Why are we still in salary cap hell?

[revospeed]

In short, the reason why we are in cap hell is because Spaulding has taken over as our cap guru. He thought that because Tyrone Crawford is Canadian, we had to pay him more to make up for the exchange rate.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

In short, the reason why we are in cap hell is because Spaulding has taken over as our cap guru. He thought that because Tyrone Crawford is Canadian, we had to pay him more to make up for the exchange rate.

Take off, eh. Don't be a knob

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And fans try to make it a rosier colored picture than it truly is too. Two sides of the same coin.

It's not nearly as dire as some think, while not nearly as good as some will try to tell you it is. The truth lies in the middle.

Not all of us. The removal of Romo and the restructures of Dez, Fred, and Tyron are all going to happen. We could do more than that but nobody here is advocating restructuring Crawford, Lee or some of the more specious moves.

It would be funny to see them restructure Crawford though.

 

[Stash]

Stop it with the scapegoating please.

It's not "scapegoating" at all, its fact. Nothing I'm saying about it is untrue (unlike some other people).

Cutting Crawford saves no money and you still need to replace him too. Even if you cut Crawford's salary in half which is the best case scenario it does not make it sensible to pay 30% of your cap to 4 players in one position group.

If those players are worth it, they're worth it. Position group is irrelevant. And Crawford's production is easily replaced, Irving outproduces him already.

I understand your concern over Crawford's deal but it is the only one on the roster. There is nothing to be done about it until next year and the concern moving forward should be not doing the same deals again. For example they should not overpay for McClain for one good year.

The sunk costs for Romo aren't doing them any favors either, at least not this year. But the good news is that once he does come off the books, it opens up a large amount of flexibility for the future, at least a few years. I'd have to see the numbers on McClain before I could say "overpaid", but his injury history isn't good, so it's definitely buyer beware. But he and Collins performed pretty well inside in my opinion and I don't hate to see him just walk. A tricky negotiation for me.

If you want to sign our key UFA like McClain plus get help for the secondary and receiving corps as well as get one of JPP, Sheard, or Campbell and still give Martin the contract he deserves then you need to let Leary go. The consolation prize is a fat compensatory pick.

I think they have to let Leary go, they've got no choice given the position they're in. That's what I've been saying. But I don't want to hear talk of "doing whatever they want" while watching one of their ten best players walk out the door. That's ********.

 

[Stash]

Not all of us. The removal of Romo and the restructures of Dez, Fred, and Tyron are all going to happen. We could do more than that but nobody here is advocating restructuring Crawford, Lee or some of the more specious moves.

Personally, I hope they leave Bryant's contract alone. Wait another year to see if you consistently get the performance relative to the cost because you didn't this year. You restructure his too, and you're stuck just like you are with Crawford. That's the downside of these deals that nobody likes to talk about.

It would be funny to see them restructure Crawford though.

Ok, now that's just mean man!

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Why is that?

Why would retaining one of your top parts of the best line in football "not a priority"?

If that's the case, somebody's priorities are screwed up.

That claim simply doesn't add up.

Because you have a cheaper cost controlled replacement ready to step in.

It's called proactive management.

 

[Stash]

Because you have a cheaper cost controlled replacement ready to step in.

It's called proactive management.

Hey, it's definitely great that they have an option, I like Collins and it's not an either/or thing where I have to dislike one to like the other. But the fact is that Leary clearly provided an upgrade over Collins this year when he came in. Now, you just hope that Collins steps up and there's not a noticeable drop off from what Leary gave you.

 

[Nightman]

Not all of us. The removal of Romo and the restructures of Dez, Fred, and Tyron are all going to happen. We could do more than that but nobody here is advocating restructuring Crawford, Lee or some of the more specious moves.

It would be funny to see them restructure Crawford though.

All contracts that can be restructured should be, especially when they are guaranteed like Crawford's will be March 13th......the decision to cut should always be separated from his dead money.......even this year if cutting Crawford and saving the 7.25 made the team better it would be smart to cut him regardless if the move was cap neutral or not......but that fact is that Crawford gets the most consistent pressure and can do it from multiple positions.....he is well worth 7.25m and is in fact a bargain

the cap space doesn't have to be spent but it is much easier to create space in March then it is once the season starts.....with rolllover any unused space is just carried over

All this hand wringing over restructures is just unwarranted...the Romo deal leaves us with a one time cap hit of 19.6m in a year we can still be 40m under the cap and leaves us 50m under the cap next year....hardly a problem......but he saved us over 40m during his contract when we did need the space

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Hey, it's definitely great that they have an option, I like Collins and it's not an either/or thing where I have to dislike one to like the other. But the fact is that Leary clearly provided an upgrade over Collins this year when he came in. Now, you just hope that Collins steps up and there's not a noticeable drop off from what Leary gave you.

Leary did not clearly provide an upgrade. We've been over this. Zeke sucked the first two weeks of the season. Morris had no issues running the ball.

And even if Leary was clearly better you don't pay him 8m when you have Collins on contract for an 8th of that. It'd be stupid.

What you're advocating for is stupid.

Don't advocate for stupid things.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

@stasheroo I get - even share - your frustration for our lack of pass rush. But I don't think Crawford is the bum you are making him out to be. I'll take 5 sacks and 23 hurries from the DT spot every year. We just need to get some DE depth to keep Crawford in his best position.

I also think Collins will make you forget about Leary in short order. If he stays healthy the ability is there. But I'm willing to concede it isn't a slam dunk.

I bet if Collins weren't in tow that Leary would be a priority.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

All contracts that can be restructured should be, especially when they are guaranteed like Crawford's will be March 13th......the decision to cut should always be separated from his dead money.......even this year if cutting Crawford and saving the 7.25 made the team better it would be smart to cut him regardless if the move was cap neutral or not......but that fact is that Crawford gets the most consistent pressure and can do it from multiple positions.....he is well worth 7.25m and is in fact a bargain

the cap space doesn't have to be spent but it is much easier to create space in March then it is once the season starts.....with rolllover any unused space is just carried over

All this hand wringing over restructures is just unwarranted...the Romo deal leaves us with a one time cap hit of 19.6m in a year we can still be 40m under the cap and leaves us 50m under the cap next year....hardly a problem......but he saved us over 40m during his contract when we did need the space

You don't restructure all contracts just because you can. If you need the space to sign someone then by all means. But if you don't there is no reason to arbitrarily push money into the future.

Anytime your stance is an absolute one.... There is nuance you're missing.

 

[Nightman]

Personally, I hope they leave Bryant's contract alone. Wait another year to see if you consistently get the performance relative to the cost because you didn't this year. You restructure his too, and you're stuck just like you are with Crawford. That's the downside of these deals that nobody likes to talk about.



Ok, now that's just mean man!

After all this you still have no idea how the cap works

 

[Nightman]

You don't restructure all contracts just because you can. If you need the space to sign someone then by all means. But if you don't there is no reason to arbitrarily push money into the future.

Anytime your stance is an absolute one.... There is nuance you're missing.

No you should......nothing is lost by restructures.....nothing..........future costs are mitigating by a rising cap at worst and present value of money at best........it is simple accounting no matter how many times it has to be explained..........Dead money is just money saved from this year or year's past......it isn't a new bill

Picking and choosing which guys to restructure is silly .....it doesn't matter.....it all goes to the same pool

The only time it would not be smart is if you are cutting that player this year...there is no missing nuance to restructures

The idea of being 50m under the cap is terrible management....even 20m under......the nuance is to walk the line that allows you maximize the cap without cutting needed players......spending up to the cap while leaving some breathing room but without leaving 20-30m in the FO wasted as profits instead of on-field talent....DAL has a cash on hand advantage they need to maximize

Every dollar not spent matters when you haven't won for as long as DAL has gone

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's not "scapegoating" at all, its fact. Nothing I'm saying about it is untrue (unlike some other people).



If those players are worth it, they're worth it. Position group is irrelevant. And Crawford's production is easily replaced, Irving outproduces him already.



The sunk costs for Romo aren't doing them any favors either, at least not this year. But the good news is that once he does come off the books, it opens up a large amount of flexibility for the future, at least a few years. I'd have to see the numbers on McClain before I could say "overpaid", but his injury history isn't good, so it's definitely buyer beware. But he and Collins performed pretty well inside in my opinion and I don't hate to see him just walk. A tricky negotiation for me.



I think they have to let Leary go, they've got no choice given the position they're in. That's what I've been saying. But I don't want to hear talk of "doing whatever they want" while watching one of their ten best players walk out the door. That's bull****.

Youre using biased facts to place the blame for Leary leaving on Crawford. That is scapegoating.

Whether or not you agree with it, the reason why they are not going to resign Leary is because of cap allocation and Collins presence on the roster. They started Collins over him. Your way ends up with $110m of a $170m cap towards the offense. I would hope that you would at least be able to entertain why that is rational to some people given how many issues the lack of pass rush and middle coverage has given us over recent history.

I'm willing to admit that there is likely a decrease in production with Collins over Leary but recall it was not until Leary's third year that he came into his own. Collins is a talented young player.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No you should......nothing is lost by restructures.....nothing..........future costs are mitigating by a rising cap at worst and present value of money at best........it is simple accounting no matter how many times it has to be explained..........Dead money is just money saved from this year or year's past......it isn't a new bill

Picking and choosing which guys to restructure is silly .....it doesn't matter.....it all goes to the same pool

The only time it would not be smart is if you are cutting that player this year...there is no missing nuance to restructures

The idea of being 50m under the cap is terrible management....even 20m under......the nuance is to walk the line that allows you maximize the cap without cutting needed players......spending up to the cap while leaving some breathing room but without leaving 20-30m in the FO wasted as profits instead of on-field talent....DAL has a cash on hand advantage they need to maximize

Every dollar not spent matters when you haven't won for as long as DAL has gone

The acceleration of dead money is the basis for choosing who to restructure. If moving accounting to future years is good then bringing it back to the present is bad.

Any player that is an injury risk or is underperforming is a candidate for a cut. Restructuring those guys should be done last if at all.

 

[Stash]

Leary did not clearly provide an upgrade. We've been over this. Zeke sucked the first two weeks of the season. Morris had no issues running the ball.

I'm not interested in continuing to debate an already well-established point.

And even if Leary was clearly better you don't pay him 8m when you have Collins on contract for an 8th of that. It'd be stupid.

What you're advocating for is stupid.

Don't advocate for stupid things.

Check yourself before you try to preach to anyone else.

 

[Stash]

After all this you still have no idea how the cap works

At least I'm not a liar.

 

[Stash]

@stasheroo I get - even share - your frustration for our lack of pass rush. But I don't think Crawford is the bum you are making him out to be. I'll take 5 sacks and 23 hurries from the DT spot every year. We just need to get some DE depth to keep Crawford in his best position.

You're playing mix-and-match with your stats here. His 23 hurries you point to came outside at DE IN 2016, not from DT in 2015.

And I'm not making him out to be some bum. I'm saying he's miscast in this defense and not worth half of what he's being paid. He's not a bad player, he's a bad return on investment.

I also think Collins will make you forget about Leary in short order. If he stays healthy the ability is there. But I'm willing to concede it isn't a slam dunk.

That's certainly everyone's hope. But I hoped to see a bigger improvement from year one to year two too and I didn't see as much of it as I would have liked.

I bet if Collins weren't in tow that Leary would be a priority.

No denying that. He certainly gives them more flexibility. But again, I just don't want to hear folks claiming that they "can do whatever they want" when that's obviously not the case.

 

[Stash]

You don't restructure all contracts just because you can. If you need the space to sign someone then by all means. But if you don't there is no reason to arbitrarily push money into the future.

Anytime your stance is an absolute one.... There is nuance you're missing.

You're absolutely right. Restructuring gets you stuck with players underperforming their contracts like Crawford with deals you can't get out of. Some people just aren't as smart as they think they are.

 

[Stash]

Youre using biased facts to place the blame for Leary leaving on Crawford. That is scapegoating.

If the cap for offense and defense were separate, you'd have a point. But they're not. Every contract affects another since it all comes out of the same pot. No scapegoating.

Whether or not you agree with it, the reason why they are not going to resign Leary is because of cap allocation and Collins presence on the roster. They started Collins over him. Your way ends up with $110m of a $170m cap towards the offense. I would hope that you would at least be able to entertain why that is rational to some people given how many issues the lack of pass rush and middle coverage has given us over recent history.

Sure I can. And I hope you're willing to admit that overpaying Crawford affects what you have left for any other contract, regardless of it being offense or defense.

I'm willing to admit that there is likely a decrease in production with Collins over Leary but recall it was not until Leary's third year that he came into his own. Collins is a talented young player.

No doubt about it. I just hoped to see a bigger improvement betweeen years one and two than we did. And I did see a big improvement in Leary's game. We all hope the dropoff from Leary to whoever they put there (I'd also like to see Cooper as an option), isn't too noticeable, or not at all.