Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Runningback Situation
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 671684"><p>Based on $15 million in signing bonuses under current contracts, you would be correct. That's Rodgers and Matthews only. However, you can't compare contracts from just a couple of years ago to recent ones under the escalating cap.</p><p></p><p>For example, Burnett's contract is the second richest in per year total value (Chancellor is first) and the highest in guarantees among safety contracts signed in 2013 or prior that are still on the books. At the time, the contract was surprisingly rich with a Pro Bowl-level projection embedded in it.</p><p></p><p>Or consider the deal Hawk signed after the 2010 season. That was a Pro Bowl-level contract as well, with a signing bonus creating sufficient dead cap to make his replacement prohibitive despite a steep decline evidenced by 2012. It was not until the dead cap was manageable for 2015 that we saw his departure. While Brad Jones' deal was not among the richest in the league, dead cap played into the timing of his release past the sell-by date.</p><p></p><p>The only 2015 Packer 2015 big dollar contract is Mike Daniels. Compare and contrast his deal with the recent deals for non-Pro Bowl peers. It is not cheap in terms of total value or signing bonus:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://overthecap.com/position/3-4-defensive-end/" target="_blank">http://overthecap.com/position/3-4-defensive-end/</a></p><p></p><p>There are a couple of levels to look at in terms of risk in a contract. Signing bonus is one, in terms of the deferred liability, but that's just one element to consider. We often hear that total guarantees are representative of risk. While this true, there are other important considerations. The players who get big guarantees are not typically the kinds of players who drop out of the l league from injury. Even if ability is diminished, they're typically still good enough to play. It's the marginal players who do regularly do not survive in the league after diminishment of ability.</p><p></p><p>The real measure of a contract is the dead cap and cap savings and the year at which the amount ceases to be prohibitive in considering a players release in the event of performance decline by injury or otherwise.</p><p></p><p>Let's take Daniels' contract as an example since it was signed under the current salary cap level, with a singing bonus in line with peers:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://overthecap.com/player/mike-daniels/1126/" target="_blank">http://overthecap.com/player/mike-daniels/1126/</a></p><p></p><p>Let's say he blew his ACL tomorrow. Are you going to cut him? Of course not. Why? Besides the fact he's a good young player with a good chance to maintain at least starter level performance upon return, you'd incur $13.4 million in dead cap and a $6 mil cap loss in 2015. With cap space currently at $8.5 mil for the top 51, you'd take cap space down to near zero when cutting him even if he broke his neck, which is out of the question going into the season. It could drive cap under zero depending on the IR body count and the cost of replacements entering the season.</p><p></p><p>Let's say instead he blew his ACL at this time next year. Or lets say his performance simply declined after getting the big contract. Would you cut him then? Well, the cap savings would be only $3.2 million. It would take a precipitous decline to even consider it since the question would be, "can you replace him with equivalent performance on a 1 year, $3.2 million contract". That's a very low bar. And when you consider that one of the Packers' more obvious elements of cap philosophy is "no meaningful dead cap!" the bar goes lower. This Packer philosophy, together will reluctance to seek replacements in the free agent market, may factor into an agent's view toward taking less signing bonus in exchange for other considerations.</p><p></p><p>It isn't until 2018 where injury or decline comes into play where the cap savings is $5.1 mil. Then again, the dead cap is $4,8 million, the kind of amounts the Packers avoid incurring like the plague.</p><p></p><p>Add it all up, and the practical affect given dead cap/cap savings under Packer philosophy is that Daniels' signing bonus, 2016 and 2017 salaries, and the roster bonuses for those seasons are effectively guaranteed short of an actual career ending, but not a career-threatening, injury: $24 million. He's certainly a good player, a core player, but some measure of his value is the relative weakness of the positions group, or what I refer to as "who else ya got?" </p><p></p><p>Now consider why the Packers might be pressed against the salary cap with a big crop of key free agents hitting the market next season. Whether you look at Cobb, Nelson, Shields, Bulaga or Daniels, or even Matthews high ticket contract, the cap numbers escalate year by year through the contract. Consider the 2017 cap numbers, dead cap and cap savings in those high ticket contracts even without the $15+ mil signing bonuses:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/green-bay-packers/" target="_blank">http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/green-bay-packers/</a></p><p></p><p>Even if you don't expect performance up to the cap number when the time comes, the players will be kept so long as expected performance exceeds the cap savings. And it seems with cases in the past, the dead cap has been the determining factor in what may be regarded as wishful thinking.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 671684"] Based on $15 million in signing bonuses under current contracts, you would be correct. That's Rodgers and Matthews only. However, you can't compare contracts from just a couple of years ago to recent ones under the escalating cap. For example, Burnett's contract is the second richest in per year total value (Chancellor is first) and the highest in guarantees among safety contracts signed in 2013 or prior that are still on the books. At the time, the contract was surprisingly rich with a Pro Bowl-level projection embedded in it. Or consider the deal Hawk signed after the 2010 season. That was a Pro Bowl-level contract as well, with a signing bonus creating sufficient dead cap to make his replacement prohibitive despite a steep decline evidenced by 2012. It was not until the dead cap was manageable for 2015 that we saw his departure. While Brad Jones' deal was not among the richest in the league, dead cap played into the timing of his release past the sell-by date. The only 2015 Packer 2015 big dollar contract is Mike Daniels. Compare and contrast his deal with the recent deals for non-Pro Bowl peers. It is not cheap in terms of total value or signing bonus: [URL]http://overthecap.com/position/3-4-defensive-end/[/URL] There are a couple of levels to look at in terms of risk in a contract. Signing bonus is one, in terms of the deferred liability, but that's just one element to consider. We often hear that total guarantees are representative of risk. While this true, there are other important considerations. The players who get big guarantees are not typically the kinds of players who drop out of the l league from injury. Even if ability is diminished, they're typically still good enough to play. It's the marginal players who do regularly do not survive in the league after diminishment of ability. The real measure of a contract is the dead cap and cap savings and the year at which the amount ceases to be prohibitive in considering a players release in the event of performance decline by injury or otherwise. Let's take Daniels' contract as an example since it was signed under the current salary cap level, with a singing bonus in line with peers: [URL]http://overthecap.com/player/mike-daniels/1126/[/URL] Let's say he blew his ACL tomorrow. Are you going to cut him? Of course not. Why? Besides the fact he's a good young player with a good chance to maintain at least starter level performance upon return, you'd incur $13.4 million in dead cap and a $6 mil cap loss in 2015. With cap space currently at $8.5 mil for the top 51, you'd take cap space down to near zero when cutting him even if he broke his neck, which is out of the question going into the season. It could drive cap under zero depending on the IR body count and the cost of replacements entering the season. Let's say instead he blew his ACL at this time next year. Or lets say his performance simply declined after getting the big contract. Would you cut him then? Well, the cap savings would be only $3.2 million. It would take a precipitous decline to even consider it since the question would be, "can you replace him with equivalent performance on a 1 year, $3.2 million contract". That's a very low bar. And when you consider that one of the Packers' more obvious elements of cap philosophy is "no meaningful dead cap!" the bar goes lower. This Packer philosophy, together will reluctance to seek replacements in the free agent market, may factor into an agent's view toward taking less signing bonus in exchange for other considerations. It isn't until 2018 where injury or decline comes into play where the cap savings is $5.1 mil. Then again, the dead cap is $4,8 million, the kind of amounts the Packers avoid incurring like the plague. Add it all up, and the practical affect given dead cap/cap savings under Packer philosophy is that Daniels' signing bonus, 2016 and 2017 salaries, and the roster bonuses for those seasons are effectively guaranteed short of an actual career ending, but not a career-threatening, injury: $24 million. He's certainly a good player, a core player, but some measure of his value is the relative weakness of the positions group, or what I refer to as "who else ya got?" Now consider why the Packers might be pressed against the salary cap with a big crop of key free agents hitting the market next season. Whether you look at Cobb, Nelson, Shields, Bulaga or Daniels, or even Matthews high ticket contract, the cap numbers escalate year by year through the contract. Consider the 2017 cap numbers, dead cap and cap savings in those high ticket contracts even without the $15+ mil signing bonuses: [URL]http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/green-bay-packers/[/URL] Even if you don't expect performance up to the cap number when the time comes, the players will be kept so long as expected performance exceeds the cap savings. And it seems with cases in the past, the dead cap has been the determining factor in what may be regarded as wishful thinking. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
G
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: GleefulGary
49 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 1st Rd pick #25 Jorden Morgan OL
Latest: gopkrs
Today at 3:00 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 3rd Rd #91 Ty’Ron Hopper LB
Latest: gopkrs
Today at 2:51 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: rmontro
Today at 2:03 AM
Draft Talk
Assessing the Draft Class (2024)
Latest: AKCheese
Today at 12:51 AM
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Runningback Situation
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top