Seahawks are “exasperated” with Jamal Adams

[playtowinthegame]

Jamal-Pro needs a massage and then meditate with the Honey Badger. 

[slats]

46 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

If he turns it down, he'll hit the market in the 2024 FA period as a 28 year old, and probably gets a top of market 5 year deal at that age (also through his age 33 season). And the market will have probably risen enough to make the money he gets for years 1 and 2 of his new deal (2024-25, which would've been the last two years on Seattle's current offer) more than enough to cover the 5.2M he "gives up" by playing out his tag.

There’s a lot of presumption here that I don’t think Adams can count on. He’s already severely damaged his brand. It’s one thing to shoot your way off a lowly franchise like the Jets, but Seattle is generally considered a first rate, player friendly organization and they’re making a very fair offer. How many teams out there will want to bring him in? 
 
Also assumes his level of play remains high, which is no guarantee. If he gets an ACL (not wishing it on him) or something that doesn’t end his career but slows him down permanently, what’s he worth on the market then? Between his attitude and potentially lesser play, probably not a lot. 
 
You’re talking about a $5.2M difference over two years, but a four year deal would mean another $35M over the following two years, with him probably guaranteed to collect at least half of that, or a difference of $22.7M and hitting free agency at 29. That’s not chump change. 
 
But I don’t suspect that there’s any logic to Jamal’s thinking at all. I think it’s all ego and emotion. Because if he was thinking rationally and agreeing with you, he’d be in camp making sure he was the best player he could possibly be in an effort to earn that first franchise tag - which is probably in question right now, too. 

[Lith]

8 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

We shouldn't be deriving pleasure from the Seahawks misfortune, but we are.  They should have seen this coming.

As for Adams, there's no misfortune in being offered more money than any other player at his position, there is just miscalculation on his part.

No.  As long as we have their first round pick next year, we absolutely should be deriving pleasure from the Seahawks struggles.  And it is a little bit sweeter for me, since my sister and bro-in-law moved out to Washington State about 15 years ago and became "fair weather" Seahawks fans immediately rewarded with 3 Super Bowl appearances and 1 championship.   Let them and those damn 12s rot at the bottom the the league standings for a while.  

Yes, the Schadenfraude is strong in this one.

[ZachEY]

47 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

If they're offering him 17.5M (as reported) they are offering to make him the highest paid safety. And him refusing to take it probably is exasperating them.

Bet you if they offered to tear up the option year he'd take it.

My point is maybe they don’t want him to take it and are trying to control the PR.

[Maynard13]

3 hours ago, mrcoops said:

This would be an ideal time for the Jets to announce a long-term contract with Marcus Maye, mainly for the giggles.

Stupid CBA won't allow it, but it would be fun.

Announcing the agreement GM Joe Douglas could say, "We believe that Marcus is the best safety in the NFL, bar none. He is exceptional in coverage, and shows true leadership both on and off the field. Marcus has handled himself like a true professional throughout his Jets career, including during recent contract negotiations. Marcus never let his desire for a new contract get in the way of his commitment to the Jets and his teammates, and acted with maturity and professionalism throughout the process. We are delighted to reward his excellent play and commitment to the Jets with a new contract that will truly ensure that he remains a Jet for life."

P.S. **** Off Jamal

[nycdan]

The Seahawks have a bigger issue with Jamal than just the cost of him being tagged. If they tag him, they can't use it on DK Metcalf who is also looking for a big payday.  So Jamal could, in theory, end up costing them two firsts and a top, young WR.  Or they could end up eating crow on Jamal and letting him walk in order to keep Metcalf (which is probably far smarter).  

There's really no way they come out of this happy.

Seahawk fans have finally woken up to this as being a horrible trade although some have taken the viewpoint that the picks would have been wasted there anyway.  Sound familiar?

I laugh at some of the things Adams was quoted to have said after the trade about how happy he was going to be in Seattle and that he had faith that the money would take care of itself.  On the other hand, he did have some very pointed and truthful things to say about Gase, which we are now all completely in agreement with:

“I don’t feel like he’s the right leader for this organization to reach the Promised Land.”

“We had a solid relationship. I don’t hate Adam Gase. You know, I don’t hate Adam Gase. I have no problem with Adam Gase. I just didn’t feel he handled certain situations well as a head coach, and that’s just my opinion. Everybody is entitled to their opinion.”

 

[ScarletKnight89]

He's their problem now. Thanks for the picks. 

[GreenFish]

Not sure how they can feel exasperated. Jamal is a leader of MEN.

[greenwichjetfan]

All I keep thinking about is how amazing it would be if for whatever reason (not wishing injury), the seahawks have a sh*tty year. Like 6-11 kind of year. Another top 10 pick to add to what will probably be our own top 10 pick would really help us out. 

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

I need to stop reading this thread. I'm feeling the anxiety and frustration of what it would have been like to still have Jamal Adams on this team. He is no longer our headache, but I'm somehow still feeling it. 

[The Crusher]

What we all need to learn from this is never buy a used car from a man named Joe Douglas.

[Sperm Edwards]

36 minutes ago, slats said:

There’s a lot of presumption here that I don’t think Adams can count on. He’s already severely damaged his brand. It’s one thing to shoot your way off a lowly franchise like the Jets, but Seattle is generally considered a first rate, player friendly organization and they’re making a very fair offer. How many teams out there will want to bring him in? 
 
Also assumes his level of play remains high, which is no guarantee. If he gets an ACL (not wishing it on him) or something that doesn’t end his career but slows him down permanently, what’s he worth on the market then? Between his attitude and potentially lesser play, probably not a lot. 
 
You’re talking about a $5.2M difference over two years, but a four year deal would mean another $35M over the following two years, with him probably guaranteed to collect at least half of that, or a difference of $22.7M and hitting free agency at 29. That’s not chump change. 
 
But I don’t suspect that there’s any logic to Jamal’s thinking at all. I think it’s all ego and emotion. Because if he was thinking rationally and agreeing with you, he’d be in camp making sure he was the best player he could possibly be in an effort to earn that first franchise tag - which is probably in question right now, too. 

Kind of my thinking, too.

It's not at all a given that someone else would also want to make Adams the highest paid safety in the league a year or two (or three) from now. The Seahawks have more of an incentive to make an appealing offer to Adams than would any other team, because they really don't want (additional) egg on their face after surrendering 2 firsts and more for him.

I'm not sure his value as a UFA now (if he was one) is higher now than it was a year earlier. Honestly I think it's lower. A year ago he could blame the lowly Jets for whatever part of the game he was lacking. When he's playing for a defensive kingmaker like Carroll after that, and he's still got coverage issues, then more than just Jets fans now view him as less than a complete safety.

I still think they'll likely bang something out, whereby he gets Seattle to give up something nominal on paper that has no actual value in reality, just to save face a little. But taken to this length he sees he's gotten as much out of them as he's going to get. They've called his bluff. He can call theirs, too, but that's a lot of money to walk away from. 

He's not going to end up with significantly more, and could end up with significantly less. Put permanent injuries aside, since I guess he could get an insurance policy (though a $20MM+ insurance policy itself, for a player with annual injury history already, won't exactly be free). What if his coverage doesn't improve any, he schitzes out mid-game one or two times out of frustration, and further, Carroll stops blitzing him so much so his sack numbers also fade on top of that? With all his other baggage - and talent aside, he clearly has some personal/emotional issues - displayed now with two teams out of two, no one else is going to exceed $17.5MM/year after Seattle's done tagging him. 

[Bruce Harper]

[Bowles Movement]

1 hour ago, Doggin94it said:

Thought I'd come to the opposite conclusion after running the numbers, but Seattle isn't offering enough to make it worth signing.

Jamaal Adams is under contract (or team control, with franchise tags) for 39.6M over the next 3 years (9.86M, 13.5M, 16.86M). They've offered him 17.5M per on a 4 year extension (meaning he plays out this year at 9.86M and the new salary kicks in next year) - that's 44.86M over the same time period - a difference of only 5.2M.

Adams is 25, turning 26 in October. If he takes this deal, he's locked up through the 2025 season, and hits FA again in the 2026 offseason as a 30 (soon to be 31) year old FS, likely looking at another big deal but not top of market, probably for 3 real years (through his age 33 season). If he turns it down, he'll hit the market in the 2024 FA period as a 28 year old, and probably gets a top of market 5 year deal at that age (also through his age 33 season). And the market will have probably risen enough to make the money he gets for years 1 and 2 of his new deal (2024-25, which would've been the last two years on Seattle's current offer) more than enough to cover the 5.2M he "gives up" by playing out his tag.

So for Adams, the rational thing to do is to get a good insurance policy covering injury and play out his tags, since "losing the guaranteed money by getting injured" is his only real incentive to sign.

Note - it would be very different if they were offering to tear up the option year; that would be a difference of 17M over the next 3 years plus he'd hit FA again at 29 (young enough to get a bigger deal). But as it is - he should be sticking to his guns. 

What this analysis fails to mention is that none of Adams money is guaranteed past this year if he isnt extended.  Playing on the Franchise tag only guarantees this years salary.

[nycdan]

25 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Kind of my thinking, too.

It's not at all a given that someone else would also want to make Adams the highest paid safety in the league a year or two (or three) from now. The Seahawks have more of an incentive to make an appealing offer to Adams than would any other team, because they really don't want (additional) egg on their face after surrendering 2 firsts and more for him.

I'm not sure his value as a UFA now (if he was one) is higher now than it was a year earlier. Honestly I think it's lower. A year ago he could blame the lowly Jets for whatever part of the game he was lacking. When he's playing for a defensive kingmaker like Carroll after that, and he's still got coverage issues, then more than just Jets fans now view him as less than a complete safety.

I still think they'll likely bang something out, whereby he gets Seattle to give up something nominal on paper that has no actual value in reality, just to save face a little. But taken to this length he sees he's gotten as much out of them as he's going to get. They've called his bluff. He can call theirs, too, but that's a lot of money to walk away from. 

He's not going to end up with significantly more, and could end up with significantly less. Put permanent injuries aside, since I guess he could get an insurance policy (though a $20MM+ insurance policy itself, for a player with annual injury history already, won't exactly be free). What if his coverage doesn't improve any, he schitzes out mid-game one or two times out of frustration, and further, Carroll stops blitzing him so much so his sack numbers also fade on top of that? With all his other baggage - and talent aside, he clearly has some personal/emotional issues - displayed now with two teams out of two, no one else is going to exceed $17.5MM/year after Seattle's done tagging him. 

Logical.  But when has that been Adams' game?  He strikes me as the type of guy who will walk away from a really good deal because he's concerned that it will make him look 'disrespected' to some imaginary people (i.e. really just him).  As others have said, I am so happy to watch this from a point of indifference where I can chuckle at the stupidity because it doesn't impact the team I care about.

[ZachEY]

26 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Kind of my thinking, too.

It's not at all a given that someone else would also want to make Adams the highest paid safety in the league a year or two (or three) from now. The Seahawks have more of an incentive to make an appealing offer to Adams than would any other team, because they really don't want (additional) egg on their face after surrendering 2 firsts and more for him.

I'm not sure his value as a UFA now (if he was one) is higher now than it was a year earlier. Honestly I think it's lower. A year ago he could blame the lowly Jets for whatever part of the game he was lacking. When he's playing for a defensive kingmaker like Carroll after that, and he's still got coverage issues, then more than just Jets fans now view him as less than a complete safety.

I still think they'll likely bang something out, whereby he gets Seattle to give up something nominal on paper that has no actual value in reality, just to save face a little. But taken to this length he sees he's gotten as much out of them as he's going to get. They've called his bluff. He can call theirs, too, but that's a lot of money to walk away from. 

He's not going to end up with significantly more, and could end up with significantly less. Put permanent injuries aside, since I guess he could get an insurance policy (though a $20MM+ insurance policy itself, for a player with annual injury history already, won't exactly be free). What if his coverage doesn't improve any, he schitzes out mid-game one or two times out of frustration, and further, Carroll stops blitzing him so much so his sack numbers also fade on top of that? With all his other baggage - and talent aside, he clearly has some personal/emotional issues - displayed now with two teams out of two, no one else is going to exceed $17.5MM/year after Seattle's done tagging him. 

Considering the more tape we get, the more he doesn't look like the best safety in the NFL, I'm not sure why a monster deal is expected in 2 years if he can't get one now.

[chrisfaceoff]

The saga just keeps getting better and better!

 

 

[ZachEY]

3 minutes ago, chrisfaceoff said:

The saga just keeps getting better and better!

 

 

Why stop there?  Why not say you're a quarterback?

[Biggs]

1 hour ago, TeddEY said:

I’m not saying he’s the reason they’re bad.  I’m saying his presence didn’t make them better or good, and frankly, in season, they performed better when he was hurt.  And with those unarguable truths, paying him top of the league money isn’t a good idea, and it looks like maybe Seattle knows that.

You haven't shown any correlation.  On a D with 11 men one person may not impact the D if others are hurt or can't make up for their production.  For instance Seattle O had the 2nd best starting position in the league.  Their opponents the 3rd worst.  Despite a terrible defensive passing O in a passing league their points allowed were substantially better than their defensive ranking. 

The Pats have won numerous SB with a bend don't break D that often has mediocre defensive ratings.

The NFL is a matchup league that exploits mismatches and adjusts on a weekly basis.  You're cherry picking stats to make an argument.  It's very likely that without Adams teams would have made different adjustments and Seattle D might have been worse.  They may have had a substantially worse record.  We don't know because you're using a very small sample size to back an argument.  I'm aware of this attempt to make these arguments because I'm guilty of it. (gay emoji, not that there's anything wrong with it)

I would suggest Seattle has one of the best records in football over a decade.  They are consistent winners.  Winning teams have the decked staked against them.  Lower draft picks, better players and less cap room.  In spite of that Seattle gave up the farm to get Adams and were willing to spend a fortune to keep him long term.  Here's a stat that has some time horizon.  Pete Carrolls record with Seattle 112, 63 and 1 along with a 10 and 8 playoff record.

The fact that negotiations broke down doesn't change that.  

 

[Spoot-Face]

[nycdan]

2022 Projected Franchise and Transition Tenders

Position	Franchise Tag	Transition Tag
QB	$28,560,000	$25,743,000
DE	$20,274,000	$16,788,000
WR	$19,170,000	$16,913,000
LB	$17,871,000	$15,251,000
CB	$17,568,000	$15,222,000
DT	$17,387,000	$13,951,000
OL	$16,820,000	$15,144,000
S	$13,553,000	$11,504,000
RB	$12,836,000	$10,295,000
TE	$11,331,000	$9,607,000
ST	$5,580,000	$5,076,000

It's just over $4M difference next year, but yeah, this is a slippery slope if players can arbitrarily change their position designation based on how they lined up.  Not saying the truth isn't somewhere in the middle, but it's going to tear apart the entire system if they allow this to be challenged every time a team franchises a player who isn't a DE or WR.

[jvill 51]

7 minutes ago, chrisfaceoff said:

The saga just keeps getting better and better!

 

 

[BroadwayRay]

This place has to stop with the damn Jamal Adams and Sam Darrnold posts .... 

after this one.

 

 

[Doggin94it]

39 minutes ago, Bowles Movement said:

What this analysis fails to mention is that none of Adams money is guaranteed past this year if he isnt extended.  Playing on the Franchise tag only guarantees this years salary.

Yes, I definitely forgot to mention that by saying that his real concern is losing the guaranteed money due to injury so he should be taking out an insurance policy

[docdhc]

2 minutes ago, BroadwayRay said:

This place has to stop with the damn Jamal Adams and Sam Darrnold posts .... 

after this one.

 

 

Funny because if he stayed here in Saleh’s scheme he would have been a linebacker. 

[Doggin94it]

19 minutes ago, chrisfaceoff said:

The saga just keeps getting better and better!

 

 

I wonder if that'll impact how they deploy him

[Embrace the Suck]

A LB in a SS's body. JA is position fluid.

[Sarge4Tide]

[Icer]

Even Jamal says hes an undersized LB, it's not just Jets fans ?

[mrcoops]

3 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

I wonder if that'll impact how they deploy him

They'll roll him out as the punter.

[Lith]

Just saw this from CJ Mosley's instagram. 

Little shot at his former teammate?

[Lith]

 

[Icer]

The lack of coverage and being sent off the edge 15 times a game makes sense now

[Doggin94it]

1 hour ago, slats said:

There’s a lot of presumption here that I don’t think Adams can count on. He’s already severely damaged his brand. It’s one thing to shoot your way off a lowly franchise like the Jets, but Seattle is generally considered a first rate, player friendly organization and they’re making a very fair offer. How many teams out there will want to bring him in? 
 
Also assumes his level of play remains high, which is no guarantee. If he gets an ACL (not wishing it on him) or something that doesn’t end his career but slows him down permanently, what’s he worth on the market then? Between his attitude and potentially lesser play, probably not a lot. 
 
You’re talking about a $5.2M difference over two years, but a four year deal would mean another $35M over the following two years, with him probably guaranteed to collect at least half of that, or a difference of $22.7M and hitting free agency at 29. That’s not chump change. 
 
But I don’t suspect that there’s any logic to Jamal’s thinking at all. I think it’s all ego and emotion. Because if he was thinking rationally and agreeing with you, he’d be in camp making sure he was the best player he could possibly be in an effort to earn that first franchise tag - which is probably in question right now, too. 

When the issue is "playing out your tag and wanting a market value deal"? Don't think any team giving him that will have any hesitation. Would be different if he was shooting his way out of town, but right now all he's doing is saying "nope, that offer's not good enough" and showing up to camp.

But yes, injury is a risk, which is why you take out a policy. 

55 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Kind of my thinking, too.

It's not at all a given that someone else would also want to make Adams the highest paid safety in the league a year or two (or three) from now. The Seahawks have more of an incentive to make an appealing offer to Adams than would any other team, because they really don't want (additional) egg on their face after surrendering 2 firsts and more for him.

I'm not sure his value as a UFA now (if he was one) is higher now than it was a year earlier. Honestly I think it's lower. A year ago he could blame the lowly Jets for whatever part of the game he was lacking. When he's playing for a defensive kingmaker like Carroll after that, and he's still got coverage issues, then more than just Jets fans now view him as less than a complete safety.

I still think they'll likely bang something out, whereby he gets Seattle to give up something nominal on paper that has no actual value in reality, just to save face a little. But taken to this length he sees he's gotten as much out of them as he's going to get. They've called his bluff. He can call theirs, too, but that's a lot of money to walk away from. 

He's not going to end up with significantly more, and could end up with significantly less. Put permanent injuries aside, since I guess he could get an insurance policy (though a $20MM+ insurance policy itself, for a player with annual injury history already, won't exactly be free). What if his coverage doesn't improve any, he schitzes out mid-game one or two times out of frustration, and further, Carroll stops blitzing him so much so his sack numbers also fade on top of that? With all his other baggage - and talent aside, he clearly has some personal/emotional issues - displayed now with two teams out of two, no one else is going to exceed $17.5MM/year after Seattle's done tagging him. 

I think if he gets to FA he'll set the market; it's just what happens for guys in the relative top tier of their position (barring the covid cap apocalypse), and while there are aspects of the game he's not great at, he does what he does at an elite enough level that he's in that top tier. But yeah, that's the gamble. My point is that Seattle's offer isn't so much better than (or so close to) his BATNA that it's worth taking if he can mitigate the injury risk

[ZachEY]

11 minutes ago, Biggs said:

You haven't shown any correlation.  On a D with 11 men one person may not impact the D if others are hurt or can't make up for their production.  For instance Seattle O had the 2nd best starting position in the league.  Their opponents the 3rd worst.  Despite a terrible defensive passing O in a passing league their points allowed were substantially better than their defensive ranking. 

The Pats have won numerous SB with a bend don't break D that often has mediocre defensive ratings.

The NFL is a matchup league that exploits mismatches and adjusts on a weekly basis.  You're cherry picking stats to make an argument.  It's very likely that without Adams teams would have made different adjustments and Seattle D might have been worse.  They may have had a substantially worse record.  We don't know because you're using a very small sample size to back an argument.  I'm aware of this attempt to make these arguments because I'm guilty of it. (gay emoji, not that there's anything wrong with it)

I would suggest Seattle has one of the best records in football over a decade.  They are consistent winners.  Winning teams have the decked staked against them.  Lower draft picks, better players and less cap room.  In spite of that Seattle gave up the farm to get Adams and were willing to spend a fortune to keep him long term.  Here's a stat that has some time horizon.  Pete Carrolls record with Seattle 112, 63 and 1 along with a 10 and 8 playoff record.

The fact that negotiations broke down doesn't change that.  

 

Yeah, so, looking at the teams pass defense over the whole season isn't cherry picking.  It's how you evaluate a teams pass defense over a season.  Looking at how the defense does with a player in vs. out isn't cherry picking either, it's the best way to see if there is a change.

And, if "it's very likely that without Adams teams would have made different adjustments and Seattle D might have been worse," why, specifically, was Seattle's defense actually better when he was hurt?

There's no sense in going any further with this, since all the data is on my side of the argument and on your side is "Seahawks/Pete Carroll = GOOD; therefore, trading for Jamal Adams and Jamal Adams=GOOD."  Also, Pete Carroll's non-Russell Wilson record in Seattle is 14-18.