Opportunity Cost

[FuzzyLumpkins]

See post 18, the inflation of the cap charge is not the same as the inflation of the cap from year to year.

Inflation is inflation of the money supply. Your arguing the wrong thing not me.

 

[Galian Beast]

But that's the problem isn't it...the Cowboys had to restructure to get under the cap in the first place.

Ware would be costing $12.25M instead of $16.15M if we didn't do the 3 restructures.

So it inflated just shy of $4M.

Not that much huh? Well the cap only went up about about 8% from last year to this year.

So what is the percentage of $4M in relation to that cap charge if was still here? It sure isn't 8%.

If we hadn't planned the restructures, we still would have had to pay him more in the first place...

 

[Bluestang]

The cap was artificually controlled as certain deductions were grandfathered from NFL income up until this past year for the CBA. The also delayed the TV money. Either way, fact is its still inflation and there its still dollar for dollar year to year on restructures.

How about the $10m Mara stole from us for following the written rules? Why is this not included in the analysis?

I forgot about that $10M. It should be included too.

 

[JD_KaPow]

First which WRs do you think are in Dez's caliber? Second which of these WRs have taken their teams to super bowls?

No WR (or player at any other position) has ever taken a team to a Super Bowl (unless there's someone out there with a private jet that I don't know about).

As far as where he sits, he's a step below Megatron, obviously, and a step above the guys who signed last year, Mike Wallace and Percy Harvin. Brandon Marshall and Jordy Nelson are similar and signed this year, but both are older. The most obvious comps--Demaryius, Green--haven't gotten their contracts yet. I expect we'll see Dez and Demaryius sign very similar deals this year.

 

[Galian Beast]

I read your posts but saying in your posts that you understand that there is more doesn't 'poison the well.' All it does is give your reader clues early.

There is no lost opportunity that you laid out.

I did lay out the opportunity cost. I established by overpaying guys like Carr, we were unable to properly field a defense due to lack of cap space left.

The reality is I could have made a longer OP diving into future years, but the point is still the same, and if you take the time to look for yourself, you see that the difference in offensive budget and defensive budget only get more unbalanced as we have to pay our offensive players in the future. Name one defensive player who is looking like they're going to get re-signed to a long term contract above average pay? There aren't any at this point, and it further emphasizes the overpayment to guys like Carr.

 

[Bluestang]

If we hadn't planned the restructures, we still would have had to pay him more in the first place...

This is assuming that we had cap space to begin with.

We didn't, we had to get under the cap so we had to restructure contracts.

If we had the cap space I don't think Stephen would be restructuring contracts in the first place.

 

[Galian Beast]

No WR (or player at any other position) has ever taken a team to a Super Bowl (unless there's someone out there with a private jet that I don't know about).

As far as where he sits, he's a step below Megatron, obviously, and a step above the guys who signed last year, Mike Wallace and Percy Harvin. Brandon Marshall and Jordy Nelson are similar and signed this year, but both are older. The most obvious comps--Demaryius, Green--haven't gotten their contracts yet. I expect we'll see Dez and Demaryius sign very similar deals this year.

You avoided the obvious point of my question, which is how much are you willing to pay Dez. And when was the last time you saw a receiver who took a large percentage of his team's salary cap win a super bowl.

That's the problem with overpaying receivers, their impact on the game is actually a lot smaller than most people think, and as a result the opportunity cost involved in paying them is great.

 

[Galian Beast]

This is assuming that we had cap space to begin with.

We didn't, we had to get under the cap so we had to restructure contracts.

If we had the cap space I don't think Stephen would be restructuring contracts in the first place.

Before the contracts were signed in the first place, they were designed to be restructured to maximize the salary cap...

 

[Bluestang]

The cap was artificually controlled as certain deductions were grandfathered from NFL income up until this past year for the CBA. The also delayed the TV money. Either way, fact is its still inflation and there its still dollar for dollar year to year on restructures.

How about the $10m Mara stole from us for following the written rules? Why is this not included in the analysis?

With the new CBA the cap started out at $120M in 2011, then went to $120.6M in 2012, and $123M in 2013. This year it jumped to $133M.

The restructures that we had to do to get under those cap figures the last 3 years, have created about 66% of that dead money figure we have now this year.

Those increased cap charges are at a higher rate than what the cap is increasing.

 

[Bluestang]

Before the contracts were signed in the first place, they were designed to be restructured to maximize the salary cap...

Not to be rude here, but not every thing Stephen tells the public is the truth.

 

[JD_KaPow]

You avoided the obvious point of my question, which is how much are you willing to pay Dez.

The "point" of your question wasn't to ask a question at all, but to imply that WRs aren't worth paying. I ignored that because I think it's silly and answered the question you actually asked, which was not "how much are you willing to pay Dez", but rather "who are Dez's comps". I also ignored the fact that you completely ignored the substance of my response.

The answer to the question you're asking now is that I'm willing to pay Dez market value.

And when was the last time you saw a receiver who took a large percentage of his team's salary cap win a super bowl?

Yeah, that's a ridiculous question, as if Super Bowl winners are somehow qualitatively different from, say, Super Bowl losers or other playoff caliber teams. But here's what I do know: the Seahawks made Percy Harvin one of the 5 highest-paid WR in the league last year, so clearly they value the position highly. Boldin was paid a lot by the Ravens in 2012. Marvin Harrison was making a boatload of money when Indy won the SB. Randy Moss had a huge contract with the Patriots in 2007 (they restructured it, but they were willing to pay him).

That's the problem with overpaying receivers, their impact on the game is actually a lot smaller than most people think, and as a result the opportunity cost involved in paying them is great.

I think I'll continue to believe that the actual market value of WRs in the NFL is a better assessment of what they're worth than your opinion is.

 

[Galian Beast]

Not to be rude here, but not every thing Stephen tells the public is the truth.

It's not really subjective, you can objectively see that they planned to spread out the first few years of base salary into years that didn't include prorated signing bonuses.

 

[Bluestang]

It's not really subjective, you can objectively see that they planned to spread out the first few years of base salary into years that didn't include prorated signing bonuses.

On the flipside, just because there is no signing bonus for years 6 and 7, doesn't mean that you should add one from a restructure.

 

[Galian Beast]

The "point" of your question wasn't to ask a question at all, but to imply that WRs aren't worth paying. I ignored that because I think it's silly and answered the question you actually asked, which was not "how much are you willing to pay Dez", but rather "who are Dez's comps". I also ignored the fact that you completely ignored the substance of my response.

The answer to the question you're asking now is that I'm willing to pay Dez market value.Yeah, that's a ridiculous question, as if Super Bowl winners are somehow qualitatively different from, say, Super Bowl losers or other playoff caliber teams. But here's what I do know: the Seahawks made Percy Harvin one of the 5 highest-paid WR in the league last year, so clearly they value the position highly. Boldin was paid a lot by the Ravens in 2012. Marvin Harrison was making a boatload of money when Indy won the SB. Randy Moss had a huge contract with the Patriots in 2007 (they restructured it, but they were willing to pay him).I think I'll continue to believe that the actual market value of WRs in the NFL is a better assessment of what they're worth than your opinion is.

I think you want to purposefully avoid the reality is that teams that pay WRs top money, do so at the cost of putting together teams that are of the quality that it requires to win super bowls... You stick with a figurative value by saying "market value", but won't touch on specifics because that would associate that number with teams that have a track record of not being able to get it done.

The Patriots didn't pay Randy Moss for long, nor did they ever win a super bowl with him. Which goes to my point, I'd rather spread the wealth around the team, than pay a wide receiver. If you think that argument is flawed, please cite historic examples of when paying a wide receiver top dollar money has worked out well for a team.

 

[85Cowboy85]

A players signs a 3 year 18 million dollar contract. There is no signing bonus and the base salary is 6 million per year.

SCENARIO 1: We do not restructure the player in year 1 or 2 and cut him before year three begins.

Total Cap hit = 6 million in year one + 6 million in year 2 = 12 million.

SCENARIO 2: We do not restructure the player in year 1 but we do in year 2 and cut him before year three begins.

Total Cap hit = 6 million in year one +
3 million in year two (base salary spread over years 2+3 is 3 million per year) +
3 million when cutting him in dead money = 12 million.

SCENARIO 3: Restructure the player in both year 1 and 2 and cut him before year three begins.

Total Cap hit = 2 million in year (base salary spread over years 1+2+3 is 2 million per year)
+ 5 million in year two. (base salary spread over years 2+3 is 3 million per year, 2 million dallar charge from year one restructure)
+ 5 million in year year 3. (2 million dallar charge from year one restructure, 3 million from year two restruycture) = 12 million

While it is true restructuring causes you to have less money in future years the overall cap hit is the same.

 

[Hoofbite]

Planned restructures are all apart of accounting practices, which are not necessarily unacceptable.

Planned or not, shoving cap dollars and increasing cap charges for later years is foolish.

Carr signed a 5 year deal for $50M and yet his cap charge is higher than what the average would be. His contract was written to be restructured and his cap charge is nearly unjustifiably high for this season and following seasons.

You can't take giant discounts up front because the vast majority of players simply can't live up to the huge costs on the back end. That's basically what forced Ware out.

 

[Hoofbite]

If we hadn't planned the restructures, we still would have had to pay him more in the first place...

Yes, but you can justify a huge payday for a guy getting 19 or 20 sacks because that's just what it costs for elite pass rushers.

Age and decline is inevitable. Pay youth for premium production or pray you get good production 3 or 4 years down the road when age and possibly injury have left you with who knows what.

 

[Galian Beast]

Yes, but you can justify a huge payday for a guy getting 19 or 20 sacks because that's just what it costs for elite pass rushers.

Age and decline is inevitable. Pay youth for premium production or pray you get good production 3 or 4 years down the road when age and possibly injury have left you with who knows what.

I'm not sure I get what you're saying here...

 

[Galian Beast]

Planned or not, shoving cap dollars and increasing cap charges for later years is foolish.

Carr signed a 5 year deal for $50M and yet his cap charge is higher than what the average would be. His contract was written to be restructured and his cap charge is nearly unjustifiably high for this season and following seasons.

You can't take giant discounts up front because the vast majority of players simply can't live up to the huge costs on the back end. That's basically what forced Ware out.

Ware was forced out by injuries and ineffectiveness.

It's easier to backload contracts when the salary cap increases over time. It also buys you time to get your drafts in order.

 

[Bluestang]

Planned or not, shoving cap dollars and increasing cap charges for later years is foolish.

Carr signed a 5 year deal for $50M and yet his cap charge is higher than what the average would be. His contract was written to be restructured and his cap charge is nearly unjustifiably high for this season and following seasons.

You can't take giant discounts up front because the vast majority of players simply can't live up to the huge costs on the back end. That's basically what forced Ware out.

The Cowboys had to take those discounts up front because they have been over the cap 3 years in a row.

It's not like they choose to do it, they were forced to - there is a huge difference.