Only A Matter Of Time?

Derek AndersonContract For Derek Anderson Could Be Coming Soon

In case you missed it, I saw this on the Plain Dealer’s site this morning. In an article by Mary Kay Cabot, she says that GM Phil Savage feels confident that DA will be signed to a 3 year deal soon. She writes,

“Talks have been a little more frequent in recent days,” Savage said in an e-mail response. “It seems that the three-year deal is becoming more the focus. We’ve had pretty good dialogue and will continue over the [NFL scouting] combine.”

Savage and Anderson’s agent, Mark Humenik of Athletes First, will be in Indianapolis for the combine over the next several days.

Also, in an interview with WKYC’s Jim Donovan posted on, Savage said, “I do feel like [an Anderson deal] is going to get done. I have reason to think it will get done. We’ll continue to work on it, but I do think it will go down to the days before free agency.”

The Browns have until Feb. 28 to sign Anderson to a multi-year deal or must tender him a one-year offer as a restricted free agent, meaning they retain a right of first refusal. Savage has said he’d give Anderson the high tender of $2.562 million, requiring a team to give the Browns a 1st- and 3rd-round pick if they signed him.”

I’ve said it a million times, I might as well say it again, I am 100% against this move by Savage. I see no reason to lock up DA for 3 years right now, unless Savage is able to completely lowball the QB. I can’t help but hope that nothing is able to be agreed upon before the deadline on the 28th, and the tender will thus be used on DA. I feel a lot less optimistic now on the Browns chances of finding someone willing to part with 2 draft picks for DA, and perhaps that’s the logic of trying to sign DA to a decent contract….try to get what you can with DA locked up to a 3 year deal rather than try to get someone to sign him plus give up the tender compensation.

Either way, I remain curious about the strong desire to lock DA up long term, but if DA puts up another Pro Bowl season or 2, then Savage will look like a genius once again. This just feels to me like more of a Danny Ferry move than a Phil Savage move…..lock up the guy long term and eliminate all the flexibility and options you already have. Only time will tell how wise this move is. The good news for me is, my job doesn’t ride on moves like this panning out.


  • Matt

    My thoughts as to why Savage would prefer a 3 year contract is it is easier to trade him with a manageable time/price intact. As far as risk/reward, having him under some kind of shorter term contract seems far less risky than tendering him, having him have another good year and then having to let him go. …at least he will have trade value being under contract.

  • Scott

    “The good news for me is, my job doesn’t ride on moves like this panning out.”

    …but it would make blogging about them that much better…

  • RockKing

    @Matt: The thing is, if he has a great year and the Browns want to re-sign him but can’t, they still don’t have to lose him….they could always franchise him. Pricey? Yes. But worth it, in my opinion, in order to be able to keep all options open. I think I’ll know a lot more about how I feel about it once we find out how much the contract is worth.

    @Scott: Haha, so true.

  • Steve

    I do believe that Savage knows what he is doing. After all, the potential contract is only for three years, and the original problem was that Anderson wanted it to be for six or seven years. I think the Ferry thing to do would be to give him that seven-year deal and be stuck. At least this contract offers some flexibility and an ability to recoup some losses quickly if it backfires.

  • Rick

    I think I’m in favor of the three year deal myself. We have the cap room, and if Anderson can come close to duplicating his first half numbers throughout the whole season then he is a steal. If not we have Quinn as an insurance. As I scan the league and see all the teams with garbage at QB I’m inclined to keep the surplus…

  • RockKing

    I think you missed my point. I’m inclined to keep DA as well, but the Browns don’t have to give him a 3 year deal to do so. It all depends on how much money the deal is for, but if DA gets anywhere near the kind of money he’s asking for over 3 years, this deal could end up being a disaster. Why take the risk? Tender him and be done with it.