As is always pointed out to me, there are always a wealth of moves to be made. The Eckel situation was a known deal, and the effect of cap dieting regarding Donte and Washington was pretty well known. The issue wasn't ever cap health... and even if/when we believe we are up against the wall, there may be more possible moves to be made (i.e., Colvin, and others if necessary.)
Getting back to the other side of the ledger, the statement was made that Asante would love to sop up all of that on his lonesome. This is not the effect of a blockbuster deal. Often such deals are structured so the first year comes plenty cheap.
The issue there is not to put the team on the hook for big dead money hits going forward. So if you guarantee 22 mill on an 80M, 8 year contract for Asante (the Clement-type money he wants,) 22M is down the tubes, then there's 58M in salary to put on the books at different yearly amounts over 7 years.
So let's say 2008 nets him 22M bucks, including 2M in salary and 20M in bonuses. That 20M option is divided by 8 years. Since 20 = 2.5 x 8, we're on the hook for Year 1 of 20M, or 2.5M, plus 2M salary = 4.5 M.
The downside is, now you're on the hook for 2.5M per year (amortization), for 8 years. If there is still a cap for 8 years, that means 2.5M each and every year in dead money if/when you get rid of the guy, because you've already spent that 2.5M/year in that signing bonus.
In addition, of course, salary over 7 years has to equal 58M per year, so that's north of 8M APY in salary for every year that you keep him...
naturally that's back-loaded to an extent, so the 80M total on the deal includes something like 15M per year for the last 2 years, bringing it down to , say, 28M that you pay over five years, in salary... for something like 5.5 M per year for 5 years, salary.
So that gets you to 8M average until years 7 and 8, inclding amortization from bonus.
To the team that means, in this made-up scenario:
- 4.5M bucks for year 1
- 8M a year for years 2 through 6 (bonus proration plus salary)
- a dead money hit of 2.5M a year that kicks in the moment you cut Asante in the future (a "penalty" based on the bonus you originally paid.)
So the way it works is not so much a sticker price for buying a guy. It's a combination of risks turned into dollar figures, and loaded against the cap on one side, or the player on the other side.
In the above very simple example, there's 30 million bucks of vanity money at the back end... by year 7 and 8 there's a limited dead money hit left, and a ton of salary money left, so the team has room to wiggle out and incentive to do so.
But during the first six years, the team would be silly to wiggle out, because (in theory) they'd be getting good performance for that long. If they wiggle out early, they will be punished, so this risk-loading makes sure they don't wiggle out without good reason. At the same time, the team has some room to do so, in the case of disasterous underperformance. But they pay.
Just felt like getting this basic info across. I'm not a cap expert of any kind, but I think it's worth mentioning this idea as we go forward. It's not so much the "right now" hit of any given signing... its the cumulative effect. We are looking at any given time at a pot of say half a billion dollars representing about 4 years, only one year of which (the current cap) is certain. And that pot trails off into the distance, it does not cut short at 4 years... The thing about cap discipline is making sure you're not building up those dead money threats in time-bomb contracts throughout your team, and resisting the urge to spend disproportionately at any given position throughout the roster. The Pats have been good at that historically, or "cheap," if you listen to some players.
Okay all done with the soap box, someone else can use it now.
PFnV
