Quote
The Rams have demonstrated they are willing to pay at the top of a position market – as they did with Gurley to reset the running back market – or competitively by making Cooks among the highest-paid receivers in the game. It stands to reason they’d do the same for Donald, coming off a 2017 season in which he was named the NFL Defensive Player of the Year and racked up 91 quarterback pressures in 14 games.
For argument’s sake, let’s just say it’s $21 million per year. And in terms of guaranteed money, let’s safely presume there’s more than $70 million sitting in the middle of the table just waiting for Donald to claim.
First, it was relatively easy to make deals for Cooks and Gurley. Cooks basically got the set range for WRs in his tier for 2018. 16 M. Gurley set a new level for RBs at 15 M, but there are several players like him, which is why every discussion of TG's deal mentions what it does for other backs like Johnson and Elliott.
There is no other elite DT in the league even close to Donald's class, there has not been for a while, and so he arguably sets an entirely new standard for highest paid defender in the league. A simple stat will drive this home. Donald faced multiple blockers more than any other player in football, but led the league in qb pressures in spite of it...and that was in 14 games. Name the other players like that across the last few years or decades. There is a list but it's short and goes back way deep into NFL history.
So what is that worth?
Anyway here's the problem with VB's article. It is just completely meaningless to say something like the Rams are willing to give Donald a big contract UNLESS you can then say the real, actual figures on both sides. Otherwise you end up in this situation where pro-management articles (like this one) say well it's a high amount, and more pro-player articles then say the Rams are in sticker shock. Both could be right and wrong at the same time.
If for example the Rams are offering 21 M, I would say that's too low. Donald's market value is more around 23-24 M. 70 guaranteed is too low. I would say it's should be around 80 or so M.
Here's an entirely different perspective--and remember this: until we actually hear real figures and real details, we have no idea whether VB is right or if this guy is right. In a situation like that, you either just take sides and believe who you want to, OR you try to be more balanced and go this is the range in the discussion, from this to this, and we don't really know.
Quote
.[
ramsrule.com]
A modest increase over the current non-quarterback standard, which is Broncos linebacker Von Miller at $19,083,333 per year and $70 million in overall guarantees, may not be enough to end the stalemates....This would mean a contract averaging over $23 million per year with $85 million in guarantees where $65 million to $70 million is fully guaranteed at signing
So VB can look at his 21 M figure and go "gosh this is a lot."
Another analysis can look at that and say no that is NOT enough for the best defender in the league in 2018, it's more around 23-24.
In terms of the value, we can debate that endlessly. Is Donald's market 21-22 M? Or is it 23-24 M? Is it 70 M guaranteed, or 85 M guaranteed?
BUT that's not even the point.
The point is that one article speculating about an amount and getting all wowed by how much it is IS NOT REAL INFORMATION. We don't know the real range, we don't know the real numbers, and it is entirely possible to see 21 M/70 guaranteed as not enough. In spite of VB personally believing it is.
This is the truth right now given what we know: we have NO idea what the real figures are, we have different views on what the market range should be, we don't know if the Rams are behind the delay, if Donald is, if both are, if neither is and it's actually not far from being resolved.
....
