LB Jerome Baker Visiting Thursday

[IsntLifeFunny]

It's similar to people saying Henry's deal is only a 1 year 9 million deal...yeah which if that's the case he is still the 8th highest paid RB in the league. 

 

The Titans haven't signed a coverage backer because they don't value it the same as the down hill blitzer in this scheme. 

[Starkiller]

Just now, IsntLifeFunny said:

We know he was guaranteed more money than Baker. If it's a one year deal because he gets cut after the season he will still have made more money than him. 

“Guaranteed money” isn’t all guaranteed. We need to see how much is guaranteed at signing vs how much becomes guaranteed if he’s still on the roster in a year. 

[reo]

2 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

The Titans haven't signed a coverage backer because they don't value it the same as the down hill blitzer in this scheme. 

 

You're taking very little information and making very large assumptions here.

 

You could be right but this is a big guess going on very little. 

[IsntLifeFunny]

Just now, Starkiller said:

“Guaranteed money” isn’t all guaranteed. We need to see how much is guaranteed at signing vs how much becomes guaranteed if he’s still on the roster in a year. 

It's guaranteed or it wouldn't have been stated as such. It isn't a roster bonus like what Dillard was going to receive. It isn't a guarantee against injury either or that would have been reported.

 

It isn't worth arguing, but since I am, no, you guys are incorrect on both sides. He'll be paid more than Baker. 

[Starkiller]

I’d argue they signed Murray as an upside guy they don’t have but need for the new scheme on D. 
 

As for Baker, they could decide that they can get a coverage LB in the 4th round to potentially start rather than paying a vet. 

[reo]

Just now, IsntLifeFunny said:

It's guaranteed or it wouldn't have been stated as such. It isn't a roster bonus like what Dillard was going to receive. It isn't a guarantee against injury either or that would have been reported.

 

It isn't worth arguing, but since I am, no, you guys are incorrect on both sides. He'll be paid more than Baker. 

 

We. Do. Not. Know. The. Numbers. 

 

 

You could end up being right. But as of now, we do not know that.

 

And since we'll never know how much they valued Baker, we'll probably never know for sure.

[reo]

Just now, Starkiller said:

I’d argue they signed Murray as an upside guy they don’t have but need for the new scheme on D. 
 

As for Baker, they could decide that they can get a coverage LB in the 4th round to potentially start rather than paying a vet. 

 

Could also be one released later.

[Starkiller]

1 minute ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

It's guaranteed or it wouldn't have been stated as such. It isn't a roster bonus like what Dillard was going to receive. It isn't a guarantee against injury either or that would have been reported.

That’s not the way it works. 

 

 

[Starkiller]

1 minute ago, reo said:

 

Could also be one released later.

Possible, though I doubt they would count on that. 

[IsntLifeFunny]

6 minutes ago, Starkiller said:

That’s not the way it works. 

 

 

That is the way it works. Guaranteed money is guaranteed. If we're only guaranteed against injury or as a roster bonus next year it would have been reported as such. 

[Starkiller]

All we know is that they brought in Baker to meet, so they were interested in adding a coverage LB. So they are looking to upgrade the position.
 

But they couldn’t agree on financial terms. So Baker was presumably asking for more than they thought he was worth. He settled on a 1-year contract elsewhere, but it’s possible he was insisting on a long term deal previously and dropped that requirement when he ran out of suitors. 
 

there’s just too much we don’t know to be remotely conclusive. 

[Starkiller]

11 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

That is the way it works. Guaranteed money is guaranteed. If we're only guaranteed against injury or as a roster bonus next year it would have been reported as such. 

Nope. 
 

There’s a big difference between “guaranteed” vs “guaranteed at signing”. And the reporting has only said “guaranteed”. 
 

Also, the reporting often relies on the agent being the source barring official contract numbers. And it benefits the agent to give the rosiest view of the contract from the player’s perspective. It would also explain why no details have come out. 
 

But we’ll see when the actual details hit. 

[ctm]

19 minutes ago, Starkiller said:

“Guaranteed money” isn’t all guaranteed. We need to see how much is guaranteed at signing vs how much becomes guaranteed if he’s still on the roster in a year. 

 This is correct.

 

In some contracts, there is guaranteed money at signing.  And then there is more guaranteed money that is triggered at a future date if the player is on the roster.  Titans just went thru that with Dillard being cut before new guarantees kicked in.

 

[IsntLifeFunny]

If you guys are quibbling about roster bonuses and such it wont apply to a 2 year deal. Murray obviously, as in very obviously, is going to get paid more ovsr this season than the 7 million Baker is making in Seattle. 

[Starkiller]

6 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

If you guys are quibbling about roster bonuses and such it wont apply to a 2 year deal. Murray obviously, as in very obviously, is going to get paid more ovsr this season than the 7 million Baker is making in Seattle. 

That depends on the size of the signing bonus. I can see him getting a $5M signing bonus plus a guaranteed minimum salary in the first year (plus incentives).

 

Then if he plays well enough he gets paid in 2025. In that scenario he’d still “only” get $9.5M in year 2.