Should Revis be the highest paid defensive player?

[jth1331]

Originally Posted by Smooth Criminal

With as good. Revis is good enough to essentially remove the other teams best receiver. And while that is an incredible feat that not many other people can accomplish, it's irrelevant in today's game if you can't cover the 2-4 other capable receiving targets teams have built these days.

I don't think I'd make him highest paid player. Not that he doesn't deserve it, but with a cap I'd rather balance what I was paying my corners and get 2-3 solid guys rather than one guy like Revis. If there was no cap Id give him anything to keep him. He's worth whatever he asks for since he's one of a very elite few the can do what he does.

This point is why I think he doesn't deserve the highest paid defensive player moniker. Teams these days have 3-5 good solid targets to pass the ball to. If you take out 1, there is still 2-4 guys who are highly capable of hurting your team.
Corners are a nice piece to the puzzle, but not a necessity.

[LonghornsLegend]

Originally Posted by jth1331

This point is why I think he doesn't deserve the highest paid defensive player moniker. Teams these days have 3-5 good solid targets to pass the ball to. If you take out 1, there is still 2-4 guys who are highly capable of hurting your team.
Corners are a nice piece to the puzzle, but not a necessity.

If this was the case why haven't teams traditionally done this vs the Jets the last few years? If it's just so easy that he locks onto the #1 guy, so throw to options 2-4 why hasn't there been much success in doing so?

[49erNation85]

Too bad he wasn't in san fran. would help our defense so much. Do it Jim!

[derza222]

The cap thing with Revis is interesting. First of all, the Jets' cap issues are overblown right now. They can save over 30 million by cutting Jason Smith, Calvin Pace, Bart Scott, Eric Smith, and Tim Tebow - which are all basically locks. And then they can save over 35 million if they cut Sione Pouha too, which has a pretty good chance of happening given they're rebuilding and he has health issues. It's far from good, but not as bad as it's made out to be. They'll probably re-work some contracts too. And then next year they can save over 15 million on top of that by cutting Sanchez and Holmes, again basically locks, and another 5 million by cutting David Harris which has a pretty good chance of happening and will almost certainly happen if he plays like he did this past year again next year.

So by 2014 the Jets will likely be free of all of their big, bad contracts besides Ferguson, Mangold, and Cromartie. They don't really have much of a need to get rid of Brick or Mangold at this point, and if they want to cut Cromartie next season that will save an additional 9.5 million.

Purely for cap purposes this season, they're actually better off trading Cromartie than Revis. Right now they've got Cromartie locked up for two more years at a little over 10 million per season, which is less than Revis would make but given he's not as good and his play will drop off more when he loses his athleticism I'd argue the difference is relatively reasonable. In addition, trading Revis this offseason creates around 3 million in dead money I believe in the year where the cap is more of an issue, whereas they'd save something in the 8-9 million range by trading Cromartie.

And moving Cromartie, while it would return less, is more of a sell high with him coming off of a career year while trading Revis wanting a new contract coming off a torn ACL is a sell low. They basically have to trade one or the other and will probably hang on to one, but assuming Revis gets a first round pick more in return than Cromartie (which is aggressive) you're weighing the difference between Revis and Cromartie, a first round pick, and probably 3 million in cap room after you pay the draft pick. It's an interesting debate.


Back to the original question, I think I'd have less of a problem with it than some of the guys we've seen get huge deals recently but I'd be reluctant to make him the highest paid defensive player in the league. He's beyond elite and in a class of his own as a corner. The benefit to Revis is he works really hard at his craft, has such tremendous technique that I think he'll have success later in his career than we see with some guys, I don't think he's going to bust on that huge contract. We've seen guys like Mario Williams and Albert Haynesworth get tons of money and it hasn't really paid off. I don't think that would happen with Revis. It's a fairly safe move to pay him, though the injury is obviously a concern. He's also obviously has much more value to some teams than others, the Jets being a team he's clearly got more value for. Push comes to shove I think the highest paid defensive player in the league should be a pass rusher, but for the Jets I think it might make sense as long as they're able to somehow protect themselves from him coming back poorly off that injury. I'm sure there's a creative way to do it too, more money overall but less guaranteed or vice versa. He's also the best player the Jets have had in a long time so unless they're able to get a kings ransom for him it's going to be tough from a morale perspective. They either have to trade him or pay him though. I think it makes more sense to pay him and trade Cro than anything else.

[cmarq83]

Originally Posted by derza222

The cap thing with Revis is interesting. First of all, the Jets' cap issues are overblown right now. They can save over 30 million by cutting Jason Smith, Calvin Pace, Bart Scott, Eric Smith, and Tim Tebow - which are all basically locks. And then they can save over 35 million if they cut Sione Pouha too, which has a pretty good chance of happening given they're rebuilding and he has health issues. It's far from good, but not as bad as it's made out to be. They'll probably re-work some contracts too. And then next year they can save over 15 million on top of that by cutting Sanchez and Holmes, again basically locks, and another 5 million by cutting David Harris which has a pretty good chance of happening and will almost certainly happen if he plays like he did this past year again next year.

So by 2014 the Jets will likely be free of all of their big, bad contracts besides Ferguson, Mangold, and Cromartie. They don't really have much of a need to get rid of Brick or Mangold at this point, and if they want to cut Cromartie next season that will save an additional 9.5 million.

Yes, this is the thing that a lot of people miss when analyzing the Jets cap situation. This year it is pretty bad, and could cost them decent players like Keller, Moore, and Landry. However, since their drafts have been so bad, they really don't have much coming up the pipeline in terms of guys who are going to be getting paid big 2nd contracts. Wilkerson is still 3 years away, and Kerley won't break the bank even when his contract expires. As the Jets cut some of the awful 2nd contracts they signed they're going to have a good amount of cap space to throw around.

[marks01234]

He'll get a Mario Williams type deal (6 years/100 milllion). And he's worth it.

Mario's deal has most of guaranteed money in the first three years. Revis will have similar. That limits the exposure for the a team. The best corner in the game for $16 million a year is a pretty good value. He's not a big risk either - at least over three years. ACL injuries aren't what they use to be. Mario's torn pectoral would be as big of a deal to me than Revis' ACL.

I do think the league is going to transition to more of zone schemes, which will hurt Revis' value and the overall value at the corner position.

Where exactly will the Colts, Browns or Dolphins find better value than a 16 million dollar cap hit for Revis?

[Smooth Criminal]

Originally Posted by LonghornsLegend

If this was the case why haven't teams traditionally done this vs the Jets the last few years? If it's just so easy that he locks onto the #1 guy, so throw to options 2-4 why hasn't there been much success in doing so?

They have other good cover guys and a pretty formidable defense as a whole.

[derza222]

Originally Posted by cmarq83

Yes, this is the thing that a lot of people miss when analyzing the Jets cap situation. This year it is pretty bad, and could cost them decent players like Keller, Moore, and Landry. However, since their drafts have been so bad, they really don't have much coming up the pipeline in terms of guys who are going to be getting paid big 2nd contracts. Wilkerson is still 3 years away, and Kerley won't break the bank even when his contract expires. As the Jets cut some of the awful 2nd contracts they signed they're going to have a good amount of cap space to throw around.

Exactly. The Jets' bad cap situation isn't really a factor here. They'll be fine in 2014, and trading him right now hurts their cap more than it helps it.

[bigbluedefense]

This is tough for me. Lord knows I love Darrelle Revis. But 16 mill a season is something only qbs and maaaaaaybe a DE should make.

But at 14 million, yeah, I pay him.

[cmarq83]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

This is tough for me. Lord knows I love Darrelle Revis. But 16 mill a season is something only qbs and maaaaaaybe a DE should make.

But at 14 million, yeah, I pay him.

It's downright foolish to think this way. You consider what the player means to your team, and what your cap situation is moving forward. Revis is far and away the best player on their team, and contributes the most to winning games at the moment. They have nobody to pay besides him for the next 3 years.

Yes everyone wants to pay elite money to a Drew Brees or a Von Miller type, but there are only a handful of those guys in the league for 32 teams. If $2 million is the difference between signing somebody who is the absolute advantage your team has over every other team, and not signing that guy, you'd be a fool to let that guy go. How're the Jets going to find a better way of allocating that money? They don't have guys in house, and there aren't guys who're going to hit the market who'll get them a better return.

[bigbluedefense]

Originally Posted by cmarq83

It's downright foolish to think this way. You consider what the player means to your team, and what your cap situation is moving forward. Revis is far and away the best player on their team, and contributes the most to winning games at the moment. They have nobody to pay besides him for the next 3 years.

Yes everyone wants to pay elite money to a Drew Brees or a Von Miller type, but there are only a handful of those guys in the league for 32 teams. If $2 million is the difference between signing somebody who is the absolute advantage your team has over every other team, and not signing that guy, you'd be a fool to let that guy go. How're the Jets going to find a better way of allocating that money? They don't have guys in house, and there aren't guys who're going to hit the market who'll get them a better return.

This is true. I'm not thinking properly. They don't have a franchise qb or anyone who resembles a franchise qb that will require a contract in 4 years, this is very true.

And in that case, yes, I do pay him. Great point. Didn't think of it.

[descendency]

It may be depressing for fans to lose a player like Revis, but overpaying for a player compared to his value is how you get in a contract mess in the first place. Ones like Mario Williams and the Bills is just exacerbated by the fact that he is playing like ****, but they paid way too much.

If the Jets cut all of that salary and shift other players in the future more, they will have no hope of winning the division any time soon, paying Revis or not.

I still don't think any corner is worth top defender money. I like the idea of a 3 year deal with a very high percentage guaranteed. But would Revis want to sign away years 28, 29, and 30 of his life to a team and then come back on the market at 31?

[derza222]

Not sure what you mean by "if the Jets cut all of that salary". The majority of the highly paid players on the team right now at the very least below average at their positions especially for what they're being paid (Sanchez, Scott, Pace, Harris), are seriously overpaid bench players (Jason and Eric Smith), or have serious attitude issues (Holmes). Harris is a bounceback candidate and Pouha is good when healthy, but outside of that it's pretty bad.

[bigbluedefense]

Good god wtf was Tannenbaum doing? Did he not see this exploding in his face?

They have to suck for 1 more year, then they'll have plenty of cap space to extend Revis and keep him. Plus the qb they draft will be cheap as hell, and by the time his contract is up so will Revis's and they won't have to worry about overlapping money or having 30 mill a season tied up to 2 players.

They just have to be willing to suck for 1 more year. It's not that bad when you think about it.

[derza222]

Yeah, he tried way too hard to keep a pretty good (but far from great) team intact, overpaid a bunch of average players, and it completely blew up in his face. They'll have a pretty clean slate to work with in 2014 but should be pretty bad this year.

I just don't know if Idzik takes a shot on a QB in this year's draft or shores up a few of the other 11 or so positions they need long-term starters at and takes someone high next year. Frankly I think a good portion of the QB's in this year's draft are clear upgrades over Sanchez, but you don't want that to hold you back from taking someone next year when you will probably have a high draft pick. And if you don't, then you wasted a reasonably high pick this year. But at the same time I don't see how you go into next year and start Sanchez, so it's interesting. I'd kind of like them to sign Matt Moore.

[jth1331]

All of this makes me remember to Mario Williams signing.
Paid the highest defensive player when he's not even close to being that was just ridiculous.

[bigbluedefense]

Originally Posted by derza222

Yeah, he tried way too hard to keep a pretty good (but far from great) team intact, overpaid a bunch of average players, and it completely blew up in his face. They'll have a pretty clean slate to work with in 2014 but should be pretty bad this year.

I just don't know if Idzik takes a shot on a QB in this year's draft or shores up a few of the other 11 or so positions they need long-term starters at and takes someone high next year. Frankly I think a good portion of the QB's in this year's draft are clear upgrades over Sanchez, but you don't want that to hold you back from taking someone next year when you will probably have a high draft pick. And if you don't, then you wasted a reasonably high pick this year. But at the same time I don't see how you go into next year and start Sanchez, so it's interesting. I'd kind of like them to sign Matt Moore.

I take a qb. Bc you can afford to gamble on a round 1 qb nowadays. They're cheap. You never pass on a qb this year to try to get one next year. You never know what happens next year, with that thinking you'll wait forever.

If they like a guy, and he's there, they have to take him. If they hate all these qbs fine I can understand passing, but if they like a guy they better take him.

[G Mobile]

Biggest contract ever just means most recent contract for a good player. There are no available elite DE or QBs they can give that money on so they are going to spend it on the top 5 player they have already.

The 16 mil a year average is such a loaded idea. The contracts are rarely spread out evenly like that. Either its front loaded so Revis gets paid now if they have space or is back loaded and he probably doesn't see those huge salary years at the end and they cut him.

[derza222]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

I take a qb. Bc you can afford to gamble on a round 1 qb nowadays. They're cheap. You never pass on a qb this year to try to get one next year. You never know what happens next year, with that thinking you'll wait forever.

If they like a guy, and he's there, they have to take him. If they hate all these qbs fine I can understand passing, but if they like a guy they better take him.

Yeah, I agree. If they like a guy in round 1 then they should absolutely take him. My question was more along the lines of, lets say they don't like anybody as a legit franchise guy. But in round 2 or 3 there's a guy who, while they're not confident he's a franchise guy, they think is an upgrade. Which seems realistic given there are plenty of QB's in this class I'm not sold on as franchise guys but would still rather see starting than Sanchez.

[bigbluedefense]

Originally Posted by derza222

Yeah, I agree. If they like a guy in round 1 then they should absolutely take him. My question was more along the lines of, lets say they don't like anybody as a legit franchise guy. But in round 2 or 3 there's a guy who, while they're not confident he's a franchise guy, they think is an upgrade. Which seems realistic given there are plenty of QB's in this class I'm not sold on as franchise guys but would still rather see starting than Sanchez.

That's a good question. Honestly I don't know. The nice thing about 2nd round qbs is you have no loyalty to them. You can give them a year, then give up on them if you want to. There's no public pressure to give a 2nd rounder a chance.

The gamble is if he is just a stop gap for a year then you wasted a 2nd round pick on essentially a backup quarterback. So they really have to like the guy and not settle.

[ph90702]

Originally Posted by descendency

http://www.ganggreennation.com/2013/...ts-100-million

Apparently, he's asking to be that, the highest paid defensive player. I'm not sure this is "news" but it has potential to be an interesting discussion...

He basically wants to be paid as the highest paid defensive player in the game, which would put the figure somewhere around 6 years 100 million with 50 million guaranteed. He's arguably the best defensive player (obviously, not this year), but would you give him the salary to say that?

And before someone points it out, I know how negotiations work. This is why I don't laugh at Joe Flacco for telling the Ravens he wants to be the highest paid QB in the league. The same is true about Revis asking for 100 million as a CB. He's basically asking for 16 million a year. While the current standard for elite CBs is much much lower, he's the unquestioned best in the game right now. So it's up to the teams to decide if he's worth that much more than the others. If he asks for 12, he will likely end up with 10. If he asks for 16, maybe he gets 12.

Personally, I don't think corners make that big of an impact to justify that big of a salary cap hit. Revis has had some amazing games against NE and the Patriots have still won. Let's also not forget that he is coming off an ACL injury, which has ended more than 1 career. If he comes back and sucks next year then the Jets (or whomever) could be on the rope for 50 million. . .

No. That's quarterback money. The only position that I don't view as replaceable is a franchise quarterback.

[ph90702]

Originally Posted by jth1331

All of this makes me remember to Mario Williams signing.
Paid the highest defensive player when he's not even close to being that was just ridiculous.

It's Buffalo. They have to pay highly for elite players.

[killxswitch]

How long has it been since the cap went up significantly? It's not like a few years ago where it was just growing and growing out of control. So I don't see how a team could justify such a ridiculous new salary for a corner, even if the team was guaranteed to receive the lockdown "Revis Island" level of play every year.

Tom Brady, Eli Manning, and Ben Roethlisberger are all multi-SB winning QBs. They all make less than $16M/year. How the hell can a corner expect to get more money than a QB that has won 2+ Super Bowls? At least the other non-QB players making that kind of money are in position to have an impact on the ball every down.

[zachsaints52]

I wouldn't pay him 16 mil a year. But I personally would like to do incentive laden deals the higher the salaries are.

[Job Reborn]

Originally Posted by zachsaints52

I wouldn't pay him 16 mil a year. But I personally would like to do incentive laden deals the higher the salaries are.

What kind of incentive?