We just had a poster say salary cap doesn't matter and that asinine comment reminded me of a post I made over the summer. Copy and Pasting the OP and linking the archived thread.
So I see an insane amount of optimism on this board from some and have no idea why. Not saying it can't happen, but we have an insane amount of dead money on the books. This hurts your ability to spend money obviously. So I wanted to take a look at how much dead money affects your ability to compete that season. I took the top 3 teams in dead money the last five years and listed their records. I decided to include some teams where there wasn't a clear demarcation. Not trying to goose the numbers.
2013 Raiders - 4-12
Jags - 4-12
Jets - 8-8
2014 Cowboys - 12-4
Panthers - 7-8-1
Bills - 9-7
2015 Saints - 7-9
Dolphins - 6-10
49ers - 5-11
Bears - 6-10
2016 Saints - 7-9
Browns - 1-15
Falcons - 11-5
Lions - 9-7
Rams - 4-12
Eagles - 7-9
2017 Browns - 0-16
49ers - 6-10
Bills - 9-7
2018 Bills - 6-10
Giants - 5-11
Cardinals - 3-13
So looking at these numbers none of these teams really found any success outside of Atlanta and the Cowboys. Atlanta's was on the back of a first team all pro effort from Matt Ryan. The Cowboys on their All-Pro offensive line, a great running back, Dez pre foot injury, and Tony Romo had a tremendous and reasonably healthy season (15 games). Does anyone really expect for us to get elite QB play or elite offensive line play?
Captain Debbie Downer Out
Link - (
New Window )
Yup exactly. And while they’re not going to throw Jones to the wolves just yet, I’m sure part of the plan is to get him some burn so he’s ready to roll next year.
How can you know that we have zero dead cap next year? You don't get dead cap until you cut someone. You don't know who they are going to cut after this year.
That's not a special achievement - for one thing, dead money gets accumulated in-year much more than into the future (except for post-6/1 cuts). But pay attention to how many posters talk about releasing guys like Jackrabbit, Ogletree, Ellison, Martin to free up more cap room next year. And see if any of them ever stop to mention the $10MM of dead money those cuts will create.
People tend to focus on the net cap room created by those releases, and while it would be significant, it's still $10MM of dead money. Which essentially takes the bargain of Daniel Jones on his rookie contract, and turns his cap number into that of a veteran QB.
This franchise has a history of generating dead money to manage the cap because they're always tight on space. If you want to give them the benefit of the doubt, go for it. I'll reserve the right to be skeptical until they prove otherwise.
Quote:
which has been the obvious plan all along. Not sure why so much bellyaching about it this season - we all know Giants are still rebuilding
How can you know that we have zero dead cap next year? You don't get dead cap until you cut someone. You don't know who they are going to cut after this year.
This team still has bad contracts to players that will likely get cut in the off season. That will generate more dead cap that DG will own to himself.
Quote:
which has been the obvious plan all along. Not sure why so much bellyaching about it this season - we all know Giants are still rebuilding
How can you know that we have zero dead cap next year? You don't get dead cap until you cut someone. You don't know who they are going to cut after this year.
here are some guys that could bump that up if cut
Jenkins 3.5
Ogletree 3.5
Ellison 1.2
Martin 1.1
some unlikely but possible big impact cuts
Tate 7.5
Solder 13.0
Watching Eli is a love hate prop. I love what he did for us over the years and the two SB's. But, he is not the QB to lead us forward. Jones showed he is ready to play in the NFL and take his lumps. Jones needs to be playing now.
well thats also without any other teams cuts added in.
But most teams have minimal dead cap for next year at this time
Watching Eli is a love hate prop. I love what he did for us over the years and the two SB's. But, he is not the QB to lead us forward. Jones showed he is ready to play in the NFL and take his lumps. Jones needs to be playing now.
I know this is an unpopular take, but I think they got handcuffed by ownership on the Eli situation. Mara wanted to make sure that he at least got a send off. And this is where I think he is completely clueless about the majority of the fanbase. I think he thinks the fans would have been pissed if they weren't getting an opportunity to see Eli's last home game. If Eli played his last home game with no QB yet on the roster in 2018 it would have been pretty shocking. I don't think anyone was buying that ticket thinking it would be Eli's last game as Giant in Giants stadium.
Quote:
we'll have somewhere around bottom third dead cap space.
well thats also without any other teams cuts added in.
But most teams have minimal dead cap for next year at this time
I was just basing that on a quick look at this years dead cap numbers.
Quote:
which has been the obvious plan all along. Not sure why so much bellyaching about it this season - we all know Giants are still rebuilding
How can you know that we have zero dead cap next year? You don't get dead cap until you cut someone. You don't know who they are going to cut after this year.
The guys who are likely cuts don’t have a lot of dead cap left next season.
Ogletree $3.5
Ellison $1.2
Martin $1.1
A blip against a projected $199 million cap
As I’ve said on other threads, thankfully DG and Abrams are smarter than some of you guys about how this works
Quote:
In comment 14570545 Zeke's Alibi said:
Quote:
we'll have somewhere around bottom third dead cap space.
well thats also without any other teams cuts added in.
But most teams have minimal dead cap for next year at this time
I was just basing that on a quick look at this years dead cap numbers.
ahhh...gotcha
Jenkins would be a $3.5 dead cap hit...interesting decision next year on him.
My point on this all along is - the Giants are eating the dead cap for most of the bad contracts this season, while setting us up with good cap space for next year and beyond.
Eli coming off the books should leave us with over $60 million in space. Now, spending that wisely is what will matter in the end.
The ones that don't are statistical anomalies. One had all pro QB play, another had a line that was absolutely dominated, and that Bills were bottom in yards for and against and somehow won 9 games. If you take the overall records of all those teams you are looking at a sub 40 percent winning percentage which is terrible in the parity driven NFL.
Quote:
In comment 14570516 mfsd said:
Quote:
which has been the obvious plan all along. Not sure why so much bellyaching about it this season - we all know Giants are still rebuilding
How can you know that we have zero dead cap next year? You don't get dead cap until you cut someone. You don't know who they are going to cut after this year.
The guys who are likely cuts don’t have a lot of dead cap left next season.
Ogletree $3.5
Ellison $1.2
Martin $1.1
A blip against a projected $199 million cap
As I’ve said on other threads, thankfully DG and Abrams are smarter than some of you guys about how this works
They might be, but you're not.
Add up enough blips and all of a sudden you start converting salary to bonus on your 31 year old underperforming yet highest paid left tackle to make sure you can even afford to place players on IR and make waiver claims, and that comes at the expense of future cap space.
In contrast, the cap in 2012 was raised by all of $600,000 and the next year by $2.4 million. Under these circumstances it was common for a franchise like Dallas to pick a very good player to remove from the roster so there would be enough money to pay the others.
This season they have signed all of the free agents (I'm taking the signing of Dak for granted) and paid them top dollar.
If the Giants have had any recent problems with the cap, attribute it to the presence of Manning on the roster starting every game and making every penny as if he were coming off one of the big winning years.
Every season there was a list of "cap casualties" who had to be sacrificed to the demon. Not this year.
If you are going to invoke the cap as the boogeyman, please tell us who we are going to have say good-bye to if we are to keep all the others happy.
Quote:
which has been the obvious plan all along. Not sure why so much bellyaching about it this season - we all know Giants are still
rebuilding
That's not a special achievement - for one thing, dead money gets accumulated in-year much more than into the future (except for post-6/1 cuts). But pay attention to how many
posters talk about releasing guys like Jackrabbit, Ogletree, Ellison, Martin to free up more cap room next year. And see if any of them ever stop to mention the $10MM of dead money those cuts will create.
People tend to focus on the net cap room created by those releases, and while it would be significant, it's still $10MM of dead money. Which essentially takes the bargain of Daniel Jones on his rookie contract, and turns his cap number into that of a veteran QB.
This franchise has a history of generating dead money to manage the cap because they're always tight on space. If you want to give them the benefit of the doubt, go for it. I'll reserve the right to be skeptical until they prove otherwise.
Dead cap money comes from poor drafting and then having to reach in free agency. Not complicated but repeats itself in perpetuity until drats turn solid.
Quote:
In comment 14570516 mfsd said:
Quote:
which has been the obvious plan all along. Not sure why so much bellyaching about it this season - we all know Giants are still
rebuilding
That's not a special achievement - for one thing, dead money gets accumulated in-year much more than into the future (except for post-6/1 cuts). But pay attention to how many
posters talk about releasing guys like Jackrabbit, Ogletree, Ellison, Martin to free up more cap room next year. And see if any of them ever stop to mention the $10MM of dead money those cuts will create.
People tend to focus on the net cap room created by those releases, and while it would be significant, it's still $10MM of dead money. Which essentially takes the bargain of Daniel Jones on his rookie contract, and turns his cap number into that of a veteran QB.
This franchise has a history of generating dead money to manage the cap because they're always tight on space. If you want to give them the benefit of the doubt, go for it. I'll reserve the right to be skeptical until they prove otherwise.
Dead cap money comes from poor drafting and then having to reach in free agency. Not complicated but repeats itself in perpetuity until drats turn solid.
This may come as a shock, but you can sign free agents without incurring dead money. Dead money comes from cutting free agents while there is unamortized guaranteed money remaining on their contract, typically because either the player proved to be a bad fit/bad value, or because the team needed cap room for other moves more than they felt like they needed that player.
Drafting better can limit your need to go into free agency aggressively, and it can definitely keep your cap healthier in general to mitigate the need to absorb dead money in pursuit of net cap space, but bad drafting alone doesn't cause dead money unless the team follows it up with bad free agent moves as well (or if the draftee is so bad that he gets cut with guaranteed money remaining, which is rare).
In short, it takes a more comprehensive effort at being a dysfunctional front office to rack up significant dead money. It can't be from bad drafting alone. And Reese (and even Gettleman) were both more guilty of poor signings (or re-signings) in accumulating the pile of dead money the Giants are currently dealing with.
Quote:
In comment 14570529 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 14570516 mfsd said:
Quote:
which has been the obvious plan all along. Not sure why so much bellyaching about it this season - we all know Giants are still
rebuilding
That's not a special achievement - for one thing, dead money gets accumulated in-year much more than into the future (except for post-6/1 cuts). But pay attention to how many
posters talk about releasing guys like Jackrabbit, Ogletree, Ellison, Martin to free up more cap room next year. And see if any of them ever stop to mention the $10MM of dead money those cuts will create.
People tend to focus on the net cap room created by those releases, and while it would be significant, it's still $10MM of dead money. Which essentially takes the bargain of Daniel Jones on his rookie contract, and turns his cap number into that of a veteran QB.
This franchise has a history of generating dead money to manage the cap because they're always tight on space. If you want to give them the benefit of the doubt, go for it. I'll reserve the right to be skeptical until they prove otherwise.
Dead cap money comes from poor drafting and then having to reach in free agency. Not complicated but repeats itself in perpetuity until drats turn solid.
This may come as a shock, but you can sign free agents without incurring dead money. Dead money comes from cutting free agents while there is unamortized guaranteed money remaining on their contract, typically because either the player proved to be a bad fit/bad value, or because the team needed cap room for other moves more than they felt like they needed that player.
Drafting better can limit your need to go into free agency aggressively, and it can definitely keep your cap healthier in general to mitigate the need to absorb dead money in pursuit of net cap space, but bad drafting alone doesn't cause dead money unless the team follows it up with bad free agent moves as well (or if the draftee is so bad that he gets cut with guaranteed money remaining, which is rare).
In short, it takes a more comprehensive effort at being a dysfunctional front office to rack up significant dead money. It can't be from bad drafting alone. And Reese (and even Gettleman) were both more guilty of poor signings (or re-signings) in accumulating the pile of dead money the Giants are currently dealing with.
Agreed. Talent evaluation shows up through both draft and FA signings. How much of dead cap money is from Gettleman signings vs Reese. OBJ and Omameh are Gettleman and Vernon etc are Reese. The big number is OBJ whose trade I fully supported notwithstanding cap hit. I believe they actually paid him only about one years worth of his contract cash wise for one year of service so was not a typical dead money cap hit like most other situations you refer to.
Bottom line is talent evaluation and value prioritization are everything and we won't know all until end of year. One thing for sure. If a team over multiple years has no cap space and still has a losing record than overall talent evaluation is the core issue and Mgt has to go.Will see over this year and next.
How do you know they’re going to have to let Byron Jones go. I’ll bet they don’t.
Do you remember back to the days when teams had to rework the contracts of vets to free up enough cap space to get through the current year? Would it be fair to say that this happened a lot. That the Giants did this a lot. That Eli alone must have had his contract reworked around five times?
Did you see a lot of vet contracts being reworked because of cap space this year? Did you see any? Yes, a handful of clubs had cap problems this off season. But they really had to screw up to get into that situation. Many more teams had more cap space than they needed.
What is sick is the urge to get rid of every player who has some talent to create more cap space. You must have been thrilled to see JPP, Harrison, Vernon and Collins all taken off the payroll. But cap space can’t rush the passer or make open field tackles.
Keeping Eli instead of sending off with Coughlin was the Giants’ big blunder. They lost talented players and in return they have eight wins in the last two seasons and no better prospects for this year.
You’re just addicted to the cap room game and don’t want to give it up. And it was a pretty interesting game before the league added around 65 million to the cap over the last six years.
But there is hope for you. After the next CBA, the cap may be important again.
They paid him $21.5 mil last year.
so about 50% more than they should have for 1 years service
Eli had his contract restructured ONE time, in 2012.
With all due respect, it doesn't seem like you really have a good handle on the cap. Just because it has had some significant increases doesn't in any way reduce the importance of managing it properly. Those increases happened for all teams, and as a result, new free agent and rookie contracts rose to match the cap increases each time they occurred. The idea that the elevated salary cap somehow reduced the importance of the cap is, for lack of a better term, utter horseshit with no factual basis in reality.
Teams started making fewer of the moves that you describe because they generally got smarter about the cap, because the rookie wage scale was implemented, because the veteran salary exception was introduced, and because the number of years across which you could amortize bonus dollars was capped. And, to some degree, because those moves happened far less frequently even then than you seem to think you remember (see above about Eli and your memory of him reworking his contract five times) But again, these are things that changed the landscape for ALL teams, so it was a net zero shift in a relative sense. The cap didn't get less important or less restrictive. It went up. That's it.
The goal is to manage your cap in such a fashion as to give you a competitive advantage, and that happens when you combine consistently good drafting with smart free agent moves and well thought out contract structures, and adhere to a multi-year plan that allows you to pivot when necessary without having to use dead money or future cap room too frequently in order to react.
For your sake, I hope you stop repeating the same garbage take about the cap not mattering. Not only is it false, it also makes you look ignorant about it.
It really is.
It's basically like if you gave 32 kids $10 to spend in a candy store, then a week later, gave those same kids $15 each but also raised the price of the candy by 50%. Does the amount of money in their wallet become less significant to how much candy they can buy?
Somehow Reese's Pieces (the poster, not the candy) would argue that it did indeed become less important.