Is Tommy Kelly Really Overpaid?

It's been a year now, and ever since the Oakland Raiders signed Tommy Kelly's new contract, some Raider fans have been moaning their guts out about how much the Raiders overpaid their defensive tackle.

Kelly's contract gets lumped into the extravagant and ineffective spending spree that Al Davis went on last spring. Fans and media routinely equate Kelly's deal with the admittedly horrible deals for Javon Walker and DeAngelo Hall.

This is not fair to Kelly or the Raiders. True, Tommy Kelly got a huge contract, the most ever for a defensive lineman the day he signed. Judging by the reaction the day after he signed, you'd think it was the last contract any DT would ever get.

As it turned out, Kelly's deal became the second biggest a month later, and by the time the season started it was third at best. If you want to compare the terms and strategies and keep making arguments that have been going on all year, knock yourself out.  

But the point is that Kelly played at a relatively high level all year. He didn't wash out because he is crazy (Walker) or just completely SUCKED (Hall). I equate Kelly's deal and play last year more with Gibril Wilson's. 

Wilson also received a huge contract last year, compared to others at his position around the league. He played well all year, if not outstanding. But you almost never get him lumped in with Walker, Hall, and Kelly in terms of bad deals for the Raiders.

I can go along with the expectation for Tommy Kelly to put up the third best numbers because he started the season with the third best deal, to a point. Al Davis said he was disappointed with Kelly's play, and he has every right to be; he wrote the check. For anybody not named Al Davis, I don't understand what all the griping is about.

Let's look at the numbers.

Here we have the top 10 defensive tackles, and Glenn Dorsey, for 2008, as ranked on NFL.com by number of tackles, including sacks and contract terms. 

I can hear you hair splitters now, spluttering about how you can't measure a tackle's performance based only on tackles (isn't that what tackles do?). Whatever. These measurables are good enough for the league; they're good enough for me. 

I measure the contracts against each other by the guaranteed money and years it can be spread out over, as everyone knows the total numbers are inflated during negotiations.

Tommy Kelly tied for sixth overall in tackles and second overall in sacks among his position group. He has the third most guaranteed money on this list, and that's if you don't adjust for the $16M Kevin Williams got two years before, in 2006.

I look at these numbers and ask myself, is Tommy Kelly a bargain? No, that would be Vince Wilfork, who is playing his fifth year (2009) on a six-year contract for $800k. For new contracts, it would be Kyle Williams for the Bills or Domata Peko for the Bengals. 

Is he a bust? No, last year that would be Glenn Dorsey, who I gleefully add is looking for a position in the Chiefs' new 3-4 defense this year. 

Is he Shaun Rogers? No, Shaun Rogers played in a class all by himself last year.

Now here's the intriguing part. Is Tommy Kelly Albert Haynesworth? 

According to the numbers, Kelly's better, but so was Tony Brown, by one tackle, who played next to Haynesworth on the Titans line. But considering the numbers Brown and Haynesworth put up together, no wonder the Titans were No. 1 against the run.

And looks who's tied with Kelly—Rocky Bernard. Tommy Kelly played his first year under his new contract at least nearly as well as the top two free agents this year. Are Bernard or Haynesworth going to come cheaper than Kelly did? 

I don't think so.

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?