The cap IS worrisome over the next few years

[scout]

Peter King just wrote an article in which he praises the Patriots for building a championship team, a blueprint in which he is critical that no one is following. What transpired in letting players go before the 2001 season and the signing of the low-range free agents could be the answer down the road. No one wants to see great players go, but if that is what Pioli and BB decide, then that is the correct decision. Of course, the same members who are blasting today's draft picks will probably blast those decisions, whatever. When those contracts come up in a few years, this ball club may already have gone through some drastic changes, as it has since the last championship. I'm ready for the ride.

 

[Fencer]

Disregarding the hostile and knee-jerk reactions from folks too lazy to think about arithmetic themselves, or who are making elementary errors, let's remind ourselves of some salary cap basics:

A. The cap goes up every year.
B. Players' expectations of pay for the same performance goes up every year. Long-term, Factors A and B roughly cancel out.
C. Every year, teams' cap figure is artificially high due to dead money (e.g., Dillon's cap hit for us this year).
D. Every year, teams' cap figure is artificially low due to back-end loaded deals. Factor D is a lot bigger than Factor C, at least for the Pats, but up to a point that can be rolled over for a number of years in a row.
E. The most reliable way to outperform the cap is to just do an outstanding job of drafting, like the Pats did a few years ago but have happened to not do for the past two.
F. It is sometimes possible to outperform the cap by getting underpriced FAs, as the Pats did with low-priced FAs before the first Super Bowl run or as they (at least in my opinion) did with Moss this past offseason.
G. In any one season, injuries of course affect how much benefit you get from your season-starting talent. But that's not what I'm talking about in this thread.

--------------------------------------------------------------

OK. That was the simple stuff. What it boils down to is:

1. Every team is on the same long-term budget.
2. Teams have flexibility about shifting expenditures from year to year. On any one contract, the talent they are paying for and the talent they are getting may not be well-matched year-by-year.
3. Team-wide, there's some similar flexibility; the total talent they're paying for may not be what they're actually getting in any one year.

---------------------------------------------------------------

I'm off to Christmas dinner. More discussion later.

 

[bradmahn]

Disregarding the hostile and knee-jerk reactions from folks too lazy to think about arithmetic themselves, or who are making elementary errors, let's remind ourselves of some salary cap basics:

A. The cap goes up every year.
B. Players' expectations of pay for the same performance goes up every year. Long-term, Factors A and B roughly cancel out.
C. Every year, teams' cap figure is artificially high due to dead money (e.g., Dillon's cap hit for us this year).
D. Every year, teams' cap figure is artificially low due to back-end loaded deals. Factor D is a lot bigger than Factor C, at least for the Pats, but up to a point that can be rolled over for a number of years in a row.
E. The most reliable way to outperform the cap is to just do an outstanding job of drafting, like the Pats did a few years ago but have happened to not do for the past two.
F. It is sometimes possible to outperform the cap by getting underpriced FAs, as the Pats did with low-priced FAs before the first Super Bowl run or as they (at least in my opinion) did with Moss this past offseason.
G. In any one season, injuries of course affect how much benefit you get from your season-starting talent. But that's not what I'm talking about in this thread.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Factors A and B do not cancel each other out when the cap increases for a team that has been the destination for FAs willing to take below average deals to play for a winner. That is a huge advantage for a team such as the Patriots.

It is reactionary to assume that the drafts of the last two years have not (or will not) provide players that can and will contribute at very low rookie contract levels to help offset the higher prices of more established "stars." Meriweather, Lua, and Richardson (players still on the team) could turn into good players at positions that are becoming more and more needy of depth and/or "revitalized youth," for lack of a better term. It's early (and if you still have some faith in guys like Chad Jackson or David Thomas, injured players who have shown promise), but the '06 draft was not crap. Maroney, Jackson, Thomas, Gostkowski, O'Callaghan, Le Kevin Smith, and Willie Andrews are the types of players (full time, part time, and developing) that make up the second tier and backups that allow money to be spent on the "stars." There is still time for those guys to become starters, too.

Not every draft has to provide three Pro Bowl players (like '03) to be a success, but the chances of the '08 draft to do so (high first, second, high third, third) are looking to be very good.

 

[ShrewBeer]

if anyone remembers it, we were in the same situation in 03. bb stacked up and it lasted two years, with a two year "lull". i am expecting this to happen again. this year is stacked, next year not so much, and the next two will be so-so, but then the third year they will have the dough to stack up again. its a system that allows you to build a championship team two years in a row followed by two years of semi-struggle.
i trust that bill and scott are not sacrificing the future in any way shape or form.

 

[mgteich]

We will have much time for this after the Super Bowl. Let me just say now that this thread is worrying about the 2010 season. We have few cap issues for 2008 and 2009. In fact, 2008 and 2009 figure to be easier than the last few years. We will have THREE five year runs back to back, in this time of free agency and the cap.

And 2010 is far away. There will be many decisions for the next decade about quarterbacks, coaches and other players.

In 2008, we will focus on how to get the best wide receiver corps we can, how to add a linebacker, and how to get enough corners on the field. But it is all doable. This time, we may need to actually play our first rounder. Lucky for us, 2008 is a much better draft pool than 2007.

 

[Fencer]

We will have much time for this after the Super Bowl. Let me just say now that this thread is worrying about the 2010 season. We ahve few cap issues for 2008 and 2009. In fact, 2008 and 2009 figure to be easier than the last few years. We will have THREE five year runs back to back, in this time of free agency and the cap.

And 2010 is far away. Thee will be many decisions for the next decade about quarterbacks, coaches and other players.

In 2008, we will focus on how to get the best wide receiver corps we can, how to add a linebacker, and how to get enough corners on the field. But it is all doable. This time, we may need actually play our first rounder.

I agree, actually. It's difficult to handle the cap every year. Duh. I expect a talent drop-off from this year to next -- but an all-time great team can afford a bit of a drop-off. All things considered, the next 1 or 2 years should be fine. Worst case is that the the Pats mortgage the future until Harrison et al. are too old to be good contributors, and then take a down-talent-year hit in which they have a real chance of not winning the division and only an outside chance of winning the Super Bowl.

I'm just saying that after two years it gets a lot harder.

 

[Fencer]

if anyone remembers it, we were in the same situation in 03. bb stacked up and it lasted two years, with a two year "lull". i am expecting this to happen again. this year is stacked, next year not so much, and the next two will be so-so, but then the third year they will have the dough to stack up again. its a system that allows you to build a championship team two years in a row followed by two years of semi-struggle.
i trust that bill and scott are not sacrificing the future in any way shape or form.

Agreed in general. We can disagree about one year here or there, of course.

 

[Fencer]

Factors A and B do not cancel each other out when the cap increases for a team that has been the destination for FAs willing to take below average deals to play for a winner. That is a huge advantage for a team such as the Patriots.

Agreed that that's an important advantage. But Moss is pretty much the only guy we've ever gotten at more than, say, a 20% discount to his market value, at least for that kind of reason.

Separately, of course, there's been diamond-in-the-rough value recognition of guys like Vrabel or Welker.

The third advantage the Pats have in FA is scheme -- simply making guys more valuable than they would be elsewhere. However, that's also been a bit overstated by the casual observer, since some of the biggest examples have been older, injury-prone (and therefore somewhat costlier than they first appear) guys like Junior Seau or Ty Poole.

 

[Fencer]

It is reactionary to assume that the drafts of the last two years have not (or will not) provide players that can and will contribute at very low rookie contract levels to help offset the higher prices of more established "stars." Meriweather, Lua, and Richardson (players still on the team) could turn into good players at positions that are becoming more and more needy of depth and/or "revitalized youth," for lack of a better term. It's early (and if you still have some faith in guys like Chad Jackson or David Thomas, injured players who have shown promise), but the '06 draft was not crap. Maroney, Jackson, Thomas, Gostkowski, O'Callaghan, Le Kevin Smith, and Willie Andrews are the types of players (full time, part time, and developing) that make up the second tier and backups that allow money to be spent on the "stars." There is still time for those guys to become starters, too.

Fair enough. But which of those guys is ever going to become seriously valuable? Maroney and Thomas still have star potential, for all we know. Ditto Meriweather. Gostowski seems on track to be very good for his position. But I think most of us would be astonished if any of the others you named (even Jackson) became much more than JAG starters. Ditto Mike Wright.

 

[bigdgp]

As per Miguel's page, this year:

Brady is playing at a very depressed cap hit, with a huge increase coming next season.

Moss is playing for well below what it would cost to keep him.

Asante is playing for a somewhat below his current market value.

Seymour (assuming he bounces back) is playing for below is current market value. He has one more year in that range, then he spikes up a few mil, then he's a FA.

A. Thomas is playing on the depressed first year of a long-term deal, and hence several mil below his value or future hits.

Warren is playing for millions below his future level of cap hit.

Watson has two more years of a cheap deal, and then is a FA.

Wilfork has two more years of a cheap deal, and then is a FA.

Koppen is early in his deal, and playing at somewhat below his future cap hits.

Mankins has two more years of a cheap deal, and then is a FA.

Green has two more years on a deal that is probably somewhat below market value, and then is a FA.

Gay is a FA after this year, and presumably will be able to command a raise.


CONCLUSIONS:

1. The Pats can probably keep something like the current level of talent together for another year or two, but after that it will be very difficult.

2. The Pats are likely to stick to their guns about not paying FULL market value for anybody expensive. Guys who won't accept that will therefore be gone.

3. Seymour is likely gone after his current contract expires.

Your ignoring the number of free agents that are going to want to come here at below market value contracts to try and get their ring. That is the added value of success. At this point we have such a track record of success and professionalism we are THE franchise that many players want to come play for.

 

[bradmahn]

Fair enough. But which of those guys is ever going to become seriously valuable? Maroney and Thomas still have star potential, for all we know. Ditto Meriweather. Gostowski seems on track to be very good for his position. But I think most of us would be astonished if any of the others you named (even Jackson) became much more than JAG starters. Ditto Mike Wright.

Thomas came here for less than the Forty-niners reportedly were prepared to offer him; Troy has taken less, Bruschi as well. Didn't Rosie have more offered to him by the Lions or Cardinals? Stallworth's "prove it" deal was sort of Patriots exclusive. It's happened and will continue to happen if they look as unstoppable to other players.

Astonished because a second rounder that has been injured turned out better than a JAG? I don't think the Patriots organization feels that way (God help us if they do).

I think we have a pretty big disagreement on the functional and organizational importance of role players and part-timers. Someone like Willie Andrews who will almost positively not become a starter but who is a special teams ace, is a very valuable player, especially when he comes at a cheap price (7th round pick rookie contract). A cheap seventh round special teams ace provides more value than a veteran free agent who only plays special teams (see Mel Mitchell). Those types of players save money in the long run as well as having a pretty big impact on the games in the present.

I don't know if I'd refer to Mike Wright (a guy who can capably fill in at NT and DE in a 3-4) as a JAG either, but to each his own.

 

[scout]

Your ignoring the number of free agents that are going to want to come here at below market value contracts to try and get their ring. That is the added value of success. At this point we have such a track record of success and professionalism we are THE franchise that many players want to come play for.

Another key is if we have some good draft picks in the latter rounds. We lost Ty Law to free agency and while he was here, was a stud. Asante Samuels picked up the slack and he was drafted in the 4th. A couple of good picks and a couple of good free agents will hopefully offset any departures.

 

[Fencer]

I think we have a pretty big disagreement on the functional and organizational importance of role players and part-timers.

I don't think so. I think the Pats have done a great job in that area in the past and will continue to do so in the future, and at comparable budgets (i.e., minimum salary for a mix of experience ranges).

It's very important to the team's success, but it's not relevant to COMPARISONS between one time period and another, because it's relatively constant (after perhaps an all-time unrepeatable spike in 2001 -- unrepeatable because BB/Pioli knew a lot of players from two previous teams AND because they caught the whole league napping).

Indeed, it would disprove my point only if the Pats were at a lull or low point right now in that kind of contribution, that could be improved on later. But Junior Seau is a heckuva high quality cheap starter. Much of the OL is cheap. The ST specialists are, as usual, cheap. The DL is cheap from #5 on. Gaffney is cheap. The Pats are likely to do just as great a job as that with cheap role players in future years -- but unless they do a lot better yet,it's not going to offset other factors we're discussing.

 

[Miguel]

The Colts are a lot closer to being in cap trouble than this team will ever be,
yet if you ask Miguel they aren't in trouble at all

Blah, Blah, Blah.

2004 -The Colts are going to be in cap hell and Miguel is in denial about it.
2005 -The Colts are going to be in cap hell and Miguel is in denial about it.
2006 -The Colts are going to be in cap hell and Miguel is in denial about it.
2007 -The Colts are going to be in cap hell and Miguel is in denial about it.
2008 -The Colts are going to be in cap hell and Miguel is in denial about it.

 

[Miguel]

The cap will be worrisome for the Patriots ONLY if a good number of their highly paid players do not play to the level of their cap number at the same time AND if Pioli loses his drafting prowess.

IMO, as long as Brady is one of the top QBs in the game, the Pats do not have a thing to worry about.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

i hope somebody wants that top 10 pick next year. cuz id imagine it will be hard for us to pay him

 

[Ice Cold Bruschi]

New talent will replace the old as long as Brady Belichick and Pioli are here, what we lose to free agency we'll get again through the draft, this just makes that lost draft pick seem that much more important these days.

 

[Fencer]

The cap will be worrisome for the Patriots ONLY if a good number of their highly paid players do not play to the level of their cap number at the same time AND if Pioli loses his drafting prowess.

IMO, as long as Brady is one of the top QBs in the game, the Pats do not have a thing to worry about.

You're overstating the case. The second-best team in the league isn't all THAT far behind the Pats. I think the Pats/Colts joint excellence surpasses anything previously seen in the salary cap era. (I don't have an opinion yet as to whether Dallas is making it a threesome; that probably depends mainly on whether Romo continues to mature the way Manning and Brady did. But I'm backing off from my opinion earlier this season that Pittsburgh deserved to be discussed in the same breath as the Colts and Pats.)

 

[40yrpatsfan]

Good thread. I think we're in good shape through the next 5 years, and there are many good sustainable trends:

- the cap goes up each year
- if we get an average of 4-5 keepers from the draft each year, which we've proven we can do, at an average length of 4 years, that's 16-20 guys we turn over through the draft at any given point in time.
- if we get 5 FA's each year, that's another 20 slots we turn over. Together that's 65% of the roster being turned over at affordable rates. And as someone pointed out, FA's want to come here, there's a ready supply.
- BB-SP will pay the DL's as long as they're performing. I do think they'll be able to come to terms with Seymour, Warren, Wilfork and Green to get us through the next 5 years.
- Brady should have 5 more years at a high level. His body seems to hold up very well. At backup, I think we replace Cassell with a reliable veteran, and groom Guttierez.
- Without any changes, we're in good shape at RB for at least 3 more years: Maroney, Faulk, Morris, and the backups.
- Same at WR, with Welker, future star Chad Jackson, Gaffney, and I think Moss.
- The OL needs a bit of an infusion, but we always find a low cost way to do that.
- We're in pretty good shape at safety with Sanders and Merriweather, and can expect another couple of years out of Rodney.
- CB and LB are constant challenges. I want to see those positions addressed in the '08 draft and FA. I don't know if we keep Assante, but I'm hoping for a miracle there.

No team has a better forecast than that.

 

[Miguel]

You're overstating the case. The second-best team in the league isn't all THAT far behind the Pats. I think the Pats/Colts joint excellence surpasses anything previously seen in the salary cap era. (I don't have an opinion yet as to whether Dallas is making it a threesome; that probably depends mainly on whether Romo continues to mature the way Manning and Brady did. But I'm backing off from my opinion earlier this season that Pittsburgh deserved to be discussed in the same breath as the Colts and Pats.)

In this salary cap era I just hope that the Pats field a team that is capable of winning a Super Bowl every year, not that they actually win a Super Bowl every year.