Ellis & Glover Cap Hit, Adam?

[boysfanindc]

Trying to figure out the benefit of these moves besides potential draft picks, what would the overall picture look like as far as cap hit be if both guys leave via cut or trade.

Allen is the third question.

Are we better of in 06, cap space wise?

[AdamJT13]

Trying to figure out the benefit of these moves besides potential draft picks, what would the overall picture look like as far as cap hit be if both guys leave via cut or trade.

Allen is the third question.

Allen's cap number is $7,558,333. If we cut or trade him before April 1, he will count $4,116,668 against the cap, a savings of $3,441,665.

Glover's cap number is $7.2 million. If we cut or trade him before the first day of the league year, he'll count $1.2 million. If we cut or trade him after that, he'll count $2.7 million.

Ellis' cap number is $3,350,000. If we cut or trade him him before the 15th day of the league year, he'll count $2.4 million. If trade him anytime after that, or if we cut him after that but before June 2, he'll count $2.9 million. If the Collective Bargaining Agreement is extended and we cut him on or after June 2, he'll count $1.1 million in 2006 and another $1.8 million in 2007. (If the CBA isn't extended, it'll be the same on or after June 2 as it would have been before it.)


Are we better of in 06, cap space wise?

We'll probably have just a little less cap room than we did last offseason -- unless we do something with guys such as Allen, Glover, Ellis, Nguyen and Singleton to open up more cap room.

[TheHustler]

We'll probably have just a little less cap room than we did last offseason -- unless we do something with guys such as Allen, Glover, Ellis, Nguyen and Singleton to open up more cap room.

What happens if Nguyen retires as expected? Assuming his contract stays as is.

[AdamJT13]

What happens if Nguyen retires as expected? Assuming his contract stays as is.

Nguyen's cap number is $2,458,333. If he retires before the league year begins, he'll count $666,668, a savings of $1,791,665.

[Hiero]

Nguyen and Glover will give us a good salary cap relief. maybe dat can have a sideline role?

[Portland Fanatic]

Based off of cap money Glover is as good as gone...that's huge. Not sure how we can get rid of Allen....who will replace?

Ellis has a good salary to trade....

I bet we cut Glover, trade Ellis, and keep Allen.

[aikemirv]

I was for cutting Allen, but his cap number difference if cut really does not justify doing that.

I think Portland has it just about right and hopefully we take that money from Glover and get Hutchinson or Bently.

[Verdict]

With the cap numbers on Allen and Glover I think both of them get restructured or cut. I'd like to see us keep both of them actually, but not with those kind of cap numbers. I really think Ellis' deal is cap friendly making him ripe for trading. Dat's cap savings was something I didnt expect.

[AbeBeta]

Glover's cap number is $7.2 million. If we cut or trade him before the first day of the league year, he'll count $1.2 million. If we cut or trade him after that, he'll count $2.7 million.


Interesting -- if we think we can get a 3 or 4 for Glover, is it worth the 1.5 mill of cap space?

[GoCowboysGo]

Allen's cap number is $7,558,333. If we cut or trade him before April 1, he will count $4,116,668 against the cap, a savings of $3,441,665.

Allen is GONE!

His cap number if tooooo large to accept considering the number of missed blocks he had.

Hard to believe that he made the pro-bowl this year, although I know it's never really about substance to make the pro-bowl anyway.

[yesfan]

Maybe they can get back that #4 pick

[Portland Fanatic]

Interesting -- if we think we can get a 3 or 4 for Glover, is it worth the 1.5 mill of cap space?


Man it would be nice to trade Glover for a top notch young FS...much needed postion on this team and considering he may not get more then a 3rd...just a wild thought.

[AbeBeta]

I was for cutting Allen, but his cap number difference if cut really does not justify doing that.


How so? we save nearly 3.5 million. Cap savings is what is important here -- not the dead money

[Hiero]

How so? we save nearly 3.5 million. Cap savings is what is important here -- not the dead money
save 3.5 million, and create another hole on our porous oline. Allen isnt the same old allen, but he's better than anything else we have. If Peterman could ever get out there and prove something it may be a different story.

[AbeBeta]

save 3.5 million, and create another hole on our porous oline. Allen isnt the same old allen, but he's better than anything else we have. If Peterman could ever get out there and prove something it may be a different story.

3.5 million would be most of the cap hit for a good FA interior lineman.

Allen may have another year left in him but I didn't see anything this year that suggests that he has anything left.

And don't rule out Peterman -- I think people assume that since he didn't get snaps at LG that he sucks -- that may not be the case.

[playit12]

Ok.... lots of more information needed before I make this decision...

First... Even though you may only save 1 million by cutting a guy making 7 million, it might still be a good decision. You need to look at the life of the contract and plan ahead a little.

How many more years is LA under contract? How many years is his bonus still prorated and what is the amount per year? What is his base salary next year and subsequent years.

Larry Allen only had two more years under his contract. He is scheduled to make base salaries of 3.5 million next year and 2.5 million in 2007 (the last year of his contract). All the additional money counting against the cap for LA is due to either his prorated bonus or various types of Bonuses. Assuming for the moment that we don't owe him any bonuses, then we will be paying LA the same amount of money against the cap (over bases salary) if we cut him or let him play out his contract. In that instance, you need to look at just what you will be "additionally" paying Larry in his base salary over the next two yearsby keeping him on the team. Considering his level of play, I think 3.5 million and 2.5 million might not be that unreasonable. Of course, this is assuming no roster bonuses... which Adam can hopefully correct me on.

All cap hits and savings must be viewed in light of the cost of replacement for that player and the total cost of the alternative (not cutting or trading the player). Often times cutting highly paid players amounts to "rebuilding" a team, where the team will take large amounts of dead money in the short term (one or two years) in order to alleviate that cap space in the longer term. I don't think we are at a rebuilding stage over the next two years... so I think we have to consider that as well.

We could cut all three guys, but I don't think we could replace all three by way of Free Agency without taking up most of our cap room. Room we might need next year for other unforseen problems.

[playit12]

One more thing... I have seen projections for the cap increase over the next year to be much more than in previous years... If that happens you can expect drastic inflation on the cost of Free Agents. Don't expect to be able to find guys for the same price that you found them last year.

[MrPhil]

What are the chances of LA accepting a pay cut?

Assuming Dat retires and we get rid of Glover and Ellis, we are looking at what? $10M+ in cap savings before looking at LA? That is a good chunk of change.......

[wileedog]

3.5 million would be most of the cap hit for a good FA interior lineman.

Allen may have another year left in him but I didn't see anything this year that suggests that he has anything left.

And don't rule out Peterman -- I think people assume that since he didn't get snaps at LG that he sucks -- that may not be the case.

Parcell's comment on Peterman was that he is "one dimensional" - meaning he's had problems picking up other positions along the line.

That doesn't necessarily translate that he is a bad LG, just that he couldn't be moved to OT where he was needed.

The question will come down to who is available. $3.5M can certainly buy you a suitable replacement to the current Larry Allen, but is there one out there? Or do we use a high round pick on an OG and coun't on him and Peterman, using the cap savings to shore up FS or LB, or even on a vet RT?

The last concern IMO is the very good criticsm that I believe S. Spadowski brought up. Our line right now is a little schizophrenic. We have 'smaller', more agile guys like Johnson, Rivera and Peterman, as well as big, more immobile guys like Allen, Gurode and Pettiti. The combination isn't working well, as you can see every time we try to run one of those train-wreck screen plays - some guys are getting where they are supposed to be, and some guys aren't, and it only takes one not getting there to blow the play up.

Bill usually opts for a more athletic line. Removing LA from the equation would be one step towards creating a better functioning O-line, even if there is a slight decrease in talent (assuming LA has more left than I think he does, even).

Gonna be interesting to see how this plays out.

[playit12]

The last concern IMO is the very good criticsm that I believe S. Spadowski brought up. Our line right now is a little schizophrenic. We have 'smaller', more agile guys like Johnson, Rivera and Peterman, as well as big, more immobile guys like Allen, Gurode and Pettiti. The combination isn't working well, as you can see every time we try to run one of those train-wreck screen plays - some guys are getting where they are supposed to be, and some guys aren't, and it only takes one not getting there to blow the play up.

Bill usually opts for a more athletic line. Removing LA from the equation would be one step towards creating a better functioning O-line, even if there is a slight decrease in talent (assuming LA has more left than I think he does, even).

Gonna be interesting to see how this plays out.

One of the most accurate assessments of our Line I've heard recently.

I'd love to see our Front office just make a decesion on our line and start to work towards it. This mix and matching strong and slow with mobile and weak is a disaster.

Considering the pieces we have... I'd go with a big line.

On the big side we have book ends (FA, TT and RP)
Guard - LA
Center - AG

On the small side we have
Guard - MR
Center - AJ

I don't know where to put Peterman just yet. He's not the type of large guard I'd want, but he's not small either.

I'd draft one of the huge mawling gaurds (USC's Taitusi for instance) and let him either replace allen or Rivera. I'd live with the rotation at center we had this year and let both young players get better. I'd also work on making peterman be a backup on both sides.

I think Rob will get stronger in the off season and help solve our problem at RT for the time being. Either way, you can always afford to help one lineman. No team can afford 5 pro-bowl lineman.

This would really help to give our team an identity on offense.

[Eskimo]

$7.2M of cap room is way too much for a backup NT who has gotten old and lost much of his ability as a pass rusher. We need to groom Fergy's replacement at NT and can use the roster spot created by Glover's dismissal. I doubt we can get anything of value for him in a trade this year due to his large salary, age and decline in production.

We can easily find an interior OL who better fits our scheme with the $3.5M freed up by letting LA go. His inability to make blocks in space is a large factor in our ability to establish a running game.

Ellis' cap figure is reasonable for a good situational pass rusher for the nickel. I would try and keep him. He was by far our best pass rusher this year and should be good for another couple of years in that role. BP needs to mend some fences this offseason with him. If he can't, he should at least try to pry a 3rd rounder from someone because Ellis is a quality 4-3 DE who gets 7-9 sacks/year and plays the run well - those players don't grow on trees, especially not for $3M/year.

[Bob Sacamano]

Ellis' cap figure is reasonable for a good situational pass rusher for the nickel.

those are also the very reasons why we should trade Ellis, reasonable contract and he has something left, a 3rd, or even a 4th, for your situational pass rusher in the nickel is a heck of a bargain

[wileedog]

Considering the pieces we have... I'd go with a big line.

On the big side we have book ends (FA, TT and RP)
Guard - LA
Center - AG

On the small side we have
Guard - MR
Center - AJ



I don't disagree with you, but just to play Devil's advocate the issue I have is that at this point all of the "big" pieces we have are unreliable.

Allen may survive this season, but certainly not next year, and his performance just keeps regressing. Flo had one good year after signing the contract in 2003, but was very inconsistent in 2004 and looked about the same in 2005 before getting hurt. We might be talking about his contract and its value soon too. Gurode has always been a mystery - this guy looks like he should be so much better than he is, yet somehow the pieces never add up. I wouldn't at all be shocked if Bill decided to cut bait with him this year.

Pettiti will certainly improve with a year of strength training, but how much? He's got a long way to go.

On the 'small' side Al was solid last year - don't know what happened to him this year. Perhaps a 'sophmore slump' of some kind. I think he can still be better than he was this year. Rivera will probably be better with a stronger back, and Peterman is still young untapped potential.

I don't see a compelling reason to go 'big' considering that the two best 'big' guys we have may be gone in a year or two, another may not make it back this offseason, and the last is a 6th round pick. That being said, the small guys are certainly full of question marks as well. Its almost a coin flip at this point.

Either way, agreed they should pick man or zone/trap blocking and stick with it, and draft/sign accordingly. Most of all I'd like to see a better O-line coach brought in (Tice?) and draft/sign along his philosophies instead of just throwing stuff at the wall and hoping it sticks.

[jksmith269]

Interesting -- if we think we can get a 3 or 4 for Glover, is it worth the 1.5 mill of cap space?
According to Adams numbers it'd be a savings of 6 million to trade or cut him.

[playit12]

I don't disagree with you, but just to play Devil's advocate the issue I have is that at this point all of the "big" pieces we have are unreliable.

Allen may survive this season, but certainly not next year, and his performance just keeps regressing. Flo had one good year after signing the contract in 2003, but was very inconsistent in 2004 and looked about the same in 2005 before getting hurt. We might be talking about his contract and its value soon too. Gurode has always been a mystery - this guy looks like he should be so much better than he is, yet somehow the pieces never add up. I wouldn't at all be shocked if Bill decided to cut bait with him this year.

Pettiti will certainly improve with a year of strength training, but how much? He's got a long way to go.

On the 'small' side Al was solid last year - don't know what happened to him this year. Perhaps a 'sophmore slump' of some kind. I think he can still be better than he was this year. Rivera will probably be better with a stronger back, and Peterman is still young untapped potential.

I don't see a compelling reason to go 'big' considering that the two best 'big' guys we have may be gone in a year or two, another may not make it back this offseason, and the last is a 6th round pick. That being said, the small guys are certainly full of question marks as well. Its almost a coin flip at this point.

Either way, agreed they should pick man or zone/trap blocking and stick with it, and draft/sign accordingly. Most of all I'd like to see a better O-line coach brought in (Tice?) and draft/sign along his philosophies instead of just throwing stuff at the wall and hoping it sticks.

Even when inconsistent I still think that FA is the best lineman on our Team. LT is an extremely hard position to fill with anyone that is even average. Just look how many times this year Walter Jones only looked decent if you need further proof. We are lucky to have Flozell.

I think Larry is on the downward slide, and I mentioned drafting a replacement, but we don't have anyone on roster right now that I'd put in there. Last year we got one of the supposed best FAs available at Guard, and I don't think he's been an improvement over Larry? So really you are talking about drafting someone there too. You can only replace so many guys at once.

Al has been consistent both years in my opinion... I just feel teams have discovered his weaknesses at this point. His upside seems to be the most limited of our linemen. Rivera should get better, I just don't know if he's a good fit.

Mostly I see it as this... Our Big guys have much more potential than our small guys. Also it would be just too costly to replace our Big Guys for Small guys, while we could certainly replace our small guys at this point.

[AdamJT13]

According to Adams numbers it'd be a savings of 6 million to trade or cut him.

I think he meant the difference between taking a $1.2 million hit by getting rid of him before the league year begins or holding onto him for a while and trading him but taking a $2.7 million hit.

I'm not positive, but I don't think we'll be able to trade him without paying his $1.5 million roster bonus first, since it's due on the first day of the league year, and that's usually the first day of the trading period.

[AbeBeta]

I think he meant the difference between taking a $1.2 million hit by getting rid of him before the league year begins or holding onto him for a while and trading him but taking a $2.7 million hit.

yep -- that's what I was asking.

I think it comes down to what we think the market is for the guy - really you get very little trade action until you get closer to the draft so we'd have to take the extra cap hit if we planned to move him. i can see taking on that dead money if there was a first day pick (or even a high 4th) involved.

[Eskimo]

yep -- that's what I was asking.

I think it comes down to what we think the market is for the guy - really you get very little trade action until you get closer to the draft so we'd have to take the extra cap hit if we planned to move him. i can see taking on that dead money if there was a first day pick (or even a high 4th) involved.

If we wanted to move Glover we should have done it last offseason. His level of play tailed off pretty significantly this year which is going to be a red flag for any team interested in him. His salary is also quite high and he is only under contract for one more year.

I suspect he will be cut or there will be a renegotiation before the season starts.

[AdamJT13]

If we wanted to move Glover we should have done it last offseason. His level of play tailed off pretty significantly this year which is going to be a red flag for any team interested in him. His salary is also quite high and he is only under contract for one more year.

I suspect he will be cut or there will be a renegotiation before the season starts.

If we did trade him, his new almost certainly would renegotiate. We'd probably even let them discuss a new contract before the trade.

[playit12]

If we did trade him, his new almost certainly would renegotiate. We'd probably even let them discuss a new contract before the trade.

That would probably be a condition of the trade. That isn't all that uncommon as I recall with older players entering into the high base salary years of their contracts.

Of course it would really help if they have a new CBA by then.

Adam, do you know if future bonuses are transfered with the contract, or is it just base salaries?

[Cheap Shot Artist]

Not sure how we can get rid of Allen....who will replace?




Toniu Fonoti UFA Vikings

[junk]

The last concern IMO is the very good criticsm that I believe S. Spadowski brought up. Our line right now is a little schizophrenic. We have 'smaller', more agile guys like Johnson, Rivera and Peterman, as well as big, more immobile guys like Allen, Gurode and Pettiti. The combination isn't working well, as you can see every time we try to run one of those train-wreck screen plays - some guys are getting where they are supposed to be, and some guys aren't, and it only takes one not getting there to blow the play up.

Bill usually opts for a more athletic line. Removing LA from the equation would be one step towards creating a better functioning O-line, even if there is a slight decrease in talent (assuming LA has more left than I think he does, even).

Gonna be interesting to see how this plays out.

Looking at BP's past, I'd agree with the comment on a more athletic line except for one thing....explain Peterman.

[AdamJT13]

Adam, do you know if future bonuses are transfered with the contract, or is it just base salaries?

The new team assumes the entire contract, including future bonuses. For example, if we trade Ellis on the first day of the league year, his new team will owe him a $500,000 roster bonus 15 days later.

[junk]

If we did trade him, his new almost certainly would renegotiate. We'd probably even let them discuss a new contract before the trade.

So, Adam, refresh my memory. How would the cap be affected if Dallas decided to renegotiate?

They are still on the hook for the signing bonus I would suspect. But could they sign a new deal with lower salaries replacing higher ones.

Take Glover as an example. He is still due to count the remainder of his signing bonus, but could the team reduce his 2006 salary without much of an adverse affect on future cap years?

[AdamJT13]

So, Adam, refresh my memory. How would the cap be affected if Dallas decided to renegotiate?

They are still on the hook for the signing bonus I would suspect. But could they sign a new deal with lower salaries replacing higher ones.

Take Glover as an example. He is still due to count the remainder of his signing bonus, but could the team reduce his 2006 salary without much of an adverse affect on future cap years?

Glover isn't signed for future years, so any pay cut he took would just reduce his cap number for this season anyway. But no, if you simply renegotiate base salaries, it doesn't change how the bonuses are handled.

[junk]

Glover isn't signed for future years, so any pay cut he took would just reduce his cap number for this season anyway. But no, if you simply renegotiate base salaries, it doesn't change how the bonuses are handled.

So, if he renegotiated, he'd still be due $1.2 million in bonus money this year, plus whatever his new salary would be, plus any additional "new" bonus money?

Thanks.

[Eskimo]

If we did trade him, his new almost certainly would renegotiate. We'd probably even let them discuss a new contract before the trade.

Isn't part of the problem that his bonus is due to be paid on the first day of the new football calendar? That doesn't leave much time to discuss trading him or working out a new contract with the new team.

[AdamJT13]

Isn't part of the problem that his bonus is due to be paid on the first day of the new football calendar? That doesn't leave much time to discuss trading him or working out a new contract with the new team.

Right, that's why it was asked whether holding onto him in order to trade him later was worth an extra $1.5 million against the cap. Would you rather take a $1.2 million hit to release him or take a $2.7 million hit to trade him for a third-round pick?

[AdamJT13]

So, if he renegotiated, he'd still be due $1.2 million in bonus money this year, plus whatever his new salary would be, plus any additional "new" bonus money?

Right if we just renegotiated his contract to keep him, we'd still take that $1.2 million cap charge for his previous signing bonus. Plus anything new (salary, bonus, etc.).

[Eskimo]

Right, that's why it was asked whether holding onto him in order to trade him later was worth an extra $1.5 million against the cap. Would you rather take a $1.2 million hit to release him or take a $2.7 million hit to trade him for a third-round pick?

I think the problem is that it is a gamble as there may very well be no team that is interested in giving us picks for Glover at this stage of his career knowing that we will likely release him if we can't work out a deal.

In general, the market tends not to be favourable for 32 year old DTs. I would be shocked if we got a 3rd rounder. I'd consider us lucky to get a 5th rounder for Glover.

However, if a hypothetical deal exists for a 3rd rounder, I would take the cap hit for the pick.

[neosapien23]

Right, that's why it was asked whether holding onto him in order to trade him later was worth an extra $1.5 million against the cap. Would you rather take a $1.2 million hit to release him or take a $2.7 million hit to trade him for a third-round pick?

I'd take the cap hit. We cannot let Glover play for a division rival. Same with Ellis.