Tramon Williams holding out?

[packers11]

https://www.rotoworld.com

Packers CB Tramon Williams may not sign his tender as an exclusive rights free agent in hopes of getting a new contract.

It wouldn't technically be a holdout, since Williams would be unsigned. The promising future starter could follow the path blazed by Ryan Grant, who successfully waited for an extension last year after one accrued year in the league. Look for this one to drag on.

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

[SnakeLH2006]

Re: Tramon Williams holding out?

www.rotoworld.com

Packers CB Tramon Williams may not sign his tender as an exclusive rights free agent in hopes of getting a new contract.

It wouldn't technically be a holdout, since Williams would be unsigned. The promising future starter could follow the path blazed by Ryan Grant, who successfully waited for an extension last year after one accrued year in the league. Look for this one to drag on.

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

Snakes a huge TWill fan. Big fan. But let's hope he doesn't follow the underwhelming path of Grant that far from 2008.

TWill is a pretty good player. Few will dispute that, and Snake feels he'll be a good starting CB if Al falls off or if Wood moves to safety in 2009 or thereafter...it will happen.

Guy's a good ass CB and if not for Al's "resurgence" AFTER his injury, I'd be pushing him for a CB starting slot. Love the guy though....great speed, enthusiasm, instincts for the ball.

Hopefully TT realizes that too, and gets him a long term deal for cheap.

[Lurker64]

Man, giving in to Grant last year is just going to keep biting us in the ass, isn't it?

That was probably Thompson's biggest mistake so far.

[SnakeLH2006]

Man, giving in to Grant last year is just going to keep biting us in the ass, isn't it?

That was probably Thompson's biggest mistake so far.

Agreed. A few on here give stats defending/"showing" Grant was a "good" RB last year, but Snake's been off that train for...............EVER since his incredible 2007 season.

True, Grant had a bunch of yards last year...stats will show he got a bit better ypc over the past few games....but stats don't show the dude had no burst/game breaker ability like in 2007, and couldn't get a first down on 3rd when we needed it (part of the reason we went from 13-3 to 6-10) when he would/could take it to the house. He's pedestrian at best and not the answer at RB as Snake has been rallying that for the past season. I could go on and on, but get rid of the guy (or least to the bench) as I wasn't happy with/nor to this day with his "deal".

TWill on the other hand, is a player on the rise. Great physical (and looks to be gamechanging skills) when given the opportunity. Wood and Al are great, but could always use a spare CB. Lock him up TT (not in the basement though... ).

[gbpackfan]

Tramon Williams has every right to hold out for a new contract. He isn't signed and has no current deal with the Packers. But the Packers have every right to tell him to f**k off. They'll probably work something out but Williams shouldn't expect a blockbuster deal. He hasn't earned it yet. Let Blackman step up.

And another thing, if Williams holds out too long, he is going to have some serious trouble seeing the field this season with Capers installing a new D.

[wist43]

Williams has improved every year, but I'd still be nervous with him as a starter.

That said, he's earning himself a shot at a starting spot, so based on that I'd give him a modest contract, and if he doesn't cut it as a starter, you've still got a good nickel - assuming his attitude didn't implode at losing his starting spot.

[DonHutson]

The best he can realistically hope for this offseason is to get paid like a good nickel back. If I were him I'd take the tender, let Al Harris get a year older, then try to break the bank and get paid like a starter next year.

He'd wait a year to get paid, but he'd probably make double per year what he'd get now. He'd come out ahead in the long run, as long as he stays healthy and keeps producing.

[Patler]

True, Grant had a bunch of yards last year...stats will show he got a bit better ypc over the past few games....but stats don't show the dude had no burst/game breaker ability like in 2007, and couldn't get a first down on 3rd when we needed it (part of the reason we went from 13-3 to 6-10) when he would/could take it to the house.

That is exactly the type of thing that stats would show. You are making the argument, so support it. What was his success on 3rd down carries? I am interested because:

1. I would like to know a source for that type of breakdown
2. I'm not sure you will find that Grant had many of those opportunities. Quite often Jackson was in the game on 3rd down, not Grant.

Mostly I am interested because of reason #1. I NEED a quick source for detailed statistical breakdowns like that!!

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

If you think about it though is he not more valuable than Propping, or Chillar, or some other nobody making millions. I would give him a small deal (very small), maybe something like 3 year 5 million just so he's making some money but so he still has to prove he's capable of one day starting.

But I would sign Jennings, Collins, and others first who are also under paid and much more valuable.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Williams has improved every year, but I'd still be nervous with him as a starter.

Any player that never started before would be cause for nervousness. But every starter was once a first-year starter.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Man, giving in to Grant last year is just going to keep biting us in the ass, isn't it?

That was probably Thompson's biggest mistake so far.

True only in hindsight. Grant had a disappointing 2008 season coming off promising 2007. But I'm not sure what TT was supposed to do, Grant held the cards. Jackson looked like doggy-doo in 2007.

[Patler]

Man, giving in to Grant last year is just going to keep biting us in the ass, isn't it?

That was probably Thompson's biggest mistake so far.

Agreed. A few on here give stats defending/"showing" Grant was a "good" RB last year, but Snake's been off that train for...............EVER since his incredible 2007 season.

What was so bad about Grant's contract? You guys write as if he got some blockbuster deal. He didn't. I won't even argue about his performance last season. just the contract itself. He got a nice paying contract, but one that is also team friendly.

- It's not a huge contract. Grant had just the 13th highest cap figure at his position.
- Much of the value is incentive based. If he gets the yards he gets the money.
- Grant is now under contract through the season of his 29th birthday, the prime RB years.
- There is minimal long term effect. If he doesn't perform he can be released with minimal cap impact.

In the overall scheme of managing a salary cap long term, this was not a bad deal for the Packers. It tied up a promising player at an affordable price through the most significant years of his career, without significant detrimental salary cap implications if he did not perform. All in all, a very reasonable approach for dealing with Grant.

[RashanGary]

I'd rather pay Williams either half way through this season (after we see him play zone) or after this season during his restricted year.

[RashanGary]

I agree that everything was reasonable and team friendly except that they didn't have to do anything for three years. Still, Grant had a very unusual situation and I know fair is kind of a childish concept at times, but I think the team went out of their way to do something fair for a guy that was losing to the system because of the way he went in.

I was against it at the time. The cut throat thing would have been to say retire or play for the price. The reasonable thing was to consider how bad his situation was and how unusual it was, then to work with him while getting a player/contract that under any other circumstance would have been considered great. Look at these contracts signed this week. If we throw Grants out there, I think we'd have the best contract signed this whole UFA period. We complain because we didn't have to do it, but Grant's situation was very unusual. I think the Packers did the right thing, to the player, to make an exception and it helped them at the same time. I'd say the Packers flexed more than Grant. The Packers had all the leverage but they didn't treat him that way.

Tramon is a young guy (not fighting the same unusual up hill battle that Grant was, being in his prime age at his position but only in his first accrued season as an undrafted player). I wouldn't make the same exception (although I do like Tramon better). I'd tell him to play this year and if he plays as well in zone as he does in man, lock him up to a starters caliber contract. He's a 24 year old kid, he's going into his restricted year next year. He's going to make money. Grant could have gotten completely screwed.

[Patler]

I agree that everything was reasonable and team friendly except that they didn't have to do anything for three years. Still, Grant had a very unusual situation and I know fair is kind of a childish concept at times, but I think the team went out of their way to do something fair for a guy that was losing to the system because of the way he went in.

I was against it at the time. The cut throat thing would have been to say retire or play for the price. The reasonable thing was to consider how bad his situation was and how unusual it was, then to work with him while getting a player/contract that under any other circumstance would have been considered great. Look at these contracts signed this week. If we throw Grants out there, I think we'd have the best contract signed this whole UFA period. We complain because we didn't have to do it, but Grant's situation was very unusual. I think the Packers did the right thing, to the player, to make an exception.

Tramon is a young guy (not fighting the same unusual up hill battle that Grant was, being in his prime age at his position but only in his first accrued season). I wouldn't make the same exception (although I do like Tramon better). I'd tell him to play this year and if he plays as well in zone as he does in man, lock him up to a starters caliber contract.

The Packers have made several contract decisions recently just because it was the right thing to do. Tauscher and I think Harris were given contract increases without added years just because the Packers determined they were underpaid for their positions and performance. Each could have been forced to play for a lesser contract.

Williams certainly will not have the same leverage that Grant did last off season. Williams could have from moderate negotiating leverage to virtually no leverage at all, depending on what the Packers REALLY think about Lee's potential in the new defense and what they do in the draft.