The Career Arc of Tom Brady

[Deus Irae]

That is a very good point.

But you leave out 2003 and 2004, when Bledsoe's $$ were off the books, but Brady's portion of the cap pie was less than it is now.

I didn't leave out anything. My response was a notation on something left out by the article, and that one example was enough to show yet another area of sloppy work by the author. I wasn't writing a line by line, year by year, rebuttal.


Now, did you write the article, or just proofread it?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I think that something may be wrong somewhere in the numbers.

Belichick has gone on record way back in the mid 2000's that "a franchise QB shouldn't take up more than 12% of your salary cap." I believe that Brady's next deal which came very close after that was directly on the 12% figure. I also don't think it has exceeded that value since, unless it was by a slight margin.

You also have an extra SB loss in there which occurs in the 2009 season.

His seasonal cap numbers are way off. The pats adusted cap was almost $130M in 2009...and 2010 was uncapped before the cap was reduced due to the new CBA to $123M in 2011. Our adusted cap in 2012 was $129M. And he's using cap hits as opposed to aav of the deal when assessing cap value in relation to total cap. He's also missing that there were other QB's on the roster in those earlier years some of whom were making in excess of $1M. Bledsoe's cap hit in 2001 alone was $8.2M while Huard and Brady combined for another million plus. Against a $66.9M cap.

12% was Belichick fomulaic ideal. And that is looking at the average of the deal at the mid point cap under which it falls knowing you can structure or restructure to balance off the hits. Manning always averaged well over 15% in Indy as his deal averaged $14M for several seasons during which the cap went from $80-128M (and his early single digit hits were offset with $20M hits on the back end). Tom's current deal averages $15.7M despite his new money averaging $18M. A $128M cap which is what the Pats adusted one is would warrant a $13.1M cap average at 12% and an $18.2M cap average at 15% of cap - what his hit would be this year had they not restructured last year...His previous deal averaged $12M against caps that went from $82.6M-129.8M. And the one before that averaged $6M against caps from $71-80M.

People, including the author and Ivanamp, are just bound and determined to make nonsensical evaluations and assessments of things they have no real understanding of.

 

[ivanvamp]

His seasonal cap numbers are way off. The pats adusted cap was almost $130M in 2009...and 2010 was uncapped before the cap was reduced due to the new CBA to $123M in 2011. Our adusted cap in 2012 was $129M. And he's using cap hits as opposed to aav of the deal when assessing cap value in relation to total cap. He's also missing that there were other QB's on the roster in those earlier years some of whom were making in excess of $1M. Bledsoe's cap hit in 2001 alone was $8.2M while Huard and Brady combined for another million plus. Against a $66.9M cap.

12% was Belichick fomulaic ideal. And that is looking at the average of the deal at the mid point cap under which it falls knowing you can structure or restructure to balance off the hits. Manning always averaged well over 15% in Indy as his deal averaged $14M for several seasons during which the cap went from $80-128M (and his early single digit hits were offset with $20M hits on the back end). Tom's current deal averages $15.7M despite his new money averaging $18M. A $128M cap which is what the Pats adusted one is would warrant a $13.1M cap average at 12% and an $18.2M cap average at 15% of cap - what his hit would be this year had they not restructured last year...His previous deal averaged $12M against caps that went from $82.6M-129.8M. And the one before that averaged $6M against caps from $71-80M.

People, including the author and Ivanamp, are just bound and determined to make nonsensical evaluations and assessments of things they have no real understanding of.

I said in that post where I got the numbers from and that I wasn't really sure if they were right, and I asked for corrections, so thanks.

So is my larger point correct - that Brady is taking up a higher percentage of the Pats' cap than he was in his early years?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Interesting point. So I looked up from USAToday's archives and from the Jets' dude's salary cap page, and here's what I got. Here's the percentage of the Pats' Cap Value Brady took up:

Year - Total Cap Value - Brady's Cap Value - Brady's %
2001 - $54,404,881 - $314,993 - 0.58% - Pats win SB
2003 - $68,501,114 - $3,323,450 - 4.85% - Pats win SB
2004 - $70,383,779 - $5,062,950 - 7.19% - Pats win SB
2007 - $100,746,881 - $7,345,160 - 7.29% - Pats lose SB
2009 - $110,645,593 - $14,627,280 - 13.22% - Pats lose SB
2012 - $92,046,794 - $8,000,000 - 8.69% - Pats lose SB

I'm not responsible for the numbers, and I confess I'm not 100% sure I'm reading them right, so someone else can sure correct me if I'm wrong. But it certainly appears that Brady is consuming a much larger portion of the Pats' payroll than he was in the first few years of his career. And that should be self-evident. He was a 6th round draft pick and his first contract reflected that. As he became a star, his subsequent contracts reflected that development.

But the point here is that the more money that's spent on Brady, the less money there is to go around to the rest of the team. That also is self-evident. And that's all well and good so long as Brady produces accordingly (which he is). But if/when the decline comes, and if he's still taking up that percentage of the available cap space, then it becomes harder for the team to develop the rest of the complementary pieces to go with a declining Brady. And that also seems self-evident.

In fact, these points are so obviously true that it's very difficult for me to understand how anyone could be arguing about them.

Here are the Patriots adjusted cap #'s for the last decade plus:

2012 -$129M
2011 - $123M
2010 - UNCAPPED
2009 - $129.8M
2008 - $121.1M
2007 - $113.0M
2006 - $100M
2005 - $ 82.6M
2004 - $ 80.4M
2003 - $74.6M
2002 - $71.1M
2001 - $66.9M

Brady's deals beyond his rookie deal which they tagged 5 years onto in 2002 averaged $6M per through 2004 followed by $12M per from 2005-2009 and $15.7M after they extended that deal by 4 years and $72M in 2010. Assessing year to year cap hits, including cherry picking them, is foolsplay as cap hits are structured in whatever manner a team sees fit to suit it's own accounting purposes. It's the average of the deal that tells you how the QB is being compensated. Which is why the remaining 2 years of Brady's current deal are compensating him at $15M per in salary and roster bonus. And against a cap that will go from roughly $130 to $135M over that time span, guess what that works out to...roughly 12%. Or Belichick's ideal for QB cap expense. Although I do believe he'd modify that a tad for having had arguably the GOAT for the last decade and counting.

 

[ivanvamp]

Here are the Patriots adjusted cap #'s for the last decade plus:

2012 -$129M
2011 - $123M
2010 - UNCAPPED
2009 - $129.8M
2008 - $121.1M
2007 - $113.0M
2006 - $100M
2005 - $ 82.6M
2004 - $ 80.4M
2003 - $74.6M
2002 - $71.1M
2001 - $66.9M

Brady's deals beyond his rookie deal which they tagged 5 years onto in 2002 averaged $6M per through 2004 followed by $12M per from 2005-2009 and $15.7M after they extended that deal by 4 years and $72M in 2010. Assessing year to year cap hits, including cherry picking them, is foolsplay as cap hits are structured in whatever manner a team sees fit to suit it's own accounting purposes. It's the average of the deal that tells you how the QB is being compensated. Which is why the remaining 2 years of Brady's current deal are compensating him at $15M per in salary and roster bonus. And against a cap that will go from roughly $130 to $135M over that time span, guess what that works out to...roughly 12%. Or Belichick's ideal for QB cap expense. Although I do believe he'd modify that a tad for having had arguably the GOAT for the last decade and counting.

Thanks for this info. As I said earlier, I appreciate the correction.

Yes, I agree with that last statement, no doubt. And that's part of the point I've been trying to make: that that's a trade I think all of us would be willing to make - having Brady take up a larger portion of the cap given what he brings to the table.

But what happens when he starts to decline, which is inevitable because he's not a machine, he's a human, but his cap hit is still higher than it used to be?

In other words, let me just draw this out simplistically in three parts:

Phase - Cap Hit
Ascent - Low-to-Modest
Peak - High
Descent - High

If what Brady actually brings to the table during the ascent and descent phases are roughly similar, but the cap hit is similar to what it is at his peak, doesn't that make it harder to build a winning team around him?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I said in that post where I got the numbers from and that I wasn't really sure if they were right, and I asked for corrections, so thanks.

So is my larger point correct - that Brady is taking up a higher percentage of the Pats' cap than he was in his early years?

Not really. The rookie deal was a fluke, you can't honestly expect to have reaped that benefit indefinitely. And they spent money on position backups then they don't spend now, including his $9M in backups in 2001...and the dead cap of $6.6M from cutting one in 2002. He's averaged within spitting distance of where Belichick ideally hopes his QB's will, while outproducing probably anything Belichick dreamed of when he developed that philosophy. His next QB won't average anything approaching that ideal for a while after Brady departs, either. Which is why worrying about the end of his deals isn't an issue. Even if there is some dead cap to work through on an extension. Indy was able to absorb a $10M dead cap hit when they cut Manning. It wasn't an issue because of the rookie deal Luck will be playing under for his first 4 seasons.

People keep looking for signs and reasons to obcess about moving on from Brady. Believe me, there will be time enough to worry about that once the first signs begin to appear. And to date they haven't.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Thanks for this info. As I said earlier, I appreciate the correction.

Yes, I agree with that last statement, no doubt. And that's part of the point I've been trying to make: that that's a trade I think all of us would be willing to make - having Brady take up a larger portion of the cap given what he brings to the table.

But what happens when he starts to decline, which is inevitable because he's not a machine, he's a human, but his cap hit is still higher than it used to be?

In other words, let me just draw this out simplistically in three parts:

Phase - Cap Hit
Ascent - Low-to-Modest
Peak - High
Descent - High

If what Brady actually brings to the table during the ascent and descent phases are roughly similar, but the cap hit is similar to what it is at his peak, doesn't that make it harder to build a winning team around him?

No, it doesn't because his peak will be about $2-3M higher and the cap will absorb that. It is going up, probably to $135M by 2015 and likely by 4-5% per year thereafter. It's not going to jump at double digits again during this CBA, but it isn't going to remain flat indefinitely, either. This team layers contracts and structures cap hits (some frontloading, some backloading, some pay as you go) to accommodate cap projections and cash outlays. One thing Brady has always done to help them in that regard is allow them to either segment his bonuses into signing and option and roster or defer payment (legally) for up to a year on portions of his bonuses to facilitate cash flow.

If they do an extension now one of the benefits is all his guaranteed money would be accounted for by 2015. Unless he falls off a cliff, and other than Illegal Contact I don't think anyone here anticipates that, the last 2-3 years of an extension are all salary and subject to restructure or a parting of the ways...mutual or otherwise. As risk reward scenarios go in the NFL, extending Brady is less an issue than signing any 28 year old FA to a top tier 5 year veteran deal.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Who is suggesting anything like that?

I see it around the forum from time to time about how Brady's not clutch anymore or blah blah Gisele or whatever other nonsense people post when they're bored.

 

[Ring 6]

Belichick has gone on record way back in the mid 2000's that "a franchise QB shouldn't take up more than 12% of your salary cap.".

Not that it's a huge deal, but I don't think this is accurate. I find it impossible to believe that BB would go on record about something like the % of the cap he would spend on QB.
This is probably something that was created by the media or a poster as what they think BB thinks, and it was repeated enough that it created your impression that BB said it publicly.
I just hate when things get attributed to someone who didn't say them, or when suppositiion turns into 'fact' by being regurgitated.
Unless you have any kind of link.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Not that it's a huge deal, but I don't think this is accurate. I find it impossible to believe that BB would go on record about something like the % of the cap he would spend on QB.
This is probably something that was created by the media or a poster as what they think BB thinks, and it was repeated enough that it created your impression that BB said it publicly.
I just hate when things get attributed to someone who didn't say them, or when suppositiion turns into 'fact' by being regurgitated.
Unless you have any kind of link.

I'm not at home so I can't quote you page and verse but it was in Patriot Reign, in the section where they talked about the position and how Brady fit the detailed description they had written for what it ideally required to be the QB of the NEP before they knew he would fill the post.

And it wasn't a matter of going on record about the amount he would spend, it was his view of what the ideal limit should be for a franchise QB. Didn't mean you had to spend that or that you couldn't exceed it with good reason. Including because the owner loved his franchise QB and he was it's face and he wanted a $100M deal to keep pace with Favre even if it was mostly a smoke and mirrors salary fueled deal). Or because you'd unexpectedly landed a GOAT.