Sammy Watkins mulling sitting out 2020 season

[Hoover]

Link

I appreciate Watkins being open about this. Curious to see if the Chiefs would be cool with him skipping OTAs if we signed a team friendly extension. I do think this really cools the trade market for him. Going to be interesting.

Sammy Watkins spent part of the week leading up to Super Bowl LIV musing that he might take a year off from football if the Kansas City Chiefs won the Super Bowl.

Two days after K.C. hoisted the Lombardi Trophy after knocking off the San Francisco 49ers, Watkins told SiriusXM NFL Radio that he is still considering some sort of break from the game this offseason, whether he's a member of the Chiefs or not.

"At the end of the day, I think the Kansas City Chiefs are in control as far as contract talks, you know? A guy of my stature, I'm still young, I still think I have a lot of good football in me. But as you know, it takes a toll on the body, the mental, the physical and I'm gonna really weigh my options out and see if I need to sit out the whole OTAs or something like that, just to get my mental back and be with my kids and family," Watkins said. "It's been a long season for the last two years. We've been in the playoffs, going all the way to the third round last year, then won the Super Bowl. So I honestly think mentally, physically, soulfully, spiritually, I need some downtime. So I will talk to coach [Andy] Reid about it.

"I don't control the contract, a trade or if they're going to give me a bigger contract. That's not my worry. I'm not really focused on the money aspect of it. I'm really focused on my health, mental health and really checking in on and making sure I'm OK with my life, my family, my wife, my kids. Once I figure that out, I think I'll be fine."

After four seasons with the Buffalo Bills and the Los Angeles Rams, Watkins signed a three-year deal worth $48 million with Kansas City during the 2018 offseason. After two so-so regular seasons and two spectacular postseasons, during which he dealt with injuries and played in 29 games, Watkins has one year left on his deal and is owed $14 million in 2020. However, if the Chiefs were to move on from Watkins, they would take on only $7 million in dead cap.

All this begs questions in the offseason as to whether K.C. want to retain Watkins at that price, whether the Chiefs will try to trade the receiver or whether they will renegotiate his deal. NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported last week that Kansas City is more likely to trade or release Watkins. NFL Network's Tom Pelissero said Tuesday afternoon that the Chiefs want to work something out with Watkins, though it won't be easy.

And then there's the query as to whether Watkins is willing to play on a pay cut or at all, given his recent comments. The receiver answered that definitively on SiriusXM NFL Radio, saying he has no intention to walk away.

"I'm too young to retire. I have not done enough yet, you know what I mean?" Watkins said. "Why not go win another championship and continue to be great? ... Be a Pro Bowl receiver. Be an All-Pro. There are a lot of things I haven't accomplished yet being. The Super Bowl is one of the biggest accomplishments in this league but I haven't did the individual goals yet and hopefully I can accomplish those next year either with the Kansas City Chiefs or another team.

"Those are the little things I want to hit, not to be selfish, but those are things I haven't really done in my career and those are things I want to do. Hopefully the next eight, nine years if I continue to be blessed and play that long, that I have those Hall of Fame numbers that I'm shooting for. Those are the dreams that I still haven't accomplished yet and those are the things I still want to accomplish."

At just 26 years old, Watkins has already reached the peak of professional football. But as he said, the receiver has not reached his personal goals. A 2014 first-round pick, Watkins has yet to reach the Pro Bowl or be voted to an All-Pro team. He has gone over 1,000 receiving yards in a season just once and averaged 707.3 yards per year through six campaigns. After scoring eight touchdowns in 2017, Watkins has logged just six in the past two regular seasons.

Now that he has won the Super Bowl, these are the numbers that stand out to him, the things to drive him to want to play on, for Kansas City or another team.

All Watkins needs is a little time off to get his head (and contract situation) right.

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

Another thought I had.

Hardman had 26 catches for 538 yards and 6 TDs in his rookie season when he apparently knew nothing about the offense or route running. Is it expected that he learns and develops and improves in that area? Of course-- he's a freaking 2nd round pick. If he doesn't, or he doesn't improve much in that area? Those numbers are still better than any other single season output by a drafted Chiefs WR not named Tyreek Hill.

He got those 26 catches on 41 targets, which is a catch percentage of 63%. That's not the best, but it's actually probably about average or a little better than average for deep threat WRs. If he boosts his efficiency up even a little bit, he's all of a sudden somebody who can serve as that 3rd threat behind Kelce and Hill. The route running thing would probably get him more targets, but not necessarily boost that efficiency.

I'm not saying it's fine if he doesn't really dive in and make learning to be a complete NFL WR his #1 goal this offseason and beyond. But if he fails in that goal or it takes him longer than we'd like it to take? He's still a damn good player who will undoubtedly outperform Kemp, Pringle, or even a somehow re-signed Robinson in 2020.

Having Watkins on the field will make Hardman a better player. If we have to plug in Hardman to replace Watkins, I'd actually argue that we're not going to lose THAT much on offense. The key following that then becomes finding a player who can be the 3rd WR that Hardman was for us, even if he's not in the mold of a super fast deep threat. I don't really believe that guy is on this roster, so it will be interesting to see if Veach goes to the draft (even though he has limited picks this year) or if he finds something in the dumpster like he did for a bunch of other positions this year.

He did have to concentrate a lot in the return game and that saved Tyreek from having to go back there as much and should have had the return in his hands and not Tyreeks when the Chiefs got desperate and Tryeek muffed a punt but that's my point he really did step it up in the return game so I want that to count for something.

I'm really wanting Pringle to take returns and let Hardman concentrate on being the #2 reciever across from Tyreek and take Watkins job then we can save cap space on his rookie contract. I think Hardman is a bigger deep threat to match with Hill and really wont' be fair to defenses.

[wachashi]

Chance of Lions cutting Slay this year if no trade offers are made for him: 0%

Chance of Chiefs cutting Watkins this year if no trade offers are made for him: 100%

The two situations are completely different. I would be really surprised if a team gave up a third for Sammy's expensive contract, especially considering he's getting cut unless a trade deal is reached.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by wachashi

Chance of Lions cutting Slay this year if no trade offers are made for him: 0%

Chance of Chiefs cutting Watkins this year if no trade offers are made for him: 100%

The two situations are completely different. I would be really surprised if a team gave up a third for Sammy's expensive contract, especially considering he's getting cut unless a trade deal is reached.

$14 million isn’t that much to a team that needs a WR and has a good amount of cap space.

[wachashi]

Originally Posted by The Franchise

$14 million isn’t that much to a team that needs a WR and has a good amount of cap space.

VEACH: "Would you like to trade your third round pick for Sammy? He'll cost you $14 million next year."

OTHER GM: "Why wouldn't I just wait to sign him until after you cut him, pay him less and keep my draft picks?"

VEACH: "Because $14 million isn't that much and you have a good amount of cap space."

OTHER GM:

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by wachashi

VEACH: "Would you like to trade your third round pick for Sammy? He'll cost you $14 million next year."

OTHER GM: "Why wouldn't I just wait to sign him until after you cut him, pay him less and keep my draft picks?"

VEACH: "Because $14 million isn't that much and you have a good amount of cap space."

OTHER GM:

Keep thinking that all 32 GMs are great at their jobs and are super smart.

[RunKC]

Cardinals have a nice new young QB and their best receiver will be 37 years old. They’ve got $52 million in cap space before any cuts.

Yeah I’m sure they wouldn’t want to trade a 3rd or 4th for a receiver like Sammy so they don’t have to compete with other teams to get a young talent like him.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by wachashi

VEACH: "Would you like to trade your third round pick for Sammy? He'll cost you $14 million next year."

OTHER GM: "Why wouldn't I just wait to sign him until after you cut him, pay him less and keep my draft picks?"

VEACH: "Because $14 million isn't that much and you have a good amount of cap space."

OTHER GM:

Any team trading for Sammy can keep him for 1 year and if they want to let him walk after that year, they will receive a comp pick the following year. Quite possibly getting a third rounder back in return. If he has a good year, he’s still young and can get another big FA deal.

Veach should be able to get a 3 or 4 for Sammy.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by The Franchise

$14 million isn’t that much to a team that needs a WR and has a good amount of cap space.

And that wants to add production now at a controlled cost, with leverage to negotiate an extension.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by wachashi

VEACH: "Would you like to trade your third round pick for Sammy? He'll cost you $14 million next year."

OTHER GM: "Why wouldn't I just wait to sign him until after you cut him, pay him less and keep my draft picks?"

VEACH: "Because $14 million isn't that much and you have a good amount of cap space."

OTHER GM:

^ this is a good point, but how much is it worth it to have exclusive negotiating rights for a year?

$14 million/year is over his market value, but even a conservative estimate probably puts him around $10-11 million a year, right? That seems to be the recent going rate for #2 WR types.

A GM that wants him (Arizona? Philadelphia? Giants? Cowboys?) could maybe save a few $$ by waiting for him to be cut... or end up owing him way more.

It's not the same as the leverage that secured great returns for Mo Sanu and Sanders - those had in-season, win-it-now pressure - but it's still a reason to make a trade rather than just waiting it out.

[wachashi]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

^ this is a good point, but how much is it worth it to have exclusive negotiating rights for a year?

$14 million/year is over his market value, but even a conservative estimate probably puts him around $10-11 million a year, right? That seems to be the recent going rate for #2 WR types.

A GM that wants him (Arizona? Philadelphia? Giants? Cowboys?) could maybe save a few $$ by waiting for him to be cut... or end up owing him way more.

It's not the same as the leverage that secured great returns for Mo Sanu and Sanders - those had in-season, win-it-now pressure - but it's still a reason to make a trade rather than just waiting it out.

Yeah, maybe so. There might be a team that likes the idea of a one-year rental, with the option of renegotiating. It's possible he gets traded, but I can't imagine a team giving up much in draft capital for that. I know I'd be pissed if the Chiefs gave up a third round pick to overpay for a player that was going to be cut.

I doubt comp picks play a role at all in teams' valuation of Sammy. Too many moving pieces/fluidity to make predictions on how that would play out.

[RunKC]

$14 million=13th highest paid receiver

That’s a pretty big discount.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by RunKC

It would be similar to Frank Clark’s trade. Sammy gets traded and the new team gives him a new long term deal. New team gets the early low cap hits with a backloaded contract, Sammy gets another payday + $7 million from us next year.

Win/win for everybody involved

Frank Clark was never in danger of being cut by Seattle so its nothing like the Clark trade at all.

The Chiefs wont keep Watkins unless he takes a massive pay cut or else he is gone. No team needs to trade for Watkins and give him a new deal when they can just give him the new deal, giving up a draft pick would be epically stupid.

[RunKC]

Florio said Green Bay would be a great trade partner for Sammy. They desperately need him too.

They don’t have any extra picks, but I’d be interested with a switch of our 3rd and their 2nd. Moving up from 93 to 62 would be cool.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by RunKC

Florio said Green Bay would be a great trade partner for Sammy. They desperately need him too.

They don’t have any extra picks, but I’d be interested with a switch of our 3rd and their 2nd. Moving up from 93 to 62 would be cool.

Not sure where they’d get the cap space for him.

But in that instance....I wouldn’t want a trade of picks. They can send over Josh Jackson and like a 5th.

[Halfcan]

Originally Posted by RunKC

Florio said Green Bay would be a great trade partner for Sammy. They desperately need him too.

They don’t have any extra picks, but I’d be interested with a switch of our 3rd and their 2nd. Moving up from 93 to 62 would be cool.

That is how you know it is bullshit.