How to create Salary Cap space

[Nightman]

I wish this were common knowledge.

And we only rolled over 8m because we saved 14m on Romo's cap hit last year

The doom and gloom from Romo's contract was never real and he retired at one of the worst possible times..... 3 years into a 6yr/108m extension

 

[big dog cowboy]

And we only rolled over 8m because we saved 14m on Romo's cap hit last year

The doom and gloom from Romo's contract was never real and he retired at one of the worst possible times..... 3 years into a 6yr/108m extension

More knowledge.

 

[Nightman]

The 19.5m stays whether you cut him or not...... it is a sunk cost

You really do save 20m if you cut him......in cash and space .....this year or the next

DEAD MONEY SHOULD NOT BE TIED TO ANY ONE PLAYER........ when someone says CLE is 80m under the cap they don't list the players that were cut or restructured to create the space... it just goes to one pot..... that is the same way to think of Dead Money.....it has no name

Look at Suh with MIA......they have paid him 60m but only charged 37m against the cap... 23m short
They owe him 17m more this year....with 9m in pro-rations his cap hit is 26m
If they cut him they still owe the 23m in dead money......if they take the full hit this year they save 3m against the cap and are out from under completely

But they didn't just save 3m......they saved the full 17m this year and future years when added together......plus 18m next year and 18m the following year...........you only keep Suh if you think he is worth another 17m...... not because of Dead Money......period

• Dead Money is not a boogeyman...... it is simply the receipt for salary cap savings already spent
  
• It shouldn't be attached to any one player any more than rollover is ......no one says they rolled over 10m and 8m comes from Romo and 2m comes from TFred.... the money just spends or carries over
  
• it is not only an interest free loan......it is cash back.......the savings are always forgotten when the bill comes due......but it is years later when the cap is higher...... that is a big net positive by itself...10m in 2013 is more painful than 10m in 2018
  
• If a player is going to 100% play for you that season you should restructure them..... injury history or production is not relevant...... it all goes into one big pot

• the worst thing to do is restructure some contracts some years and not do them other years for other players.... you can't be half pregnant.......once you commit to it stick with it....... DAL left over 30m on the shelf in 2017......that cap space could have been spent on an extra win or two

Everyone complains about Romo's contract and Dead Money but his contract was super team friendly his whole career.....his cap hit was never over 15m his whole career except for 2016..... he was a perennial ATM for cap space .......but even when he retired prematurely he still saved cap space

His 18.9m in Dead Money was spent over 2013-2016 on other players......but even still they saved 14m in 2017 and 20m on 2018 against the cap...... his Dead Money was eradicated by his saved salary...... he was due to count for 53m for 2017-18 and instead he only cost 18.9m

That is why they are 65m under the cap for 2019...... but it doesn't help us this year by waiting...restructure some contracts and borrow some of that 65m this year when we need it... if we create 50m in space this year it will only reduce 2019 from 65m to 55m under the cap...... I can live with that especially since the cap will go another 10m at worst

 

[Hoofbite]

That is the most childish, juvenile and rude thing you have ever said around here and that is saying something

Hey, hey, hold up a second. I've said much worse and on numerous occasions. I know I don't post that much any more but I assure you that calling people out for dabbling in make-believe would have to be pretty low on a list of my transgressions.

Grow up dude and quit being a poop thrower ALL THE TIME...... you literally add nothing else

I challenge you to post something interesting and put your balls on the line for once instead of critiquing everyone else's work

Challenge met. Read the post you replied to.

I "put my balls on the line" every time I post about the salary cap because my posts directly refute what people have taken as Gospel. What risk is there in feeding into unrealistic, unpracticed, best case scenarios? You're an uber-believer amongst believers...that means you're "putting your balls on the line"? Give me a break, you may as well be Jim Jones.

How's this...I'll make it really easy for everyone involved. If anyone can name a single team that maximizes their restructuring every single year like Nightman has suggested, I will never submit another post about the salary cap again. Name any team that goes all out every single year in restructuring and you'll never hear from me again about this issue.

How's that for "putting my balls on the line"?

 

[cern]

Experts are paid for their advice.

 

[Nightman]

Experts are paid for their advice.

So jelly

 

[Nightman]

How's this...I'll make it really easy for everyone involved. If anyone can name a single team that maximizes their restructuring every single year like Nightman has suggested, I will never submit another post about the salary cap again. Name any team that goes all out every single year in restructuring and you'll never hear from me again about this issue.

Nice Strawman

DAL actually did it for several years and so did WAS

Others team don't do it because it takes a ton of cash and aGM that has job security

It is a long-term strategy but @xwalker has shown in the past that it can go on indefinitely at spending 50% cash over cap every year

DAL doesn't do it all the way anymore because SJones has sold JJones on being invisible during FA.... the only way to do this is to pretend they are cap poor because they can never be accused of being cash poor...they still do it, but in drips an drabs..... not all at once

Teams that restructure and pay big signing bonuses need lots of cash...guaranteed contracts have to have the money placed in escrow..... DAL should use their 600m in revenue as a hammer inside of a shield

 

[Nightman]

Hey, hey, hold up a second. I've said much worse and on numerous occasions. I know I don't post that much any more but I assure you that calling people out for dabbling in make-believe would have to be pretty low on a list of my transgressions.

You guys make it so personal

@AdamJT13 changed the entire industry and the way the cap was understood.... he inspired OTC and Spotrac and made cap and comp picks info accessible to all....... he is the reason that many of us at CZ have the knowledge we have..

To belittle that because you disagree is really hurtful ......people put a lot of work into this stuff and to just throw bombs is weak...... I will say you try to refute things on a more factual basis sometimes but the rebuttals just come up short

I wear the tag of Capologist as a tribute to the work that has come before me and I will try to answer any question that any member has about the cap........ so many members want to take cheap shots because of that and that is really petty...... CHANGE MY MIND but don't insult me or I will go Silverback right back at you

There is so much misinformation about DAL and the salary cap and frankly too many members here just perpetuate those lies and seem to do it for fun in spite of being told the truth

 

[Nightman]

@xwalker @Killerinstinct

Suh's release is the perfect example of Xwalker's point

The only number that matters is the base salary when deciding to cut someone

Suh is due 16m and MIA no longer wants to pay him that much....... he has 23m in Dead Money...... MIA is willing to eat all of that this year to avoid paying him 16m+ going forward

They will save 3.9m against the cap this and 12.1m next year = 16m
They will also save another 18m next year when his base salary is gone and another 18m in 2020

The 23m in Dead Money plays no factor in their decision.....there is no better time to cut him when his Dead Money is lower... you are just spending more good money for another year so the optics look better next year ....but it is not real...... the only real thing is spending another 16m for a player you don't want..... the 23m Dead Money stays whether you cut him or keep him...... no difference

 

[xwalker]

@xwalker @Killerinstinct

Suh's release is the perfect example of Xwalker's point

The only number that matters is the base salary when deciding to cut someone

Suh is due 16m and MIA no longer wants to pay him that much....... he has 23m in Dead Money...... MIA is willing to eat all of that this year to avoid paying him 16m+ going forward

They will save 3.9m against the cap this and 12.1m next year = 16m
They will also save another 18m next year when his base salary is gone and another 18m in 2020

The 23m in Dead Money plays no factor in their decision.....there is no better time to cut him when his Dead Money is lower... you are just spending more good money for another year so the optics look better next year ....but it is not real...... the only real thing is spending another 16m for a player you don't want..... the 23m Dead Money stays whether you cut him or keep him...... no difference

Good find.

I should have used a real example instead of the hypothetical Hanna example. I thought an anyone would be able to understand the concept of a hypothetical example but appearently not.

In my example Killerinstinct would have paid Hanna 20M for 2018 because it only impacted the 2018 cap by 500K.

 

[Nightman]

Good find.

I should have used a real example instead of the hypothetical Hanna example. I thought an anyone would be able to understand the concept of a hypothetical example but appearently not.

In my example Killerinstinct would have paid Hanna 20M for 2018 because it only impacted the 2018 cap by 500K.

The idea that teams have to keep throwing good money after bad because of Dead Money is mind bottling

I want to cut Suh right now but since we paid him 60m and only charged him 37m on the cap we might as well pay him another 16m even though that will have zero effect on his Dead Money

We could save 3.9m on the cap this year and completely wipe away any Dead Money in future years but I can't live with the fact a 23m Dead Money charge will appear on the books.....can't live with it even though the moves save 10s of millions in cap space and cash over the next 3 years

 

[Nightman]

How they can create space*
Restructure= R
Cut or Trade= CT*
Extend= E

TSmith...............R.............7.3m
DLaw.................E..............10m
..........................CT............17m
Dez....................R..............10m
..........................CT.............8.5m
..........................E...............8m
TFred................R...............7.4m
SLee.................R...............3m
ZMartin.............E................4m
TCrawford.........R...............3.4m
.........................CT..............1.8m
Witten..............CT...............6.9m
........................R.................3.9m
TWill...............R...................1.8m
.......................CT.................(2.5m)
LCollins............R................1.8m
OScan............CT................1.4m
Mayowa...........CT..............2.7m
Hanna.............CT................2.7m
Beasley...........CT................3.2m
Bailey..............R..................1.6m
........................CT...............3.4m
Heath..............CT................1.6m

*No June 1st cuts and No Rule of 51 savings

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

How they can create space*
Restructure= R
Cut or Trade= CT*
Extend= E

TSmith...............R.............7.3m
DLaw.................E..............10m
..........................CT............17m
Dez....................R..............10m
..........................CT.............8.5m
..........................E...............8m
TFred................R...............7.4m
SLee.................R...............3m
ZMartin.............E................4m
TCrawford.........R...............3.4m
.........................CT..............1.8m
Witten..............CT...............6.9m
........................R.................3.9m
TWill...............R...................1.8m
.......................CT.................(2.5m)
LCollins............R................1.8m
OScan............CT................1.4m
Mayowa...........CT..............2.7m
Hanna.............CT................2.7m
Beasley...........CT................3.2m
Bailey..............R..................1.6m
........................CT...............3.4m
Heath..............CT................1.6m

*No June 1st cuts and No Rule of 51 savings

I agree with you that we can easily make room and without sacrificing the future, but as time keeps going by and free agency inches closer, it is disappointing to see that they really haven't done anything of significance to make room. I guess the thinking is why make the move until you have to.

Yes, cutting Mayowa gave us a little room but there are so many others that could be made. In reality, I don't think there are many on the cut list that are truly candidates to be cut. Heath isn't going anywhere. Beasley isn't either. Bailey and T. Williams also aren't, and of course DLaw isn't. Crawford and Witten are pretty obvious candidates, along with Scandrick. Hanna should be, because if we cut him I don't think he gets picked up anywhere else and could be resigned for vet minimum.

The restructures should be done, especially for Frederick and Collins and the extension of Martin is a given. Get it done.

I would do the following:

Extend Martin - 4m

Restructure Frederick - 7.4m
Restructure Witten - 3.9m (only because I don't see them cutting him)
Restructure Collins - 1.8m

Cut Scandrick - 1.4m
Cut Hanna - 2.7m

These two I would do as needed....Dez and Crawford. I would pay Lawrence the tag and resign him next year if he produces again.

That adds 21m to the coffers, allowing us to make a couple significant moves in order to get better right now!

 

[Nightman]

I agree with you that we can easily make room and without sacrificing the future, but as time keeps going by and free agency inches closer, it is disappointing to see that they really haven't done anything of significance to make room. I guess the thinking is why make the move until you have to.

Yes, cutting Mayowa gave us a little room but there are so many others that could be made. In reality, I don't think there are many on the cut list that are truly candidates to be cut. Heath isn't going anywhere. Beasley isn't either. Bailey and T. Williams also aren't, and of course DLaw isn't. Crawford and Witten are pretty obvious candidates, along with Scandrick. Hanna should be, because if we cut him I don't think he gets picked up anywhere else and could be resigned for vet minimum.

The restructures should be done, especially for Frederick and Collins and the extension of Martin is a given. Get it done.

I would do the following:

Extend Martin - 4m

Restructure Frederick - 7.4m
Restructure Witten - 3.9m (only because I don't see them cutting him)
Restructure Collins - 1.8m

Cut Scandrick - 1.4m
Cut Hanna - 2.7m

These two I would do as needed....Dez and Crawford. I would pay Lawrence the tag and resign him next year if he produces again.

That adds 21m to the coffers, allowing us to make a couple significant moves in order to get better right now!

Good plan

My list is just a MENU ...... it shows how much different moves can save......players listed as CT are cuts or trades, not just cuts......

 

[big dog cowboy]

There is so much misinformation about DAL and the salary cap and frankly too many members here just perpetuate those lies and seem to do it for fun in spite of being told the truth

 

[charron]

No reason to restructure untill you need it. Its not like you get more cap relief doing it today vs tomorrow. The FO has a philosophy and its not about yearly restructuring unless they have to.

I'd restructure wit, lee, tcraw, dez, fred, and smith. Cut/ trade hanna, trade only-byron and beasley. Use the cash to bolster the DL, LB, and if a good safety becomes available we could really boost the back end of this defense.

 

[Nightman]

No reason to restructure untill you need it. Its not like you get more cap relief doing it today vs tomorrow. The FO has a philosophy and its not about yearly restructuring unless they have to.

I'd restructure wit, lee, tcraw, dez, fred, and smith. Cut/ trade hanna, trade only-byron and beasley. Use the cash to bolster the DL, LB, and if a good safety becomes available we could really boost the back end of this defense.

Some FAs won't even call if they think you have no money or you are always going to be cheap

It is better to have it and not use it since you can always rollover the excess

Sometimes time is of the essence and you may not be able to create space in time to sign or trade for a hot player

Also I like your plan a lot

 

[Nightman]

How they can create space*= DAL now 12m under
Restructure= R
Cut or Trade= C/T*
Extend= E

TSmith...............R.............7.3m
DLaw.................E..............10m
..........................C/T............17m
Dez....................R..............10m
..........................C/T.............8.5m
..........................E...............8m
TFred................R...............7.4m
SLee.................R...............3m
ZMartin.............E................4m
TCrawford.........R...............3.4m
.........................C/T..............1.8m
Witten..............C/T...............6.9m
........................R.................3.9m
TWill...............R...................1.8m
.......................C/T.................(2.5m)
LCollins............R................1.8m
OScan............C/T................1.4m
Mayowa...........C/T..............2.7m
Hanna.............C/T................2.7m
Beasley...........C/T................3.2m
Bailey..............R..................1.6m
........................C/T...............3.4m
Heath..............C/T................1.6m

 

[AdamJT13]

I'm sick of seeing self-proclaimed "cap experts" constantly prop up hypotheticals as though people should expect any team to choose to employ them. NO TEAM DOES. PERIOD. I challenge any self-proclaimed "Cap Expert", "Capologist", or "Cap Guru" to name a single team that has managed their cap in the manner that they suggest. {Expletive}, find whatever rock Adam crawled under and see if he can pass this test. I assure you that none of them can, not even Adam.

Why can't they? Because as good as it looks on paper, in practice it's an absolute joke. Consequently, no team has ever maxed out their restructuring on an annual basis. Not a single one.

First of all, I'm not a "self-proclaimed" anything. One of the mods created that title, not me.

Secondly, just because a hypothetical situation has never happened in practice doesn't mean prove or disprove anything. Every person in my neighborhood would save money by paying off their mortgage today. But none of them have done that, so it must not be true, right? Of course not.

As Nightman already mentioned, that argument is nothing but a strawman. The fact remains that cap-wise, there is absolutely no downside to restructuring a contract that is going to be paid either way. How many times it happens or doesn't happen in practice is completely irrelevant.

 

[Nightman]

As Nightman already mentioned, that argument is nothing but a strawman. The fact remains that cap-wise, there is absolutely no downside to restructuring a contract that is going to be paid either way. How many times it happens or doesn't happen in practice is completely irrelevant.

It is amazing how something so basic and sensible is blamed and attacked for all the contract problems in DAL

DAL will restructure or extend a contract a week for the next 5-6 weeks instead of just doing it all at once and everyone will keep believing that we are in cap jail because of Romo