If the 49ers can't reach a deal and franchise Goldson, what is his trade value?

I see what you're saying and this has been thought about and the reasons why Green Bay wouldn't do it are this.

Matt Flynn would make top 5 QB money like $14.5 Million. That's almost twice what Aaron Rodgers is making.
Now of course they can't let this guy make more than Aaron and even though Aaron signed a contract just a few seasons ago
guess what his Agent will say .... SHOW ME THE MONEY. And he'll say it as soon as Matt signs the tender.

Also if no team is willing to give up what Green Bay wants, now they are stuck paying a guy who sees the field once or twice a year because the money is guaranteed. And at the end of the season your choices are to franchise him again or let him go. Franchising anybody for trade bate is risky business,
especially if they are unproven.

The Eagles still had Kolb under contract which was a big advantage. The Eagles practically stole Cromartie and a pick from
Arizona for a guy who got outplayed by Some dude named Skelton.

If you were going to franchise to trade someone, they would have to be a Patrick Willis, Drew Brees or some high calibre player. Goldson is good, but
not great.

Franchise him. Of course you do, but only to work out a long term deal imo.

Originally posted by aTx49er:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
Nothing he's a free agent

Originally posted by DaDivaRecieva15:
I think he means if we slap the franchise tag on him

Again, nothing, 0. If he's franchised his trade value won't be assessed until the 2013 season as. I don't know of a team franchising a player them trading that player in the same season.

A team will frachise a player to get compensation instead of just letting them go. The Pats did it with Cassel a few years ago. Greenbay will probably do it this year. If Greenbay puts a franchise tag on Flynn they definitely will trade him because they'd have too much money tied up at the QB position.

Yes because even if a team low balls you with a 5th rounder it is better then getting absolutely nothing if the guy is 100% set of leaving town.

Lifer, I don't know why you're being so stubborn on the topic also your perception of "market value" is a little off. You have it right in terms of free agency that he needs to be on the open market so we'd know what to pay him but trading players is much simpler. Teams have value charts based where and how a player was drafted, his overall production and current financial situation.

By your own words Goldson is a top 3 safety or in your own opinion the #1 Safety in the entire league. If a team coveted him that much and wasn't sure if they could lure him in FA and they could get him in a trade and an entire season sooner you bet your sweet a** teams would come calling.

EDIT: I agree with Irish on this by the way. Goldson is good but no one will trade for him, franchising him will only be done if we want more time to work out a deal, because the franchise tag is so close to his actual market value I don't see why we wouldn't just re-sign him on a long term deal.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by dhp318:
Are you serious? It's always a serious thing to consider, as the Packers are likely doing with Matt Flynn. Biggest example in recent memory: Matt Cassel. Of course, there aren't many examples, simply because trades just don't happen very often in the NFL, especially with players that have franchise tag value

Not sure if you agree or disagree with me. Matt Flynn isn't franchised. Cassel, on the other hand, was, I think, a strategic move on the Patriots part. They had what many thought was a budding star and knew some team would over pay to get him. GB could be using that same strategery. On the other hand, Goldson is a different matter. He has played himself into the top 2 or 3 FS in the NFL (I would argue the best). Once that franchise tag is slapped on him all trade talk is over unless a team comes with 2 #1's and a #2 to boot.

Teams will overpay for the QB position, that much is certain. but for a QB with 2 games started, I'm not sure how much they'd overpay. 2 #1's for Dashon is ludicrous. Nobody would give us one 1 #1 for him let alone 2 and a 2nd rounder.

Originally posted by sfout:
Yes because even if a team low balls you with a 5th rounder it is better then getting absolutely nothing if the guy is 100% set of leaving town.

Lifer, I don't know why you're being so stubborn on the topic also your perception of "market value" is a little off. You have it right in terms of free agency that he needs to be on the open market so we'd know what to pay him but trading players is much simpler. Teams have value charts based where and how a player was drafted, his overall production and current financial situation.

By your own words Goldson is a top 3 safety or in your own opinion the #1 Safety in the entire league. If a team coveted him that much and wasn't sure if they could lure him in FA and they could get him in a trade and an entire season sooner you bet your sweet a** teams would come calling.

EDIT: I agree with Irish on this by the way. Goldson is good but no one will trade for him, franchising him will only be done if we want more time to work out a deal, because the franchise tag is so close to his actual market value I don't see why we wouldn't just re-sign him on a long term deal.

My point is that he will never see the market to assess his value in the first place, at least not this year anyway. Now, we can speculate what his value is - I think he's the best at his position right now. I think he should be paid top dollar and awarded a multi-year contract. But this is a business, and the 49ers front office are making a business decision. I can understand the angle the 49ers are taking. They don't want to lose him but don't want to have to break the bank to keep him. The 49ers have cap room, but not endless cap room. Franchising him gives the front offce time to negociate without the danger of a possible inflated market value to beat (see Nate Clements). I think a deal will be reached. But I also think we might have to franchise him to do it.

Originally posted by gavindirishmen:
Teams will overpay for the QB position, that much is certain. but for a QB with 2 games started, I'm not sure how much they'd overpay. 2 #1's for Dashon is ludicrous. Nobody would give us one 1 #1 for him let alone 2 and a 2nd rounder.

Ok, I was being facetious

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Not sure if you agree or disagree with me. Matt Flynn isn't franchised. Cassel, on the other hand, was, I think, a strategic move on the Patriots part. They had what many thought was a budding star and knew some team would over pay to get him. GB could be using that same strategery. On the other hand, Goldson is a different matter. He has played himself into the top 2 or 3 FS in the NFL (I would argue the best). Once that franchise tag is slapped on him all trade talk is over unless a team comes with 2 #1's and a #2 to boot.

Of course I disagree with you right now. What are you talking about? Once we put a franchise tag on Goldson and he signs, we can trade him. Why would is all trade talk over after that? You're not making very much sense right now.

Originally posted by dhp318:
Of course I disagree with you right now. What are you talking about? Once we put a franchise tag on Goldson and he signs, we can trade him. Why would is all trade talk over after that? You're not making very much sense right now.

OK. Tell me why we trade him after we franchise him?

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
OK. Tell me why we trade him after we franchise him?

I don't know, because we can get something in return? Why do trades ever happen?

I'm not saying it's going to happen, but it's not a totally unrealistic scenario either.

The Chargers do it to Vincent Jackson every year. He has no choice. Jackson hates it. But he always ends up playing for the Chargers again. He will have no alternative. It's exactly what we need to do.

Originally posted by dhp318:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
OK. Tell me why we trade him after we franchise him?

I don't know, because we can get something in return? Why do trades ever happen?

I'm not saying it's going to happen, but it's not a totally unrealistic scenario either.

Thats because a trade won't happen. Possible?, yes! Realistic?, absolutely not! And thats what I'm getting to. If he refuses their offer he will be franchised, and the 49ers front office will not listen to any trade deal for him unless that team is willing to overpay for him. And I'm sure Goldson knows this, which is why I think he will eventually sign. Or they will just franchise his ass next year too, especially if they get everyone else, or at least most, to re-signed this year.

If they franchise him this year and he plays well enough to deserve the franchise tag once more, might as well think about giving the guy top 5 money for his position. It's a good move by the 49ers. If his play drops off or he wants Weddle money, he can walk.

Originally posted by GoldenJoe:
If they franchise him this year and he plays well enough to deserve the franchise tag once more, might as well think about giving the guy top 5 money for his position. It's a good move by the 49ers. If his play drops off or he wants Weddle money, he can walk.

They offered him 5 years $25 million last year. And this year they will offer him more IMO. The franchise tag for safetys is a little above $6 million. Yet you have all these guys complaining we are paying him too much.... We just offered him $5 million a year last year. Now we will probably offer him $6 million per year. Or franchise him for 1 year at that price. The mere fact that we offered him that last year tells me that the 49ers brass recognize his value unlike so many WZers. And this was before the monster year he had this year. If anything he has more value now.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GoldenJoe:
If they franchise him this year and he plays well enough to deserve the franchise tag once more, might as well think about giving the guy top 5 money for his position. It's a good move by the 49ers. If his play drops off or he wants Weddle money, he can walk.

They offered him 5 years $25 million last year. And this year they will offer him more IMO. The franchise tag for safetys is a little above $6 million. Yet you have all these guys complaining we are paying him too much.... We just offered him $5 million a year last year. Now we will probably offer him $6 million per year. Or franchise him for 1 year at that price. The mere fact that we offered him that last year tells me that the 49ers brass recognize his value unlike so many WZers. And this was before the monster year he had this year. If anything he has more value now.

weddles contract is the bench mark his agent will point to, dude is gonna get paid

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by DaDivaRecieva15:
I think he means if we slap the franchise tag on him

This, holy s**t. If you put a franchise tag on somebody, the team doing so can negotiate a deal with any team looking to get him, or at least that's what my understanding is, not sure why people are getting f**king snarky.

we would just keep him though.

Why do so many of you think trades in the NFL are realistic...trades rarely happen...