Cap situation - ESPN Insider

[ivotuk]

For those that have it:
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/ ... season-nfl


According to the article though, Seattle is in very good shape with 24 Million in cap space. Which is pretty good compared to other teams.

I LOVE John Schneider, he's been planning for this all along. He said they have a "Model" that goes out 3 or 4 years.

 

[mikeak]

For those that have it:
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/ ... season-nfl


According to the article though, Seattle is in very good shape with 24 Million in cap space. Which is pretty good compared to other teams.

I LOVE John Schneider, he's been planning for this all along. He said they have a "Model" that goes out 3 or 4 years.

I don't have it so they may or may not be making these points.

Not only does the Seahawks have that cap space but have not really done any trickery with cap. Compre to the Bears that have clauses in their contracts that gives the team the right to revise salary to signing bonus to spread money out against the future. It was done with Cutler last year. This means that other teams have a real hard time cleaning up their cap because they are mortgaging the future. Don't get me wrong if you have 2 years or so left with a QB, RB and WR maybe it is worth it but teams like Dallas, Saints and Bears being crushed by their cap situation is stupid.

So Seahawks has their cap space plus minor tricks before they even need to start manipulating the cap. All the experts keep talking about issues once they sign RW. He will get an extension then say $20million signing bonus. That means he only counts $5 million ($4from signing + $1from salary) next year. That leaves $20M to spend...compare that to the Saints.

In addition all cap projections for the last two years have been way off the actual cap has been millions higher. I would not be surprised if actual cap adds $5+ million....

 

[Popeyejones]

I think the Hawks are in pretty good cap shape for how much talent on the defensive side they've already locked up long term, but I also think that 22 million figure is a tad misleading.

The Insider piece recognizes that a chunk of that is going to go to Wilson and Wagner, but it overlooks that (IIRC) the Hawks only have 31 players under contract for next year.

So, that 22 million goes to Wilson, Wagner AND 22 other guys to fill out the roster.

DRAMATICALLY over simplifying lets just say they fill out those 22 roster spots with cast-offs at the veteran minimum, and we're talking being 11 million under cap and needing to give massive deals to Wilson and Wagner (the first years of which will obviously be lower than the average. Let's say that's 10 million total for Wilson and Wagner in their first years (which would be really low and pushing costs down the line). From that perspective, the Hawks have 12 million to sign another 22 guys.

With as much talent as they have that's not putting them in *bad* cap space, but I don't think it's *good* cap space either. I also think it's basically impossible for a team as talented as the Hawks to be in *good* cap space over the long term though. It's just the way it works.

 

[RobBaker7714409]

You don't remember correctly. The Hawks have 46 players under contract for next season.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/cap/2015/

 

[FidelisHawk]

For those without ESPN insider, here’s estimates for the salary cap space of all 32 teams without commentary…

 

[Hyak]

When you factor in the 11 tendered players from yesterday, 2015 draft pool slots, and assume they tender RFA's Kearse (2nd round tender) and Morgan, and ERFA's Shead and Lockette, they should have somewhere around 20 M in cap space using the top 51 formula with 62 people/slots.

They do have some potential cap cuts or restructures that they could pull some money from if they wish to.

Looking at what the Hawks have done recently with new deals for guys, I would expect moderate base salaries for any Wilson or Wagner deals in year 1 of a new deal. What they are doing is giving a decent signing bonus that is prorated over the length of the deal and then guaranteeing base salaries in future years. That will help for 2015 and if you look ahead to 2016 they have plenty of cap space (about 83 M) and only 25 active contracts.

The key to this offseason IMO is to lock up a couple of more core guys, resolve Lynch's deal, and hopefully retain some of our own UFA's while adding a few players for depth/competition.

 

[Popeyejones]

You don't remember correctly. The Hawks have 46 players under contract for next season.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/cap/2015/

The page you're looking at includes draft picks for the next draft and reserves/future contracts, neither of which are used in the 22 million cap space figure.

 

[SomersetHawk]

I think the Hawks are in pretty good cap shape for how much talent on the defensive side they've already locked up long term, but I also think that 22 million figure is a tad misleading.

The Insider piece recognizes that a chunk of that is going to go to Wilson and Wagner, but it overlooks that (IIRC) the Hawks only have 31 players under contract for next year.

So, that 22 million goes to Wilson, Wagner AND 22 other guys to fill out the roster.

DRAMATICALLY over simplifying lets just say they fill out those 22 roster spots with cast-offs at the veteran minimum, and we're talking being 11 million under cap and needing to give massive deals to Wilson and Wagner (the first years of which will obviously be lower than the average. Let's say that's 10 million total for Wilson and Wagner in their first years (which would be really low and pushing costs down the line). From that perspective, the Hawks have 12 million to sign another 22 guys.

With as much talent as they have that's not putting them in *bad* cap space, but I don't think it's *good* cap space either. I also think it's basically impossible for a team as talented as the Hawks to be in *good* cap space over the long term though. It's just the way it works.

I believe that figure of $22m is based upon us having 46 guys under contract for next year (though one of those guys is Garrett Scott). Of course that's a bit misleading because some of the guys on that 46 wont get close to the eventual 51 highest contracts that count against the cap next year, but it's not like we'll need to sign 22 guys with $12m! I also think the cap will be higher than the $142m these guys are working off. I'd rather go off $145m.

I believe we've got 16 guys on the current active roster who become Free Agents. Byron Maxwell and James Carpenter would be the most expensive guys to retain, but it looks like at least one if not both will be gone. Then you'll have Jermaine Kearse who some are expecting we'll give a second round tender to; which would equate to around $2.5m. None of the other free agents will be in for any more than a marginal raise, bar O'Brien Schofield if we were to keep him (he counted $570k against us this year, I'd expect that will be quadrupled, wherever he lands).

It's also not like we need to re-sign and replace these 16 active squad FAs. Out of our 11 draft picks combined with UDFA's you'd be banking on us landing at least six guys for the active squad, and hopefully closer to eight (last year Richardson, Britt, Marsh, Pierre-Louis, Norwood, Brock Coyle, Garry Gilliam and Ra'Shaun Allen all made their way onto the 53 at some point). Say we get another eight guys onto that active roster, they'd probably combine for around $5-6m against the cap in 2015, and take our contracted players to 54. Remember only 51 players count against the cap and so if we wanted to replace/re-sign the remaining 8 positions lost through FA, plus extensions for Russ and Bobby, then we're probably looking at having around $20m to do so.

So, say we do somehow get Russ and Bobby at a $10m hit next year, we'd essentially have $10m spare money for filling some FA positions. Only the FA signings exceeding the lowest contracts in the current 51 would count against the cap e.g. say the lowest paid player on the 51 is getting $400k but we bring back Kevin Williams at $1.4m, it would only add $1m to the cap.

Sweezy and Lynch extensions should be on the cards, with a nice chunk of money to upgrade some other positions in FA. At a stretch, we might be able to keep Byron, or Carp (if you're like that), but it would mean filling the roster with more bargain contracts/inexperienced players than usual. Look for such contracts to come from the players we just signed on future deals, last year B.J Daniels and Cooper Helfet made the squad after getting futures contracts.

 

[Popeyejones]

Thanks for the detailed reply, and I forgot that it's only the top 51 that count. Thanks for the needed reminder.

The Hawks have 22 players who become FAs, not 16:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/ ... -seahawks/

53-22 = 31

As I recall none of the reserves/future contracts count toward that 22 million dollar cap figure because they're not "real" contracts until the start of the next league year:

"Teams can sign players to futures contracts as soon as the previous regular season is over, but the contract won't count against the salary cap or 53-man limit. Instead, it'll count against the salary cap and 90-man camp limit of the following season."

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1947 ... -contracts

Instead, the cap figures ESPN is using is just the next year contract value of the current players on the team not including those who have a zero dollar for next year because they're FAs of various sorts.

You're absolutely right about tenders and rookies making the squad, which makes the estimate of 500K per new deal pretty conservative (e.g. averaged across the draft class rookies are going to be making >>> 500K; the 2.5 million Kearse tender you bring up is >>>> 500K). That said we can also from the back of the envelope estimate clear out 1 million (500k*2) because it's only 51 who count not 53.

So, the questions are 1) how much will Wilson and Wagner take up on the first years of their big deals, and 2) how will the remaining money be distributed to fill out the rest of the roster.

Also worth saying that if ESPN is incorporating contracts that don't exist yet (the reserves/futures) into it's salary cap for next year figure (I don't think they do, but could obviously be wrong), then I'm obviously mistaken. :th2thumbs:

 

[Uncle Si]

Which NFL team spread their cap hits to different years? I can't remember who or where I heard it, but basically it was a summary of how an NFL team signed elite players and was able to manage the cap by making sure each player's biggest year came at a different time. Each then had the opportunity to be the "highest paid" on the team... for a year.

Any ideas?

 

[SomersetHawk]

Thanks for the detailed reply, and I forgot that it's only the top 51 that count. Thanks for the needed reminder.

The Hawks have 22 players who become FAs, not 16:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/ ... -seahawks/

53-22 = 31

As I recall none of the reserves/future contracts count toward that 22 million dollar cap figure because they're not "real" contracts until the start of the next league year:

"Teams can sign players to futures contracts as soon as the previous regular season is over, but the contract won't count against the salary cap or 53-man limit. Instead, it'll count against the salary cap and 90-man camp limit of the following season."

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1947 ... -contracts

Instead, the cap figures ESPN is using is just the next year contract value of the current players on the team not including those who have a zero dollar for next year because they're FAs of various sorts.

You're absolutely right about tenders and rookies making the squad, which makes the estimate of 500K per new deal pretty conservative (e.g. averaged across the draft class rookies are going to be making >>> 500K; the 2.5 million Kearse tender you bring up is >>>> 500K). That said we can also from the back of the envelope estimate clear out 1 million (500k*2) because it's only 51 who count not 53.

So, the questions are 1) how much will Wilson and Wagner take up on the first years of their big deals, and 2) how will the remaining money be distributed to fill out the rest of the roster.

Also worth saying that if ESPN is incorporating contracts that don't exist yet (the reserves/futures) into it's salary cap for next year figure (I don't think they do, but could obviously be wrong), then I'm obviously mistaken. :th2thumbs:

My point was we have 16 FAs from the current active roster. Though I might have miscounted, it might be 17.

As for the futures contracts, I hadn't suggested they count against the cap yet. But as with BJ Daniels and Cooper Helfet, some of those guys could land on the active roster and count against the cap next year, at a very low price.

Where was the 500k estimation from? ESPN? I worked out 8 players at $5-6m (will be closer to $5m).

It will be really interesting when we find out the Wilson and Wagner deals, it should reveal plenty about our future plans e.g. lower first and second year hits and no deals for Byron or Carp could be indicative of us making a play for a bigger FA name, and I'd guess a WR along the lines of Fitz, Marshall or Jackson. As well as Russ, I'd expect Bobby gets a plenty of guaranteed cash.

 

[ivotuk]

I was listening to Clayton on 710 the other day and he said he thought the cap would make a decent jump this year. Can't remember the number though.

 

[Popeyejones]

My point was we have 16 FAs from the current active roster. Though I might have miscounted, it might be 17.

Yeah, and the 22 total who are still on the team and go into these cap figures who are going to be FAs next year as I understand it, but let's just go with you 17 for simplicity's sake.

As for the futures contracts, I hadn't suggested they count against the cap yet. But as with BJ Daniels and Cooper Helfet, some of those guys could land on the active roster and count against the cap next year, at a very low price.

Where was the 500k estimation from? ESPN? I worked out 8 players at $5-6m (will be closer to $5m).

The 500K estimate was me ballparking a VERY CONSERVATIVE estimate for filling out the active roster, and where that 22 million in cap room is going to go. I went with a very conservative estimate because it highlights my point about ESPN making a mistake by not taking into consideration the number of FAs a young team like the Hawks will be having to replace (e.g. the 22 million cap figure is a little misleading if it doesn't take into account the 17 players that will have to fill out the team)

Re: Daniels and Helfet, yeah, that's why I'm using a conservative estimate. Daniels, if he's on the active roster would count 600K (not 500) and Helfet would cost 510. 500K per player is also way on the conservative side for slotting draft picks onto the active roster (e.g. if the Hawks 1st round pick makes the active roster he'll count about 1.75 million against the salary cap, the equivalent of more than three players in our conservative 500K per player schema).

So, if we go with your 17 number and my VERY conservative estimate of that 22 million we are assigning:

8.5 million to the 17 open spots (a lowball estimate).

+

10 million to Wilson and Wagner (another lowball estimate)

Leaving a total of 3.5 million total in cap room (while acknowledging that we've relied on two lowball estimates to get there).

Basically, just to resign Wilson and Wagner and fill out the rest of the team with below replacement-level salaries the Hawks are going to be eating up all but 3.5 million of what initially appears to look like a ton of cap space, but actually isn't.

It will be really interesting when we find out the Wilson and Wagner deals, it should reveal plenty about our future plans e.g. lower first and second year hits and no deals for Byron or Carp could be indicative of us making a play for a bigger FA name, and I'd guess a WR along the lines of Fitz, Marshall or Jackson. As well as Russ, I'd expect Bobby gets a plenty of guaranteed cash.

Yeah, this is kind of what I'm getting at. While the cap number *looks* big at first glance, it would actually take a ton of moves to clear out the cap space to sign a Tier 1 FA like Fitz, Marshall, or Jackson.

That's not a knock against the Hawks at all (they have probably the most talented team in the NFL and they're doing an excellent job re-signing their guys), but IMO they're simply not at a place in their salary cap development to be bringing in Tier 1 FAs to get stronger. They might end up swinging something, but I don't think it's likely (it's possible of course because teams DO sometimes do some crazy cap jujitsu to bring in big FAs; the Hawks could do that too).

Basically, as we're all already expecting Wilson and Wagner to stay and given that the Hawks have an unusual number of roster spots to refill, that 22 million is kind of a mirage. I think ESPN just looked at the number and ran with it rather than looking at in context.

And just to be clear and to reiterate. The Hawks have done a GREAT job keeping the team together so far through these transitions. I'm not knocking them at all.

 

[Popeyejones]

I was listening to Clayton on 710 the other day and he said he thought the cap would make a decent jump this year. Can't remember the number though.

Yeah, as far as I understand it they're basing the figures on the expected jump.

TBH I'm still not entirely clear on where this expected jump is coming from (there aren't any new media contracts and the cap increases over the last few years have actually been artificial -- they've had to steal from the pension fund to keep the cap from DECREASING since the new CBA), but it has been so widely reported that I'm assuming it's true and there's just something I don't know about the contract payment structures or something.

 

[brimsalabim]

I thought Wilson was already under contract for next season? If so wouldn't any new contract numbers hit the cap in 2016?

 

[Popeyejones]

^^^^ Not necessarily. They can choose to leave the base number the same and just put signing/workout/roster bonuses on top of it, but if Wilson is re-signed the chances of him playing next year with a 800K cap hit are essentially nil.

They can structure it many different ways, but it ends up in mostly the same place:

For example:

They could leave the base salary the same and put 10-15 million per year into signing/workout/roster bonuses as the Cowboys did with Tony Romo and the Packers did with Rodgers across the first three years of his deal.

They could put all the money into salary and leave the bonuses really low as the Bears did with Jay Cutler

Or they could split it out a bit more evenly as the 9ers did with Kaepernick and the Chiefs did with Alex Smith.

Basically, if everyone is right and we're expecting Wilson to get about 22 million per year or so, you're looking at something like Aaron Rodgers' contract, which had an 11.6 million cap hit in the first year: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay-pa ... n-rodgers/

I think they'll push the money problems back more than that, but best case scenario I'd guess is Wilson having a 7 million dollar cap hit. Maybe they really push back and get it down to six or five, but below that (and maybe even that) just causes a ton of problems down the line.

 

[SomersetHawk]

Okay, let me put this simply.

We now have 57 players contracted for next year including the futures. The 51 counting against the cap put us at a little over $124m. If we're saying the cap jumps to $145m (a not all that optimistic projection) then that will leave us with $21m.

That $21m would be spent on extending Russell and Bobby as well as some FA contracts. However, it's not like we've only got $21m to extend guys and sign like 20 free agents, so quit that thinking!

Because we've already got our 51 contracted players to count against the cap, any free agent and rookie signings will only add to the cap if their contracts exceed those currently in the top 51. Among the top 51 contracts are five futures signings all earning $435k. All future draft signings and free agents signings will exceed those numbers but for the majority it will be marginal. If we work off eight draftees/udfa making the 51 at an average of $600k, the cap will rise just $1.3m.

That would leave us with the best part of $20m for extensions and free agency. Say we bring in about 8-10 free agents, the majority of those would be on similar contracts to the draftees and so wont impact the cap. A few will be higher. But assuming we can extend Russ, Bobby, Sweezy and Marshawn for a $15m hit in 2015, we'd be left with about $6-7m for a couple of bigger FA guys. (Of course keeping Kearse would wipe out a third of that).

In light of recent reports. If you forget about Kearse and cut McDaniel you could be looking at $10m to throw at Suh. If he really does want to come to Seattle, then $10m might just be enough to land him. When you consider the rising cap plus the likelihood Lynch, Mebane and Okung could be gone after next year it just might work. Other than Irvin, I see nobody else currently with us looking at a big contract in 2016.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I was listening to Clayton on 710 the other day and he said he thought the cap would make a decent jump this year. Can't remember the number though.

Just wait until the playoffs expand this year and the NFL gets that extra TV money

Of course that doesn't mean players will still agree to the same annual salaries. Just that the cap will soar in the coming years.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I thought Wilson was already under contract for next season? If so wouldn't any new contract numbers hit the cap in 2016?

When a player signs an extension, the current contract is ripped up and the new cap # starts so the player can start getting his bonus money immediately.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

I was listening to Clayton on 710 the other day and he said he thought the cap would make a decent jump this year. Can't remember the number though.

Just wait until the playoffs expand this year and the NFL gets that extra TV money

Of course that doesn't mean players will still agree to the same annual salaries. Just that the cap will soar in the coming years.

The players get a percentage of the whole so salaries will go up regardless. I would assume there will be a huge strike once this collective bargaining contract is up though (as there should be given the players are getting royally screwed with this one). They should demand a much higher percentage of the total to balance out the rookie wage scale.