Watkins among FAs that could be overpaid

[top dawg]

Should we really be the team that overpays Sammy Watkins?  

Gregg Rosenthal put together an article listing free agents that have a fairly good chance of being overpaid,  and Watkins and Star Lotulelei are in it.  

Now,  of course that's not really a newsflash, but when you start thinking about the specific rationale and actual numbers, the scale starts moving back towards being practical and rational as opposed to emotional. 

Everyone pretty much knows that $16 mil per year (and probably even 15, 14, or 13) is too much to pay Jarvis Landry. And Landry has produced,  regardless if you believe he's overrated, question his efficiency, or whatever else.  But here we have Sammy Watkins, and I'm sure some are ready to roll out the Brinks truck. 

 

"Some team will dig up its old draft profile of Watkins and pay him like a No. 1 receiver. But Watkins was the third-most productive wideout on his own team last year, behind a third-round rookie (Cooper Kupp) and former Bills teammate Robert Woods. Watkins has only combined for 1,023 yards over the last two seasons, yet he could get a contract that ranks among the top five NFL receivers because it's so rare for a player with his profile to hit free agency. That's a recipe for outsized expectations."

 

Just like Watkins hasn't exactly lit the world on fire, we all know that Star hasn't, but yet and still someone just may overpay. 

 

"Designated run stoppers aren't nearly as coveted in today's NFL, especially ones who aren't that dominant. Lotulelei is a strong candidate to get a generous contract because he was part of a stout Carolina defensive line and has a first-round pedigree. But the Panthers know better; he's not Damon Harrison or Linval Joseph. Lotulelei graded out as a negative run defender over the last two years, according to Pro Football Focus. He's a solid rotational player who is set to get paid like a star."

 

Now just like it's fairly easy to see why we shouldn't overpay for Star's services,  why in the hell should we overpay Watkins?  I mean,  they're both former first rounders who have really disappointed as much as people try and justify they're lack of production with rational reasoning or not. It is what it is. 

If we're letting Star walk for value-based reasons, then we should let Sammy walk on by if the value is lost within expectations of an inflated contract. 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000919562/article/sammy-watkins-headlines-free-agents-who-could-be-overpriced

 

[LinvilleGorge]

We shouldn't overpay for either. I'm really interested in Watkins... at the right price. I don't think $10-12M per year is the right price. If we're going to spend that type of money on a WR, it needs to be Allen Robinson and even then the structure needs to be right to account for the risk of him coming off of an ACL. Other than that, go out and grab a stopgap like Mike Wallace that can fill the role that we need for significantly less money.

[Saca312]

Watkins fits us best tbh. Big receiver who has deep threat speed that fits the mold of a Norv Turner Air Coryell receiver. He'd be perfect for Cam. 

I personally believe 10-12m per year is reasonable and great for a receiver like Watkins. I feel he's the Cam Newton of receivers, where the talent/scheme surrounding him is not the best fit and doesn't allow him to reach his full potential. I mean, just look at this:

 

[TheRed]

The reality is there is going to be overpaying across the board this offseason.

[Diehardpanther02]

Ok fug Watkins. Pay Robinson and Landry.

[MHS831]

45 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Should we really be the team that overpays Sammy Watkins?  

Gregg Rosenthal put together an article listing free agents that have a fairly good chance of being overpaid,  and Watkins and Star Lotulelei are in it.  

Now,  of course that's not really a newsflash, but when you start thinking about the specific rationale and actual numbers, the scale starts moving back towards being practical and rational as opposed to emotional. 

Everyone pretty much knows that $16 mil per year (and probably even 15, 14, or 13) is too much to pay Jarvis Landry. And Landry has produced,  regardless if you believe he's overrated, question his efficiency, or whatever else.  But here we have Sammy Watkins, and I'm sure some are ready to roll out the Brinks truck. 

 

"Some team will dig up its old draft profile of Watkins and pay him like a No. 1 receiver. But Watkins was the third-most productive wideout on his own team last year, behind a third-round rookie (Cooper Kupp) and former Bills teammate Robert Woods. Watkins has only combined for 1,023 yards over the last two seasons, yet he could get a contract that ranks among the top five NFL receivers because it's so rare for a player with his profile to hit free agency. That's a recipe for outsized expectations."

 

Just like Watkins hasn't exactly lit the world on fire, we all know that Star hasn't, but yet and still someone just may overpay. 

 

"Designated run stoppers aren't nearly as coveted in today's NFL, especially ones who aren't that dominant. Lotulelei is a strong candidate to get a generous contract because he was part of a stout Carolina defensive line and has a first-round pedigree. But the Panthers know better; he's not Damon Harrison or Linval Joseph. Lotulelei graded out as a negative run defender over the last two years, according to Pro Football Focus. He's a solid rotational player who is set to get paid like a star."

 

Now just like it's fairly easy to see why we shouldn't overpay for Star's services,  why in the hell should we overpay Watkins?  I mean,  they're both former first rounders who have really disappointed as much as people try and justify they're lack of production with rational reasoning or not. It is what it is. 

If we're letting Star walk for value-based reasons, then we should let Sammy walk on by if the value is lost within expectations of an inflated contract. 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000919562/article/sammy-watkins-headlines-free-agents-who-could-be-overpriced

 

Nice post, Dawg.  How often does a player who gets top market value ever live up to the contract?  I think of the times we have paid top dollar for free agents---Sean Gilbert, Mike Wahle, Justin Hartwig, etc.  Not the best.  Our best UFAs were players like Jake Delhomme, Mike Tolbert, Mike Mitchell, and Ted Ginn---all gems lost in a bad system or on the bench.  Heck, Coleman fits that description....

We need to look for players that are deflated because they did not perform well in their current systems of they were buried on the depth chart behind a stud.  There are these kinds of players in free agency this year, which is why I suggested

Paul Richardson (WR) Seattle.  Not a good system for him.  Still, averaged nearly as many yards as Funchess.   (estimated cost: $7.5 m)

Terrence Brooks (S) NY Jets.  Buried on the depth chart, but played well when in the game.  Mike Mitchell?  Kurt Coleman?  I think Brooks is better and entering his prime. (estimated cost: $3-4m)

Bradley McDougald (SS) Seattle. Not great in coverage, but he is 27 and buried behind a good player.  Really good in the box in run support. (estimated cost:  $4m)

Trey Burton, (TE) Philadelphia.  Behind Ertz, he was great.  TEs do not grab top dollar, but the TE on this team is worth more than in other offenses.  He was a reserve TE and is good enough to start.  He should like the opportunity to join a team with such a big role for TEs behind a 33-year old vet.  (estimated cost: $6 million)

We could get them all for $20m.

[Cpt slay a ho]

Instead of getting in a bidding war I’d go straight for tier -a or b fa while other teams fight over and overpay big names.

only guy I’d court is Robinson and that’s if a guy like sanders from Denver isn’t released. 

[GoobyPls]

We should try and backload his contract 

[The Huddler]

2 hours ago, GoobyPls said:

We should try and backload his contract 

Hurney, is that you?

[Thorrez]

Overpaid compared to what? Of course a guy in FA will make more than one that signed a year early to get out of a small number in the last year of the rookie deal. That's how nfl works and does not mean the FA is overpaid. 

The real questions are:

1. Do we need the money/cap to keep our next draft class (With Funchess, Williams and Thompson upcoming)? 

2. What other FA can we get for the money left? 

With both Kalils gone next year, retaining that 15 start class should not be impossible with cap to spare. 

Then the question becomes what FA is better than Watkins? I don't really see one and would not mind us making a push for him. 

(of course, I think we should have kept Norwell instead. But as we all know that ship has sailed.) 

[TylerVagyler]

So the article included stats in a season where he was injured for half the year to make it sound like he isn’t producing? 

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, TylerVagyler said:

So the article included stats in a season where he was injured for half the year to make it sound like he isn’t producing? 

To be fair, and honest,  looking at Watkins' entire body of work,  it arguably makes the argument stronger because it is indicative of even more injuries and missing expectations.  Compared to what they paid in draft capital and what they received,  Watkins came up short of expectations.  He then ostensibly went to a better situation,  and he got outplayed by a rookie.  

Fair or not,  this is a "What have you done for me lately?" type of league. 

[tondi]

There's no way we get Watkins unless he gives us a discount to get back to the Carolinas or to play with Cam. 

[Snake]

Honestly it's how you structure a deal not what they get paid. We are not getting any good players for 5 million a year. Sorry that's Russell Shepard money.