DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns analysis: As draft approaches, Anderson's value may rise for suitors

Browns analysis: As draft approaches, Anderson's value may rise for suitors
by Tony Grossi/Plain Dealer Reporter Saturday February 14, 2009, 8:02 PM

-- The biggest decision facing Browns coach Eric Mangini and General Manager George Kokinis is what to do with quarterback Derek Anderson.
"We haven't defined which way that has to go. I think I am open to all different possibilities," Mangini said on Feb. 4.

Well, the possibilities boil down to keeping him or trading him. Each option poses different issues. Ultimately, the Browns should view this decision as an opportunity to improve their team rather than as a headache.

Unlocking the dilemma at quarterback finally would steer the entire franchise behind one field leader. The Browns aren't going anywhere until they commit all their resources to one quarterback.

Certainly there are challenges before the Browns can maximize this opportunity.


The contract

Anderson's three-year deal, negotiated by former GM Phil Savage to keep Anderson off the restricted free-agent market in 2008, is extremely "player friendly."

In the coming season, the second of the contract, Anderson is scheduled to receive a base salary of $1.45 million and a workout bonus of $50,000. That's cheap for a quarterback with one Pro Bowl on his resume.

The problem is a guaranteed $5 million roster bonus due on March 15. The Browns have to pay it even if they release Anderson before then. If they trade him before then, the new team would inherit the roster bonus. Who would make that trade with the Browns before the bonus is paid?

The Browns can pay the bonus and continue to pursue a trade. Anderson's trade value would figure to be at its height in the days before the draft when quarterback-starved teams realize there isn't a quarterback in the draft reasonably capable of stepping in and contributing immediately.

(Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco did it for Atlanta and Baltimore, respectively, in 2008. But both were fifth-year college players, which helped them tremendously. The top two quarterbacks in the 2009 draft -- Georgia's Matt Stafford and USC's Mark Sanchez -- are both juniors. Stafford played in 38 career games, Sanchez in 26.)

Anderson's final year of his contract in 2010 includes another roster bonus of $2 million and a base salary of $7.45 million.

Now, here's the rub. Trading Anderson would not clear Anderson's salary cap figures from the Browns' books. If they traded him after paying the $5 million bonus, Anderson would count about $8.2 million on the Browns' 2009 salary cap. If they kept Anderson, he would count about $8.8 million.

So, is it better to keep him and have him compete with Brady Quinn at a cap cost of $8.8 million? Or should they commit to Quinn and get something in return for Anderson at the cost of $8.2 million in cap charges?


Trading D.A.


Tracy Boulian/The Plain Dealer
While the Browns do face a $5 million bonus payment to Derek Anderson in March, there's little reason why that looming paycheck should force the team into rushing into a decision about his future.

Anderson's career statistics

Anderson's trade value is open to wide debate.
Some believe the increasing prospect of the league salary cap being removed after 2009 hurts Anderson's trade value because teams would be less inclined than ever to surrender high draft picks. This theory, advanced by Pat Kirwan of NFL.com, suggests the Browns are more likely to command a player(s), rather than draft pick(s), in return.

Other negatives for the Browns: Anderson's performance in '08 regressed as opponents scouted him more thoroughly and receivers failed him, and teams realize the Browns don't have a lot of leverage in moving him.

But there are positives. Anderson is young (he turns 26 in June) and his NFL experience is a double-positive. His 27 games as a starter set him up to be a winner immediately in the right situation, and you can argue that he'll only get better over time. Plus, he has the one thing coaches cannot teach -- a rocket arm.

If the Browns pay the $5 million before trading him, that alone would increase his value because the acquiring team would be on books for only $1.5 million in 2009. That's quite a bargain for a starting quarterback.

Add it all up. It says here that it's not unrealistic for the Browns to demand a No. 1 pick for Anderson, or a combination of picks that approaches similar value.


Interested teams

By my count, 10 teams should be in the market for a starting quarterback.

Although Anderson is young enough to grow with a team not yet ready to compete for the playoffs, he should be more appealing to teams that need an immediate starter to complete their puzzle.

Foremost in this field of teams would be the Jets, Minnesota, Chicago and Tampa Bay. Here's a closer look at those teams.

1. N.Y. Jets: This is a natural, and all the national football Web sites are jumping on it. The Jets have to replace retired Brett Favre with an experienced quarterback, or they will be erased off the back pages of the tabloids by the Giants. It helped the Browns that the Jets retained Brian Schottenheimer as coordinator because he runs the same vertical passing offense best suited for Anderson.

2. Minnesota: Yes, the Vikings might be an elite team if they hired a capable quarterback. But this isn't a good match. Coach Brad Childress runs an off-shoot of the West Coast offense, which demands accuracy on shorter passes.

3. Chicago: General Manager Jerry Angelo finally has given up on Rex Grossman. He said he wants somebody to compete with incumbent Kyle Orton. He recently signed Chicago-area native and Carolina Panther journeyman Brett Basanez, who looks no better than a No. 3.

4. Tampa Bay: The Buccaneers just signed former Browns fourth-round draft pick Luke McCown for $7.5 million over two years, with reportedly $5 million guaranteed. What were they thinking? Anderson is a year younger than McCown and vastly more accomplished. If they traded for Anderson after the Browns paid the $5 million bonus, the salaries of the two would be no problem.

This team desperately needs a big-armed quarterback. New coordinator Jeff Jagodzinksi developed Matt Ryan at Boston College and displayed an aggressive pass offense there. This is a very intriguing match.


Wild cards

1. Carolina: Can the Panthers stick with 34-year-old Jake Delhomme after his miserable effort in the NFC playoffs? The problem is, the Panthers don't have a first-round pick.

2. San Francisco: Of all franchises, can't the 49ers figure out it's a quarterback-driven league?

3. Seattle: With Mike Holmgren out of the picture, how much rope is left for Matt Hasselbeck, 33? Anderson, of Scappoose, Ore., would be returning close to his roots.

Mangini and Kokinis are at a disadvantage in not seeing much of Quinn on video because of his finger injury. But this is the kind of decision that either jump-starts a franchise to brighter days or prolongs the doldrums. It will tell a lot about the new Browns management tandem.

I agree on everyone but Seattle. Why would be be a fit there and not Minnesota? Grossi should to a little research and find out Seattle plays the WCO too.

I think that Detroit and Miami should also be on the list, unless Miami re-signs Pennington.

I still don't see us getting a first day pick for him, but if we did, I'd think Detroit has to be one of the favorites to do so with 3 first day picks.

I'm sorry but Grossi is dreaming if he thinks a team will give up a 1st rd draft pick for DA. There is no way that happens. I would be happy with a third. I think a player like a peppers is more likely.

Quote:

---

-- The biggest decision facing Browns coach Eric Mangini and General Manager George Kokinis is what to do with quarterback Derek Anderson.

---

There goes Grossi again.. LOL guy cracks me up. every single interview I've seen with Mangini, and I've seen 3 now.. He's clearly said that he's not made a decision about the QB spot..

Grossi is just guessing the one to go (if any) will be Anderson...

Im not saying Im in favor of trading Anderson but I have thoughtof a few scenerios that could happen that werent mentioned.

If Anderson only counts $1.45 million to a new team, thats a great price for an accomplished, young, former Pro Bowl backup. Ive said that Dallas could be interested in a backup and would be a good fit. Brad Johnson didnt work out too well for them. Some have said, "Why would Dallas do that? Even Jerry Jones aint that dumb to pay all that money to a backup" What they failed to realize, is that he would come at a great price as a backup and the new team isnt paying his +$8 million. They also dont have an intriuging young backup. If Romo gets hurt, Anderson could thrive with Witten, TO, Barber, etc...

When or if New England decides what to do ith one of their Franchise QBs, they could use Andersons experiance. They only go into the season with 2 QBs and is there a better option then Anderson at $1.45 million? They could get Todd Boekman as an UDFA and keep him on the PS for a few years like they did with Cassel. If the guy they keep gets hurt and in comes Anderson, they sign another vet and store Boekman on the PS. Like they did with Testeverde and kept Cassel on the PS.

At $1.45 million, that is a bargain for Anderson as a backup. It might not be a 1st round pick (Grossi is fooling himself if he can make the readers think he can pull that off in his fantasy GM world), but the Browns might be able to get a veteran LB or CB out of the deal. The Jets have been mentioned many of times and Mangini knows what defenders over there could help out the Browns. Based on reports, his players respected him. It seemed like the negatives were from annonymous off the field guys (assistant coachs?, scouts?) that felt like they were walking on eggshells. Coaches like Crennel, Belicheck, and Parcells, have all brought over former/familiar players from their previous teams. The Jets could do what he Giants did when they signed Warner, then drafted Manning. The Jets could use a vet and a rookie because I dont think any of the 3 they have, are capable of taking them to the playoffs.

Just a few scenerios that are plausable.

Quote:

---

Trading Anderson would not clear Anderson's salary cap figures from the Browns' books. If they traded him after paying the $5 million bonus, Anderson would count about $8.2 million on the Browns' 2009 salary cap. If they kept Anderson, he would count about $8.8 million.

---

Those figures are correct...And that's how it works...

Where Grossi's pretty sure of himself but I DISAGREE is this...

Didn't he recently indicate that we were on the hook for that 5M RB regardless of what we did???...Including trading him B4 the bonus was due???...And taking the Cap Hit for it...PEEN...U asked me about that when it came out...Where was it???...If u find it bring it into this thread will ya'...I wanna read it again...Maybe I read wrong...

Grossi's also pretty sure noone will trade for him until AFTER the RB date...One thing he fails to realize is if a team trades for Anderson B4 the RB is due...They can and IMO most likely will sign him to a NEW Contract...And that wipes out the existing completely...

I have yet to see anything legit in print that states a team trading a player with a "Guaranteed" RB...Is responsible for the Cap Hit of said RB if traded B4 RB is due...I swear that's what Grossi put out there a few weeks ago and put this thing into a whirlwind of confusion...Now he's not saying it...

Was never a huge Anderson fan but NEVER cheered his failures but...
I'm kinda thinking this organization can't totally move on until he's gone, you know with the fan animosity and some of his statements.

Maybe I'm wrong.

Quote:

---

I'm kinda thinking this organization can't totally move on until he's gone, you know with the fan animosity and some of his statements.

---

When mangini and koks do things contrary to the best interest of this team in order to satisfy the fans animosity,, then they will fail,,

What did Anderson ever say that would cause you to question him in anyway?

Don't confuse my comments as being in support of Anderson or Quinn. To me, I just don't think you get rid of a guy because the fans don't like him. and I don't remember anything that Anderson ever said that could be considered negative..

Just trade him... lol... I don't care to who..

I'm really hoping for a 2nd round pick though...

Well now, hold on there.

When a player's performance is seriously affected by fan's animosity, then the "best interests of the team" can be changed by this.

DA has noted how obvious the dislike for him is. People cheering for a serious injury does not inspire a player to excellence. I don't know if DA will ever be a consistently effective QB anywhere, but his chances of doing that here have been reduced or even eliminated at least partly by fan reaction.

We need more draft choices. DA will get us at least some value. That value has not been increased by what we, the fans, have done. We are part of the equation.

Here's a chicken-or-egg question. When was the last time we fully and whole-heartedly supported a new QB, for more than a few weeks?

The one team everyone continues to leave off of their list is the Detroit Lions. I know they tend to do everything a bit backwards up there but they have got to get a true LT up there and move Backus over to the other side. They also have #17 from Dallas to address the corner position. Would they spend the #33 on DA? well it is the Lions.

2. Minnesota: Yes, the Vikings might be an elite team if they hired a capable quarterback. But this isn't a good match. Coach Brad Childress runs an off-shoot of the West Coast offense, which demands accuracy on shorter passes.


I live in viking country, I think it's a myth that the vikings run a west coast offense. Sure, that is supposed to be Childress' roots, but that went out the window when AP was drafted. Now its AP on first down, AP on second down and Chester on third down. Every now and then throw to the TE, every now and then throw long to losen up the defense. IF anything, this has become a vertical offense to losen the defense and then hit the D with the runningback. If you believe the west coast stuff, then DA would be a terrible fit for this offense- however, with the vertical nature of it, he might be OK. The one thing i know, the vikes are a QB away from being legit contenders. The other thing is Childress seems to be a stubborn man. He drafted TJack, and seems intent to sink or swim with him. Even when Gus was healed from injury- TJack got the start in the playoffs.

"Now, here's the rub. Trading Anderson would not clear Anderson's salary cap figures from the Browns' books. If they traded him after paying the $5 million bonus, Anderson would count about $8.2 million on the Browns' 2009 salary cap. If they kept Anderson, he would count about $8.8 million. "

I think this is wrong. I think it (our cap hit) would be 7.35 mil not 8.2 mil if we trade DA after the 3/15 bonus.

The only way it could be just a savings of 600grand as opposed to the salary of 1.45 mil is if he's figuring the Signing bonus being split 3 years 08, 09 n 2010.

But I'm pretty sure (I can be wrong as I'm not an expert but possibly more than Grossi is ) that all signing bonuses have to be accounted for by 2090. So that the bonus last year was split by 2 for the cap hit. 08 n 09.

Unless I got that wrong but I thought thats the way the signing bonuses were working...if you notice running down to the end of the CBA signing bonuses have got smaller and smaller and we see more n more one year Roster bonuses put in there.

Also obviously if traded this yer (when we need draft picks cause we only got 4) we won't have to worry about any cap hit next season and the farther removed from 07 the less value DA will have. The shorter the contract is for DA (2 years as opposed to 1 year ) will also cut out value for DA in any trade as it would be Now or never for us or lose DA to FA if we wait till 2010.

All depends on how many teams vie for his services in a trade. Supply n Demand, Football or Oranges...doesn't matter. That will play a big part in what we would get.

Seahawks...I've been bantering that around in some draft threads as nobody speaks about Seattle as a possible drafter of a QB. I think Sanchez might be the perfect pick for the Seahawks. Let him learn under Hassleback for a year or two.

Not quite sure how DA would fit in that scenario? I think he loses trade value if the team is looking for him solely to backup and they don't need his Experience NOW over a young Prospect.

JMHO

Looks like the bonus may be due on the 13th instead of the 15th....

Quote:

---

More on Derek Anderson's situation

February 13, 2009 2:00 PM

Posted by ESPN.com's James Walker

I wanted to pass along a quick note to the AFC North readers.

There have been a lot of reports about Cleveland Browns quarterback Derek Anderson and his $5 million roster bonus due in March. But there was no clarifications on the actual date.

According to a source, Anderson will get the roster bonus on March 13. The bonus is guaranteed, so if he's still on Cleveland's roster at that time, the Browns will be on the books for $5 million. If Anderson is traded before then, that team will ante up the $5 million.

This is important because this sizable bonus could hinder potential trades.

If the Browns want to dump Anderson before March 13, teams would also have to consider paying that high bonus. If Cleveland keeps Anderson beyond that date, it could be paying a $5 million bonus to a quarterback who could spent next year as a backup to Brady Quinn.

---

nordawg

Quote:

---

Well now, hold on there.

When a player's performance is seriously affected by fan's animosity, then the "best interests of the team" can be changed by this.

---

Nope,, I won't hold on.. I agree that IF a players performances is affected by fan animosity,, then that player needs a confidence boost or he needs a new environment.. no argument there..

But if a Coach or GM trades or dumps or benches a player who the fans don't like, SIMPLY because the fans don't like him,,, then that's freakin stupid.

If the guy isn't getting the job done,, then sure.. but JUST because of fan animosity.. Sorry, can't agree with that.

I don't know about the Lions .. they've got so many holes to fill ... I think they keep all there picks ..... I do not believe that the combo of how many holes they have to fill and Linehan's past experience with Culpepper that they donlt give him a shot ...

Nelson ... give it up man ... waste of time ... your dealing with someone that actually believes that Coke and Jeannie have not made up there minds on the starting QB cause they haven't announced it ... I mean for anyone to believe that ... they still may believe in santa cause theres been no official announcement from the North Pole ...

Speaking of the Lions, did fans attitudes towards Rogers, and his understandable feelings in response to that, Increase or Decrease the price we paid for him?

Evem if you accept that the unrelenting pounding we visit upon our starting quarterbacks does not affect their play, it sure as hell doesn't help.

Maybe BQ's popularity will shield him from this for a while. I just hope he can really get done what so many say he will do.

The one team everyone continues to leave off of their list is the Detroit Lions.
Detroit/Minny/NY Jets..and Carolina..those would seem to be the teams to me..

... and, of that group, Detroit may be the only team we'll be able to pry a Day 1 pick from for DA. DA is better than any QB they currently have on the roster. He also has a pretty cap-friendly contract (particularly if we pick up his $5 mil bonus in March). So, if we could get Detroit's 3rd round pick for DA (I doubt they'd part with their 2nd), that would still give the Lions their top two picks to grab a potential franchise LT and a solid defensive player. Win-win for both teams, IMO.

We'll see...

j/c

I guess I'm wondering why any team would want to trade for Anderson when they can wait to see if he's going to be released? Why give something up if you don't have to?

I mean, I guess maybe it's so you can *guarantee* that he's coming to your team. Still, I'll be pretty surprised if we work out a trade for DA that nets us something truly worthwhile. IMO, we'd have to get a 1st day pick to make it worthwhile or a player that can immediately come in and contribute.

The Browns aren't going to just release DA and the entire NFL knows that.
That would be stupid.
There are teams who need a QB..and will not get one in the draft..he has some value to those teams mentioned..
I suppose if they had to, they could [pay the bonus , then trade him..but I'm sure some info regarding that bonus will come out.
I'd take a third..we don't have one..or take a fourth and fifth and see if you can pack them to jump back in the third.

U don't release a QB you can get something for , or keep as a backup.
The Browns can get something for him regardless if it's a mid or low round pick..

He's a decent enough QB. And people always fall in love with the big arm guys. Even if that's all they have. Plus, he's pretty cheap as QBs go.

We won't just release him. Unless some pictures surface on Youtube involving Derek and farm animals........

because he has value?

now if your implying, is what we could gain (picks in the draft) worth more than shelling out that bonus....then i follow ya...

the best thing, imo, would be to work out a trade where were we retructure his contract before the bonus is due...we save cap, and get some picks...

once we pay that bonus, his price will go up....

Just looking at some of the teams with extra picks who might be interested in a vet qb.

Det....1st and 3rd

I doubt we will get either of the first rounders, but it isn't totally crazy to think we could get both 3rds...they are giving up 2 players for 1 player

Jets.....have a 4th rounder....if what I said earlier is indeed crazy , getting both of these picks shouldn't be out of reach.

I'd settle for a third and a fourth/fifth from any of those teams..since Detriot is going to select early in any rounds they're the best choice...

No doubt....

79 - there is a lot of uncertainty to this statement but a lot of media outlets have reported that he gets that $5 million bonus even if we release him. I don't know for sure - I have not seen the contract. If this is true then we have no incentive to release him.

As for trade value, I say we get a late 2nd or early 3rd from this years draft and a conditional pick in next years draft.

I think since the bonus is guarantied, a trade before the bonus = less trade value (new team pays bonus) after bonus is paid = more value since new team would be off the hook for the bonus. Makes me think before bonus,a 3rd or 4th, after bonus a 2nd or 2 picks ,1 this year and 1 next year, maybe? Just a thought.

j/c...

If giving up 5 Mil is what it takes to get more draft picks, then by all means... Give him the 5 Mil...

Mike Furrey a WR that was cut from the Lions was on NFL RADIO today... said he still has a lot of friends in Detroit...and they told him the plan is to keep Culpepper and and two of the young guys....More than likely letting Kitna and Orlovsky walk...and keeping Stanton, Henson, Culpepper....and a camp arm.

Take it for what its worth.

HACK

In my opinion they gotta take Stafford. When drafting that high you can't pass on a possible quality NFL QB unless you already have one on your roster and Detroit sure doesn't. If i'm Detroit i'm taking Stafford with the # 1 pick and the best OLineman available with the other 1st rnd pick and Defense with the rest of the draft.

John Clayton on the Browns
link
Q: Can you see the Browns making any key additions, via a trade or free agency, during the offseason?

Cory in Oregon, Ohio

A: What would be interesting is if the Browns put Braylon Edwards and/or Kellen Winslow Jr. on the trade block. Edwards is good enough to net a first- and third-round pick in return. Winslow could get a second- or third-round choice. The right trade for QB Derek Anderson could land the Browns a second-rounder. Strategically, though, they should keep at least one of their top pass-catchers in order to give Brady Quinn some weapons. Because he's healthy and a No. 1-quality receiver, Edwards would net the most value. If they don't trade him in the next year or two, they will have to pay him $8 million to $10 million a year. He's probably at his maximum value. The Browns have an easy schedule this year, so their record should improve even if their talent base stays the same. They are set at quarterback with Quinn, so why not be bold and build the roster the way Eric Mangini might desire?


Interesting take by Clayton on what he sees as Anderson, Edwards and Winlow's trade value. I agree with his assessment and think keeping Winslow is the way to go. I'd be happy getting a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks for Anderson and Edwards.

Mike Furrey a WR that was cut from the Lions was on NFL RADIO today... said he still has a lot of friends in Detroit...and they told him the plan is to keep Culpepper and and two of the young guys....More than likely letting Kitna and Orlovsky walk...and keeping Stanton, Henson, Culpepper....and a camp arm.


Yeah...I buy that..like his friends are going to know whats coming down in FA and the draft..not heckling U..but I take that with a grain of salt..and I don't use salt in my diet

Could DA voluntarily accept a lower bonus, in return for a better chance to be traded and possibly start somewhere else?

Would we pay the 5 Mil and keep him as a backup, or would that be at least reasonable leverage to re-negotiate? I don't think he has Holcomb Syndrome.

I would keep Edwards as he is in his contract year and should perform, I like Winslow but his injuries are a big concern. I also prefer TEs who can block.

That doesn't make sense.

He will get his 5 mil and still have the same chance.

The "rule" is if you don't have a franchise Qb and one is available you draft him. Personally I don't think Stafford is that type of Qb. He may be as you put it NFL quality but there is a big difference between NFL quality and Franchise Qb.


While they certainly might draft Stafford (or Sanchez), it is by no means a given. And in my mind they would be better off shoring up their oline with the 1st pick because as shown by Couch and Carr and an innumerable number of other #1 pick Qbs, a young Qb won't be successful without a quality oline.

They have a good young Rb and if they shore up the oline this year they can draft their Qb next year in a draft that will have better Qbs to choose from who will have a better chance of success behind the better oline. Or they could trade for a Qb. Derick Anderson perhaps?

I'm thinking that if we pay the bonus, we will want a higher draft choice for him, while if the other team would pay the bonus, we would accept a lower draft choice in the trade.

What if DA was told " If you take the 5 mil, we can't make a reasonable deal and you will stay here and ride the bench unless Brady is injured, you will not be competing for a starting job. BUT, if you take, say, 3 mil instead, we CAN make a reasonable deal and you can go there and have a chance to start".

He wants to leave Cleveland, he wants to start. I'll assume he does not want to be cut, he should want to nake himself more tradeable. The high bonus makes him less tradeable, does it not? I'm pretty sure other players have done similar reductions for similar reasons.

My reference to Holcomb was that he would take the 5 mil and ride the pine. I don't think DA would like that outcome.

Think what you want...first, we aren't even going to pay the bonus if we" tell" a guy he has "no" chance to compete....we would just cut him.


Plus.....if someone came to you and said that, what would you do?......Me?? I tell them to pound salt and pay me the 5 mil for doing nothing or cut me.

I would ask them if I didn't stand a chance to compete, would it be possible for me to stay home and not even practice.

Why should he do us any favors??

Really