Raanan: Giants should be $56 million under cap PLUS

Places like Jacksonville may have cap space but unless they shoot the moon on contract offers who would want to play there? Irsay may have Luck but that FO is a disaster since Polian left. The Redskins won the NFCE by default but does anyone believe in Dan Snyder building a winner?

Not every destination is desirable even if teams have money to spend.

Also the Giants will not shy away from a bidding war to get a guy they really want. Not this yr at least

In comment 12811925 Torrag said:

Quote:

...if the Giants were to consider altering their defensive scheme this is the perfect opportunity to do so. No significant money is invested in DE's or LB's right now. Hankins can play as a 5Tech or possible a 3-4NT. I have no idea if they're at all interested in making such a switch. If they are the players we target in free agency could look far different than what many of us have theorized.

Not that it means much, but Spagnuolo has never coached a 3-4 defense. Granted, all defenses show multiple looks, but the base defense has always been 4-3 by philosophy, that's what he learned under Johnson.

I would love to see a shift to the 3-4, but I think that ship sailed when they retained Spags.

we've need 25+ new roster players this year.

Where do people think they're going to come from?

we HAVE TO sign a bunch of free agents. that's the reality. to think we won't is foolish

Will believe it when we see it.

The size of your chip stack matters.

The Giants have the 3rd most and it will probably increase when the Cruz paycut is announced.

Agents know where the money is and the best way for them to get clients paid is to focus on the teams with the money to spend.

You have to consider the dynamics of the psychology involved in play. Free agents don't want to play the waiting game. They want to go in that first wave of big money signings to validate their status and their wallets.

Agents want to be seen leading the pack so future 1st Rounders see them as desirable commodities to sign with.

We are well positioned to significantly impact this roster in free agency.

In comment 12811940 Torrag said:

Quote:

Places like Jacksonville may have cap space but unless they shoot the moon on contract offers who would want to play there? Irsay may have Luck but that FO is a disaster since Polian left. The Redskins won the NFCE by default but does anyone believe in Dan Snyder building a winner? Not every destination is desirable even if teams have money to spend.

The redskins have been terrible for 20 years and never seem to have a problem giving their money away.

re places like Jax, there is no State tax..That can be conducive to stars going there..Not saying they will, but it is/can be a factor

always a pleasure, my friend..

The Redskins spend to spend. Most of the guys they've signed weren't of interest to us anyway. I still think JR punked them with feigned interest in Haynesworth.

Name the big free agents that have signed with Jacksonville in recent times. /crickets

I agree taxes can be a factor for some guys. So is winning potential and the increased marketability of starring in NY.

BTW I've long held the major sports should scale cap dollars to the markets taxes. Increasingly this is skewing the 'level playing field' intended by salary cap leagues. A discussion for another day.

and allowed me no time to respond with your crickets introduction

:)

Explain one thing to me. If u think they have no intention on being aggressive then y did they create the cap space they did. That's where u lose me on your argument. I takes no sense

How r u? Do you agree w me on this or no?

but rather, I don't think they'll be winning bidding wars. They're not mutually exclusive concepts.

I hope the optimistic fans ultimately are correct, but common sense, percentages, and logic all suggest otherwise, imv.

the 2015 Jets are a good model. They had some good players, hit on some draft picks, and were able to rebuild their team pretty well last offseason in free agency

And that's with Fitzpatrick who ended up playing QB...while he gives a worthy effort, hes still a ham n egger. But looks how much better with Eric Decker flanking Brandon Marshall (who got his head screwed on right and played very well)

Would love a guy like Decker as our #2. Not an all-pro, but plays hard, runs his routes and catches almost everything thrown his way

The three players they just cut were not cut to create cap space. They were cut because for various reasons they could not be counted on to perform at a level suitable to their cap number. Keeping those players around was bad business.

I don't want the Giants to shell out any big contracts in this FA period. 9 times out of 10 big FA deals end up as bad business. The guys that are worth paying big money (Miller, Berry) are going to be paid big money by the teams already paying them.

The approach this offseason should be the same as any other. Try to find good value for the cap space allotted. Odds are the Giants are better off signing 6 guys at low to mid range cap numbers than they are trying to make a big splash on 2 or 3.

Fair enough. Well agree to disagree. I will b stunned if they don't walk away w three high level guys and three to five good pieces. I guess time will tell. Also ii will say this. People think there won't b good players on the market are wrong. There will b plenty of talent available. I will also say this. Don't b shocked if the Giants trade for a player or two from a cash strapped team. It's possible

Agreed across the board.

All good, I certainly hope you're on target.

usually when a guy becomes a free agent it's because the team he was on realizes he isn't worth what he is asking.

Look at it this way...there's a fan in San Diego right now excited by the prospect of his team giving Prince $10 million/year. Or a guy on a 49er board saying they should pay JPP $13 million/year.

Those of us here that are sane find that ridiculous, but we know better than they do. Well Cleveland knows more than we do about Gipson, Denver about Trevathan, etc.

The best we should be hoping for is that a mid-range signing ends up a bargain (like Harris did last year).

I disagree. I've come to believe that if you step into the free agent market you go big or go home. Noone is cheap as proven by the amounts needed to sign guys like Casillas and Thomas. You're better off acquiring one very good player than two or three JAGS.

It has a more reliable and significant impact on your ballclub. Now you don't just spend for the sake of it. If you have legitimate holes in your staring roster though that is the way to go.

All due respect. You don't create 60 plus mill in cap space to sign 3 or 4 mid tier guys. The giants, at a minimum, will sign two top free agents. Book it

If there were someone worth going big for, I'd be on board. If Von Miller becomes a free agent I'll support throwing the checkbook at him...but he's never becoming available.

Malik Jackson? Gipson? Trevathan? Nice players, but they're not worth paying like stars.

In comment 12812037 jtgiants said:

Quote:

All due respect. You don't create 60 plus mill in cap space to sign 3 or 4 mid tier guys. The giants, at a minimum, will sign two top free agents. Book it

Overpaying is bad business whether you have 60 million in cap space or 6 million.

Here's where your wrong. Between the broncos and chiefs alone 5 to 6 quality free agents will b available. Good teams have to make tough choices. They want to keep players but cant

The giants, weather u agree, or not, view this offseason as 2005 all over again. They know elis time is now. They are going for a homerun.

Franchise DE's get $15M. Malik Jackson won't see that kind of scratch in free agency. But he's deservedly going to make a lot more than George Selvie. The same applies to every player.

There are tiers in free agncy and the Giants should be active in the upper tiers this year. We should be targeting quality starting talent that will be paid market rates for their established productivity.

W u on malik jackson and trevathon. Both would b excellent pickups and I suspect at least one will b a giant

In comment 12811994 jtgiants said:

Quote:

How r u? Do you agree w me on this or no?

I'm doing really well, thanks..Yes, I tend to agree

I'm very much looking forward to it.

grizz299 said:

Quote:

And I'm sure I'm wrong...but I'm seeing dead money going from 1 plus million to 9 plus million as a result of those cuts. In effect there is a cap savings of 12 million but an increase of dead money of 8 million that means an effective cap increase of 4 million... Or, to put it another way we could have kept Beatty and Schwartz for 2 million a piece. Now I assume that's not right and I'm mixed up....so pls. someone explain....

That's not right, and you are mixed up. Here's why:

The total dead money on Beatty, Schwartz and Beason is indeed about $8.4MM, broken down as follows:
Beatty: $5MM;
Schwartz: $1.92MM (might be more, but this is the consensus figure);
Beason: $1.47MM

But here's the key point: All of that money was already spent, and all of it would have hit the cap anyway - about 58% of it in 2016, the balance in 2017. In fact, the worst-case accelerated amortization from the three cuts in 2016 is less than $3.5MM:

Beatty: $2.5MM
Schwartz: $0.96MM
Beason: $0 (because 2016 was the last year of his contract).

It's worth emphasizing the distinction between total dead money and bonus acceleration. If you're looking for a negative cap impact from these cuts, the biggest number you should use is $3.5MM. I understand that the other $4.9MM has been "wasted"; my point is simply that it was already counted against the 2016 cap. By the way, it seems that the $3.5MM can be reduced to under $1MM by designating Beatty as a post-June 1 cut.

Regardless of how the unamortized bonus money is accounted for, the savings from not paying those three salaries are quite real, and they are not in any way eroded by dead money. The money that is now "dead" was going to hit the cap anyway, in addition to the salaries.

that is better than last years player at that position, improves the team. They dont need the big named guys necessarily, just the ones that fit the scheme.
Last years player can become this years back-up, and would likely be better than last years, if he makes the team at all.
I have to believe that the top 2 draft picks, at a minimum, are day 1 starters, since there a just too many holes in the team, and more youth and speed are needed to be sprinkled in quickly, especially on D.

In comment 12812055 jtgiants said:

Quote:

W u on malik jackson and trevathon. Both would b excellent pickups and I suspect at least one will b a giant

Malik Jackson at 7-8M AAV I could see Reese in, but not at 10M-12M AAV.

As for the Trevathon if he is looking for 6M AAV, the Giants will probably opt to re-sign Brinkley at 30% of that and draft a MLB round 3 or later.

The Giants are not going to go the way of Jones Cowboys or Snyders Skins, they will stick to their value boards in FA and the Draft and move accordingly.

yep.

While I agree the Giants will be aggressive in free agency its not because they "created" salary cap with the eye towards this approach, the truth of the matter is the cap space has been created due to the fact the 2009-2012 drafts sucked and we had no one worth re-signing.

The last two Super Bowl teams were right up against the cap because the team would sign the core players to extensions before free agency (Osi, Tuck, Webster, Eli, Snee, Diehl, etc.) taking up the bulk of the cap space allowing them for normally one or two big splashes every couple years to fill big holes (Burress, McKenzie, Pierce, Rolle)

chiefs D too....
DT Jaye Howard, CB Sean Smith, OLB Tamba Hali - I'd take all 3.

League with more holes than the FDR after a winter of sand and rock salt exposure. Replacing our JAG's with slightly better JAG's isn't getting this team any better. I'm not advocating going hog wild, but there has to be an influx of 2-3 higher end talents thru FA. If not, get used to seeing more ST type imports like Thomas and Casillas playing on offense and defense.

the "don't overpay anyone ever" ship has sailed. we've drafted like sh#t. we haven't retained our good players.

we're stuck in a hole and its either buy a bunch of UFA's or fill the slots with rookies and be the worst team in the league.

In comment 12812093 JPinstripes said:

Quote:

In comment 12812055 jtgiants said: Quote: W u on malik jackson and trevathon. Both would b excellent pickups and I suspect at least one will b a giant Malik Jackson at 7-8M AAV I could see Reese in, but not at 10M-12M AAV. As for the Trevathon if he is looking for 6M AAV, the Giants will probably opt to re-sign Brinkley at 30% of that and draft a MLB round 3 or later. The Giants are not going to go the way of Jones Cowboys or Snyders Skins, they will stick to their value boards in FA and the Draft and move accordingly.

Points well taken. However, with Reese purportedly on the hot seat, I think his normal FA value board goes astray or very well might as compared to his normal m.o...

In comment 12812100 Brandon Walsh said:

Quote:

While I agree the Giants will be aggressive in free agency its not because they "created" salary cap with the eye towards this approach, the truth of the matter is the cap space has been created due to the fact the 2009-2012 drafts sucked and we had no one worth re-signing. The last two Super Bowl teams were right up against the cap because the team would sign the core players to extensions before free agency (Osi, Tuck, Webster, Eli, Snee, Diehl, etc.) taking up the bulk of the cap space allowing them for normally one or two big splashes every couple years to fill big holes (Burress, McKenzie, Pierce, Rolle)

Factor in no 2nd contracts to Wilson, Phillips, Nicks, Steve Smith, JPP and Terrel Thomas because of injuries and then you are 100% correct.

In comment 12812121 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

In comment 12812093 JPinstripes said: Quote: In comment 12812055 jtgiants said: Quote: W u on malik jackson and trevathon. Both would b excellent pickups and I suspect at least one will b a giant Malik Jackson at 7-8M AAV I could see Reese in, but not at 10M-12M AAV. As for the Trevathon if he is looking for 6M AAV, the Giants will probably opt to re-sign Brinkley at 30% of that and draft a MLB round 3 or later. The Giants are not going to go the way of Jones Cowboys or Snyders Skins, they will stick to their value boards in FA and the Draft and move accordingly. Points well taken. However, with Reese purportedly on the hot seat, I think his normal FA value board goes astray or very well might as compared to his normal m.o...

I don't think Mara will allow this. Regardless of Reese's standing with the team, Mara is not going to allow us to become the Saints and ruin our seemingly solid cap situation going forward for the next couple years.

Once again, I think we will be aggressive, but there are checks and balances (as Reese as even said himself with everyone being involved) and no way Mara, Abrams, etc. let him go tossing money around that isn't warranted. We may overpay, but very slightly compared to the last couple years.

I get your points. No argument. All I'm saying is the giants will b major players this offseason. How they got the cap space is well documented. They have it and will spend it. They know they can't keep wasting yrs w Eli and wont. You guys r gonna b surprised how aggressive they will b. I also wouldn't b shocked if they made a trade or two

In comment 12812175 jtgiants said:

Quote:

I get your points. No argument. All I'm saying is the giants will b major players this offseason. How they got the cap space is well documented. They have it and will spend it. They know they can't keep wasting yrs w Eli and wont. You guys r gonna b surprised how aggressive they will b. I also wouldn't b shocked if they made a trade or two

I won't be surprised because I expect them to be very aggressive, I just don't think they are going to way overpay based on the market value they put on a player, that wouldn't be prudent.

They will earmark their top targets, go after them hard, and probably slightly overpay if there is a bidding war, but I don't expect them to set the market higher and raise the bar for said position like other teams have done in the past (Redskins)

In comment 12812115 area junc said:

Quote:

the "don't overpay anyone ever" ship has sailed. we've drafted like sh#t. we haven't retained our good players. we're stuck in a hole and its either buy a bunch of UFA's or fill the slots with rookies and be the worst team in the league.

You don't turn a team around by signing high priced free agents.

The draft pipeline stopped flowing from 2008-2012. That's the pain we're feeling now. The pipeline has started up again and will be the reason this team sinks or swims.

Overpaying Danny Trevathan isn't going to solve anything.

that we are going to be overpaying leads me to believe that you need a vacation, GT. Can we at least wait and see what we do?

last year -- look where it got us in the Safety department

If you want some players this year you are going to have to loosen the value Board at least a little -- I'm not saying through all caution to the wind -- but values this year are going to go up because there is a lot of big money out there to spend

Timely free agent acquisitions is absolutely a resource to fortify your roster. 2005 confirmed that for the Giants. Antrelle Rolle confirmed that for the Giants. The examples that prove you wrong are everywhere across the NFL.

In comment 12812230 Randy in CT said:

Quote:

that we are going to be overpaying leads me to believe that you need a vacation, GT. Can we at least wait and see what we do?

Overpaying is what free agency is about. What makes free agency a red herring is that players get paid for what they've done, not what they're going to do.

Guys like Trevathan and Jackson were lieutenants on Denver to Miller and Ware. Whomever pays them is going to pay them like a general, but that doesn't mean they'll be generals...especially with no Miller and Ware next to them.

The examples of this are countless and far exceed the number of big free agent signings that work out.

It wasn't that long ago we were excited about signing Schwartz and Beason.

Trying to recreate that is folly.