Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Rams Huddle › Figuring out the cap
- This topic has 12 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 8 months ago by zn.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 29, 2015 at 11:22 pm #21961znModerator
The cap goes up and down by the day, and I don’t remember how much they had to start with when all the recent stuff began. Someone else might know that. Ag?
So I can’t do the math, just add up the expenditures.
First–
Cut Wells and Long. Save 12 M.
Trade Bradford. Save 13 M.Spending —
Tender offer to McCleod. 2.4 M
Tender offer to Harkey. 1.5 M
Tender offer to Davis. 1.5 M
Tender offer to C. Reynolds. 0.585
Tender offer to Washington. 0.585Barnes ….about 1 M
G. Reynolds…. about 1 MKendricks… about 5.5 M this year
Ayers … about 2.9 M this year
Fairly … about 4.75 M this year
Britt …. about 4.3 M this yearFoles … about 1.5 M this year
Now is that all correct?
You tell me.
March 29, 2015 at 11:22 pm #21729znModeratorWhat about future cap space?
They have to decide on Foles, and they have other free agents up. So what is the cap space in 2016?
And then why 2017? Because the Rams frontload and often use the 2nd year of a contract to park the biggest frontload hit. An example is Quinn. Quinn signed an extension in 2014. His cap hit in 2015 is 16.7+ M. But after that it avgs. about 11+ M a year.
I assume the cap in 2016 will be 150 M. It will probably be higher than that in 2017, but I will still keep it at 150 M cause we really don;t know yet.
Okay…in 2016 they currently have available, before any other move (including signing draft picks), 56.5+ M.
2016 free agents include Fairley, Barron, Hayes, Brockers, Sims, Jenkins, Foles, and Givens.
The biggest hit by far will be Foles, if they like him and keep him. They won’t keep all of the ones I just listed, but then Foles or no Foles they never were going to keep all of them anyway.
In 2017 they currently have available, before any other move (including signing draft picks), 94+ M.
2017 free agents include Long, Britt, Austin, Ogletree, McDonald, and Bailey.
During the off-season in 2017, they will at that point have added (as of now) 7 new 1st-3rd round draft picks.
I listed, besides Foles, 13 guys. Ideally (and this is “ideal” on every level), if they do well drafting 7 new players with those picks, they only need to keep 6 of the FAs.
…
April 2, 2015 at 12:56 am #21979AgamemnonParticipantThe cap goes up and down by the day, and I don’t remember how much they had to start with when all the recent stuff began. Someone else might know that. Ag?
So I can’t do the math, just add up the expenditures.
All you stuff is correct. But, lets start with 11 million figure given by JT and Wagoner. Then you figure in all the expense for the year. etc. etc. Short answer, the Rams can write a contract/s that add approx. 4 million in cap to this years cap. They can do this without making any other moves. imo
You could give Barksdale any kind of contract, 2 years 4 years, whatever, as long as the hit this year was less than 4 million. If you wanted to squeeze the cap, you could write a couple of vet minimum contracts, too. But then you would probably have to make some adjustments during the year, especially if you started having injuries that meant you had to IR players. imo
As long as the Rams stay at about 5 million a year with Barksdale, I see no problems this year or next or the next. Remember too, Demoff wanted to extend Bradford, this was before his second knee injury. So, I am sure he had Bradford budgeted in the future years cap space. Paying the going rate for a QB in the future should be no problem. Of course you would be better if you spend that money elsewhere, but who has everything. 😉
- This reply was modified 9 years, 8 months ago by Agamemnon.
April 2, 2015 at 1:01 am #21980znModeratorAll you stuff is correct. But, lets start with 11 million figure given by JT and Wagoner. Then you figure in all the expense for the year. etc. etc. Short answer, the Rams can write a contract/s that add approx. 4 million in cap to this years cap. They can do this without making any other moves. imo
You could give Barksdale any kind of contract, 2 years 4 years, whatever, as long as the hit this year was less than 4 million. If you wanted to squeeze the cap, you could write a couple of vet minimum contracts, too. But then you would probably have to make some adjustments during the year, especially if you started having injuries that meant you had to IR players. imo
Okay.
But this is what confuses me. The figures I present there are around 30 M. But for those figures to add up to be around 30 M, and to have around 10 M left (with Barnes), then, that means somewhere along the line they were 40 under. (Or does the 11 M already count Barnes? I forget.) Not all at once, but in different stages, in this off-season, they musta had 40 M to spend, total.
I don’t remember what they had before all this activity happened, so I don’t know how they did that. Not that it matters. Just curious.
.
April 2, 2015 at 1:06 am #21982AgamemnonParticipantAll you stuff is correct. But, lets start with 11 million figure given by JT and Wagoner. Then you figure in all the expense for the year. etc. etc. Short answer, the Rams can write a contract/s that add approx. 4 million in cap to this years cap. They can do this without making any other moves. imo
You could give Barksdale any kind of contract, 2 years 4 years, whatever, as long as the hit this year was less than 4 million. If you wanted to squeeze the cap, you could write a couple of vet minimum contracts, too. But then you would probably have to make some adjustments during the year, especially if you started having injuries that meant you had to IR players. imo
Okay.
But this is what confuses me. The figures I present there are around 30 M. But for those figures to add up to be around 30 M, and to have around 10 M left (with Barnes), then, that means somewhere along the line they were 40 under. Not all at once, but in different stages, in this off-season, they musta had 40 M to spend, total.
I don’t remember what they had before all this activity happened, so I don’t know how they did that. Not that it matters. Just curious.
.
Right, we don’t have to know how they got to their destination, only if they got there. Anyway, that is bookkeeping. I like math, not bookkeeping. 😉
I don’t chase details, but did you add the amount the cap increased? Did you add the credit from Finnegan? etc. etc.
Barnes is small change, pocket money.
April 2, 2015 at 11:18 am #21997AgamemnonParticipant
http://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space/
Here are some figures for the salary cap in the coming years. What is important is not the actual dollar amount, but the relative positions of each team. The Rams are in the top 10 for the coming years. We are in good shape to keep who we want. imo
April 2, 2015 at 7:56 pm #22018AgamemnonParticipantBarnes counts $710K against the 2015 cap. Rams now have $9.82 million in cap space.
— Jim Thomas (@jthom1) April 2, 2015
Ok, it looks like the cap space is 10 million, not 11 million like they were saying. But, it is not a big deal. It does change my estimation of how much they can add in cap space with new contracts to ~3 million instead of the old estimate of ~4 million.April 2, 2015 at 8:04 pm #22021znModeratorOk, it looks like the cap space is 10 million, not 11 million like they were saying. But, it is not a big deal. It does change my estimation of how much they can add in cap space with new contracts to ~3 million instead of the old estimate of ~4 million.
And of course there’s still some cuts and tweaks they can do to get more.
April 2, 2015 at 8:18 pm #22024AgamemnonParticipantOk, it looks like the cap space is 10 million, not 11 million like they were saying. But, it is not a big deal. It does change my estimation of how much they can add in cap space with new contracts to ~3 million instead of the old estimate of ~4 million.
And of course there’s still some cuts and tweaks they can do to get more.
Right, my number is based on them not doing anything. Otherwise, it wouldn’t have much meaning. 😉
April 3, 2015 at 12:52 am #22032HerzogParticipantSo that means just one free agent o-lineman.
April 3, 2015 at 12:55 am #22033JackPMillerParticipantSo that means just one free agent o-lineman.
Joe Barksdale? Just hoping.
April 3, 2015 at 8:41 am #22047znModeratorSo that means just one free agent o-lineman.
Unless, as we were saying, they do more to get more space. Tweak some contracts, cut a guy or 2 (like Pead).
April 4, 2015 at 8:12 pm #22133znModeratorWhat is important is not the actual dollar amount, but the relative positions of each team. The Rams are in the top 10 for the coming years. We are in good shape to keep who we want. imo
Good stuff. Thnx
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.