NFL Free Agency 2022 edition

[upstater1]

Another way to imagine this is that the true cap number is whatever the cap number is going to be three or four years from now, rather than what it's listed at today. So you can restructure deals to fit today on the basis that the additional cost in future years will be a similar percentage of the cap, and that's your real limiting number. So if the cap this year is $200m, and it's projected to be $250 by 2025, then realistically you can finagle the money around a $250m cap THIS year with the right accounting.

Like you said, this is flexibility, but it still doesn't mean that Kraft could spend a billion dollars per year on players and somehow "make it work" under the cap. There will always be a limit, it's just higher than the official cap number in a given year.

I believe the right number would be the sum total of the next 4 future caps divided by the average length of contract (4); but then of course you might look at how much you're willing to devote to each position, especially at QB.

 

[Guts]

The cap is not HARD. It is very much real. You can push money to future caps, and just continuously do this, but that money ALWAYS hits eventually, often times after the player is gone due to dead hits. Not every contract can be restructured in a way that frees space, so eventually the ability to maneuver becomes limited if you do it to excess every single year.

Again, this makes the cap less limiting than the hard numbers would imply, but you couldn't have pro bowlers on deals near the top of the market at every position, no matter how you want to structure the deals. So the limitations provided by the cap are real, it's just got some bend to it.

I'm one that keeps saying that the cap is fake, but I have no real grasp on how it all works. So I'd be interested in seeing if you can explain to me how the Saints keep getting away with it since 2017.

 

[Sicilian]

I believe the right number would be the sum total of all the future caps divided by the average length of contract; but then of course you might look at how much you're willing to devote to each position, especially at QB.

A good point, the exact mathematical formula is likely far more complex than I was saying (and highly dependent on team philosophy). Also, you can borrow more from future caps if you choose to rely more heavily on the draft and it's cheap, cost controlled players. But even the best teams there don't general knock the draft out of the park every year, so eventually you need to restock from elsewhere. Regardless, the overall point I was trying to make was that the limits of the cap are very real, while the actual listed number is not.

 

[Ross12]

If we look back, teams get hit every once in a while.

I was looking at the Bills in 2026 when Von Miller is 36 years old. He'll have a $24m dead cap hit that year if they cut him. Allen will be into his 3rd contract before then, and will likely be up near $55m-$60m a year if Aaron Rodgers' deal is any sign. Tre White will have a cap hit of $16m that year if he hasn't extended.

No one else is signed for then though they have abut $5m in dead money.

They are looking at $100m for just Josh Allen and Tre White in cap hits. Projected cap for that year is $265m.

That's $165m for the rest of the players, or about $3m each.

How?

Yeah, the answer is that they'll likely have to sign Allen to a long deal with lower cap hits in the early years similar to Mahomes' deal in order to have any room to operate.

 

[Sicilian]

I'm one that keeps saying that the cap is fake, but I have no real grasp on how it all works. So I'd be interested in seeing if you can explain to me how the Saints keep getting away with it since 2017.

So, I don't want to portray myself as an expert either, because I'm DEFINITELY not. So while these are my opinions, please take them with a grain of salt

In the case of the Saints, they seem to be doing exactly what I've been saying, where they restructure current deals to spread the cost over future caps. It looks like (at least the last two offseasons post Brees), that their initial number over the cap went up each year, forcing more and more restructures to get it down. Eventually that will catch up, and if I'm being honest, it kind of already has. You'll notice the Saints haven't signed anyone yet this free agency either, despite having some room under the cap now. And they still don't have a QB unless they trade for Watson. So for all their maneuvering, they haven't improved their 8-9 team from last year any more than the Patriots have to this point.

The cap is flexible enough that you can always find a way out from under it, but that doesn't mean you'll have enough room to just sign whoever you want. This is always my problem with the "cap is crap" mentality. It implies that they ONLY reason you wouldn't sign a player, whatever it took, is that you're cheap because the cap doesn't exist. I just think that's incorrect.

 

[upstater1]

I'm one that keeps saying that the cap is fake, but I have no real grasp on how it all works. So I'd be interested in seeing if you can explain to me how the Saints keep getting away with it since 2017.

It's a matter of priorities, they don't have enough to sign Terron Armstead, the best LT on the market. They lost a lot of good players because of the cap. I'm sure they wanted Trey Hendrickson back, he's a stud.

So even teams that find space for players only do so by letting other players go. Yes you can make signings, but only if you make yourself weaker elsewhere. It's not unlimited.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

The cap. Is. Not. REAL

This makes Anderson (thankfully) untradeable. Trading him now would cost the Panthers another 8 mil in cap space and 19 mil in dead money. plus his 2023 cap number is now over 21 mil.

 

[jah]

So, I don't want to portray myself as an expert either, because I'm DEFINITELY not. So while these are my opinions, please take them with a grain of salt

In the case of the Saints, they seem to be doing exactly what I've been saying, where they restructure current deals to spread the cost over future caps. It looks like (at least the last two offseasons post Brees), that their initial number over the cap went up each year, forcing more and more restructures to get it down. Eventually that will catch up, and if I'm being honest, it kind of already has. You'll notice the Saints haven't signed anyone yet this free agency either, despite having some room under the cap now. And they still don't have a QB unless they trade for Watson. So for all their maneuvering, they haven't improved their 8-9 team from last year any more than the Patriots have to this point.

The cap is flexible enough that you can always find a way out from under it, but that doesn't mean you'll have enough room to just sign whoever you want. This is always my problem with the "cap is crap" mentality. It implies that they ONLY reason you wouldn't sign a player, whatever it took, is that you're cheap because the cap doesn't exist. I just think that's incorrect.

Thanks for pulling me back to earth, I was starting to finally believe in that narrative after years of holding out.

 

[Love The Drake]

This makes Anderson (thankfully) untradeable. Trading him now would cost the Panthers another 8 mil in cap space and 19 mil in dead money. plus his 2023 cap number is now over 21 mil.

Why thankfully?
We need another really good WR.

 

[Ross12]

A good point, the exact mathematical formula is likely far more complex than I was saying (and highly dependent on team philosophy). Also, you can borrow more from future caps if you choose to rely more heavily on the draft and it's cheap, cost controlled players. But even the best teams there don't general knock the draft out of the park every year, so eventually you need to restock from elsewhere. Regardless, the overall point I was trying to make was that the limits of the cap are very real, while the actual listed number is not.

That kind of gets to the heart of things - Bill has never been a "big spender" or one to borrow heavily from future years. He's ALWAYS sought value and preferred to build via good drafting as much as possible. However, as we all know, the drafts in the 2010s were not very good overall, so in the back half of the decade he did have to get a little spendy and we saw that come to a head with a lot of dead money in 2020. I think we are seeing an attempt at more of a "return to form" now - while there was a lot of cash spent last year, it was mostly good value, and they drafted very well. I'm sure he's hoping to draft well again this year. He spent money last year on solid but still relatively young veterans to re-establish the culture to build upon with rookies.

 

[Sicilian]

Thanks for pulling me back to earth, I was starting to finally believe in that narrative after years of holding out.

I think it's fair to question it, because teams (not just the Patriots) are obviously going to control the messaging to make themselves look as good to their fans and investors as possible. So when someone says, "We couldn't sign this guy for cap reasons", while it's not total crap, it's healthy to be skeptical. But in general the cap does factor in, players are just valued differently by different teams. Team A thinks JC Jackson is worth this percentage of the cap in each year for the next five years, while Team B doesn't. The money still gets spent eventually, it's just distributed differently.

 

[venecol]

Yes very disappointing if true. IMO the rumour exists only because the lack of activity so far...not because they got an inside tip. Maybe I am wrong (and I often am...I'm very good at it), but don't the Patriots spend the max cap amount or very close to it every year? Kraft is a Billionaire...is he suddenly caring about saving 10-50 million and risk not having a more successful team? I just don't see it.

This has to do with the signing bonus (paid upfront) needed to reduce the cap # for the 2022 season since the bonus can be spread throughout the life of the contract. That's what everyone is doing (incl. Pats last season). Kraft said last season "he never had to come up with so much capital before." In order to afford a guy like JC, we would've had to pay him $25M up front even though his cap hit would've only been $8M (as an example). That's why guys that say what the Patriots did last year is what they always do (spend to the cap) ignore the enormous amount of cash Kraft had to dish out.

This surprises me though. I've got to believe that he didn't take the playoff loss to kindly and maybe told Bill to make it work using his GM magic. Who the f*ck knows. Maybe they'll surprise us in the next 5 months.

 

[Sicilian]

That kind of gets to the heart of things - Bill has never been a "big spender" or one to borrow heavily from future years. He's ALWAYS sought value and preferred to build via good drafting as much as possible. However, as we all know, the drafts in the 2010s were not very good overall, so in the back half of the decade he did have to get a little spendy and we saw that come to a head with a lot of dead money in 2020. I think we are seeing an attempt at more of a "return to form" now - while there was a lot of cash spent last year, it was mostly good value, and they drafted very well. I'm sure he's hoping to draft well again this year. He spent money last year on solid but still relatively young veterans to re-establish the culture to build upon with rookies.

Definitely. If you nail every draft, you gain a level of flexibility that almost makes the cap moot, because you'll ALWAYS have good, young, cheap talent in the pipeline.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Why thankfully?
We need another really good WR.

He is a scumbag.

 

[Lagaffe_07]

Definitely. If you nail every draft, you gain a level of flexibility that almost makes the cap moot, because you'll ALWAYS have good, young, cheap talent in the pipeline.

The problem is, it’s almost impossible to nail every draft and when you don’t have a top tier QB that can maximize mid level player you finished where we are now.

 

[MahomestoKelce]

Raiders are going to be dropping 40 a game. Another AFC team that vaulted right past us.

Carr puts them in a weird spot.

He's definitely a top 12 QB. A starter. Very good.

But he's going into year 9. He hasn't gotten to that upper tier.

But yeah this division will be a bloodbath.

 

[ashley]

not sure how I would feel about this, especially with needs along the o-line and in the secondary, specifically cb:

 

[Sicilian]

The problem is, it’s almost impossible to nail every draft and when you don’t have a top tier QB that can maximize mid level player you finished where we are now.

I think it's unrealistic to nail every draft regardless. I can't think of a team that's done it for more than a few years in a row. It's kind of that pie in the sky utopic view of things. In reality, you're always going to have to dip into free agency, and the better you do at drafting the more flexibility you have there.

 

[Love The Drake]

He is a scumbag.

That’s surprising.
But I agree I’d prefer good character guys with talent.
However there is a

not sure how I would feel about this, especially with needs along the o-line and in the secondary, specifically cb:

Would love this signing.
He kind of reminds me of Andy Katzemoyer.
I’m sure he will ask for a fair wage Kraft will say no and he signs with a rival.
Not holding my breath.
Danielle hunter is still out there the deal should of been done for him asap.
Still young and very promising.

 

[Rob0729]

Can you be specific?

Agholor's contract is below a lot of the contracts we're seeing. Judon's contract is now below. So is Kendrick Bourne's.

Who are we talking about? Jonnu Smith is a disappointment only because his numbers are so low, we expected so much more, all the FAs signing elsewhere are not going to be resounding successes. Sometimes FA signings fail. Jonnu might be such a failure. But maybe both Nelson and Jonnu will do much better this year with a 2nd year QB who isn't moving as slowly through his progressions.

Agholor was above market last year. This year he wouldn't be. But they could have

But did the Pats need pay top of the market price (at least for last year) for two TEs? Maybe they just got one last year. Tried to develop Asiasi. And then this year, they could have paid Robinson a little more than what he got with the Rams. Or another top free agent who they didn't go after this season.