Martin contract getting closer but not official until contract details are released

[817Gill]

ruptured knee or back coming, its the cowboy way get paid big get hurt never be the same lOL

Don't jinx it man

 

[J12B]

You have already been addressed on that point.

i will add that pointing to his contract is not an argument other than to say some teams have not worked to push costs to future years' books.

You in no way have shown how or why that is beneficial. You have not even shown the reasoning behind that move; although it is amusing how ignorant you were. You really just wave your hands a lot. It's almost as adorable as thinking household finance memes apply in this case.

I was right to figure you wouldn't understand that point about the nature of the NFL labor demand market.

It's called cap management and helps teams in the future so that they can afford to retain talent and bring in new key pieces.

So? There is also June 1 if the proverbial **** hits the fan.

What is obvious is that you had zero clue why they structured that that way.

You want to discuss the deflationary, interest free mechanic of pushing costs to future years or just stay ignorant?

You're the ignorant one. Martin will be in his prime next year or the year after, the cap should correlate that rather than have his highest cap hits later in his career when his play drops off or when injuries could possibly become an issue. Dallas has the cap space now so they may as well just take a bigger hit now rather than spread it out evenly over the years or balloon it up later on to "save".

Again, if you can't see the benefit in that then you are the ignorant one.

 

[ksg811]

SF can get out of the deal after the 2nd year. 13 million in dead money if he is released after this year.

He also only has a cap hit of 20 million in the second year. And its structured for the best interest of both cap management and risk management

Wrong, they can get out after this season with $13.1 million in dead money broken down as 4 years of prorated bonus money at $1.4M a year and $7.5M of guaranteed salary.

Put another way, he was guaranteed $48.7 million at signing. His entire salary this year of $6.2M is guaranteed. $28M of his signing bonus was designated as a roster bonus, which all hits this year. He has an additional $1.4M of his prorated $7M signing bonus. Add it up 28 + 6.2 +1.4 and you have $35.6M of his guarantees on the books for this season. 48.7 - 35.6 = $13.1M remaining after this season. With a $20M cap hit next season, they cut him with $6.9M in cap savings so long as he is cut pre 4/1, when he has another $9.7M in salary guarantee.

I applaud your effort, but your knowledge of the cap isn't where you think it is. There is no interest in the NFL and you actually get more money each year with cap increases, your power of money increases year after year. In this sort of environment, its in your best interest to push expenses into the future, not take them now.

 

[CWR]

So what good players we drafted did we let walk after their rookie contract ? Because like you trying to put it we do this all the time.

And no it is no dilemma. Martin had 5 great years with us. It is not like for example with lawrence were we had to wait for 3 years until he showed something. With Martin we already cashed in exactly the way it should be when you say you wanna build thru the draft. Because that doesnt mean you sign your drafted players to high 2nd contracts. It means your drafted players produce for you in their cheap rookie contracts.

You can always sign players to high 2nd contracts in FA. No need to spend draft picks on them. But spending big bucks is what you are trying to avoid.

Of course decissions are always hard. But in Martins case it shouldnt been even a question to let him walk or trying to trade him. Good guards are easy to find even im the 2nd round. And it need not be an all pro like Martin. Lets watch what conor will do at the left side. If he plays well as a 2nd rounder he will cost us a tenth of what we pay Martin but the quality drop off will be only mininal. We could invest the money in quality depth or other positions where we need better starters.

This is not a question if Martin is a great player or not. He certainly is. This is a question wether you can sustain a small drop off in production and therefore gain alot of resouces.

Kind of like we did with Leary but then that didnt work out so we had to address it with a 2nd round pick.

We've made decisions to walk away from good players before in order to save $$. Demarco comes to mind as well.

I dont think the drop off is as minimal as you believe it to be. Martin is the best in the league and has been all world pretty much since game one.

I understand everyones thoughts on the oppurtunity costs of signing Martin, however I dont agree. We've managed the cap well and have a young, talented team. Some guys are worth retaining. I believe our entire identity is in bludgeoning opposing defenses and controlling the clock. Martin helps tremendously at that.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's called cap management and helps teams in the future so that they can afford to retain talent and bring in new key pieces.


You're the ignorant one. Martin will be in his prime next year or the year after, the cap should correlate that rather than have his highest cap hits later in his career when his play drops off or when injuries could possibly become an issue. Dallas has the cap space now so they may as well just take a bigger hit now rather than spread it out evenly over the years or balloon it up later on to "save".

Again, if you can't see the benefit in that then you are the ignorant one.

A) You are doing the handwaving thing again. You can call it whatever you like. It's still not an argument. I call it ignorance myself.
B) The word you are looking for is correspond not correlate. Also you are wrong. Zack Martin will be 31 at the end of 5 years of that contract. There is no reason to expect he won't make it as opposed to any other player in the NFL. That is where the risk is not you having costs correspond to what you think are his prime years. that is of no consequence.
C) You are still ignorant to the benefits of pushing costs in a deflationary environment.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Kind of like we did with Leary but then that didnt work out so we had to address it with a 2nd round pick.

We've made decisions to walk away from good players before in order to save $$. Demarco comes to mind as well.

I dont think the drop off is as minimal as you believe it to be. Martin is the best in the league and has been all world pretty much since game one.

I understand everyones thoughts on the oppurtunity costs of signing Martin, however I dont agree. We've managed the cap well and have a young, talented team. Some guys are worth retaining. I believe our entire identity is in bludgeoning opposing defenses and controlling the clock. Martin helps tremendously at that.

The Murray decision was wise in retrospect. He still isn't with a team.

We don't pay the Hitchens and Leary's of the world so we can sign the Martin and Fred's of the world. It's the difference between retaining solid starters and all pro talent. It is much easier to replace a solid starter in the draft as opposed to expecting draftees to replace what elite players gave you.

In a microcosm, it is reasonable to expect Williams to play to the level of what Leary provided. It is not reasonable to expect Martin's level of play from him. Much the same with Hitchens and Vander Esch.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

The Murray decision was wise in retrospect. He still isn't with a team.

We don't pay the Hitchens and Leary's of the world so we can sign the Martin and Fred's of the world. It's the difference between retaining solid starters and all pro talent. It is much easier to replace a solid starter in the draft as opposed to expecting draftees to replace what elite players gave you.

In a microcosm, it is reasonable to expect Williams to play to the level of what Leary provided. It is not reasonable to expect Martin's level of play from him. Much the same with Hitchens and Vander Esch.

I agree with that overall. Though, I don't know if it's been officially determined if Williams will be playing OT or OG. I suppose it depends on where they want Collins to play. I'm still of the opinion that Collins is better at guard, which would make Williams the RT.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I agree with that overall. Though, I don't know if it's been officially determined if Williams will be playing OT or OG. I suppose it depends on where they want Collins to play. I'm still of the opinion that Collins is better at guard, which would make Williams the RT.

He's been practicing at OG and they announced him as an OG when they drafted him. Everything is subject to change to be fair though.

Even in that case you can reasonably expect LC to play to the level of Leary too with Williams replacing Free. Same principle applies.

 

[J12B]

A) You are doing the handwaving thing again. You can call it whatever you like. It's still not an argument. I call it ignorance myself.
B) The word you are looking for is correspond not correlate. Also you are wrong. Zack Martin will be 31 at the end of 5 years of that contract. There is no reason to expect he won't make it as opposed to any other player in the NFL. That is where the risk is not you having costs correspond to what you think are his prime years. that is of no consequence.
C) You are still ignorant to the benefits of pushing costs in a deflationary environment.

No he probably will make it, that's not the argument. But in your scenario he will be having a cap hit at 17 or 18 million in year 4 or 5. My scenario is that he'll have 12 or 13 by then, so Dallas will have even more cap space later on when the cap does rise.

Btw, your Mom called and said she'd be leaving your lunch money at the principal's office

 

[CWR]

The Murray decision was wise in retrospect. He still isn't with a team.

We don't pay the Hitchens and Leary's of the world so we can sign the Martin and Fred's of the world. It's the difference between retaining solid starters and all pro talent. It is much easier to replace a solid starter in the draft as opposed to expecting draftees to replace what elite players gave you.

In a microcosm, it is reasonable to expect Williams to play to the level of what Leary provided. It is not reasonable to expect Martin's level of play from him. Much the same with Hitchens and Vander Esch.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No he probably will make it, that's not the argument. But in your scenario he will be having a cap hit at 17 or 18 million in year 4 or 5. My scenario is that he'll have 12 or 13 by then, so Dallas will have even more cap space later on when the cap does rise.

Ou btw, your Mom called and said she'd be leaving your lunch money at the principal's office

You're doing the handwaving thing again.

You are also doing the ignorance thing again. The cap will continue to rise and money now will be worth more than money 5 years from now. I get that you really don't understand that but it is there just the same.

And the maturity smack is internally ironic. It is about the level of dig i would expect from a child in primary school. Try harder.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

He's been practicing at OG and they announced him as an OG when they drafted him. Everything is subject to change to be fair though.

Even in that case you can reasonably expect LC to play to the level of Leary too with Williams replacing Free. Same principle applies.

Fair enough, and I agree there too. Either way, our oline looks absolutely magnificent now. If we can manage to get Gregory back before long, I reckon that we'll be in for quite the treat this season, old boy.

 

[J12B]

You're doing the handwaving thing again.

You are also doing the ignorance thing again. The cap will continue to rise and money now will be worth more than money 5 years from now. I get that you really don't understand that but it is there just the same.

And the maturity smack is internally ironic. It is about the level of dig i would expect from a child in primary school. Try harder.

Just answer this question, what is more costly 5 years from now-16 million or 11 million?

Btw, I am your principal

 

[ksg811]

Just answer this question, what is more costly 5 years from now-16 million or 11 million?

Btw, I am your principal

Which has more buying power? $16M now or $16M in 5 years?

$16M at current $185M cap = 8.6% of cap

$16M at future $227M cap = 7% of cap. (Assuming growth at current ~$10M per annum and ignoring future rollovers)

There is your very brief deflation lesson.

 

[J12B]

Which has more buying power? $16M now or $16M in 5 years?

$16M at current $185M cap = 8.6% of cap

$16M at future $235M cap = 6.8% of cap. (Assuming growth at current ~$10M per annum)

There is your very brief deflation lesson.

The buying power isn't needed now since we know this team is pretty much set now. No telling what this team will be needing 5 years from now and that's why more flexibility in later nears is needed

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

The buying power isn't needed now since we know this team is pretty much set now. No telling what this team will be needing 5 years from now and that's why more flexibility in later nears is needed

Well, that is a valid point about not knowing what we'll need 5 years from now. However, I do think that it's brilliant that we have the ability to shift the contracts of our oline about a bit to create more cap space as needed.

 

[J12B]

Well, that is a valid point about not knowing what we'll need 5 years from now. However, I do think that it's brilliant that we have the ability to shift the contracts of our oline about a bit to create more cap space as needed.

I'm just not a fan of restructuring deals to create cap space. It's like putting a band aid on a much bigger wound

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

I'm just not a fan of restructuring deals to create cap space. It's like putting a band aid on a much bigger wound

I suppose that's fair enough. Still, I'm just glad that we sorted this out. I'm curious to see what our team does from this point forward. I think this move was just as much about helping our receivers as it was Zeke. Zeke, of course, will have a nice career here behind our oline. However, in the short-term, Dak will have plenty of time to find our WRs. Plus, our oline allows him to spread the ball about which is when he is rather dangerous, as he was in 2016 without Dez.

 

[Nightman]

I'm just not a fan of restructuring deals to create cap space. It's like putting a band aid on a much bigger wound

That isn't what it is at all

It is taking a cash back interest free loan

If I borrow $10 today and have to pay back $9 next year I would be a fool not to take the deal....in fact I should take as many as offered with those terms..... that is restructuring

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I suppose that's fair enough. Still, I'm just glad that we sorted this out. I'm curious to see what our team does from this point forward. I think this move was just as much about helping our receivers as it was Zeke. Zeke, of course, will have a nice career here behind our oline. However, in the short-term, Dak will have plenty of time to find our WRs. Plus, our oline allows him to spread the ball about which is when he is rather dangerous, as he was in 2016 without Dez.

It's really not. The only risk in restructuring deals is if you do it to the point where you have everything leveraged and an injury puts you over the cap such that you have to cut talent to match the cap.

Dollars are transferable and diminish in value year to year. There is no downside in what we are doing.

Basically what he is doing is taking the valid concerns people have about financing things to push costs down the line but in that case you accrue interest at a level that outstrips the lessening value of the dollar. There is no interest in the NFL.

And when you ask him to validate anything he has nothing more than platitudes and hand wringing. I don't see that as fair or reasonable. Ignorance is no justification for such things.