Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

Franchise Tag rules explained (hopefully)


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
32 replies to this topic

#25 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 13,865
  • Reputation: 4,621
Administrators

Posted 16 January 2014 - 08:35 AM

 

 

 

Kraken must be  FT'd and moved early in the process for substantially less than the tag requires. Don't be fugging greedy people.

 

 

 

This is the key here.

 

Teams are no oblivious to our team, its needs and its cap space.

They know we will struggle to keep a intact core if we have pay hard the franchise tag.

 

Something like a pair of seconds (14/15), a 1st and a pair of 3rds (14, 14, 15) an early second (14, Raiders/Jacksonville). Would be an excellent compensation for a player we picked in the 6th, got insane production vs compensation value, and likely can't afford to keep.



#26 ItsNotGonnaBeAlright

ItsNotGonnaBeAlright

    Insane Racist Moron

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,569
  • Reputation: 2,254
HUDDLER

Posted 16 January 2014 - 08:48 AM

It's also worth noting that since the new CBA was put in place, I can't think of a player who has been franchised and then moved to another team. Also haven't found an article that mentions a trade happening.

#27 Cracka McNasty

Cracka McNasty

    Literally Can't Even

  • Joined: 27-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,335
  • Reputation: 2,148
HUDDLER

Posted 16 January 2014 - 08:49 AM

We can work additional picks, but that deal would technically have to be seperate from the actual deal that moves Hardy. So say we trade with Oakland. Oakland sends us their 2014 and 2015 first rounders, we send Hardy. Then, we trade Oakland the 2015 pick for their 2014 third rounder. It's also possible that we would get someone's 2015 and 2016 selections, but only if the deal happens after this year's draft.

As for the RFA stuff, I have no idea.

 

Ok, that makes sense. So we could negotiate the trade for two first rounders and then we would have to make a clause in the dealings that says we will then trade one of the first rounders they gave us for a 3rd rounder in a separate trade after the original one goes through, even though it would make sense to just do a first and third to begin with. 

 

it's almost like a "take my word for it" kind of a trade in a sense then. 



#28 Panthro

Panthro

    aka Pablo

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 25,802
  • Reputation: 6,975
Moderators

Posted 16 January 2014 - 08:59 AM

Letting the player hit free agency unrestricted would accomplish the same thing. The new CBA pretty much made the transition tag a useless thing.

 

You might be mistaken.

 

We over payed CJ by something like $15-20M to keep him from going to Atl. If Atl set the price we could have matched it or let him walk if it was more than we wanted to pay.

 

Its only worthless if you are Hurney.



#29 ItsNotGonnaBeAlright

ItsNotGonnaBeAlright

    Insane Racist Moron

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,569
  • Reputation: 2,254
HUDDLER

Posted 16 January 2014 - 09:31 AM

You might be mistaken.

We over payed CJ by something like $15-20M to keep him from going to Atl. If Atl set the price we could have matched it or let him walk if it was more than we wanted to pay.

Its only worthless if you are Hurney.


I see what you're saying, but I think it only becomes a real option if its percieved that the player has no trade or the team has already used the franchise tag on another player.

Valid point though.

#30 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    Blazing Trails Thru the NFC South

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,332
  • Reputation: 4,585
HUDDLER

Posted 16 January 2014 - 10:26 AM

This is the key here.

 

Teams are not oblivious to our team, its needs and its cap space.

They know we will struggle to keep a intact core if we have pay hard the franchise tag.

 

Something like a pair of seconds (14/15), a 1st and a pair of 3rds (14, 14, 15) an early second (14, Raiders/Jacksonville). Would be an excellent compensation for a player we picked in the 6th, got insane production vs compensation value, and likely can't afford to keep.

 

 

I'd be thrilled with that amount of compensation for Hardy in a trade but don't expect it.

A 2nd rounder would be adequate, even a 3rd rounder would mean you'd receive that compensation a year earlier than you would by waiting for an NFL granted Compensatory pick a year after the fact which depending on how many FAs we sign might not even be guaranteed.

As you say we've already gotten insane value out of this 6th rounder. 



#31 jtm

jtm

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,764
  • Reputation: 203
HUDDLER

Posted 16 January 2014 - 10:52 AM

Don't know how to make this any more clear: If the player is tagged with the non-exclusive tag, it's two first rounders with no negotiating. There can be negotiations after that deal, but the offering team has to give up its next two consecutive original first round draft picks. If it's the exclusive tag, then the offer of picks can be whatever the teams agree on, but it's unlikely any team would enter that deal because the money is greater and there's no guarantee of a long term deal.


Who would give up two 1st rounders for any player? I guess you have to do a handshake deal and trade your future picks with the other team as an earlier poster mentioned. I'd be super happy if we could get one first rounder out of this.

#32 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    Blazing Trails Thru the NFC South

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,332
  • Reputation: 4,585
HUDDLER

Posted 16 January 2014 - 11:41 AM

Who would give up two 1st rounders for any player? I guess you have to do a handshake deal and trade your future picks with the other team as an earlier poster mentioned. I'd be super happy if we could get one first rounder out of this.

The Panthers gave up 2 first rounders once for an FT'd player. What a disaster that was.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app



#33 ItsNotGonnaBeAlright

ItsNotGonnaBeAlright

    Insane Racist Moron

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,569
  • Reputation: 2,254
HUDDLER

Posted 16 January 2014 - 12:03 PM

Who would give up two 1st rounders for any player? I guess you have to do a handshake deal and trade your future picks with the other team as an earlier poster mentioned. I'd be super happy if we could get one first rounder out of this.


Would depend on the tag type.

Exclusive - negotiate whatever terms for the trade, but the other team has no long term guarantee with the player.

Non-exclusive - other team gets a long term guarantee and would avoid paying the franchise tender, but those two first rounders are gone.

If this sounds like it makes it harder to tag and trade a player, that's the point. The compromise in the CBA negotiations was that the league could use a new formula for determining franchise tag values, while the union made it less enticing for a team to prevent a player from entering free agency. As with any hastily thrown together compromise, there's loopholes.