Jump to content

  •  

Photo
- - - - -

The All Revis Trade Discussion Threads are the Same Discussion Thread - MERGED NUMEROUS TIMES


  • Please log in to reply
784 replies to this topic

#626 faba

faba

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 24,601 posts
  • LocationHolmdel

Posted 28 January 2013 - 05:50 PM

It's been brought up to death. I've brought it up only 15 times myself.

He's a $12M cap hit to trade, but it's a "net" cap hit of $3M. $3M is locked into hitting 2013's cap no matter what. So you don't count that twice. Plus his $6M salary for the year.

Lose him next year and it's a pure $9M cap hit, which is a pure net $9M hit.

Keep him via an extension/reworking of his current deal and add $3M/year to whatever numbers we agree upon for the cap hits through 2016 for money we've already paid him in the past (your $12M divided over 4 years). So new deal worth $17M/year is effectively $20M/year, etc.

He isn't worth that, and the reason isn't because he isn't a great enough CB.

We'll see what his real demands are. No one wants to trade Revis just for the sake of trading him. He is not affordable long-term (even less so for us than for another team because of his prior bonus money I mentioned), and a long-term deal doesn't mean squat to him. Barring a similar clause Tannenbaum put in there, where he get extended forever at cheap dollars if he holds out for even 1 hour, he's just going to hold out again in a couple of years. And I don't see him signing another contract with that language in it because he clearly wanted to hold out yet again before the 2012 season.

We can't afford him long term, can't trust him to not hold out again if we can find common ground on a reasonable deal, and are going nowhere this year with or without him. Get something for him while we can unless he agrees to a $10-12M/year deal with aggressive anti-holdout language in it (meaning salaries are guaranteed rather than a lot of signing bonus money being paid, and those guarantees disappear if he holds out and his non-guaranteed salary drops to $3M/year). He'll never sign that so get something for him while the iron's hot.


Sperm our capologist supreme! WE or any team can not handicap ourselves tying too much into one player- so if we can not make it work we have to explore trading Revis
  • 0
Treat people with how you want to be treated-with respect.

#627 bitonti

bitonti

    Draft Bathroom Attendant

  • Members
  • 14,518 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 05:59 PM

We can't afford him long term,


If the Jets can't afford him, how can other teams? Everyone has the same salary cap.

Not being sarcastic I really want to know how 121 million in payroll doesn't have room for another Revis contract.

Grantland says he's the best player ever to be put on the block. fwiw.

http://www.grantland...ers-ever-traded

Edited by bitonti, 28 January 2013 - 06:00 PM.

  • 0

My posts have to get worse, so they can get better.


#628 LAD_Brooklyn

LAD_Brooklyn

    Rookie Free Agent

  • Members
  • 618 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:16 PM

Um, why would we do that trade? Ridiculous.


Huh? Do you have any insight of the value of draft picks? The 1st overall is valued at 3,000 points while the 9th overall is 1,350. For us to normally trade up to the 1st it would require swapping a high 1st, giving up their current 2nd rounder and trading away 2 future 1st round picks. This is similar to what the Redskins did to trade up with the Rams.

Having the number one pick is a huge trade asset for any team looking for an elite prospect or a ransom. Also their 2nd round pick is the 33rd pick? That's like a late 1st rounder.
  • 0

#629 bitonti

bitonti

    Draft Bathroom Attendant

  • Members
  • 14,518 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:16 PM

but keeping revis will hamstring our ability to upgrade the parts of the team that did fail


not really. All they have to do is wait a year and get rid of Mark, use Mark's money on a new QB.
  • 0

My posts have to get worse, so they can get better.


#630 LAD_Brooklyn

LAD_Brooklyn

    Rookie Free Agent

  • Members
  • 618 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:20 PM

If the Jets can't afford him, how can other teams? Everyone has the same salary cap.

Not being sarcastic I really want to know how 121 million in payroll doesn't have room for another Revis contract.

Grantland says he's the best player ever to be put on the block. fwiw.

http://www.grantland...ers-ever-traded


It's make zero sense when people utter that. We may only have $55 mil on the books in 2014 with Scott, Sanchez, Holmes, Cro and Pouha gone. I thought the whole point of trading him was not being able to agree upon a reasonable contract?
  • 0

#631 #27TheDominator

#27TheDominator

    Forza Rhinos!

  • Members
  • 26,384 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:24 PM

Huh? Do you have any insight of the value of draft picks? The 1st overall is valued at 3,000 points while the 9th overall is 1,350. For us to normally trade up to the 1st it would require swapping a high 1st, giving up their current 2nd rounder and trading away 2 future 1st round picks. This is similar to what the Redskins did to trade up with the Rams.

Having the number one pick is a huge trade asset for any team looking for an elite prospect or a ransom. Also their 2nd round pick is the 33rd pick? That's like a late 1st rounder.


I thought the point structure was being reevaluated? That isn't an exact science. You think the Broncos would have to up their offer because they are at the bottom of the round? I think that helps them. Look at the Abraham deal. Everybody was so happy we got a 1st. Yippee. They can give us a less value, but the press and public will be more likely to be accepting.
  • 0

by Angel crazy with over 3000 post some day 


#632 LAD_Brooklyn

LAD_Brooklyn

    Rookie Free Agent

  • Members
  • 618 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:24 PM

how about the chief just give us their #1 and 3rd or gtfo.


Too valuable of an asset. If anything the Chiefs would be better of trading out of the number one overall pick and gathering up assets like the Rams. From there trade one of the 1st rounder they received for Revis, but doing so straight up doesn't sound too smart at all.
  • 0

#633 TnT

TnT

    Patty Cake Champion

  • Members
  • 790 posts
  • LocationMiami

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:26 PM

Revis to Denver for Von Miller, Brock Osweiler.
We can even throw in Tebow...LETS DO IT!
  • 0

#634 CrazyCarl40

CrazyCarl40

    3rd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 11,133 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:26 PM

Huh? Do you have any insight of the value of draft picks? The 1st overall is valued at 3,000 points while the 9th overall is 1,350. For us to normally trade up to the 1st it would require swapping a high 1st, giving up their current 2nd rounder and trading away 2 future 1st round picks. This is similar to what the Redskins did to trade up with the Rams.

Having the number one pick is a huge trade asset for any team looking for an elite prospect or a ransom. Also their 2nd round pick is the 33rd pick? That's like a late 1st rounder.


I think he means why would we trade up to number one when there isn't someone there worth trading for.
  • 0

#635 unbanmadmike1

unbanmadmike1

    3rd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,814 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:34 PM

Huh? Do you have any insight of the value of draft picks? The 1st overall is valued at 3,000 points while the 9th overall is 1,350. For us to normally trade up to the 1st it would require swapping a high 1st, giving up their current 2nd rounder and trading away 2 future 1st round picks. This is similar to what the Redskins did to trade up with the Rams.

Having the number one pick is a huge trade asset for any team looking for an elite prospect or a ransom. Also their 2nd round pick is the 33rd pick? That's like a late 1st rounder.

Not this year it's not.
  • 0
Tank for Teddy.

#636 LAD_Brooklyn

LAD_Brooklyn

    Rookie Free Agent

  • Members
  • 618 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:35 PM

I thought the point structure was being reevaluated? That isn't an exact science.


Look at the current point structure and look at the trades the past two drafts and the current point structures fits right in line in regards to draft trades.


You think the Broncos would have to up their offer because they are at the bottom of the round? I think that helps them.


Why shouldn't a lesser valued pick have less value than a higher? I don't even know how this can be questioned.

Look at the Abraham deal. Everybody was so happy we got a 1st. Yippee. They can give us a less value, but the press and public will be more likely to be accepting.


I don't know how Abraham and Revis situation are even comparable as the situation are tremendously different.

Edited by LAD_Brooklyn, 28 January 2013 - 06:43 PM.

  • 0

#637 unbanmadmike1

unbanmadmike1

    3rd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,814 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:41 PM

not really. All they have to do is wait a year and get rid of Mark, use Mark's money on a new QB.

Money won't be an issue with the QB, they will just have to draft the right one.
  • 0
Tank for Teddy.

#638 SenorGato

SenorGato

    Schottenhomer

  • Members
  • 19,634 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:45 PM

but keeping revis will hamstring our ability to upgrade the parts of the team that did fail


That's not true. If they plan to draft their pass rusher and QB in the next two years then those positions will be cheap while Revis is not.
  • 1

We sick an' tired of-a your ism-skism game. Dyin' 'n' goin' to heaven in-a Jesus' name, Lord. We know when we understand:

Almighty God is a living man. - Bob Marley "Get up Stand up"


#639 unbanmadmike1

unbanmadmike1

    3rd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,814 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 07:26 PM

but keeping revis will hamstring our ability to upgrade the parts of the team that did fail

Not if they trade Cromarte...
  • 0
Tank for Teddy.

#640 stoicsentry

stoicsentry

    Not Really Stoic

  • Writers \ Bloggers
  • 8,178 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 07:44 PM

I think he means why would we trade up to number one when there isn't someone there worth trading for.


Pretty much. I mean, I'm not seeing the point here. We have a future HOF'er to deal. Why trade him to get to the 1 unless we're talking franchise QB or a mega-star at an offensive skill position (e.g. Calvin Johnson-type). I don't see the value here.

Given that there are no sure QB's in this year, and given the fact that future picks are worth less, I would rather trade for future picks

Edited by stoicsentry, 28 January 2013 - 07:45 PM.

  • 0

#641 New York Mick

New York Mick

    Still Censored

  • Members
  • 8,320 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 07:51 PM

Return the favor??? We got ****ing tebow from them and we'd be giving them revis.
  • 0

#642 stugotz81

stugotz81

    2nd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,022 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 07:57 PM

i disagree with King on alot of stuff but he's dead nuts correct that you never get the value back from this type of deal. No matter what the Jets get in return, it will be less than what they are giving up.


I concur
  • 0
You can’t fly with eagles when you keep walking with turkeys

#643 New York Mick

New York Mick

    Still Censored

  • Members
  • 8,320 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 08:07 PM

i disagree with King on alot of stuff but he's dead nuts correct that you never get the value back from this type of deal. No matter what the Jets get in return, it will be less than what they are giving up.


Dallas Walker trade?
  • 0

#644 stugotz81

stugotz81

    2nd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,022 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 08:11 PM

What is the possibility that we have landry, cro, bell, and revis as our starting backfield again next year?

IMO....that should be the focus of the defensive...bc at that point all you need is a little more youth/speed at linebacker and a solid replacement for Pace...then this defense would be ELITE.....maybe if anything we trade cro so we can use that cap relief for the linebackers and/or Pace's replacement. If this Idzik guy is a money expert then he can find a way to use little money to bring some youth/speed to this linebacker core.....and the def line seems to be well on its way by next year with Coples and MO....

I have no solutions or suggestions for the offense...to far gone
  • 0
You can’t fly with eagles when you keep walking with turkeys

#645 SpartanJet

SpartanJet

    "Egg" Pennington Realist

  • Members
  • 467 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 08:14 PM

Personally if I were the Jets I'd work on getting him extended for a reasonable CB value (8m or so plus bonus). If this doesn't work you have to trade him. The idiot bean counter took the Jets leverage away by taking the franchise tag off the table. Sorry getting a potential first rounder or a package of draft picks is greater than 1 selfish player who just wants to get paid. Losing him the year after and getting a POSSIBLE 3rd round draft pick (there are rules to the compensatory picks) is unacceptable. Draft picks are like gold now.

Edited by SpartanJet, 28 January 2013 - 08:14 PM.

  • 0

#646 Matt39

Matt39

    damn you're smooth

  • Members
  • 20,435 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 08:19 PM

Trading Revis gives Rex another reason to draft a CB early
  • 0

#647 Il Mostro

Il Mostro

    Cazzone

  • Members
  • 4,265 posts
  • LocationOut West

Posted 28 January 2013 - 08:21 PM

It's been brought up to death. I've brought it up only 15 times myself.

He's a $12M cap hit to trade, but it's a "net" cap hit of $3M. $3M is locked into hitting 2013's cap no matter what. So you don't count that twice. Plus his $6M salary for the year.

Lose him next year and it's a pure $9M cap hit, which is a pure net $9M hit.

Keep him via an extension/reworking of his current deal and add $3M/year to whatever numbers we agree upon for the cap hits through 2016 for money we've already paid him in the past (your $12M divided over 4 years). So new deal worth $17M/year is effectively $20M/year, etc.

He isn't worth that, and the reason isn't because he isn't a great enough CB.

We'll see what his real demands are. No one wants to trade Revis just for the sake of trading him. He is not affordable long-term (even less so for us than for another team because of his prior bonus money I mentioned), and a long-term deal doesn't mean squat to him. Barring a similar clause Tannenbaum put in there, where he get extended forever at cheap dollars if he holds out for even 1 hour, he's just going to hold out again in a couple of years. And I don't see him signing another contract with that language in it because he clearly wanted to hold out yet again before the 2012 season.

We can't afford him long term, can't trust him to not hold out again if we can find common ground on a reasonable deal, and are going nowhere this year with or without him. Get something for him while we can unless he agrees to a $10-12M/year deal with aggressive anti-holdout language in it (meaning salaries are guaranteed rather than a lot of signing bonus money being paid, and those guarantees disappear if he holds out and his non-guaranteed salary drops to $3M/year). He'll never sign that so get something for him while the iron's hot.


Thank you.
  • 0
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. Then it's just fun.

#648 Jetscode1

Jetscode1

    Veteran

  • Members
  • 7,062 posts
  • LocationNorth America; Western Hemisphere; the Earth; the Solar System; the Universe; the Mind of God

Posted 28 January 2013 - 09:23 PM

If he was under contract to the Steelers or the Patriots does Peter King change his opinion?
  • 0

Det. William 'Bunk' Moreland: A man must have a code. 


#649 jack48

jack48

    2nd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 4,171 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 09:49 PM

I saw 4 teams play a few weeks ago to get into the SB and not one of their CBs was within a sniff of Revis, ability and experience wise. How did these teams possibly get to that point without a Revis? maybe they had some talent? Maybe they had some depth? Maybe they did not ascribe to the stupid NFL myths that some writers do?
  • 0

#650 Cyberjet

Cyberjet

    Practice Squad Player

  • Members
  • 261 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 11:49 PM

That is correct - the Jets will not get someone as great as Revis but at least you don't tie up $$$ that can be spent on two maybe three players that will be valuable to the team and provide more quality at different positions which may make up for a CB who is not as great as Revis. Dump Revis now - the Jets will never have this opportunity again. A risk yes but the right move if you are investing long term.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users