Kraft on Spending to the cap

[smg93]

“In terms of spending, you have to look where we are at the end of the season, not the beginning,”

http://patriots.bostonherald.com/patriots/view.bg?articleid=180801

There you go. Please no more "kraft is cheap" threads.

 

[Miguel]

I wish that the Herald reporters would ask the Krafts if he is including giving Troy Brown a $350,000 LTBE incentive, Dan Koppen a $1.927 million LTBE incentive for playing on special teams, and Antwain Spann a $2,913,410 LTBE incentive as part of Patriots' spending to the cap.

It is a fair question to ask even if you, like me, do not believe that the Krafts are cheap.

 

[DarrylS]

I saw the comments, looks as though many still believe that Kraft is cheap.. last I heard the Pats spent over the cap and will suffer a penalty in '07. The Boston press have to realize that Mr. Kraft will do anything he can to bring the Trophy back.

 

[bosfan]

The headline reads 'promises to spend to the salary cap'. Now what does that infer, that they haven't done this previously? Why didn't it read 'promises to continue to spend to the salary cap'? I emailed the author of the article with the same question, if he responds I'll let you know.

 

[DefenseRules]

You know, there were several other teams in the league who didn't spend to the cap in 2006. Why doesn't anyone throw them under the bus?

 

[Ghost of Ben Dreith]

The headline reads 'promises to spend to the salary cap'. Now what does that infer, that they haven't done this previously? Why didn't it read 'promises to continue to spend to the salary cap'? I emailed the author of the article with the same question, if he responds I'll let you know.

I think you are being a bit nitpicky here. The two items I believe the column spoke to is that the team will spend money to the cap and that Kraft does not control the spending. This same type of topic has come up in previous years and the response was always the same. We fans need to quit believing what the lying arseclowns in the Boston press writes to stir up things and trust in the Pats management.

Get ready too for the next wave of cheap accusations after this off-season. We all know some people will just not let go of this topic. Like night follows day.

 

[upstater1]

I wish that the Herald reporters would ask the Krafts if he is including giving Troy Brown a $350,000 LTBE incentive, Dan Koppen a $1.927 million LTBE incentive for playing on special teams, and Antwain Spann a $2,913,410 LTBE incentive as part of Patriots' spending to the cap.

It is a fair question to ask even if you, like me, do not believe that the Krafts are cheap.

I agree that's a fair question BUT presumably at some future point they'll be in the same difficulties that they were in when they signed Brady and had to cut people with bigger contracts. I'm sure the last thing Belichick wanted to do was get rid of Milloy that year, but he simply wanted the contract # down.

Eventually, those incentives will be used up instead of carried over year to year.

So what are we talking about here? $5 million tops? I actually believe it's lower since I can easily see a bit of those incentives being real (i.e. Troy getting paid).

I'm on a committee that's in charge of a budget. Usually, we scramble to fit everything in, and we always need money. A couple years ago, we were flush with new cash because of the sale of a windfarm. At the end of the year, we were criticized for not spending all the money available to us because whatever is left goes into a general fund out of our control. We simply felt we couldn't justify spending money just to spend it, even though it meant Money not Spent is Money Lost to our department. If anyone has had a significant budget increase, they can tell you it takes a bit to get adjusted to the new parameters. In the Patriots case, ramping contracts up by 15 to 20% instantly could throw the whole payroll out of whack. Samuel would get more money than Seymour, Brady would earn only 10% more than Samuel. You simply can't do that, you have to do it gradually to preserve unity. It's just like in a business with unions. If the workers come in at a lower entry level, and earn 3.5% raises yearly (which isn't even as common as it used to be) then eventually the market will surpass them, and you'll have entry level workers with 20 years less experience who are getting paid practically what the veterans are getting.

In the NFL, I just think the whole system is wacky. It's grossly unfair that Rodney Harrison could play all those years without the big payday, just because he wasn't drafted high, and then you get a complete bust who comes in and makes money for a lifetime, all because of his draft position.

I'm a firm believer in pay for play. That's not the NFL system.

 

[unoriginal]

So what are we talking about here? $5 million tops? I actually believe it's lower since I can easily see a bit of those incentives being real (i.e. Troy getting paid).

Troy getting paid was real, but not the big LTBE. He was also given a $50,000 signing bonus. (maybe it was $30,000, I can't remember, the point is he basically got a nice free car)

In the NFL, I just think the whole system is wacky. It's grossly unfair that Rodney Harrison could play all those years without the big payday, just because he wasn't drafted high, and then you get a complete bust who comes in and makes money for a lifetime, all because of his draft position.

I'm a firm believer in pay for play. That's not the NFL system.

It's not the NFL system, true, but in large part you have to talk to the NFLPA about that, as they are the ones who it seems are pushing for high "star" contracts, to the detriment of the rest of the roster. Also they are about creating security and guarantees for as many clients as possible, and those by nature are forward-looking, not based on past performance.

Of course, its not all one-way. For example, the NFL does have that program that awards significant cash bonuses to players substantially outperforming their rookie contracts.

 

[upstater1]

Troy getting paid was real, but not the big LTBE. He was also given a $50,000 signing bonus. (maybe it was $30,000, I can't remember, the point is he basically got a nice free car)



It's not the NFL system, true, but in large part you have to talk to the NFLPA about that, as they are the ones who it seems are pushing for high "star" contracts, to the detriment of the rest of the roster. Also they are about creating security and guarantees for as many clients as possible, and those by nature are forward-looking, not based on past performance.

Of course, its not all one-way. For example, the NFL does have that program that awards significant cash bonuses to players substantially outperforming their rookie contracts.

My problem is simply with the rookie contracts coming out of the draft. I think those are really ridiculous. The disparity between what Marques Coltson is going to make over his career versus say, what Roddy White or Troy Williamson will make is too substantial. 7th round stud versus 1st round bust. Who makes more money?

 

[Brarrell]

I wish that the Herald reporters would ask the Krafts if he is including giving Troy Brown a $350,000 LTBE incentive, Dan Koppen a $1.927 million LTBE incentive for playing on special teams, and Antwain Spann a $2,913,410 LTBE incentive as part of Patriots' spending to the cap.

It is a fair question to ask even if you, like me, do not believe that the Krafts are cheap.

Lets face it this in my mind isn't about spending to the cap. They should be doing that without question as the 2nd or 3rd richest franchise in the league and the highest ticket prices in the NFL and waiting list for the season tickets. What happen this year IMO was mismanagement of the off season in which they did nothing and in the end with a little more quality on the roster they probably would be playing tomorrow. It came down to making one first down to go to the SB with a team which was as talented as it could have been. It just shows how good BB really is. He is truly the best coach in the league its not even close. We know they will spend to the cap the real question is will Kraft shell out the bonus money that is the real question and thats what these reporters should be asking.

 

[upstater1]

Lets face it this in my mind isn't about spending to the cap. They should be doing that without question as the 2nd or 3rd richest franchise in the league and the highest ticket prices in the NFL and waiting list for the season tickets. What happen this year IMO was mismanagement of the off season in which they did nothing and in the end with a little more quality on the roster they probably would be playing tomorrow. It came down to making one first down to go to the SB with a team which was as talented as it could have been. It just shows how good BB really is. He is truly the best coach in the league its not even close. We know they will spend to the cap the real question is will Kraft shell out the bonus money that is the real question and thats what these reporters should be asking.

I don't buy it. You tell me what you would have done that was different, and then maybe I'll go along. By my estimation, they ended about $4 million under the cap (if you count the incentives as phony). So, what would you have done?

They were $13 million under when they tried to resign Ty Law and Deion Branch. They needed that money to sign them. If the Patriots had decided to cut bait on Branch and Law eearlier, who would you have signed instead?

Also, realize that they never thought they'd lose control of Branch. When the Patriots messed up by cutting Branch's agent out of the loop, they had to trade him. Branch was essentially told, we'll give you the money you're asking for. Fire your agent, and the money is here. After they did that the Patriots HAD to trade Branch. This wasn't an offseason strategy screw-up, it was a negotiating screw-up. Two different things. One is an organizational problem, the other is a brainfart. Unless you can guarantee me yoou'd never make such a mistake as a negotiator, I think it's hard to come down on the Patriots for their approach, especially when you consider Branch was under contract AND his agent refused to respond to the Patriots' contract offers.

 

[Patriot Missile]

You know, there were several other teams in the league who didn't spend to the cap in 2006. Why doesn't anyone throw them under the bus?

The anser is simple. This organization is so well run that it's very hard for the local media to take something negative and run with it. To be honest,imo the Patriot's are a columnist's nightmare. In reality,all they can write about is how great this team is. It's perserverence,consistency,a true model of what a professional sports team should be.

They don't have Manny Ramirez being Manny. They don't have fellows like TO or players from the Cincinatti penitentiary. The stories of how great this team have been written over and over from 01 to 04 that they are probably looking for something new. They can't get the true inside scoop what's going on behind closed doors so they are frustrated with their columns. So frustrated that they take pot shots any chance they can get.

Reiss is rewarded because the Patriots trust him. And he should be, it takes years to get some people's trust and he has been good to them through and through. Borges,Felger on the other hand think just because they are Boston media that they are entitled to inside scoops. That's not the case,nor should it be.

 

[JoeSixPat]

"With all due respect to my friends in the media and the fans, they don’t understand the intricacies of the cap."

Not quite true Bob - plenty of posters on Patsfans certainly did not but there were more than a handful that seemed to understand, the $10 million in space to start the season was there as a result of a good faith effort to sign Branch and other players.

... and that when that didn't work out to start the season the cap $ would be spent in other ways.

We repeated and reminded other fans of this everytime a thread would appear fretting about spending all of the cap $.

These same fans will continue to fret, not realizing that the $30 million in cap space next season isn't just for next year - but can be used to provide cap flexibility in future years.

In fact as a team you ALWAYS want some flexibility in the cap - other teams want it, get it, use it, waste it, then want it again - whereas the Patriots cherish it, use it wisely and always have the ability to use it when they need to.

 

[mgteich]

My bottom line is that the FO decided that the best use of $5M of cap money was to carry it over to 2007. There have been several reasons given:

1) there wasn't sufficient value available.
2) there were 2006 bonuses that would cost us against the 2007 cap, so this was a good use of the money, paying for 2006 obligations
3) there were potential cash over cap penalties that would count against the 2007 cap, so this was a good use of the money, paying for 2006 obligations
4) the team wanted to bring money into future years
5) they needed the money for Branch or Law, and there was no one else they wanted
6) Kraft wanted to pocket the cash

The FO clearly believes 1-3. No one know about 4, although since we have even more cap room in 2007, this seems unlikely. Reason 6 is nonsense.

As I have said many, many times, $2.5M of cap room a year is plently to sign anyone in the league for their first year, except for the very top quarterbacks, so #4 makes little sense to me. I certainly could structure a contract for either Law or Branch that would have cost $2.5M in 2006 cap money. Also, there were other restructures available that could have free up cap money, if they wanted someone else, while waiting for Law and Branch to decide.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

My bottom line is that the FO decided that the best use of $5M of cap money was to carry it over to 2007. There have been several reasons given:

1) there wasn't sufficient value available.
2) there were 2006 bonuses that would cost us against the 2007 cap, so this was a good use of the money, paying for 2006 obligations
3) there were potential cash over cap penalties that would count against the 2007 cap, so this was a good use of the money, paying for 2006 obligations
4) the team wanted to bring money into future years
5) they needed the money for Branch or Law, and there was no one else they wanted
6) Kraft wanted to pocket the cash

The FO clearly believes 1-3. No one know about 4, although since we have even more cap room in 2007, this seems unlikely. Reason 6 is nonsense.

As I have said many, many times, $2.5M of cap room a year is plently to sign anyone in the league for their first year, except for the very top quarterbacks, so #4 makes little sense to me. I certainly could structure a contract for either Law or Branch that would have cost $2.5M in 2006 cap money. Also, there were other restructures available that could have free up cap money, if they wanted someone else, while waiting for Law and Branch to decide.

In Law's case that was not true. They only wanted to commit to him for 2 years and didn't want dead cap or another messy divorce pending for 2008. He would have cost them basically $4.5M per plus incentives based on their offer of 2 years $9-11M - not much room to maneuver on that player. You've groused in the past when they pushed money forward that the mortgaged the future to pay for the present - although at that time they had no choice but to. Why should they do it now, just because they can? If it doesn't gain you functional talent, what is the point? It's like a spend down which only makes sense if you cannot roll savings forward - and we know you can.

 

[mgteich]

First, for me, $4.5M for Law was more than fine. Second, the alternative of pushing $5M into 2008 would have been fine, given the circumstances. The circumstance, for me, was that I thought we needed help badly at corner. In the end, our trio fo Samuel, Hobbs and Scott were absolutely terrific. In the end, Law could have retired here, so it not clear that even the $5M would have been wasted. After all, many here wanted him to stay as safety for 2008 and 2009. As I have said, I disagreed at the time with not pushing much harder (and higher) for Law. I was nervous all year. But in the end, the FO was right. Our corners were just fine. Hawkins and Sanders could have played at nickel, if they were needed there instead of safety. And we had Hank, until we was no longer needed.

So, bottom line, the FO was right and I was wrong. That's why they get the big bucks!

In Law's case that was not true. They only wanted to commit to him for 2 years and didn't want dead cap or another messy divorce pending for 2008. He would have cost them basically $4.5M per plus incentives based on their offer of 2 years $9-11M - not much room to maneuver on that player. You've groused in the past when they pushed money forward that the mortgaged the future to pay for the present - although at that time they had no choice but to. Why should they do it now, just because they can? If it doesn't gain you functional talent, what is the point? It's like a spend down which only makes sense if you cannot roll savings forward - and we know you can.

 

[frankiesfly]

hopefully we sign Donte Stallworth. Hes a free agent and think he'll fit in here.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

My bottom line is that the FO decided that the best use of $5M of cap money was to carry it over to 2007. There have been several reasons given:

1) there wasn't sufficient value available.
2) there were 2006 bonuses that would cost us against the 2007 cap, so this was a good use of the money, paying for 2006 obligations
3) there were potential cash over cap penalties that would count against the 2007 cap, so this was a good use of the money, paying for 2006 obligations
4) the team wanted to bring money into future years
5) they needed the money for Branch or Law, and there was no one else they wanted
6) Kraft wanted to pocket the cash

The FO clearly believes 1-3. No one know about 4, although since we have even more cap room in 2007, this seems unlikely. Reason 6 is nonsense.

As I have said many, many times, $2.5M of cap room a year is plently to sign anyone in the league for their first year, except for the very top quarterbacks, so #4 makes little sense to me. I certainly could structure a contract for either Law or Branch that would have cost $2.5M in 2006 cap money. Also, there were other restructures available that could have free up cap money, if they wanted someone else, while waiting for Law and Branch to decide.

I agree with proposition #1-3. I think they set aside $$$ for Branch, but just couldn't come to terms, partly because Branch's agent wanted to become famous. The good thing is we got a 1st round pick. Having 2 1st rounders will be critical to get some youth on defense.

As far as FA, exactly how many players are on the rosters or JAGs, and how many are premier FA. Dillon doesn't count, we traded for him, and Vrabel was picked up on the cheap, and then got a bigger contract. Colvin and harrison are really the only two you could make an argument for. The rest of the team is drafted, which is the key to the Patriot successes, and the key to our future successes.

 

[alamo]

It is a fair question to ask even if you, like me, do not believe that the Krafts are cheap.

It's only marginally a fair question... because it frames the Pats in a way that is contrary to their history, and because the final outcome won't be known until next year so they have no definitive defense against accusations of cheapness. They have in the past used the trick to carry money over to the next year.

 

[smg93]

I have got to believe that if the salary cap process allows teams to carry over unused cap space to another year by some loophole in the salary cap mechanism, Kraft, BB, and SP will definitely use that to their advantage because it allows them to go after players like Colvin for instance in Free Agency or to try and re-sign their core players like Brady and Seymour.

I have seen arguments over whether the pats will go big in free agency or not. People who believe this will tell you to look at the Colvin signing and even to a certain degree the Dillon trade. Others will tell you that the Pats wont sign big name free agents because the draft is more their style.

What I believe is that if their are ways to move salary cap space from one year to the next, the Pats do it because they are very selective about who they like from a list of FA's every off season. They may not sign big names every year, but if someone like a Colvin becomes a FA, they go after them as aggressively as Dan Snyder does because they have the extra cap room and because they know that that FA is the guy they've been waiting for even if it takes them 2 or 3 offseasons to sign him because they were still under contract.