(04-18-2023, 10:03 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(04-17-2023, 05:41 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: You're explaining it just fine for your point which is not my point. All I'm saying is I feel better about the future money on the cap when the player is still on the roster when we're dinged for it in the future year. I do not like it when we are attributing cap dollars to players who are not on the roster like the $4 million we're taking for Shaq Griffin this year. Lots of players taking up your cap space who aren't actually playing for you anymore is the risk of all these restructures (see Jags 2003). Look at the Rams, they have ~20% of this year's cap tied up in Ramsey, Floyd, Bobby Wagner, and the 2 year retired Andrew Whitworth; that's the textbook definition of cap hell that I want the Jags to avoid.

Okay, I think I understand what you are saying now.  You would feel better if a guy who's carrying a dead cap hit is on the team.  There's nothing wrong with that feeling, although personally, I would not want the dead cap hit the guy is carrying around to factor into the decision as to whether to keep him.  

I don't like the way we are pushing cap hits, for money already paid, into the future, but that's the result of hiring a bunch of high priced free agents who, against all odds, actually lived up to their contracts, so we don't want to let go of them, and to keep them around, we have to push the cap hits for other players into the future.  We've restructured about everyone we can restructure this year, and I don't know what we're going to do next year, unless we do funky stuff like adding (fake) voidable years onto contracts and pushing even more cap hits into the future.  There is a limit, I'm just not sure where it is.

Hey Marty, I think you are losing us a bit in semantics...  There's no such thing as "dead cap money" for a player still on the roster.  It's just their cap hit.  If we get rid of someone that got a large bonus, then the rest of their bonus years accelerate into the current one (or is split over 2 years if a post June 1 cut designation).  Yeah, I get it, some guys have high salaries and cap hits, but if we get rid of them we get hit with the 'dead cap' AND we have to pay someone else to replace them - that's really the biggest difference.

I haven't looked for any updates, but as much as we were up against the cap to start this league year, we had a CRAPTON of available cap in 2024 and 2025.  Even though it seems like Baalke and company have pushed a fair amount of bonus money into the future with restructures this year, they had a LOT of room to work with.  I think we're still in really good shape going forward.

And considering #1 receivers are getting upwards of $20+million per year these days, $13mil for Kirk feels like a bargain now.

---

(04-18-2023, 10:03 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(04-17-2023, 05:41 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: You're explaining it just fine for your point which is not my point. All I'm saying is I feel better about the future money on the cap when the player is still on the roster when we're dinged for it in the future year. I do not like it when we are attributing cap dollars to players who are not on the roster like the $4 million we're taking for Shaq Griffin this year. Lots of players taking up your cap space who aren't actually playing for you anymore is the risk of all these restructures (see Jags 2003). Look at the Rams, they have ~20% of this year's cap tied up in Ramsey, Floyd, Bobby Wagner, and the 2 year retired Andrew Whitworth; that's the textbook definition of cap hell that I want the Jags to avoid.

Okay, I think I understand what you are saying now.  You would feel better if a guy who's carrying a dead cap hit is on the team.  There's nothing wrong with that feeling, although personally, I would not want the dead cap hit the guy is carrying around to factor into the decision as to whether to keep him.  

I don't like the way we are pushing cap hits, for money already paid, into the future, but that's the result of hiring a bunch of high priced free agents who, against all odds, actually lived up to their contracts, so we don't want to let go of them, and to keep them around, we have to push the cap hits for other players into the future.  We've restructured about everyone we can restructure this year, and I don't know what we're going to do next year, unless we do funky stuff like adding (fake) voidable years onto contracts and pushing even more cap hits into the future.  There is a limit, I'm just not sure where it is.

Yeah, sucks when you're stuck with someone because they aren't living up to the contract (e.g. Russell Wilson).  Fortunately the guys we've paid good money to are pretty much earning it.

---