3 million base + 11 years in the league + big dollar contract to make him happy = 3rd round pick. Not Edwards = 3rd round pick. My issue in the equation was that it was "would you give a 3rd round pick to get Derrick Brooks?" when that's a small part of the issue.

Which is why I suggested, possibly unfairly, that you were compaigning for this.




Sure, there is no reason for my anger. You obviously haven't been picking a fight with me, insulting me, or making false statements about my opinions. There isn't any reason that you're as widely despised on this board as I am, magnus. No reason at all.

Nope, I always had him mid-2nd. And I've always had a problem with reaching for rookie linemen to fill needs.

A good chuckle for the rest. I do find it hard to believe, however, that considering how insulting you are in general to people here and elsewhere, that you got this pissed up at "fanboy".