Josh Oliver Signs 3 Year Deal With Vikings

[Cearbhall]

This guy reminds me a bit of Jimmy Kleinsasser.  Kleinsasser is one of my favorite relatively unheralded players this side of David Dixon. Ergo, I am very happy to finally have a guy that can maybe block as well as Kleinsasser, who was also quite a receiving threat in college.  

That said, given the marginalizing and diminishing going on here of critical opinions I am feel inclined to side with the contrarians. If that is what the supporters of the move have, it makes me not want to be a supporter of the move.

Given the investment to the TE position the team made last year, it may well have been a mistake to spend more then the entire amount of currently available cap space. Beyond that. if the deal is essentially a two year deal and has over $11MM paid out in those two years between signing bonus and salary that is $5.5M per year that will eventually go against the cap. Looking at only the cap number in the first year is short-sighted and a mistake to focus on IMO.

Teams can move cap dollars between years in an assortment of ways so it doesn't matter too much what the cap charge is in the first year.  What is important to me is the average cost per year. Cap accounting tricks are something that has importance in the league, but I don't believe it wise to factor them into valuation of a player on the roster. It makes no difference to the quality of the roster whether they defer $2MM of Oliver's cap charge to next year or instead defer $2MM of Harrison Smith's cap charge to next year.

[JDBrocks]

It’s not marginalizing or diminishing a critical opinion if that opinion is based on less than the full picture of the deal, which most of the dissenting opinions were.

Also, the cap implications are less important over the life of the deal than they are this year because of how tight the money is currently. Context is important. How can you not factor a players contract value in relation to what they add to the roster? 

Having contrary opinions is fine and valid, but  at least support them in a way that makes sense. Suggesting that backup guards could do the same thing or being upset that the first signing wasn’t a different position of need before knowing what else can/will be done with the available cap space is short sighted.

[battle2heaven]

Josh Oliver came into this league as a long, lanky, slot, super athletic TE that was known for his receiving skills, over his blocking skills.

Since then, he has re-made himself into a monster of an inline blocker; and that is where his main value is.

THAT SAID, he is still athletic as hell, and his receiving skills are still there, just not having been showcased because he was on a roster with Mark Andrews and Isaiah Likely.

 

Where I am going with this is that there is a lot of upside here in 12 personnel to have him run routes. There is a giant hedge here in case Hockenson goes down with an injury, they dont have to turn to Mundt or someone else as TE1 and I think Oliver could pick up some of the slack there; if given the opportunity.

He's only 25/26 and TEs take a bit to come into their own. I think the Vikings got him on the upswing and he's going to help this team a lot the next 2 years.

[swede700]

25 minutes ago, JDBrocks said:

It’s not marginalizing or diminishing a critical opinion if that opinion is based on less than the full picture of the deal, which most of the dissenting opinions were.

Also, the cap implications are less important over the life of the deal than they are this year because of how tight the money is currently. Context is important. How can you not factor a players contract value in relation to what they add to the roster? 

Having contrary opinions is fine and valid, but  at least support them in a way that makes sense. Suggesting that backup guards could do the same thing or being upset that the first signing wasn’t a different position of need before knowing what else can/will be done with the available cap space is short sighted.

It sounds just like the world of politics.  😂

[Cearbhall]

43 minutes ago, JDBrocks said:

Also, the cap implications are less important over the life of the deal than they are this year because of how tight the money is currently. Context is important. How can you not factor a players contract value in relation to what they add to the roster? 

Oh please, stop with the straw man arguments. That is one way that I see others opinions being marginalized way to often around here. I didn't say that I wouldn't factor in a player's contract value.  I absolutely would.  That is very important in the NFL. That is exactly what should be considered. 

What is not important when you have two players that will be on the roster for three years is which one you use cap accounting gimmicks on to decrease their cap charge in the first year.  The moving of cap dollars to particular years in useful in the NFL across a roster, but it has little to do with evaluating the worthiness of a player versus their contract.  There are more ways than one to move cap charges around. It is inconsequential to the value a player has to the team unless a player is so inflexible that they won't work with the team to allow the team to manage the cap as they see fit, which really only happens when I player no longer wants to be on a team.

Beyond that, I wonder why you seem to take personally what I said about people's opinions being marginalized and diminished here.  Do you feel like you marginalized and diminished someone's opinion here?  If so, and that is not the person that you want to be, you might consider sending them a direct message with a heartfelt apology.

[battle2heaven]

1 minute ago, Cearbhall said:

The moving of cap dollars to particular years in useful in the NFL across a roster, but it has little to do with evaluating the worthiness of a player versus their contract.

I think the issue here is how everyone evaluates the said contract.

Some people are looking at it at 3 years 21m, and think, "OMG OVERPAY".

But in the NFL (as you know), it is not as white and black as that. Guaranteed money is the main indicator of a contract's value. In this scenario, it drops the total AAV by over half; which looking at the contract in that lens, provides a very real rational that the contract and the player both match accordingly. 

 

[Cearbhall]

13 minutes ago, battle2heaven said:

I think the issue here is how everyone evaluates the said contract.

Some people are looking at it at 3 years 21m, and think, "OMG OVERPAY".

But in the NFL (as you know), it is not as white and black as that. Guaranteed money is the main indicator of a contract's value. In this scenario, it drops the total AAV by over half; which looking at the contract in that lens, provides a very real rational that the contract and the player both match accordingly. 

 

Yep yep.  I haven't seen the details of Oliver's contract but based on what I have been able to gather it practically guarantees him 2 years on the roster, which means I would look at the payout during those two years -- base salaries in those years plus all bonuses.  Without knowing all the details, from what I have read it seems like the third year is a team option year.  It will be interesting to see the details of the contract to validate this or indicate otherwise.

Based on what I know, which isn't a complete picture, I am thinking the contract will amount to 2 years for ~$12MM with a team option year after that for ~$9MM. However, it could easily be $14MM in the first two years too given how early he signed in free agency.

[battle2heaven]

1 minute ago, Cearbhall said:

Yep yep.  I haven't seen the details of Oliver's contract but based on what I have been able to gather it practically guarantees him 2 years on the roster, which means I would look at the payout during those two years -- base salaries in those years plus all bonuses.  Without knowing all the details, from what I have read it seems like the third year is a team option year.  It will be interesting to see the details of the contract to validate this or indicate otherwise.

Based on what I know, which isn't a complete picture, I am thinking the contract will amount to 2 years for ~$12MM with a team option year after that for ~$9MM. However, it could easily be $14MM in the first two years too given how early he signed in free agency.

here

 

 

[Cearbhall]

9 minutes ago, battle2heaven said:

here

 

 

Thank you.  It looks like a practical guarantee of almost $13M on a two year contract with a team option year of $7.95MM after the two years are up.  In other words, he is costing the Vikings close to $6.5M per year on average for two years of service -- no matter how the hits are spread on their cap.

Looking at it as only costing the Vikings $3.5MM for this year is a short-sighted way of seeing that contract. There is value, in allocating dollars to future cap years but the actual cost is what is important in determining value of the player.

Edited March 14, 2023 by Cearbhall

[JDBrocks]

12 minutes ago, Cearbhall said:

Beyond that, I wonder why you seem to take personally what I said about people's opinions being marginalized and diminished here.  Do you feel like you marginalized and diminished someone's opinion here?  If so, and that is not the person that you want to be, you might consider sending them a direct message with a heartfelt apology.

I'm not apologizing for anything, and I didn't take anything you said personally. I don't think anyone's opinions were marginalized - they were certainly criticized for being based on incomplete information. If you have a need to discuss me or my character feel free to DM me, as per forum rules.

I've said my piece on the deal and why it makes sense. The contract details support my stance. 

[JDBrocks]

2 minutes ago, Cearbhall said:

Looking at it as only costing the Vikings $3.5MM for this year is a short-sighted way of seeing that contract. There is value, in allocating dollars to future cap years but the actual cost is what is important in determining value of the player.

It's only short sighted if you aren't considering the cap table as a whole. Given the projections for next year and the contracts already in place, this is a low risk and potentially high reward deal with a very targeted goal: addressing the run game.

[JDBrocks]

I've watched a bunch of clips on Oliver, and he gets to his assignments quickly, and looks for work as a blocker. Typically chips hard on a DL and then wins at the 2nd level. The Jimmy K comp was a solid one.

[PrplChilPill]

3 minutes ago, JDBrocks said:

I've watched a bunch of clips on Oliver, and he gets to his assignments quickly, and looks for work as a blocker. Typically chips hard on a DL and then wins at the 2nd level. The Jimmy K comp was a solid one.

Jimmy sure was a better pass catcher, though (so far).

[JDBrocks]

2 minutes ago, PrplChilPill said:

Jimmy sure was a better pass catcher, though (so far).

Maybe! Kleinsasser only had 4 seasons with better production as a receiver, and only 1 that was significantly better. His value was entirely tied to his blocking ability.

Oliver came into the league as an athletic receiving threat, reinvented himself to play a different role for the Ravens, and did so at a high level. 

[swede700]