Crabtree Extended

Twinkie defense · Post #1 » by **Twinkie defense** » Thu Dec 10, 2015 1:56 am

Nice! Per the Raiders app, Crabtree is signed to a 4-year extension. Great to have him in the fold with Amari and Carr for the long term!

According to Ian Rapoport ✔ @RapSheet
"The #Raiders and WR Michael Crabtree have agreed to terms on a 4-year extension worth $35M, source said. He gets nearly $19M guaranteed."

Seems like a good deal for both sides.

Post #2 » by **FNQ** » Thu Dec 10, 2015 5:30 pm

When you have the most capspace 3 years in a row, and you know that most FAs are overpays, logic dictates that you try and go for the best name, since you are going to overpay anyways. Get the most talent out of it. Re-signing our own guys.. meh. Our own guys have for the most part led us to a 6-7 win season. It's most important to keep our key guys, and 90% of them are under contract next year. Autry should be a RFA, Woodson should be retiring (though hopefully not), and outside of Aldon Smith, I don't see a guy that we really need to keep. A #4 WR, a declining LE coming off season ending surgery, a soon to be 35 y/o LT, a punter, a backup safety.. meh.

I'd much rather - in theory - be pursuing an elite free agent and making a splash that way. Reggie is proving to be solid at finding OK players and not overpaying, but the issue with that is that we currently don't have any cap crunch. So now is the perfect time to strike with a frontloaded, heavy gtd front deal for a name that can accelerate our development.

I'd also be willing to bet Gipson doesn't get franchised after this year. Don't forget Alex Mack has an out-clause this year that he's sure to exercise. Gipson hasn't been great this year either.. and he's one of my top targets as someone who can do damage when his team has a little pass rush. Irvin I like as well, though I tend to agree that Miller/Wilkerson/Norman don't see free agency.

But that's only part of the concern with a Crabtree extension. The other part is his production (1100 yards is a career high), his injury status, and frankly his attitude. In his 1st year with the 9ers, we didnt hear much about his attitude either.

Twinkie defense · Post #3 » by **Twinkie defense** » Thu Dec 10, 2015 8:15 pm

I was sceptical on Crabtree too, but he's having a career year and continuity is important. His salary is not even that high for his production, compared to other WR contracts. Trying to sign the big name FA's is dangerous - if their teams liked them, they would keep them. Plus Oakland has not proved to be an attractive destinations for FAs. But maybe I'm just a Reggie homer

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Twinkie defense · Post #4 » by **Twinkie defense** » Thu Dec 10, 2015 9:00 pm

Clayton says Raiders did it right: http://es.pn/1OUdqYZ

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Post #5 » by **FNQ** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:22 am

At a significant less amount guaranteed, I'm fine with it. As for teams letting go of big names, it can be a variety of things, from scheme to age to injury.. having cap when those types hit the market is the time to spend, right? Of course protect yourself like Reggie did last year, but we shouldn't be completely risk averse either.

Post #6 » by **FNQ** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:31 am

Twinkie defense wrote:Clayton says Raiders did it right: http://es.pn/1OUdqYZ

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Im not saying Clayton is wrong, but several things bother me:

Was that the best photo of Crabtree they could find?
Comparing Crabs stats to Torrey and Andre is disingenuous - both have had QB issues and Andre is obviously done. I think a fairer barometer is Maclin, and Crabtree still looks like a better value. But it still discounts the intangible, the reason why Crabtree was available at all to begin with: attitude.

Neddy · Post #7 » by **Neddy** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 5:57 am

great signing. KingCrab is still young and his best assets can translate deep into his career as Tim Brown and Jerry Rice did in silver and black under chucky. Amare seems to have enough speed to be the big play WR so Crabtree can age nicely as a big target possession receiver.

we now have our receiving corp with Amare, Crabtree, Walford, Roberts, Rivera, Reece and Andre and hopefully Rod for years to come. our running backs seem a little thin but Murray is doing well enough to keep chugging along to record 1000 yards per year for the foreseeable future, I think it is time to start investing into defense and OL.

Twinkie defense · Post #8 » by **Twinkie defense** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:12 am

Nate Allen has $12 mil guaranteed, Crabby seems like a bargain in comparison

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Post #9 » by **HMFFL** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 12:35 am

The future continues to be exciting due to extensions like this one.

Post #10 » by **FNQ** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 12:39 am

Twinkie defense wrote:Nate Allen has $12 mil guaranteed, Crabby seems like a bargain in comparison

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

He doesn't though. He only has his first year (7m) actually guaranteed, the following 4.9m salary is only guaranteed if he's on the roster on the 3rd day of the 2016 season. I learned that agents (and the teams humoring them) will call things like this 'guaranteed' to make contracts look better for them, but in reality, the only way Allen is guarantee the 4.9m is if he's on IR/injured, OR if we decide to keep him for 2016.

Which makes me think that Crabtree's contract will be "19m gtd" like previously reported, but in actuality be the 11m guaranteed that other outlets reported. One season will be guaranteed for injury / guaranteed if he's on the roster on X date.

Twinkie defense · Post #11 » by **Twinkie defense** » Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:32 am

Ah yes, $7 mil (per Spotrac). Money is either guaranteed or it is not - if the money is conditional on staying on the roster, it's not guaranteed. I understand while agents would want to hype up the total, never gonna happen, potential maximum lifetime value of a contract, but it's just stupid for them to call money that is not guaranteed, guaranteed.

Spotrac says $19 mil for Crabby, but they leave out details. $20 mil for Hudson.

Post #12 » by **FNQ** » Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:07 pm

Twinkie defense wrote:Ah yes, $7 mil (per Spotrac). Money is either guaranteed or it is not - if the money is conditional on staying on the roster, it's not guaranteed. I understand while agents would want to hype up the total, never gonna happen, potential maximum lifetime value of a contract, but it's just stupid for them to call money that is not guaranteed, guaranteed.

Spotrac says $19 mil for Crabby, but they leave out details. $20 mil for Hudson.

I had the same argument with some random dude and Bill Williamson on twitter when the signing happened. Williamson explained it like it's bold print contract guaranteedfor injury

Hudson's is accurate - he is guaranteed his 2nd year salary pending playing X amount of games (believe it was 8) so he's locked in for next year, but after that is pay as you go. Crabtree's will likely be similar - 1st year full guaranteed, 2nd year partial guarantee (fully guaranteed for injury), 3rd and 4th year pay as you go. I expect his deal is frontloaded, thus him making 19m over the 1st 2 years and the option to cut clean after year 2. And maybe even after year 1, who knows. It's entirely possible we signed him to an 11m gtd deal in year one and then year 2 is only gtd by injury at 8m.. Reggie's style of contracts are wonky, to say the least