So there's an article on NFL network saying that Orlando Brown is expected to sign for 6 years $145 mil.
That comes to $24.16 mil/yr and makes him the highest paid offensive lineman in football. It also would give him the 19th highest salary per year in the NFL
How would you feel if that is the contract he ended up signing?
I'm fine with it. He is a top 5 LT and he's only 26 next season. A young great LT is a guy you can't let leave. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TomBarndtsTwin:
You’re living in fantasy world. That’s not how contracts work for top half guys. Next guy up at the ‘prime’ positions gets the new best big contract . . . . until the next guy does.
Brown is in the process of hiring an agent and is coming off 3 straight Pro Bowl seasons. You think his new agent is gonna say ‘well, PFF has him only rated as a Top 15 tackle, so despite his 3 straight PB trips, we’re just gonna ask for a Top 5 to Top 10 salary. Obviously that’s stupid and no one (with a brain, anyway) would do that.
Let’s say, hypothetically, you let Brown walk after this year, draft a tackle in next years draft and he becomes what Brown is in a couple years. Guess what? When he’s at Browns level, you’ll be paying him more than you would have been paying Brown at that same time after his rookie deal is extended.
Let’s say the drafted LT becomes ‘elite’. Then 3 years from now HE’LL be setting the market for LT’s at 35+ mil. per year, when you could have been paying Brown 25 mil. for solid to possibly elite (if Brown continues to improve) for the same years. That’s just not smart business.
Veach knows this. He’s not an idiot.
There’s a reason the Chiefs have decided to go ahead and extend him ASAP.
As they should . . . . .
This article from yesterday pretty much reflects what I said 4 days ago.
Originally Posted by TEX:
17. ORLANDO BROWN JR., KANSAS CITY CHIEFS
Pretty much spot on IMO. He's ascending and consistent but not special (yet). He's not in the discussion for one of the top LT's in the NFL, unless you count being in the top 1/3 as being "top." Can he get top 3 - 5? The Chiefs seem to think so.
Why you quote me?
Red Dawg is completely wrong, as per usual, no? He has the whole situation wrong-as if he made it up. It's a terrible take. I'm lukewarm on Brown, but at least get your facts straight.
If they pay him, I get it. In a couple of years the contract will be a bargain. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
Why you quote me?
Red Dawg is completely wrong, as per usual, no? He has the whole situation wrong-as if he made it up. It's a terrible take. I'm lukewarm on Brown, but at least get your facts straight.
If they pay him, I get it. In a couple of years the contract will be a bargain.
Only if he actually lives up to it and becomes a top 5 tackle if he actually gets a top 5 contract. Otherwise no. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
If it's top 5 in average now, it won't be top 5 in a couple years. I don't know why this is hard to understand.
Also, nothing Red Dawg said is true. He didn't fail at LT, he didn't fail at RT, he wasn't being moved to G.
It is all bullshit.
The only reason he's in KC is because The Ravens paid a LT already.
I understand that it won't be top 5 in 5 years. That's an dumb way of looking at it though. Why not pay what he's worth so that in 5 years it's an even bigger bargain if he does improve. Or its still a fair contract if he doesn't.
The people who have been screaming about the cap past 2 months suddenly don't care about the impact paying non elite players elite money can have on the salary cap. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
I understand that it won't be top 5 in 5 years. That's an dumb way of looking at it though. Why not pay what he's worth so that in 5 years it's an even bigger bargain if he does improve. Or its still a fair contract if he doesn't.
The people who have been screaming about the cap past 2 months suddenly don't care about the impact paying non elite players elite money can have on the salary cap.
Because that's not how it works with 26 year old multiple pro bowl left tackles. Like I said, I'm like Luke warm on Brown, but we've had him on the cheap so far. He's due to get paid, and this deal will be entirely prime years. If you feel he's still ascending, you do it, and you don't look back [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
Because that's not how it works with 26 year old multiple pro bowl left tackles. Like I said, I'm like Luke warm on Brown, but we've had him on the cheap so far. He's due to get paid, and this deal will be entirely prime years. If you feel he's still ascending, you do it, and you don't look back
It’s a worthless endeavor explaining this to him. There’s only 2 options with him:
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
Because that's not how it works with 26 year old multiple pro bowl left tackles. Like I said, I'm like Luke warm on Brown, but we've had him on the cheap so far. He's due to get paid, and this deal will be entirely prime years. If you feel he's still ascending, you do it, and you don't look back
So you agree this is all dependent on him becoming a top 5 lt?
Isn't that literally what I just posted?
Btw, if you're ready to give him a top 5 deal...why not wait to see how he does this year? How much more expensive do you think it will get? At least by then you'll know if he deserves it.
Originally Posted by RunKC:
It’s a worthless endeavor explaining this to him. There’s only 2 options with him:
1. He’s stupid
2. He’s trolling
Explain what to me?
It's hilarious that a guy who's "lukewarm" about re-signing him and feels Orlando might not be the best fit here is at the same time trying to justify why signing him to a top 5 deal can be a good move. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
Why you quote me?
Red Dawg is completely wrong, as per usual, no? He has the whole situation wrong-as if he made it up. It's a terrible take. I'm lukewarm on Brown, but at least get your facts straight.
If they pay him, I get it. In a couple of years the contract will be a bargain.
Nothing I said is wrong. He's not that good and that's correct based on ranking and watching him play. Veach won't make him number 1 in money. If he was going to do that he could have already. It's very possible he plays on the tag and we go LT hunting next year. None of that is crazy nor wrong. Its very viable. [Reply]
duncan_idaho 06-05-2022, 07:56 AM
This message has been deleted by duncan_idaho.
Reason: 2x post
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
Nothing I said is wrong.
You're continuing the trend of being wrong.
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
He did play LT for many games
This part is true. Good start!
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
and was so great they got an expensive one
Ronnie Stanley was already on the roster and had signed his lucrative extension in October of the 2020 season. He played one game after the extension before he got hurt. So, this is, 100 percent wrong.
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
and traded him. Moved on because he sucked at LT.
It's true. They did trade him to Kansas City. They didn't move on because he "sucked" though. They moved him because he wanted to play LT, Stanley was expected to be healthy in 2021 and was on a huge deal they couldn't get out of yet. So, incorrect again.
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
If he wasn't below coverage he wouldn't be ranked below average.
But he isn't ranked below average, even in the PFF ranking that you apparently believe is gospel.
You can rank his position two ways: Either LT only or including both LT and RT.
There are 32 teams in the NFL.
Therefore, by basic math, if you're ranking just one of those two positions, someone would need to be 17th or worse in the ranking of just those position players to qualify as "below average" (because there are 32 players to rank).
He ranks 14th if you eliminate RTs.
If you're lumping them into one group and ranking all tackles together, you would have 64 players to rank. Which would mean a player would need to rank 33rd or worse to qualify as "below average."
He ranks your much-quoted 23rd if you're ranking all T together.
So your math doesn't work to qualify as below-average. Incorrect again. Even if you buy 1000 percent into the PFF ranking, which most don't and a smart person shouldn't.
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
He's a convert that now wants to be highest paid. Is there any media outlet that thinks he better than half the LTs? Nope.
Yes. PFF does, in fact. 14/32 at that position means there are 18 worse than him. Incorrect, even based on your own silly source.
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
He's not that good and that's correct based on ranking and watching him play.
As broken down above, you are not applying the ranking correctly. Incorrect again.
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
Veach won't make him number 1 in money. If he was going to do that he could have already. It's very possible he plays on the tag and we go LT hunting next year. None of that is crazy nor wrong. Its very viable.
At least you closed by keeping your wrong streak going. Brown just signed with an agent this week. Which is a very good reason for Veach and his representation to not have completed a deal. Because he's had representation for 4 days.
Is it possible he plays the season on the tag, gets tagged again, and moved? Sure. It's possible. Is it the route the Chiefs and Veach will take? That would require the Chiefs' confidence in their ability to locate an equal or better player for a less significant allocation of resources.
That would be a big risk to take in the middle of a highly competitive window, with a superstar QB. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
Nothing I said is wrong. He's not that good and that's correct based on ranking and watching him play. Veach won't make him number 1 in money. If he was going to do that he could have already. It's very possible he plays on the tag and we go LT hunting next year. None of that is crazy nor wrong. Its very viable.
No, almost everything you've said is wrong, other than it's possible he'll play on the tag this year and we'll go LT shopping next year. That's possible. Everything else is utterly false.
He didn't fail at RT.
He didn't fail at LT.
The Ravens weren't moving him to guard.
They'd already committed a top LT contract to Staley. Brown wanted to play LT, and had gotten a pro bowl nod there, as well as one at RT.
In the right offense, he's perfect. I'm not sure he is in this one, but if Veach and Reid think so, then they know better than you or I. If they think he's ascending, they'll pay him. If they're not sure, they'll tag him and go shopping next off-season. Either way, we got him for a mid-second value, with a cheap year of rookie deal money. He's been a bargain. I'm fine with either decision, and defer to the actual experts over morons on the internet.
There's having legitimate criticism, and there's making bullshit up. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
So you agree this is all dependent on him becoming a top 5 lt?
Isn't that literally what I just posted?
Btw, if you're ready to give him a top 5 deal...why not wait to see how he does this year? How much more expensive do you think it will get? At least by then you'll know if he deserves it.
