Cap question.

UK_Seahawk":2z9avnea said:

Have been looking at Overthecap.com and it seems bigger cap savings are made if we cut players after June 1st.

Am I reading this correctly and what is the logic here?

E.g. Lynch cap saving pre June 1st 6.5m post June 1st 9m.

Click to expand...

UK_Seahawk":3ankcssj said:

Have been looking at Overthecap.com and it seems bigger cap savings are made if we cut players after June 1st.

Am I reading this correctly and what is the logic here?

E.g. Lynch cap saving pre June 1st 6.5m post June 1st 9m.

Click to expand...

Popeyejones":3o06y5ik said:

UK_Seahawk":3o06y5ik said:

Have been looking at Overthecap.com and it seems bigger cap savings are made if we cut players after June 1st.

Am I reading this correctly and what is the logic here?

E.g. Lynch cap saving pre June 1st 6.5m post June 1st 9m.

Click to expand...

Before June 1 all remaining guaranteed money goes into dead money for the next year.

After June 1 the remaining guaranteed money for next year goes into next year, and the remaining guaranteed money after that goes into dead money for the following year.

The cap savings are "bigger" next year because the dead money is being split across multiple years rather than being consolidated into next year; in the end it's the same, it's just how you choose to distribute it.

For a team like the Hawks unless they're pushing problems down the road if they want to cut Lynch pre-Pune 1 makes sense. Next year they're last in the league for players under contract (by a wide margin) but also have cap room to absorb the dead money hit while trying to fill out the roster.

The year after that they've got the 6th most money in the league already committed to the third fewest players in the league under contract.

I think 2017 is really the year JS has to be ready for, so pushing dead money into it isn't really that wise.

Just my take though, who knows what he does.

Click to expand...

Popeyejones":1qlyndhf said:

Also, if people are curious, Seattle's salary cap eskimo brother is probably the Packers.

Next year they have 8 million less in cap space than the Hawks but 6 more players already under contract than the Hawks.

In 2017 they're respectively #6 and #7 in money already spent, but #30 and #27 in number of players that money is going to.

Basically, these are teams using a "superstar" formula of cap construction. This tends to mean a couple things, which we're already seeing, IMO:

1) These are teams with some of the best players at their respective positions in the NFL, and are paid as such.

2) To keep those players these teams steal from Peter to pay Paul, and as a result often fill out their rosters with rookie minimum UFAs, and can suffer from a lack of depth.

3) With atypically large income inequality on the roster, holdouts and losing contributors to FA can be more common than usual.


TO BE CLEAR I'm not saying this is a BAD way to construct a roster (personally I find it to be a really fascinating experiement in roster construction for the NFL), but these are the types of things that can result from it.

Click to expand...

IBleedBlueAndGreen":gt4yu22y said:

Just remember, with the newest collective bargaining agreement the cuts don't actually have to happen after June 1st. A team could designate a player as a post-June first cut to spread the dead money cap hit over two years no matter when the cut occurs.

Essentially what this means is if the team decided to cut Marshawn next week they could do so and take the entire $5M cap hit in 2016, or could designate him as a post-June 1st cut and spread that hit over '16 and '17.

Click to expand...

Sports Hernia":3b71wpld said:

Popeyejones":3b71wpld said:

Also, if people are curious, Seattle's salary cap eskimo brother is probably the Packers.

Next year they have 8 million less in cap space than the Hawks but 6 more players already under contract than the Hawks.

In 2017 they're respectively #6 and #7 in money already spent, but #30 and #27 in number of players that money is going to.

Basically, these are teams using a "superstar" formula of cap construction. This tends to mean a couple things, which we're already seeing, IMO:

1) These are teams with some of the best players at their respective positions in the NFL, and are paid as such.

2) To keep those players these teams steal from Peter to pay Paul, and as a result often fill out their rosters with rookie minimum UFAs, and can suffer from a lack of depth.

3) With atypically large income inequality on the roster, holdouts and losing contributors to FA can be more common than usual.


TO BE CLEAR I'm not saying this is a BAD way to construct a roster (personally I find it to be a really fascinating experiement in roster construction for the NFL), but these are the types of things that can result from it.

Click to expand...

LMAO, you said "Eskimo brother". :th2thumbs:

Click to expand...

Seahawkfan80":f2jygojj said:

IBleedBlueAndGreen":f2jygojj said:

Just remember, with the newest collective bargaining agreement the cuts don't actually have to happen after June 1st. A team could designate a player as a post-June first cut to spread the dead money cap hit over two years no matter when the cut occurs.

Essentially what this means is if the team decided to cut Marshawn next week they could do so and take the entire $5M cap hit in 2016, or could designate him as a post-June 1st cut and spread that hit over '16 and '17.

Click to expand...

Can you do more than one of these post-June 1st cuts or is it only one playa allowed?

Click to expand...