Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Leverage and no trade clauses

AU-panther

By AU-panther,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

AU-panther Mentor

AU-panther

Posted
Posted

yes, another Desean Watson post.

I see a lot of misinformation in all of these Watson threads so it might be good to explain how some of this works.

First of all the financial reasons Watson won't sit out too long:

So far in his career he has made about $40m.  Lets assume between agents and taxes he lost about 40% (speak up any accountants) of that, that leaves about $24m.

Sounds great, but $27m of that was a signing bonus, of which he has only played one year of.  According to Schefter they could actually go back after $21.6m.  

So if he has $24m and they can go after $21.6m, that only leaves $2.4m.  To most of us that is enough to live a lifetime but I'm guessing he has bigger bills than us.  I know he probably has some endorsement money also but overall he stands to lose a large percentage of his income.  

He needs his money way more than the Texans need theirs.  He won't sit out for an extend time or retire.  

 

 

In regards to the "no trade clause" it doesn't create as much leverage as some on here think. 

A "no trade clause" has the most leverage when a player DOESN'T want to be traded.  Example:

Team says, "Hey Desean, we are trading you to Minnesota", Desean says, "no thanks, I like it here, I have a no trade clause."

No trade clauses are mostly designed to help players NOT get traded.  Once a player says he wants to get traded he basically loses some of the leverage that the clause carries.  Example:

Desean says "I want to be traded".  Desean says, "I really want to go to the 49ers".  Teams says "we have better deals from the Jets and Panthers, you can choose between those two or you can not be traded at all"

The team knows Desean wants to leave, and they know if he wants to leave that bad he will go to most teams.

Don't get me wrong, the no trade clause helps, and yes Desean can sit out and it does hurt the team but he doesn't have all of the leverage like some on here think.

 

 

 

 

  • Pie 3
  • Flames 3
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SizzleBuzz Grand Master

SizzleBuzz

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

yes, another Desean Watson post.

I see a lot of misinformation in all of these Watson threads so it might be good to explain how some of this works.

First of all the financial reasons Watson won't sit out too long:

So far in his career he has made about $40m.  Lets assume between agents and taxes he lost about 40% (speak up any accountants) of that, that leaves about $24m.

Sounds great, but $27m of that was a signing bonus, of which he has only played one year of.  According to Schefter they could actually go back after $21.6m.  

So if he has $24m and they can go after $21.6m, that only leaves $2.4m.  To most of us that is enough to live a lifetime but I'm guessing he has bigger bills than us.  I know he probably has some endorsement money also but overall he stands to lose a large percentage of his income.  

He needs his money way more than the Texans need theirs.  He won't sit out for an extend time or retire.  

 

 

In regards to the "no trade clause" it doesn't create as much leverage as some on here think. 

A "no trade clause" has the most leverage when a player DOESN'T want to be traded.  Example:

Team says, "Hey Desean, we are trading you to Minnesota", Desean says, "no thanks, I like it here, I have a no trade clause."

No trade clauses are mostly designed to help players NOT get traded.  Once a player says he wants to get traded he basically loses some of the leverage that the clause carries.  Example:

Desean says "I want to be traded".  Desean says, "I really want to go to the 49ers".  Teams says "we have better deals from the Jets and Panthers, you can choose between those two or you can not be traded at all"

The team knows Desean wants to leave, and they know if he wants to leave that bad he will go to most teams.

Don't get me wrong, the no trade clause helps, and yes Desean can sit out and it does hurt the team but he doesn't have all of the leverage like some on here think.

Preach.

40% is low...

Deshaun cannot afford to sit out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SizzleBuzz Grand Master

SizzleBuzz

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, mav1234 said:

Lol.. those of us noting Watson has leverage due to the no trade clause is relative to a player without one.  Do we really need to walk through why that is the case?

Akin to a guy who has $1 compared to the dude who is flat broke?

Neither have any leverage...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tepper's Chest Hair Contributor

Tepper's Chest Hair

Posted
Posted

I also feel there is a form of leverage on Watson's side that wasn't mentioned.  Its more indirect and not easily quantifiable. 

I feel the negative PR of Texans front office with dealing with Watson + his status up in the air (placing Texans "plan" up in the air, can all be a factor in getting quality FAs.  The longer this goes on, the worse its gets.  It benefits the Texans to take care of this as quickly as possible.  Either placating Watson to stay, or moving him. 

Sure, there will always be the FAs that just follow the money and take the highest pay out.

But I am sure there are many FAs that have similar offers from a variety of teams.  They look for contender status, who their team mates would be, how the front office works with its players.

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raleigh PF Rising Star

Raleigh PF

Posted
Posted

Tell me the last time forcing a player to sit out worked well for the team that did it? In the end, the player ends up going elsewhere, happily or otherwise. 

You can make a case about Antonio Brown, but he was/is a nut case. Deshaun is not that.

Free agents will still sign with the Texans, but probably not big ones if Texans do that.

Hint: they won't.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • frankw
      Trade Deadline Talk

      By frankw · Posted

      You guys are just going to have to accept the fact that Dan Morgan is a mid GM best case scenario currently. I used to have people get very belligerent over defending Scott Fitterer too. And that's not hyperbole. People used to go to bat for that guy like he was blood related. We have a truckload invested in the OL and what do we have to show for it? The whole unit is already banged up including one of our big signings. Even without all that the group has largely take a step back from last year in pass protection. Then you get to the QB room and there's only two conclusions you can make about Dan Morgan. Either he deliberately ignored it two years in a row on his own accord or he took orders from Tepper to do so. Either scenario says he's not fit to be an NFL GM.
    • strato
      Is Canales digging his own grave?

      By strato · Posted

      Frank, ceding control of the defense in no way verifies that Tepper told Canales to bench Young.    It certainly buttresses the idea that Canales would need permission to bench him but that is as far as you can take it.    After that it is pure speculation and it doesn’t make sense. 
    • strato
      Trade Deadline Talk

      By strato · Posted

      Uhh, okay yes that happened. I didn’t like the pick either I am a 3rd or later RB guy. Always. Actually hated the CMC pick too. Hated the Stewart pick.  No one wants to talk about trading the #39 in that draft and what he did with that.  Got #52, #155, and the Rams 2025 2nd to boot.   The 52 and 155 plus our 142 5th rounder to go up for a Brooks Everyone wants to forget about the 2025 2nd for that Rams trade  which was used to move up for Scourton.  That Rams trade down was a great deal for us.     
×
×
  • Create New...