Bob Sturm: Still mad that Cowboys didn’t pay DeMarco? A look back at ‘insane’ deals Dallas did hand

[dallasdave]

Ok, I wlll ask you the same question, if we cut Free next year, then the total cap hit for 2016 will be 3 million, is this correct ? ,

?

 

[dallasdave]

Hey Jobber let me make sure I got this, if we cut Free next year, then the total cap hit for 2016 will be 3 million.

?

 

[AbeBeta]

Ok, I wlll ask you the same question, if we cut Free next year, then the total cap hit for 2016 will be 3 million, is this correct ? ,

It is correct.

But if we keep him the total cap hit is 5.5 mill.

Cutting Free generates a net cap savings of 2.5 mill. That's 2.5 mill MORE cap space than we would have otherwise.

 

[dallasdave]

It is correct.

But if we keep him the total cap hit is 5.5 mill.

Cutting Free generates a net cap savings of 2.5 mill. That's 2.5 mill MORE cap space than we would have otherwise.

Thank you, Adam used to explain this stuff but he doesn't seem to be around much anymore.

 

[Nightman]

We're not talking (at least we weren't) about the cost efficiency of the product but dead money.

Wouldn't it be better to have a cost efficient product AND no dead money?
There are no instances where dead money is good for the team. Who wants to make mortgage payments on a house that burned down with no insurance on it?

That is one of the most incorrect statements I have ever read about dead money.

Dead money is just salary that was spent but hasn't been accounted for yet.

Dallas has paid Carr 33m and accounted for 20m.

That means they have saved 4m+ a year against the cap.

If they cut him they are just paying off the balance, with ZERO interest.

Whether he is on the team or not isn't relevant.

Haven't you ever paid for a vacation on a 0% credit card? You are still paying for it long after you get home, but got to spread out the payments interest free and didn't tie up a bunch of cash all at once. And since then you have got 3 COLA raises at work.

 

[Nightman]

?

Yes we would owe 3m in dead money. And we are paying 4m this year as dead money on his cap hit.

But we saved cap space on his contact every year he was here, that is how a smart team works the cap.

 

[AbeBeta]

That is one of the most incorrect statements I have ever read about dead money.

Dead money is just salary that was spent but hasn't been accounted for yet.

Dallas has paid Carr 33m and accounted for 20m.

That means they have saved 4m+ a year against the cap.

If they cut him they are just paying off the balance, with ZERO interest.

Whether he is on the team or not isn't relevant.

Haven't you ever paid for a vacation on a 0% credit card? You are still paying for it long after you get home, but got to spread out the payments interest free and didn't tie up a bunch of cash all at once. And since then you have got 3 COLA raises at work.

It is so very true. The analogy is ridiculous - "There are no instances where dead money is good for the team. Who wants to make mortgage payments on a house that burned down with no insurance on it?"

With a rising cap, it means you are basically paying negative interest. Who wants to pay negative interest? Well, pretty much anyone.

The no insurance piece is similarly off - you do have cap space insurance. A correctly structured deal (and this is something we've been doing since the beginning of the cap era) does have insurance - the non-guaranteed base - you can tell exactly how long we project keeping a guy given a poor performance based on where his base outpaces the dead money. With Free his deal is clearly a one year - we've obviously insured ourselves against the dead money.

 

[xwalker]

We're not talking (at least we weren't) about the cost efficiency of the product but dead money.

Wouldn't it be better to have a cost efficient product AND no dead money?

There are no instances where dead money is good for the team. Who wants to make mortgage payments on a house that burned down with no insurance on it?

If you could see into the future you'd, once again, structure the contract to attract and keep the player until you no longer wanted him and have no dead money. And it is possible to pay a player without having dead money.

Again, I don't see you being able to never have any dead money anymore than I expect every draft pick to stick or become a star. But those are your goals.

There was conflation of bonus money and salary vs dead money and now we're throwing in the performance vs costs into the equation.

Did you review my Suh example?

If the Cowboys had Suh for 4 years at a total cost of 20M and he was All-Pro each year, then that is a great contract for the team even if there is dead money at the end.

Whatever reasons caused them to push money forward in his contract was not related to whether or not his contract was a good one.


What if when Payton Manning was a free agent, the Broncos only had 5M of cap space. What if they signed him to a 2 year deal with a 1st year cap hit of 5M and they won the Super Bowl his first year. He then retired and they had a 10M dead money hit in the second year.

They paid Manning 15M in a year when they only had 5M of cap space and won the Super Bowl. They would likely have a cheap young QB that 2nd year so the 10M of dead money would not be a problem.

 

[jobberone]

Dude - you don't need to explain this to me. I fully understand the structure and what counts toward what. What exactly is the point you are trying to make again? That you know the web address for Spotrac?

Man , some of the stuff you are posting here ... Obviously there is no dead money when a guy plays out his deal (if that deal has no fake option years) - what a huge duh statement. The bonus accelerates! Wow, only like small children don't know that.

Taking Free's deal and assuming he gets cut in 2016, please explain to me how it is a problem to have 3 mill in dead money when you clear his base out of the equation, you've saved 1 mill in cap space.

BTW - with Murray's deal, it was actually 4 mill in savings.

4M in savings? You have to post all the details for someone to understand the contract or where you got that figure from. Is it 4M in dead money, cap space or money paid to the player?

He signed a 5 year $40,000,000 contract. There was a $5M signing bonus of which $21M guaranteed with an average annual salary of $8M. He will earn a 1M base salary, a signing bonus of $5M and a roster bonus of $3M. His cap hit is $5M and his dead money is $18M. Dead money will be 13M next year.

From the glorious web $18M was initially guaranteed (SB+ 2015 roster bonus + 2015/16 base + $2M of 2017 base). An additional $3M of 2017 base fully guarantees on the 5th league day of 2017. 2015-18 incentives are makeable at 1250 Rush Yards: $250,000 salary escalator and 1450 Rush Yards: $500,000 salary escalator.

BTW, there is no way we wanted to be saddled with that kind of guaranteed money as well as dead cap for a RB with a history of injuries and one big year. Not IMO.

 

[jobberone]

That is one of the most incorrect statements I have ever read about dead money.

Dead money is just salary that was spent but hasn't been accounted for yet.

Dallas has paid Carr 33m and accounted for 20m.

That means they have saved 4m+ a year against the cap.

If they cut him they are just paying off the balance, with ZERO interest.

Whether he is on the team or not isn't relevant.

Haven't you ever paid for a vacation on a 0% credit card? You are still paying for it long after you get home, but got to spread out the payments interest free and didn't tie up a bunch of cash all at once. And since then you have got 3 COLA raises at work.

Yes it is money not paid for yet still it is calculated per year. And we were talking about cutting players so the dead space is what it is each year. You're taking it out of context and you and some others latch onto one statement in a sea of posts and respond to it ignoring what a poster has said in the entire thread.

Tell you what. Instead of displaying facts I'll just stay out of these debates as it is a total waste of time. Anyone can look at the data, assuming they look at it, and see what it is.

Have a great day.

 

[jobberone]

Did you review my Suh example?

If the Cowboys had Suh for 4 years at a total cost of 20M and he was All-Pro each year, then that is a great contract for the team even if there is dead money at the end.

Whatever reasons caused them to push money forward in his contract was not related to whether or not his contract was a good one.


What if when Payton Manning was a free agent, the Broncos only had 5M of cap space. What if they signed him to a 2 year deal with a 1st year cap hit of 5M and they won the Super Bowl his first year. He then retired and they had a 10M dead money hit in the second year.

They paid Manning 15M in a year when they only had 5M of cap space and won the Super Bowl. They would likely have a cheap young QB that 2nd year so the 10M of dead money would not be a problem.

I read it and responded to you. We are talking two different issues one being cap and other contract issues and the other cost efficiency per contract.

Bowing out now.

 

[xwalker]

I read it and responded to you. We are talking two different issues one being cap and other contract issues and the other cost efficiency per contract.

Bowing out now.

I thought the issue was dead money.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

4M in savings? You have to post all the details for someone to understand the contract or where you got that figure from. Is it 4M in dead money, cap space or money paid to the player?

He signed a 5 year $40,000,000 contract. There was a $5M signing bonus of which $21M guaranteed with an average annual salary of $8M. He will earn a 1M base salary, a signing bonus of $5M and a roster bonus of $3M. His cap hit is $5M and his dead money is $18M. Dead money will be 13M next year.

From the glorious web $18M was initially guaranteed (SB+ 2015 roster bonus + 2015/16 base + $2M of 2017 base). An additional $3M of 2017 base fully guarantees on the 5th league day of 2017. 2015-18 incentives are makeable at 1250 Rush Yards: $250,000 salary escalator and 1450 Rush Yards: $500,000 salary escalator.

BTW, there is no way we wanted to be saddled with that kind of guaranteed money as well as dead cap for a RB with a history of injuries and one big year. Not IMO.

Nicely laid out Jobber.

No matter how you slice it... Murray was given a ridiculous contract.

 

[AbeBeta]

4M in savings? You have to post all the details for someone to understand the contract or where you got that figure from. Is it 4M in dead money, cap space or money paid to the player?

He signed a 5 year $40,000,000 contract. There was a $5M signing bonus of which $21M guaranteed with an average annual salary of $8M. He will earn a 1M base salary, a signing bonus of $5M and a roster bonus of $3M. His cap hit is $5M and his dead money is $18M. Dead money will be 13M next year.

From the glorious web $18M was initially guaranteed (SB+ 2015 roster bonus + 2015/16 base + $2M of 2017 base). An additional $3M of 2017 base fully guarantees on the 5th league day of 2017. 2015-18 incentives are makeable at 1250 Rush Yards: $250,000 salary escalator and 1450 Rush Yards: $500,000 salary escalator.

BTW, there is no way we wanted to be saddled with that kind of guaranteed money as well as dead cap for a RB with a history of injuries and one big year. Not IMO.

Dude - I assumed that you could simply look up those details. They are readily available. 4 mill savings - that's simply your cap hit vs. the dead money. Cap hit is what you pay if a guy is there. Dead money what you pay when he's gone.

The dead money of 13 mill next year is what you would see pretty much with any deal - if you have to cut a guy on his first UFA deal after one year, it is a failure all around. However, if he is cut, 13 mill is not what you need to look at. You may be taking a 13 mill charge but you'd be paying 8 mill in cap charges if he remained. So the hit there should be seen as a net 5 mill loss in cap space. In 2017 they'd actually save 4 mill - again difference between what you get hit with if he stays vs. the dead money.

The escalators are minor - 250k for 1250 yards and 500k for 1450? You'd be happy to give him that if he performed at that level.

That isn't a ridiculous deal in terms of structure - like any deal it is a bet on his performance. If he's the guy he was last year, you'd gladly pay that over the first two years.

 

[AbeBeta]

Nicely laid out Jobber.

No matter how you slice it... Murray was given a ridiculous contract.

Those who don't understand the cap continue to support each other. Nice.

 

[dallasdave]

Yes we would owe 3m in dead money. And we are paying 4m this year as dead money on his cap hit.

But we saved cap space on his contact every year he was here, that is how a smart team works the cap.

I thought Jobbers cap sheet showed 3 million for this years cap hit for Free?

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Those who don't understand the cap continue to support each other. Nice.

Must be the Cowboys don't understand it either because they didn't resign the guy.

 

[dallasdave]

I thought Jobbers cap sheet showed 3 million for this years cap hit for Free?

?

 

[Nightman]

I thought Jobbers cap sheet showed 3 million for this years cap hit for Free?

Free was technically a FA. His old contract dead money hit this year whether we re-signed him or not. That is 4m.

His new contract carries another 3m in cap charges this year, for a total of 7m this year.

 

[Nightman]

Those who don't understand the cap continue to support each other. Nice.

The dead money vs pay as you go argument is a legitimate debate. But to say your side is the only correct way of doing things while ignoring several other people that are pointing out your mistakes is something else.