Slowly but surely we need to get rid of contracts

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Galian Beast, Jan 20, 2013.

  1. cowboyeric8

    cowboyeric8 Chicks dig crutches

    5,436 Messages
    256 Likes Received
    SMH :bang2:
  2. Galian Beast

    Galian Beast Well-Known Member

    12,744 Messages
    4,510 Likes Received
    Tom Brady 2001 Super Bowl Champion

    Defense, 6th in points, 24th in yards
    Rushing, 1793 yards, 15 rushing touchdowns

    2003 super bowl champions

    Defense, 1st in points, 7th in yards
    Rushing, 1607 yards, 9 rushing touchdowns

    2004 super bowl champions
    Defense, 2nd in points, 9th in yards
    Rushing, 2134, 15 touchdowns

    But yeah... it's Romo
  3. Galian Beast

    Galian Beast Well-Known Member

    12,744 Messages
    4,510 Likes Received
    What are Romo's best years?

    2007 - 13-3

    Defense, 13th in points, 9th in yards
    Rushing, 1746, 14 touchdowns

    2009 11-5 +1 playoff win

    Defense, 2nd points, 9th in yards
    Rushing, 2103, 14 touchdowns
  4. SkinsandTerps

    SkinsandTerps Redskins Forever

    7,607 Messages
    110 Likes Received
    Based on the second well as the first...

    You get rid of bury Romo, so get rid of him too.

    The Austin contract was over the top to begin with... you franchise that guy and trade him to the highest bidder (make him prove himself again). He was never as amazing or great as people like to give him credit for. I would guess that most people put him well into the second level of WRs at this point.

    Good thing is that Austin was front loaded.
  5. cowboysgenius

    cowboysgenius New Member

    8 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    I'd like to see a trade for Michael Vick.
  6. Hoofbite

    Hoofbite Well-Known Member

    35,090 Messages
    4,359 Likes Received
    You can't just release Austin, even if his availability is 12 games per season. You won't find a replacement that would have a cap hit less than him who can produce the same amount.

    His number is "friendly" because Dallas took that 17M hit in the uncapped year and they are now taking that 5M hit for this year and next. Even though it is decent now, it would be very good if they hadn't been forced to move his base salary in 2011. If they hadn't restructured last year, his cap number would be incredibly friendly for 2012, 2014 and 2015 and Dallas would be getting very good returns on the cap space allocated to him during that time.

    Without the restructure that year, his cap number for this year would have been effectively 6.1M (penalty included) and his cap number for next season would effectively be 11.7M (penalty included)

    When you look at 2014 and 2015 though, Dallas has increased his cap number to the area where if he misses time, the team is not getting the great value that they could have.

    • Previous cap number in 2014: 5.5M, which is an exception number for a guy of his production and a phenomenal number for a guy of his potential. Consider that Laurent received a contract of 5 years, 32.5M and Miles Austin would have been an absolute steal. Without the restructure, Miles' cap hit would have been almost 2M less than Robinson's
    • Previous cap number in 2015: 6.8M, which is currently very good for a guy of Austin's ability but 3 seasons from now with contracts always going up, it's possible this could have been a great deal, on par with 2015.
    • Current cap number in 2014: 7.0M, which is good but it's likely not going to be viewed as some awesome number unless he explodes. If he plays on par with what he has been I think it's an okay number.
    • Current cap number in 2015: 8.4M, again same deal. Likely won't be considered a "steal" unless he produces big time but in the are of what you would expect it would cost to get that type of production through free agency.

    As it is, Dallas has a little over 4.7M on the books they'd have to account for. Not significantly different than his base this year so cutting him isn't going to get you a guy that can produce like he can, even if they spread the cap hit out.

    There's talk of restructuring him again and I would rather not even though it will likely be a necessity. They might be able to take about 5M off the books for 2013 but it gets spread across the rest of the deal and makes the following years higher.

    Assuming 5M is restructured, his cap hits could fall around.......

    Cap hit in 2014: 8.3M, which is still in the area of what you could expect a cap number to be on average for a free agent of his quality. Not great like it would have been but you aren't seeing it as money down the drain.

    Cap hit in 2015: 9.7M, which is probably at the point at which you start looking at what he actually gives you and how much longer you can expect him to give you that, or even be on the roster for that matter. He'd be 31 and while this number could be in line with what a free agent would average in cap allocation, a free agent gives you a player locked up for more time.

    Cap hit in 2016: 12.6M, which is probably too much for a guy that would be on his last year (assuming no extension) and probably higher than what a free agent of his quality would cost, assuming his play doesn't deteriorate at all. Also, the free agent gives the benefit of working the number way down for that very first year, if you choose.

    This is why I don't like the way Dallas is working the cap. They restructure out of need instead of a desire to operate above normal capacity in terms of free agency. If you don't have to restructure just to get by and you leave that card in your back pocket, you can bust it out during a time when you think a couple of keys players can really help you get further.

    If they restructure again this year and then cut him before 2015, that's 4M of dead money on the books which is little different than what it is now. Something about that just doesn't seem stellar to me. Almost as though the team is increasing the likelihood of carrying dead money by raising the cap hit to the point where they have to contemplate his utility and by guaranteeing some of that money in future years. Essentially, any sort of benefit to be gained by backloading a contract so the first year is very cap friendly is reduced because you're carrying dead money from the guy that your new FA is replacing. Rather than save a good amount by cutting a high priced veteran, you've simply kept your cap hit for that position the same and swapped out your old piece for a new one.

    Perhaps it's just my perception but it just seems like that is how it would play out by restructuring every single year.

    Another thing, planning on restructuring is playing with fire, IMO. Writing contracts that are meant to be restructured later (Carr, for example) is really banking on that player being the guy you think he is for as long you think he will be. It really only takes 1 bad acquisition to really screw you over and put you in a position to either carry an enormous amount of dead weight or suffer through the guy's tenure until a time at which you don't take such a large cap charge for clearing him out.

    Carr's 14M.3 base salary will be restructured. If we assume that they clear 12M (might be able to go to 13M if they want), that adds 2.2M in guaranteed money each year for the remainder of the contract. Heaven forbid he completely turns into Doug Free of the secondary but if he should, Dallas is sitting in the offseason looking at a horrid season for a CB who would have 14.8M of guaranteed money left on his contract. Given that not every player works out, it's really only a matter of time before a Doug Free pops up and thankfully Dallas didn't bet the farm on him or else they'd really be in a pickle right now.

    I don't claim to be a cap guru so my numbers could be off. I've estimated many of them for simplicity's sake and I apologize now for any faults

    As for the thread, if Dallas is looking at guys to get rid of, slowly should not be their plan. They should clear as many as possible as quickly as possible. If a guy isn't in your longterm plans, restructuring him and delaying the cap burden that he will present when he is cut is only compounding the problem. It's like slowly peeling off a bandaid. Prolonging the pain when you could just tear that sucker off, feel a little sharper sting but be done with it in a few seconds.

    The team should really look at every player and decide if they are getting good value. If they aren't they need to assess whether they can get good value from that guy or at least expected value. If they can, restructure. If they can't, it's time to go.

    Doug Free is a prime example. 9M for his cap hit compared to what we just saw is downright awful. I think a rookie could probably play on the level we just saw and was Parnell better or worse? If worse, can he at least get to Doug's level of performance (I can't see any way he couldn't). Cut Free, eat the hit this year and draft a guy to compete with Parnell. Even a 1st round OT and a full proration of the money from Free this year would save money cap space. The year when the dead money comes off the books, now you're saving serious money.

    Restructuring Free only pushes money to the future. You may add as much as like 6M and only 2M would be taken off by having him on the roster. Now next season you have a guy with a cap hit even higher than the ridiculous number it is already at and cutting him results in more dead money carrying over.
  7. Galian Beast

    Galian Beast Well-Known Member

    12,744 Messages
    4,510 Likes Received
    When I said slowly but surely, I really mean over the course of the next year to three years we need to work these contracts off the books.

    The cap penalty only affects us for one more year, so I would say that 2014 is the year you want most of your dead money.

    We have two problems, the first being getting these contracts off the books, and the second is simultaneously resigning young players to second contracts.

    We often wait too long to give players extensions, and then are forced to overpay them. We should be looking to lock up Bryant, Lee, and Carter earlier rather than later. To do this we have to manage their contracts along side the frontloaded dead money.

    This is why it's vital to get as much off the books now, so that we can be competitive in the future. Rely more on first contract players rather than underperforming overpaid veterans.
  8. durrrr

    durrrr Active Member

    721 Messages
    70 Likes Received
  9. Disturbed

    Disturbed A Mere Flesh Wound

    1,451 Messages
    6 Likes Received

    That was great. I was going to say Vick is constantly hurt and not a good QB anymore, etc etc etc. But your response is priceless!!! My hat is off to you sir.:laugh2:
  10. Macnalty

    Macnalty Well-Known Member

    2,553 Messages
    1,000 Likes Received
    I agree with you I just do not like it. The reality is the new defense will not place a high priority on resigning Lee, if you can remember Ken Norton you will understand.
    Thanks for taking this unpopular message to the populace. Emotionally it hurts.
  11. Mansta54

    Mansta54 Well-Known Member

    9,945 Messages
    480 Likes Received
    Nicely done!!!
  12. LatinMind

    LatinMind iPhotoshop

    12,227 Messages
    4,870 Likes Received
    I actually agree with the OP but not the way he looks at it.

    Austin, Ratliff, Free will all be on the hot seat this yr. And i think if either of them stumble this offseason they'll be gone before TC.

    If they see something in younger players i think they'll release them in june. But it would take a big step for them to release Austin.

    I will say i think this is the last yr for Austin and Ratliff in Dallas. They would probably want to release them but they just cant. Next yr their contracts will be easier to cut.

    And i actually agree with somebodys view on Ware in this thread. Right now i would rather have Dallas trade him and get return then keep him. I love Ware and i Loved him before he was a name in his offseason before his draft when most of you were on Merrimans jock. But its time to build and keep building. Fans of their respective teams hated the idea of letting players like Peppers and Williams walk and trading Semoure but the patriots panthers and texans all benefited from it.

    Ware is in his prime so that probably makes it a bad idea, but if a team would offer a big return which he would command i wouldnt cry if it happened. Its all about building. DEs are easier to find in a 4-3 then a passrushing OLB.
  13. ufcrules1

    ufcrules1 Well-Known Member

    9,232 Messages
    3,121 Likes Received
    Excellent post. Hanna really impressed me with the limited play he got. He is very fast, has good hands and it just seems like his play making potential is higher. Reminds me a little of Aaron Hernandez.

    The problem is Jerry is just too loyal to players and has too much of an emotional tie to them. By the time we realize a player is going down hill here, it is simply to late to get anything for that player.

    Ware is a prime example. We could trade him now and easily get a #1 for him but we will instead keep him and he will continue to get injured and not produce as much as he used to. It will get to a point where no team will want him, or if they do, they won't offer much.

    I love some of these guys like Witten and Ware but this is a business and you have to do what is right for the team/organization. The ultimate goal has to be to win a championship.
  14. 1fisher

    1fisher Well-Known Member

    5,777 Messages
    120 Likes Received
    This is going to be the longest offseason in the history of offseasons!

  15. Risen Star

    Risen Star Likes Collector Zone Supporter

    39,033 Messages
    46,935 Likes Received
    The only player there that I was for signing/extending was Ware. The other guys were clearly bad contracts when they were signed.
  16. LatinMind

    LatinMind iPhotoshop

    12,227 Messages
    4,870 Likes Received
    You sign Ware to a new contract and in 2-3 yrs from now fans are crying about how much he costs against the cap. Ware has 4 yrs left on his current contract.
  17. joseephuss

    joseephuss Well-Known Member

    24,496 Messages
    3,106 Likes Received
    The drop off you would get from trading Witten would be huge. It would not be palatable at all.
  18. Galian Beast

    Galian Beast Well-Known Member

    12,744 Messages
    4,510 Likes Received
    Thanks for the support, but I disagree. The MLB is crucial in a tampa 2 defense. Look at Brian Urlacher.

    The Tampa 2 4-3 defense needs a middle linebacker who can drop into coverage, and read and react quickly to the run.

    That is Sean Lee to a tee. Him and Carter are almost certainly the reason we are moving to the tampa 2.
  19. Galian Beast

    Galian Beast Well-Known Member

    12,744 Messages
    4,510 Likes Received
    I just don't think so. I think we can open the offense up without Witten. You might not get as many receptions, but I do think you would get more yards per catch, and potentially more touchdowns.

    I think Witten's production can be supplanted by gains at the wide receiver position as well.

    I'm not particularly in a rush to see Witten traded, but I would suggest that trading him, getting a high quality draft pick, and using the resources spent on him towards enhancing the offensive line would pay dividends.
  20. MartinRamone

    MartinRamone Well-Known Member

    1,470 Messages
    112 Likes Received
    I agree. except Ware.

Share This Page