But not likely given his salary. Other teams would would have interest if released.
I fully understand La Conforas track record lol just wanted to pass on. Also i think a poster of BBI could speculate that if the giants had a trade partner, they’d rather do that than cut Zeitler out right.
There’s no reason to cut or extend Zeitler now. They should wait out 1) how things evolve with Williams 2) if they can land a high talent interior lineman in UFA.
It’s quite cut throat, but if the Giants hold tight and wait for some money to dry up in the market, they’ll have more leverage for Zeitler to take a pay cut.
Waiting for money to dry up also means, theoretically, that some of the players the Giants might like to use additional cap space on would be unavailable, they having been parties to the drying of the market.
I wonder if the Giants could, however, effectively disregard their rookie salary pool during the early part of free agency, and then squeeze KZ after the first (or even second) wave of signings to restore the cap room they'll need for draft picks and/or bargain FAs?
okay I get that... but stickes here are usually reserved for FACTS and deals that have actually occurred. Not a hypothesis regardless of whether it is plausible.
Cutting Zeitler will be a clean process, with clear unambiguous savings. The Giants just need to file the papers with the league on his termination, before they file new papers on any acquisition.
They can come to terms with a new player, and just cut Zeitler before they email in the new contract.
It's shitty, and they probably won't do it to Zeitler, but they can.
The front office runs more like a business than a football team. Somewhere Kevin Abrams and crew are running financial models with all the traditional performance management metrics any other company uses. Sure the Giants have different capital but certain fundamentals exist across all businesses.
With Hernandez and Lemieux appreciating and Zeitler depreciating at a heavy cost, they have likely concluded Zeitler's piece of the pie can be more efficiently used elsewhere. It has nothing to do with Tomlinson in particular and more to do with properly running a business.
Quote:
because the team has to create space just to sign it's own then that's absolutely egregious. A team that has won about 5 games per year mind you, struggles on the OL already and has no credible replacement on the roster at Right Guard as of yet.
If KZ is getting released because they are targeting some other type of strategic OL move in free agency or early in the Draft then I could give his some leeway.
But if this is just a "hey, we screwed up moment and KZ is kind of expensive so we will just allocate his money to an immediate need and figure it out later" type of moment then its really a ridiculous side-show in that front office...
They shouldn't have to cut Zeitler to sign Williams, but vet players on the last year of a big free agency deal tend to find themselves extended or cut.
There's a decent glut of veteran Guards on the market already and that's before the expected blood letting which many in the league reckon will happen the moment the cap is set. Zietler's cap hit is just simply not an effective use of resources.
Definitely agree with you regarding the last year of larger deals in majority of cases. And I am not advocating extending Zeitler, but unless the Giants OL has become a model of stability and I missed it then I wouldn't be in any rush of using current OL monies to fix other problems on the roster.
At the very least, let free agency play out a little bit to see and negotiate with some of this glut of Guards before Zeitler is turned loose.
This screams of being between a rock and hardplace at the negotiating table with Williams...
The front office runs more like a business than a football team. Somewhere Kevin Abrams and crew are running financial models with all the traditional performance management metrics any other company uses. Sure the Giants have different capital but certain fundamentals exist across all businesses.
With Hernandez and Lemieux appreciating and Zeitler depreciating at a heavy cost, they have likely concluded Zeitler's piece of the pie can be more efficiently used elsewhere. It has nothing to do with Tomlinson in particular and more to do with properly running a business.
Yes I realize monies are fungible and cap models should be run and looked at wholistically. However, there are typically only a few roster players each year that make a material impact in the decision making process of keep/cut/restructure. You can look for $ under every rock but lets call a spade a spade here.
Also see my previous post on this topic as to the sensitivity of the OL right now...
Cap maneuverability seems more a function of the GM's decisions since Abrams is sort of just the henchman from my viewpoint. Dead money on Odell in 2019 and Tate this upcoming year is DG's fault, not Abrams'.
Maybe I'm wrong.
I find trench players are breaking down earlier. You have outliers like Whitworth and Peters but seems a lot of them start going downhill at 30 which Zeitler is.
Someone said Abrams needs to do his "thing". Trust me I understand how the cap works and how a cap manager for a mom and pop shop like the Giants operates as much as anyone who doesn't see NFL financials can.
You can spin it any way you want to until you're twisted into an adhesive tape pretzel. The Giants roster is horrible and they are right up against the cap. That doesn't mean have to mean doom for 2021 but right now those are the facts.
A simple question: Is it better to be $40M under the cap or up against it?
A simple question: Is it better to be $40M under the cap or up against it?
With a roster this bad? $40M under.
With a strong roster assembled by a competent front office led by a GM who isn't an incompetent buffoon? Up against it.
A simple question: Is it better to be $40M under the cap or up against it?
No, here's a simple question...
What did Arniefez post that was so out of line that you had to go and take a ridiculous and unnecessary jab as to his overall financial acumen?
A simple question: Is it better to be $40M under the cap or up against it?
100% matters on the quality of your roster, the distribution of contracts, and where you are in your competitive window.
A simple question: Is it better to be $40M under the cap or up against it?
coming off of 4 losing seasons, 3 of which resulted in Top 10 draft picks and now picking 11th?
I should hope to hell $40M under.
Cap space rolls over. being up against the cap for the sake of being up against the cap isn't a thing anymore.
When cap space did not roll over, sure. But it's long outdated thinking and the way you continue to peddle it around here while talking down to others is cringe-worthy. Tough to watch.
Quote:
can manage your taxes any way you'd like. I'm not giving advice - I'm saying your take on the cap is terrible.
A simple question: Is it better to be $40M under the cap or up against it?
coming off of 4 losing seasons, 3 of which resulted in Top 10 draft picks and now picking 11th?
I should hope to hell $40M under.
Cap space rolls over. being up against the cap for the sake of being up against the cap isn't a thing anymore.
When cap space did not roll over, sure. But it's long outdated thinking and the way you continue to peddle it around here while talking down to others is cringe-worthy. Tough to watch.
But the thing is - the cap isn't static. Being "up against the cap" isn't just a snapshot of today. Look at where we are projected to be in 2022, 23, and 24.
Being up against the cap isn't the issue. It is having the flexibility to create space, which is the situation we are in today.
You guys can't just say that since we're a bad team, we need to be well below the cap. It doesn't work that way - because to build a good team, contracts need to be staggered. The Jags, Jets and Bengals being well under the cap doesn't mean they will be good next year or the year after, it means they have mismanaged their cap, leaving them with a ton of money, and if they spend that money, it will still have to be in the form of well structured contracts.
There's no doubt that if we were $40M under the cap, there'd be some of you bitching that we are cheap bastards that aren't spending enough. When the team is losing, it is a no-win situation with some of you. The entire team stinks and nothing is good.
What I don't understand is a guy who will die on the hill almost 7 days a week to defend 15-33 and close to the worst roster in the NFL today - granted pre FA and the draft for 2021. But don't ever change it would be boring here without you.
Teams with the most amount of cap space since you could rollover $$$ - starting in 2011 haven't fared very well.
Less than 20% of the top 5 teams in cap space made the playoffs the following three years. The highest percentage of playoff teams came from those with between $10M and $20M in cap space.
What I don't understand is a guy who will die on the hill almost 7 days a week to defend 15-33 and close to the worst roster in the NFL today - granted pre FA and the draft for 2021. But don't ever change it would be boring here without you.
And yet I don't understand posters who spend hours a week on this site and continually bitch about the team they follow.
Hell, you bitch about management of every team you follow, including an unhealthy obsession with hating Brian Cashman.
You don't understand people supporting the team they follow because you are a miserable fuck towards all the teams you follow.
I asked that exact question two years ago, and warned that more shitty football was coming because the organization wasn't making real changes. And here we are, with more shit every Sunday in the fall.
When is it ok to be critical?
Quote:
I also understand that the Giants have very few high paid players going forward and can pretty much sign almost anyone they want to if they're willing to push money forward. That is not how they've operated in the past very often and not an excuse for being up against the cap right now.
What I don't understand is a guy who will die on the hill almost 7 days a week to defend 15-33 and close to the worst roster in the NFL today - granted pre FA and the draft for 2021. But don't ever change it would be boring here without you.
And yet I don't understand posters who spend hours a week on this site and continually bitch about the team they follow.
And yet you spend hours a week on this site and continually bitch about the fans that bitch about the team they follow...
I asked that exact question two years ago, and warned that more shitty football was coming because the organization wasn't making real changes. And here we are, with more shit every Sunday in the fall.
When is it ok to be critical?
Terps you clearly don't understand the rules. You are only allowed to complain if you can't make the case that the Giants are 2-3 years away from competing. John Mara could shoot Bradberry on the 50 yard line at halftime and you'd have people coming here to talk about how optimistic they are about the change in ownership and how it opened up cap dollars for us to bring in a new impact player.
Teams with the most amount of cap space since you could rollover $$$ - starting in 2011 haven't fared very well.
Less than 20% of the top 5 teams in cap space made the playoffs the following three years. The highest percentage of playoff teams came from those with between $10M and $20M in cap space.
You're treating cap space as though it's a contributing factor to making the playoffs. Isn't it much more likely that teams who are closer to the cap have more talent on their roster than teams who have the most available cap space?
The issue isn't the Giants being close to the cap. The issue is being close to the cap with such a mediocre roster.
But before the contract was finalized, the bonus structure was tweaked. The Giants instead gave Bradberry a $3 million 2020 roster bonus and a $9 million signing bonus. Roster bonuses count fully against the cap in the year that they’re earned, while signing bonuses are amortized over the life of the contract.
The change made no difference to Bradberry: He was due $12 million within days of signing the contract under either structure. But the change lowered his cap hit for 2020 to $10 million, while bumping it up to $17 million in 2021 and $16.5 million in 2022.
Similarly, Martinez’s three-year, $30.75 million contract initially included a $10 million roster bonus in 2020 and no signing bonus. That structure resulted in cap hits of $14 million in 2020, $8.3 million in 2021 and $8.5 million in 2022. But the Giants switched to a $4 million roster bonus in 2020 to go with a $6 million signing bonus. As a result, his 2020 cap hit dropped to $10 million before jumping to $10.3 million in 2021 and $10.5 million in 2022
The Giants were up against the cap last year and looked like in final negotiations pushed a difference of $10M in these two contracts from 2020 to 2021 and 2022. Those two contracts alone are costing us and extra $5M this year where our team really needs more money than it has with so many holes. Traditionally teams that have been as bad as we have the last X number of years would like to be far less strapped against the cap than we are THIS year. I think this is what we keep bumping up against. A lot of talk about how we will do better but when you look at what we spend and what we get year after year it doesn't look good for us.
A snag in Giants’ talks with Leonard Williams? Could team pursue Kyle Van Noy? - ( New Window )
Quote:
to look at.
Teams with the most amount of cap space since you could rollover $$$ - starting in 2011 haven't fared very well.
Less than 20% of the top 5 teams in cap space made the playoffs the following three years. The highest percentage of playoff teams came from those with between $10M and $20M in cap space.
You're treating cap space as though it's a contributing factor to making the playoffs. Isn't it much more likely that teams who are closer to the cap have more talent on their roster than teams who have the most available cap space?
The issue isn't the Giants being close to the cap. The issue is being close to the cap with such a mediocre roster.
Link - ( New Window )
It must be awesome to be so omniscient in the ways all others will think in future, alternate circumstances.
You realize you just made up a perspective for a group imaginary people, and then got mad it, right?
There are people on this very thread referencing the record of the past few years.
What part of "the entire team stinks and nothing is good" is a mischaracterization of how others feel and continually post about it?
There are people on this very thread referencing the record of the past few years.
What part of "the entire team stinks and nothing is good" is a mischaracterization of how others feel and continually post about it?
Please point us to this group of people who would complain if the Giants were 40M under the cap and who think nothing is good.
This is why a declining number of posters take you seriously.
There's no need to make up some wild boogieman perspective no one holds, and pair it with an (exaggerated, but) defensible perspective.
I asked that exact question two years ago, and warned that more shitty football was coming because the organization wasn't making real changes. And here we are, with more shit every Sunday in the fall.
When is it ok to be critical?
I agree with you. The organization has been shit since 2011 sans one year when the defense stood in its head to propel us into the playoffs.
We lied to ourselves about Eli's ability to perform at a high level OR refused to make the change due to the potential for a fan mutiny.
We can point to decisions made by both Gettleman and Reese over the past 10 years. However, the true culprit here is John Mara. He set us back with the horrible coaching decisions that he made.... and possibly some of his input on the various first round selections (only a hypothesis there).
A lot goes into putting a productive team on the field. I know we had issued with strength and conditioning with the record breaking soft tissue injuries during a stretch. We also had to question our analytics and technology too.
When you combine all of these things with poor player selections, questionable head and assistant coaching selections, poor play calling, preparation and game plans... you end up with a garbage performance on the field.
I do think Joe Judge was the right guy for us. I think he is starting to figure this out and hopefully will have decision making power when it comes to player selections. Now, we need a new offensive coordinator.
I'd prefer Hendrickson over Tomlinson.
Did you notice that most teams in the right quadrants had found the right solution to QB?
Zeitler is a solid player, but with the reduced cap, we need the cap room if we want to resign Leonard Williams and Dalvin Tomlinson.
The are a few teams with a decent amount of cap space.
For example, the Jets may be willing to trade one of their 5th round picks (ironically one from NYG) for Zeitler.
They need to keep Sam Darnold (or new QB) upright and Zeitler also provides veteran leadership for their oline.
The Jets already have a healthy swag of draft pick, losing a 5th round pick won't be a problem.
1. Sign Patriots backup OL Jermaine Eluemunor. He can play both Guard and Tackle.
The Giants hope Peart can start at RT,Eluemunor provides competition and insurance at both tackle and guard.
2. Draft a mid round guard, possibly someone like Ben Cleveland.
There are people on this very thread referencing the record of the past few years.
What part of "the entire team stinks and nothing is good" is a mischaracterization of how others feel and continually post about it?
What part of that is a mischaracterization of the team itself?
Lmao thats the dumbest shit ive ever heard. The giants roster is worse than jets? Jets have MAYBE two foundational pieces.
Im taking the giants roster every day over jets and twice on Sunday even without williams.
The giants have some holes but you are given them way too little of credit. Ifneagles dont tank giants are in playoffs. Idc about division, we are a young team with basically a rookie qb last year.
Quote:
Who has the worst roster in the NFL? Remember Williams and Thomlinson are no longer on the Giants roster. Giants right up against the cap? Jets 82 million under? Jags 85 million under? Bengals 47 million under? I'd rather be them than the Giants.
Lmao thats the dumbest shit ive ever heard. The giants roster is worse than jets? Jets have MAYBE two foundational pieces.
Im taking the giants roster every day over jets and twice on Sunday even without williams.
The giants have some holes but you are given them way too little of credit. Ifneagles dont tank giants are in playoffs. Idc about division, we are a young team with basically a rookie qb last year.
Great...we're better than the Jets.
The bar is set at the earth's core.
Quote:
Interesting. What is his "thing"?
The Giants have a bottom 5 roster and that might be generous since their best defensive player last year probably their best player period, isn't under contract. Another top 5 defensive player last year isn't under contract and the Giants are right against the cap limit with a QB on his rookie deal.
His "thing" like almost everything else surrounding the Giants Front Office sucks.
Abrahms manages the cap. And he's done well in that capacity. If you think the Giants are in poor shape in regards to the cap, you're probably yet another poster who judges cap success by how much money a team is under the cap.
Which means you probably think the more money you get back on taxes is managing your deductions better.
Some folks can't see past the nose on their face. 2021 isn't superb, but we are tops in this area for the next 2-3 years and "they" don't even have us listed in 2024.
Cap space - ( New Window )
You take the hits this year; retain LW and DT so you have a strong DL to build up; and, hope that you really hit with three starters in the first 3 picks!
WR #11 - Waddle
OG 2nd - if we cut Zeitler, we may go with top OL
RB RB/WR - we will go offense the first three round value.
I don't see us picking up more than perhaps one key UFA that costs us, perhaps a pass rusher or even a WR just not one of the top 3 expensive guys. I do like Sammy Watkins as I could see him coming here and being a solid 75-1050-7 type of guy. He has talent.
I think we build this team through the draft. The "KEY" is to retain our own that fit the system AND not miss in the DRAFT, especially the premium first 3 picks.
You take the hits this year; retain LW and DT so you have a strong DL to build up; and, hope that you really hit with three starters in the first 3 picks!
WR #11 - Waddle
OG 2nd - if we cut Zeitler, we may go with top OL
RB RB/WR - we will go offense the first three round value.
I don't see us picking up more than perhaps one key UFA that costs us, perhaps a pass rusher or even a WR just not one of the top 3 expensive guys. I do like Sammy Watkins as I could see him coming here and being a solid 75-1050-7 type of guy. He has talent.
I think we build this team through the draft. The "KEY" is to retain our own that fit the system AND not miss in the DRAFT, especially the premium first 3 picks.
Draft picks will be a crap shoot.
Id take Parsons over Waddle. Waddle size scares me
Quote:
anyone who doesn't fit the future: Solder, Zeitler and a few other veterans.
You take the hits this year; retain LW and DT so you have a strong DL to build up; and, hope that you really hit with three starters in the first 3 picks!
WR #11 - Waddle
OG 2nd - if we cut Zeitler, we may go with top OL
RB RB/WR - we will go offense the first three round value.
I don't see us picking up more than perhaps one key UFA that costs us, perhaps a pass rusher or even a WR just not one of the top 3 expensive guys. I do like Sammy Watkins as I could see him coming here and being a solid 75-1050-7 type of guy. He has talent.
I think we build this team through the draft. The "KEY" is to retain our own that fit the system AND not miss in the DRAFT, especially the premium first 3 picks.
Draft picks will be a crap shoot.
Id take Parsons over Waddle. Waddle size scares me
If we get one big UFA it would have to be a WR as there is more quality there than ER (IMHO).
Bottom line: draft well, please.
Quote:
In comment 15167505 arniefez said:
Quote:
Interesting. What is his "thing"?
The Giants have a bottom 5 roster and that might be generous since their best defensive player last year probably their best player period, isn't under contract. Another top 5 defensive player last year isn't under contract and the Giants are right against the cap limit with a QB on his rookie deal.
His "thing" like almost everything else surrounding the Giants Front Office sucks.
Abrahms manages the cap. And he's done well in that capacity. If you think the Giants are in poor shape in regards to the cap, you're probably yet another poster who judges cap success by how much money a team is under the cap.
Which means you probably think the more money you get back on taxes is managing your deductions better.
Some folks can't see past the nose on their face. 2021 isn't superb, but we are tops in this area for the next 2-3 years and "they" don't even have us listed in 2024.
Cap space - ( New Window )
Some folks - those who know how to do math, that is - understand that you need to conform to this year's cap before 2022 and 2023 matter.
Quote:
to look at.
Teams with the most amount of cap space since you could rollover $$$ - starting in 2011 haven't fared very well.
Less than 20% of the top 5 teams in cap space made the playoffs the following three years. The highest percentage of playoff teams came from those with between $10M and $20M in cap space.
You're treating cap space as though it's a contributing factor to making the playoffs. Isn't it much more likely that teams who are closer to the cap have more talent on their roster than teams who have the most available cap space?
The issue isn't the Giants being close to the cap. The issue is being close to the cap with such a mediocre roster.
For FMIC (although anyone else who'd like to participate is welcome to do so):
Here's a very simple metric for you to play with, since you seem to get stuck on available cap space being some sort of indicator of poor cap management, although I don't know why anyone would ever consider lean contracts to be a detriment:
Divide any team's on-the-books occupied cap space by their victories (regular season AND postseason) from the year prior. See how that shakes out. Let me know if you find any teams who are over/underperforming on the cap relative to their on-field success.
And let us know where the Giants stack up on that score.
Looking forward to your thoughts on this, and curious to see if you'll somehow spin this into a defense of DG/KA.