Bengals extend Shawn Williams

[Trademark]

They signed him to a four year extension

http://www.bengals.com/news/article-1/Williams-extension-solidifies-safety-spot/0e1cee66-4c6c-4d65-8af6-d07d42e5ac13

[Au165]

Great move. We now know our back end is locked up for the next 4 years. Base don the timing I am assuming we got a good deal on him as well.

[StLucieBengal]

Excellent signing. Now we have 2 home grown guys on the backend.

I would imagine Zeitler is the next in line.

[YoungThundercat]

Fantastic signing. I agree with the coaching staff that Williams looks like a starting player on a great defense (though they have seen more of him than I).

Always love deals like this, get him done at an appropriate cost before he hits FA.

[Clappington]

Im happy with this signing. hopefully he gets back out here and ball like he did last year.

[MasonDT70]

From BR app, 4 years 19.5 million 4 million guaranteed.

[CJD]

And there it is.

Our starting safety has been named.

[Wes Mantooth]

I'm very anxious to see the details on this deal. It's such an odd signing. I'm not sure how these two sides came up with an agreeable market value.

Either A.) he gave up his rights for 4 years, with no leverage in contract negotiations, and took a very small payday (in comparison to the one he would have seen had he played out the year as a full time starter) or B.) We overpaid for a player, who has 4 career starts, and just committed a significant investment in him, with a very small sample size.

It's hard to imagine much in between. Why would Shawn Williams take a long term deal now, when he's slotted to be a full starter, and there's a good chance his value will sky rocket? And assuming the answer is because we paid him a lot of money early, then why are we so eager to gamble on a player who has seen the field so little?

I'm sure some people will manage to hate me asking this. It really has nothing to do with disliking Shawn Williams at all. I'm anxious to see him play, and I thought he did a good job last year. But this is kinda weird to me. I feel like one of these sides is not getting the appropriate value, relative to their situation. Either he signed to early and was scared to play for more, or we are in way to big of hurry to lock up a player of his experience. Take your pick.

[CageTheBengal]

(05-17-2016, 11:27 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: And there it is.

Our starting safety has been named.

I would have been pretty worried if Mays or the 7th rounder was starting.

[Au165]

(05-17-2016, 11:32 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I'm very anxious to see the details on this deal.  It's such an odd signing.  I'm not sure how these two sides came up with an agreeable market value.  

Either A.) he gave up his rights for 4 years, with no leverage in contract negotiations, and took a very small payday (in comparison to the one he would have seen had he played out the year as a full time starter) or B.) We overpaid for a player, who has 4 career starts, and just committed a significant investment in him, with a very small sample size.

It's hard to imagine much in between.  Why would Shawn Williams take a long term deal now, when he's slotted to be a full starter, and there's a good chance his value will sky rocket?  And assuming the answer is because we paid him a lot of money early, then why are we so eager to gamble on a player who has seen the field so little?

I'm sure some people will manage to hate me asking this.  It really has nothing to do with disliking Shawn Williams at all.  I'm anxious to see him play, and I thought he did a good job last year.  But this is kinda weird to me.  I feel like one of these sides is not getting the appropriate value, relative to their situation.  Either he signed to early and was scared to play for more, or we are in way to big of hurry to lock up a player of his experience.  Take your pick.

Both got what they wanted. 4 year about 20 million, but only 4 million guaranteed.

[*ochocincos*]

(05-17-2016, 11:27 AM)MasonDT70 Wrote: From BR app, 4 years 19.5 million 4 million guaranteed.

If true, that's not bad. If Williams pans out, he's getting good pay for quality work. If he doesn't, the guaranteed money is low enough he can be cut in 2017/2018 without much dead money at all.

[Wes Mantooth]

(05-17-2016, 11:27 AM)MasonDT70 Wrote: From BR app, 4 years 19.5 million 4 million guaranteed.

Same guaranteed money as Reggie Nelson, and more money per.

If you compare that to the deals around the league, that's a pretty sizeable deal for a free safety.  The games very best, and younger, are seeing upwards of 6-7 mil per.  But a lot of the guys in the top 10 are right around 3-5 mil.

I have to ask, where is the fire?  Why the rush? 

[Au165]

(05-17-2016, 11:41 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Same guaranteed money as Reggie Nelson, and more money per.

If you compare that to the deals around the league, that's a pretty sizeable deal for a free safety.  The games very best, and younger, are seeing upwards of 6-7 mil per.  But a lot of the guys in the top 10 are right around 3-5 mil.

I have to ask, where is the fire?  Why the rush? 

Reggie nelson was 4 guaranteed over 2 years, and he is on the back end of his career, compared to a guy getting 4 over 4 at the start. The rush is if he hits FA he demands a lot more. There is no risk here and you are paying him as the 21st highest paid safety right now. If it pans out you got a great deal, if it doesn't you cut him with nothing lost. At the very least you saved on his guaranteed as there are 35 other safeties with more guaranteed per year. If you had waited you undoubtedly would have had to pay him more guaranteed.

[fredtoast]

(05-17-2016, 11:41 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote:   The games very best, and younger, are seeing upwards of 6-7 mil per.  But a lot of the guys in the top 10 are right around 3-5 mil.

The top 2 paid safeties (Eric Berry, Earl Thomas) both have average salaries of $10 million.

The #10 paid safety (based on average salary) is Aaron Williams at $6.5 million.

Williams deal averages $4.9 million.  That may seem a little high because it ranks him about #20, but new contracts are always a little higher then the old ones.  If he plays out the whole contract he will be one of the lower paid safeties in 4 years.

[Wes Mantooth]

Shawn Williams - 4 years, 19.5 mil (4.875 per), 4 mil guaranteed

Reggie Nelson - 2 years, 8.5 mil (4.25 per), 4 mil guaranteed

TJ Ward - 4 years, 22.5 mil (5.625 per), 7 mil guaranteed

Mike Mitchell - 5 years, 25 mil (5 per), 5 mil guaranteed

[GreenCornBengal]

(05-17-2016, 11:32 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I'm very anxious to see the details on this deal.  It's such an odd signing.  I'm not sure how these two sides came up with an agreeable market value.  

Either A.) he gave up his rights for 4 years, with no leverage in contract negotiations, and took a very small payday (in comparison to the one he would have seen had he played out the year as a full time starter) or B.) We overpaid for a player, who has 4 career starts, and just committed a significant investment in him, with a very small sample size.

It's hard to imagine much in between.  Why would Shawn Williams take a long term deal now, when he's slotted to be a full starter, and there's a good chance his value will sky rocket?  And assuming the answer is because we paid him a lot of money early, then why are we so eager to gamble on a player who has seen the field so little?

I'm sure some people will manage to hate me asking this.  It really has nothing to do with disliking Shawn Williams at all.  I'm anxious to see him play, and I thought he did a good job last year.  But this is kinda weird to me.  I feel like one of these sides is not getting the appropriate value, relative to their situation.  Either he signed to early and was scared to play for more, or we are in way to big of hurry to lock up a player of his experience.  Take your pick.

I think the argument is production vs potential.

If you value production, then Shawn Williams got the better end of this deal. Only 4 starts as you stated, hasn't proven anything. In that sense, he is getting overpaid for his minimal production.

If you value potential, then Cincinnati is getting the better end of the deal (in theory). They expect Shawn Williams to turn into a better safety than Reggie Nelson.. or so it seems. If that is the case, then paying him early is a win for Cinci.

We won't really even start to know until the latter end of next season and the seasons after that. Assuming the odds of a player playing up to their deal is probably less than a player not playing up to their contract, Cinci is losing this deal (for now).

I would like to think Cinci is playing it smart here, but I'm with you and think Shawn Williams scored a good deal for not showing really much of anything other than a few exciting interceptions at a few crucial moments in his career.

In any case, hope it works out for the best for us.

[Wes Mantooth]

(05-17-2016, 11:57 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The top 2 paid safeties (Eric Berry, Earl Thomas) both have average salaries of $10 million.

The #10 paid safety (based on average salary) is Aaron Williams at $6.5 million.

Williams deal averages $4.9 million.  That may seem a little high because it ranks him about #20, but new contracts are always a little higher then the old ones.  If he plays out the whole contract he will be one of the lower paid safeties in 4 years.

His deal is very comparable to that of guys like TJ Ward, Mike Mitchell and Antoine Bethea.  It's right below, and not at all far off from guys like Eric Weddle and Morgan Burnett.

It seems like a bit of head scratcher to be in such a rush to pay a play with 4 career starts a TJ Ward level contract. 

To each their own, but I would have rather paid a know commodity in Reggie Nelson for another season, and revaluated Williams's situation after the year. 

[GreenCornBengal]

I think the main thing I am going to take away from this is that Cinci is scared to get into bidding wars against other franchises. Sign the guy up now because we won't fork over the kind of dough other teams will, when his contract is up. Our safeties are lacking depth, and we can't fill another hole at safety in the next few years without causing a huge liability in the defense. I think that is what the FO is thinking.

[Wes Mantooth]

This team is like Oprah when approaching new contracts for guys in house. "You get a new deal!!! And you get a new deal!!! And you get a new deal!!!..." "

"Your contract isn't even up for two years, and you've never gotten in a game, but you get a new deal too!!!"

It's in such stark contrast to their approach on players outside the organization. They approach those potential deals with such caution, and almost never guarantee more than a couple mil, if anything at all. It's so strange that the approach differs so much, only entirely dependent on whether or not the player is in house. It has almost nothing to do with actual risk or value, just whether or not he's worn the jersey before.

I hope it works out for them. And I griped about Andy's deal, which seemed like a huge rush and that worked out. I just wish they'd find some balance though. Maybe be a tad more conservative in re-upping their own, and maybe a tad more progressive in free agency. I mean, you can do both.

[OrlandoBengal]

I do not see the rush in making this deal at all. The guy has four career starts. In my mind, you see what he can do for a full year before giving him a new deal. I know some are saying that he can be cut if he does not do well. How often do you see the Bengals cut someone loose before their contract is up?