$20M under 2007 cap with full roster

[mgteich]

Miguel's numbers for 41 players $30.8M
2006 already moved money into 2007 1.9M
2006 to be moved into 2007 (guess, might be more) 2.1M
Resign 4 ERFA's (1.8M)
Re-sign 8 or vet relacements (8.0M)
allowance for draft,PS and injuries (5.0M)
--------
$20.0M

The four ERFA's are Yates, Britt, Wright and Alexander

Note that the 8 vets to be re-signed or replaced include Brown, Iwoma, Evans, Izzo, Davis, Banta-Cain, Gay and Seau. $8M f or 8 players is likely to allow the signing of a mid-range free agent or two, since some will qualify for the veteran cap deduction.

I have not counted the signing of Graham or Samuel who would be one of the major free agent signings, if they are signed.

=====================================

BOTTOM LINE

I've paid for the full 53 roster (41 + 4 + 8). This 53 is improved by signing draftees who will replace players. That cost is included.

Not that it usually costs less than $3.5M of cap costs for a top freee agent ($1M salary plus $2.5 of amortized bonus). Since the player they will replace is likely to one of the $1M jags, we could sign 8 of those players ($2.5M x 8)

Of course we won't find eight. Maybe we'll find one or two. And, we'll be starting the season again discussing the $15M cap excess.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Wow, with lotsa draft picks in 2007, and a ton of cap room. The Pats don't rebuild, they RELOAD !!

 

[mcsully]

Thanks for the POST about the cap room.. My understanding is a lot of teams have started the trend of resigning their own players, thus saving money on outside free agents. I belive Dallas and Philly, two examples, are going to have a LOT of cash to spend..

 

[RayClay]

Miguel's numbers for 41 players $30.8M
2006 already moved money into 2007 1.9M
2006 to be moved into 2007 (guess, might be more) 2.1M
Resign 4 ERFA's (1.8M)
Re-sign 8 or vet relacements (8.0M)
allowance for draft,PS and injuries (5.0M)
--------
$20.0M

The four ERFA's are Yates, Britt, Wright and Alexander

Note that the 8 vets to be re-signed or replaced include Brown, Iwoma, Evans, Izzo, Davis, Banta-Cain, Gay and Seau. $8M f or 8 players is likely to allow the signing of a midrange free agent or two, since some will qualify for the veteran cap deduction.

I have couted the signing of Graham or Samuel who would be one of the major free agent signings, if they are signed.

=====================================

BOTTOM LINE

I've paid for the full 53 roster (41 + 4 + 8). This 53 is improved by signing draftees who will replace players. That cost is included.

Not that it usually costs less than $3.5M of cap costs for a top freee agent ($1M salary plus $2.5 of amortized bonus). Since the player they will replace is likely to one of the $1M jags, we could sign 8 of those players ($2.5M x 8)

Of course we won't find eight. Maybe we'll find one or two. And, we'll be starting the season again discussing the $15M cap excess.

Am I getting the vibe you think this is a bad thing?

 

[Urgent]

Which says that the Pats can certainly afford to re-sign Samuel and Graham.

It would be nice to see them get a free agent LB, since they don't draft them and have no one close to replacing any of the aging starters.

A free safety would be nice as well, although they could address that in the draft and let someone play behind the current group for a year.

So with a need for only one above-average free agent, the Pats have both the cap space and lots of incentive to re-sign those two. I would imagine that there would be some PR issues if they once again allow their top free agents to depart. Samuel and Graham are young starters, a different story than McGinest and Vinatieri.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Which says that the Pats can certainly afford to re-sign Samuel and Graham.

It would be nice to see them get a free agent LB, since they don't draft them and have no one close to replacing any of the aging starters.

A free safety would be nice as well, although they could address that in the draft and let someone play behind the current group for a year.

So with a need for only one above-average free agent, the Pats have both the cap space and lots of incentive to re-sign those two. I would imagine that there would be some PR issues if they once again allow their top free agents to depart. Samuel and Graham are young starters, a different story than McGinest and Vinatieri.

I think they have already re-signed their top FA (Seymour and Koppen) and it will be unfortunate if the PR spin fails to account for that. I think that any re-signing of Graham and Samuel will be entirely dependent on their health (in Graham's case) and their willingness to sign a deal that represents value for both sides and not an over reach for the team. Taking the approach that they can afford to overpay would be a mistake because they see the long term ripple effect across a roster where the core has met them half way and they do not want the alienate that group. And they know that over the next 2-3-4 years they will have some serious talent lining up for their second contracts. They will want to be in position to pay them market rate should they choose to in order to retain them. They also know that players like Tedy and Junior and Rodney may have to be replaced by other than an inexpensive youngster or aging veteran in the forseeable future and they likely are advance planning to be in position to make some Colvin/Harrison like moves in those cases - not necessarily in 2007 but by 2008-2009.

I trust their understanding of the market and their evaluation of available talent and system fits and their financial accumen enough that I believe kvetching about the future is really just spinning our wheels as fans to fill time. Miguel is reluctant to credit the $2M they just LTBE'd forward in Koppen's contract lest their already exist NLTBE's we know not of. That's fine, but the fact remains that when some including Miguel opined just a few weeks ago that with the NFLPA opposed to such tactics they might not be able to, well... they did. And I'm confident that if they can't get any other extensions done they will manage to spend down the existing cap creatively or bankroll what they cannot for 2007.

 

[DaBruinz]

BTW, MG, did you take into consideration that the Pats have 12 million pay-out to Seymour that is due in March that goes against next year's cap? I don't believe that Miguel has that in the future numbers, though I could be wrong.

 

[Miguel]

BTW, MG, did you take into consideration that the Pats have 12 million pay-out to Seymour that is due in March that goes against next year's cap? I don't believe that Miguel has that in the future numbers, though I could be wrong.

You are indeed wrong.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

BTW, MG, did you take into consideration that the Pats have 12 million pay-out to Seymour that is due in March that goes against next year's cap? I don't believe that Miguel has that in the future numbers, though I could be wrong.

It would appear he does and has figured it in as a prorated option bonus (although again I assume they could alter that treatment and convert some to roster bonus if they want to absorb it more rapidly as most of us expected they might have done this season - but did not). He has his his cap figures at $7M+ in 2007 and 2008 and $10M+ in 2009 or over $25M+ of the $32M his deal plus this season entailed. Add in the $6M+ cap hit from 2006 and you are at that $32M mark.

 

[Miguel]

Miguel is reluctant to credit the $2M they just LTBE'd forward in Koppen's contract lest their already exist NLTBE's we know not of. That's fine, but the fact remains that when some including Miguel opined just a few weeks ago that with the NFLPA opposed to such tactics they might not be able to, well... they did. And I'm confident that if they can't get any other extensions done they will manage to spend down the existing cap creatively or bankroll what they cannot for 2007.

Right after my posts mgteich correctly pointed out that the NFLPA would not have a problem if the player also got something substantial - in this case $7.5 million. Good job, mgteich.

 

[mcbee]

Not to mention they probably will cut Colvin. That's 6+M right there. Unless he takes a steep paycut.

I think they let Samuel walk, try to sign Clements, if not, maybe sign a safety or Lance Briggs. Briggs may get franchised though.

Lots of room.

 

[patchick]

Not to mention they probably will cut Colvin. That's 6+M right there. Unless he takes a steep paycut.

Why would you assume that? Such cuts are usually made for cap reasons, and as this thread has established that shouldn't be an issue.

 

[LloydBraun]

Rosy as well as Dillon will likely need to be renegotiated next year, creating even more cap room. Of course there is room to pay these guys, but a renegotiation could lead to more space, more players and a better team.

Should be a great offseason after we win SB 41. Look for LB and S help. WR's are too expensive in FA, look for a draft pick here on day 1.

 

[cstjohn17]

Rosy as well as Dillon will likely need to be renegotiated next year, creating even more cap room. Of course there is room to pay these guys, but a renegotiation could lead to more space, more players and a better team.

Should be a great offseason after we win SB 41. Look for LB and S help. WR's are too expensive in FA, look for a draft pick here on day 1.

I agree, Dillion and Colvin need to step up their games to stay on the squad next year. Both are on a downward trend. Who knows it could even be one of the years where there are actually some trades in the NFL offseason.

 

[mgteich]

Colvin may be overpaid by a couple of million, but he is not on a downward trend. Also, I see no reason to cut Colvin and Dillon just to create cap room that we don't need.

I agree, Dillion and Colvin need to step up their games to stay on the squad next year. Both are on a downward trend. Who knows it could even be one of the years where there are actually some trades in the NFL offseason.

 

[mgteich]

You can choose whether it is a bad thing to try to beat other teams while spending 15% less on personnel than they do. How can it be an advantage to the patriots to voluntarily spend less?

It is possible that in the patriot's five year plan, there will eventually be the need for this cap money, in 2009 or 2010. In the meantime, we will play with $10M-$15M less of players than some of our competitors.

I strongly support the extension of our own players, as the team has always done. Yes, I understand that this year it didn't look that way. I am ecstatic at the extending of Koppen (although I knew from folks in Philly that it would probably get done). As I have said, I would like to see a few more extensions completed.

I have also suggested an even more radical approach, extend with 2-years left on player's contracts, when players would have more significant interests to avoid two year's of injury risk (the signing bonus would be in two parts, of course, part in the current year and part when the new contract period actually started).

In any case, I think that the $15M bubble should be used over the next three years to extend players in the manner I have described. We have started with Seymour and Koppen.

Am I getting the vibe you think this is a bad thing?

 

[mcbee]

Why would you assume that? Such cuts are usually made for cap reasons, and as this thread has established that shouldn't be an issue.

didn't they cut Lawyer Milloy when they already had enough cap room?

They though he didn't deserve his money so cut he was. Serves him right.

I think BB is morally opposed to paying too much for players. Colvin hasn't had an 6M year, not even close.

 

[mgteich]

There's no need to discuss the Milloy cut any more. He is long gone. However, I do believe that if bb had it do over he again, he would NOT have fired Milloy the week before the season started. It cost the next game. The team was in public rebellion (led by Bruschi). All settled down quickly, but that day was remembered by all, and from that day the point was made. This is a business, and the team will use whatever leverage it can to further the business interests of the patriots.

didn't they cut Lawyer Milloy when they already had enough cap room?

They though he didn't deserve his money so cut he was. Serves him right.

I think BB is morally opposed to paying too much for players. Colvin hasn't had an 6M year, not even close.

 

[alamo]

didn't they cut Lawyer Milloy when they already had enough cap room?

Depends how strict a definition of "already had enough cap room" you want to adopt. Did they have to cut him that very moment? No. Would they have won the SB in 2004 if they hadn't? In my opinion, the answer is also No.

The details are hazy and I am not going to go back and work it all out again, but I remember analyzing it and saying to myself "they needed to do that". Remember how tight they were on cap space the last two years? I believe they saw that coming, decided they needed to cut somewhere, and when Milloy wouldn't renegotiate they felt the best way to save cap space was to cut him.

 

[RayClay]

You can choose whether it is a bad thing to try to beat other teams while spending 15% less on personnel than they do. How can it be an advantage to the patriots to voluntarily spend less?

It is possible that in the patriot's five year plan, there will eventually be the need for this cap money, in 2009 or 2010. In the meantime, we will play with $10M-$15M less of players than some of our competitors.

I strongly support the extension of our own players, as the team has always done. Yes, I understand that this year it didn't look that way. I am ecstatic at the extending of Koppen (although I knew from folks in Philly that it would probably get done). As I have said, I would like to see a few more extensions completed.

I have also suggested an even more radical approach, extend with 2-years left on player's contracts, when players would have more significant interests to avoid two year's of injury risk (the signing bonus would be in two parts, of course, part in the current year and part when the new contract period actually started).

In any case, I think that the $15M bubble should be used over the next three years to extend players in the manner I have described. We have started with Seymour and Koppen.

Simple, we plan ahead, so we can make personnel decisions based on the value we assign players.

If we have injuries or other unforeseen emergencies we can make deals without having to cut other players.

Why is being forced to make decisions based on economic necessity an advantage?

You have checked all the other teams, have you? Last time I looked we weren't the only team well under the cap in this unusual year.