Quote
David Deacon
My take is that there is a deal to get done. Both sides are getting to each others BOFA. Pressure is building on AD side as they have little leverage and lots of risk.
This I don't agree with. They have no risk, if AD's main interest is a contract that recognizes his value, and he is willing to stand by that no matter what. So for example after this year, as has been said, he can just demand a trade rather than play for a team that will not pay him what he's worth. The tag would count against the cap and teams usually cannot afford to NOT trade a player like that under those circumstances.
They dont "risk" anything to get that. Unless you think all he cares about is the money which does not strike me as being remotely plausible. His entire vibe is different from that.
Those are some guesses and assumptions I have. Here's some more.
Everything I say assumes this: Rams and Donald are low and high on their offers and demands and moving toward the compromise. I
do NOT assume that this is just a case of AD being a problem. In fact if there are problems I assume it's both of them. I also see Demoff's comments the other day as his biggest mistake so far since he has been with the Rams. You don't announce in public that the deal is stalled because the 2 sides value the player differently. That's getting close to Zygmunt in 2000 saying he wasn't sure Kurt had demonstrated he was worth a big contract because he had only done it for one year. I see Kronke coming in and Snead speaking up as a way to bury that mistake.
I will repeat something I say a lot when it comes to this. We know very little. When you know very little about this kind of thing, exactly opposite statements, for all we know, could be equally true or false. So the assumption that Donald needs to be reined in from an extravagant contract demand is the equal and opposite of this statement: the Rams are too slow to budge from a low offer and get closer to a deal that acknowledge's AD's actual value as a player. Which statement is more true? The simple truth is no one knows. AND in the absence of knowing, it is very indicative which kinds of assumptions we tend to take at face value. One common assumption I see around is that Donald is the problem and the innocent virtuous team just has to handle him somehow. There is no evidence for that anymore than there is evidence for the opposite view.
There is a tiny bit more evidence for this view, though still not a lot of evidence: that this is just a completely professional tough negotiation and that they are moving toward compromise. That's the assumption I tend to hold. I admit it's an assumption and that I have no hard evidence for it.
....
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/08/2018 02:27PM by zn.
