for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Dead money if Victor Cruz is cut this off season?

Gross Blau Oberst : 12/7/2016 8:10 am
What are the salary cap implications if the Giants were to release Victor Cruz in the offseason?

Currently, Victor Cruz's salary for the current and next two years is:

2016 season $2,400,000
2017 season $6,400,000
2018 season $7,400,000

How much is saved, and what is the dead money if released?
If he's cut  
pjcas18 : 12/7/2016 8:12 am : link
after this season, 1.9M dead and 7.5M saved.

He has a 9.4M cap hit in 2017, he's most certainly not playing at that number.
1.9MM dead money  
YAJ2112 : 12/7/2016 8:12 am : link
7.5 cap savings
Link - ( New Window )
.  
Danny Kanell : 12/7/2016 8:14 am : link
He's definitely getting cut in the offseason.
RE: .  
Deej : 12/7/2016 8:18 am : link
In comment 13252857 Danny Kanell said:
Quote:
He's definitely getting cut in the offseason.


Or taking a pay cut.
RE: .  
Tuckrule : 12/7/2016 8:24 am : link
In comment 13252857 Danny Kanell said:
Quote:
He's definitely getting cut in the offseason.


He's not worth a pay cut. He doesn't play specials. No reason to have him sitting on the bench. Time to move on. Great player in his prime sadly it was cut very short and we never got to see Odell and Cruz together
RE: RE: .  
Giantology : 12/7/2016 8:26 am : link
In comment 13252869 Tuckrule said:
Quote:
In comment 13252857 Danny Kanell said:


Quote:


He's definitely getting cut in the offseason.



He's not worth a pay cut. He doesn't play specials. No reason to have him sitting on the bench. Time to move on. Great player in his prime sadly it was cut very short and we never got to see Odell and Cruz together


Disagree. He's still making big plays (usually good for 1 a game) and rounding back into form. He won't ever be 2011 Vic, but at a reduced salary he can have a role on this team.
I expect  
bouchy24 : 12/7/2016 8:44 am : link
A good game out of him Sunday night. I think our offense is going to go off. I can't wait to be there!
And again the "dead money" doesn't matter  
BillT : 12/7/2016 8:46 am : link
It's a sunk cost. Cap savings is the only relevant issue.
Its a dammed shame how injuries  
shelovesnycsports : 12/7/2016 8:49 am : link
took Cruz and Nicks from us so soon. They were both stars.
Dead money  
pjcas18 : 12/7/2016 8:51 am : link
is relevant only in the sense you have less cap to start with.

Agree cap space saved is the determining factor for most bubble decisions (like Cruz), but dead space adds up and while it's not the determining factor it's still a relevant number.
RE: Its a dammed shame how injuries  
AcidTest : 12/7/2016 8:52 am : link
In comment 13252907 shelovesnycsports said:
Quote:
took Cruz and Nicks from us so soon. They were both stars.


Yup.
Cutting these guys may nearly double our cap room  
est1986 : 12/7/2016 9:02 am : link
Cruz
Jennings
Harris
Casillas
JT
DRC (the only one listed I want to see back in '17)

Re-up with JPP, Hankins and Kennard. Maybe even extend Pugh and Richburg eventually. If we can get one dynamic LB or OL or TE or WR in FA, then we can adress the rest in the draft.
Obvious and likely pay cut forthcoming  
JonC : 12/7/2016 9:03 am : link
.
Unfortunately for Victor ....  
Beer Man : 12/7/2016 9:10 am : link
His best position is the slot and he is on the wrong side of 30. Sterling Shepard is seen as the long term answer in the slot and is 8 years younger, so Victor may have to change teams if he wants to taste a little glory of the past before retiring.
RE: Its a dammed shame how injuries  
ColHowPepper : 12/7/2016 9:11 am : link
In comment 13252907 shelovesnycsports said:
Quote:
took Cruz and Nicks from us so soon. They were both stars.
I don't think this is quite accurate: In the year Cruz was re-signed to his big deal, Nicks was still reasonably healthy and playing. There was a ton of discussion here about how Giants couldn't afford to pay both and who would they select as the guy with the pay-day, so in effect giving it to Cruz meant Nicks was going to opt out for FA in any event.
RE: Cutting these guys may nearly double our cap room  
Beer Man : 12/7/2016 9:12 am : link
In comment 13252937 est1986 said:
Quote:
Cruz
Jennings
Harris
Casillas
JT
DRC (the only one listed I want to see back in '17)

Re-up with JPP, Hankins and Kennard. Maybe even extend Pugh and Richburg eventually. If we can get one dynamic LB or OL or TE or WR in FA, then we can adress the rest in the draft.
With Perkins, the team could also trade or cut Vereen.
RE: .  
Joey in VA : 12/7/2016 9:14 am : link
In comment 13252857 Danny Kanell said:
Quote:
He's definitely getting cut in the offseason.
I'm with this twat, he's donezo. :)
The guy who  
area junc : 12/7/2016 9:22 am : link
should return on a pay-cut is Jennings. I am done with him as a starter (don't see too many 31 year old starting RBs for a reason). But as a #3, utility back that can play in all situations? Sign me up.
He's not a field stretching outside reciever  
penkap75 : 12/7/2016 9:22 am : link
Not sure why they position him there, especially after multiple injuries that took away his explosiveness.

He made his fame as a slot reciever, and I bet he can still do damage there, just without the YAC explosiveness of 2011. He can be like old Giants Steve Smith, catch the ball for a 1st down in the slot and then fall down.

They have him totally out of position.
RE: Cutting these guys may nearly double our cap room  
Carthonfan : 12/7/2016 9:25 am : link
In comment 13252937 est1986 said:
Quote:
Cruz
Jennings
Harris
Casillas
JT
DRC (the only one listed I want to see back in '17)

Re-up with JPP, Hankins and Kennard. Maybe even extend Pugh and Richburg eventually. If we can get one dynamic LB or OL or TE or WR in FA, then we can adress the rest in the draft.


Harris and DRC both contribute and you wouldn't cut both LBs unless you can replace at equal or less cost (unlikely) or find an upgrade and pay for it with other cap space (more likely but need to look at FA list). I think youve proposed as such but FA doesn't always work out and it's important to note they do not have a current replacement on the roster as they do with Jennings, for instance.
Cruz is making $5.5M in salary in 2016  
shyster : 12/7/2016 9:37 am : link
if salary is understood as "new dollars" and, let's face it, new dollars are new dollars.

$2.4M base.

100k roster bonus.

$3M in weekly bonuses every time he gets a game jersey.

Giants could save $187K per week towards next year's cap by deactivating Cruz right now. Cruz could make a big play this week but so might Tavarres King if he were given a shot.
RE: RE: .  
GloryDayz : 12/7/2016 2:06 pm : link
In comment 13252862 Deej said:
Quote:
In comment 13252857 Danny Kanell said:


Quote:


He's definitely getting cut in the offseason.



Or taking a pay cut.


I'd like to see what he can still do in the slot, his natural position, before we cut him.

A pay cut is most likely coming up after the season, but I wouldnt cut him. What if Sheppard is hurt? How nice would it be if on 4 WR sets, you have Cruz & Sheppard inside, OBJ and a decent #2 on the outside?

He is definitely getting cut  
Vanzetti : 12/7/2016 2:50 pm : link
unless he really steps up these last 4 games.

He started the season OK but has been mostly invisible the last few weeks.

They are hurting the team by not putting King in there  
EricJ : 12/7/2016 3:00 pm : link
..
RE: RE: RE: .  
allstarjim : 12/7/2016 3:24 pm : link
In comment 13252872 Giantology said:
Quote:
In comment 13252869 Tuckrule said:


Quote:


In comment 13252857 Danny Kanell said:


Quote:


He's definitely getting cut in the offseason.



He's not worth a pay cut. He doesn't play specials. No reason to have him sitting on the bench. Time to move on. Great player in his prime sadly it was cut very short and we never got to see Odell and Cruz together



Disagree. He's still making big plays (usually good for 1 a game) and rounding back into form. He won't ever be 2011 Vic, but at a reduced salary he can have a role on this team.


1 a game means you are a JAG and you don't pay that guy $8 mil. He's a slot receiver, and we have a better one now. Team will have priority free agents they will need that money for, and he should be gone. I hope he finds another home in which he can play slot for a team and excel.
I should add  
allstarjim : 12/7/2016 3:25 pm : link
He's not going to reduce his salary enough to justify him being a back up slot receiver or for what his production is or is likely to get back to. Unless he's playing the slot, he just doesn't have the same utility to a team.
I never understood...  
bradshaw44 : 12/7/2016 4:16 pm : link
If he's cut I know we face dead money, but does he personally collect the entire amount? I would think that's bull shit if he doesn't collect all or lost of the salary. Any info would be appreciated. And that goes for all players in general.

Thanks
Lost=most  
bradshaw44 : 12/7/2016 4:17 pm : link
...
RE: I never understood...  
pjcas18 : 12/7/2016 4:21 pm : link
In comment 13253951 bradshaw44 said:
Quote:
If he's cut I know we face dead money, but does he personally collect the entire amount? I would think that's bull shit if he doesn't collect all or lost of the salary. Any info would be appreciated. And that goes for all players in general.

Thanks


He only collects what was guaranteed.

That is why a lot of players and media focus on the guarantees.

In Cruz's case, he has 1.9M pro-rated from his signing bonus remaining. Which is why from a cap standpoint his dead money is just the 1.9M, but from a cap standpoint all his salary is savings, and he gets none of it.
the 'dead' money is mainly due  
giants#1 : 12/7/2016 4:24 pm : link
to how the NFL treats signing bonuses from a cap perspective. The player is paid the signing bonus immediately, but for accounting purposes, the team is able to pro-rate it over the length of the contract or 5 years (whichever is shorter).

So if you sign a 5 year contract with a $10M signing bonus, then the player gets the $10M on signing, but only $2M per season counts against the cap. If that player is then cut after year 3, the team will have a $4M 'dead' money cap charge since they'll have 2 years worth of pro-rated bonuses that never counted against the cap. The player does not have to pay any money back though.

Got it  
bradshaw44 : 12/7/2016 4:27 pm : link
Thank you, both.
They will probably renegotiate the contract...  
EricJ : 12/7/2016 4:50 pm : link
.
pj  
fkap : 12/7/2016 5:06 pm : link
"Agree cap space saved is the determining factor for most bubble decisions (like Cruz), but dead space adds up and while it's not the determining factor it's still a relevant number"

I would argue that dead space isn't relevant at all, going forward. It is incurred as soon as the contract is signed.

IMO, the relevant factors are: can the player produce? Can you replace the player production for a cheaper cost than the savings? Can you increase production if you go with a different player regardless of cost?

He's costing 1.9 mil against the cap regardless. it's too late to think about dead space - that was a decision made a couple years ago. What matters now is whether he's worth keeping on the roster at any salary + workout bonus + roster bonus. How much new money would you pay (money not already sunk into that hole) on top of that 1.9 mil? IMO, not much. minimum wage and maybe a little more, but that's a debate. the question today is whether he's worth the new money he'll cost. Dead Space doesn't mean squat for the decision on whether to keep him (there are scenarios where dead space would cost more in cap hit than savings, but that's not the situation with VC)
RE: .  
montanagiant : 12/7/2016 5:15 pm : link
In comment 13252857 Danny Kanell said:
Quote:
He's definitely getting cut in the offseason.

Yeah, it's a shame but I don't see the same player at all
RE: pj  
pjcas18 : 12/7/2016 5:23 pm : link
In comment 13254024 fkap said:
Quote:
"Agree cap space saved is the determining factor for most bubble decisions (like Cruz), but dead space adds up and while it's not the determining factor it's still a relevant number"

I would argue that dead space isn't relevant at all, going forward. It is incurred as soon as the contract is signed.

IMO, the relevant factors are: can the player produce? Can you replace the player production for a cheaper cost than the savings? Can you increase production if you go with a different player regardless of cost?

He's costing 1.9 mil against the cap regardless. it's too late to think about dead space - that was a decision made a couple years ago. What matters now is whether he's worth keeping on the roster at any salary + workout bonus + roster bonus. How much new money would you pay (money not already sunk into that hole) on top of that 1.9 mil? IMO, not much. minimum wage and maybe a little more, but that's a debate. the question today is whether he's worth the new money he'll cost. Dead Space doesn't mean squat for the decision on whether to keep him (there are scenarios where dead space would cost more in cap hit than savings, but that's not the situation with VC)


It's only relevant from the standpoint of is it worth keeping the player or not.

Think of it this way.

If you have $10 to spend. You spend $7 on one guy. You have $3 left. If you cut the one guy you could save $2. Does that $5 give you enough to replace him.

because if you do cut him and use $5 on someone else you only had $7 spent on your roster, because $3 is dead.

So while I completely agree the cap saving is the more relevant factor, the dead space does get considered even as a sunk cost, because you cannot recoup it.

Plus there is the post June 1 cut designation that helps move the dead money and savings.

RE: Its a dammed shame how injuries  
spike : 12/7/2016 5:50 pm : link
In comment 13252907 shelovesnycsports said:
Quote:
took Cruz and Nicks from us so soon. They were both stars.


Steve Smith too.

We have awful luck at WR. We have to wrap Odell in a bubble wrap.
How does everyone feel about DeSean Jackson in blue next year?  
DennyInDenville : 12/7/2016 6:27 pm : link
To replace Cruz on the outside?

Pretty nice fit for us. Not the big man we all want but he's an outside burner
I still believe in Cruz  
rasbutant : 12/9/2016 9:51 pm : link
And we would be very glad we have him if something was to happen to Shepard. Remember Stockley
RE: How does everyone feel about DeSean Jackson in blue next year?  
drkenneth : 12/9/2016 10:33 pm : link
In comment 13254111 DennyInDenville said:
Quote:
To replace Cruz on the outside?

Pretty nice fit for us. Not the big man we all want but he's an outside burner


They need to get bigger and more physical on offense (WR/TE/OL).

No.
He's not separating from coverage and he's not open most of the time.  
Ten Ton Hammer : 12/10/2016 2:08 am : link
I wanted to see him play again, but I don't think he has it anymore.
Back to the Corner