Forum Replies Created
-
Ok, you want to find good players. You want to keep good players. At some point you can’t keep them all because you have a salary cap. You have to replace the players you lose with cheaper players. The best way to do that is through the draft. The more draft choices you have, the more chances you have to do that. But we knew that already. My stuff just gives me a better idea of different ways to do a cap model. Or at least that I shouldn’t/can’t spend more than 53% of the cap on premium players(players that make more 3M/yr in 2016). Cause I don’t want below average players as starters. imo
The numbers parts just give me reasonable baselines. They aren’t written in stone.
AgamemnonJust adding some information about how teams spend the cap for their highest paid players.
There are a few teams at the top and bottom. But, overall, how the salary cap is broken down, seems to be quite consistant. imo There is not even much variance in the sub totals.
Looks like a lot of work went into that.
But to be honest I am not sure I followed that. It’s me–I don’t do well with graphs and visual representations and columns and stuff.
Could you explain a bit?
That was more on the theme of an experiment. I was looking for a better way to look at the structure of rosters. I wanted more data to see how my ?theory held up. One thing I could add, the top and bottom teams had a relation to which teams had excess cap and which teams had virtually no cap.
I wasn’t really looking at the bottom(the green stuff), that sort of fell out of the numbers. The average and the Rams being close to the average sort of fell out, although that might not mean anything.
I think the fact that the data does have structure means that the cap guys on the teams look at stuff like this and have some sort of guidelines on how they handle the cap. I think stuff is way to consistent to be an accident.
It was just something I did for myself that since I did it, I might as well post it if anyone else was interested. I quit before the hard stuff. 😉
As far as following it. It isn’t that kind of information. I put it out there and you make of it what you will. I am making observations more than finding a perfect model. Mostly I wanted to see what kind of constraints applied. I think it is more like how regular roster is made. So many OLine, DBs, etc., there are a lot of ways to make it work.
It is an addition to the stuff I did here. http://theramshuddle.com/topic/one-kind-of-roster-model/#post-46411
Agamemnonhttp://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000671174/article/jj-watt-rob-gronkowski-top-nfls-best-nonqbs
J.J. Watt, Rob Gronkowski top NFL’s best non-QBs
By Chris Wesseling
Published: June 23, 2016 at 03:04 p.m.As much as it might stagger the imagination of a 21st century football fan, quarterbacks weren’t always atop the NFL’s salary-structure food chain. Back in the late 1970s, Hall of Fame running backs O.J. Simpson and Walter Payton were the highest-paid players in the league.
The subject is back in the news of late, with Von Miller’s quest to become the highest-paid defensive star and Fletcher Cox’s new contract that rewards him as the second-highest paid non-quarterback in NFL history.
With that in mind, let’s take a look at the most valuable non-quarterbacks entering the 2016 season:
1. J.J. Watt, DE, Houston Texans: Winner of three of the past four Defensive Player of the Year awards, Watt is the dominant, game-wrecking defensive force of his generation. He now ranks with Lawrence Taylor and Reggie White as the most devastating defenders ever to stalk the gridiron.
This isn’t the first time we’ve wondered if Watt might just be more valuable than several of the NFL’s franchise quarterbacks.
2. Rob Gronkowski, TE, New England Patriots: The offense’s answer to Watt, Gronkowski is such a freakishly stellar specimen that NFL Media analyst Nate Burleson once suggested he was “built in a lab” or “pieced together by the football gods.” Stopping Gronk is a Herculean task that would require a Frankenstein-like mashup of Jamie Collins’ size and athleticism, Richard Sherman’s playmaking ability and Patrick Peterson’s speed and quickness.
Cardinals general manager Steve Keim explained earlier this offseason that NFL teams no longer find complete tight ends. Today’s tight ends are either inline blockers (Y) lacking the skill set of pass catchers or overgrown wide receivers (F) who get blown up at the point of attack. Gronkowski is not just the exception to the rule. He’s the best to ever do it.
3. Aaron Donald, DT, Los Angeles Rams: What separates Donald from other stud defensive tackles is his unparalleled first-step burst off the snap. That quickness is enhanced by a swashbuckler’s strong but dexterous hands, a relentless array of moves and the ferocious closing speed of an apex predator.
“Extremely. Extremely (disruptive),” Buccaneers coach Dirk Koetter raved late last season. “Our scouting department scouts teams a couple of weeks in advance, and they told me that he was on the same level as J.J. Watt. And I thought to myself, ‘Wow! That’s hard to believe.’ “When it came my time to watch the tape, I said, ‘Oh, wow! He’s on the same level as J.J. Watt!’ I mean, this guy’s having a fantastic year, definitely a game-wrecker for this game.”
4. Von Miller, LB, Denver Broncos: A true outcome shifter, Miller was the difference between the Broncos and the losing teams in the AFC Championship as well as Super Bowl 50. When an offensive tackle overcompensates for his dynamic speed off the edge, Miller unleashes a devastating spin move that accounted for 16 QB pressures alone last season, per Pro Football Focus. He’s going to be rewarded as the NFL’s highest-paid non-quarterback when he signs his next contract.
5. Luke Kuechly, LB, Carolina Panthers: The Panthers ask more of their linebackers than any team in the league, and Kuechly is driving force with freakish athleticism and the ability to process reads at an uncanny speed. His closing speed in the run game and range in the passing game jump off film, as evidenced by his Thanksgiving Day performance that ranks as one of the most impressive by a linebacker in the past half-decade. If not for Miller’s MVP performance, we would have spent the offseason recounting Kuechly’s own dominant playoff run.
6. Antonio Brown, WR, Pittsburgh Steelers: Chris Harris is one of the NFL’s premier cornerbacks, earning Pro Bowl nods in back-to-back seasons. Football’s best route runner flat-out tortured him in a December shootout, hauling in 13 of 15 targets in Harris’ coverage for 147 yards and a pair of scores.
“It was the best versus the best, and he won,” Harris conceded. “I haven’t given up a touchdown in two years. … He’s a great player. The best receiver in the game right now.”
7. Julio Jones, WR, Atlanta Falcons: If Brown stands atop the NFL’s wide-receiver hierarchy, Jones is nipping at his heels. In fact, Jones is clearly the more physically dominant of the two. He closed out the 2015 season with the second-most receptions (136) and receiving yards (1,871) in league history.
More valuable than franchise quarterback Matt Ryan, Jones has been the unique power/speed dynamo making the Falcons offense go since he entered the league in 2011.
8. Odell Beckham, WR, New York Giants: Brown and Jones should enjoy the attention now, because the greatest pure athlete in the league is coming like a freight train. No receiver in NFL history can match Beckham’s production through two NFL seasons. Since he debuted in Week 5 of the 2015 season, Beckham has 25 touchdowns. Gronkowski is the only player in the league within five receiving scores of Beckham over that span.
What makes Beckham so special? Let’s start here: vertical explosiveness, incredible leaping ability and hang time, improvisational creativity, mid-air dexterity, rare suddenness, easy separation, ability to play every wide-receiver position and run a full route tree, humongous suction-cup hands and world-class athleticism.
9. Khalil Mack, LB/DE, Oakland Raiders: Just two seasons into his career, Mack is already pushing Miller as the NFL’s best all-around edge rusher. He made history last year as the first player selected at two different positions (defensive end, outside linebacker) on the Pro Football Writers Association’s All-NFL team. After watching his teammate close out 2015 with 10 sacks in his final six games, Derek Carr believes Mack can break Michael Strahan’s single-season record this year.
“I think he’s going to sack the quarterback 30 times,” Carr recently told Adam Schein on SiriusXM’s Mad Dog Sports Radio. “Watch the tape. He’s held every play. He’s like nobody else in the league. He’s talented.”
10. Patrick Peterson, CB, Arizona Cardinals: Peterson has long been viewed as football’s most physically gifted defensive back. Prior to last season, though, there was a sense that his annual spot in the Pro Bowl and on the All-Pro’s first team was due more to reputation than results. After dropping weight and getting his Type 2 diabetes under control last offseason, Peterson put it all together in 2015. The NFL’s stingiest shutdown cornerback, Peterson topped all cornerbacks with a 45.6 passer rating and 18.9 coverage snaps per reception.
Just missed: Geno Atkins, Ndamukong Suh, Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas, Le’Veon Bell, Adrian Peterson, Todd Gurley, DeAndre Hopkins, Dez Bryant, A.J. Green, Fletcher Cox, Tyrann Mathieu
Agamemnon
Just adding some information about how teams spend the cap for their highest paid players.
There are a few teams at the top and bottom. But, overall, how the salary cap is broken down, seems to be quite consistant. imo There is not even much variance in the sub totals.
AgamemnonOh I absolutely agree, hard choices.
It’s just that I would choose for a Donald.
If I had to fit AD in THIS year at (as a hypothetical) 21 M a year, I would sacrifice Johnson and Saffold. I would figure they could do more with a new CB plus AD than they could with Johnson and a different DT. And of course guards are easier to replace than elite DTs.
I agree that it’s different visions and different approaches. Given that, I favor the elite DT no matter what.
…
I would do that this year, although I am not as certain about doing it as you are. 😉
NO and Pitt have 2 players taking 23%+ of the cap. A couple others are close.
Agamemnon
The Rams have spent~98% of the their cap. Imagine trying to fit 2 players that count ~23% of the cap into this roster. Hard choices have to be made. imo
You can subtract Foles and the present cost of Goff and Donald. That is ~10%. We still have to save another ~14%?
AgamemnonI know. 50-60% ought to be around half of your cap and usually includes anywhere from 8-10 players.
I just bet in advance it includes both Donald and Goff.
My reasoning is that in both cases, those are the kinds of players where if you have THEM, you can just add guys around them. Donald will make any decent to good DL better, and having a franchise qb makes your offense better. Subtract either thing, and it’s harder to have a top DL and it’s harder to run an effective offense.
Plus they are both absolutely top-drawer “lead by example” types who are devoted to the game.
I would rather have a few lesser players in other spots than do without either one.
All that assumes btw that Goff will turn out as promised, which is, he will be a very good qb, a franchise qb type (whether or not he’s ever elite).
…
That is a legitimate model for a roster. Given that the players are who we think they are.;)
In a future where Goff gets 25/yr and Donald gets 20/yr that is about 24/25% of your cap. imo
Agamemnon<
Well I agree with that, but, that depends on what is meant by “his status.” I figure at a minimum that will be “best DT in the game.”And I don’t see contracts as equivalent to just a performance measure. That is, what determines a contract more is not “how precisely well are you playing” as much as it is “what does it cost to keep you”…and the latter is driven by the market.
In terms of how long could he be productive?
Let’s look at a roughly similar player–John Randle.
Randle was getting high grades and double-digit sacks up through his 12th year.
Another similar player? Randy White. White was getting high grades and double-digit sacks in his 11th year.
Alan Page (though we don’t know his sacks) was getting high grades in his 13th year.
The thing that subtracts from longevity with these kinds of interior rush tackles is usually a serious knee injury. If he doesn’t get that, history shows that type can play at a high level for a decade.
The fact that you have a salary cap at all, limits just how far away from a norm contracts can get. I would say 53 – 60 percent of the cap for your best players. After that it becomes problematic if you can even pay the rest of your roster. imo Teams are much smarter now and excessive contracts just don’t get done. Like I said, even Suh’s “monster contract was for 10.5% of the can when the norm was 9.0% of the cap.
As far as what Donald actually is worth, that has to contain a lot of subjective evaluation. But it won’t be done in a vaccumn. There is always the rest of the team to consider. But, yeah the Rams can keep him if they want. The question is, would it be smart to do that?
Whatever contract he gets will be like a 4 year fully guaranteed contract, before he can be cut.
Agamemnon10 things to know about the franchise tag
10 things to know about the franchise tag
Posted by Mike Florio on February 28, 2013, 2:31 PM EDT
Super Bowl XLVII – Baltimore Ravens v San Francisco 49ers Getty ImagesThe franchise tag is old enough to vote, and nearly old enough to drink. The tag made its annual return more than a week ago. Unlike the Great Pumpkin, the tool for restricting a player’s ability to move from team to team will indeed make an appearance, in multiple NFL cities.
Eventually. We think. Perhaps starting as soon as today.
So here are 10 things to know about the tag. You may have already known them. You may have known and forgotten. Or you may not have known at all.
Or perhaps that you didn’t want to know.
1. The formula has changed.
.
Under prior labor deals, the non-exclusive franchise tag was determined by calculating the average of the five highest-paid players at each position from the prior year. Under the 2011 CBA, the franchise tenders come from a more complex procedure.
.
Under Article 10, Section 2 of the CBA, the number is based on the five-year average cap percentage for the tag at each position.
.
So it’s no longer driven by what players at the same position made in the prior season, but by the average cap percentage consumed by the franchise tender over five years. Then, that percentage will be applied to the 2013 salary cap to determine the franchise tender at each position.
.
Already confused? We’ve got nine more.2. In some cases, the formula doesn’t matter.
A player getting the non-exclusive franchise tag is entitled to the greater of the formula clumsily explained above (and that was the fourth draft of it) or 120 percent of the player’s cap number from the prior year.
That’s why, for example, the franchise tender for Dolphins tackle Jake Long would be much higher than the franchise tender for an offensive lineman. Long made enough in 2012 to result in a 20-percent raise, trumping the franchise tender.
This dynamic often applies to players who were taken high in the draft before the implementation of the rookie wage scale. As rookie contracts expire under the new labor deal, franchise tenders for many of them will be lower.
3. The transition tag has become meaningless.
Teams can use, in any given year, one franchise tag or one transition tag. The transition tag gives a team the right to match an offer sheet, but no compensation if the team chooses not to match.
At one point, the transition player’s contract was not fully guaranteed once it was accepted by the player. It now is.
The fact that the guaranteed pay on the one-year transition tender isn’t much less than the guaranteed pay for the one-year franchise tender, coupled with the lack of draft-pick compensation, has made the transition tag largely meaningless.
4. Franchise tags can be withdrawn.
The amount of the franchise tender becomes fully guaranteed once the player signs it. Since signing the franchise tender puts the player under contract, requiring him to show up to all mandatory offseason activities and training camp, some players choose to wait deep into the preseason before inking the offer.
The risk is that the franchise tag can be withdrawn, at any time, before it has been signed.
It doesn’t happen often, but it’s not unprecedented. Especially in Philly. In 2002, the Eagles pulled the franchise tag from linebacker Jeremiah Trotter in early April. Three years later, the Eagles removed the franchise tag from defensive tackle Corey Simon in late August.
The move immediately converts the player to an unrestricted free agent. But if it comes after the big money has been spent, the player will have a hard time getting the pay day he would have realized on the first day of free agency.
5. Franchise tender is guaranteed, with one exception.
Once a player signs the franchise tag, the one-year salary becomes fully guaranteed. But there’s a little-known exception.
Under Article 10, Section 2(c) of the CBA, the contract can be terminated if the player fails “to establish or maintain his excellent physical condition.”
Any effort to do so would result in a review of the situation by a neutral physician and, eventually and inevitably, arbitration. Still, the franchise tender technically isn’t fully and completely guaranteed.
6. No non-quarterback will be tagged more than twice.
Former Seahawks tackle Walter Jones once spent three straight years under the franchise tag, pocketing a total of $20 million and then signing a long-term deal that paid him $20 million more guaranteed, back when $20 million was a very big deal for NFL purposes.
Jones rolled the dice on bearing the injury risk for the three franchise years, and he won. Most players prefer the certainty of a long-term deal.
That’s why the 2006 CBA changed the formula to pay a non-quarterback the quarterback franchise tender if he’s tagged a third time.
Quarterbacks are protected, too. In the third year of the franchise tag, they get at least a 44-percent raise over their cap number in the prior year.
7. Arguably, no player can be tagged more than three times.
Last year’s grievance filed by Saints quarterback Drew Brees established that, if a player is tagged once by two different teams, it counts as being tagged twice. Which would have entitled him to a 44-percent raise in 2013, if he had played under the franchise tag last year for the Saints. (He was tagged in 2005 by the Chargers.)
Based on the language of the CBA, there’s an argument to be made that no player may ever be tagged more than three times during the course of his career.
Of course, tagging a player a fourth time would entail paying out a second 44-percent raise one year after paying out an initial 44-percent raise. Which would make it highly unlikely that any team would ever want to use the tag more than three times.
8. It’s cheap to tag kickers and punters.
There’s a belief among some fans that the use of the franchise tag meant that the player was a “franchise player.” And so, when a team uses the tag on a punter or a kicker, fans are confused and/or amused.
But the formula for calculating franchise tenders has made it cheaper to use the tag than to sign the player to a market-value deal.
At $2.9 million for 2013, more kickers and punters could find themselves being regarded as “franchise players.”
9. Long-term deals can be negotiated, through July 15.
Previously, the window for a team signing its franchise player to a long-term deal closed not long after the free-agency period started and then opened again on July 15. Now, the window remains open until July 15.
After July 15, the franchise player can sign only a one-year deal with his current team. It can be for more than the franchise tender, and it can include other terms, like playing-time or performance triggers that would prevent the tag from being used again.
But the duration can be no more than one year.
10. One offer sheet may be signed, through July 15.
For a player carrying the non-exclusive tag, he can negotiate with any other team. Ultimately, one offer sheet can be signed.
Once it’s signed, the situation simplifies considerably. The player’s current team will match the offer and keep him, or the player’s team will not match the offer and collect a pair of first-round picks from the new team.
The two first-round picks given as compensation must be the team’s original picks — not any picks obtained via trade or otherwise.
And there’s a loophole which, eventually, a desperate coach or G.M. may use. The period for signing franchise players to offer sheets lingers beyond the current year’s draft. Thus, for example, a team that wants to sign quarterback Joe Flacco (if the Ravens use the non-exclusive tag) could, in theory, wait until after the draft, sign Flacco to a front-loaded offer sheet that the Ravens can’t match, and then surrender not the 2013 and 2014 first-round picks, but the first-round picks for 2014 and 2015.
There’s nothing in the labor deal that prevents this from happening until July 15, after which date the player can sign only a one-year deal with his current team.
AgamemnonNFL Franchise Tag: Everything You Need to Know
Teams can continuously franchise players, but it’ll cost them to do that. As had been the case previously, a player tagged a second straight year would have his number set at 120 percent of the previous figure. A third straight year? That’s where things change, and the percentage goes up to 144.
It’s clear that signing a player to a long-term deal is mutually beneficial for teams and player after the first year, if the team still views the player as one worth a long-term deal.
AgamemnonIf 2016 is out, according to Donald, one possibility is that he would be ultimately aiming at free agency. Because in fact “not thinking about it now” could just be code for “I will be a free agent after 2018 and that’s my goal.”
But then the option year is picked up for 2018 that still leaves options. I assume he could sign an extension any time between now and when he finishes the 2018 season.
If on the other hand he comes up as a free agent after 2018, he will just plain cost significantly more.
I don’t know if 2016 is out or that it makes much difference between 2016 and2017. The Rams can use the 5th year option for 2018 and then I think they can use the franchise tag in 2019. Also i don’t know that it would be significantly more. Suh’s “monster contract” was for 10.5% of cap. imo But then 1% of the cap could be 2M. If that is what you mean by significant? As much as we would like to keep Donald, is he really going to be able to play that high for that long? That would be like going to the probowl 6 or 7 years in a row. imo I think the reality is that the Rams can pay his contract and it won’t be significantly out of line with his status. I is more do they really want to do that? Would they get more value putting the money somewhere else? I bet he is a Ram in 2019. I will check if the Rams can use the Franchise tag to make that happen.
Agamemnon
Let’s try to make this clearer. First, Cox’s contract value did not change for 2016. Some/most of his 2016 salary is now part of a bonus. Second, this is an extension, we should look at what it means in new money and new years. This is simple here, cause nothing really changed for the cap charge in 2016.
I would expect Donald’s contract to follow this model. The first four new years of new money[2017 – 2020] are almost fully guaranteed.
Cox’s salary = 9.5% of cap in the first 4 years. 8.5% in the last 2 years.
That is in line with 8.9% of the cap for a franchise DT. The biggest thing imo is that the contract is virtually guaranteed or 4 years. That is a long time for a player to play at that level.
By the time Donald gets a new contract it could be for ~19M/year = or -, but it will probably be for ~9.0% of the cap.
Watt’s got 10.1%, but he is considered a DE. imo Suh got 10.5%. I consider this a bit of an outlier. I use my own models for this. Somebody else might get slightly different numbers.
Agamemnonhttp://overthecap.com/fletcher-cox-contract-analytics/#more-12095
Fletcher Cox Contract Analytics
Posted on June 14, 2016 by Bryce JohnstonContract Analytics: Cordy Glenn | Terron Armstead | Josh Norman | Shawn Williams | Jordan Reed |Allen Hurns | Harrison Smith
Members of the NFL media will analyze this contract from a number of perspectives, each stressing that the face value of the contract is not determinative of the amount of money Cox will receive or the strength of the contract relative to other contracts, while at the same time highlighting certain pertinent contract characteristics. Many will note the amount of “total guarantees”, while others will focus on the “full guarantees at signing”. Others may highlight the amount of money that will be fully guaranteed as of a certain point in time (such as March 2017), while others will stress the annual cash flows. The analysis may include phrases such as “virtually guaranteed” or “practically guaranteed”, and the observations may note that “the contract is really $X over Y years, followed by Z team options.”
I do not disagree with any of this analysis. All of these contract characteristics are important to varying degrees and should be weighted in the analysis as appropriate. However, the degree of nuance in the contract makes it exceedingly difficult for any one person to synthesize all of the relevant information and articulate analysis that does not over-emphasize any particular characteristic. The best approach is to establish a framework for analysis that incorporates all of the considerations that one deems to be important to contract analysis, and to then apply that framework to all new contracts such that each is analyzed in a holistic, objective and consistent manner. This is the goal of Expected Contract Value:
As the chart below shows, Fletcher Cox possesses the largest Expected Contract Value of any non-QB contract in the entire NFL. This contract contains all of the characteristics that drive a high Expected Contract Value. First, there is a large signing bonus, which provides significant dead money protection into the fifth contract season. Second, there is a fully guaranteed option bonus in the second contract season that provides additional dead money protection through the sixth contract season. Third, the contract includes impressive Accelerated Future Team Option Deadlines whereby the 2018 salary and half of the 2019 salary vest as fully guaranteed during the 2017 offseason, and the other half of the 2019 salary vests as fully guaranteed during the 2018 offseason. Because Cox is extremely likely to remain under contract into 2017, the Accelerated Future Team Option Deadlines produce a waterfall effect that greatly enhances the probability Cox will remain under contract through 2019.
Fourth, because the contract is an extension, the yearly cap numbers are less than the “new money APY” would suggest they might be, which provides Cox somewhat more of a buffer zone to suffer a performance decline before the team would determine that releasing him is a more efficient use of salary cap space. Fifth, the contract is not structured in a back-loaded fashion, which means there is a legitimate opportunity that the team will find Cox’s cap numbers in 2021-2022 to be reasonable, particularly once salary cap inflation is taken into account. Finally, Cox will only be 25 years old at the beginning of the 2016 season, and due to typical aging curves, younger players have a higher probability of remaining under contract longer, and in turn receiving a higher percentage of the face value of a contract.
By this measure, the team incurred $36.3 million worth of risk in order to manufacture $27.9 million worth of upside, which would be a much better ratio than in the examples I calculated for Allen Hurns and Harrison Smith, although it is fair to argue that risk should include the guarantees affected by the Accelerated Future Team Option Deadlines (as there is a greater than 99% probability that the team will incur this risk). However, it is also very possible the team places a higher Intrinsic Value on Cox, or the team projects that salary cap to rise faster than 5%. In any event, it is probably fair to characterize the contract as “high-risk, high-reward”.
Further, the team secures some amount of optionality value. While Cox’s cap numbers represent some amount of surplus value relative to Intrinsic Value, they may also represent a further discount relative to market value in each offseason. It is entirely possible that Muhammad Wilkerson or some other player signs an even larger contract as a free agent next offseason. If that happens, the team will reap value in each offseason to the extent it is able to choose to retain Cox without the necessity to pay such market value. And because the contract is not structured in a back-loaded fashion, the team options in 2020-2022 are more valuable than in other large contracts. Phrased inversely, how likely is it that Cox will demand a new contract in 2021, at the age of 30, potentially coming off a number of Pro Bowl seasons? The degree to which this is likely is the degree to which the Eagles derive optionality value in that contract season.
While we are not in a position to draw firm conclusions on the issues of expected surplus value and quantity of optionality value, this analysis shows that the contract was within a range of reasonableness for the team, as one can point to several benefits to the team despite the player-friendly contract structure.
The Eagles ranked #1 in Commitment Index prior to executing this contract, and the team now possesses a score of 265, which signifies a true net cap commitment 265% greater than the theoretical team possessing a true net cap commitment equal to the mean of all 32 teams. Baltimore is the next closest team, with a Commitment Index score of 203. The Eagles also possess the least amount of True Cap Space for 2017, as more than $113 million worth of 2017 salary cap space is accounted for by prorated signing bonus amounts, fully guaranteed salary and minimum salary obligations. It should be noted, however, that a substantial portion of this commitment comes in the form of guaranteed salary that can be traded. As the Eagles demonstrated this offseason, the market for trading away unwanted guaranteed salary appears to be seller-friendly.
Commitment Index and True Cap Space speak solely to flexibility relative to the other teams in the league, so the conclusion should not be that the team is in a “bad” salary cap situation. Substantially all of the key players are signed for multiple seasons beyond 2016, so if the team plays well in 2016, flexibility may be a moot point. But if the team does not play to expectations, the Eagles have less ability than any other team to pivot in a different direction in 2017.
Agamemnonhttp://overthecap.com/thoughts-fletcher-cox-contract-extension/#more-12093
Thoughts on Fletcher Cox’ Contract Extension
Posted on June 14, 2016 by Jason FitzgeraldAfter a year of contentious contract discussions, the Eagles and their new front office has ended any problems between the Eagles and Fletcher Cox by signing Cox to a massive $102.6 million contract extension that contains over $60 million in injury guarantees. Based on a report by Pro Football Talk we can look at the contract in a bit more critical manner to see just how it ranks in a few different metrics compared to those of the other big defensive players.
He $17.1 million APY will make Cox the 2nd highest paid defensive player in the NFL, just surpassing Olivier Vernon’s contract with the Giants. From a cap perspective the contract will carry a value of $15.771 million which is a bit more affordable than those free agent contracts.
The initial guarantee on the Cox contract trails all but Houston in the big defensive contract category both in terms of the total amount and percentage of contract that is guaranteed. While he did get the largest injury guarantee of any player once you factor in the fact that he already had $7.8 million guaranteed that number does drop to $55.5 million. That’s still second in the NFL, but in terms of being some major bright spot for Von Miller as some suggested I don’t see that at all as the numbers are more in line with the market.
Where Cox makes out tremendously well is the guarantee and bonus structure. Guarantees get a significant amount of press, but there are ways to virtually guarantee contracts through smart structuring and that is what Cox did here. Cox received a $26 million signing bonus and a $6 million option bonus which creates a huge dead money charge if the Eagles were to think of releasing him.
The $32 million ties Dareus for the most friendly contract structure and is more or less $7 million more than anyone else in the group at the time they signed their contract. These kind of signing bonuses for a non-QB are tremendous and in both cases the players did great for themselves.
Cox makes out even better with early vesting dates that make it more difficult for the Eagles to consider releasing him. His 2018 and part of his 2019 salary will become fully guaranteed in 2017 which is a major win for the player. So even though the on paper full guarantee is not anything record setting everything else in the deal is more or less terrific for Cox.
In terms of year by year cash, again I don’t see this moving the market for a Miller. While it is another data point to consider its not something that completely turns the market on its head.
Cox was not able to get the same up front payment terms as Dareus and will be right in line with Vernon over the first two new years of the contract. Cox will take over the second spot in year 3 and he will slightly maintain an edge over Vernon in year 5. The bigger difference between Cox and Vernon is that Vernon will be a free agent after 5 years while Cox will be under contract an additional season. That is probably not a big concern for Cox though.
I think at this point it is safe to say that the Vernon deal signing by the Giants this year is clearly the market defining deal. Suh is still an outlier but the numbers here are designed to slowly build on Vernon’s deal. Vernon’s contract was a major leap from the Justin Houston contract. There is a bit of Dareus in here but that contract also remains an outlier of sorts with the up front cash.
Cox’ contract should become the next jumping point for the next wave of extensions or free agents not named Miller. This contract should further bolster Muhammad Wilkerson’s demands on a new contract with the Jets and I cant see that contract happening. Wilkersons in the most immediate contract on the horizon.
The Cox contract will further the Eagles move into superstar pay strategy that is currently used by the Packers and Seahawks. When looking at the Eagles moves this offseason I think it further justifies why they did what they did to draft a quarterback. While you can defer cap charges, as they did here, for a year or two eventually there comes a time where you can not do that. If you are forced into paying a veteran $18-$20M a year it makes it very difficult to handle a roster like Philadelphia’s.
With a rookie QB a team can possibly get $20 million in play for a $7 million salary. That $13 million benefit can be spread around the roster so you can maintain a high priced roster for a few seasons. By the time the rookie is signed to a market value extension most of the big priced players from today will be gone. Chase Daniel remains the failsafe in the event Carson Wentz fails so you don’t waste a high priced roster because of the QB. So while a good portion of the benefit goes to the backup I can understand the logic in the construction.
The Eagles may be a better case study than the other teams with expensive rosters since they are the one with the big questions at quarterback. If Wentz is great then they wont be any different than Seattle, but if he struggles it will give a better idea of how a non-great QB team can do with a roster that is in theory very good.
In light of the money the Eagles are paying Cox it is hard to justify not doing this contract last year. All I can think is that Chip Kelly, who looked to move Cox as part of a package to Tennessee, did not see Cox as a future piece for the team. Not only would the Eagles have saved a few dollars by signing prior to free agency this year but they would have been able to reduce the cap charges even further. My assumption is that the guys in the Eagles front office probably wanted to do this deal last season but were told not to do so. We’ll have to wait and see if that was a mistake.
Agamemnon
I figure the Rams are 6-8M short for next year. There are a couple things they might do. Not resign Britt, Ayers, Reynolds, and Quick or let Brockers walk. Any combination that saves the money works. Any players they lose will have to be replaced. By younger cheaper players.
They might restructure or extend some contracts to find savings. Say, Tavon, Macdonald, Brockers, and Johnson, If they could keep these players for less than 36M, that might work. This is pretty much like predicting the weather. 😉
Also, I think we have about 1-2M left to spend of the cap. We will probably keep that unless somebody gets hurt before the season starts. imo
Agamemnonhttp://www.turfshowtimes.com/2015/6/2/8701681/st-louis-rams-todd-gurley-tre-mason
2015 St. Louis Rams Roster: Todd Gurley vs Tre Mason
By misone
@MightyOrMisone on Jun 2, 2015, 8:11a 111
Kirby Lee-USA TODAY SportsDoes Tre Mason have a point? Did the Rams wrongfully doubt him, or is Todd Gurley truly just that much better than him?
The Rams drafted Todd Gurley in the first round of the 2015 NFL Draft, prompting Tre Mason – who was coming off a solid rookie season – to feel a little befuddled. And former Rams running back Zac Stacy flat out asked to be traded. His wish was granted two days later. Usually when players react like this;
Doubting me..? 🐸☕️
— Tre Mason (@TreMason) May 1, 2015
It’s warranted from the player showing what they can do. No one that’s done nothing at all will have the gall to say that. Because you are essentially saying, the team feels they need help and I am all they need.
So let’s review common traits among the leagues best backs, and see who has the edge between Tre Mason and Todd Gurley.
POWER: I have to give the edge to Gurley here. But it’s far from a run-away. Tre is very close behind him. While Gurley has three inches and about 15 lbs on Mason, Tre runs extremely physical and rarely falls backwards. Both players do a great job of running behind their pads, and in just that regard alone I would give the edge to Mason as Gurley tends to run a little high making it more of a challenge to get behind his pads. But when he does pain and suffering is sure to follow. Overall though this is Gurley all the way, he breaks tackles moving at quarter speed.
BURST: Here Tre makes his mark. His burst is nothing to play with. When he hits the whole it is so fast and scary. Gurley flashes good burst but it’s inconsistent. Even so, when it is there it’s not quite as explosive as Tre’s first step. He gains speed extremely fast, where as Todd is more of a build up guy.
TOP-END SPEED: Gurley has the better overall top-end speed. Tre is no slouch, and he ran a 4.44, but in all fairness to Todd – because we don’t have any recorded 40 times for him – I have to use another source. Track and field. Gurley ran a 10.7 100 meter dash, to Mason’s 11.9. Of course Mason gained plenty of speed from his senior year of high school, evident from his 4.44 40, but that time usually translates to about a 10.9-11 flat. Also when you watch them break long runs you can see Gurley continuing to gain speed, as Tre maxes out around 30 yards. My guess is, a healthy Gurley is about a 4.42 guy.
VISION: This was actually the hardest area to dissect between the two. Both players have displayed exceptional vision. Tre is the surprising one here, as he played in a weird option in college. But he proved to be able to learn and adapt extremely fast, and exploits lanes with the best of them. But I have to give the nod to Gurley here. His experience with running in a pro style offense gives him the edge over most. Because he has spent the bulk of his career running between the tackles, he really understands patience, cutbacks, and setting up blocks.
BALANCE: I think Tre wins this one easily. Physics play a huge role in this. His natural low center of gravity, and powerful legs give him great balance when running the ball. He’s not a guy you can just hit and he falls, he has to actually be tackled. That’s not to say that you can just hit Gurley, but he can’t make a move or get vertical – or whatever it may be that normally cause some one to lose balance while running – as well as Tre. Although neither player is really elusive. Neither guy really shakes defenders that well, but Tre is definitely more elusive than Gurley. Also his burst meshes well with his change of direction, whereas Todd can’t stop and go as well at full speed without losing balance.
THIRD DOWN ABILITY: Gurley wins here by a landslide. He blocks, runs good routes out of the backfield and catches the ball extremely well. There’s not much of an argument to be made here, if any at all.
RELIABILITY: Believe it or not this is the most important trait of all. As the saying goes for guys on the roster bubble, “you can’t make the club in the tub”. Well even if you’re a high draft pick that’s guaranteed a spot, you’re still no good, if your riding the wood (keep your minds out the gutter folks). I have no doubt Tre can carry the ball 35 times a game. I have a lot of doubt that Gurley can carry it 30 times a game. This is in reference to if need be, can this guy carry the ball 30-35 times every week for 16 games? I am not sold that Todd can do that. His speed levels change during the game showing fatigue sooner than you would like, which is normal for a bigger back. However, Tre just keeps going, he’s like a little ball of energy. Also, Todd comes with an extensive injury history.
CONCLUSION: Honestly, its a bit of a push. Gurley actually reminds me of a young Steven Jackson, which I know a lot of Rams fans might love to hear. Tre on the other hand reminds me of a young Maurice Jones-Drew, who by the way I used to call a miniature Steven Jackson (ironic I know). The simple truth is they have a Tre Mason clone in Gurley, he’s just bigger. Let’s be honest about two things here:
1.) Gurley gets the love he get’s because of his size. If he was 5’9″ 205, the Adrian Peterson and Marshawn Lynch comparisons would have never come. Also he probably would have never been considered a top 25 and certainly not a top ten pick. Big backs that can move like small backs will always get the love. Just look at the numbers, and it will make a lot more sense;
2.) Like Tre Mason, Gurley was not necessarily needed at the time he was drafted. But he was brought in because he impressed in a way that no other back on the Rams current roster had impressed. That lasting impression came in the form of size. His speed would be a lot less impressive if he was three inches shorter and 15 lbs lighter.
With all this being said I would go with Gurley for one reason, his third down ability. Even after Mason’s year in the NFL, Gurley is still head and shoulders above him in this area. This is really the tie breaker in my opinion.
So it appears the Rams could very well have two beastly backs on their hands. Of course this all depends on the performance of the offensive line. But that’s another story for another day.
And just for kicks and giggles here’s some entertainment for you all….
You did it to yourself, tre……. Besides, Gurley is just better. I don’t think tre makes the roster.
AgamemnonHere he is on Goff from before the draft.
.
We have a punter that can pass. It is only right that we have a QB that can punt. But, does he have small feet. 😉
AgamemnonHe’s enthusiastic about this draft. I forget, though…how good was he last year?
He is an enthusiastic guy.
AgamemnonIs Jared Goff as ready to start as Russell Wilson was as a rookie?
The “NFL Total Access” crew compares Los Angeles Rams rookie quarterback Jared Goff and Seattle Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson. Is Goff as ready to start as a rookie as Wilson was?
AgamemnonROSS TUCKER FOOTBALL PODCAST with Brian Burke
Analytics expert Brian Burke discusses the numbers behind going for it on 4th down and going for two points two more often in the NFL.
“You should go for 2 about half the time.”
The next things for analiytics is roster building(models) and player evaluation(salary cap stuff,?draft), everything that happens on the field. What works against what defense.
AgamemnonLooking at next year, I don’t think it makes much difference which game Goff starts this year. By next year Goff should be Ok regardless of how he starts this year. I think he should start at least 10 games this year.
AgamemnonWill we ever find a #1 WR?
Even if Robinson busts and Saffold goes on IR, we have replacements. imo Maybe not for OC?
Agamemnon
