Chiefs The Future of Eric Fisher - Page 5

kccrow · 02-10-2016, 12:56 AM

Let's discuss Eric Fisher. I'm going to give my thoughts, which are long-winded and detailed from a contractual perspective.

Coming to an agreement on an extension for Eric Fisher should be of great importance to the Chiefs this offseason. Fisher is in the final year of his rookie contract, but being a first round pick he could be optioned for a fifth year. Consideration of the option year is where the Chiefs need to be diligent. This year's transition tag value for offensive lineman will be the option year salary for Eric Fisher should the Chiefs decided to exercise it since Fisher was a top 10 selection. Based on salary data available from OverTheCap.com, the transition tag value is set to be around $10,764,053. Obviously, that figure will not be perfectly accurate but it will be a very near approximation. Nearly $10.8 million for Eric Fisher in 2017 is an unacceptable figure based on his level of play so far in his career. That salary would place Fisher, as it stands now, 9th overall in salary for offensive lineman in 2017. Not only does the transition tag figure not fit Fisher's current level of production, but it also will significantly impact the salary cap.

I do not argue that Fisher has been quietly ascending as a player, but he has performed far below his lofty draft status of first overall and certainly would not be a top 10 offensive lineman at this juncture. It makes sense on multiple fronts for the Chiefs to extend Fisher to, hopefully, reduce his 2016 cap hit ($7.06 million) and his cap hits in future years.

When it comes to Fisher, I think you have to start looking at the Will Beatty and Joe Staley type of contracts in the $7.5 million average per year range and work off of that. Even though I don't think Fisher deserves that type of salary and would argue for a Michael Oher-like low APY, I do realize this is a league where salaries are going to continue to increase. At this point, I can't fathom Fisher as anymore than a middle of the league left tackle, and a $7.5 million APY would certainly reflect that going forward. A large portion of Fisher's contract should be incentive laden without a ton of guaranteed money but we'll have to see how KC handles that.

What would I offer Eric Fisher? Let's start by converting his currently guaranteed roster bonus of $2,755,977 to a signing bonus and giving him an additional $5 million added to that, for a total signing bonus of $7,755,977. Also, give him an option bonus in 2017 of $10 million that is fully guaranteed at signing. This will allow the Chiefs to spread what is effectively a $17,755,977 signing bonus out over 6 years instead of 5. Leave his current $675,000 salary for 2016 in tact and fully guaranteed, bringing him to $18.43 million in guaranteed money. Fisher gains $15 million in new, guaranteed money for the extension, while the Chiefs receive the ability to prorate over a longer period of time. Give Fisher $250,000 workout bonuses in all 6 years of the deal. Add in $500,000 in roster bonuses as injury and performance incentives in 2017 through 2020. Add a $2,000,000 roster bonus in 2021. Give him salaries of $3.0, 3.75, 4.0, 4.75, and 6.0 million in 2017 through 2021. The new contract for the entire 6 years becomes a $49,060,612 deal with $18,430,977 fully guaranteed for an APY of $8,176,769 and 37.6% guaranteed. Annual cap hits would be approximately $6.1, 7.3, 8.0, 8.3, 9.0, and 10.3 million. The extension adds $42 million in new money to the deal, which provides $7.0 APY over the 5 new years with 36% guaranteed. Oh, and the Chiefs would free up nearly $955,000 in 2016 using this format.

Obviously old money escalates the deal slightly above my target, but I'd feel pretty good about the new money and his cap hits would be middle of the road going forward for left tackles. This is a contract that isn't that Chiefs' friendly in terms of being able to cut Fisher before 2020, but I think he's shown considerable growth and you're banking on that continuing. The only question is, how do Eric Fisher and his agent view Eric Fisher at this point? If they view his value over and above this, I think the Chiefs would be wise to not elect to use the option and see if Fisher grows in 2016. Even if Fisher turns into the best tackle in the NFL (doubtful at best) that warrants a Trent Williams deal, the Chiefs wouldn't be losing in 2017.

Otter · 05-02-2016, 11:10 AM

Dude is 25 years old to boot. Pay this man.

**Rain Man** · 05-02-2016, 11:13 AM

I think Fisher is unfairly maligned because of his draft slot. Perhaps we need to forget about the draft slot and start thinking of him as a player. We shouldn't care at this point if he's "overperforming" or "underperforming" where he was drafted several years ago.

DJ's left nut · 05-02-2016, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

If they wanted lynch, they could have gotten him. I don't think they did, especially seeing the report that they had a deal in place with Dallas to go down if he were there round 1.

From where I'm sutting, looks like they'd honed in on Jones from the beginning, figured they could get him where they did and we're blowing alot of ass smoke

Yeah, I don't buy the Lynch stuff.

If they really wanted him, they wouldn't have offered to move off him for a mere 3rd.

Otter · 05-02-2016, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I think Fisher is unfairly maligned because of his draft slot. Perhaps we need to forget about the draft slot and start thinking of him as a player. We shouldn't care at this point if he's "overperforming" or "underperforming" where he was drafted several years ago.

It was widely noted that Fisher had the higher ceiling but Lockner (sp?) was more NFL ready. The geno mafia homos were obnoxious and loud at the time which overshadowed anything being put into perspective as far as best pick and common sense was shouted down like 2 year old's crying over having to eat veggies before dessert.

**Shaid** · 05-02-2016, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I think Fisher is unfairly maligned because of his draft slot. Perhaps we need to forget about the draft slot and start thinking of him as a player. We shouldn't care at this point if he's "overperforming" or "underperforming" where he was drafted several years ago.

yep, he's trending towards top 10 LT and continued improvement looks likely. Lock the guy up now and stop worrying about him not playing like a future HOFer.

ThaVirus · 05-02-2016, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I think Fisher is unfairly maligned because of his draft slot. Perhaps we need to forget about the draft slot and start thinking of him as a player. We shouldn't care at this point if he's "overperforming" or "underperforming" where he was drafted several years ago.

I like to pretend we took Kelce in the 1st round and Fish Daddy in the 3rd. Helps me cope.

O.city · 05-02-2016, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Yeah, I don't buy the Lynch stuff.

If they really wanted him, they wouldn't have offered to move off him for a mere 3rd.

Pretty much.

I also think Dallas ****ed up by not including more or whatever it took to get him, if they were in fact as high on him as they're saying.

If he's the guy they want, post Romo, go get him. Hell, he isn't playing this year or likely next, give up next years first for him. If he's your franchise guy, he's worth a first round pick.

**BossChief** · 05-02-2016, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Yeah, I don't buy the Lynch stuff.

If they really wanted him, they wouldn't have offered to move off him for a mere 3rd.

His agent said KC tried to trade up for him.

DJ's left nut · 05-02-2016, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

Pretty much.

I also think Dallas ****ed up by not including more or whatever it took to get him, if they were in fact as high on him as they're saying.

If he's the guy they want, post Romo, go get him. Hell, he isn't playing this year or likely next, give up next years first for him. If he's your franchise guy, he's worth a first round pick.

That's why I don't understand why every team in the first isn't more aggressive.

If you see a guy and you've already decided he's worth a first round pick, if you could include a 4th to move up and ensure you get him, why don't you do it every time?

If he's worth a 1st, he's worth a 1st and a 4th. Period.

These are prospects, not proven players. There's no way you can be so certain in an evaluation that you know that a 4th rounder is a deal breaker. If you're confident enough that you have an impact player in front of you, then that 4th rounder should never EVER be an impediment to moving up and getting him.

**BossChief** · 05-02-2016, 11:46 AM

I hadn't heard about the deal with Dallas.

Can I get a link?

DJ's left nut · 05-02-2016, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

His agent said KC tried to trade up for him.

Agents - totally honest guys that never float stuff to curry favor with GMs or just flat out make shit up for their clients benefit.

Explain to me why the Chiefs were willing to move on for a mere 3rd if they were also looking to move up to get him.

They couldn't have liked the guy that much if they'd have been willing to bail out for so little.

Something's not adding up so I'm not sure why you're taking an agent on faith here.

**BossChief** · 05-02-2016, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

That's why I don't understand why every team in the first isn't more aggressive.

If you see a guy and you've already decided he's worth a first round pick, if you could include a 4th to move up and ensure you get him, why don't you do it every time?

If he's worth a 1st, he's worth a 1st and a 4th. Period.

These are prospects, not proven players. There's no way you can be so certain in an evaluation that you know that a 4th rounder is a deal breaker. If you're confident enough that you have an impact player in front of you, then that 4th rounder should never EVER be an impediment to moving up and getting him.

This team is trying to win a Super Bowl.

I wanted Lynch, too...but the 5 guys we got instead of him are gonna help us win a title.

Dorsey will scout other QBs and maybe in the future, he decides to move up to get his guy.

**BossChief** · 05-02-2016, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Agents - totally honest guys that never float stuff to curry favor with GMs or just flat out make shit up for their clients benefit.

Explain to me why the Chiefs were willing to move on for a mere 3rd if they were also looking to move up to get him.

They couldn't have liked the guy that much if they'd have been willing to bail out for so little.

Something's not adding up so I'm not sure why you're taking an agent on faith here.

I guess I was just taking the comment at face value.

Eleazar · 05-02-2016, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Explain to me why the Chiefs were willing to move on for a mere 3rd if they were also looking to move up to get him.

They couldn't have liked the guy that much if they'd have been willing to bail out for so little.

Exactly

**DaneMcCloud** · 05-02-2016, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Agents - totally honest guys that never float stuff to curry favor with GMs or just flat out make shit up for their clients benefit.

Explain to me why the Chiefs were willing to move on for a mere 3rd if they were also looking to move up to get him.

They couldn't have liked the guy that much if they'd have been willing to bail out for so little.

Something's not adding up so I'm not sure why you're taking an agent on faith here.

Exactly. I don't buy that the Chiefs "tried" to trade up for Lynch or Treadwell.

With at least three comp picks coming next year for Allen, Stephenson, Branch and Smith, they could have easily thrown in next year's picks to move up and grab either player if they loved him.

They didn't, which is proof enough for me that's it's all nonsense.

02-10-2016, 12:56 AM
kccrow MVP Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Michigan Casino cash: $-1070000	The Future of Eric Fisher Let's discuss Eric Fisher. I'm going to give my thoughts, which are long-winded and detailed from a contractual perspective. Coming to an agreement on an extension for Eric Fisher should be of great importance to the Chiefs this offseason. Fisher is in the final year of his rookie contract, but being a first round pick he could be optioned for a fifth year. Consideration of the option year is where the Chiefs need to be diligent. This year's transition tag value for offensive lineman will be the option year salary for Eric Fisher should the Chiefs decided to exercise it since Fisher was a top 10 selection. Based on salary data available from OverTheCap.com, the transition tag value is set to be around $10,764,053. Obviously, that figure will not be perfectly accurate but it will be a very near approximation. Nearly $10.8 million for Eric Fisher in 2017 is an unacceptable figure based on his level of play so far in his career. That salary would place Fisher, as it stands now, 9th overall in salary for offensive lineman in 2017. Not only does the transition tag figure not fit Fisher's current level of production, but it also will significantly impact the salary cap. I do not argue that Fisher has been quietly ascending as a player, but he has performed far below his lofty draft status of first overall and certainly would not be a top 10 offensive lineman at this juncture. It makes sense on multiple fronts for the Chiefs to extend Fisher to, hopefully, reduce his 2016 cap hit ($7.06 million) and his cap hits in future years. When it comes to Fisher, I think you have to start looking at the Will Beatty and Joe Staley type of contracts in the $7.5 million average per year range and work off of that. Even though I don't think Fisher deserves that type of salary and would argue for a Michael Oher-like low APY, I do realize this is a league where salaries are going to continue to increase. At this point, I can't fathom Fisher as anymore than a middle of the league left tackle, and a $7.5 million APY would certainly reflect that going forward. A large portion of Fisher's contract should be incentive laden without a ton of guaranteed money but we'll have to see how KC handles that. What would I offer Eric Fisher? Let's start by converting his currently guaranteed roster bonus of $2,755,977 to a signing bonus and giving him an additional $5 million added to that, for a total signing bonus of $7,755,977. Also, give him an option bonus in 2017 of $10 million that is fully guaranteed at signing. This will allow the Chiefs to spread what is effectively a $17,755,977 signing bonus out over 6 years instead of 5. Leave his current $675,000 salary for 2016 in tact and fully guaranteed, bringing him to $18.43 million in guaranteed money. Fisher gains $15 million in new, guaranteed money for the extension, while the Chiefs receive the ability to prorate over a longer period of time. Give Fisher $250,000 workout bonuses in all 6 years of the deal. Add in $500,000 in roster bonuses as injury and performance incentives in 2017 through 2020. Add a $2,000,000 roster bonus in 2021. Give him salaries of $3.0, 3.75, 4.0, 4.75, and 6.0 million in 2017 through 2021. The new contract for the entire 6 years becomes a $49,060,612 deal with $18,430,977 fully guaranteed for an APY of $8,176,769 and 37.6% guaranteed. Annual cap hits would be approximately $6.1, 7.3, 8.0, 8.3, 9.0, and 10.3 million. The extension adds $42 million in new money to the deal, which provides $7.0 APY over the 5 new years with 36% guaranteed. Oh, and the Chiefs would free up nearly $955,000 in 2016 using this format. Obviously old money escalates the deal slightly above my target, but I'd feel pretty good about the new money and his cap hits would be middle of the road going forward for left tackles. This is a contract that isn't that Chiefs' friendly in terms of being able to cut Fisher before 2020, but I think he's shown considerable growth and you're banking on that continuing. The only question is, how do Eric Fisher and his agent view Eric Fisher at this point? If they view his value over and above this, I think the Chiefs would be wise to not elect to use the option and see if Fisher grows in 2016. Even if Fisher turns into the best tackle in the NFL (doubtful at best) that warrants a Trent Williams deal, the Chiefs wouldn't be losing in 2017.
Posts: 14,015

05-02-2016, 11:13 AM	#62
Rain Man Seize life. Be an ermine. Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: My house Casino cash: $-462449 VARSITY	I think Fisher is unfairly maligned because of his draft slot. Perhaps we need to forget about the draft slot and start thinking of him as a player. We shouldn't care at this point if he's "overperforming" or "underperforming" where he was drafted several years ago. __________________ Active fan of the greatest team in NFL history.
Posts: 145,262

05-02-2016, 11:46 AM	#70
BossChief SuperBowl or bust Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: BF Iowa Casino cash: $-1555912	I hadn't heard about the deal with Dallas. Can I get a link? __________________ Dreams do come true... http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...postcount=1407
Posts: 47,876

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode