Interesting AFCE cap analysis from Jason

[Ochmed Jones]

I've had a few days to reflect on the dead money chart and come away with: BB has no problem pulling the trigger on a vet, pick, or fa, who is beat out by someone else (it may even go deeper then that). I always think back to the 49er's dynasty when Bill Walsh would let go big name vets early rather then late (Ronny Lott), and that was before the salary cap.

I agree 100%. BB thrives on creating competition which helps his teams avoid complacency.

 

[TruthSeeker]

There are 2 areas that bear close watching per the cap. First is Brady's contract. There has to be something done this next off season that will be a permanent solution to the final years of his contract. Secondly is the dead money issue. Having 15% of your cap tied up in dead money can't be good. Even under the best of circumstances, dead money is usually the result of a financial commitment that didn't go as well as expected.

Finally after watching so many of the promising signings of the spring go out the door this fall, I think it might be time to do some 20-20 hindsight.

I bet we wish we were willing to pay those few extra million more for Red Bryant right now, as opposed to those empty dollars left by Fanene.

Well, the Patriots philosophy has been (comparatively) to keep the best football players with minimal regard to cap hit. Other teams choose to keep football players who have a large cap hit almost regardless of production or team leadership and chemistry (see NY Jets). Of course, the Jets are one of the more extreme examples in the NFL and they make their own bed by signing players for significantly more than their worth making it extremely hard to cut them.

So, with this philosophy in place, the Patriots are likely to have a higher dead cap hit than other teams - but bizarrely enough may also be likely to have better players overall. All is not as it seems at first glance.

 

[Urgent]

With a glass half-full view, we can point to Belichick's willingness to pull the plug on veterans that do not out-produce younger players.

As Jason points out, a glass half-empty view points to the significant amount of money wasted on bad personnel decisions. And this is not a new thing.

That money could have gone to Wes Welker. Or Kamerion Wimbley rather than Bobby Alexander. Or covered Brady's large 2012 hit rather than extend it to 2013.

Further, some of those transactions for Ochocinco and others cost draft picks that would have been used on the youth strategy.

Yes, Belichick was especially successful with a couple of these. Welker, Harrison and Seau in particular, Pleasant and Hamilton earlier.

The Patriots were more active than most teams bringing in vets this year, and very few of them made the team. The spaghetti strategy used this offseason brings a real penalty.

Bedard, in today's Globe, takes a look at these GM decisions, and points to the Hoyer decision. What if, he asks, instead of the $1.9mm tender Belichick used the lower $1.2mm tender? He could have gauged interest in Hoyer with the option to match. Hoyer might have been more attractive with a $700K lower price tag for the Patriots, or might have ended with a team that would work him into their system through the offseason. It ended with Hoyer a late cut, after all the pre-season games, too late for him to pick up another system. No compensation for the Patriots. No money for Hoyer. Tough all around. If the Patriots were willing to play it out, could there have been another scenario the GM could have considered?

I think many of the folks here point to Belichick the coach making up for Belichick the GM. No one thinks Belichick is not working hard enough. While Belichick the GM is willing to make the hard personnel decisions, it seems the Patriots could use a more strategic GM to consider the direction of personnel policy to avoid so much dead cap money that could be allocated far more effectively.

 

[Sfpat]

Isn't Reese (ex Oiler GM) supposed to be the strategic guy in regards to personnel policy?

 

[mgteich]

I strongly disagree.

The goal of an nil football team is about putting the best team on the field, not to avoid dead cap money.

Belichick's methodology includes taking risks on mid-level free agents, and then cutting the losers as soon as it evident that there are not part of the future. Belichick signed Stallworth, Branch, Gaffney, Fenene, Scott, Fells, Shiancoe and Lloyd. Some have made the team. Some have not. Fanene cost us a lot. But that is part of the risk.

Folks are whining, but it is indeed the general consensus that the patriots did as well as any in the offseason. Do you disagree?

The dead cap money is part of doing business. Belichick is fielding the BEST team in the nfl, has had money to extend Gronkowksi, Hernandez and Love, and still will have enough money to cover ALL the 2013 dead money from the excess 2012 cap money. We will start 2013 with a full amount of cap monies, with ZERO drag from dead money (carrying over cap money and dead money which will likely cancel out).

I think many of the folks here point to Belichick the coach making up for Belichick the GM. No one thinks Belichick is not working hard enough. While Belichick the GM is willing to make the hard personnel decisions, it seems the Patriots could use a more strategic GM to consider the direction of personnel policy to avoid so much dead cap money that could be allocated far more effectively.

 

[Ring 6]

I strongly disagree.

The goal of an nil football team is about putting the best team on the field, not to avoid dead cap money.

Belichick's methodology includes taking risks on mid-level free agents, and then cutting the losers as soon as it evident that there are not part of the future. Belichick signed Stallworth, Branch, Gaffney, Fenene, Scott, Fells, Shiancoe and Lloyd. Some have made the team. Some have not. Fanene cost us a lot. But that is part of the risk.

Folks are whining, but it is indeed the general consensus that the patriots did as well as any in the offseason. Do you disagree?

The dead cap money is part of doing business. Belichick is fielding the BEST team in the nfl, has had money to extend Gronkowksi, Hernandez and Love, and still will have enough money to cover ALL the 2013 dead money from the excess 2012 cap money. We will start 2013 with a full amount of cap monies, with ZERO drag from dead money (carrying over cap money and dead money which will likely cancel out).

This contradicts your stated opinion that Belichick cuts players he wants on the team, then brings them back after week 1 in order to be able to possibly save $50,000 game checks if he cuts the player (who supposedly he really wants on the team) later in the season.
Clearly if this is one of his responsibilities, handing out signing bonuses to players he is going to cut might get him fired.

 

[jason423]

jason - can I assume you're equally against the welker and moss trades, as well as th emore recent signings of waters, carter, and anderson?

or is it just a bad idea when the guy doesn't pan out?
if you throw out the misses, you have to throw out the hits, and I'd happily miss on 8 guys to hit on moss and welker.

let's see how lloyd works out -- are you for or against this one?

I think the signings depend on the situation. I thought Moss and Welker were back when Pioli more or less ran that side along with Belichick, but I could be wrong on that one. Both were low cost moves made at a point when the cap exploded. Moss renegotiated down to $3 million on a 1 year deal when he went to NE. When I went back and looked thru the numbers I thought the Moss move was pretty brilliant. This was something I wrote when the Jets were rumored to be interested in him:

Is Randy Moss Worth a Look

Basically the cliff notes are that the production decline in Oakland was way overstated. Its more the lack of understanding that people have (or had) about the importance of a competent QB and line on wide receiver stats. Sure moss dogged it but when he played he was ok. Similarly it would have made sense for the extension for him when the Patriots gave it and they wisely cut bait when his play fell dramatically.

Waters was also one of the top rated guards in the NFL from a production standpoint. Again it was a low risk deal financially when it was first made and cost the team nothing if he did fall off a cliff. My issues would be a guy like Chad Johnson who had nothing left in the tank and it was pretty apparent from looking at the player on film or in a box score. Paying Shaun Ellis 4 million when the only other option he had was 925K from the Jets.

Lloyd? Im not sure. Contractually they have an out for $2 million I believe next year which isnt bad. Id be concerned about a few things, primarily his catch rate which I dont think will be tolerated with Belichick and Brady. Going back to Moss that was the one area where he was poor in Oakland, but he had a track record of being a 60% guy in Minnesota. Not surprisingly his numbers fell with Cassel as well. I think the risk with Lloyd is that there is no track record. His best season was 52% in Chicago on only 26 receptions and 50.5% in 2010 in Denver which was his big breakout year. If he gets a similar boost as say Deion Branch over his averages hed probably be around 52%. Someone like Gaffney got no boost outside of the 2007 season where he caught 72% of his targets but in the other years was right around his norms (though Lloyd is a far better player than Gaffney). That to me is the one red flag. They probably want around 57-62% from their outside threats.

Hits and misses are just like anything else and I think its what have you done for me lately. There was a brief period (and I still hear about it now from the most optimistic Jet fans) where the team did very well in the draft- Ferguson, Mangold, Harris and of course Revis. But to argue that they are anything but poor right now (Gholston, Keller, Sanchez, Wilson, Ducasse, etc...) is foolish. Yes the strategy worked for a few drafts but whatever they are doing now hasnt and should be changed. If you continue to throw darts and none of them hit the board you have to think about re-evaluating what you are doing. If you look at the worthless dead (i.e not a guy like Ty Warren who gave you years of great service) and what benefits the team got from similar deals I guess you would have a good feel as to whether or not the strategy still works. As an outsider I cant think of gems uncovered (unless Waters is a gem and maybe he should be considered that since nobody else seemed to want him even though he was still a good player) but Id think in the offseason that might be a fun exercise for the fans of the team to do.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Isn't Reese (ex Oiler GM) supposed to be the strategic guy in regards to personnel policy?

No. Reese is the lead contract negotiator. Caserio is the Player Personnel Director. He oversees pro and college scouting and the draft. Bill is the defacto GM. He has the final say on who and how much, although he defers to Kraft on the costlier or potentially controversial decisions as a matter of courtesy. As do most GM's or they aren't GM's for long.