(03-16-2022, 08:34 AM)Mikey Wrote:

(03-15-2022, 07:55 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: God, I hate back loaded deals. That's what Baalke did in San Francisco and when they finally got rid of him, they were in "cap hell" for years, because of all the back loaded deals he did.

....so your preference is to pay a guy 30-odd mill this year between signing bonus and salary, and pray that he doesn't hold out for a new deal when the final year only pays 2-3MM?

The structures are not overly lopsided. Cap hits are reduced in the first year, but the player is getting the entirety of the bonus today to offset their temporarily reduced salary. If they are playing well, the contract affords them a salary consistent with other players around the league. If they aren't, the cap hit/dead money is not going to put us in a bare bones season to revive our cap.

Did you look at the deals before you dismissed them based on your preconceptions? Come on.

If I sign a guy to a front loaded deal, he can hold out if he wants, but I'm not giving him a new deal until the old one is finished. I word the contract that I can fine the crap out of him if he does hold out. If they want the big money up front, they will be expected to play out the contract. I'm sick of pushing money into the future. That's how you end up in cap hell and you have to end up cutting all your best players to get under the cap. San Francisco had to do it when Baalke structured all the contracts the same way and the Niners lost most of their good players and had to re-build. 

I believe in spending what you have now and making the hits on the back end light enough, so if you make a mistake and sign a player who doesn't live up to the deal, you can cut him without taking a hit of dead money. We've got stuck with way too many bad players in the past that we couldn't cut, because of the way the contract was structured. Rayshawn Jenkins was awful last season and we're stuck with him this year, because the dead money cap hit is too big. I hate that.

---