Drew Rosenhaus says there’s more bombshell trades coming.

[GunnerBill]

19 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

I know that’s not correct.  I think you’re mixing up some of the rules for franchise tags.  And even if it was, then the team could just extend the contract using void years.

 

5th year options are fully guaranteed, but the contract can be altered (unlike the franchise tag after a certain date).  Allen’s was altered.  It wasn’t just extended, but the salary in his his fifth year option year was reduced substantially.  Obviously he got a big signing bonus before then, but that’s not substantially different than what I was talking about with Mayfield.

 

I am not, I promise you, 5th year options are precluded from including bonus money. They are fully guaranteed on signing and they have to be 100% salary. The only way out of those rules is for a team to extend the player (as the Bills did with Josh). The Browns are not allowed by rule to do what Carolina did with Bridgewater. I guarantee you that is correct. 

 

From the CBA:

 

"(ii) Without limitation on any other operation or interpretation of Section 3(c) of this Article (Other Permissible Terms), any Rookie Contracts executed on or after April 24, 2018 may not contain any individually negotiated provision that:

 

(A) grants a Club the unilateral right to convert any form of Salary to signing bonus (i.e., “automatic conversion” provisions are prohibited);

(B) conditions a player’s entitlement to earn any performance incentive described in Section 6 of this Article (Performance Incentives) upon (i) being in a particular roster category (e.g., Active/Inactive, Reserve/Injured, etc.) on any particular date; or (ii) the applicability or priority of statistical sources listed or enumerated in the contract provision."

 

There you have it. No conversion allowed, must be all salary. And no performance escalators allowed. The only way out of that is an extension because the 5th year option is then no longer considered by the league to be part of a rookie contact. 

Edited March 28, 2022 by GunnerBill

[Doc]

Yeah, trading Mayfield doesn't count as a "bombshell."  It's pretty much expected he'll be gone from the Browns soon and unlikely to be traded anyway.

[Southern_Bills]

6 hours ago, Big Turk said:

Why would any team trade for that contract when they know the Browns have to release him and they can get a much more favorable one?

 

If I'm not mistaken doesn't Cleveland have to pay Baker even if they cut him?

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Southern_Bills said:

 

If I'm not mistaken doesn't Cleveland have to pay Baker even if they cut him?

 

yep

[HOUSE]

Except the trade that brings CB James Bradberry to Buffalo

[filthymcnasty08]

Saquan and McCaffrey come to mind.

[H2o]

I wonder if the other trades that Rosenhaus is speaking of are going down during the draft? 

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

6 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

The obvious answer is to guarantee his acquisition. If there is more than one team interested, then a release would give the asset some control of where he goes. Giving up assets eliminates that uncertainty. Obviously. 

 

Heard over the headphones:

"So, two cheese and pepperoni, original crusts ready for 4:30.  Got it, Mr. Marrone!"

Edited March 28, 2022 by Ridgewaycynic2013
Seeing double!

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

7 hours ago, Big Turk said:

Why would any team trade for that contract when they know the Browns have to release him and they can get a much more favorable one?

 

You guarantee you having him for one thing.

 

But to me the bigger reason is there's alot of uncertainty around him as to whether he's any good or not.  I highly doubt if he's released and now and a FA he'll sign a one year contract anywhere.  Likely will ask for a 4 year minimum, maybe someone can get it down to 3 years, but certainly be a large signing bonus. By the time you factor those things in, if you can afford the one year cap hit he'd play on, it's not such a bad deal to trade for him. 

 

The 5th year option will cost more this year, but if you sign him to a 3 to 4 year contract and he flops and you cut him, likely the cost the years he's cut will be as high as the 5th year option.

 

But because it is only a one year deal and his questionable abilities, likely Cleveland won't get too much in return.

[SoTier]

3 hours ago, Donuts and Doritos said:

Thought Phin's owner Stephen Ross, was All In on Tua. It's the reason he says he fired Flores, & they wanted to build around him. They have Teddy Bridgewater backing up. Why do we think they're interested in Baker? Wouldn't Seattle or Saints be more in the mix here?

 

I used to be a big Mayfield fan, but I don't think that Mayfield is that much of an upgrade over Tua at this point, especially when it comes to maturity and growth on and off the field.  Tua seems to have made more progress as a QB on the field.  Mayfield seems to keep making a lot of the same mistakes he was making in his first or second seasons.   Both of them had to deal with the possibility of being replaced by Deshaun Watson, and Tua handled it as an adult while Mayfield handled it as a whiny, entitled brat.

 

20 minutes ago, Southern_Bills said:

 

If I'm not mistaken doesn't Cleveland have to pay Baker even if they cut him?

 

I think that the money is less of an issue with Cleveland than having an aggrieved Baker Mayfield sulking in the locker room.  One way or another, I think the Browns are sending Mayfield packing before the season starts.

[simpleman]

51 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

(A) grants a Club the "unilateral" right to convert any form of Salary to signing bonus (i.e., “automatic conversion” provisions are prohibited);

(B) conditions a player’s entitlement to earn any performance incentive described in Section 6 of this Article (Performance Incentives) upon (i) being in a particular roster category (e.g., Active/Inactive, Reserve/Injured, etc.) on any particular date; or (ii) the applicability or priority of statistical sources listed or enumerated in the contract provision."

 

There you have it. No conversion allowed, must be all salary. And no performance escalators allowed. The only way out of that is an extension because the 5th year option is then no longer considered by the league to be part of a rookie contact. 

Not sure exactly what you are arguing about. As long as the Browns can get Mayfield to agree to it, they definitely CAN extend and convert. They can bargain with Mayfield and compromise with him to give him something he wants in exchange for making the trade more attractive for the team he is traded to. Mayfield indeed has control on where he wants to go and the circumstances, and cant be unilaterally forced to accept the listed limitations on his contract rights.. This rule is designed to protect the player from being pressured into accepting the extend and conversion, not to forbid it from being done.

 

[2003Contenders]

2 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

I used to be a big Mayfield fan, but I don't think that Mayfield is that much of an upgrade over Tua at this point, especially when it comes to maturity and growth on and off the field.  Tua seems to have made more progress as a QB on the field.  Mayfield seems to keep making a lot of the same mistakes he was making in his first or second seasons.   Both of them had to deal with the possibility of being replaced by Deshaun Watson, and Tua handled it as an adult while Mayfield handled it as a whiny, entitled brat.

 

 

I think that the money is less of an issue with Cleveland than having an aggrieved Baker Mayfield sulking in the locker room.  One way or another, I think the Browns are sending Mayfield packing before the season starts.

 

Agreed. Also, especially given all the QB moves that have been made around the league thus far, it is noteworthy that every move that the Dolphins have made has been to bolster the supporting cast around Tua. It appears that they want to give him every opportunity to succeed before deciding to move on at the QB position.

[DCofNC]

7 hours ago, Big Turk said:

Why would any team trade for that contract when they know the Browns have to release him and they can get a much more favorable one?

I wonder if the Browns won’t hold on him for the first half of the year when it’s likely their new jackass will be suspended.

[GunnerBill]

7 minutes ago, simpleman said:

Not sure exactly what you are arguing about. As long as the Browns can get Mayfield to agree to it, they definitely CAN extend and convert. They can bargain with Mayfield and compromise with him to give him something he wants in exchange for making the trade more attractive for the team he is traded to. Mayfield indeed has control on where he wants to go and the circumstances, and cant be unilaterally forced to accept the listed limitations on his contract rights.. This rule is designed to protect the player from being pressured into accepting the extend and conversion, not to forbid it from being done.

 

 

They CAN extend and convert. Never disputed that. What they can't do is simply convert part of the 5th year option to signing bonus because the 5th year option is a unilateral power the team has. A player is not allowed to negotiate the 5th year option. It is non-negotiable. So any amendment to it would be unilateral and that is prevented. 

 

So if they want to convert Mayfield's 5th year option into signing bonus they need to extend him first. It is possible, maybe they find a way to do an extension with a single dummy year to help get him traded to his preferred spot. But it isn't as straight forward as it would be on a normal contract. 

 

[LabattBlue]

5 hours ago, 13 Second Prevent Defense said:

Is baker mayfield to the dolphins a “bombshell”?

 

My initial reaction also. 

[78thealltimegreat]

Considering Steven Ross made his money owning “Blockbuster” Baker to the Dolphins makes sense…but Bakers talent level is the equivalent of buying a bunch of Blu Rays and getting a Betamax machine to play them. 

[Rochesterfan]

28 minutes ago, simpleman said:

Not sure exactly what you are arguing about. As long as the Browns can get Mayfield to agree to it, they definitely CAN extend and convert. They can bargain with Mayfield and compromise with him to give him something he wants in exchange for making the trade more attractive for the team he is traded to. Mayfield indeed has control on where he wants to go and the circumstances, and cant be unilaterally forced to accept the listed limitations on his contract rights.. This rule is designed to protect the player from being pressured into accepting the extend and conversion, not to forbid it from being done.

 

 

I believe @GunnerBill has said that.  The issue is the Browns can not just decide to do it - as we did with Diggs last year and as was done to Bridgewater.

 

The Browns need to have Baker agree to an extension to change the equation.  The question is why would Baker do that.  
 

Currently he get 18+ million this year and is a FA next year to choose a team.  Why extend unless he is getting a big fat paycheck from someone and postpone the FA.

 

 

[Charles Romes]

I think Baker would have to sign off on a trade and re-sign where the new club would have him for about 2 years 36/18 per which is about his current FMV. No one is going to pay 18 for a one year look and then have to start all over if he plays well.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

7 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

The obvious answer is to guarantee his acquisition. If there is more than one team interested, then a release would give the asset some control of where he goes. Giving up assets eliminates that uncertainty. Obviously.

 

This.  Plus the trade partner can negotiate for the Browns to keep part of his salary as the Rams did with Von Miller, and they can even try to renegotiate as part of the trade.

1 hour ago, Southern_Bills said:

 

If I'm not mistaken doesn't Cleveland have to pay Baker even if they cut him?

 

Yes, his salary is fully guaranteed.

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, simpleman said:

Not sure exactly what you are arguing about. As long as the Browns can get Mayfield to agree to it, they definitely CAN extend and convert. They can bargain with Mayfield and compromise with him to give him something he wants in exchange for making the trade more attractive for the team he is traded to. Mayfield indeed has control on where he wants to go and the circumstances, and cant be unilaterally forced to accept the listed limitations on his contract rights.. This rule is designed to protect the player from being pressured into accepting the extend and conversion, not to forbid it from being done.

 

You’re not comprehending this correctly.