A veteran QB we could sign if Alex retires

[e16bball]

4 minutes ago, Thaiphoon said:

Okay. Mr. GM @e16bball, what round tender would you give him, if he truly is a RFA?

So originally I said tender him at the 1st round level, with the intent of trying to make absolutely sure we can keep him. 

But based on last year’s RFA tenders,* we’re looking at about $4.6M for a 1st round level, compared to $3.2M for a 2nd round. That’s a pretty big difference, and I think it’s pretty unlikely anyone bites at either draft pick price — so we’d probably be just as well-served to go for the lower number. 

Plus, if someone would be willing to give us a 2nd rounder for Heinicke...we’d really have to take that, right? So maybe it’s worthwhile to put him out there at a 2nd round level and see if anybody takes the bait. With a 1st, two 2nds, and two 3rds, we’d absolutely have ammo to move up if one of Fields or Wilson fell to 5 or 7. 

[Thaiphoon]

On 1/10/2021 at 1:34 AM, MKnight82 said:

Smith needs to be hired as QB Coach.  The guy did a great job helping Heinicke get ready for this game. 

I completely agree. While he was there, he helped Kaep turn into a serviceable QB. He mentored Mahomes for a year (okay I'm gonna give him SOME credit for him). And now the QBs on the roster. Especially Heinecke. 

That dude is not going to be hurting once he hangs his cleats up. I can see him being a coach for a LONG time.

[Thaiphoon]

5 minutes ago, e16bball said:

So originally I said tender him at the 1st round level, with the intent of trying to make absolutely sure we can keep him. 

But based on last year’s RFA tenders,* we’re looking at about $4.6M for a 1st round level, compared to $3.2M for a 2nd round. That’s a pretty big difference, and I think it’s pretty unlikely anyone bites at either draft pick price — so we’d probably be just as well-served to go for the lower number. 

Plus, if someone would be willing to give us a 2nd rounder for Heinicke...we’d really have to take that, right? So maybe it’s worthwhile to put him out there at a 2nd round level and see if anybody takes the bait. With a 1st, two 2nds, and two 3rds, we’d absolutely have ammo to move up if one of Fields or Wilson fell to 5 or 7. 

Completely agree. With one quibble. $1.4m isn't peanuts, so if we have the cap space, why not tender him there?

On the flip-side, I agree with the 2nd round tender for two reasons.

He's had basically one great game so I dunno about the 1st round tender. Plus, as you alluded to, the 2nd round is not TOO expensive and MIGHT get a team to sign him and pay for that (doubtful, but alot easier to do than a 1st round tender). Which would absolutely give us the draft capital we want/need to move up (or stay put and then sign a vet and roll with the vet, Allen, Montez/some mid-round project and fill out other positions with those 5 picks and then get the QB in 2022.

[offbyone]

I am sure Heinicke earned himself some backup jobs, but I wouldn't be too concerned about another team poaching him from us.  If we offer him a competitive contract he would be inclined to stay somewhere he had success and fits in the system.  To me we are asking the wrong question.   The right question is what do you offer him?  Vet minimum or a real contract?

[MikeT14]

While I would say there is a less than 2% chance someone actually tries to sign Taylor H for a 2nd round level tender, if they did, you would take it and you would run. 

[e16bball]

21 minutes ago, Thaiphoon said:

Completely agree. With one quibble. $1.4m isn't peanuts, so if we have the cap space, why not tender him there?

On the flip-side, I agree with the 2nd round tender for two reasons.

He's had basically one great game so I dunno about the 1st round tender. Plus, as you alluded to, the 2nd round is not TOO expensive and MIGHT get a team to sign him and pay for that (doubtful, but alot easier to do than a 1st round tender). Which would absolutely give us the draft capital we want/need to move up (or stay put and then sign a vet and roll with the vet, Allen, Montez/some mid-round project and fill out other positions with those 5 picks and then get the QB in 2022.

I forgot to include the “asterisk” piece of my post, which is that I’m not sure what happens to the RFA tenders with the salary cap almost certainly going down (perhaps quite significantly). 

The CBA’s treatment of the RFA tender amounts is built around the concept that the cap will inevitably increase every year — which we all believed would be true until this unprecedented situation. So the way they determine each year’s RFA tender amount is by pegging it at “last year’s amount increased by the percentage increase in the current cap number over the prior year’s cap number (if any).” So of the cap goes up by 8%, the RFA tenders all go up by 8%. Simple stuff. 

But it doesn’t say anything about what happens if the cap goes down. Do the RFA tender levels also go down proportionately?

I think the arguments on both sides hold some water. The players will say that the document really doesn’t speak to a decrease at all, and if it does, the “if any” term is what contemplates a decrease — if there’s a decrease, there’s not any increase, so it stays the same. The owners will say the intent was to peg the RFA tender levels at a specific proportion of the cap, so the only way to honor the spirit of the agreement is to move the RFA tenders down when the cap goes down. 

In my view, the players have the better end of that argument. The owners were (at minimum) equally empowered participants in drafting the document, and they had full ability to negotiate for a provision regarding a decrease in the cap. They chose not to. Based on the four corners of the document and the plain language, I think you’d have to determine that in the event of a cap decrease, the RFA tender levels will stay the same. So I’d expect the same numbers as last year (the $4.6M, $3.2M, and $2.1M levels). 

[RSkinGM]

9 minutes ago, MikeT14 said:

While I would say there is a less than 2% chance someone actually tries to sign Taylor H for a 2nd round level tender, if they did, you would take it and you would run. 

"Money for nothing and chicks for free " !

[e16bball]

12 minutes ago, offbyone said:

I am sure Heinicke earned himself some backup jobs, but I wouldn't be too concerned about another team poaching him from us.  If we offer him a competitive contract he would be inclined to stay somewhere he had success and fits in the system.  To me we are asking the wrong question.   The right question is what do you offer him?  Vet minimum or a real contract?

Since he’s an RFA, we have the option to tender him a one-year contract at certain levels with protection — but you’re right, we don’t have to use the RFA system. We could refuse to tender him and simply make him a UFA.

Then we could offer him a one-year contract for as low as $990k. This is tricky, so just skip to the next paragraph now if you don’t care about the CBA minutiae stuff 😂 Basically, there are two separate concepts regarding the amount of credit for time in the league a player has. There are accrued seasons, where you have to be on the active roster for at least 6 games, and that’s what determines your eligibility for FA. Heinicke only has 3 of those, which is why he’s an RFA. There are also credited seasons, where you have to be on the active roster for at least 3 games, and that’s what determines your minimum salary. Heinicke has 5 of those — 2017 and 2020 both qualify as credited seasons but not accrued seasons — so he’s eligible for a minimum salary of $990k. 

If we non-tender him and offer him that $990k salary (or thereabouts), he’s just a regular old UFA at that point. No right to match and no compensation if he leaves (aside from the standard possibility of a comp pick). 

We also could offer him a long-term deal, but I think that’s pretty far-fetched. Surely even he must understand that we’ll need to see more from him before we can commit to long-term money. 

So that leaves us with 5 basic options, listed in order of most commitment to least.

1. Long Term Deal on whatever terms they agree to

2. 1 year / $4.6M (we get a 1st rounder if he signs elsewhere)

3. 1 year / $3.2M (we get a 2nd rounder if he signs elsewhere)

4. 1 year / $2.1M (we get the right to match any contract he signs with another team)

5. 1 year / from $990k to $2.0M

[RSkinGM]

Seems to me -looking back over his career and signings .. He has be a UFA since this was his 4th season .

[Thaiphoon]

55 minutes ago, e16bball said:

I forgot to include the “asterisk” piece of my post, which is that I’m not sure what happens to the RFA tenders with the salary cap almost certainly going down (perhaps quite significantly). 

The CBA’s treatment of the RFA tender amounts is built around the concept that the cap will inevitably increase every year — which we all believed would be true until this unprecedented situation. So the way they determine each year’s RFA tender amount is by pegging it at “last year’s amount increased by the percentage increase in the current cap number over the prior year’s cap number (if any).” So of the cap goes up by 8%, the RFA tenders all go up by 8%. Simple stuff. 

But it doesn’t say anything about what happens if the cap goes down. Do the RFA tender levels also go down proportionately?

I think the arguments on both sides hold some water. The players will say that the document really doesn’t speak to a decrease at all, and if it does, the “if any” term is what contemplates a decrease — if there’s a decrease, there’s not any increase, so it stays the same. The owners will say the intent was to peg the RFA tender levels at a specific proportion of the cap, so the only way to honor the spirit of the agreement is to move the RFA tenders down when the cap goes down. 

In my view, the players have the better end of that argument. The owners were (at minimum) equally empowered participants in drafting the document, and they had full ability to negotiate for a provision regarding a decrease in the cap. They chose not to. Based on the four corners of the document and the plain language, I think you’d have to determine that in the event of a cap decrease, the RFA tender levels will stay the same. So I’d expect the same numbers as last year (the $4.6M, $3.2M, and $2.1M levels). 

Agreed on all points. The owners were well represented in the negotiations and could've argued for a provision for if the cap goes down. They didn't. As I've reminded sub-contractors and my clients, a contract says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say.

Picking your legal brain here... IIRC, if there is ambiguity in the contract language, it kinda defaults to the players' side, correct? At least that is how it is in my corporate/consulting world. But not sure when there is collective bargaining.

[Thaiphoon]

13 minutes ago, RSkinGM said:

Seems to me -looking back over his career and signings .. He has be a UFA since this was his 4th season .

Yes. But take a look at the accrued season language in the CBA. It's not cut and dry with Heinecke's situation as @e16bball pointed out

[RSkinGM]

3 minutes ago, Thaiphoon said:

Yes. But take a look at the accrued season language in the CBA. It's not cut and dry with Heinecke's situation as @e16bball pointed out

From what I read- 3 games on a roster, active, inactive, I R, Pup- = a qualified season. He think he has done that .

[Thaiphoon]

3 minutes ago, RSkinGM said:

From what I read- 3 games on a roster, active, inactive, I R, Pup- = a qualified season. He think he has done that .

Okay what are we ( @e16bball, me, and Heinecke himself) missing?

https://frontofficenfl.com/2020/05/24/2020-nfl-cba-explained-accrued-seasons-credited-seasons/

Quote

 

Accrued seasons: Used to determine a player’s free agency status (unrestricted, restricted, exclusive rights). In order to accrue a season, a player must have been on (or should have been on*) full-play status for at least six regular-season games in a given season. A player under contract must report to his team’s training camp on his mandatory reporting date in order to earn an accrued season. If player holds out his services for a “material period of time,” he is also at risk of not accruing a season.

*When I write “or should have been on,” note that this is the language used in the CBA. Basically, in order to accrue a season, the player needs to be on the team’s active/inactive list, injured reserve or reserve PUP for at least six regular-season games in a given season.

 

@e16bball did the math, and Heinecke didn't have 6 games in 2017.

 

I think you're looking at Credited Seasons (which determines contract $$, not free agency status). That language is 3 games, not 6.

Quote

 

Credited seasons: Used as a measure for many benefits, it’s most notably utilized to determine a player’s minimum salary. To earn a credited season, a player must be on (or should have been on) full-pay status for a total of three or more regular season games.

Minimum salaries in 2020 based on Credited Seasons (CS):

0 CS: $610,000
1 CS: $675,000
2 CS: $750,000
3 CS: $825,000
4-6 CS: $910,000
7+ CS: $1,050,000

 

 

[RSkinGM]

3 minutes ago, Thaiphoon said:

Okay what are we ( @e16bball, me, and Heinecke himself) missing?

https://frontofficenfl.com/2020/05/24/2020-nfl-cba-explained-accrued-seasons-credited-seasons/

@e16bball did the math, and Heinecke didn't have 6 games in 2017.

 

I think you're looking at Credited Seasons (which determines contract $$, not free agency status). That language is 3 games, not 6.

 

OK. hope he's right !

[Thaiphoon]

Just now, RSkinGM said:

OK. hope he's right !

ME TOO!!

I've been wrong before. I thought Trent didn't have the accrued seasons to prevent that one season as a countable season. I was wrong (*)

 

(*) though I adamantly maintain I was right, I tell you. Right!!!