Signed by Cowboys Trevon Diggs 5-Year, $97M Extension (Contract Details Post 416)

[Vtwin]

Good job, Stephen.

 

[VaqueroTD]

Cap experts, I’m sure you can explain better, but supposing he plays 2 years and is a bust or injured, looks like we’re on the hook for about $20 millionish? This whole contract looks friendly and easily workable. For those trashing it as a ‘don’t know football’ move, I would probably say in response ‘you don’t know money.’

 

[Sydla]

The back end will never be seen. He'll either do an extension after the third year or get cut. The dead cap hit at that point will be lower than the cost to keep him. Could restructure the fourth year to convert his base, but would have to at least add some void years to make it worthwhile.

Most likely we restructure next year, turning $10 million of his base into a prorated restructure bonus, so his cap hit for 2024 reduces to $8.25 million. (It would then increase to $16.25 million the next year, but it's already at $14 ... and technically, we could do another restructure). Then, int 2026, it would cost us $14.5 to cut him or $19.5 to keep him, so if he's playing well, the team will work out an extension to lower the hits for the first couple of years or cut him if he's declining. Whatever way they go, he's not going to see those last three base salaries of $14.5 million-plus.

But if you keep restructuring you are proving my point - the back end could be scary.

If he's not playing at an elite level you are going to be forced to carry him because the restructures result in limited cap savings to cut him. I am just not sure paying a CB is all that wise (like TBs). But it is what it is.

 

[FVSTONE]

Most likely reason - 2023 was the last year of his rookie deal.
1) Cowboys didn't want take the chance of Diggs having an All-Pro season, then afterwards he demanding a contract making him the highest paid CB to keep him with team.
2) With his deal on the books, the FO now can move on to Lamb --
probably wanting to sign him before extending his rookie contract with the 5th-year option for a 1st round pick.

I disagree, Diggs has accumulated some bad habits that needed to be addressed before the check book was opened up. Now that Diggs got paid he will continue his FETUS STYLE tackling and jumping invisible receiver routes giving up chunk yards and there isn't going to be a dam thing anyone can do about this because he'll be making too much money to sit his ***.

 

[glimmerman]

But if you keep restructuring you are proving my point - the back end could be scary.

If he's not playing at an elite level you are going to be forced to carry him because the restructures result in limited cap savings to cut him. I am just not sure paying a CB is all that wise (like TBs). But it is what it is.

Yeah I leave this contract the way it is. Low 40’s guaranteed and over half of it paid in signing bonus we will have an out in 2025 or 2026 if needed.

 

[gimmesix]

But if you keep restructuring you are proving my point - the back end could be scary.

If he's not playing at an elite level you are going to be forced to carry him because the restructures result in limited cap savings to cut him. I am just not sure paying a CB is all that wise (like TBs). But it is what it is.

Restructuring is just the way of the cap. Eventually with all good players you are going to take a dead cap hit. The keys are 1) absorbing it through restructuring other megadeals you've made recently and 2) having the dead cap hit be less than the cost to keep the player at the time you release him.

If he's not playing at an elite level, then Dallas can cut him in 2026 for a cap savings of $11.25 million. That is a significant number and means that only the first three years matter in this deal. A restructure is likely next year (which will increase that dead cap hit if we cut him in 2026) because of the higher base number ($11 million), but it's not an absolute given, especially if he isn't playing at an elite level. Dallas essentially married itself to Diggs for the next three years at a respectable cost capwise ($36 million) and it could lower that cap hit over those three years with a restructure to about $30 million. If it wants to continue to relationship beyond those three years, then it could with another restructure or by extending the deal.

Let's say you take $10 million of the base in 2026 and turn it into bonus, adding a void year to spread it over four years. His cap number then goes down to $12.25 million for that year (which should be very reasonable based on CB pay at that time) and the dead cap hit to cut him the next year goes up to $11.75 million the next year, which is still far below the $24 million it would cost to keep him on the roster that year. (If we restructure next year, you'd have to add another $4 million to that, but it's still quite a bit below the cost to keep him.)

So essentially for the next four years with restructures, we could easily be paying Diggs an average of around $11 million per year (if my math is right, but it's usually spotty). Yes, you'll have the dead hit to absorb, but that's expected. Remember that none of the $54 million in base pay the last three years is guaranteed. There is also three years of $1 million roster bonuses that would not be paid if he was cut in 2026. That still leaves three years at $40 million total without any restructures, but we'll want to get that down some either next year or 2026 or possibly both.

 

[gimmesix]

Yeah I leave this contract the way it is. Low 40’s guaranteed and over half of it paid in signing bonus we will have an out in 2025 or 2026 if needed.

2025 is not a good out, though, because we only save less than $2 million. Of course, if he's playing poorly, less than $2 million saved is better than paying $14.25 million for a bad corner.

 

[AsthmaField]

Unequivocally a good deal for Dallas. Really, it is good for both sides. I don’t know why more contracts don’t go like this one, where both sides seem reasonable and it works both ways.

 

[glimmerman]

2025 is not a good out, though, because we only save less than $2 million. Of course, if he's playing poorly, less than $2 million saved is better than paying $14.25 million for a bad corner.

Yeah after 2025 I think he is all paid up and if healthy and playing well he would be good trade bait if we have the next good upcoming corner.

 

[Desperado]

https://overthecap.com/player/trevon-diggs/8791

 

[visionary]

I disagree, Diggs has accumulated some bad habits that needed to be addressed before the check book was opened up. Now that Diggs got paid he will continue his FETUS STYLE tackling and jumping invisible receiver routes giving up chunk yards and there isn't going to be a dam thing anyone can do about this because he'll be making too much money to sit his ***.

This

 

[gimmesix]

Cap experts, I’m sure you can explain better, but supposing he plays 2 years and is a bust or injured, looks like we’re on the hook for about $20 millionish? This whole contract looks friendly and easily workable. For those trashing it as a ‘don’t know football’ move, I would probably say in response ‘you don’t know money.’

If we had to cut him after two years, his dead cap hit would be $12.75 million. This year and next year are the only ones where it would cost more to cut him than keep him. Now that'll change if we restructure his $11 million base next year.

 

[LocoBates]

Most were when the other Teams hadn't figure him out. It would be good to see how many passes and TDs were completed when thrown to his corner. Last season in particular was embarrassing to see him fall for the fake throw, jump the route to go for the INT and get burned by the WRs second move THEN the QB making the throw.

Don't get me wrong, congrats to him for what for sure was one of his life goals ($), not his fault that the FO decided to pay him that much. He is a good player but IMHO not as bright and effective as when he started, don't know the reason.

 

[kskboys]

But if you keep restructuring you are proving my point - the back end could be scary.

If he's not playing at an elite level you are going to be forced to carry him because the restructures result in limited cap savings to cut him. I am just not sure paying a CB is all that wise (like TBs). But it is what it is.

Glad to hear someone else say it.

There isn't much difference in length of careers between RB's and CB's. Both are usually done before 30. The ones that last longer are the exceptions, not the rule.

 

[kskboys]

Unequivocally a good deal for Dallas. Really, it is good for both sides. I don’t know why more contracts don’t go like this one, where both sides seem reasonable and it works both ways.

Players tend to be unreasonable w/ contract demands.

 

[kskboys]

I disagree, Diggs has accumulated some bad habits that needed to be addressed before the check book was opened up. Now that Diggs got paid he will continue his FETUS STYLE tackling and jumping invisible receiver routes giving up chunk yards and there isn't going to be a dam thing anyone can do about this because he'll be making too much money to sit his ***.

Dude simply needs to play more disciplined. If he doesn't, then this contract is bad. If he does, then it's a bargain.