View Single Post
Old 01-13-2013   #63
FuzzyLumpkins
The Boognish
 
FuzzyLumpkins's Avatar
 
Joined:
Jun 2004
Location:
Posts:
13,854
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoofbite View Post
One thing I wanted to mention above but the post got long was the idea of cap "savings". I dunno why but the word "save" just kind of seems a little less appropriate than say, "avoidance".

He must be replaced by someone and presumably if they're wanting the type of play that they expected for him they're going to have to pay for it.

In Free's case, you could probably get equal play from Parnell and just draft a guy to be the backup so I suppose the term "save" is probably as accurate as it gets.

But more generally the term "save" seems a little less applicable. There's threads every year, "how much do we save but cutting...[insert name]" and many times while the player may be underperforming the cost of getting an equal player for a contract more reflective of play would result in additional cap charges when combined with the cut player's accelerated money.

[View Full Quote]
I get what you are saying. In the end you have to pay the piper at some point. If Sportrac is right and that is a big if then we don't have much in terms of dead money next year. Leonard Davis was two years ago and Marion Barber and Terrence Newman counted last year but if you remember the guys we cut were not June 1 designations. We just ate the prorations. Their cap hits are gone.

There are guys we cut this year like McGee and the rookies but its not all that much ie $40k here and there. But we have surprisingly little dead money to begin with. Not like a few years ago where it was $10s of millions.

Eating the prorations last year was huge. We just have a lot guys that had big AAV this year. It really seems to me if I am at all accurate that they prepared for this year and we will be fine if not big players.

Its all based on sportrac and napkin math but that is my take.
“Cynicism is nothing but intellectual cowardice.”
- Henry Rollins

Planning to fail is not the same as planning for failure.
FuzzyLumpkins is offline   Reply With Quote