Sisyphean Bills Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Where was this reported? My understanding of the situation was that they didn't want to pay him $8M/year when they knew they'd have to give a new contract to Eric Wood, who is a better player. They extended Urbik for $4M/year...you can't tie up $18M/year in a center and 2 guards...why is this so hard to understand? Who said it was hard to understand? The actual point was made that there was no way to keep all the good players when Levitre was mentioned. Well, it turns out that argument has a $14.8M hole in it. It absolutely, positively was possible to keep Levitre for what he got paid. You're changing the argument and implying that the Bills have a sub-cap on the interior line positions and couldn't afford Levitre based on your assumptions about this sub-cap.
thebandit27 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Who said it was hard to understand? The actual point was made that there was no way to keep all the good players when Levitre was mentioned. Well, it turns out that argument has a $14.8M hole in it. It absolutely, positively was possible to keep Levitre for what he got paid. You're changing the argument and implying that the Bills have a sub-cap on the interior line positions and couldn't afford Levitre based on your assumptions about this sub-cap. Many folks have expressed that they don't understand why the team didn't keep Levitre. I didn't change the point at all...it's not about being able to afford the player, it's about tying up a huge amount of resources to the interior of the OL when, in the very near future, other players will need new contracts. Among them: Chandler Carrington Dareus Byrd Spiller Not to mention leaving room to go after key free agents. It's not prudent to tie up $18M/year into 2 guards and a center...your response indicates to me that I either didn't make my statement clearly, or that you fervently disagree.
Smears Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Another agent screwing up a good thing. Get Byrd and his agent out of Buffalo. I dont care anymore.
K-9 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Who said it was hard to understand? The actual point was made that there was no way to keep all the good players when Levitre was mentioned. Well, it turns out that argument has a $14.8M hole in it. It absolutely, positively was possible to keep Levitre for what he got paid. You're changing the argument and implying that the Bills have a sub-cap on the interior line positions and couldn't afford Levitre based on your assumptions about this sub-cap. Of courses it was possible to keep him. But maybe this is easier for you to understand: The Bills simply disagree with your assessment that Levitre was worth keeping at the price he got from the Titans. They also disagree with your assessment that he's a dominant player at his position. Levitre was NEVER GOING TO SIGN PRIOR TO FREE AGENCY. It would have been stupid for the Bills to negotiate against themselves in that regard and once the Titans offer was in, they weren't going to match it. Can't keep them all even when it's possible CAP WISE, to do so. GO BILLS!!!
papazoid Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Who said it was hard to understand? The actual point was made that there was no way to keep all the good players when Levitre was mentioned. Well, it turns out that argument has a $14.8M hole in it. It absolutely, positively was possible to keep Levitre for what he got paid. You're changing the argument and implying that the Bills have a sub-cap on the interior line positions and couldn't afford Levitre based on your assumptions about this sub-cap. and they would have even more cap space if not for some colossal bad contracts: Fitzpatrick and Mark Anderson the Bills currently have over $13 million tied up in Dead Money (25 players who count against the cap but are no longer on the team). Fitz, Anderson, Terrence McGee, Chris Kelsay, Lindell, Wilson, Barnett, Jackson, Troup, Sheppard, Morrison, to name a few.
C.Biscuit97 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Another agent screwing up a good thing. Get Byrd and his agent out of Buffalo. I dont care anymore. It's not that simple. Right now, I think Parker is the biggest Richard on the planet. At the same point, he is doing his job and you'd want your agent to do the same thing. A NFL career is so short and the injury factor is so high. And even though we hated his methods, he got Peters what he wanted. Personally, I think Bryd is a lot more mature than Peters and hopefully, we can come to a happy ending.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Many folks have expressed that they don't understand why the team didn't keep Levitre. I didn't change the point at all...it's not about being able to afford the player, it's about tying up a huge amount of resources to the interior of the OL when, in the very near future, other players will need new contracts. Among them: Chandler Carrington Dareus Byrd Spiller Not to mention leaving room to go after key free agents. It's not prudent to tie up $18M/year into 2 guards and a center...your response indicates to me that I either didn't make my statement clearly, or that you fervently disagree. I don't disagree that a team has to manage its cap resources. That's a no brainer. You are arguing about general implications and presenting arguments to buttress why the Bills decided to not bother pursing Levitre. That's all fine and well worn as we both know. Still it simply isn't germane to the point that was actually being refuted that you jumped in the middle of. That argument was that the Bills had to make a choice and couldn't sign both Levitre and Byrd to top contracts. Ignoring all the extraneous possibilities, the actual money numbers say that that argument is indefensible. The Bills could easily have kept both players and had money left over. That's the simple objective math of it. The subjective arguments of who is more valuable and why a team might go cheap at this position and spend at that position notwithstanding. There's a good debate there, to be sure, but I was NOT speaking to it. Of courses it was possible to keep him. But maybe this is easier for you to understand: The Bills simply disagree with your assessment that Levitre was worth keeping at the price he got from the Titans. They also disagree with your assessment that he's a dominant player at his position. Levitre was NEVER GOING TO SIGN PRIOR TO FREE AGENCY. It would have been stupid for the Bills to negotiate against themselves in that regard and once the Titans offer was in, they weren't going to match it. Can't keep them all even when it's possible CAP WISE, to do so. GO BILLS!!! I understand the mathematics rather well. Thanks, anyway. BTW, your psychic powers aren't working. I never said Byrd was flawless.
K-9 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 (edited) ... I understand the mathematics rather well. Thanks, anyway. BTW, your psychic powers aren't working. I never said Byrd was flawless. I wasn't sure about your mathematical understanding, but you're welcome just the same. As to my psychic powers, you'll have to forgive me for thinking you sound like most every other Byrd fan that just can't abide an honest assessment of his value relative to his talent. Or are you actually saying you can abide by the Bills' assessment of Byrd? GO BILLS!!! Edited September 6, 2013 by K-9
thebandit27 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 I don't disagree that a team has to manage its cap resources. That's a no brainer. You are arguing about general implications and presenting arguments to buttress why the Bills decided to not bother pursing Levitre. That's all fine and well worn as we both know. Still it simply isn't germane to the point that was actually being refuted that you jumped in the middle of. That argument was that the Bills had to make a choice and couldn't sign both Levitre and Byrd to top contracts. Ignoring all the extraneous possibilities, the actual money numbers say that that argument is indefensible. The Bills could easily have kept both players and had money left over. That's the simple objective math of it. The subjective arguments of who is more valuable and why a team might go cheap at this position and spend at that position notwithstanding. There's a good debate there, to be sure, but I was NOT speaking to it. I guess I can't look at the two as mutually-exclusive points. Cap resources are an all-encompassing factor in the operation of a franchise. Yes, the team could keep them both; if that's all you were pointing out then my apologies for clouding the discussion.
NoSaint Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 They can take that unused cap room and roll it over into next year i cant quote the rule, and dont have time to search beyond the quick one i just did that didnt get firm answers, but ive read on a few occasions that cap space rolled from last year into this cant be rolled into next year. not sure if thats old CBA, poor reporting, or 100% accurate. if they can carry cap space over for years on end, cool, but i dont think thats the case
ALF Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 If Byrd can't play 100% and misses games for PF, how could he demand a top pay, guaranteed long term contract? We have to see what he can do in the new system and see if another team will make a fair trade offer.
BillsVet Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 We've been down the Levitre road numerous times. No need for me to rehash anything here. He's gone. I'm past it. You can argue all you'd like about a LG being more important than a center, but you'd be hard-pressed to find much, if any, agreement on that point. But I'd be interested in reading anything you can find, though. I'm not opposed to shifts in paradigm, I just need to be convinced. GO BILLS!!! Kirwan wrote a book a few years ago that listed the order of importance on OL as: LT, RT, LG, C, RG. Take it for what it is. However, the case can be made that pay indicates value. Contracts for LG's are far and away more numerous and higher than centers. Jahri Evans, Davin Joseph, Logan Mankins, the old Hutchinson deal in MIN, Levitre, Dockery way back when, Carl Nicks, and others. According to sportrac, 2 centers have base salaries of more than 4M per. http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/guard/'>http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/guard/ 8 guards have 4M+ base deals. http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/guard/ I realize there are bonuses and such, but the demand is clearly on guards over centers.
mannc Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Can't keep them all even when it's possible CAP WISE, to do so. Why not? Are you suggesting that the team doesn't have the $$$? If they have the cap room, why can't they sign all of their better players before they hit FA?
GA BILLS FAN Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Of courses it was possible to keep him. But maybe this is easier for you to understand: The Bills simply disagree with your assessment that Levitre was worth keeping at the price he got from the Titans. They also disagree with your assessment that he's a dominant player at his position. Levitre was NEVER GOING TO SIGN PRIOR TO FREE AGENCY. It would have been stupid for the Bills to negotiate against themselves in that regard and once the Titans offer was in, they weren't going to match it. Can't keep them all even when it's possible CAP WISE, to do so. GO BILLS!!! K-9 and the Bandit27, a question for both of you, what would you do with the $20M in cap space the Bills find themselves with given that the absolute cap number won't be much higher next year ? --- you obviously are comfortable not signing Levitre, Byrd or FA's --- should the Bills just bring it to the bottom line as profit ? ---- I would propose, if they didn't resign Byrd or Levitre, why not restructure and move other players $$ into 2013 to relieve cap pressure in 2014 and 2015 --- what would you guys do if you were Brandon ??
PaattMaann Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 in the words of the famous douche Michael Kay..."seeeeeeee yaaaaa"
K-9 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Kirwan wrote a book a few years ago that listed the order of importance on OL as: LT, RT, LG, C, RG. Take it for what it is. However, the case can be made that pay indicates value. Contracts for LG's are far and away more numerous and higher than centers. Jahri Evans, Davin Joseph, Logan Mankins, the old Hutchinson deal in MIN, Levitre, Dockery way back when, Carl Nicks, and others. According to sportrac, 2 centers have base salaries of more than 4M per. http://www.spotrac.c...ings/nfl/guard/ 8 guards have 4M+ base deals. http://www.spotrac.c...ings/nfl/guard/ I realize there are bonuses and such, but the demand is clearly on guards over centers. Thanks for the links. I've read some of Kirwan's stuff over the years and his OL position rankings reflect his dedication to the "passing league" evolution. I fully understand where he's coming from in that regard. And it's worth further consideration I think. I also appreciate your links to the relative salaries as well. I think there are some other factors involved in the escalation of salaries vs. a single argument that Gs are just worth more. Hutchinson's deal is the single biggest contributing factor imo. That, and the averaging of salaries to include LTs and the premium salaries they command have made it difficult for teams to keep their Gs, resulting in increased bidding wars for their services. Centers tend to not reach FAgency because teams extend them before they are eligible most of the time which in my mind supports the idea that they are still the QB of the OL and are more highly valued if not more highly paid. But we need to look at individual players as well. Hutchinson is one of those once in a generation OLmen that dominated his position. As good a G as their have been good Cs since he entered the league. He was the Mangold of Gs. Kind of like a Hannah, if you will. Anyway, thanks again for the info. I'll look forward to reading more about it. GO BILLS!!! K-9 and the Bandit27, a question for both of you, what would you do with the $20M in cap space the Bills find themselves with given that the absolute cap number won't be much higher next year ? --- you obviously are comfortable not signing Levitre, Byrd or FA's --- should the Bills just bring it to the bottom line as profit ? ---- I would propose, if they didn't resign Byrd or Levitre, why not restructure and move other players $$ into 2013 to relieve cap pressure in 2014 and 2015 --- what would you guys do if you were Brandon ?? I would do exactly what they've already done. That is, make an honest assessment of their value relative to talent and go from there. Given that I agree Byrd is a better S than Levitre is G and the S position is key in Pettine's scheme, I too would have franchised Byrd. I also think the Bills are dead on in their assessment of him being a top 5 S. But there is no way I would have given Levitre what he got from the Titans (more power to him, btw) and I wouldn't go north of 8m, 20m guaranteed for Byrd. But again, teams are built within certain constructs currently and moving forward and just because they had the cap space to make BOTH of them the highest paid at their positions, doesn't mean they should have done that, imo. They made value assessments relative to both and I have no problem with that line of thinking. If I really thought Byrd was the best at his position or that Levitre is a dominant player at G, I'd want to see them paid what the want. I think the Bills would have done the same. GO BILLS!!!
Kelly the Dog Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Thanks for the links. I've read some of Kirwan's stuff over the years and his OL position rankings reflect his dedication to the "passing league" evolution. I fully understand where he's coming from in that regard. And it's worth further consideration I think. I also appreciate your links to the relative salaries as well. I think there are some other factors involved in the escalation of salaries vs. a single argument that Gs are just worth more. Hutchinson's deal is the single biggest contributing factor imo. That, and the averaging of salaries to include LTs and the premium salaries they command have made it difficult for teams to keep their Gs, resulting in increased bidding wars for their services. Centers tend to not reach FAgency because teams extend them before they are eligible most of the time which in my mind supports the idea that they are still the QB of the OL and are more highly valued if not more highly paid. But we need to look at individual players as well. Hutchinson is one of those once in a generation OLmen that dominated his position. As good a G as their have been good Cs since he entered the league. He was the Mangold of Gs. Kind of like a Hannah, if you will. Anyway, thanks again for the info. I'll look forward to reading more about it. GO BILLS!!! I would do exactly what they've already done. That is, make an honest assessment of their value relative to talent and go from there. Given that I agree Byrd is a better S than Levitre is G and the S position is key in Pettine's scheme, I too would have franchised Byrd. I also think the Bills are dead on in their assessment of him being a top 5 S. But there is no way I would have given Levitre what he got from the Titans (more power to him, btw) and I wouldn't go north of 8m, 20m guaranteed for Byrd. But again, teams are built within certain constructs currently and moving forward and just because they had the cap space to make BOTH of them the highest paid at their positions, doesn't mean they should have done that, imo. They made value assessments relative to both and I have no problem with that line of thinking. If I really thought Byrd was the best at his position or that Levitre is a dominant player at G, I'd want to see them paid what the want. I think the Bills would have done the same. GO BILLS!!! Granted, you do have to evaluate each player and position individually, and decide how much you're willing to pay him, and how much worth he has to your team. But it is not in a vacuum about just the abilities of that player. On every team there are approximately a third of the players overpaid, a third underpaid, and a third about what they deserve (of course this varies greatly). The Bills are not necessarily cheap but they rather consistently get salaries wrong both ways. Some players you need to overpay. Personally, I think Byrd is one of them. Contracts are based partially on what have you done for me previously but mostly what are you about to do for me. Byrd was criminally underpaid for four straight years by the Bills. He is getting better and has not even entered his prime. If we sign him to a 5 year deal, he's likely to be playing at a very high level (barring injury of course) all five of those years. There aren't a lot of players who are in his position, being paid relative peanuts for consistently top level production AND young enough where all of their years on new contracts should exceed that previous play. The Bills need to keep their top talent, they needed to keep one of the two between Levitre and Byrd this year. He is worth what he is asking for, IMO, as top 1-2 safety in the league because of what he has done and what he likely will do and what the Bills situation is.
papazoid Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Tyrd officially listed as "doubtful" for this sunday.
thebandit27 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 K-9 and the Bandit27, a question for both of you, what would you do with the $20M in cap space the Bills find themselves with given that the absolute cap number won't be much higher next year ? --- you obviously are comfortable not signing Levitre, Byrd or FA's --- should the Bills just bring it to the bottom line as profit ? ---- I would propose, if they didn't resign Byrd or Levitre, why not restructure and move other players $$ into 2013 to relieve cap pressure in 2014 and 2015 --- what would you guys do if you were Brandon ?? Well, I guess my first comment is that nearly $7M of their current cap allocation is being used on Byrd, so we have to consider that as well. As for what I'd do...let's see: Extend Chandler Extend Carrington Extend Dareus (assuming he plays up to his potential) Re-open negotiations with Byrd Start long-term talks with Spiller Chase a top-flight CB in free agency Sign a capable LG and swing tackle (who can also take over for Pears at RT when his contract runs out) in free agency Pursue an experienced backup QB Sign a situational pass rusher in free agency Those kinds of things.
Recommended Posts