5 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

Lamar says he could have played last year. Does that help or hurt his cause? I have to believe the Ravens would have played him.

It will probably hurt Lamar's case, but nobody going into contract negotiations is risking further injury in that scenario. 

35 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

#Collusion

I have no doubt.  But his stats from the last 2 seasons will be used at the crux of the argument against.

19 minutes ago, spindoc said:

I have no doubt.  But his stats from the last 2 seasons will be used at the crux of the argument against.

And then someone with similar stats will get a bigger contract after Lamar signs whatever his new contract will be. 

If you (anyone) were an owner, how much, how long and what guarantee would you give Lamar knowing you also are giving up 2 first round picks for him?

1 minute ago, Voice of Reason said:

If you (anyone) were an owner, how much, how long and what guarantee would you give Lamar knowing you also are giving up 2 first round picks for him?

Impossible to answer that question without knowing the specifics of the organization. But, assuming I had the cap space, I'd give him the contract he wanted, probably 75% guaranteed and the other 25% incentive based. 

My question would be what two first round picks are going to bring more value than Lamar?

11 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

If you (anyone) were an owner, how much, how long and what guarantee would you give Lamar knowing you also are giving up 2 first round picks for him?

For me it would be a "prove it" contract which means Lamar wouldn't sign with my team.  And no way on two first round picks. 

4 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

My question would be what two first round picks are going to bring more value than Lamar?

I hear you and fundamentally agree. The answer to your question is a little more nuanced than that because a very successful recipe for teams is to acquire capital on these rookie deals. In short, you cannot replicate Lamar's production when comparing player to player, but if I can get multiple players on rookie deals that are contributing for a fraction of the cost (see the Eagles this past season), it potentially sets you up better than a team investing everything into one player with no draft capital.

3 minutes ago, theguru said:

For me it would be a "prove it" contract which means Lamar wouldn't sign with my team.  And no way on two first round picks. 

Essentially, that's what contract he's on now.  If he plays lights out for an entire season, I think he can write his own check the following year, tag or no tag.

If I am one of these suitors I wait until after draft, which would be my assumption as to what happens. If I am the Colts, for example, why would I give up this year's first round pick since it is the fourth pick in the draft? Go through the draft, then maybe trade the two first rounders the following seasons.

18 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

And then someone with similar stats will get a bigger contract after Lamar signs whatever his new contract will be. 

With all due respect, if the last 2 seasons were Lamar's only seasons in this league, he would be playing for half of what he's gonna get on this tag.  It's his history that makes him valuable.   That is the argument to be made by anyone who doesn't want to pony up the huge contract and give up 2 first rd picks for him.  Is it collusion?  I'm certain it is.  However, with his last 2 campaigns there's no argument that he would have those who would disagree on his value.

13 minutes ago, spindoc said:

Essentially, that's what contract he's on now.  If he plays lights out for an entire season, I think he can write his own check the following year, tag or no tag.

I don't believe that. I believe they'd still find reasons not to pay his worth. 

8 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

I don't believe that. I believe they'd still find reasons not to pay his worth. 

So you think there's a conspiracy against Lamar.  Come on man.  His situation is unique.  Didn't follow traditional NFL path regarding second contract especially for a QB.   I'm not buying that it's just because he's Lamar.  In this league teams will sell their souls to win (Rams for instance).  If they thought Lamar was the golden goose they'd pull the trigger on a deal for him.  Do I think he's being colluded against on some level by agents and owners?  I sure do.  But you act like it's personal because it's Lamar.  I won't bother to argue about his "worth".

1 minute ago, spindoc said:

So you think there's a conspiracy against Lamar.  Come on man.  His situation is unique.  Didn't follow traditional NFL path regarding second contract especially for a QB.   I'm not buying that it's just because he's Lamar.  In this league teams will sell their souls to win (Rams for instance).  If they thought Lamar was the golden goose they'd pull the trigger on a deal for him.  Do I think he's being colluded against on some level by agents and owners?  I sure do.  But you act like it's personal because it's Lamar.  I won't bother to argue about his "worth".

No, I don't think it's because he's Lamar, per se. I think Lamar fits a mold that makes owners uncomfortable. I'll leave it at that. 

11 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

 

I'd like to know who the other 17 are ahead of him and maybe 4 or 5 below him.  I'd like to see if any of those guys have been considered injury prone or hell, "tough".

I don't consider Lamar to be "injury prone", it's just that his injuries have been in the last 2 seasons, which have kept him out of the end of seasons.  12 Games played in the 21 season,  12 last season.  And as he continues, his body is only going to breakdown more.  It's the nature of pro football and his current playing style.  He's expecting a lot of money and recent track record says he won't be around in the big money games.