Who is the Hardest 2015 Free Agent to Re-Sign

Originally posted by theduke85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Bargaining power leans towrads who has the upper hand. B/c we have viable and proven replacements for both Crabtree and Iupati, we hold the bargaining power. If we did NOT have Stevie Johnson or a replacement for Iupati, then their agent can rape us knowing we are completely dependent upon us signing them. The "market" will set the price, I agree...but WE set our own as well. You'll get a very fair contract here and be taken care of...and you'll get to play for a perennial Superbowl-caliber team but if you want more, you can go to the Raider, Browns, Bills, Bucs, etc...and we'll be just fine.

I guess I just don't consider that bargaining power per se.

The key for me is that the 49ers were never going to match Iupati/Crabtree's market value. They're almost never going to pay full value on a long-term contract (an exception would be someone like Kap). They're either going to extend early at a discount, or let the player walk.

We know the 49ers have had preliminary discussions with Crabtree and his agent about a new deal. Suppose the 49ers came in with a 5-year, $45M offer; the agent countered with, say, 5-year, $50M. Hypothetically, let's say the agent knows for a fact that Crabtree can get 5/$50M on the open market. Well, just because the 49ers brought in Johnson and Ellington doesn't mean that Crabtree is worth less to the league all of a sudden. The 49ers were never going to overpay for him out of desperation to begin with, and us bringing in these two receivers doesn't affect his market value either. His value is the same before and after the trade. To me it has nothing to do with bargaining power (although the acquisitions most-definitely serve as insurance fallback plans, no doubt about that).

On the flip side, let's look at someone like Aldon Smith. Aldon Smith is someone the 49ers (in my view) hold bargaining power over. Smith is a guy who's value has undoubtedly been damaged by his off-the-field history. Now the 49ers can say, "look, we know you want $14M a year, but the fact is, your market value is diminished because of your history and the risk that goes with it -- we can only give you $12M per."

Crabtree/Iupati
Before draft: vital to the 49ers / still would get more on the open market
After draft: not as important to the 49ers / still would get more on the open market

Smith:
With hypothetical perfect track record: worth a lot to the 49ers / worth a lot to the open market
With countless off-the-field issues: worth a lot (but slightly damaged value) to the 49ers / worth a lot (but slightly damaged value) to the open market

But hey, we may completely agree, and ultimately this all may come down to a matter of semantics. To me bargaining power requires a compelling reason why the player is not as valuable to the league, not why the player is not as valuable to the team; otherwise, there's no leverage. Sure, Baalke can say, "look, now that we got Stevie we can't justify giving Crab big money too -- he's not as big of a need anymore." The agent will just laugh that off and say, "okay, we'll go to free agency and get our full value then -- see ya!" Is it a security blanket? Sure. An insurance policy? Yep. Leverage and bargaining power? I just don't see it.

Originally posted by SFFanSince72:

Originally posted by GolittaCamper:
Maybe not the pokes, but someone with cash! Maybe the Texans, but I don't expect him to be an easy signing.

I could see him signing with the Texans after they trade or release Johnson. I really think he has wanted to play in Texas since he grew up there and played his college ball there.