TICK TICK TICK; COREY WILLIAMS= GREAT ARTICLE

[Bretsky]

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/2008/02/18/clock-ticks-on-williams-decision.aspx


Based on the statistical formula Bedard uses, he notes that Corey Williams would be the best bargain of the top 10 DT's if he were tagged.........assuming no improvement from last year's stats.

Also, he noted he'd find it hard to believe if TT does not tag Williams when there is a huge market for him and quite possible one that could include a trade.

2 DAYS TO GO

[pittstang5]

I'm not sure what to think of the Williams situation. During the season and up until the end, I figured if the Pack doesn't sign him - Oh well, no big deal. Now, I think I'm falling for all the hype and would rather see Williams stay, whether by a tag or a long term deal. I still think the Franchise tag price is pretty expensive for what Willams can bring to the Packer table...But the Pack has a huge amount of cap room, and it would only be for one year. They could still tag him and work out a deal later if need be.

Again, I never really thought TT would tag him.....now I'm starting to think otherwise. We shall see.

[b bulldog]

I soley want him tagged now just so we can trade him. Bedard did mention that in his opinion, 99 is overrated.

[pittstang5]

I soley want him tagged now just so we can trade him. Bedard did mention that in his opinion, 99 is overrated.

Trading him would be ok for me too. At least you're getting something for him instead of letting him walk.

[vince]

As I said previously, I wouldn't be upset if he is tagged. I'm not confident though, that he'd be all that tradeable with just a one-year contract. It would likely have to be contingent on a successfully negotiated extension, which might be difficult to do with the player so close to free agency again.

I've never heard of anyone successfully trading a franchised player. It would seem this would be a common occurrence if there were a market for it...

[b bulldog]

he would need to agree with his new team on a long term deal before he would be traded in all probability.

[MJZiggy]

You're forgetting, if they tag Williams, he's not gonna want a trade. Boy wants to stay here if he can get the cash.

[Bretsky]

he would need to agree with his new team on a long term deal before he would be traded in all probability.

I don't think that would have to be; the new team could choose to tag him next year as well if they chose. Then again if TT held out for a higher draft pick they might want to work out a long term deal with him.

I think there are teams out there that would give up a draft pick for C Williams at around 6MIL per year

I just can't see letting him go for free with the market as is.

Worst case is he use him for a year to see if he develops more

[Bretsky]

You're forgetting, if they tag Williams, he's not gonna want a trade. Boy wants to stay here if he can get the cash.

He has not trade veto power in this game.

I'm starting to warm up to Bedard; he's becoming more comfortable in offering up views. Recently he analyzed the Miami Defense of old and questioned whether that type of D is best served when trying to win it all. Wist would have been pounding his chest if he saw that. He's also questioned the lack of blitz creativity from Bob Sanders.

Now he offers up some more views on reasons we might tag CW

Here is his past paragraph

Maybe I’m completely off about this, I don’t know. But something just tells me that Thompson would be about the last person to just let a young player go when there’s a willing market ready for him.

[Farley Face]

he would need to agree with his new team on a long term deal before he would be traded in all probability.

I don't think that would have to be; the new team could choose to tag him next year as well if they chose. Then again if TT held out for a higher draft pick they might want to work out a long term deal with him.

I think there are teams out there that would give up a draft pick for C Williams at around 6MIL per year

I just can't see letting him go for free with the market as is.

Worst case is he use him for a year to see if he develops more

I'll just add, if we do let him walk, we will get a compensatory pick for him.

Likely no better than a 4th rounder, but the league will give us something, assuming like I do we don't sign another similarly valued player in UFA.

That said, I am still strongly in the tag him, trade him camp as I mentioned in the original thread on this topic.

[Bretsky]

he would need to agree with his new team on a long term deal before he would be traded in all probability.

I don't think that would have to be; the new team could choose to tag him next year as well if they chose. Then again if TT held out for a higher draft pick they might want to work out a long term deal with him.

I think there are teams out there that would give up a draft pick for C Williams at around 6MIL per year

I just can't see letting him go for free with the market as is.

Worst case is he use him for a year to see if he develops more

I'll just add, if we do let him walk, we will get a compensatory pick for him.

Likely no better than a 4th rounder, but the league will give us something, assuming like I do we don't sign another similarly valued player in UFA.

That said, I am still strongly in the tag him, trade him camp as I mentioned in the original thread on this topic.

Yes, I kind of stole your thunder after you referred to the Bedard article

But lately we've been short on Packer threads and I thought it deserved its own

[Scott Campbell]

Here is his (Bedard's) last paragraph:

Maybe I’m completely off about this, I don’t know. But something just tells me that Thompson would be about the last person to just let a young player go when there’s a willing market ready for him.


Especially when if he can't unload him as possibly planned, we can still use him and are only on the hook for 1 year at ~$6M, in a year that we could absorb the $$$.

I guess I hope we do tag him.

[RashanGary]

6.25 is really not a large amount with the way the cap has gone up but DT salaries have not. It's a good time to use a tag on a DT.

A couple more days and we'll have the answer.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

You're forgetting, if they tag Williams, he's not gonna want a trade. Boy wants to stay here if he can get the cash.

I have to disagree...omg..our first fight.

Players don't wanna be tagged. Sure, they get a good salary for one year, but they don't get the large cash they want from a multi year deal and the signing bonus.

For example, Darius in Jville.

[sepporepi]

Here is his past paragraph

Maybe I’m completely off about this, I don’t know. But something just tells me that Thompson would be about the last person to just let a young player go when there’s a willing market ready for him.

I like this more: :lol:

(I totally screwed up my first attempt at doing this formula in Excel. Thanks for a couple of readers for pointing out what an idiot I am with numbers. This is why I write and don't crunch numbers for a living. That chart is now right and while the conclusion is different, the overriding point in the same. And, yes, I realize this chart favors pass-rushing DTs. You're never going to be able to compare guys realistically considering the different schemes and responsibilities the players have.)

At least he is sincere :P [/code]

[LL2]

I've never heard of anyone successfully trading a franchised player. It would seem this would be a common occurrence if there were a market for it...

It didn't work for SD last year with Turner. Not sure if Turner got the franchise tag or a lesser tag, but SD tried to trade Turner.

I just do not think TT is going to franchise CW. I have a feeling that TT offered CW some pretty good contract offers, but CW wants to take his chance on getting a bigger, more lucrative long term deal.

[The Leaper]

Players don't wanna be tagged. Sure, they get a good salary for one year, but they don't get the large cash they want from a multi year deal and the signing bonus.

Yep...players REALLY don't want to be tagged. There is no financial security being tagged.

To put it in practical terms...CW could take 6.25M for 2008 by being tagged, and he would be forced to continue to perform at a high level to ensure future payouts. A serious injury could basically cripple his future earning potential.

OR

CW could take $10M in a signing bonus for a 5 year deal as a free agent that probably includes another $6M in salary in the first 3 years of the deal which also are virtually guaranteed because of the large signing bonus, regardless of injury or level of play.

Which would you rather have?

[run pMc]

Seems like a nice guy and a decent player.
Still, we're talking about $6M for a part time starter.

Pass.

I wonder if there's something in the NFL contract laws that prevents the tag-and-trade from happening. I'd think this would happen a lot. If TT could pull that off, I'd be happy for CW and TT.

[Deputy Nutz]

Could we have any more topics about Cory Williams? I mean I know the off-season is pretty boring right now but seriously can we think of anything other than Cory Williams?

[The Leaper]

Seems like a nice guy and a decent player.
Still, we're talking about $6M for a part time starter.

Pass.


I agree. If we are going to spend $6M, why not do it on a player that can make a legitimate impact to improve the team from where it was in 2007? I'd rather see that money go toward signing one of the solid 2nd tier OGs.

[Bretsky]

Could we have any more topics about Cory Williams? I mean I know the off-season is pretty boring right now but seriously can we think of anything other than Cory Williams?

I agree, but seeing it's free agency I'm not sure what else to discuss :lol: