From Bill Barnwell (ESPN)
Terry McLaurin trade request: Should the Commanders pay up?
What's keeping the Commanders and McLaurin from agreeing to a new deal?
Fair value and how age impacts the idea of what NFL players are worth. Teams are paying more attention to aging curves and how risky it can be to make major investments in players as they approach and pass age 30. When there has been a disconnect between a player's value and the moves teams have made in recent years, it has almost always been with well-known veterans who are ending their second contracts and looking for third deals or significant new guarantees as they near 30 years old.
That's where we are with McLaurin, who turns 30 in September. He is heading into the final year of his second contract with the Commanders, a
three-year extension that was designed to get him to a third contract before turning 30. With most of the bonus money for that contract paid out in previous years, he is to make $19.9 million in 2025, $2.8 million of which was already paid in March.
Meanwhile, the Commanders have
made trades this offseason to add Samuel and
Laremy Tunsil to their offense. While the competitor in McLaurin must surely be excited about having talented veterans joining the organization, Peters committed $17.5 million to Samuel and $21.4 million to Tunsil as part of those deals. Tunsil is also likely to earn an extension after the Peters sent significant draft capital to the Texans to acquire the franchise left tackle, one that could come before the Commanders address the McLaurin situation.
might seem like McLaurin will just be this player forever in the same way that Evans has been, but it's only realistic for the Commanders to be concerned about what happens next. Adams was an All-Pro in his first season with the Raiders and then saw his numbers decline.
Julio Jones led the league in receiving yards at 29 and signed a three-year,
$66 million extension in 2019. By the time that extension started, the Falcons had
dealt Jones to the Titans for a second-round pick; after a 1,394-yard season at age-30, he racked up just 1,578 yards over his next four seasons combined before retiring.
Allen Robinson had 1,250 yards with
Mitch Trubisky and
Nick Foles at quarterback in his age-27 season and just 1,059 yards over his next four years combined, which included a significant third contract with the Rams.
I don't expect McLaurin to fall off, but one of the reasons teams are hesitant to hand out significant contracts to wideouts in this age range is the potential for what can sometimes be a very sudden drop-off.
How can the Commanders resolve this without a trade?
If there were a simple solution, both sides would have found it by now. It's usually not difficult for teams and players to overcome a small gap in negotiations, but there could be a difference of $10 million per year between Metcalf's contract and the extensions signed by Sutton and Evans. McLaurin sitting out and eventually missing regular-season games with what has been listed as an ankle injury wouldn't do either side any favors, but Commanders fans know how things can go when a player decides he wants out, with
Trent Williams' absent
2019 season and eventual trade for
third- and fifth-round picks as a painful memory.
If the Commanders are going to get this done without resorting to a trade, there are only a few ways it can play out. What do those look like?
1. The Commanders blink and give McLaurin what he wants. While we don't know the specifics of what he would accept, giving him the four-year, $132 million extension Metcalf signed with the Steelers would likely be enough to get a deal done. Metcalf had $18 million remaining on his pact with the Seahawks, so he got $42 million in new guarantees between 2025 and 2026. The Commanders probably would have to do the same. While I'm sure McLaurin and his camp would like some guarantees into Year 3 of a potential extension, I'm not sure that's realistic.
2. McLaurin blinks and plays out the final year of his deal. He would be in position to become an unrestricted free agent entering his age-31 season, which would be about the same age as Evans and a year older than Ridley when they hit free agency in 2024. Even with a productive year, the best-case scenario for him would likely be something like the contract Adams inked with the Rams a few months ago, which was a two-year,
$44-million pact with one year and $26 million guaranteed. Even with a rise in the salary cap coming again in 2026, it would be a surprise if McLaurin landed more than $25 million per year in free agency entering his age-31 season.
And obviously, there's major downside if McLaurin has a disappointing season. He could get injured. Daniels could get injured, which could impact his numbers. His 13 touchdowns in 2024, an outlier for a player who had averaged five receiving scores annually before 2024, could regress toward his career rates. Or he could just see a smaller target share with the addition of Samuel, giving the Commanders the legitimate second wideout they didn't have in the offense a year ago.
If McLaurin does excel, the Commanders might have to use the franchise tag to keep him around in 2026. At the moment, that projects to come in
around $28.1 million, which would still be below the figures he would likely hope to be guaranteed in 2026 as part of a new deal. That number also matters in negotiations, since it limits what the Commanders would have to pay if they do decide to go year-to-year with him.
3. They compromise on a new contract. The best thing for both sides would be to get a deal done. The Commanders need McLaurin and don't want to essentially waste a year of Daniels' rookie contract without a viable top wideout for him. McLaurin's best chance of getting a meaningful guarantee on a third contract is this offseason, not next. The clock is ticking for both sides.
For that to happen, both sides need to give some on their demands. The Commanders probably aren't going to get McLaurin signed for what the Broncos gave Sutton, which sounds like it's going to be about $41 million over two years, although it could come in higher after we get the exact terms. And McLaurin probably isn't going to get what the Steelers gave Metcalf in terms of actual guaranteed money, which was $60 million over two years.
Splitting the difference between those figures is $50.5 million over the next two seasons. That's just short of two franchise tags, given that the 2025 tag for wideouts is just under $24 million, while the 2026 tag projects to the $28.1 million figure I mentioned. McLaurin has already made $2.8 million from a March roster bonus, so the Commanders would be on the hook for about $49 million more between 2025 and 2026. With him currently set to make a $15.5 million base salary in 2025, they could up that to $20.5 million in 2025 compensation and add $28.5 million in 2026 in what amounts to a de facto franchise tag in advance.
Meanwhile, McLaurin could win the public side of the disagreement by getting a four-year, $136 million extension, topping what Metcalf got in his deal with the Steelers on paper. Most of that money, though, would be non-guaranteed and come after the 2026 season. In return, they would settle for about $52 million in guaranteed money over the next two years, $8 million short of what Metcalf landed from the Steelers. That might not sound ideal, but two franchise tags would be a great outcome for McLaurin given that he is guaranteed only $15.5 million right now.
4. The Commanders sweeten the deal. In the past, teams have pacified players who want new contracts by moving money from future seasons into the current year. When Jones wanted a new deal with three years left to go on his existing pact in 2018, as an example, the Falcons took $2 million out of his 2019 salary and gave it to their star wideout a year in advance while promising him they would agree to terms on a new deal after the season.
Well, McLaurin is in the final year of his existing contract. (While he is technically on the Commanders books next year, that's just for accounting purposes, as his deal voids before the 2026 offseason begins, with $5.6 million in dead money left on Washington's cap.) The Commanders would have to restructure his existing deal to add more money, but if they wanted to do so, they could add, say, $3 million to that $15.5 million base salary, guarantee that whole amount for 2025, and then table the discussion about what happens in 2026 until after the season.
Between the four scenarios I laid out, this is the most likely one. If there really is a significant divide between the two sides on a contract extension, the easiest way for McLaurin to save face and the organization to seem like it is rewarding one of its longest-tenured players and a fan favorite is to throw a little extra money his way. If this happens, the organization will say that it is guaranteeing him $18.5 million, even though he was already going to have $15.5 million of that figure guaranteed when he was on the roster for Week 1, which means it's really just $3 million in new money.
If the two sides just can't find any sort of common ground and McLaurin digs in further, let's talk about the scenario Commanders fans don't want to see ...
What can the Commanders get if they trade McLaurin?
Realistically, I don't think there's a strong chance McLaurin gets traded. There's been no suggestion from the Commanders' side that they're looking to deal him, even after his request. Trading him now would likely result in landing 2026 draft picks, which won't help the Commanders in a season in which they're hoping to compete. And there just aren't many teams with the cap space or cash budget at this point of the offseason to give him the sort of deal he appears to want.
When I put together my recent
trade tiers piece, I didn't have McLaurin landing a first-round pick in a potential deal. Commanders fans might feel like anything short of that would be a major disappointment, but the reality is we just don't see players without multiple All-Pro appearances and/or a viable case as the best player at their position dealt for first-round picks as they approach 30, with quarterbacks as the lone exception.
Timed just before the season, and with the acquiring team either renting McLaurin on a one-year deal or giving him a significant extension, the Commanders would likely be looking at a third-round pick and a potential Day 3 selection if they actually did trade him. The Browns got a third-round pick and a swap of late selections
from the Bills for a 30-year-old
Amari Cooper as a rental last October, and that was during the season, when teams get a little more desperate. I wouldn't be stunned if Washington were able to land a second-round pick, but a first-rounder would be truly shocking.
And of course, if the return is going to be a only third-round pick and a little more, the Commanders aren't really incentivized to deal McLaurin. Even if they don't want to do any sort of long-term contract with him, they're probably better off having him on the roster for one more season while hoping to land a compensatory pick for him in free agency next offseason. Stranger things have happened, though.
The Commanders' star wide receiver wants a new extension -- or a new team. Can they justify paying him? And what could they get if they dealt him?
www.espn.com
 }})
