$13M in cap space &Tucker's Contract Negotiations

[BmoreBird22]

1 minute ago, rmw10 said:

I'd imagine that's the biggest discussion right.  There's a fascination all over the league with being the highest paid player, though.  Guys are always looking for that extra $100K or so to be the top dog.  Assuming the 4 year contract is the standard for a K, I think we could see an $11-12M guarantee come tomorrow.

$9.9M is what he'd make with back to back tags, so $10M is the number to beat.

[rmw10]

Just now, BmoreBird22 said:

$9.9M is what he'd make with back to back tags, so $10M is the number to beat.

Conveniently right around what Gostkowski got at $10.1M guaranteed.  I'd hope it comes in lower than the $11-12M I'm thinking it could be, but I'm not the one handing out contracts.  I think it'll get done at $4.5M or less per season.  I can't imagine us getting too hung up over an extra $250K in guaranteed money or $200K in base salary per year.  It's so minuscule in NFL terms.  The question is how much are Tucker and his camp really trying to get.

[BmoreBird22]

Just now, rmw10 said:

Conveniently right around what Gostkowski got at $10.1M guaranteed.  I'd hope it comes in lower than the $11-12M I'm thinking it could be, but I'm not the one handing out contracts.  I think it'll get done at $4.5M or less per season.  I can't imagine us getting too hung up over an extra $250K in guaranteed money or $200K in base salary per year.  It's so minuscule in NFL terms.  The question is how much are Tucker and his camp really trying to get.

I just can imagine the Ravens wanting to see improved consistency this year and wanting to tag and sign him next year instead of this year (since the injury risk for a kicker is practically zero), but those comments, if true, obviously threw a wrench in things.

[allblackraven]

11 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I just can imagine the Ravens wanting to see improved consistency this year and wanting to tag and sign him next year instead of this year (since the injury risk for a kicker is practically zero), but those comments, if true, obviously threw a wrench in things.

Steelers would like to respond to this statement.

[burnstr19]

We need to pay Tucker - how is this even a debate FO? He's single handedly made up for our atrocious OC's and lack of offensive playmakers. I for one would not want to waste time on the position only to settle for another Cundiff (btw are we still paying him?).

[usmccharles]

48 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

I'd guess $4.5M is the magic number in Tucker's camp.  I'd think the Ravens want to pay $4.1M or so.  For reference, I don't believe the idea that we offered less than we had offered previously.  Come tomorrow, I think they'll agree somewhere slightly above Gostkowski.

 

53 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

Tough to say since Gostowski is making $4.3 and Crosby is making $4.0. I don't think he should make more than Gostowski, but more than Crosby. I personally wouldn't mind if he tied Gostowski, but it sounds like he's trying to set the precedent of being the highest paid kicker in the NFL and at that point, you'd be looking at AAV of at least the tag amount, probably more, and the guaranteed money would have to exceed at least $9.9M (that's what two tags back to back would be).

With the way contracts change every year, i wouldnt care if he was the highest paid kicker, I cant fathom there is a huge difference in lets say, 4.3mill compared to 4.7mill a year.  But like i said....cap hits and salaries are definitely not my strong suit. 

 

[Lightlock]

I just noticed the ESPN article about the Ravens actually coming back to Tucker with a *lower* offer than they had previously made to him. What an insult. They appear to be clowning around with him if that's the case, and I don't blame him one bit for vowing not to resign with the Ravens after this "forced" season under the franchise tag.  Seriously, who is crunching the numbers over there and deciding that with 13 Million in cap space, Tucker still isn't worth what his body of work has shown us?

Pay the man !!!  Geez!

And to think I was ready to buy a couple of Tucker Ravens jerseys as soon as he signed. Good thing I held out, because he'll probably be kicking for the Steelers next season at this rate. Let's hope the front office can get it together before tomorrow's deadline.....but somehow I doubt they'll be trying very hard.

[redrum52]

Pay him.  I've seen his accuracy numbers brought up and though he's missed some he shouldn't, he's also been asked to kick from some pretty outrageous distances.  He's also, one of our main sources of hope in our down seasons.

[Tiznut]

A drawback for hesitating to say this what may be a fair offer early is that the other side can start to re-evaluate your importance to them. Right or wrong if you hesitate you allow the other side to hone in on the negatives such as what ESPN wrote:  "However, Tucker is coming off the roughest season of his four-year career, converting a personal-low 82.5 percent of his field goals." 

 

 

[TheConquerorWorm]

1 hour ago, burnstr19 said:

We need to pay Tucker - how is this even a debate FO? He's single handedly made up for our atrocious OC's and lack of offensive playmakers. I for one would not want to waste time on the position only to settle for another Cundiff (btw are we still paying him?).

 

Exactly the point. Is a kicker worth $5 million per year? Tucker definitely slipped last year kicking from deep. Especially when you consider this Matt Stover mentored guy is available for the league minimum:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/ravens-insider/bal-brad-craddock-emulates-matt-stover-not-justin-tucker-20160224-story.html

 

[redrum52]

I want him signed long term, but as a K or P, it seems like you'd actually like to be franchised as much as possible.

[RaRaRavens]

7 hours ago, bioLarzen said:

About the worst thing Tuacker could have actually done is trying to corner Ozzie with a threat. It has never worked. The last player to try that road was Haloti Ngata - to weeks later he was lookig for a house in Detroit...

One thing's for sure: a kicker - even if it's one like Tucker - won't make a precedent of how to threat Ozzie into a better contract offer. I seriously think that Tucker has made his chances to stay in Baltimore significantly worse - if he hasn't burnt the bridge altogether (which, as he indicated - he has no intent to walk accross anyway. You don't threat a good GM.

It's probably not what you meant above, but let's get one thing straight - Tucker is not in charge of his contract negotiations. How agent-client relationships usually work is that a player and his representative set some mutual understanding about the situation which usually is "right place for the right money", very rarely do players refuse specific teams or insist on absolutely staying with their current team, and after that the agent has full authorization on behalf of his client at the negotiation table.The agent chooses the tools he uses to get the result his client wants. So at this point Tucker is pretty much in charge with saying "Yes" or "No" to Ravens' offers. So pinning the blackmailing tactics on him is not right.

Having said that, I can't blame Tucker if he's getting frustrated at Ozzie's shenanigans. I mean, arguably the best/most clutch kicker in the NFL being offered the #4 money and after that the next offer is reportedly even lower than that?! It's just business, but this kind of attitude is showing some serious arrogant disrespect and I can't blame anyone for not wanting to do business with a team that doesn't respect them. 

Too early to make any predictions, but if Oz fails to close Tucker, then there is reason for strong concerns in his abilities over the past couple of seasons. 

Edited July 15, 2016 by RaRaRavens

[redrum52]

5 minutes ago, RaRaRavens said:

It's probably not what you meant above, but let's get one thing straight - Tucker is not in charge of his contract negotiations. How agent-client relationships usually work is that a player and his representative set some mutual understanding about the situation which usually is "right place for the right money", very rarely do players refuse specific teams or insist on absolutely staying with their current team, and after that the agent has full authorization on behalf of his client at the negotiation table.The agent chooses the tools he uses to get the result his client wants. So at this point Tucker is pretty much in charge with saying "Yes" or "No" to Ravens' offers. So pinning the blackmailing tactics on him is not right.

Having said that, I can't blame Tucker if he's getting frustrated at Ozzie's shenanigans. I mean, arguably the best/most clutch kicker in the NFL being offered the #4 money and after that the next offer is reportedly even lower than that?! It's just business, but this kind of attitude is showing some serious arrogant disrespect and I can't blame anyone who does not want to do business with a team that doesn't respect them. 

Too early to make any predictions, but if Oz fails to close Tucker, then there is reason for strong concerns in his abilities over the past couple of seasons. 

We always question if players post here... I'm starting to wonder if we should ask if players agents read these boards as well.

[RaRaRavens]

5 hours ago, Lightlock said:

I just noticed the ESPN article about the Ravens actually coming back to Tucker with a *lower* offer than they had previously made to him. What an insult. They appear to be clowning around with him if that's the case, and I don't blame him one bit for vowing not to resign with the Ravens after this "forced" season under the franchise tag.  Seriously, who is crunching the numbers over there and deciding that with 13 Million in cap space, Tucker still isn't worth what his body of work has shown us?

Pay the man !!!  Geez!

And to think I was ready to buy a couple of Tucker Ravens jerseys as soon as he signed. Good thing I held out, because he'll probably be kicking for the Steelers next season at this rate. Let's hope the front office can get it together before tomorrow's deadline.....but somehow I doubt they'll be trying very hard.

I read that too man, my jaw dropped through the floor. My first thought was that has Oz gone senile?! Arguably the best/most clutch kicker in the NFL being offered the #4 money and after that the next offer is reportedly even lower than that?! Tucker expressed such optimism and contentment about staying with the Ravens. Is Oz insulting Tucker on purpose trying to get rid of him??

If the reports turn out to be true, then it's one of the dirtiest, ugliest things I've seen this "classy" organization do and in that case I can't blame Tucker and his agent for the blackmail tactics. Yeah, it's just business, but this kind of attitude is showing some serious arrogant disrespect and I can't blame anyone for not wanting to do business with a team that doesn't respect them. It's just ugly!

Edited July 15, 2016 by RaRaRavens

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Cillmatic said:

3 hours ago, RaRaRavens said:

I read that too man, my jaw dropped through the floor. My first thought was that has Oz gone senile?! Arguably the best/most clutch kicker in the NFL being offered the #4 money and after that the next offer is reportedly even lower than that?! Tucker expressed such optimism and contentment about staying with the Ravens. Is Oz insulting Tucker on purpose trying to get rid of him??

If the reports turn out to be true, then it's one of the dirtiest, ugliest things I've seen this "classy" organization do and in that case I can't blame Tucker and his agent for the blackmail tactics. Yeah, it's just business, but this kind of attitude is showing some serious arrogant disrespect and I can't blame anyone for not wanting to do business with a team that doesn't respect them. It's just ugly!

Turns out, the deal the Ravens just offered Tucker was LESS than a PREVIOUS offer. 

 

I've NEVER Heard of a professional sports team do something that asinine & disrespectful in negotiations.

Finally, some legitimate questioning of the Front Office shenanigans.

 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, RaRaRavens said:

 

Too early to make any predictions, but if Oz fails to close Tucker, then there is reason for strong concerns in his abilities over the past couple of seasons. 

Newsome will clearly have Tucker play under the Franchise Tag this year.  We figure to be a middling team at best and Tucker could very well be worth 2 close wins. In Division the difference between 2-4 and 4-2 is possibly a playoff spot, granting that is not realistic this year.  As key as a good kicker can be, failing to sign Tucker will not suddenly change Newsome's stewardship from competent to incompetent.  Newsome has established a performance issue that goes way beyond his negotiations with Tucker.

[rmcjacket23]

15 hours ago, TheConquerorWorm said:

 

Exactly the point. Is a kicker worth $5 million per year? Tucker definitely slipped last year kicking from deep. Especially when you consider this Matt Stover mentored guy is available for the league minimum:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/ravens-insider/bal-brad-craddock-emulates-matt-stover-not-justin-tucker-20160224-story.html

 

Probably not. But I'm also not sure you want to be the team that is haggling with players over less than $1M a year over 4-5 years, which at least according to Tucker's agent, is precisely what we are doing. No real benefit to the team there.

 

[rmw10]

12 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Probably not. But I'm also not sure you want to be the team that is haggling with players over less than $1M a year over 4-5 years, which at least according to Tucker's agent, is precisely what we are doing. No real benefit to the team there.

Could care less about YouTube highlights of kickers either. There's dozens of guys just like that every year, and many of them are out of the league quickly.

I think that's the real kicker here.  Yes, awful pun intended.

I highly doubt Tucker is coming into this looking to make $6M a year or something well above market value.  I'd think they're asking for $5M, which while a little high, isn't totally unreasonable.  I mean, that's only $700K over the current highest paid, and $700K is minimal cap space to an NFL team.  That's why I have a hard time seeing it not get done.  I don't believe we'd be in the business fr burning a bridge just to save $700K per year.  The only other issue I could see is if the guarantees just aren't up to par.

[rmcjacket23]

2 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

I think that's the real kicker here.  Yes, awful pun intended.

I highly doubt Tucker is coming into this looking to make $6M a year or something well above market value.  I'd think they're asking for $5M, which while a little high, isn't totally unreasonable.  I mean, that's only $700K over the current highest paid, and $700K is minimal cap space to an NFL team.  That's why I have a hard time seeing it not get done.  I don't believe we'd be in the business fr burning a bridge just to save $700K per year.  The only other issue I could see is if the guarantees just aren't up to par.

I mean the guarantees could be part of it, but to me that's such a small number also and it appears the "slotting" for kickers is so consistent that its not the issue.

I rarely am on the players side on these types of situations, but to me the Ravens come off looking bad here. Not so much because they allegedly "made a weaker offer" or any of that stuff that's likely not even true considering the source.

To me, its just not worth the hassle. I would almost guaranteed Tucker is slotting in somewhere between $4-5M a year, which is what he would get on the open market and what this team should pay him. If he's at like $4.8, and you're at $4.1, what the hell is the point of even bargaining much longer?

We aren't talking about us offering KO like $8M and him signing for $12M. That's a big difference. We have to easily be talking about less than $1M per year, meaning at best maybe $3M over four years. Its an absurd thing to argue about with $13M in cap space now, the appearance of substantial cap space available going forward, AND a $160M salary cap that is rising.

Just seems absurd to me. 

And what makes it worse is... whats the big deal if he doesn't "live up" to the contract? The contract is relatively pedestrian in terms of cap hits by NFL standards, and the dead money would be borderline irrelevant, considering if you had to cut him after like 2 years, the dead money cap impact would probably be, at best, like 1% of the total salary cap for that season. 

I sort of just don't see the problem at this point. To me, the problems of him missing kicks (which is exclusively a 50+ yard problem) is fixable by just performing better on offense and maybe some more aggressive play calling.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

28 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

I think that's the real kicker here.  Yes, awful pun intended.

I highly doubt Tucker is coming into this looking to make $6M a year or something well above market value.  I'd think they're asking for $5M, which while a little high, isn't totally unreasonable.  I mean, that's only $700K over the current highest paid, and $700K is minimal cap space to an NFL team.  That's why I have a hard time seeing it not get done.  I don't believe we'd be in the business fr burning a bridge just to save $700K per year.  The only other issue I could see is if the guarantees just aren't up to par.

You're right in that $700k isnt much in the grand scheme of things, but i think the more appropriate way to look at it is the % increase to the next highest paid. At $5m/yr that would be a 16% increase in the average annual compared to Gostkowski. Pretty big jump percentage wise. I dont know what that looks like in comparison to precedents set at the other positions in terms of the percentage increase over the previously highest paid, but that could play a part.

Contracts have a ripple effect around the league where each new contract becomes bargaining power for the next guy. And it could be that we dont want to set the precedent that every year deems a 16% increase in annual salary for the best FA at each position. Might give Brandon Williams a bargaining chip to say he deserves a 16% increase on Harrison's contract.

 

It could have nothing to do with it, but if it does i get it. For a kicker we're only talking $700k - basically pennies in terms of overall spend. But, a 16% increase for the next FA we try to sign, like Williams would mean a precedent of him getting $10.72 million/yr to Harrison's $9.25m/yr. May not be a cat they want to let out of the bag.

Edited July 15, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[rmw10]

1 minute ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

You're right in that $700k isnt much in the grand scheme of things, but i think the more appropriate way to look at it is the % increase to the next highest paid. At $5m/yr that would be a 16% increase in the average annual. Pretty big jump percentage wise. I dont know what that looks like in comparison to precedents set at the other positions in terms of the percentage increase of the highest paid, but that could play a part.

Contracts have a ripple effect around the league where each new contract becomes bargaining power for the next guy. And it could be that we dont want to set the precedent that every year deems a 16% increase in annual salary for the best FA at each position. Might give Brandon Williams a bargaining chip to say he deserves a 16% increase on Harrison's contract.

 

It could have nothing to do with it, but if it does i get it. For a kicker we're only talking $700k - basically pennies in terms of overall spend. But, a 16% increase for the next FA we try to sign, like Williams would mean a precedent of him getting $10.72 million/yr to Harrison's $9.25m/yr. May not be a cat they want to let out of the bag.

I don't think you can really compare apples to apples in regards to Williams vs. Tucker - and I also don't think it'll come in at $5M per year.  I'd guess that's what they're gunning for, but I'm still of the opinion we'll settle somewhere slightly above what Gostkowski got.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

1 minute ago, rmw10 said:

I don't think you can really compare apples to apples in regards to Williams vs. Tucker - and I also don't think it'll come in at $5M per year.  I'd guess that's what they're gunning for, but I'm still of the opinion we'll settle somewhere slightly above what Gostkowski got.

I think by looking at % increase relative to other players at the same position does make it apples to apples. Tuckers in the conversation for being the best at what he does - probably 1 other guy thats definitely above him, but that guy was signed a year ago so probably deserves a slight increase.

Williams is in the conversation for being the best at what he does (block eating, run stuffing NT) with arguably 1 other guy thats above him, but that guy was signed this offseason, so Williams will probably be in line for a slight increase going into his FA period.

Raw money, not its not apples to apples... but % increase over the most recent precedent, i think the two situations are pretty comparable.

[rmw10]

2 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

I think by looking at % increase relative to other players at the same position does make it apples to apples. Tuckers in the conversation for being the best at what he does - probably 1 other guy thats definitely above him, but that guy was signed a year ago so probably deserves a slight increase.

Williams is in the conversation for being the best at what he does (block eating, run stuffing NT) with arguably 1 other guy thats above him, but that guy was signed this offseason, so Williams will probably be in line for a slight increase going into his FA period.

Raw money, not its not apples to apples... but % increase over the most recent precedent, i think the two situations are pretty comparable.

I don't agree with that sentiment solely because we're talking about Special Teams here.  When Gostkowski signed, he got a 14% increase over the next highest paid kicker at the time.  I highly doubt teams are going into negotiations, pointing at a kicker, and saying he set the percentage mark.  The contract increases have everything to do with the overall salary cap increases.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

14 hours ago, RaineV1 said:

On the road Tucker is amazing. At home... he's had his issues. The Ravens might be waiting to see if he can get more consistent during this season.

This is definitely it. And Tuckers agent doesnt want to risk cashing in now, because we all know how quickly a kicker can be out of the league or at the very least have their value drop (Suisham, Cundiff). Gotta strike while the coal is hot. He doesnt want to have Tucker drop his accuracy a 3rd straight year and fall another bracket.

I think the key words are that he wont entertain Ravens offers next offseason, which tells me he knows the Ravens prefer to let him play this year out on the tag and then sign him next year if he rebounds. The Ravens got Cundiff'ed after all. Had to cut him the year after signing him to a big deal, so they know first hand how giving your kicker money can screw you over for a couple years.

But, I feel pretty good about the fact that Tucker isnt going to fall off a cliff... hes a big part of the community, a fan favorite, and has hit some big kicks for us. Hit 3 game winners last year alone (though I almost wish he hadn't). I hope they get it done bc I really like the guy, and think hes going to be a great kicker for quite a while... but I can certainly understand the Ravens wanting to wait til next year, especially if Tucker is trying to get in that $5m/yr range.

 

Plus, the whole "they offered him less" thing could be misleading. We dont know if it means they offered him less guaranteed money with a higher per year average, less per year average but with more guaranteed up front (or guaranteed salary over the first 2-3 years), or if it was straight out less of both.

If they turned down the 1st offer wanting more guaranteed, its not disrespectful for the Ravens to come back with a bigger guaranteed offer but then asking for Tucker to sacrifice some money/yr in order to get it. I mean, that's what a negotiation is - a give and take. If you want this, give me a little there. Same thing - If Tucker wanted more per year, its totally fine for the Ravens to give him that but ask for a little off on the guarantee. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

12 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I just can imagine the Ravens wanting to see improved consistency this year and wanting to tag and sign him next year instead of this year (since the injury risk for a kicker is practically zero), but those comments, if true, obviously threw a wrench in things.

Exactly. We did get Cundiff'ed, and we got to see first hand the Steelers get Suisham'ed which allowed us to win. The whole reason Tucker is here is bc we got Cundiff'ed the year after we gave him a big deal (for kickers). And we had to eat some money there. Kicker is probably the most volatile position in football. We've seen great kickers, fall the rock bottom in less than a year, and even some rebound back to being good again (Hauschka, sp?).

I love Tucker and want him here long term.... but i understand the Ravens taking a harder stance here than expected. Especially when theyve seen his accuracy drop 2 years in a row... thats 1 year away from being a serious trend; which would then be only the 1st year in a pretty substantial commitment, especially for a kicker.

[rmcjacket23]

41 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

You're right in that $700k isnt much in the grand scheme of things, but i think the more appropriate way to look at it is the % increase to the next highest paid. At $5m/yr that would be a 16% increase in the average annual compared to Gostkowski. Pretty big jump percentage wise. I dont know what that looks like in comparison to precedents set at the other positions in terms of the percentage increase over the previously highest paid, but that could play a part.

Contracts have a ripple effect around the league where each new contract becomes bargaining power for the next guy. And it could be that we dont want to set the precedent that every year deems a 16% increase in annual salary for the best FA at each position. Might give Brandon Williams a bargaining chip to say he deserves a 16% increase on Harrison's contract.

 

It could have nothing to do with it, but if it does i get it. For a kicker we're only talking $700k - basically pennies in terms of overall spend. But, a 16% increase for the next FA we try to sign, like Williams would mean a precedent of him getting $10.72 million/yr to Harrison's $9.25m/yr. May not be a cat they want to let out of the bag.

Partially true, but also consider that the salary cap is now 8% higher. Generally, as the salary cap rises, so does the cost of players. 

So by inflation of the salary cap alone, if Tucker thought he deserved a par-level contract with Gostkowski ($4.3M/year), then he could realistically ask for $4.6M a year, because that's Gostkowski's contract adjusted for another year of cap inflation.

So while it may be 16% higher (which I agree with others that he's not asking for this type of deal), half of that is justifiable based on cap inflation.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

31 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

I don't agree with that sentiment solely because we're talking about Special Teams here.  When Gostkowski signed, he got a 14% increase over the next highest paid kicker at the time.  I highly doubt teams are going into negotiations, pointing at a kicker, and saying he set the percentage mark.  The contract increases have everything to do with the overall salary cap increases.

Gostkowskis increase was in comparison to a contract from 2 years prior... unless of course you're referring to Dan Bailey, in which case his guaranteed money was almost half of Gostkowski's and was a 7 year deal so the average is kind of inflated since the Cowboys can get out of the deal after 2 years with no harm. Not to mention Gostkowskis has shown to be clearly a better and more consistent kicker than any of the previous contracts.

Tucker is in the convo, but i think consensus would say is slightly below Gostkowski, and is signing a deal just 1 year after. So the previous precedent was a 14% increase after 2 years for the hands down best kicker, unless the 14% increase is comparing to Bailey's in which case its a bad comparison considering his average salary is inflated by money he'll never see.

So, Tucker getting an even bigger % increase would be a pretty big precedent.

But, thats assuming hes asking for ~$5m/yr which we dont know, so it might be a useless argument.

[rmw10]

2 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Gostkowskis increase was in comparison to a contract from 2 years prior... unless of course you're referring to Dan Bailey, in which case his guaranteed money was almost half of Gostkowski's and was a 7 year deal so the average is kind of inflated since the Cowboys can get out of the deal after 2 years with no harm. Not to mention Gostkowskis has shown to be clearly a better and more consistent kicker than any of the previous contracts.

Tucker is in the convo, but i think consensus would say is slightly below Gostkowski, and is signing a deal just 1 year after. So the previous precedent was a 14% increase after 2 years for the hands down best kicker, unless the 14% increase is comparing to Bailey's in which case its a bad comparison considering his average salary is inflated by money he'll never see.

So, Tucker getting an even bigger % increase would be a pretty big precedent.

But, thats assuming hes asking for ~$5m/yr which we dont know, so it might be a useless argument.

Yeah that's one thing I wanted to mention.  I don't think Tucker is actually getting $5M per year.  I'd imagine that's the asking price (what agent isn't going to start high?), but they'll settle somewhere just above Gostkowski.

I just don't believe that, say, a QB and his agent are going to walk into negotiations and ask for 16% more because that's what a kicker got.  That's not to belittle the position or anything, but we're looking at a position that while important, is somewhat replaceable at a fraction of the cost.  I think special teams is where you'll eventually stagnate on how much they're going to be paid.  A kicker is important but I highly doubt you're going to see them getting 5 year, $30M deals or something ridiculous like that.  I think guys like Gostkowski and Tucker are getting up to the max.

[rmcjacket23]

3 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Gostkowskis increase was in comparison to a contract from 2 years prior... unless of course you're referring to Dan Bailey, in which case his guaranteed money was almost half of Gostkowski's and was a 7 year deal so the average is kind of inflated since the Cowboys can get out of the deal after 2 years with no harm. Not to mention Gostkowskis has shown to be clearly a better and more consistent kicker than any of the previous contracts.

Tucker is in the convo, but i think consensus would say is slightly below Gostkowski, and is signing a deal just 1 year after. So the previous precedent was a 14% increase after 2 years for the hands down best kicker, unless the 14% increase is comparing to Bailey's in which case its a bad comparison considering his average salary is inflated by money he'll never see.

So, Tucker getting an even bigger % increase would be a pretty big precedent.

But, thats assuming hes asking for ~$5m/yr which we dont know, so it might be a useless argument.

The two most recent deals that make sense are Gostkowski's from last year and Crosby's from roughly three months ago.

He should slot somewhere in between, which is between $4-$4.3M. I can't see his agent going he should be higher than $4.5, though again I think its laughable we are talking about a couple hundred K difference.

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, rmw10 said:

Yeah that's one thing I wanted to mention.  I don't think Tucker is actually getting $5M per year.  I'd imagine that's the asking price (what agent isn't going to start high?), but they'll settle somewhere just above Gostkowski.

I just don't believe that, say, a QB and his agent are going to walk into negotiations and ask for 16% more because that's what a kicker got.  That's not to belittle the position or anything, but we're looking at a position that while important, is somewhat replaceable at a fraction of the cost.  I think special teams is where you'll eventually stagnate on how much they're going to be paid.  A kicker is important but I highly doubt you're going to see them getting 5 year, $30M deals or something ridiculous like that.  I think guys like Gostkowski and Tucker are getting up to the max.

I'd dare say no agent is dumb enough to compare cross positions in his negotiating position.