vincec Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 (edited) Every player is either overpaid or underpaid. The Bills seem to have no problem paying Byrd around $7M. But I guess that isn't enough. PTR No one is overpaid or underpaid. Everyone is paid exactly what he is able to negotiate. If he can get $8m from someone else then his market value is $8m and if the Bills want a top safety then it costs $8. Edited June 14, 2013 by vincec
San Jose Bills Fan Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 No one is overpaid or underpaid. Everyone is paid exactly what he is able to negotiate. If he can get $8m from someone else then his market value is $8m and if the Bills want a top safety then it costs $8. Over-simplification. One does not negotiate his pay every year. There are many players who under the terms of their current contract are either underpaid of overpaid. Put differently there are many players who outperform or underperform their contracts.
mitchmurraydowntown Posted June 14, 2013 Author Posted June 14, 2013 Here's a hypothetical. As a show of good faith and camaraderie, Byrd reports to the team, doesn't participate in any drills but spends time around the facility and familiarizing himself with the scheme. Hopelessly ridiculous? What else do they talk about that furthers Byrd's cause?
vincec Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Over-simplification. One does not negotiate his pay every year. There are many players who under the terms of their current contract are either underpaid of overpaid. Put differently there are many players who outperform or underperform their contracts. It is not an oversimplification. How can you can that someone "outperforms their contract" when both the quality of their performance and its actual value are completely relative? What someone is worth financially is not a clearly defined number. It's just a construct of the market and usually varies with one's perspective. People place different emphasis on things they find important, like statistics, leadership, being associated with winning, health history, loyalty, potential, etc. That's why there are disagreements and negotiations. At the end of the day your financial value is what you have negotiated. Nothing more or less.
syhuang Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 (edited) No one is overpaid or underpaid. Everyone is paid exactly what he is able to negotiate. If he can get $8m from someone else then his market value is $8m and if the Bills want a top safety then it costs $8. You are confusing "market value" to "market price". In your example, $8m is the market price, not market value. When market price is higher than market value, the person is overpaid. When market price is lower than market value, the person is underpaid. So yes, people can be overpaid or underpaid. http://en.wikipedia....ki/Market_value http://en.wikipedia....ki/Market_price Market value is a concept distinct from market price, which is “the price at which one can transact”, while market value is “the true underlying value” according to theoretical standards. The concept is most commonly invoked in inefficient markets or disequilibrium situations where prevailing market prices are not reflective of true underlying market value. For market price to equal market value, the market must be informationally efficient and rational expectations must prevail. Edited June 14, 2013 by syhuang
Delete This Account Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 We will not overpay for him, he's a one year wonder on a consistently losing team. If he was consistent on a winning team, he'd have a chance at his contract goal. one-year wonder? i disagree. first, if he was, then the Bills would not have franchised him. second, the numbers indicate that he's not. and not entirely sure what you would consider "overpay." Byrd is seeking what he believes that he's worth. the Bills believe the number's lower. it's called a negotiation. they're willing to pay him $6.9 million for next season. if they didn't think he was worth that, then why apply the tag? jw
mitchmurraydowntown Posted June 14, 2013 Author Posted June 14, 2013 one-year wonder? i disagree. first, if he was, then the Bills would not have franchised him. second, the numbers indicate that he's not. and not entirely sure what you would consider "overpay." Byrd is seeking what he believes that he's worth. the Bills believe the number's lower. it's called a negotiation. they're willing to pay him $6.9 million for next season. if they didn't think he was worth that, then why apply the tag? jw I didn't say he wasn't a great player, I'm just saying that his first season was like phenomenonal & he hasn't performed as well aince. He wants to be paid like he has & that the last 3 years were like his first. That to me is a one hit wonder, not getting back to that high point since.
Nanker Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 one-year wonder? i disagree. first, if he was, then the Bills would not have franchised him. second, the numbers indicate that he's not. and not entirely sure what you would consider "overpay." Byrd is seeking what he believes that he's worth. the Bills believe the number's lower. it's called a negotiation. they're willing to pay him $6.9 million for next season. if they didn't think he was worth that, then why apply the tag? jw Well, it a bit more complex than just that. The "F" word when applied to a player means he doesn't walk without the team holding his rights gets compensated - like what happened with Clements. Byrd has a non-exclusive F tag. That means Parker had the ability to shop his client's wares all over the League. So he knows what the market is for Byrd. But they didn't have another team sign him to their offer sheet. Had they, The Bills had the option of matching it and keeping him, or letting him walk for the other teams number one picks in the 2014 and 2015 drafts. Didn't see that happen because 1. No other team thinks he's worth 2 #1s and 2. They named their price and need Parker to get Byrd loose from The Bills somehow so they can then do business - ala Jason the Peter. Parker's done this to The Bills before. All he wants is top money for his client. It's what his business career is predicated on. The other complexity is in the package of money being negotiated. How much signing bonus, how much guaranteed money, the length of the contract, and other strings, clauses, and loops, yada, yada, yada. But it generally comes down to the money and the guaranteed money. For all we know The Bills might be offering him $8m or more a year on average, but the guaranteed coin isn't what Parker requires so he can trumpet the numbers around the league. 5 years 45m, 10m signing bonus, salaries of 5, 5, 5, 10, 10 with only 20m guaranteed is much different than: 5 years 45m, 10m signing bonus, salaries of 6, 6, 8, 8, 7 with 30m guaranteed. There are a myriad of ways to slice and package a contract - even if the total dollar amount is in agreement. But I suspect for other reasons that is not the case here. I think Parker has his number from another team and will not budge a millimeter. The Bills will have to meet his number and the general contract structure that he knows he can get elsewhere. JMHO.
vincec Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 You are confusing "market value" to "market price". In your example, $8m is the market price, not market value. When market price is higher than market value, the person is overpaid. When market price is lower than market value, the person is underpaid. So yes, people can be overpaid or underpaid. http://en.wikipedia....ki/Market_value http://en.wikipedia....ki/Market_price Market value is a concept distinct from market price, which is “the price at which one can transact”, while market value is “the true underlying value” according to theoretical standards. The concept is most commonly invoked in inefficient markets or disequilibrium situations where prevailing market prices are not reflective of true underlying market value. For market price to equal market value, the market must be informationally efficient and rational expectations must prevail. I don't think you can equate the NFL with the stock market for many reasons, two of which are that Byrd is a human being with his own opinion of his value and that the value of a stock if far easier to monazite than an NFL player. A player doesn't deliver clear monetary rewards to a franchise so it's very difficult to determine what he was worth financially to a team. The true measure is what he draws from the market place at the time of negotiation. Anyway, if you think that some other team will pay Byrd what he is asking then that's his value, IMO. Whether you want to pay it or not is up to you but I wonder if any player is going to settle for less than what he could earn somewhere else just for the privilege of remaining a Bill.
8-8 Forever? Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 This means that both sides are digging in, this isn't good. Its not about the money. Byrd wants to win and be with a solid franchise that will win. It will have to be a overpay situation for him to stay and that won't happen. See Levitre. This is the Bills we are talking about.
mrags Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 incorrect, the 20m includes rollover dollars (roughly 10m). they should be right at, or above the minumum currently. correct, but you havent provided the bills have not cleared that threshold this Here's a hypothetical. As a show of good faith and camaraderie, Byrd reports to the team, doesn't participate in any drills but spends time around the facility and familiarizing himself with the scheme. Hopelessly ridiculous? has this EVER happened? In not being a wise @$$ here. I actually can't recall It ever happening with anyone and any team. I wish it happened more tho.
PromoTheRobot Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Its not about the money. Byrd wants to win and be with a solid franchise that will win. It will have to be a overpay situation for him to stay and that won't happen. See Levitre. This is the Bills we are talking about. So why did he join the Titans if he was looking to play for a contender? PTR
Delete This Account Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 I didn't say he wasn't a great player, I'm just saying that his first season was like phenomenonal & he hasn't performed as well aince. He wants to be paid like he has & that the last 3 years were like his first. That to me is a one hit wonder, not getting back to that high point since. disagree. he's developed into more of a complete player over past three years. and as well as Byrd did in his rookie season, a case can be made that last year was his most complete season. he was the most consistent player on defense last season, and despite the unit's numbers, that is a compliment. jw
PromoTheRobot Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 disagree. he's developed into more of a complete player over past three years. and as well as Byrd did in his rookie season, a case can be made that last year was his most complete season. he was the most consistent player on defense last season, and despite the unit's numbers, that is a compliment. jw No disagreement on Byrd's performance but do you think these negotiations get on the wrong foot when players/agents get adversarial right off the bat? Do you think more would be getting done if Byrd was in camp? PTR
eball Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 (1) Its not about the money. (2) Byrd wants to win and be with a solid franchise that will win. (3) It will have to be a overpay situation for him to stay and that won't happen. (4) See Levitre. (5) This is the Bills we are talking about. (1) Wrong. A player's second contract in the NFL is usually the most important one he'll ever sign. (2) Sure he does -- as long as he's also getting paid what he believes he's worth. (3) Wrong. (4) See point #1. (5) Yes, it is. The Bills that brought in young, energetic coaches every player is raving about. I'm sure Byrd just wants no part of that at all. Please, get real.
xsoldier54 Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Its not about the money. Byrd wants to win and be with a solid franchise that will win. It will have to be a overpay situation for him to stay and that won't happen. See Levitre. This is the Bills we are talking about. It's always about the money. Byrd wants more money, plain and simple and Levitre went to the highest bidder. That bidder was Tennessee and I don't exactly see them winning it all. Byrd will get what the Bills feel he's worth, or he'll have to go somewhere else, but not this year, because nobody signed him to an offer sheet. He'll either have to sign his franchise offer or sit out and not get paid at all. My guess is that he will sign.
CodeMonkey Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Its not about the money. Byrd wants to win and be with a solid franchise that will win. It will have to be a overpay situation for him to stay and that won't happen. See Levitre. This is the Bills we are talking about. (1) Wrong. A player's second contract in the NFL is usually the most important one he'll ever sign. (2) Sure he does -- as long as he's also getting paid what he believes he's worth. (3) Wrong. (4) See point #1. (5) Yes, it is. The Bills that brought in young, energetic coaches every player is raving about. I'm sure Byrd just wants no part of that at all. Please, get real. It's a business decision pure and simple. Byrd needs to maximize his money because as eball rightly points out, this is more than likely the most important contract he will sign in his professional life. It has nothing to do with being an a-hole, or not a team player, or a locker room cancer or any of the other clichés often thrown around. It's simply business.
Ralph W. Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Let me know when someone knows exactly what the Bills are offering. B.c as of now no one knows except for some random rumor that was MONTHS ago.
Delete This Account Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 No disagreement on Byrd's performance but do you think these negotiations get on the wrong foot when players/agents get adversarial right off the bat? Do you think more would be getting done if Byrd was in camp? PTR don't know if talks are adversarial. Byrd, through his agent, has not exactly dug in, but is sticking to what they believe is fair. The Bills obviously disagree. there's no animosity here to my knowledge. and why should Byrd show up to camp and give up a semblance of leverage. take sports out of the equation. this is a black and white business negotiation, and to suggest one side should do something that you might not do is a little naive to suggest. i don't mean to be mean here, but couldn't the same thing be said of the Bills. might it not be in their best interest to sit down in Byrd's living room or Parker's office and hash this out? jw
Braedenstearns Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Here's a hypothetical. As a show of good faith and camaraderie, Byrd reports to the team, doesn't participate in any drills but spends time around the facility and familiarizing himself with the scheme. Hopelessly ridiculous? Is that what he is really doing? If so they might be closer then you think.
Recommended Posts