The Patriots were toast before the season began- a casualty of the salary cap.

[CPA_MM]

It only makes sense for the Pats to do this now is if they had a bunch of players worth big money deals and you want to squeeze them under the cap. We don’t have those players and they largely weren’t available last free agency, so spending money to spend money would have done no good. If we can spend money on real OTs and a WR1, I’d be all for it!

I agree 100%. It only makes sense when you have a quarterback capable of taking you to the Super Bowl. Then you free up cap to maximize the amount quality players you can obtain. In the end- it all comes down to player evaluation.

 

[CPA_MM]

Patriots are set up well for the future salary-cap wise. So they could've easily moved money out into the future.

The reason the Patriots have so much money to play with in the future is because they are one of the youngest teams in the NFL. Since Mac Jones joined the team, we've added 54 players to the current roster. This is why we're set up well.

In other words, I don't think the salary cap had any impact whatsoever on the team's ability to do anything this year.

This year is the key. Until a team has a quarterback capable of taking them to the Super Bowl does it make any sense manipulating the cap to gain extra flexibility.

 

[CPA_MM]

I try to hang in with the intricacies of the cap (and this thread in general), but admittedly I'm lacking in understanding.

What I'm wondering, big picture, is if draft picks and cap money have higher perceived value than reality. I know the rosters are much smaller, but we've seen NBA 1st rounders swapped like they're nothing in order to acquire top talent, which teams end up paying huge contracts to. Since it's a rare occurrence for top talent to reach free agency, does it make more sense to ditch draft picks for the top players at positions like QB, WR, LT, CB and give them big money?

I'm just wondering if the roster should optimally be more top heavy.

Good question.
When I tracked the top 25% of player contracts by position- a interesting fact.
-- the team with the most top 25% player contracts - Carolina Panthers (1-6) at 20.
-- the average is 14- the Patriots have 15.

So it comes down to Player evaluation in the end.

 

[CPA_MM]

There are specific monies set aside for the Salary cap. Trying to say that the Patriots are skimping because of the cash there spending is BS when you use the REAL numbers as set in the CBA. Ignoring this makes your entire % spiel null and void.

That is correct. The Eagles signed Jalen Hurts to an extended contract. The contract will cost them $43M (effective APY) per year. The 2023 cap charge is $6M. (Mac Jones is $4M) The contract has void years at the end with $98M of cap assigned to it. Patrick Maahomes cap hit is $37M.

The problem is cap money can buy you a contract where only 14% of the real cost is recognized. $10,000,000 of cap can buy you $16,000,000 worth of contracts if structured like the Eagles, or $12,500,000 if structured by the average NFL club. If you have a chance for the Super Bowl- go for the $16M worth.

 

[Triumph]

This year is the key. Until a team has a quarterback capable of taking them to the Super Bowl does it make any sense manipulating the cap to gain extra flexibility.

If the Pats were winning right now like the Eagles, BB would be a genius for his cap management and GM work.

 

[CPA_MM]

The whole point of the hard salary cap is to prevent a situation like MLB where one team is able to consistently spend $100M more (or less) than other teams.

The problem is it is not a hard cap = cost. The contract that is agreed to is broken down by season based on the design of the contract- having no bearing to true cost. So the Eagles can sign Hurts to a contract that costs $43M per year and only have a cap hit of $6M for this year. Mahomet cap is $37M. Is this not an advantage created artificially based on the design of a contract.

 

[Triumph]

That is correct. The Eagles signed Jalen Hurts to an extended contract. The contract will cost them $43M (effective APY) per year. The 2023 cap charge is $6M. (Mac Jones is $4M) The contract has void years at the end with $98M of cap assigned to it. Patrick Maahomes cap hit is $37M.

The problem is cap money can buy you a contract where only 14% of the real cost is recognized. $10,000,000 of cap can buy you $16,000,000 worth of contracts if structured like the Eagles, or $12,500,000 if structured by the average NFL club. If you have a chance for the Super Bowl- go for the $16M worth.

I would like to see Mac get a contract worth 25 mil per season.

The Pats have enough cap to get this done.

 

[RobertWeathers]

This year is the key. Until a team has a quarterback capable of taking them to the Super Bowl does it make any sense manipulating the cap to gain extra flexibility.

It does if they create cap flexibility to acquire a franchise QB

 

[RobertWeathers]

If the Pats were winning right now like the Eagles, BB would be a genius for his cap management and GM work.

Correct.

That would mean his FA signings and draft picks were home runs.

 

[RobertWeathers]

That is correct. The Eagles signed Jalen Hurts to an extended contract. The contract will cost them $43M (effective APY) per year. The 2023 cap charge is $6M. (Mac Jones is $4M) The contract has void years at the end with $98M of cap assigned to it. Patrick Maahomes cap hit is $37M.

The problem is cap money can buy you a contract where only 14% of the real cost is recognized. $10,000,000 of cap can buy you $16,000,000 worth of contracts if structured like the Eagles, or $12,500,000 if structured by the average NFL club. If you have a chance for the Super Bowl- go for the $16M worth.

I view it similarly.

As long as the cap expands is the key. Think of the NFL cap as expanding your credit line with increased monetary exchange rates in your favor.

 

[Pape]

Do you want the winner of the Super Bowl based on who played the best on the field or who manipulated the cap the most?

This seems to parallel reality in that talent is expensive, and that expense often leads to a superior product on the field... So one could say you need both in these days of parity... I think you nailed it in saying it comes down to player evaluation...

But when we take a look at super team assemblage all too often they fail to win the Lombardi...

It comes down to one key position on the field... QB... Get that piece, no matter the cost, then manipulate the cap to add pieces to the roster to maximize that one piece...

The failings of BB in the recent years has been failures at both player eval and depth building to protect / maximize what talent we do have (edit in key roster spots)... The talent level of this team, as currently constituted, should be producing better results than it is...

 

[RobertWeathers]

This seems to parallel reality in that talent is expensive, and that expense often leads to a superior product on the field... So one could say you need both in these days of parity... I think you nailed it in saying it comes down to player evaluation...

But when we take a look at super team assemblage all too often they fail to win the Lombardi...

It comes down to one key position on the field... QB... Get that piece, no matter the cost, then manipulate the cap to add pieces to the roster to maximize that one piece...

The failings of BB in the recent years has been failures at both player eval and depth building to protect / maximize what talent we do have... The talent level of this team, as currently constituted, should be producing better results than it is...

Yep. "Bad contracts" only exist if the player isn't performing and/or the team isn't winning.

If Jonnu Smith was a 70/800/10td player and not a ~$13m dead cap charge.

 

[Triumph]

Correct.

That would mean his FA signings and draft picks were home runs.

The highest paid player on the Eagles right now is the RT. The Eagles are built to win now because players like AJ Browns cost will surely rise as his contract unfolds.

 

[Pape]

The highest paid player on the Eagles right now is the RT. The Eagles are built to win now because players like AJ Browns cost will surely rise as his contract unfolds.

Maybe limit the number of restructures allow in one particular season? Kinda like how the 6/1 designation is limited to two players? I think it's two... Correct me if I'm wrong...

Still allows for void years, but you limit their overall flexibility that way...

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

The problem is it is not a hard cap = cost. The contract that is agreed to is broken down by season based on the design of the contract- having no bearing to true cost. So the Eagles can sign Hurts to a contract that costs $43M per year and only have a cap hit of $6M for this year. Mahomet cap is $37M. Is this not an advantage created artificially based on the design of a contract.

It is not an advantage because every team can do it. It is a strategy that the Eagles chose to do. Posters can't understand the difference between a strategy and an advantage.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Maybe limit the number of restructures allow in 9ne particular season? Kinda like how the 6/1 designation is limited to two players? I think it's two... Correct me if I'm wrong...

Still allows for void years, but you limit their overall flexibility that way...

No reason to limit flexibility if all teams have the same option. Being fair and equal is what matters. All teams play by the same rules and have the same spending total.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Correct.

That would mean his FA signings and draft picks were home runs.

Injuries and the QB exaggerate everything for the better (Brady) or worse (Mac). It is not as simple as FA and draft picks - I wish it was.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The problem is it is not a hard cap = cost. The contract that is agreed to is broken down by season based on the design of the contract- having no bearing to true cost. So the Eagles can sign Hurts to a contract that costs $43M per year and only have a cap hit of $6M for this year. Mahomet cap is $37M. Is this not an advantage created artificially based on the design of a contract.

It's called a "hard" cap because there is no luxury tax mechanism to allow teams to spend over it; contracts that don't fit are rejected by the league.

There are a couple of small subsidies in the salary cap, but essentially every dollar that ends up in a player's paycheck has to be accounted for within that cap.

And, as I've said before, if you want to argue that BB has mismanaged the cap, that's a perfectly valid argument. But saying Kraft is refusing to spend, or keeping salary cap money for himself, as numerous people claim, is not.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Injuries and the QB exaggerate everything for the better (Brady) or worse (Mac). It is not as simple as FA and draft picks - I wish it was.A

Agree but adding talent throughout the roster is the tide that lifts all boats. That was kinda us in 2021.

Teams like the 2019 Titans make the AFCCG w/ Tanny at QB are examples.

 

[upstater1]

This year is the key. Until a team has a quarterback capable of taking them to the Super Bowl does it make any sense manipulating the cap to gain extra flexibility.

When you know you have a lot of good young players coming up for their 2nd contracts, you want to preserve the ability to sign all of them; and there's always a possibility that this year -- finally -- there may be WR talent in the FA pool.

Mac Jones is not capable of taking this team to the SB. BUT--a lot of QBs who are decent (not Pro Bowlers) are. People make it seem like it will be exceedingly difficult to find a QB that's capable. But here are the names of some Super Bowl QBs the last 20 or so years: Garoppolo, Jalen hurts, Jared Goff, Nick Foles, Cam Newton, Russell Wilson, Joe Flacco, Matt Hasselbeck, Rex Grossman, Donovan McNabb, Jake Delhomme, Rich Gannon, Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Kerry Collins, Chris Chandler, and I'd even add broken-winged Peyton Manning to the list.

None of these guys were all-pros except for Cam Newton. Some of them had career years in which they were considered as top players for the year, like Jalen Hurts and Rich Gannon. Most were journeymen. But the main thing about all of them except Newton is that they were guys that would've been easy to acquire, guys who were not considered the tops at their positions. In other words, we need an adequate or better QB.