[Old 2020 thread] NFL Free Agency/Trade Rumors:

[Sfpat]

By restructure, I did mean adding on years to the contract. And the same with Evans and others. I agree they likely cannot keep everyone, but they can and will defer the biggest part fo the cap hit for a few years to take advantage of the Tom Brady window they have which I expect they believe will be the next 2 years and yes to take advantage of that I expect they will gladly accept that it will blow up in 3-4 years. And see Venecol's above which demonstrates they have a pretty easy road to freeing up a lot of cap space if they are willing to go all in for a few years.

You mean kind of like what the Patriots did when they recently went to 3 out of 4 SBs?

 

[venecol]

There is a HUGE problem with you using what OTC says the "savings" will be on an extension. They offer nothing to support how they got that number just saying that it's the "MAXIMUM that can be saved". I guarantee you that NONE of those 5 players are doing an extension without getting some new money. Which means they are no where close to freeing up $57M. Furthermore, you seem to forget that SB money can only be amortized over 5 years in total. With the exception of Jensen and Smith, it's unlikely that they are going to do anything of that nature.

Also, their Brady number is incorrect. There is no way that an "extension" drops Brady's cap hit to 6.535M. The 3.375M in Other Bonuses is the NLTBE bonuses that Brady earned in 2020. That is a set amount. That only leaves $3.16M. The Minimum salary that Brady can be signed to is 1.075M leaving 2.085M. There is no feasible way that 23.925M ($15M salary +10M roster bonus-1.075M min salary) divided 5 = 2.085M. Even if they were to give Brady NO new money this year for signing an extension, you're still looking at 4.875M in SB Amortization. So, you have 3.375M + 4.875M + 1.075M = 9.275M. 9.275M from 28.375M = $19.1M.

I'm not @Miguel but I have followed him enough to know a majority of the basics without screwing up.

You spent more time thinking about this than I did that's for damn sure. They have a calculator where you can input numbers for different actions such as restructure, extend or cut, etc. Not even going to try to learn how to use it. I'll take your word for it.

 

[AlexB]

So, you are changing your argument. You said they could just add voidable years. They can't. They have to have Brady's agreement to do that. And doing so is part of what caused Brady to leave New England.

I'm not changing my argument, I previously made a detailed post on the various moves the Bucs could make and specifically said the could use a mix of real and voidable years. It obviously would take agreement from the players, but there are multiple ways to do so.

If the team went to Brady and told him they want to pay him the same money for the year, but need to add voidable years to spread out the cap hit so that he can be surrounded by talent, there's no reason he would say no. He would have been thrilled if the Patriots had offered him something similar (i.e., the money he wanted plus adding talent in exchange for cap accounting tricks). There is absolutely no reason why players wouldn't agree. Your only argument was that the players wouldn't do it because it'd affect their franchise tag number, but that's not an issue for most players and the team could always add a no-tag clause to solve that problem.

 

[AlexB]

There is a HUGE problem with you using what OTC says the "savings" will be on an extension. They offer nothing to support how they got that number just saying that it's the "MAXIMUM that can be saved". I guarantee you that NONE of those 5 players are doing an extension without getting some new money. Which means they are no where close to freeing up $57M. Furthermore, you seem to forget that SB money can only be amortized over 5 years in total. With the exception of Jensen and Smith, it's unlikely that they are going to do anything of that nature.

Also, their Brady number is incorrect. There is no way that an "extension" drops Brady's cap hit to 6.535M. The 3.375M in Other Bonuses is the NLTBE bonuses that Brady earned in 2020. That is a set amount. That only leaves $3.16M. The Minimum salary that Brady can be signed to is 1.075M leaving 2.085M. There is no feasible way that 23.925M ($15M salary +10M roster bonus-1.075M min salary) divided 5 = 2.085M. Even if they were to give Brady NO new money this year for signing an extension, you're still looking at 4.875M in SB Amortization. So, you have 3.375M + 4.875M + 1.075M = 9.275M. 9.275M from 28.375M = $19.1M.

I'm not @Miguel but I have followed him enough to know a majority of the basics without screwing up.

The maximum savings calculated by OTC assumes that each player's salary is reduced to the minimum and the remaining amount is converted to a signing bonus which is amortized over 5 years. For players who have less than 5 years on their deal, they would need to be extended or have voidable years added to their contract.

For Brady, I'm not sure whether the $3.375m from NLTBE incentives that have already been earned can be converted to a signing bonus or not. OTC's formula is $28.375m of compensation that can be converted minus the minimum salary (~$1m) and multiply the difference by 4/5 (because that's the portion that can be shifted to future years). That's why they get $21.8m of savings. If the $3.375m can't be converted, the calculation becomes ($25m - $1m) * 4/5 = $19.2m. This was the number I cited in my post when calculating the maximum cap savings.

OTC is not always 100% accurate, but they're very close. So the number may not be $58m of total savings, but maybe $55m instead. Add in some additional friction if you give some more new money to players (say $1m extra each as a sweetener), and you're still easily looking at $50m+ of cap savings, for a total cap availability of $78m. And that's only from 5 players - they have many options to rinse and repeat if they really need more space.

Finally, they can apply this same concept for their free agents too. For example, Trey Flowers signed a 5 year deal at $18m / year, but the first year cap hit was only $6.4m since they paid a signing bonus to spread out the hit. So Bucs don't even need to create all of that cap space to sign their free agents.

 

[Deus Irae]

Bottom line, league sources doubt Roseman has been offered a first-round pick of any sort for Wentz, this year or in the future. The haul from a Wentz trade is the only mitigation Roseman can get from the disaster of having to deal away a healthy 28-year-old QB he handpicked as the future of the franchise, saw play for three years, then rewarded with a $128 million contract extension. If Roseman walks away with a midround pick this year and a conditional second or something down the road, he has seriously marred his legacy and probably has deepened the hole the 4-11-1 Eagles have to climb out of, in terms of acquiring talent.

Why is it taking so long for the Eagles to trade Carson Wentz?

 

[ohiopatsfan]

Hear that the Eagles would like to trade Ertz and Wentz as a package deal. Would like to see Ertz as a Pat but have no interest in Wentz. Maybe BB can engineer a three-way deal with Ertz coming to NE and Wentz going elsewhere.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Ertz getting cut, his cap number is 12 million, they save 7 million by cutting him, remember the Iggles are like 50 million over the cap.

 

[DaBruinz]

The maximum savings calculated by OTC assumes that each player's salary is reduced to the minimum and the remaining amount is converted to a signing bonus which is amortized over 5 years. For players who have less than 5 years on their deal, they would need to be extended or have voidable years added to their contract.

For Brady, I'm not sure whether the $3.375m from NLTBE incentives that have already been earned can be converted to a signing bonus or not. OTC's formula is $28.375m of compensation that can be converted minus the minimum salary (~$1m) and multiply the difference by 4/5 (because that's the portion that can be shifted to future years). That's why they get $21.8m of savings. If the $3.375m can't be converted, the calculation becomes ($25m - $1m) * 4/5 = $19.2m. This was the number I cited in my post when calculating the maximum cap savings.

OTC is not always 100% accurate, but they're very close. So the number may not be $58m of total savings, but maybe $55m instead. Add in some additional friction if you give some more new money to players (say $1m extra each as a sweetener), and you're still easily looking at $50m+ of cap savings, for a total cap availability of $78m. And that's only from 5 players - they have many options to rinse and repeat if they really need more space.

Finally, they can apply this same concept for their free agents too. For example, Trey Flowers signed a 5 year deal at $18m / year, but the first year cap hit was only $6.4m since they paid a signing bonus to spread out the hit. So Bucs don't even need to create all of that cap space to sign their free agents.

You clearly didn't bother to see that my response was to Venecol, not you. You should also know that I'm pretty damn good at math and have been following @Miguel for the past 20+ years, so while I may not have ALL the intricacies down, I do understand most of them. Your attempt to "explain" things just leaves me shaking my head;

I do know that NLTBE earnings from the previous year cannot be converted into signing bonus because it's already earned money. I also know that because it was earned the previous year, that those bonuses are automatically counted as LTBE. That is why the 3.375M doesn't go anywhere.

I also know how the league goes about amortizing signing bonuses. I proved that in my response to Venecol so I don't get your need to re-explain something that I already know.

 

[Froob]

Do you guys want Ertz? I think he’s only on the books for 5 mill 2021 and 3.5 mill 2022 for the trading team but could be wrong. That looks like a steal to me.

 

[luuked]

Do you guys want Ertz? I think he’s only on the books for 5 mill 2021 and 3.5 mill 2022 for the trading team but could be wrong. That looks like a steal to me.

His contract looks more like 8.2M for 2021 and two more dummy years that automatically void.

 

[Froob]

His contract looks more like 8.2M for 2021 and two more dummy years that automatically void.

Hmm that’s not terrible either if last year was more to do with Wentz than it was him.

 

[venecol]

Do you guys want Ertz? I think he’s only on the books for 5 mill 2021 and 3.5 mill 2022 for the trading team but could be wrong. That looks like a steal to me.

Yes. Anything is better than LaGlass and Consi-Consa.

 

[luuked]

Hmm that’s not terrible either if last year was more to do with Wentz than it was him.

To be honest Ertz doesn't really move the needle for me. He'd be a nice complementary piece but he is far away from being a chess piece that opponents gameplan around. But maybe he will be the best of whats available/left when FA opens, so who knows.

 

[Sicilian]

Why is it taking so long for the Eagles to trade Carson Wentz?

I think this is one example of the advantage that Belichick has had in his career in New England. Because he had so much success so early, he built up a shield of sorts against these kinds of criticisms. Not that they weren't made (or aren't valid in many cases), but if he had over committed to a player, and had to deal them away for pennies on the dollar just to get SOMETHING for them, he could do so and not fear being fired over it. Most GM's have to keep their team competitive, their owner happy, AND their fanbase/media rooting for them. Bill could at least ignore that third part.

Not to take any credit away from him. It was a luxury he earned through success. But still, I feel for GM's that have to play into a sunk cost fallacy because they fear a backlash from the public.

 

[Sicilian]

To be honest Ertz doesn't really move the needle for me. He'd be a nice complementary piece but he is far away from being a chess piece that opponents gameplan around. But maybe he will be the best of whats available/left when FA opens, so who knows.

I think he would be fine as a vet options, IF Asiasi and Keene take steps forward in year two. We don't necessarily need a guy other teams have to gameplan around, we need a guy who can take advantage of play action opportunities created by our solid running game. That, of course, also depends on keeping the OL together (or replacing anyone we lose) plus getting a QB that can consistently recognize those opportunities. But in those conditions, Ertz would be a good piece, for the right price.

 

[luuked]

But still, I feel for GM's that have to play into a sunk cost fallacy because they fear a backlash from the public.

It is their own decision to be more afraid of external forces they can't control instead of taking ownership of the things they actually have control over and make decisions where the odds are in their favor. Of course things can and will go awry sometimes but over time you will end up ahead.

And you can extend this to on field decisions by coaches as well. Instead of going with out of the box approaches that statistically give them an (however small) edge they rather go with conventional thinking despite worse odds just to avoid questions from the media/fans in case things go south.

The issue is that if you stay on the conventional route there is almost no chance to get an edge because everyone is thinking alike. So on some level those people -- whether they are GMs or coaches or even players -- are stunting their own development and career.

 

[luuked]

I think he would be fine as a vet options, IF Asiasi and Keene take steps forward in year two. We don't necessarily need a guy other teams have to gameplan around, we need a guy who can take advantage of play action opportunities created by our solid running game. That, of course, also depends on keeping the OL together (or replacing anyone we lose) plus getting a QB that can consistently recognize those opportunities. But in those conditions, Ertz would be a good piece, for the right price.

See I disagree. I think this offense absolutely needs a chess piece not only to make life easier for other players but also to put McDaniels back into a position where he can do what he does best: design mismatches and exploit them. It simplifies life for everyone including the QB.

To me Gronk was always the key that enabled the offense to run at full throttle enabling others to shine. And then of course when he got the ball he ruthlessly took advantage of it as well.

 

[borisman]

Why is it taking so long for the Eagles to trade Carson Wentz?

The Eagles are so deep in cap hell you'd think they'd be the ones giving up a draft pick just to get rid of Wentz (and maybe Ertz at the same time)

 

[Sicilian]

See I disagree. I think this offense absolutely needs a chess piece not only to make life easier for other players but also to put McDaniels back into a position where he can do what he does best: design mismatches and exploit them. It simplifies life for everyone including the QB.

To me Gronk was always the key that enabled the offense to run at full throttle enabling others to shine. And then of course when he got the ball he ruthlessly took advantage of it as well.

I won't argue that that's the ideal, no doubt. I'm just not convinced there are many TE's like that in the league. Gronk, Kelce, Kittle and Ertz in his prime are the recent examples. Most really good #1 TE's are guys that get 700 yards and take advantage of plays like I described. If there was a Gronk level TE available I'd say break the bank and let's get him. But in the absence of that, I just want guys that we remember are on the team week to week.

 

[Love The Drake]

Z

I won't argue that that's the ideal, no doubt. I'm just not convinced there are many TE's like that in the league. Gronk, Kelce, Kittle and Ertz in his prime are the recent examples. Most really good #1 TE's are guys that get 700 yards and take advantage of plays like I described. If there was a Gronk level TE available I'd say break the bank and let's get him. But in the absence of that, I just want guys that we remember are on the team week to we

Im not reach to give up on the rook tight ends yet.
Between Covid the complicated playbook lack of practices and Newton acclaiming to the offense. Give the rooks a offseason to study the playbook get in in a NFL training room, hopefully improved QB play. We coild
See them be good to very good players.
They were productive in college and I remember some draft experts saying they loved both picks.
Not ready to close the door however giving up 15th for Wentz and Errz is intriguing pros and cons.
Get your popcorn ready.
Thre more I see of Kellen Mond the more he reminds of a Russell Wilson or a little. Bit of Doug Flutie/
I like the kid is trade from the fourth into the late third for him.