We screwed up the Spencer Tag

[visionary]

Right, and what I'm saying is I doubt we work out a deal with him. He'll see this "buyer's market" and see guys on his level (whether you think he's slightly better or not is fine, but still same general level) getting far less than the 10M/year average he was expecting. This likely convinces him to pocket the 10.6M this year and shoot for a big money 3 or so year deal next offseason.

Avril has averaged 9.66 sacks per year over the last 3 and is younger. I expected Avril's market value to exceed Spencer's, or be about equal. Even he couldn't get big money or a long term deal. Spencer would've likely re-signed with us for something like 1 year, 7M or 3 years, 24M... either way significantly less than what we'll give him in 2013 and beyond.

i cant believe he is thinking this way for 2 reasons:

1. the cap is flat next year and things are likely to be worse not better for teams

2. he will be a year older so teams will be more hesitant to give him a long term big money deal

i wish we had tagged him for a 1 or 2 (not sure if there was something precluding us from doing this) or franchised him but told his agent to negotiate with other teams

IMO we should either let him play out his tender or sign him to no more than 6 mill/4 year deal

we have some leverage if we are willing to play hard ball

 

[cowboysooner]

Right, and what I'm saying is I doubt we work out a deal with him. He'll see this "buyer's market" and see guys on his level (whether you think he's slightly better or not is fine, but still same general level) getting far less than the 10M/year average he was expecting. This likely convinces him to pocket the 10.6M this year and shoot for a big money 3 or so year deal next offseason.

Avril has averaged 9.66 sacks per year over the last 3 and is younger. I expected Avril's market value to exceed Spencer's, or be about equal. Even he couldn't get big money or a long term deal. Spencer would've likely re-signed with us for something like 1 year, 7M or 3 years, 24M... either way significantly less than what we'll give him in 2013 and beyond.

Averil is a system guy. He has been playing in a wide 9 with dominant penetrating tackles. That system let Jason Babin get 18 sacks and he was cut for making $5 million. Babin was coming off of a double digit sack year for the Titans when he got $5 million.

Spencer has been an 80-110 tackle guy with good not elite pressure metrics. Spencer is Paul Kruger's pass rush combined with Cortney Upshaw's run defense. The risk in Spencer is that he can't do that with a hand on the ground and he is two drafts older.

This league is becoming one where quarterbacks get paid and about 20-30 other elite playmakers (Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, Revis, Ware, Watt, Mike Wallace, Clady etc.)

Then really good- but not catalytic- players at other positions are going to make $6-8 million.

 

[CowboysLaw87]

So seeing the type of deals these guys are getting (with 8M/year for Kruger being the biggest contract), where do you guys stand on extending him? I originally was all for keeping him on the 1-year deal to avoid a massive long-term contract, but if it'll be more like 6-8M/year as opposed to the 9-11M I expected, that is swaying my opinion I think.

 

[Wolf2k5]

Ah, nice to hear a voice of reason here on CZ.

It's the offseason. I was convinced they were all banned

 

[Idgit]

I'm really surprised how soft the market is for decent pass rushers. But it works in our favor in this case, so I'm not complaining.

Both sides should have motivation now to get a deal done. Dallas for the cap relief, and Spencer to not be on the market next year after 30 when the market this season has already been demonstrated to be softer than expected. Teams are going to be in a similar position relative to the cap again next season, so he'll be looking at the same prospect one year removed.

The idea that you don't extend a 29 year old player is silly. What matters is the contract and how it's structured.

 

[Risen Star]

I'm really surprised how soft the market is for decent pass rushers. But it works in our favor in this case, so I'm not complaining.

Both sides should have motivation now to get a deal done. Dallas for the cap relief, and Spencer to not be on the market next year after 30 when the market this season has already been demonstrated to be softer than expected. Teams are going to be in a similar position relative to the cap again next season, so he'll be looking at the same prospect one year removed.

The idea that you don't extend a 29 year old player is silly. What matters is the contract and how it's structured.

Yeah, it's silly to worry about paying age. All good teams litter their roster with aging expensive players.

 

[unionjack8]

Ah, nice to hear a voice of reason here on CZ.

My question has always been why do we want to sign a 30 yr old to a long term deal?

 

[unionjack8]

The thing is, Spencer is better than all of those guys. He'd get more money than Kruger from pretty much everywhere.

Doesn't matter if he is better, point is there were younger guys available with a better cost to production value

 

[jterrell]

At best Spencer is on the same level as Avril. I don't think most non-Cowboys-fans would say Spencer is clearly better.

That's not true at all.

Spencer was a better player at Purdue, a more highly drafted player and puts up better overall stats.

Avril has been a 1 dimensional pass rusher and last season Spencer who has ALWAYS been a better player at everything else was even the better pressure guy.

Avril had 38 total tackles last season. Spencer had 95.

Avril got only a 2 year deal at 15m because he is really a nickel pass rusher.

As to the market stuff... apples and oranges. Spencer would have been very well paid because he is a 3-4 OLB who can play a 4-3 DE for you. Not a 4-3 DE who is just marginal anyways.

The closest player on the list not surprisingly got 40m. 10m is a lot on this year's cap but it is a lot less than 40m. Kruger is really no where near as proven as Spencer. He parlayed 4.5 sacks a year as a SOLB into 40m.

 

[Hoofbite]

This mistake goes back to last year.

This is precisely why you don't tag guys simply because you can't decide whether or not to give that player a long term contract or not.

Tag him and say "show me" and you've painted yourself into a corner.

He shows up, price goes up.

He doesn't show up, you've wasted a bunch of cap space.

 

[jterrell]

My question has always been why do we want to sign a 30 yr old to a long term deal?

because it is fun to win games?

 

[AbeBeta]

Not really. He likely gets more than Kruger on the open market.

We've got a ton of leverage now. Prices are dropping and he's in a position where he can either earn 10 mill now and then go into a soft market a year older OR he can take a long term deal and get about 20 mill or so guaranteed.

 

[unionjack8]

So seeing the type of deals these guys are getting (with 8M/year for Kruger being the biggest contract), where do you guys stand on extending him? I originally was all for keeping him on the 1-year deal to avoid a massive long-term contract, but if it'll be more like 6-8M/year as opposed to the 9-11M I expected, that is swaying my opinion I think.

I like spencer but I wouldn't have tagged him, some things you just have to walk away from, this is one of those circumstances IMO.

 

[unionjack8]

because it is fun to win games?

8 of them?

 

[visionary]

Yeah, it's silly to worry about paying age. All good teams litter their roster with aging expensive players.

those idiots (Bill Polian and Bill Parcells) said that players above 28 should not be in tier 1 of FA but they were obviously not talking about FAs of the cowboys

and what do they know anyway compared to CZ posters?

 

[visionary]

8 of them?

we are trying to be "consistent" (according to some posters here)

and consistency requires that we win no more than 8 games since we won 8 last year and 8 the year before that

Yay!!

We are trying to be the model of consistency

 

[jterrell]

8 of them?

A lot more fun then winning 5 of them.


So NE was stupid for signing Tom Brady and Denver for signing Payton Manning?

All those over 30 guys should just die now....

 

[Hoofbite]

That's not true at all.

Spencer was a better player at Purdue, a more highly drafted player and puts up better overall stats.

Avril has been a 1 dimensional pass rusher and last season Spencer who has ALWAYS been a better player at everything else was even the better pressure guy.

Avril had 38 total tackles last season. Spencer had 95.

Avril got only a 2 year deal at 15m because he is really a nickel pass rusher.

As to the market stuff... apples and oranges. Spencer would have been very well paid because he is a 3-4 OLB who can play a 4-3 DE for you. Not a 4-3 DE who is just marginal anyways.

The closest player on the list not surprisingly got 40m. 10m is a lot on this year's cap but it is a lot less than 40m. Kruger is really no where near as proven as Spencer. He parlayed 4.5 sacks a year as a SOLB into 40m.

If by "proven" you mean not having played anywhere close to the same number of snaps.

He was nothing more than a part timer before this year. You could add up all his snaps from his first three years and it's still less than the number he played this year.

Neither guy is really all that proven in terms of their 2012 production.

 

[unionjack8]

A lot more fun then winning 5 of them.


So NE was stupid for signing Tom Brady and Denver for signing Payton Manning?

All those over 30 guys should just die now....

Lmbo, apples and oranges,, but carry on......... Cos signing spencer to a long term deal is equivalent to the patriots signing Tom Brady.

 

[Idgit]

Yeah, it's silly to worry about paying age. All good teams litter their roster with aging expensive players.

It all depends on the age, and on what you pay them.

Good 29 year old players get extended all the time in this league. But the fact that Dallas hasn't announced a deal with Spencer yet should give you a pretty good indication that they understand that there are limitations in terms of how the extension needs to be structured.