Giants the most top heavy team salary wise.

but it's driving me crazy that the author used "stars and duds" instead of "studs and duds."

And should bear the responsibility of Eli still being here as well

You would think those 2 things go hand in hand, but we are thin all the way through the ranks.

next year looks great.

This does not necessarily mean that the Giants have the most overpaid players. In this study it is all about relativity. Gettleman has cleared out a lot of the of "bottom feeders" and basically decided in year 2 to do a complete rebuild. So as we speak we have a few highly-paid players and then basically nothing below that, but once Eli is off the books we're going to have like $100M in cap room. So this doesn't say that we necessarily have a bunch of overpaid players, it more means that we have a few highly paid players and then a bunch of players who make nothing (hence why they survived the purge), but we have plenty of money to spend and I assume Gettleman is not going to spend it all on big names, I assume he is going to get some middle-of-the-pack players in terms of salary who he likes.

Do we win a prize?

In comment 14368426 Leg of Theismann said:

Quote:

This does not necessarily mean that the Giants have the most overpaid players. In this study it is all about relativity. Gettleman has cleared out a lot of the of "bottom feeders" and basically decided in year 2 to do a complete rebuild. So as we speak we have a few highly-paid players and then basically nothing below that, but once Eli is off the books we're going to have like $100M in cap room. So this doesn't say that we necessarily have a bunch of overpaid players, it more means that we have a few highly paid players and then a bunch of players who make nothing (hence why they survived the purge), but we have plenty of money to spend and I assume Gettleman is not going to spend it all on big names, I assume he is going to get some middle-of-the-pack players in terms of salary who he likes.

I also think it is more of a historical blip than a strategy...

Also, a LOT of the variance along the Y-axis is determined by whether or not you have a QB on a rookie contract.

But DG seems to be cleaning that up. Look at the future cap situation

More meaningless shit on the web.

Snacks, Beckham, Vernon, etc use to be on that list. It will take time to correct this. It's not a good year to analyze since they are in the middle of a rebuild.

Jenkins will likely be re-worked, cut, or traded prior to 2020. I expect Zeitler's contract will be re-worked possibly before this season starts.

Other team's top 5 cap percentages currently going into 2019 (start with division):

Giants: 39.31%
Redskins: 39.32%
Cowboys: 38.26% (Dak isn't one of the top 5 yet)
Eagles: 31.34% (Wentz isn't one of the top 5 yet)
---------
Chargers: 43.09%
Buccaneers: 42.21%
Seahawks: 42.17%
Panthers: 41.73%
Broncos: 39.44%
Saints: 38.39%
Packers: 38.03%
Lions: 37.98%
Raiders: 37.74%
Steelers: 36.68%
Patriots: 34.63%
Colts: 32.69% (Don't know why they didn't spend big in FA. Tons of cap space.)

players like Snacks, OV, and OBJ make us more top-heavy? Keeping them certainly would have increased the % of cap going to players 6-8, no?

Not really a surprise - the Giants are shedding salary this season and loading up on draft picks. They are working to establish a young group of talented football players right now - not loading up for a run at the SB.

The more spread out the salary cap is over the roster, the better equipped the team will be to deal with injuries AND be liquid to make trades and other personnel moves. In a league where injuries are a major determinant of wins and losses, that is a smart way of doing business. You want to be where New England and Cleveland are in this graph: spending all of your cap space in a manner spread out over your entire roster.

There was a point earlier this offseason where 6 players accounted for about 60% of the cap.

Gettleman to his credit turned Vernon into Zeitler at a big discount and Beckham into Peppers + 3M for the draft picks.

I think Gettleman is crushing it -- but I can't wrap my head around Solder and Tate. It's the opposite of every other move he's making.

In comment 14368690 Go Terps said:

Quote:

The more spread out the salary cap is over the roster, the better equipped the team will be to deal with injuries AND be liquid to make trades and other personnel moves. In a league where injuries are a major determinant of wins and losses, that is a smart way of doing business. You want to be where New England and Cleveland are in this graph: spending all of your cap space in a manner spread out over your entire roster.

A lot of the teams on the chart that are distributing the wealth are on rookie QB contracts. New England is not one of them, so I kind of agree. I don't think Cleveland is going to be in that place in a couple years when they have to start making decisions.

In comment 14368741 DonQuixote said:

Quote:

In comment 14368690 Go Terps said: Quote: The more spread out the salary cap is over the roster, the better equipped the team will be to deal with injuries AND be liquid to make trades and other personnel moves. In a league where injuries are a major determinant of wins and losses, that is a smart way of doing business. You want to be where New England and Cleveland are in this graph: spending all of your cap space in a manner spread out over your entire roster. A lot of the teams on the chart that are distributing the wealth are on rookie QB contracts. New England is not one of them, so I kind of agree. I don't think Cleveland is going to be in that place in a couple years when they have to start making decisions.

Yup.

TB12 never making crazy $ due to his wife & some shady deal he has with Kraft & Patriot Place.

In comment 14368709 christian said:

Quote:

There was a point earlier this offseason where 6 players accounted for about 60% of the cap. Gettleman to his credit turned Vernon into Zeitler at a big discount and Beckham into Peppers + 3M for the draft picks. I think Gettleman is crushing it -- but I can't wrap my head around Solder and Tate. It's the opposite of every other move he's making.

I think he made those deals out of necessity in Solder’s case. You have to have a guy at LT you can at least somewhat trust even if that means breaking the bank to do so. It shows you how bad our tackle situation was when Gettleman got here because he is not one to spend big on FA. The Tate deal makes sense to me because he is always healthy (knock on wood it stays that way), and is an incredible blocker which is essential in a run first offense.

the top 5 salaries aren't the highest in the league from a % standpoint.

Doesn't that make the thread title inaccurate?

In comment 14368841 eric2425ny said:

Quote:

In comment 14368709 christian said: Quote: There was a point earlier this offseason where 6 players accounted for about 60% of the cap. Gettleman to his credit turned Vernon into Zeitler at a big discount and Beckham into Peppers + 3M for the draft picks. I think Gettleman is crushing it -- but I can't wrap my head around Solder and Tate. It's the opposite of every other move he's making. I think he made those deals out of necessity in Solder’s case. You have to have a guy at LT you can at least somewhat trust even if that means breaking the bank to do so. It shows you how bad our tackle situation was when Gettleman got here because he is not one to spend big on FA. The Tate deal makes sense to me because he is always healthy (knock on wood it stays that way), and is an incredible blocker which is essential in a run first offense.

Solder was part of an offseason where Gettleman spent lots of money on UFAs, acquiring contracts, and extensions. I can see the logic fitting last year. I shouldn't be surprised about that deal.

This year, Gettleman has traded into cap room, committed very modest guaranteed money, or acquired picks on every transaction, and then gave Golden Tate 20M+ dollars. It's an outlier any way you cut it.

who will play up to their contract?

it's quite possible, 4 of those 5, might not be on the roster next year...

...the Giants are the most top heavy...
...or the 8th most top heavy?

Kind of a big difference, no?!

Nice discovery.

I don't think we are taking a QB in Round 1 or 2. I do believe we'll go DL/ER, DL/ER and OL with our first three picks as there will be "value" there in the first two rounds.

Maybe we pick a QB in round 3? I don't see it happening either unless of course some small school guy falls into our draft board lap? I just don't know. I do still have some "hope" that last year's 4th rounder, K. Lauletta, picks his head up and gives us his best, mature self this year. I think the kid has some tools but wasn't ready for the "NY Giants" or the speed of the NFL last year. As a fan, I hold our hope but have no expectations for success.

After this year, we can say good-bye to a lot of age and high salaries. I mean, if we have a viable LT (say #17 is J. Taylor or C. Ford) for 2020 would we cut Solder ? Probably not yet. But we are in great cap shape and will keep our younger guys including WR S. Shepard should he perform. Though I still think he might be part of a trade to move up possibly.

for paying a QB a ridiculous salary for what he's done, but not what he's capable of doing

Which just leave the 2 OLmen....and a ton of cap....

why people are bellyaching over this, given the fact that it is being done now to clear the books for next year. This is what needs to be done in order to go forward in building this team back into playoff contention. What's been done is done. It looks ugly right now, but it is a necessary evil.

In comment 14368924 Brown_Hornet said:

Quote:

...the Giants are the most top heavy... ...or the 8th most top heavy? Kind of a big difference, no?!

It is kind of like people are ignoring the fact that the premise of the thread is inaccurate.

In comment 14369050 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

In comment 14368924 Brown_Hornet said: Quote: ...the Giants are the most top heavy... ...or the 8th most top heavy? Kind of a big difference, no?! It is kind of like people are ignoring the fact that the premise of the thread is inaccurate.

Are you basing that on the comments above re: the percentage of top 5 players or the index the author of the story is using?

In comment 14368924 Brown_Hornet said:

Quote:

...the Giants are the most top heavy... ...or the 8th most top heavy? Kind of a big difference, no?!

Just read the article.

In comment 14369155 DonQuixote said:

Quote:

In comment 14368924 Brown_Hornet said: Quote: ...the Giants are the most top heavy... ...or the 8th most top heavy? Kind of a big difference, no?! Just read the article.

I suspect that's asking a little much :)

In comment 14368854 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

the top 5 salaries aren't the highest in the league from a % standpoint. Doesn't that make the thread title inaccurate?

No, because the top 5 salaries on the team is not what the article is about.