Question about tommy polley

#1 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

Ok all of you defensive experts out there, question about tommy polley, who is going to be an unrestricted free agent at the end of 2004.

Polley's 2004 cap charge is $816,500. Polley was not a first round pick and did not receive an enormous signing bonus. This is the last year of his rookie contract, and presumably, he is going to be looking for a serious raise come next year.

Lets assume for a second that polley has another good but not great year for us, ie struggles again with some injuries and some inconsistent play. The kind of guy that you like to have on your team, but also the kind of guy that other teams tend to overpay for and deep talented teams like the rams have to let go since on the rams he most likely wont be considered a core player.

How hard to we try and keep him? What nfl players at the outside linebacker position is his comparable to and what do they make?

From everything i have read, we are taking a wait and see approach to polley and even if we sign Pace and open up some cap money for 2005, i havent seen anything that says we will try to lock polley up long term before the 2004 season. if anyone thinks we should be trying to lock him up, what price would you try to do so (ie pick an nfl player he is comparable to and what does that guy make). Will Polley take less to stay? I have no idea.

If polley has a great year, he might price himself right off the rams' chart for next year (ie increasing the possibility that someone will pay money that we cant afford). If he gets hurt or regresses and chillar or one of the other linebackers steps up, maybe we arent interested in keeping him at all unless he takes way less to stay.

I share the concern of many of you on these type of situations, which is the following. Not overpaying in the salary cap era is critical, but you need an alternative. Can we get another veteran next year who is comparable to polley for the same money. Do we have to use a #1 or #2 pick to replace him and hope for the best. Does Chillar, son of Ram, or one of the other guys step up and look like a future starter?

Tx and all the other defensive gurus, please let us know your thoughts. My general observations from watching the traffic on the board are that nearly everyone is a Pisaite (aka 5-0 ite), most are Thomasites (with the caveat that he needs to stay healthy), but the feelings on Polley tend to be mixed. Is there a hard core Polleyite out there who wants to make the case for him as a core guy on the defense?

ramming speed to all

general counsel

**AvengerRam** · #2 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

You're dead on with respect to the catch22 here. Polley has demonstrated flashes of being a top notch LB, but he has not been consistent - or consistently healthy.

That said, if he stays healthy and has even a decent year, he'll probably be a blue-chip UFA next year. Its going to be tough to sign him.

My feeling is that the Rams won't be able to resign him next year unless they clear some serious space by signing Pace to a cap friendly long term deal, and maybe restructuring older players like Faulk and Bruce. He may not be worth the effort, though, particularly if the DTs develop. If you have dominating DTs, even average LBs will play like Pro Bowlers, and paying top $ to Polley won't be necessary.

**Nick** · #3 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

I think the urgency to resign Tommy Polley will be directly effected by how Chillar does this season. Obviously we won't necessarily need to resign Polley if Chillar looks like starter material.

That said, it's a bit of a gamble. Polley is an established pro who has played well. I'd say see if you can negotiate a new deal before the start of the season, maybe with an incentive based contract that offers enough bonus money to make it rewarding for him but safe for us.

*Ferter* · #4 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

If Pace were signed to a long term deal I suppose the Rams could take a proactive approach and try to lock Polley up to a cap friendly long term deal. It's a tough call even if Pace were signed to a long term deal. Overall I think I would be inclined to let Polley play out his contract and keep the options open. I understand the concerns as far as an alternative, but there is no reason to believe that Chillar can't be the guy. If he can't, the options are still there to try and sign Polley or another FA.

*ramstiles* · #5 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

I like Polley and we could do with him signed to long term deal but as always its what hes worth on the open market theres always someone who will pay more

We could have done with keeping london but couldn't afford him I think this will happen with Polley.

Lets hope Chiller steps up,

**txramsfan** · #6 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

I actually have a Polley jersey. Polley has his moments, but all in all seems to have the tools to be an awesome LB. He has speed, good coverage skills, but needs to improve on the run defense as does the whole unit. If Polley and the rest of this LB unit improves against the rush, we have to sign them all somehow. They are spaced out contractually that we may be able to afford this.

*ramstiles* · #7 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

I agree Tx the longer they play together hopefully the better they will become

What worries me regarding the contracts is when does archeleta's contract expire he was drafted in the same year

#8 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

Ramstiles, archuleta was a first round pick, meaning he signed a longer term contract than polley, typically seven years. we should be in good shape with archuleta for at least a couple of more years.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

**evil disco man** · #9 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

Archuleta's contract expires after the 2005 season. :ramlogo:

#10 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

thanks jake for the clarification, that surprises me quite a bit. I wonder why he only signed a four year deal since the first round picks often sign for six or seven. I would think that sometime after the 2004 season, after pace is signed, we would strongly consider trying to get an extension done with archuleta so he doesnt hit the free agent market. Health permitting of course.

general counsel

*ramstiles* · #11 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

GA

I know archuleta was a first round pick and as disco says it expires after 2005 will we need to sort it out at the end of this year so we don't go into the last year and risk arch testing the waters of FA

*RAMMAN68* · #12 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

The Rams should have cap space next season from Warners release. Polly is a talented LB and should be considered one of the leaders on D. Hopefully he stays healthy and plays to his potential this season. With all three starting LB's healthy, Thomas with one year at MLB under his belt, and Pisa (The next Jr. Seau IMO) the LB's should be a strong point on D. Overall I'm very optimistic that the defense will be just as strong or better than last year.

**Nick** · #13 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAMMAN68

The Rams should have cap space next season from Warners release.

That would have been true had they released Warner prior to June 1st. But they spread the cap hit out over this season and next, meaning the Rams will have about $6.7M in dead money against their cap next season from Kurt. He's counting more next season than he will be this season.

*RAMMAN68* · #14 (**permalink**) -19-06-2004

My bad Nick. I was never good with numbers. :disappoin

**HUbison** · #15 (**permalink**) -20-06-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by txramsfan

I actually have a Polley jersey. Polley has his moments, but all in all seems to have the tools to be an awesome LB. He has speed, good coverage skills, but needs to improve on the run defense as does the whole unit. If Polley and the rest of this LB unit improves against the rush, we have to sign them all somehow. They are spaced out contractually that we may be able to afford this.

If the interior D-line is as good at run stopping as I think they are going to be this year, it should make the whole LB corp look better at defending the run.