I enjoy your work. Its a great addition to BBI. I have a question, lets say we cut the following players without using the June 1 cuts. How much money will we have to spend roughly after RFA's and rookies? Is it feasible? Im thinking we should go the Raiders route and totally gut the team and suck it up for a year.
Snee
Baas
Myers
Webster
And possibly Kiwi.
I feel Nicks, Joseph, Tuck and Brown are going to walk.
Try to re-sign Beason and Stevie Brown (on the cheap).
What are you thoughts? I would love an Alex Mack signing but might be unrealistic, maybe bring a Slauson type for LG and let the young-ins battle for the RG.
I enjoy your work. Its a great addition to BBI. I have a question, lets say we cut the following players without using the June 1 cuts. How much money will we have to spend roughly after RFA's and rookies? Is it feasible? Im thinking we should go the Raiders route and totally gut the team and suck it up for a year.
Snee
Baas
Myers
Webster
And possibly Kiwi.
I feel Nicks, Joseph, Tuck and Brown are going to walk.
Try to re-sign Beason and Stevie Brown (on the cheap).
What are you thoughts? I would love an Alex Mack signing but might be unrealistic, maybe bring a Slauson type for LG and let the young-ins battle for the RG.
Here are the cap savings for each of the players you asked about i they were normal cuts (non June 1st cuts):
The total Cap Savings for these 5 would be $15,075,000. I already sated what I would do with Baas in a previous article I wrote about him in the BBI cap section. I'd designate him as a June 1st cut. Myers and Webster are not free agents. They have voidable years which will result in leftover Dead Money counting against the cap.
Out of Nicks, Joseph, Tuck, and Andre Brown, I'd try and re-sign Joseph to a reasonable deal, but if he gets an offer that he can't refuse elsewhere, then he'll be gone. Johnathan Hankins is his replacement in waiting already on the roster. Nicks seems like he's gone. I'd try to franchise and trade him, but that's neither here nor there. Andre Brown is a guy who won't cost a lot, as the RB market in general has went south (same for Ben Tate; neither one will cost much). Tuck is a guy you let go if you feel Kiwi can take his place.
As far as Alex Mack is concerned, all I'll say is this: don't get your hopes up. Cleveland has a TON of cap room. Why would they not franchise him and keep him there? They finally have a good front office. They're not losing him. He'll cost an arm and a leg anyway if Cleveland let him walk in FA.
Wait and see who gets cut by other teams. Tampa Bay could let a guy like Davin Joseph go. Wait and let the market develop.
Which if any do you feel outplayed their cap value this season?
Maybe: Hill, McBride, Beason and Joseph?
This is what saddens me the most, what poor performance per dollar we are getting out of this team.
You nailed it Eddie. Those 4--especially Hill and Beason--REALLY outperformed their respective cap values. It's a good topic for analysis.
The flip side is also important. Who hasn't played up to their cap value this season? Snee, Webster, and Baas stand out--all three are on I.R. to boot, lol. Kiwi, Nicks, Beatty, and JPP stand out from the players who are currently on the active 53-man roster. JPP was hurt, in his defense, but all bets are off next year.
It will be his walk year, and he'll have to perform and stay healthy. The other 3 are interesting: Nicks is heading towards FA this coming offseason, and will probably be somewhere else next year. Beatty will be here next year, regardless of his subpar performance. Kiwi is a guy that they could conceivably cut or hang on to. That will bare watching.
Sorry to sound so ignorant but the financial side of the game is one I've tried to avoid.
Great question PeterS.
A Cap number is how much a player counts against a team's adjusted salary cap (each team has a different adjusted salary cap). A player's salary is not necessarily the same as his cap number. Most of the time it isn't. Only about a third of the players on the Giants' roster now have a salary that is equal to their cap number (I wrote about this in more detail in the article).
Simply put, a cap number is basically this: a player's prorated signing bonus + his base salary + other assorted bonuses (i.e., workout bonus, roster bonus on a given day in the league year). Let's use a player already on the roster as an example to help explain. Here's Will Beatty's contractual breakdown courtesy of OverTheCap.com:
Look at Beatty's contract starting from 2013, the first year of the deal that he signed last off-season. He received $12.5 Million in guaranteed dollars---the key for any NFL player, especially in their 2nd contracts. Only 1.5 of this amount counted towards the cap (contracts can only be prorated for no more than 5 years under the latest CBA agreement between the NFLPA and owners signed in August of 2011; I think it was for 6 years under the old CBA).
This is why you rarely see contracts for more than 5 years under the new CBA. This spreads the money out over the length of the 5 years, unless the contract is for a a shorter amount, like say 3 years, like the one Cullen Jenkins signed this past off-season with the NYG.
When you add up the roster bonus money (nothing) and offseason workout bonus ($50K) for 2013 and workout bonuses you get to the prorated amount of $2.5 million for this season. Those are not prorated. That's it for the bonuses. That leaves the non-guaranteed portion of the deal---the paragraph 5 salary, a.k.a. a player's base salary. This can be structured however the player's agent and team contract officer agree on. In Beatty's case, it happens to be for exactly $1 Million in 2013.
This brings his cap number to $3,550,000. His salry for 2013 though is different. Counting his bonuses and paragraph 5 money, Beatty earned $13,550,000 in real money. This is in essence, the difference between CAS and CAP dollars, which was another issue of contention between the players and owners (I'll talk about that another time though).
Now what is Dead Money? Another great question. Let me use another food analogy, besides the one I used when explaining it another time. Before I give the example, first remember this equation as I go through the analogy below:
CAP NUMBER - CAP SAVINGS = DEAD MONEY
Let's say you're a poor starving college student living in a dorm. You're hungry, and you love pizza. Guess what? There's a box with leftover slices that your roommate liberated from a party he attended the previous night and brought back for you. You're starving, and you help yourself the cold pizza in the box when you wake up. Problem is this: you can't save all the pizza. There is half of the pie left (4 slices), but one slice is no good, and is stuck to the bottom of the cardboard pizza box wit lots of cheese missing on top too.
That slice is analogous to DEAD MONEY. You saved the 3 other slices (CAP SAVINGS), but weren't able to save the slice stick to the box--that was also missing a lot of cheese as well.
Apply this now to Will "Beat Me's" contract in the 2015 season:
CAP NUMBER ($8,050,000) - CAP SAVINGS ($550,000) = DEAD MONEY ($7,500,000)
Let's also apply this logic back to the pizza box. The pizza box originally had 8 slices in it--our CAP NUMBER. You subtracted the savings from it (4 slices), and were left with one bad slice that you couldn't put to use, a.k.a. DEAD MONEY. In the case of the pizza box, you had DEAD MONEY amounting to one slice. In Beatt's case, should the giants decide to cut him in 2015, you're left with $7.5 Million in DEAD MONEY.
What's DEAD MONEY? It's the amount of a given player's CAP NUMBER that is left over after you cut him and count CAP SAVINGS. It's the part of the player's contract that remains on the books after letting go of him. He still counts towards your team's salary cap even though he's off the team. When Free Agents walk, they have no Dead Money--unless they have voidable year deals like Myers and Webster, but they're exceptions to the rule.
Webster (done last year) & Myers (this year's mistake) have to go. the question- If we cut both this year, how LONG will it hurt, money-wise ?
Snee (broken all-over) needs to go, how much will that hurt ($$$) ?
Baas - I read your explanation
Nicks - I know this is not popular - I think they should try to keep him. No matter how he tries to convince other teams, he can't hide he was part of our problem, this year. (I think he hurt his bargaining position, just like Cruz did last year )
Stevie Brown (coming off an ACL) has limited bargaining power (even if h'e fully healed)
Hill - We need him
Linval - This will hurt, if he goes
Tuck - Had a rebound year. He's not going to get the money he's making now, elsewhere
Kiwi - Disappeared when we needed him most (when JPP couldn't play); I'd say he's in BIG danger of getting the ax
A. Brown - He played well, but didn't ring-up 1000 yards
Beason - He found himself here, and deserves to get paid
Diehl - It's time
Boothe - A transition player, at this point (stays)
McBride - looks like a keeper
Brewer - He's not NFL (that's why they drafted Pugh)
Eli - Worse season of his career, (despite the horrible O-line); I'd be ashamed to take that $20M. He needs to take some of that money and make it incentive based.
is a great site. Optimus pimps them all the time, and they usually are fairly accurate. Go to the site, find Giants 2014 cap figures. They list the Cap hit, and the amount of dead money IF a player is released, and the resultant cap savings. It's all spelled out, so you can figure out if you're hurt or helped, capwise, if a player is released.
My own opinion is that too many people get hung up on the dead money. the most important part is the amount of money you save by cutting a player and whether you can replace that player with the amount of money saved. For example, Rolle has a hit in the 9 mil range, but you would save 7 mil if you cut him. Can you replace Rolle for 7 mil or less cap hit next year? if the answer is yes, the dead money is somewhat immaterial. If you can save money on the cap while getting the job done, or improve the job being done, the dead money is not as important.
the caveat is that you have to be able to get the job done while saving money. Rolle is a valuable/productive member of the team. You better make darn sure you can replace his production/value before you start eyeing that 7 mil savings. Doesn't do you much good to save 6.99 mil if you're creating a hole in the defense.
Or sometimes a player can be so useless (as many people, rightly or wrongly, see Baas) that as long as it doesn't cost you (if the dead money outweighs the salary), it would be worth it to get rid of him. Doesn't do you any good to have a player who can't get the job done. Cutting Baas would save 1.8 mil. Can you get a quality center for that? first year hit, maybe, but even if not, what good does it do to keep Baas if you don't think he can stay healthy, or perform the job if he does stay healthy? The important part is that it doesn't cost you money to get rid of him, and production wise, you need to get rid of him. that he's costing 6 mil in dead space to be rid of him is less important than it being more expensive to keep an unproductive player.
is a great site. Optimus pimps them all the time, and they usually are fairly accurate. Go to the site, find Giants 2014 cap figures. They list the Cap hit, and the amount of dead money IF a player is released, and the resultant cap savings. It's all spelled out, so you can figure out if you're hurt or helped, capwise, if a player is released.
My own opinion is that too many people get hung up on the dead money. the most important part is the amount of money you save by cutting a player and whether you can replace that player with the amount of money saved. For example, Rolle has a hit in the 9 mil range, but you would save 7 mil if you cut him. Can you replace Rolle for 7 mil or less cap hit next year? if the answer is yes, the dead money is somewhat immaterial. If you can save money on the cap while getting the job done, or improve the job being done, the dead money is not as important.
That's covered in the article.
What about him?
Snee
Baas
Myers
Webster
And possibly Kiwi.
I feel Nicks, Joseph, Tuck and Brown are going to walk.
Try to re-sign Beason and Stevie Brown (on the cheap).
What are you thoughts? I would love an Alex Mack signing but might be unrealistic, maybe bring a Slauson type for LG and let the young-ins battle for the RG.
Maybe: Hill, McBride, Beason and Joseph?
This is what saddens me the most, what poor performance per dollar we are getting out of this team.
Snee
Baas
Myers
Webster
And possibly Kiwi.
I feel Nicks, Joseph, Tuck and Brown are going to walk.
Try to re-sign Beason and Stevie Brown (on the cheap).
What are you thoughts? I would love an Alex Mack signing but might be unrealistic, maybe bring a Slauson type for LG and let the young-ins battle for the RG.
Here are the cap savings for each of the players you asked about i they were normal cuts (non June 1st cuts):
Snee - $7,250,000
Baas - $1,775,000
Myers - $3,250,000
Webster - $1,000,000
And possibly Kiwi - $1,800,000
The total Cap Savings for these 5 would be $15,075,000. I already sated what I would do with Baas in a previous article I wrote about him in the BBI cap section. I'd designate him as a June 1st cut. Myers and Webster are not free agents. They have voidable years which will result in leftover Dead Money counting against the cap.
Out of Nicks, Joseph, Tuck, and Andre Brown, I'd try and re-sign Joseph to a reasonable deal, but if he gets an offer that he can't refuse elsewhere, then he'll be gone. Johnathan Hankins is his replacement in waiting already on the roster. Nicks seems like he's gone. I'd try to franchise and trade him, but that's neither here nor there. Andre Brown is a guy who won't cost a lot, as the RB market in general has went south (same for Ben Tate; neither one will cost much). Tuck is a guy you let go if you feel Kiwi can take his place.
As far as Alex Mack is concerned, all I'll say is this: don't get your hopes up. Cleveland has a TON of cap room. Why would they not franchise him and keep him there? They finally have a good front office. They're not losing him. He'll cost an arm and a leg anyway if Cleveland let him walk in FA.
Wait and see who gets cut by other teams. Tampa Bay could let a guy like Davin Joseph go. Wait and let the market develop.
Click here ot see the Giants' players' cap numbers - ( New Window )
Maybe: Hill, McBride, Beason and Joseph?
This is what saddens me the most, what poor performance per dollar we are getting out of this team.
You nailed it Eddie. Those 4--especially Hill and Beason--REALLY outperformed their respective cap values. It's a good topic for analysis.
The flip side is also important. Who hasn't played up to their cap value this season? Snee, Webster, and Baas stand out--all three are on I.R. to boot, lol. Kiwi, Nicks, Beatty, and JPP stand out from the players who are currently on the active 53-man roster. JPP was hurt, in his defense, but all bets are off next year.
It will be his walk year, and he'll have to perform and stay healthy. The other 3 are interesting: Nicks is heading towards FA this coming offseason, and will probably be somewhere else next year. Beatty will be here next year, regardless of his subpar performance. Kiwi is a guy that they could conceivably cut or hang on to. That will bare watching.
Great question PeterS.
A Cap number is how much a player counts against a team's adjusted salary cap (each team has a different adjusted salary cap). A player's salary is not necessarily the same as his cap number. Most of the time it isn't. Only about a third of the players on the Giants' roster now have a salary that is equal to their cap number (I wrote about this in more detail in the article).
Simply put, a cap number is basically this: a player's prorated signing bonus + his base salary + other assorted bonuses (i.e., workout bonus, roster bonus on a given day in the league year). Let's use a player already on the roster as an example to help explain. Here's Will Beatty's contractual breakdown courtesy of OverTheCap.com:
Look at Beatty's contract starting from 2013, the first year of the deal that he signed last off-season. He received $12.5 Million in guaranteed dollars---the key for any NFL player, especially in their 2nd contracts. Only 1.5 of this amount counted towards the cap (contracts can only be prorated for no more than 5 years under the latest CBA agreement between the NFLPA and owners signed in August of 2011; I think it was for 6 years under the old CBA).
This is why you rarely see contracts for more than 5 years under the new CBA. This spreads the money out over the length of the 5 years, unless the contract is for a a shorter amount, like say 3 years, like the one Cullen Jenkins signed this past off-season with the NYG.
When you add up the roster bonus money (nothing) and offseason workout bonus ($50K) for 2013 and workout bonuses you get to the prorated amount of $2.5 million for this season. Those are not prorated. That's it for the bonuses. That leaves the non-guaranteed portion of the deal---the paragraph 5 salary, a.k.a. a player's base salary. This can be structured however the player's agent and team contract officer agree on. In Beatty's case, it happens to be for exactly $1 Million in 2013.
This brings his cap number to $3,550,000. His salry for 2013 though is different. Counting his bonuses and paragraph 5 money, Beatty earned $13,550,000 in real money. This is in essence, the difference between CAS and CAP dollars, which was another issue of contention between the players and owners (I'll talk about that another time though).
Now what is Dead Money? Another great question. Let me use another food analogy, besides the one I used when explaining it another time. Before I give the example, first remember this equation as I go through the analogy below:
CAP NUMBER - CAP SAVINGS = DEAD MONEY
Let's say you're a poor starving college student living in a dorm. You're hungry, and you love pizza. Guess what? There's a box with leftover slices that your roommate liberated from a party he attended the previous night and brought back for you. You're starving, and you help yourself the cold pizza in the box when you wake up. Problem is this: you can't save all the pizza. There is half of the pie left (4 slices), but one slice is no good, and is stuck to the bottom of the cardboard pizza box wit lots of cheese missing on top too.
That slice is analogous to DEAD MONEY. You saved the 3 other slices (CAP SAVINGS), but weren't able to save the slice stick to the box--that was also missing a lot of cheese as well.
Apply this now to Will "Beat Me's" contract in the 2015 season:
CAP NUMBER ($8,050,000) - CAP SAVINGS ($550,000) = DEAD MONEY ($7,500,000)
Let's also apply this logic back to the pizza box. The pizza box originally had 8 slices in it--our CAP NUMBER. You subtracted the savings from it (4 slices), and were left with one bad slice that you couldn't put to use, a.k.a. DEAD MONEY. In the case of the pizza box, you had DEAD MONEY amounting to one slice. In Beatt's case, should the giants decide to cut him in 2015, you're left with $7.5 Million in DEAD MONEY.
What's DEAD MONEY? It's the amount of a given player's CAP NUMBER that is left over after you cut him and count CAP SAVINGS. It's the part of the player's contract that remains on the books after letting go of him. He still counts towards your team's salary cap even though he's off the team. When Free Agents walk, they have no Dead Money--unless they have voidable year deals like Myers and Webster, but they're exceptions to the rule.
Dead Money is what you're stuck with still counting against your cap AFTER you get rid of the player.
William Beatty's salary cap pagecourtesy of OverTheCap.com - ( New Window )
You're right Bill. Can't argue with that, even from the perspective of someone like me who is an Eli apologist.
Snee (broken all-over) needs to go, how much will that hurt ($$$) ?
Baas - I read your explanation
Nicks - I know this is not popular - I think they should try to keep him. No matter how he tries to convince other teams, he can't hide he was part of our problem, this year. (I think he hurt his bargaining position, just like Cruz did last year )
Stevie Brown (coming off an ACL) has limited bargaining power (even if h'e fully healed)
Hill - We need him
Linval - This will hurt, if he goes
Tuck - Had a rebound year. He's not going to get the money he's making now, elsewhere
Kiwi - Disappeared when we needed him most (when JPP couldn't play); I'd say he's in BIG danger of getting the ax
A. Brown - He played well, but didn't ring-up 1000 yards
Beason - He found himself here, and deserves to get paid
Diehl - It's time
Boothe - A transition player, at this point (stays)
McBride - looks like a keeper
Brewer - He's not NFL (that's why they drafted Pugh)
Eli - Worse season of his career, (despite the horrible O-line); I'd be ashamed to take that $20M. He needs to take some of that money and make it incentive based.
My own opinion is that too many people get hung up on the dead money. the most important part is the amount of money you save by cutting a player and whether you can replace that player with the amount of money saved. For example, Rolle has a hit in the 9 mil range, but you would save 7 mil if you cut him. Can you replace Rolle for 7 mil or less cap hit next year? if the answer is yes, the dead money is somewhat immaterial. If you can save money on the cap while getting the job done, or improve the job being done, the dead money is not as important.
Or sometimes a player can be so useless (as many people, rightly or wrongly, see Baas) that as long as it doesn't cost you (if the dead money outweighs the salary), it would be worth it to get rid of him. Doesn't do you any good to have a player who can't get the job done. Cutting Baas would save 1.8 mil. Can you get a quality center for that? first year hit, maybe, but even if not, what good does it do to keep Baas if you don't think he can stay healthy, or perform the job if he does stay healthy? The important part is that it doesn't cost you money to get rid of him, and production wise, you need to get rid of him. that he's costing 6 mil in dead space to be rid of him is less important than it being more expensive to keep an unproductive player.
Apparently this was known when he was picked, and now will it become chronic as he's asked to plow into the line ?
I have no idea what the Giants will do, but whatever the decision, it will affect the short-term & long-term future of the team, more than anything.
My own opinion is that too many people get hung up on the dead money. the most important part is the amount of money you save by cutting a player and whether you can replace that player with the amount of money saved. For example, Rolle has a hit in the 9 mil range, but you would save 7 mil if you cut him. Can you replace Rolle for 7 mil or less cap hit next year? if the answer is yes, the dead money is somewhat immaterial. If you can save money on the cap while getting the job done, or improve the job being done, the dead money is not as important.
I agree.