News: Sign QB to bucks, lose top players

Vtwin

Vtwin

Safety third
Messages
8,109
Reaction score
11,020
CowboysWillRise said:
Looking at sportrac it shows 2 void years. If you average out the remainder into both those years his hit is about 30 million per year. Still a ton of money but not enough to create a Doomsday scenario. As well as when we may release Dak towards the end if there is significant savings post guarantees. Not a cap expert either.

We have a bunch of guys under contract as well as future signings. I'd says it's about the same as most teams; only we have our QB locked up.

Good thing is we have a minimum of probably 3 seasons before we need to move on Parsons and 2 before we move on Diggs. I don't see any other huge signings we need to make before them.
Click to expand...
Lamb is going to come due also.

I fully admit I'm out of my element with the ways of the cap and I need help understanding how shifting dollars from one year to another is always a good thing. Being happy that we are 28 under right now just means that we are going to be unhappy when we are on the books for that 30 when the main recipient of that money might not even be on the roster. I understand the concept and it would be worth it IF the player was legit worth the contract AND it paid off for the team, with success. I'd take the 'pay me later' approach if it meant celebrating success, but paying out later while the window is closing and a retool is necessary is a tough spot to be in.

Killing it in the draft is the only way out.

I'm wide open to being educated on the error of my thinking.
 
gimmesix

gimmesix

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Messages
37,495
Reaction score
34,605
Reid1boys said:
Here is a good article explaining what happens when you give the qb big bucks. We all already know this, so why is everyone so surprised? A couple of things are garbage in the article as it applies to Dallas, but the fallout from Rodgers and mahomes deals is evident.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/how-40...scott-are-losing-the-offseason-001036835.html
Click to expand...

This is a very simplistic idea. The Packers offered Davante Adams the same deal that he got from the Raiders. The Rams signed WR Allen Robinson for virtually the same APY they were paying Robert Woods. They are hosting Bobby Wagner, which would be an expensive signing. The Chiefs signed S Justin Reid to a three-year, $31.5 million deal.

Teams make decisions every year about which free agents are worth paying what they are asking and those decisions rarely seemed to be based on what the quarterback is receiving. It is a value game, and the teams decide whether what the player believes to be his value is what the team thinks he's worth and if they could get better value from another player at his position (plus something in return). Player push for maximum value and the team.

We didn't trade Amari Cooper because we couldn't afford him. We easily could have restructured his deal, opened up $15 million in space and even still signed Gallup if we wanted to. However, Cooper's contract was valued higher than his play suggested it should be and the Joneses believed paying Gallup No. 2 money was a better value than paying Cooper No. 1 money. Remember also that despite Gregory signing with the Broncos, we had matched that deal before he balked because of the contract's void clause.
 
CWR

CWR

Well-Known Member
Messages
23,536
Reaction score
34,258
Vtwin said:
Lamb is going to come due also.

I fully admit I'm out of my element with the ways of the cap and I need help understanding how shifting dollars from one year to another is always a good thing. Being happy that we are 28 under right now just means that we are going to be unhappy when we are on the books for that 30 when the main recipient of that money might not even be on the roster. I understand the concept and it would be worth it IF the player was legit worth the contract AND it paid off for the team, with success. I'd take the 'pay me later' approach if it meant celebrating success, but paying out later while the window is closing and a retool is necessary is a tough spot to be in.

Killing it in the draft is the only way out.

I'm wide open to being educated on the error of my thinking.
Click to expand...

Lamb is a good point. These are hard to figure, technically you get 5 years with a first, but then you have d bags like Zeke who wanna hold out after 3.

So we probably have a minimum of 2 years before Lamb hits us hard. Those are the only 3 guys that come to mind.

Keep in mind the cap is surging up as we speak so the percentages coming off per player already under contract shrinks.

It really is very fluid and would take a lot of time to completely grasp. Although the concept of pushing money out isn't nearly as bad as it seems, because you push it out to a time when more cap is available.

I get your idea of a rebuild, I just don't believe Jerry is willing to do so. He's become very good at keeping us mediocre. It's also why I'd prefer we go all in and if we can't get over the hump so be it. We can then rebuild. Instead he's trying to stretch out mediocrity, hoping it somehow turns to success. Which is probably only coming through another couple off seasons of ridiculously good drafting.
 
gimmesix

gimmesix

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Messages
37,495
Reaction score
34,605
Vtwin said:
Lamb is going to come due also.

I fully admit I'm out of my element with the ways of the cap and I need help understanding how shifting dollars from one year to another is always a good thing. Being happy that we are 28 under right now just means that we are going to be unhappy when we are on the books for that 30 when the main recipient of that money might not even be on the roster. I understand the concept and it would be worth it IF the player was legit worth the contract AND it paid off for the team, with success. I'd take the 'pay me later' approach if it meant celebrating success, but paying out later while the window is closing and a retool is necessary is a tough spot to be in.

Killing it in the draft is the only way out.

I'm wide open to being educated on the error of my thinking.
Click to expand...

Contracts roll because of restructures. That's why teams head into the offseason over the cap and then suddenly they are under the cap. The idea is to keep rolling the money forward, eating bad contracts and dead money when necessary through built in restructures that push money into future years where higher caps and other restructures can eat that money.

What teams like the Cowboys did not understand when the cap was first introduced was how to keep it rolling forward. They eventually slammed up against the cap wall and entered cap hell. They eventually figured out that restructures allowed you to keep spreading out bonuses over the lifetime of the contract. Yes, eventually that builds up dead money, but again, you swallow that up with restructures of other contracts you end up doing.

Using Prescott's contract as an example, he has big base salaries so that we can convert it into bonus and get "cap relief." This year, we reduced his base salary to $1.6 million. Next year, he has a $31 million base and we'll probably reduce it again. It's probable the next year, if he's playing at a high level that they will renegotiate his contract and a lot of that money they pushed forward will be spread out over the lifetime of the new contract. If he's not, then they will cut him, take the hit (which capwise appears that it would be less dead money than his cap hit would have been) and draft a quarterback who would be on a contract with a similar hit to the savings.
 
Kingofholland

Kingofholland

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,887
Reaction score
6,301
All these contracts are workable and all receivers could have been kept. But frankly there was a reason the teams didn't want them. In the case of Hill and Adams it was a little easier to say goodbye based on the compensation behind it.
 
5Stars

5Stars

Here comes the Sun...
Messages
35,744
Reaction score
13,203
Captain-Crash said:
dang ken, settle down. we know you at infatuated with dak. Sheesh, I guess I'll go the library is closing down. l8r. and tone down the infatuation, sheesh let somebody else get some protecting dak posts up.
Click to expand...

How many letters are in Ken's name? How many are in Tad's name? Coincidence? Ken man crushes it!
 
VaqueroTD

VaqueroTD

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,098
Reaction score
16,509
I agree with the article's hint that it's not coincidence that those 3 teams lost their highest paid receiver, but I do want to be a little bit of devil's advocate and point out it's much easier to find a star receiver in the draft than it is a franchise QB.

Our teams is a good example. We already have another guy waiting who beat Amari's numbers last year.

(This doesn't mean Dak is a franchise QB BTW, but he better be soon because he is definitely being paid like one!)
 
VaqueroTD

VaqueroTD

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,098
Reaction score
16,509
Kingofholland said:
All these contracts are workable and all receivers could have been kept. But frankly there was a reason the teams didn't want them. In the case of Hill and Adams it was a little easier to say goodbye based on the compensation behind it.
Click to expand...

Don't know about Adams, but I would be a little nervous giving Hill all that guaranteed money with his domestic abuse track record. Cooper is the ultimate sulker and inconsistent. You're right, they weren't just squeezed out for money alone. When you want to be paid like the best, you're under some intense scrutiny.
 
Flamma

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,016
Reaction score
18,823
CowboysWillRise said:
Looking at sportrac it shows 2 void years. If you average out the remainder into both those years his hit is about 30 million per year. Still a ton of money but not enough to create a Doomsday scenario. As well as when we may release Dak towards the end if there is significant savings post guarantees. Not a cap expert either.

We have a bunch of guys under contract as well as future signings. I'd says it's about the same as most teams; only we have our QB locked up.

Good thing is we have a minimum of probably 3 seasons before we need to move on Parsons and 2 before we move on Diggs. I don't see any other huge signings we need to make before them.
Click to expand...

If you want to piss them off, wait that long. Teams that want to keep their stars sign them to an extension after 3 years, not 4. Otherwise they might be asking for a trade.
 
CWR

CWR

Well-Known Member
Messages
23,536
Reaction score
34,258
Flamma said:
If you want to piss them off, wait that long. Teams that want to keep their stars sign them to an extension after 3 years, not 4. Otherwise they might be asking for a trade.
Click to expand...

Not typically in first round rookies. The team has five years of control. What Zeke did was beyond the norm.
 
Typhus

Typhus

Captain Catfish
Messages
19,732
Reaction score
22,630
Captain-Crash said:
sweet, we know who bought all of those super bowls.

the league had to ruin it with the salary cap, if not jerry would still be buying super bowls. sheesh, he would be a super bowl buying legend.
Click to expand...
Kind of funny when you look back now and how Jerrys' influence has changed the league forever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top