2023: Continued dead cap hell (Currently $54 Million)

[paco]

13 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

Did you just google 'Top NFL FA' and copy and paste the first list you saw?

Other then Marcus Williams and MAYBE Davante Adams (who probably will not see FA) - most of these guys are just OK and will demand a lot of money that will not be worth it.

Do you think that Allen Robinson, Mike Williams, Michael Gallup and Chris Godwin (coming off an injury) is worth more than $18 million a year? That is what Golladay got paid last year and these guys will want more. Guys like Ryan Jensen, Melvin Ingram, Casey Hayward are all at or over 30 and on a young team you shouldn't spend a lot of money on them. 

Even if we had that dead cap money none of it should be spent on most of those guys.

After watching Reagor and JJAW, they are worth double that  

[pallidrone]

29 minutes ago, paco said:

Here is another:  Pretend they have 0 dead cap space and instead have a whopping $62 million in dead cap.  Even if you look at the roster and think we are still too far away from really contending and need to build through the draft, you can always roll over the cap to the next year and then go on a spree of resigning players and filling the remaining gaps in FA.

 

Honestly, I can't begin to understand the line of thinking "well, we can't really contend nor get players make us contend, we really arnt at a disadvantage".  It's like saying "well, dinner isn't until 5 and I have no money, I don't see the point in buying groceries now"

They are not at a disadvantage because even with the negative cap space, they are still well above the salary cap. They can still spend money if they want to and they can be creative. I mean I remember so many capologists that said there was no way the Eagles could afford to sign Alshon in FA that he was too expensive and they had no cap space, and yet they did.

They had to fix the perfect storm that hit them (Paying a QB top dollar, who became disgruntled and they had to trade him and then the salary cap lowering instead of rising another 10-15% like it always did) and that was never going to be done in one year. It had to spread out over a couple years. That did not stop them from extending key personnel during the season and they still have some cap space IF they want to sign a Marcus Williams.

What they cant do is blow $60 million on a bunch of over the hill or mediocre players in FA. What they probably can't do is sign a WR to a 4 year $72 million contract and hope that he produces more than 37 catched for 512 yards and no TDs but do you really want them to do that?

[NOTW]

41 minutes ago, downundermike said:

The cap hit for the 15th, 16th and 19th picks last year totaled 9.288 million.  Will obviously be more than that this year.  11 million for all 5 of our top 100 picks.

They have $12 million in cap space.  Obviously, there will be some room created with players that get cut or restructured.  But not if they wanted to do something bigger in free agency, as you said a safety or a veteran WR.

[paco]

5 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

They are not at a disadvantage because even with the negative cap space, they are still well above the salary cap. They can still spend money if they want to and they can be creative. I mean I remember so many capologists that said there was no way the Eagles could afford to sign Alshon in FA that he was too expensive and they had no cap space, and yet they did.

They had to fix the perfect storm that hit them (Paying a QB top dollar, who became disgruntled and they had to trade him and then the salary cap lowering instead of rising another 10-15% like it always did) and that was never going to be done in one year. It had to spread out over a couple years. That did not stop them from extending key personnel during the season and they still have some cap space IF they want to sign a Marcus Williams.

What they cant do is blow $60 million on a bunch of over the hill or mediocre players in FA. What they probably can't do is sign a WR to a 4 year $72 million contract and hope that he produces more than 37 catched for 512 yards and no TDs but do you really want them to do that?

You are SO close to getting why we are staring at over 50 million in dead cap space for the second straight year!!!!

 

  

Just now, NOTW said:

They have $12 million in cap space.  Obviously, there will be some room created with players that get cut or restructured.  But not if they wanted to do something bigger in free agency, as you said a safety or a veteran WR.

There is also roll over from 2021.

[NOTW]

7 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

They are not at a disadvantage because even with the negative cap space, they are still well above the salary cap. They can still spend money if they want to and they can be creative. I mean I remember so many capologists that said there was no way the Eagles could afford to sign Alshon in FA that he was too expensive and they had no cap space, and yet they did.

They had to fix the perfect storm that hit them (Paying a QB top dollar, who became disgruntled and they had to trade him and then the salary cap lowering instead of rising another 10-15% like it always did) and that was never going to be done in one year. It had to spread out over a couple years. That did not stop them from extending key personnel during the season and they still have some cap space IF they want to sign a Marcus Williams.

What they cant do is blow $60 million on a bunch of over the hill or mediocre players in FA. What they probably can't do is sign a WR to a 4 year $72 million contract and hope that he produces more than 37 catched for 512 yards and no TDs but do you really want them to do that?

Your argument is kind of like:

Hey, I have all my credit cards maxed out, bad credit so I can't get a loan and every month I am over budget and can't afford my bills.  But who cares?  There's nothing new I need to purchase and I can just cut out a few things to stay on budget.

I don't like overpaying in free agency either.  I like smart free agent signings like Steven Nelson.  I like being able to "make a splash" on occasion when it's worth it.  Some examples were Brandon Brooks and Javon Hargrave.  Every year you will have some free agents that end up re-signing with their current teams, some that go to teams for way more than they're worth and then you have the value guys that help solidify the roster.  You also have guys that become available because of cap casualties that aren't slated to be free agents right now, but may become available.

I like the team to have flexibility.  I don't like Howie extending old guys like Brooks, Graham, Lane Johnson for way more years on the contract than they should or giving out bad guaranteed contracts to Jeffrey and Jackson instead of cutting them or doing shorter term deals.  Some of it is about more than the current year, planning things out.  Howie used to plan things out much better.

You're talking about 2017 when they signed Jeffrey, yes he made that happen. He also managed to extend Cox's contract after signing/extending a bunch of other players and fans thought he wasn't going to be able to do it, and he did.  That was then.  

Since winning the SB in addition to your perfect storm example, the other storm that hit them is bad drafting for years.  Howie can't draft, so he has to go to free agency and trades especially on defense.  So he started extending older players to very long term deals instead of just doing 2 year deals.  There's money taken up in the cap being paid to guys who have spent 1-2 years on IR, guys who haven't been on the team in 2 years.  

You are right that as long as they are under the cap and don't want to sign any valuable players it's no big deal...unless they want to sign someone who becomes available, unless they do actually draft all three 1st round picks...unless they want to make a trade for someone who goes on the trading block and their contract situation is a factor.

I think it's a disadvantage to your options and flexibility even if you don't have a certain move you want to make.  If you didn't have all that dead money then you have some money to throw around and maybe you overpay a little bit for a player but it's worth it because it upgrades a position and helps your team and doesn't hurt your cap situation.

[NOTW]

14 minutes ago, paco said:

There is also roll over from 2021.

Ok help me with that one, do you mean cap savings from 2021 that rolls over into 2022 giving them more cap space?  I was just going on the current cap space figure on OTC.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Ok help me with that one, do you mean cap savings from 2021 that rolls over into 2022 giving them more cap space?  I was just going on the current cap space figure on OTC.

24.4 million from this year rolls over and adds to the 2022 number of 12.1 million.  That 24.4 million is before a variety of things, performance bonuses, roster bonuses before the start of the league year, etc.

For instance, the Eagles gave Nelson an incentive bonus in the form of a signing bonus of 375K,  That has not been figured into the current cap yet.  Rodney McLeod has up to 750K in game bonuses.  All this will be applied to the cap once paid to the player.

[pallidrone]

37 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Your argument is kind of like:

Hey, I have all my credit cards maxed out, bad credit so I can't get a loan and every month I am over budget and can't afford my bills.  But who cares?  There's nothing new I need to purchase and I can just cut out a few things to stay on budget.

I don't like overpaying in free agency either.  I like smart free agent signings like Steven Nelson.  I like being able to "make a splash" on occasion when it's worth it.  Some examples were Brandon Brooks and Javon Hargrave.  Every year you will have some free agents that end up re-signing with their current teams, some that go to teams for way more than they're worth and then you have the value guys that help solidify the roster.  You also have guys that become available because of cap casualties that aren't slated to be free agents right now, but may become available.

I like the team to have flexibility.  I don't like Howie extending old guys like Brooks, Graham, Lane Johnson for way more years on the contract than they should or giving out bad guaranteed contracts to Jeffrey and Jackson instead of cutting them or doing shorter term deals.  Some of it is about more than the current year, planning things out.  Howie used to plan things out much better.

You're talking about 2017 when they signed Jeffrey, yes he made that happen. He also managed to extend Cox's contract after signing/extending a bunch of other players and fans thought he wasn't going to be able to do it, and he did.  That was then.  

Since winning the SB in addition to your perfect storm example, the other storm that hit them is bad drafting for years.  Howie can't draft, so he has to go to free agency and trades especially on defense.  So he started extending older players to very long term deals instead of just doing 2 year deals.  There's money taken up in the cap being paid to guys who have spent 1-2 years on IR, guys who haven't been on the team in 2 years.  

You are right that as long as they are under the cap and don't want to sign any valuable players it's no big deal...unless they want to sign someone who becomes available, unless they do actually draft all three 1st round picks...unless they want to make a trade for someone who goes on the trading block and their contract situation is a factor.

I think it's a disadvantage to your options and flexibility even if you don't have a certain move you want to make.  If you didn't have all that dead money then you have some money to throw around and maybe you overpay a little bit for a player but it's worth it because it upgrades a position and helps your team and doesn't hurt your cap situation.

The problem that I have is that people keep trying to compare this to real world finances. It is not like 'maxing out a credit card' or paying a mortgage or anything else that happens with personal finances. It is most like a business borrowing against future earnings to pay for current needs, with the exception that future earnings are consistent and constantly moving upwards.

It is like they are buying things for a $100 today from money next year when it is worth $80 because of the rising cap. That money still has to be paid and it ends up on the books, but it has less value in the future then it does right now. Teams have figured this out which is why they push dead numbers forward.

While I do not think it is a disadvantage, especially this year, I do agree with the rest of your post. Drafting has been bad, coaching up those draft choices has been bad and that had a trickle down effect where they had to invest too much in older players.

[NOTW]

28 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

The problem that I have is that people keep trying to compare this to real world finances. It is not like 'maxing out a credit card' or paying a mortgage or anything else that happens with personal finances. It is most like a business borrowing against future earnings to pay for current needs, with the exception that future earnings are consistent and constantly moving upwards.

It is like they are buying things for a $100 today from money next year when it is worth $80 because of the rising cap. That money still has to be paid and it ends up on the books, but it has less value in the future then it does right now. Teams have figured this out which is why they push dead numbers forward.

While I do not think it is a disadvantage, especially this year, I do agree with the rest of your post. Drafting has been bad, coaching up those draft choices has been bad and that had a trickle down effect where they had to invest too much in older players.

Sure it's not a perfect analogy, I did say "kind of." 😉 

It's just the flexibility & options. And while it's not our money of course, I hate seeing so much money going to players not contributing. They're paying $5 million per year for 2 years to Alshon Jeffrey who isn't even on the team.

 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Sure it's not a perfect analogy, I did say "kind of." 😉 

It's just the flexibility & options. And while it's not our money of course, I hate seeing so much money going to players not contributing. They're paying $5 million per year for 2 years to Alshon Jeffrey who isn't even on the team.

 

Malik Jackson 9 million in dead cap this year.  We didn't even get 9 million in value when he played.

[MillerTime]

These are the numbers if Brooks retires Post June 1st. 

2022: 5,939,235 million in dead cap

2023: 9,797,000 million in dead cap

Cap savings:
2022: 13,500,000, won’t be available till june 1st, can be used on rookies and roll over

2023: 13,700,000. 

2024: 15,500,000

Meaning we are getting more money back then we originally had in each year. We are getting the value back from Brooks because Dickerson is on a rookie contract and he is playing excellent. Which means we are getting production from the position. They will need a backup guard who will ultimately make league minimum. We can upgrade a different position now where we aren’t getting production. 

Don’t let @downundermike scare you with his dead cap number.

(The Eagles can restructure Brooks and then designate him as a june 1st retirement and use some money before June 1st if they want to)

[MillerTime]

DT, DE, and CB are important in this draft for multiple reasons. The obvious one being we need defense. The other being if we can get young players and rookie contracts that produce behind the big contracts that we have then we can let the big contracts go.

When we let the big contracts go, the dead number will hit, but we will have young producing players to make up for the value for the position. Which means we won’t overspend. This year is important for that having 3 first round picks. Howie has been setting this up.

Hopefully we can figure QB out without giving up these resources. Mostly why the team wanted Hurts to work out. It’s going to be interesting how this plays out this offseason. 

[kiwieagle]

4 hours ago, pallidrone said:

What they cant do is blow $60 million on a bunch of over the hill or mediocre players in FA. What they probably can't do is sign a WR to a 4 year $72 million contract and hope that he produces more than 37 catched for 512 yards and no TDs but do you really want them to do that?

Yep but that is limiting your options, the number of upgrades you can make and forces you to be right with the signings you do make i.e. rolling over, voidable years etc that lead to this dead cap space do have an opportunity cost.

[kiwieagle]

4 hours ago, NOTW said:

They have $12 million in cap space.  Obviously, there will be some room created with players that get cut or restructured.  But not if they wanted to do something bigger in free agency, as you said a safety or a veteran WR.

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/philadelphia-eagles/

You are looking for players with large salaries to be converted to bonuses to spread that out. As I've said before this makes them harder to cut over the next two-four years so you only want to do it with young players who you intend to be here a long time. Slay and Hargrave are the ones that stand out with large salaries. Not sure its the best move to be doing that with Slay given his age but that is what will happen. Lane is next who I love but already has massive cap numbers the next few years. Then Seumalo (gulp)

[MillerTime]

1 minute ago, kiwieagle said:

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/philadelphia-eagles/

You are looking for players with large salaries to be converted to bonuses to spread that out. As I've said before this makes them harder to cut over the next two-four years so you only want to do it with young players who you intend to be here a long time. Slay and Hargrave are the ones that stand out with large salaries. Not sure its the best move to be doing that with Slay given his age but that is what will happen. Lane is next who I love but already has massive cap numbers the next few years. Then Seumalo (gulp)

You don’t have to restructure any of them this year. Or any year. We are under the cap. Next year is the last year for multiple of them. We can sign 2-3 big free agents to back loaded contracts and multiple stop gaps. Brooks saved money will sign the rookies and provide roll over. There will be some dead money moving forward but we are gonna gain money and value in replacing them.

[kiwieagle]

1 hour ago, MillerTime said:

You don’t have to restructure any of them this year. Or any year. We are under the cap. Next year is the last year for multiple of them. We can sign 2-3 big free agents to back loaded contracts and multiple stop gaps. Brooks saved money will sign the rookies and provide roll over. There will be some dead money moving forward but we are gonna gain money and value in replacing them.

My understanding was Brooks only saved $4m? Our projected cap space was $12m before that according to the link I posted but I am not sure if the $12m already includes $25m rollover we get from this year or not?

The three first rounders alone based on this year would take up $10m, so if the $12 includes the rollover, you will need at least one restructure to sign the free agents. And yeah by necessity those contracts will need to be massively back-loaded which isn't great either   

[MillerTime]

1 minute ago, kiwieagle said:

My understanding was Brooks only saved $4m? Our projected cap space was $12m before that?

The three first rounders alone based on this year would take up $10m, so you will need at least one restructure to sign the free agents. And yeah by necessity those contracts will need to be massively back-loaded which isn't great either   

Read my post up above about Brooks. Restructuring one would be fine too, but its not a necessity.

[kiwieagle]

3 hours ago, MillerTime said:

These are the numbers if Brooks retires Post Junes 1st. 

2022: 5,939,235 million in dead cap

2023: 9,797,000 million in dead cap

Cap savings:
2022: 13,500,000, won’t be available till june 1st, can be used on rookies and roll over

2023: 13,700,000. 

2024: 15,500,000

Meaning we are getting more money back then we originally had in each year. We are getting the value back from Brooks because Dickerson is on a rookie contract and he is playing excellent. Which means we are getting production from the position. They will need a backup guard who will ultimately make league minimum. We can upgrade a different position now where we aren’t getting production. 

Don’t let @downundermike scare you with his dead cap number.

(The Eagles can restructure Brooks and then designate him as a june 1st retirement and use some money before June 1st if they want to)

Thanks - how do you get $13.7 for 2023. If his scheduled cap number is $18m and we have $10m in dead money, wouldn't the savings only be $8m?

[kiwieagle]

For someone who knows more about the cap and how this works. Does the $12m cap room per OTC before or after the $25m rollover from this year?

I'm missing something here using the OTC numbers but would have expected that cap is set at 208.1, we roll over 24.5 so 232.6 adding the two up. Less top-51 of 190.3, less dead cap of 22.0 = our room is 20.3

[MillerTime]

13 minutes ago, kiwieagle said:

Thanks - how do you get $13.7 for 2023. If his scheduled cap number is $18m and we have $10m in dead money, wouldn't the savings only be $8m?

Anything after 2023 accelerates. So you are correct with this sir. But that saves more money in 2024 and 2025

[kiwieagle]

28 minutes ago, MillerTime said:

Anything after 2023 accelerates. So you are correct with this sir. But that saves more money in 2024 and 2025

Yep, so savings in 2024 would be the full $19m. At least that's how I understand the cap works but I'm no expert 

[Cochis_Calhoun]

10 hours ago, MillerTime said:

These are the numbers if Brooks retires Post June 1st. 

2022: 5,939,235 million in dead cap

2023: 9,797,000 million in dead cap

Cap savings:
2022: 13,500,000, won’t be available till june 1st, can be used on rookies and roll over

2023: 13,700,000. 

2024: 15,500,000

Meaning we are getting more money back then we originally had in each year. We are getting the value back from Brooks because Dickerson is on a rookie contract and he is playing excellent. Which means we are getting production from the position. They will need a backup guard who will ultimately make league minimum. We can upgrade a different position now where we aren’t getting production. 

Don’t let @downundermike scare you with his dead cap number.

(The Eagles can restructure Brooks and then designate him as a june 1st retirement and use some money before June 1st if they want to)

Nelson, Barnett and McLeod are all out of contract, Brandon Graham is mid 30's coming off a ruptured achilles and would cost us $27million in dead cap to get rid of, Hargrave is going into his last year, was our best interior lineman this year but we're in the crap now because his contract was structured such that his cap number next year is 3.5 times higher than it was the first 2 years and so is now higher than Cox, except extending him won't help because he's outperforming Cox who's contract is immovable and Hargrave can see what Cox is getting for the level of performance Hargrave had last year.

If the stories about clauses in Kelce's contract are true, we only have 1 post June 1st designation so you use that on Brooks you can't use it on Graham or Cox.

We are still in a hole and I hope Howie is still intent on actually dealing with it, if he trades for a big name QB, we'll be in a huge hole, that would be inescapable without trading / cutting some assets, and by assets I mean young players on decent contracts and letting guys like Hargrave go while keeping Cox around because we can't afford to cut him and he isn't worth his cap number to any potential trade partner.

[paco]

14 hours ago, pallidrone said:

The problem that I have is that people keep trying to compare this to real world finances. It is not like 'maxing out a credit card' or paying a mortgage or anything else that happens with personal finances. It is most like a business borrowing against future earnings to pay for current needs, with the exception that future earnings are consistent and constantly moving upwards.

It is like they are buying things for a $100 today from money next year when it is worth $80 because of the rising cap. That money still has to be paid and it ends up on the books, but it has less value in the future then it does right now. Teams have figured this out which is why they push dead numbers forward.

While I do not think it is a disadvantage, especially this year, I do agree with the rest of your post. Drafting has been bad, coaching up those draft choices has been bad and that had a trickle down effect where they had to invest too much in older players.

In a vacuum, you are correct.  The problem some of us has is that Howie does not do this in moderation.  If you do this too much, your cap becomes rigid and the end result is you are precluded from making moves you may want to make.

 

If you care, this was my take when they extended cox

Spoiler

On 9/17/2021 at 8:50 AM, paco said:

Finally getting around to this since baby girl is sleeping and I have a quick minute.

 

Yes, any discussion about the proper way to build a team is academic.  The rest of this is unfounded given the cap is, by definition, finite.  I can give an example (which will help me make a few broader points) where a team actually found themselves in a position that it was virtually impossible to get under the cap: the 2006 Washington Rwords.

 

One of my criticisms of Howie post superbowl on how he was managing the team is that it reminded me of the early to mid aught Vinny Cerrato.  Like Howie, he would borrow heavily from future cap and use draft picks to trade for aging veterans.  He ended up with an extremely tight cap, no young talent, and a very shallow roster.  (Sound familiar?).  The result?  Consistently finishing around 6-10 with a random playoff season sprinkled in

2002	2002	NFL	NFC	East	3rd	7	9	0	—		Steve Spurrier
2003	2003	NFL	NFC	East	3rd	5	11	0	—
2004	2004	NFL	NFC	East	4th	6	10	0	—		Joe Gibbs
2005	2005	NFL	NFC	East	2nd	10	6	0	Won Wild Card Playoffs (at Buccaneers) 17–10 Lost Divisional Playoffs (at Seahawks) 20–10
2006	2006	NFL	NFC	East	4th	5	11	0	—
2007	2007	NFL	NFC	East	3rd	9	7	0	Lost Wild Card Playoffs (at Seahawks) 35–14
2008	2008	NFL	NFC	East	4th	8	8	0	—		Jim Zorn
2009	2009	NFL	NFC	East	4th	4	12	0

 

Now I know we did slightly better and there is one main difference:  We actually had an average to above average QB play in Wentz in 2018 and 2019, where they had a long expired shelf life of Mark Brunell and other flops like Jason Campbell.  

 

Now on to my example:

  

While I am a fan of the Joe Banner model (lock up players early, leave yourself cap flexible), I will say one thing.  Leveraging future cap space isn't the worst thing under one condition:  The expectation that the cap will go up perpetually.

 

In 2006 the NFL was going through its collective bargaining agreement.  A deal could not be made by the deadline which meant the cap stayed at the same #.  The R-words were in a bind.  Their model of restructures and consistently borrowing them from the future meant that it was virtually impossible for them to get under.  They had to make a ton of cuts and the only thing that got them under was Lavar Arrington wanted out so bad he returned 4 million so they would have a small cap savings when they cut him.  In the end this was all moot, the CBA got extended, the cuts that were made were contingent on no CBA and the players reverted back to the team.  But this example was a cautionary tale to what Howie was doing.

Fast forward to this year.  The cap went down unexpectedly and Howies hands were tied.  He pulled all but one or two levers to get us under.

 

So why borrow from the future at all?  If you expect the cap to go up, it can actually make financial sense.  Much like when the mortgage rates drop and money becomes "cheaper", a higher future cap is "cheaper" money.  If the cap is 300 million one year and 320 million the next year, borrowing 30 million from the future year is a smaller % of that years cap vs 30 million of the current cap.  If done in moderation, it is an effective way to build your team.  The trick is balance, making sure you also have cap flexibility for the unexpected whether it be a pandemic or a breakout star that you want to extend.

 

 

[NOTW]

9 hours ago, kiwieagle said:

For someone who knows more about the cap and how this works. Does the $12m cap room per OTC before or after the $25m rollover from this year?

I'm missing something here using the OTC numbers but would have expected that cap is set at 208.1, we roll over 24.5 so 232.6 adding the two up. Less top-51 of 190.3, less dead cap of 22.0 = our room is 20.3

 

15 hours ago, downundermike said:

24.4 million from this year rolls over and adds to the 2022 number of 12.1 million.  That 24.4 million is before a variety of things, performance bonuses, roster bonuses before the start of the league year, etc.

For instance, the Eagles gave Nelson an incentive bonus in the form of a signing bonus of 375K,  That has not been figured into the current cap yet.  Rodney McLeod has up to 750K in game bonuses.  All this will be applied to the cap once paid to the player.

 

[paco]

9 hours ago, kiwieagle said:

For someone who knows more about the cap and how this works. Does the $12m cap room per OTC before or after the $25m rollover from this year?

 

Its before the rollover.  You won't see it until the beginning of the new league year.