Top Heavy New England Cap

[mgteich]

It has often been said that New England spreads out its money, and doesn't pay top money to its top players. Let's look to see the reality. The patriot cap is about $92M for the top 53 (when we exclude about $8M for IR, the PS, dead money and a reserve for picking up players during the season).

The top ten now account for $46 of the cap.

The next ten now have caps totalling about 14M.

The bottom 33 share about $20M.

There is $12 unspent, and available.

Top 10 $46M (over $2M cap)
Next 10 $14M (over $1M cap)
Bottom 33 $20M
Current dead $ 4M
----
$84M (includes player 52 and player 53)
available for top 53 $ 12M
needed cushion $ 4M (for IR, PS and player added in season)
------
total patriot cap $100M

I presume that $10M of the $12 will go top players. The total might end up being 21 or 22 playes I suppose.
----------------------------------------------

In what way do we spread the money around more than other teams?

Are other teams not able to pay their second level players a million a year?

Do other teams have LESS the $22M for their bottom 30-35 players?

Or perhaps other teams just have more dead money.

 

[Joker]

why do you constantly obsess over the cap numbers?

are you an employee of the New England Patriots in the accounting dept?

Really, what is the constant avalanche of mind numbing capology posts suposed to prove? Do you think you know more than the Patriots front office? Pioli? Is that it?

 

[RayClay]

It has often been said that New England spreads out its money, and doesn't pay top money to its top players. Let's look to see the reality. The patriot cap is about $92M for the top 53 (when we exclude about $8M for IR, the PS, dead money and a reserve for picking up players during the season).

The top ten now account for $46 of the cap.

The next ten now have caps totalling about 14M.

The bottom 33 share about $20M.

There is $12 unspent, and available.

Top 10 $46M (over $2M cap)
Next 10 $14M (over $1M cap)
Bottom 33 $20M
Current dead $ 4M
----
$84M (includes player 52 and player 53)
available for top 53 $ 12M
needed cushion $ 4M (for IR, PS and player added in season)
------
total patriot cap $100M

I presume that $10M of the $12 will go top players. The total might end up being 21 or 22 playes I suppose.
----------------------------------------------

In what way do we spread the money around more than other teams?

Are other teams not able to pay their second level players a million a year?

Do other teams have LESS the $22M for their bottom 30-35 players?

Or perhaps other teams just have more dead money.

Ignore the static. That's a good point. We no longer have the luxury of balancing out our cap.

To maintain the same talent level, we have to pay up for top performers.

We have to choose those players wisely and work even harder for sufficient depth.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Hey, I find the cap talk interesting. Ignore posts and topics that bore you. I do.

 

[the taildragger]

interesting.

i wonder how this compares to other teams though? the pats create a lot of depth by bringing in versatile players, but there are always a few guys who you really can't afford to lose.

 

[dalero]

interesting.

i wonder how this compares to other teams though? the pats create a lot of depth by bringing in versatile players, but there are always a few guys who you really can't afford to lose.

How many times can you lose a Woody and get a Koppen to replace him before you get burned?

 

[mgteich]

Yes, bb has some real bargains, but not as many as he used to. Perhaps that is of necessity, We used to have much more dead money.

I think the key is that none of 22 are marginal players, or grossly overpaid; that is, none are mistakes.

If you include our top 2 rooks, the following have caps over $1M.

QB Brady
RB Dillon, Maroney, Faulk
WR Branch, Jackson,Brown
TE Graham, Watson
OL Light, Mankins, Koppen, Neal
DL Seymour,Wilfork,Warren,Green
LB Colvin,Bruschi,Vrabel
CB
S Harrison
P Miller

The bargains are
Kaczur and the defensive backfield.

 

[Poll]

Maybe this top heave situation will be corrected when new contracts are given to the pending FAs (Samuel, Koppen)

 

[fgssand]

Maybe this top heave situation will be corrected when new contracts are given to the pending FAs (Samuel, Koppen)

Don't forget Branch & Graham in there,,,,,,

 

[spacecrime]

In what way do we spread the money around more than other teams?

Interesting numbers, but you only post the Pats numbers and draw a conclusion that we are no different than other teams. Shouldn't you actually look at other teams numbers before suggesting that?

I'm not sure why youk broke it down as 10-10-33. I hope you picked these nubmers frist and THEN looked at data, rather than figure out what looked best (or worst) and selected those numbers.

I do think it is interesting about distribution of cap dollars.

Perhaps we could settle on some categories and list them

The top ten is too large a sample for high priced players. No team has twn superstars.

maybe top five?

It's kind of hard to figure out each teams starters, but maybe top 25, or O, D, and P-K-LS.

that would leave the bottom 28, which could be further broken down into backups, fill-ins and developmental as 10-10-8.

Yeah, that would satisfy the engineeer in me. Who has the time to dig out team salaries and post each team's cap spent for

Top 5,
Next 10 Quality starters
next 10 Journeyman starters
next 10 backups
next 10 JAGS
last 8 developmental

Now THAT would give up information.

However, since we are only looking at Pats data, let me look at the Pats numbers and draw the opposite conclusion as you, that the Pats spend more on lower tier than other teams.

I'm guessing that some teams will be spending about 2.0 mil on bottom eight,
3.0 on JAGS, and about 6.0 mil on backups. The pats do better than that!

 

[shakadave]

If you include our top 2 rooks, the following have caps over $1M.

QB Brady
RB Dillon, Maroney, Faulk
WR Branch, Jackson,Brown
TE Graham, Watson
OL Light, Mankins, Koppen, Neal
DL Seymour,Wilfork,Warren,Green
LB Colvin,Bruschi,Vrabel
CB
S Harrison
P Miller

I suspect this statistic (# of players over $1m) may be the one that separates us from the competition. I THINK we have more than other teams, but this is just an impression. Actual data would be interesting here.

 

[pats1]

In order to keep ahead of the competition and well, win the way they have, the Pats keep a fluid system. Every strategy still derives from a solid core, but has the ability to flex to fit the situation and still give the team the best chance in the league to succeed. Just because one cap philosophy has brought wins in the past doesn't mean it will in the future, nor does it mean the Patriots will bind to it like glue (the same can be seen in the McGinest/Vinatieri situations).

I also believe this may be a backwards view on the situation. Instead of Beioli sitting down and saying "we want to have a very strong middle class by doing this, this, and that," it just has turned out that way and been viewed as a facet of the winning formula.

 

[Hoodie]

Are the cap numbers for 2006 a bit misleading given the tricky things they've done with Richard's cap number?

 

[Joker]

Everything is misleading with these numbers , as year after year shows. No matter what any of you Albert Einstein University types frantically obsess over, the Patriots will move forward and be competitive. The sky is NOT falling, there are NOT wolves amongst the sheep, no ILL WIND blows and there are no black cats crossing Route 1 wearing #13 flea collars. All this supposition is nothing more than mental masturbation

 

[SoonerPatriot]

THE SKY IS FALLING!!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!

(sorry, ive always wanted to say that)

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Well, now that we have a Top-10-averaging-4.6M-complaint, I guess we need to ask how that compares to other teams (me, I don't have that info, but some of these figures are inevitable.) Also note that the following players would have been among that Top 10, had they not been allowed to walk off (assuming the Pats did not put off the cap hit):

- Willie McGinest
- Adam Vinatieri
- David Givens

...and Ashworth would have been on the "bubble." I don't know the details of Jarvis Green's deal, but he's the only one that does not shout out "bargain" just going by the cap hit for this year.

I'd be interested to see the salary structures of the Broncs, Steelers, Colts, and Seahawks, for example - four teams picked at random, other than that they are also expected playoff contenders. I'd LOVE to see the Redskins' structure, just for fun.

102 million (unadjusted cap) minus 46 million equals 56. Call it 54 this year, based on the expected adjusted cap. Minus 4M dead money, for an even 50. We have well over an average of $1M per player for the impoverished masses [under the top 10]- and you'll note we have not a single CB over 1M/year (reflecting the youth of the defensive backfield.)

I guess my point here is simply that the current approach is a balanced one. The only option is to ditch the big skewing influences of this framework (and by the way, I think Colvin may be a couple years out from that treatment.) Raise your hand if you think Brady's not worth his cap hit of 14M this year. You know how he's overrated and all...

And take out the 14M from the Brady hit, and you get 32 M for the next 9 in the Top 10... for an average of an "obscene" 3.5M hit, from #2-#9. This is not an unusual effect for a franchise QB to have. It's difficult to get the best player at the most important position on the field without taking a bit of a hit eventually.

All things considered though... you bring up a good point. This isn't 2001/02 anymore, where we can ditch Drew, get Tom cheap, and pay the rest like the Super Bowl was a fluke. Hence the annual angst and tearing out of hair over the departing free agents (now they've gone TOO FAR...)

On the bright side, the only other guy getting the Brady treatment is Seymour. If anything, I think the current structure reflects some pretty good cap management, given the maturing of so many individual talents on the team.

Okay that was long-winded. Thanks for bringing up the point... this is the stuff behind the scenes that makes or breaks dynasties. Me, I'm still learning (hopefully) about it.

PFnV

 

[mgteich]

Please understand that I am not complaining about our cap managment. Nor am I complaining about letting anyone go ( I would like to understand the McGinist situation better). I just wanted the facts on the table for us all to see. As you said, it isn't 2001/2002 anymore.

It will also be interesting to see what kind of "treatment" the following get: Branch, Koppen, Samuel and Graham.

I want more analysis so that we can understand existing situations better, and be better able to anticipate future moves, as almost of us did with regard to Givens (for a year).

Well, now that we have a Top-10-averaging-4.6M-complaint, I guess we need to ask how that compares to other teams (me, I don't have that info, but some of these figures are inevitable.) Also note that the following players would have been among that Top 10, had they not been allowed to walk off (assuming the Pats did not put off the cap hit):

- Willie McGinest
- Adam Vinatieri
- David Givens

...and Ashworth would have been on the "bubble." I don't know the details of Jarvis Green's deal, but he's the only one that does not shout out "bargain" just going by the cap hit for this year.

I'd be interested to see the salary structures of the Broncs, Steelers, Colts, and Seahawks, for example - four teams picked at random, other than that they are also expected playoff contenders. I'd LOVE to see the Redskins' structure, just for fun.

102 million (unadjusted cap) minus 46 million equals 56. Call it 54 this year, based on the expected adjusted cap. Minus 4M dead money, for an even 50. We have well over an average of $1M per player for the impoverished masses [under the top 10]- and you'll note we have not a single CB over 1M/year (reflecting the youth of the defensive backfield.)

I guess my point here is simply that the current approach is a balanced one. The only option is to ditch the big skewing influences of this framework (and by the way, I think Colvin may be a couple years out from that treatment.) Raise your hand if you think Brady's not worth his cap hit of 14M this year. You know how he's overrated and all...

And take out the 14M from the Brady hit, and you get 32 M for the next 9 in the Top 10... for an average of an "obscene" 3.5M hit, from #2-#9. This is not an unusual effect for a franchise QB to have. It's difficult to get the best player at the most important position on the field without taking a bit of a hit eventually.

All things considered though... you bring up a good point. This isn't 2001/02 anymore, where we can ditch Drew, get Tom cheap, and pay the rest like the Super Bowl was a fluke. Hence the annual angst and tearing out of hair over the departing free agents (now they've gone TOO FAR...)

On the bright side, the only other guy getting the Brady treatment is Seymour. If anything, I think the current structure reflects some pretty good cap management, given the maturing of so many individual talents on the team.

Okay that was long-winded. Thanks for bringing up the point... this is the stuff behind the scenes that makes or breaks dynasties. Me, I'm still learning (hopefully) about it.

PFnV

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Mg, understood... and I think it's a good point overall. We do have to come to terms with the inevitable, and I think you've shed some light on that. My take (stating the obvious here) is that the ongoing infusions of youth and bon voyages have everything to do with this very phenomenon.

As one of the full-on capologists here pointed out earlier, the Colts (for example) are starting to structure a lot more along the lines of the Pats' model... as you've pointed out here, the Pats are converging the other direction (to an extent.)

The good news is, we're a long way from being one of those teams that wins three titles then spends a decade in cap jail, because we're willing to do it with a different roster every year. No superstars - with the Brady exception, and the Seymour corollary.

Good stuff,

PFnV

 

[smg93]

Not only would a comparison to other teams be interesting but what about a comparison to past seasons? How did the cap situation look in 2003 or 2004 for example? Is there a significant difference from the current status?

 

[mgteich]

There will be no cap jail as long as Jonathan Kraft and Scott Pioli are in the front office. Whatever strategies and tactics we use will be well thought out and meet both current and future needs.

Mg, understood... and I think it's a good point overall. We do have to come to terms with the inevitable, and I think you've shed some light on that. My take (stating the obvious here) is that the ongoing infusions of youth and bon voyages have everything to do with this very phenomenon.

As one of the full-on capologists here pointed out earlier, the Colts (for example) are starting to structure a lot more along the lines of the Pats' model... as you've pointed out here, the Pats are converging the other direction (to an extent.)

The good news is, we're a long way from being one of those teams that wins three titles then spends a decade in cap jail, because we're willing to do it with a different roster every year. No superstars - with the Brady exception, and the Seymour corollary.

Good stuff,

PFnV