Clayton posts preliminary cap projections for all 32 teams

[Miguel]

For the record, all of the cap projections will shrink by a couple of million when the new minimum salaries are factored in. Brandt has them all going up roughly $55K this year.

For the Pats this only affected less than a dozen players in the Top 51 and the amount of the increase was less than $55K each since the preexisting minimum salaries were already higher than the 2010's.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

For the Pats this only affected less than a dozen players in the Top 51 and the amount of the increase was less than $55K each since the preexisting minimum salaries were already higher than the 2010's.

Thanks. I was basing what I said on what Brandt said, and I'm not sure what ESPN was using for it's data since some items like RFA tenders were not included in theirs based on no known data. I also hear tag numbers may change due to a formula change. Were you using 2011 figures the expired CBA? Does this change what teams can convert in restructures?

 

[TheSolderKing]

the infamous NERD Clayton. I bet he got the job @ ESPN to achieve the QUOTA of NERDS on ESPN


I seldom read him

 

[TheSolderKing]

Clayton is a moron and a dbag. Anything he writes is almost garunteed to be agenda driven and inaccurate.

u forgot the Nerd part check my last post. He certainly does not belong on ESPN

 

[Miguel]

Thanks. I was basing what I said on what Brandt said, and I'm not sure what ESPN was using for it's data since some items like RFA tenders were not included in theirs based on no known data. I also hear tag numbers may change due to a formula change. Were you using 2011 figures the expired CBA? Does this change what teams can convert in restructures?

I am basing the Law Firm's RFA tender based on the old CBA. It may not be correct. I will change it when I hear the correct number. Nothing I have seen leads me believe that there are changes to what teams can convert in a restructure.

 

[Ring 6]

Thanks. I was basing what I said on what Brandt said, and I'm not sure what ESPN was using for it's data since some items like RFA tenders were not included in theirs based on no known data. I also hear tag numbers may change due to a formula change. Were you using 2011 figures the expired CBA? Does this change what teams can convert in restructures?

It will hit the Jets pretty hard. They have IIRC between 20 and 30 players who are signed at the minimum. Thats 1 to 1.5 mill extra for the horrendous depth they will be stuck with.

 

[patfanken]

Im not really sure how it works and what it means, but I've read where teams will be able to get over $6MM in cap relief this year. About 3MM on some kind of vet exemption, and another $3MM in money they can "borrow" into the future. So if this is correct the cap is really closer to $126MM than 120

Let me know if I'm in the ballpark with this and how it works. Thanks

 

[Miguel]

It will hit the Jets pretty hard. They have IIRC between 20 and 30 players who are signed at the minimum. Thats 1 to 1.5 mill extra for the horrendous depth they will be stuck with.

I doubt it.

I do not follow the Jets cap as much as it appears that you do. But I doubt that they have 20 to 30 players in their Top 51 whose salaries are at the minimum. The Jets may have 75 players signed or tendered with 20 to 30 of them whose salaries are at the minimum but most of them will not have their salaries counts.

Example, using a Patriots player.

Brandon Deaderick's salary was $405,000 but it counted $0 against the cap because he did not have a Top 51 cap number. Even though under the proposed CBA his 2011 salary would be increased to $450,000 right now it will still count $0 against the cap because he still would not have a Top 51 cap number.

MLR's interpretation of the impact of minimum salary increase is simply wrong.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I doubt it.

I do not follow the Jets cap as much as it appears that you do. But I doubt that they have 20 to 30 players in their Top 51 whose salaries are at the minimum. The Jets may have 75 players signed or tendered with 20 to 30 of them whose salaries are at the minimum but most of them will not have their salaries counts.

Example, using a Patriots player.

Brandon Deaderick's salary was $405,000 but it counted $0 against the cap because he did not have a Top 51 cap number. Even though under the proposed CBA his 2011 salary would be increased to $450,000 right now it will still count $0 against the cap because he still would not have a Top 51 cap number.

MLR's interpretation of the impact of minimum salary increase is simply wrong.

Well there was that year the Colts fielded 19 minimum salary players on their 53... If somebody ends up with that many on their 53 this season they will now cost $1.045M more than they were projected to when they do count.

 

[The Scrizz]

I doubt it.

I do not follow the Jets cap as much as it appears that you do. But I doubt that they have 20 to 30 players in their Top 51 whose salaries are at the minimum. The Jets may have 75 players signed or tendered with 20 to 30 of them whose salaries are at the minimum but most of them will not have their salaries counts.

Example, using a Patriots player.

Brandon Deaderick's salary was $405,000 but it counted $0 against the cap because he did not have a Top 51 cap number. Even though under the proposed CBA his 2011 salary would be increased to $450,000 right now it will still count $0 against the cap because he still would not have a Top 51 cap number.

MLR's interpretation of the impact of minimum salary increase is simply wrong.

I think Andy is referring to the jets current situation where they have 57 guys signed and nearly half of them are at Deadrick's salary or less (according to nyjetscap.com which is to your page what the Jets are to the Pats - not close).

Sure they can replace them with higher salary guys, but then it costs them even more against the cap so they're damned do, damned don't.

 

[Miguel]

Well there was that year the Colts fielded 19 minimum salary players on their 53... If somebody ends up with that many on their 53 this season they will now cost $1.045M more than they were projected to when they do count.

That's simply wrong. The 2011 minimum salaries were already higher than the 2010 salaries by $10,000. Example, in 2010 the rookie salary was $320,000. The 2011 rookie class was tendered a minimum salary of $330,000. Now their tender has been increased by $45,000 to $375,000.

Here is what you said - "For the record, all of the cap projections will shrink by a couple of million when the new minimum salaries are factored in".

Do you still believe that the projections for all teams will shrink by a couple of million of dollars?

 

[Miguel]

I think Andy is referring to the jets current situation where they have 57 guys signed and nearly half of them are at Deadrick's salary or less (according to nyjetscap.com which is to your page what the Jets are to the Pats - not close).

The salary increase only affects the cap number for those who are in the Top 51. The salary increase is most likely $45K than $55K because the 2011 minimum salaries were already $10K higher than the 2010 salaries. If nyjetscap.com is right about the # of the players that the Jets signed, then the minimum salary increase may indeed cost them close to a million in cap space.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

That's simply wrong. The 2011 minimum salaries were already higher than the 2010 salaries by $10,000. Example, in 2010 the rookie salary was $320,000. The 2011 rookie class was tendered a minimum salary of $330,000. Now their tender has been increased by $45,000 to $375,000.

Here is what you said - "For the record, all of the cap projections will shrink by a couple of million when the new minimum salaries are factored in".

Do you still believe that the projections for all teams will shrink by a couple of million of dollars?

I don't know. Could or may would have been a better term. That said, I'm not sure rookies were tendered at anything since they were drafted when no CBA existed and signed no documents to my understanding. You did assume tenders, other amateur capologists simply didn't include them at all. Not sure what those tracking the league cap committments at ESPN did. They didn't include RFA tenders and those were set under the old CBA too... Depending on how many teams have the combination of several rookies and several mimimum salary veterans and several youngsters working on rookie deals with salary pegged to the minimum on the roster may.

 

[patman52]

I have heard it reported that the players will get their workout bonuses. Does anyone know if Clayton's figures include the workout bonus money.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I have heard it reported that the players will get their workout bonuses. Does anyone know if Clayton's figures include the workout bonus money.

Probably. Those amounts are generally presumed earned in cap projections until otherwise noted. I've heard those reports too. That was one of the remaining open issues in the Wednesday proposal the NFLPA released. They want those paid to any player who shows up for camp and is cleared and is physically able to perform in camp, and they wanted a stipulation that cutting a player to avoid payment wasn't an option. Whether the league gave in on that remains a guess.