WR contracts compared to Pass Rusher contracts

Nightman

Capologist
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
24,038
It did come out shockingly close to the calculation.

I was originally thinking 14M per, but I was thinking the guaranteed money would be lower until I did this calculation and realized that "market value" on the guaranteed money was probably at least 3x the average salary (3 x 14M = 42M).

When they start adding qualifiers and offsets to the guaranteed money, it really isn't as high as it appears.

But your numbers were spot on. Well done.
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,220
Reaction score
64,734
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
When they start adding qualifiers and offsets to the guaranteed money, it really isn't as high as it appears.

But your numbers were spot on. Well done.

  • $32M initially guaranteed (signing bonus + 2015, 2016 salaries)
  • 2017 salary fully guarantees on the 5th league day of 2016
  • $7M of signing bonus deferred to 3/15/16

Yes, 13M (the 2017 base salary) is just a pseudo guarantee, but it is highly likely to be achieved. It would have been better if the 2017 salary didn't guarantee until March of 2017 instead of March of 2016. He would have to be cut in the spring of 2016 to not get the 2017 guarantee which seems highly unlikely to happen. That would mean they paid him 32M for 1 year. If it didn't guarantee until March 2017, then they could cut him after 2 years for 32M total or 16M per season which could easily happen if he got into trouble.

This is the 1st time in a long time that I've seen the Cowboys defer money. That normally happens when teams are cash strapped which seems unlikely to be an issue for the Cowboys. It's almost as if they just didn't want him to have to much money in his pocket for the 1st year.
 

phildadon86

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,590
Reaction score
32,378
It appears that the average of the top 5 WRs is about 84% of the average of the top 5 outside pass rushers.

Applying that to find numbers for Dez relative to Houston's new contract:

84% of 101M = 84.8M

Average over 6 years 84.8 / 6 = 14.14M

Guaranteed 84% of 52M = 43.68M

Note: If I remove the top paid WR and top paid Pass Rusher, then it drops to 81%.

So lets tie this into the possiblity of re-signing Hardy next season. Do you think its possible to sign him, and keep our O Line together?
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,220
Reaction score
64,734
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
So lets tie this into the possiblity of re-signing Hardy next season. Do you think its possible to sign him, and keep our O Line together?

Yes.

With the 5th year option on 1st round picks, Martin will not be a free agent until the 2019 season. Romo will likely be gone and replaced by a cheap young QB by then.

Re-signing Hardy is somewhat dependent on Lawrence and Gregory. If they are terrific this season, then the Cowboys will be less inclined to try to re-sign Hardy; although, they still really need about 3 starting caliber DEs. Mincey is already 31, so he is a short timer. If they don't re-sign Hardy, they would need to look for another DE early in the draft, IMO. Even if Russell or Gardner step up this year, they seem more like Strong Side types.
 

Nightman

Capologist
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
24,038
So lets tie this into the possiblity of re-signing Hardy next season. Do you think its possible to sign him, and keep our O Line together?

Dallas can afford Dez, Hardy and TCrawford next year.

Romo only has a 8.5m base salary next year and Carr and maybe Free will be gone.

They have contracts that can be redone like TSmith, Witten and Dez.

Hardy could get a deal like Dez- 5/70m and TCrawford could get a 4/24m to a 5/35m
 

phildadon86

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,590
Reaction score
32,378
Dallas can afford Dez, Hardy and TCrawford next year.

Romo only has a 8.5m base salary next year and Carr and maybe Free will be gone.

They have contracts that can be redone like TSmith, Witten and Dez.

Hardy could get a deal like Dez- 5/70m and TCrawford could get a 4/24m to a 5/35m

I dont see Dez as the restructuring type, but it makes sense
 
Top