Chris Baker Re-Signed

[MagicBizkit87]

Jets signed TE Chris Baker to a three-year extension through 2012.

The deal includes $12.2 million in "new money" and basically amounts to a new five-year, $15 million pact. If Baker plays in 50% of the Jets' offensive snaps in 2008, he'll be guaranteed $9 million. Baker lacks the explosiveness of rookie Dustin Keller, but is more effective in the run game. Neither is especially intriguing in fantasy leagues for this season. Sep. 10 - 6:40 pm etSource: NFL.com

[Sperm Edwards]

Then can someone now explain to me why they made him twist in the wind like this for 6+ months?

[aec4]

Then can someone now explain to me why they made him twist in the wind like this for 6+ months?

Maybe they were making a behind the scenes show,

"Hard Knocks: Contract renegotiation"

[Sperm Edwards]

Maybe they were making a behind the scenes show,

"Hard Knocks: Contract renegotiation"

lol

It's certainly bizarre for them to make such a stance over this for the better part of a year & then after an uneventful week 1 give him the deal he wanted all along.

[SoFlaJets]

Then can someone now explain to me why they made him twist in the wind like this for 6+ months?

after those first few days of camp he shut it down and stopped complaining, prolly knowing full well that this was coming

[rick34125]

Adam Schefter

Jets extend deal with TE Baker

Posted: Adam Schefter | Adam Schefter | Tags: Chris Baker, New York Jets

http://blogs.nfl.com/2008/09/10/jets-extend-deal-with-te-baker/

A standoff between the New York Jets and disgruntled tight end Chris Baker ended without fanfare and attention over the weekend when the two sides connected on a new deal.

Baker

[BroadwayJ667]

let this be a lesson, let the team resign you on their terms, and stop pissing off us fans by making yourself look like a child

[flgreen]

Then can someone now explain to me why they made him twist in the wind like this for 6+ months?

The Bubba Franks experiment failed

[Sperm Edwards]

The Bubba Franks experiment failed

OK that's a concrete reason, but only sort of. The Jets denied this to Baker before they signed Franks; before Franks was waived by Green Bay I believe.

It's definitely weird, you have to admit.

[glenn212]

Lesson here.Shut the f**k up and don't use the media to negoiate and we'll take care of you if you deserve it...lesson learned

[madmike1]

OK that's a concrete reason, but only sort of. The Jets denied this to Baker before they signed Franks; before Franks was waived by Green Bay I believe.

It's definitely weird, you have to admit.

They should've done this months ago.

[JETSFAN5180]

I hope we see Keller lined up in the slot or 2 tight end sets this weekend against New England.

[slats]

The new deal will pay him $12.2 million over those three new years, including $9 million of guaranteed money if Baker plays in 50 percent of the Jets plays this season and is on the roster the fifth day of the league year. But if the Jets opt against paying the guaranteed money, then Baker would become a free agent in March.

If Baker fails to play in 50 percent of the Jets’ plays, he still will get the three-year, $12.2 million extension –- just without any guaranteed money.

As long as he's healthy, he'll have no trouble hitting that 50% mark. Then it's up to the Jets whether they want to keep him for that guaranteed figure, or let him try to make that much elsewhere.

I'm glad to have Baker here long term, and I hope he does stay. He's a solid TE.

Then can someone now explain to me why they made him twist in the wind like this for 6+ months?

They wanted to look tough?

Now they can say to the next disgruntled guy, "look what we did for Baker last year. Just come in and do your job, and we will take care of you."

And that will work until they don't.

[CobraVerde]

let this be a lesson, let the team resign you on their terms, and stop pissing off us fans by making yourself look like a child

You look like a child. Go and sacrifice your body and pull some spectacular catches and then act like you don't deserve a penny...that'll be the day.

CHA CHING 4 BAKER.

[uart]

I hope we see Keller lined up in the slot or 2 tight end sets this weekend against New England.

Agreed. That is how I really hoped we'd see Keller used.

[rick34125]

It's certainly bizarre for them to make such a stance over this for the better part of a year & then after an uneventful week 1 give him the deal he wanted all along.

September 10, 2008

Baker's new deal not a great catch

Chris Baker

[rillo]

September 10, 2008

Baker's new deal not a great catch

Chris Baker

[Bx Jet Fan]

The sticking point was the free parking I heard.....

[Greenseed3]

I don't see any clear-cut losers in this. The team gets a reliable multi-purpose threat: a player with decent in-line ability and great hands; the player gets an extended contract and some financial incentives; the front-office gets to inflate its' chest and "show" other players how to go about getting their needs met. I like Baker, always have. My only beef with him was the whining. Hopefully this move disuades future episodes of that behavior from other members of the lockerroom.

[DACHUMS]

believe dat !!

[serphnx]

Baker will be cut before he sees a dime on this new deal. The reason why he took it is because it became woefully apparent to both him and his agent that the Jets were not going to buckle, and that nobody else in the NFL was going to pay him what he wanted. His production and salary were both in line before he whined and complained. He was something like the 17th best TE last year and got the 15th highest TE salary.

If Keller develops for us, we will just draft a blocking TE sometime late next draft. Then we don't need Baker, who isn't that great recieving, and is mediocre at best in blocking. Keller however, I've heard, is a terrible blocker. I don't think I even saw Keller at all last week actually, so I can't say myself what I think of his blocking. Keller is going to need to learn how to block if he ever wants to get onto the field though.

[SouthernJet]

Then can someone now explain to me why they made him twist in the wind like this for 6+ months?

its managements job to make the serfs have fear and trepidation and when one of them steps out of line or gets a attitude , a example has to be set so the others dont lose thier sense of where they are in the pecking order or life.

[124]

Either now we keep Baker for a Baker-Keller combo or we release him five days into the official 2009 season schedule. Good move.

[slats]

If Keller develops for us, we will just draft a blocking TE sometime late next draft. Then we don't need Baker, who isn't that great recieving, and is mediocre at best in blocking.

Baker is the Jets best all around TE by far. He's a solid blocker who's made some very tough catches for the Jets. He doesn't have many drops at all. If anything, he's under utilized. The idea of having one TE to catch the ball and another to block is a bad one. The defense would know what to expect based on which TE's on the field. You need a guy who can cover every aspect of the position to be your regular starter.

Keller's a strong guy, with a strong lower body, and I'm sure he can learn to block - but the Jets will be better served figuring out other ways to get him on the field. Lining him up as the H-back, second TE, FB, or even out wide.

Baker, IMHO, is very underrated around here. And I feel the attacks on him for wanting more money were always unwarranted. Football's the only major sport that doesn't guarantee their contracts. I don't begrudge any of these guys trying to make more money.

I also don't think Baker will have any problem at all hitting that 50% mark. So the Jets will have to decide whether they feel he's worth that extension or not. It's hardly a back breaker, so I'd think they'd hold onto him.

[Sperm Edwards]

But then again, football is the only sport that give players signing bonuses before they play a game on a new contract. So that does counter the not-guaranteed aspects of football contracts a bit. It guarantees the player can't get cut right away because of the accelerated cap hit. But if the player sucks or gets badly injured, it does protect the team in that they don't have to keep the player on the books for the next 5 years or whatever.

This isn't like baseball where there's no salary cap. If a high-priced player is awful, a team could pick up another one if it so desired. In football & basketball, you can't. The whole franchise has to ride out the storm & probably suck until the contract is off the books.

If the player's as good as hoped (or better), the team will either honor the contract or give the player a new one that pays equal or greater amounts, but is more cap-friendly.

If busts were forced to give back signing bonuses (or forgo guaranteed money), I'd be a hell of a lot more sympathetic to the players. But since the team incurs all that risk, I'm not going to weep too hard for players who participate in the golden age of football salaries.

And while Baker's blocking has improved greatly over what it once was, he's still far from being a premiere player in this aspect. And he does have good hands; his problem is getting open. That may be minimized more now with a QB who can get it to him when there's only a small window of time that he's open, but it's not like he spent the past years doing nothing but juking the guy covering him and no one simply threw him the ball.

[slats]

If the player's as good as hoped (or better), the team will either honor the contract or give the player a new one that pays equal or greater amounts, but is more cap-friendly.

If busts were forced to give back signing bonuses (or forgo guaranteed money), I'd be a hell of a lot more sympathetic to the players. But since the team incurs all that risk, I'm not going to weep too hard for players who participate in the golden age of football salaries.

I feel strongly that some sort of rookie cap needs to be put in place. So that aside...

Players need those bonuses for some sort of job security. Teams pay those bonuses because they're in competition with other teams who are wiling to pay similar amounts for the same player (presumably). It's certainly not charity. When dealing with veteran FA's -especially their own- they have a very good idea of what they player's capable of. That's a "risk" that they're obviously willing to take, and it's really not a big risk. FA busts are pretty rare, and are generally the result of a team executive making a bad guess on a player rather than paying him on merit in the first place.

NFL contracts could be guaranteed with a change to the salary cap rules, but the owners don't want that. They need rules in place that prevent them from free spending. It keeps the bottom line down while they can simultaneously tell their fans that they've done everything they could under the salary cap rules. It's a huge win-win for them.

If a player outperforms his contract and looks for more money, he gets vilified in the press and on these message boards. He signed a contract; he should honor it, blah, blah, blah. But the owner doesn't have to honor that same contract if the player underperforms. It's not a level playing field, not by a long shot.