What Should the 49ers do With Pending Free Agent Arik Armstead?

With the offseason now in full swing, every organization has a lot of decisions to make and the most difficult one for the San Francisco 49ers is what to do with Arik Armstead.

After finishing the year one win shy of the organization’s ultimate goal, the San Francisco 49ers now shift their focus to how the team can get back to the Super Bowl and of course, finish the job. 

The offseason is here and the first step in this long seven-month process is to determine who is staying and who is going. What to do with defensive end Arik Armstead will be at the forefront of general manager John Lynch and head coach Kyle Shanahan’s minds.

A year ago, this decision seemed like an easy one, wish him the best and let Armstead walk. However, the Sacramento native put together a career year where he led the team in sacks with 10 and finished with the second-most tackles for loss with 13.5. Now, the 49ers’ decision-makers have run into the dilemma of how much weight to put into a player’s performance during a contract year.

Is Armstead’s play in 2019 a sign that he has turned the corner and adjusted to the NFL? Or was this season a fluke and the first four years of his career, where he never accumulated more than three sacks in one season, more indicative of who he is as a pro?

Lynch and Shanahan essentially have three options when deciding on the former first-round pick’s future with the team: the franchise tag, agree to a long-term contract or let him walk. Below is a look at the pros and cons of each.

Franchise Tag

Slapping the franchise tag on a player is always a tricky situation. Some guys don’t like to and refuse to play on the one-year contract - see the Le’Veon Bell situation in 2018 - and the team still has to shell out a lot of cash. Per OverTheCap, going this route would mean San Francisco has to pay Armstead about $19 million for the year, a nice pay bump for a guy who made about $9 million this past year.

From the organization’s perspective, this seems like a pretty good idea. Give the defender a lot of money to keep him happy and buy another year to see if he can replicate his efforts. If he doesn’t, there are no long-term or lingering effects because of the short contract.

However, it’s not that simple. San Francisco projects to have about $13 million in cap space so right of the back, the team would have to cut a few players to stay under the salary cap. Even if the team was already planning on getting rid of some dead weight, tagging Armstead would significantly handcuff the 49ers when it comes to acquiring free agents.

Then there is also the issue of the precedent that is set. Hypothetically, say the Oregon product puts together the exact same season in 2020 as he did in 2019. San Francisco’s negotiation leverage will be diminished next offseason because they’ve already agreed to pay him a top-five salary for his position, and they’ll essentially just delay this year’s decision to next year. If he continues to improve, the decision to keep him might be easier, but it will be a lot harder to argue that he’s not worth a top-tier contract.

Armstead did report that he would be open to the franchise tag, so the organization shouldn’t have to worry about running into the Bell situation mentioned above. Obviously, that’s positive for the Red and Gold, but his willingness to play on the one-year deal only eliminates one of the many issues that come with going this route.

Long-term Contract Offer

In a way, agreeing to a long-term contract is a win-win for both sides. For the player, he gets paid an amount he feels is fair and gets financial security for a handful of years. For the organization, it locks up a good player for a significant amount of time and potentially saves some money and cap space because there is no requirement to give him a top-five salary.

It seems like a clear-cut decision, right? Wrong.

As previously mentioned, there is an issue of whether or not Armstead’s play in 2019 is sustainable. Handing out big, lengthy contracts to players who thrive during contract years and don’t produce during the other three or four seasons are how good teams head in the wrong direction quickly. Not only is the return on investment bad, but also the organization’s cap situation can become a nightmare.

If Armstead is given a long-term deal, then bringing back a player like DeForest Buckner, whose contract expires after the 2020 season, will be a lot more difficult. Between those two, the latter has been much more consistent and arguably, is more deserving of this type of contract. Also, ensuring there is enough room for defensive rookie of the year Nick Bosa needs to be in the back of Lynch’s mind and it would be nearly impossible to keep all three guys.

Granted, the 49ers could front-load Armstead’s new contract to give the organization a potential out when Bosa’s rookie deal is up. However, agents and players typically like to spread out the amount of guaranteed money throughout the life of the contract to prevent that exact situation from happening. In other words, it would be hard to get the soon-to-be free-agent to agree to that type of contract.

At the end of the day, a long-term contract seems like a high-risk, low-reward option for San Francisco.

Let him walk

The simplest solution to this problem would be for the 49ers and Armstead to say their goodbyes and part ways. He gets a chance to land a big contract with another team, and the organization moves on and begins the search to find his replacement.

For San Francisco, the issue here is the defensive lineman was a key contributor to its top-ranked defense and replacing him will be no easy task. As the old cliche goes: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” and getting rid of a player who was a big factor during the team’s Super Bowl run might not be the wisest idea.

If Armstead goes to another team and continues to trend upwards, there will certainly be a lot of regret in the building. Then again, the other way around can come with the same amount of disappointment and is extremely more expensive. It’s all a matter of risk and which situation the organization’s decision-makers will feel most comfortable with if things go south.

My Take

Of course, I’m not Lynch nor Shanahan and by all means, this is not meant to be a prediction of what will unfold and is simply my opinion on the matter.

If I’m calling the shots, I’d let Arik Armstead walk.

The franchise tag is far too expensive for what he’s worth, in my opinion, and will prohibit the team’s ability to address other areas of need in free agency. San Francisco picks 31st overall in the draft, and if the team wants to add an impact starter to finally accomplish the quest for six, a veteran will fit that role much better than a near second-round pick. Unless Lynch can work some sort of salary cap magic, the franchise tag is not feasible.

As mentioned above, a long-term contract seems like a low-risk, high-reward option for the organization and personally, I think it’s the worst scenario of the three from the club’s perspective. There are too many other variables in play and the defensive lineman has shown four average to below-average seasons compared to the one really good one.

While the 49ers will be left with a void along the defensive line, I don’t think there will be a very pressing need to replace Armstead. Nick Bosa, DeForest Bucker, and Dee Ford will still be under contract and Sheldon Day showed some flashes down the stretch. 

Ultimately, this is another way spending four out of the last five first-round picks on the defensive line pays off. There is plenty of depth among the unit so there is no need to panic when one guy leaves.