2013 Up-to-Date Cap Space

[King Carls 5 Year Plan]

Monomach, where is the Chiefs cap space if they cut Cassel and Tyson Jackson? i know all of Cassels guaranteed money is already done. my guess is Jackson will renegotiate for a much lower amount (just like last year). for him, a bird in the hand is better than the FA conctract he would receive from any other team.

[49ersfan_87]

According to an NFL source, Brooks scheduled 2013 base salary of $4.3 million was lowered to $2.7 million because he did not meet certain requirements. His salary cap figure falls from $6.65 million to $5.05 million. Even with the money saved from Brooks' deal, the 49ers are currently bumped up against the projected 2013 cap of approximately $121 million.

http://www.csnbayarea.com/blog/matt-...tes-16-million

Does this change the number you have for the 49ers in any way?

[Monomach]

Originally Posted by King Carls 5 Year Plan

Monomach, where is the Chiefs cap space if they cut Cassel and Tyson Jackson? i know all of Cassels guaranteed money is already done. my guess is Jackson will renegotiate for a much lower amount (just like last year). for him, a bird in the hand is better than the FA conctract he would receive from any other team.

Dunno. Having trouble figuring out whether Cassel restructured to convert base salary into a bonus at some point or just has the weirdest contract structure in the NFL.

Originally Posted by 49ersfan_87

http://www.csnbayarea.com/blog/matt-...tes-16-million

Does this change the number you have for the 49ers in any way?

No, that news broke two weeks ago. Dunno why there's a round of reports on it today.

[Azhais]

New York Jets cut Calvin Pace, Eric Smith, Jason Smith, Bart Scott, and waived Josh Baker

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...th-jason-smith

edit: Waived baker, not cut.

[Monomach]

Originally Posted by Azhais

New York Jets cut Calvin Pace, Eric Smith, Jason Smith, Bart Scott, and waived Josh Baker

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...th-jason-smith

edit: Waived baker, not cut.

Huge number of starters leaving the team via cuts and free agency, still no money to get quality replacements. It's a rough time to be a Jets fan.

Let the rebuild begin. See you in 2015, Jets!

[fenikz]

How has Calvin Pace been the last few seasons

[Monomach]

Originally Posted by fenikz

How has Calvin Pace been the last few seasons

PFF has had him as one of the worst pass rushers in the league over that time.

[bigbluedefense]

Originally Posted by Monomach

Huge number of starters leaving the team via cuts and free agency, still no money to get quality replacements. It's a rough time to be a Jets fan.

Let the rebuild begin. See you in 2015, Jets!

It's not like they were quality starters. You can replace them with just about anyone and get the same production.

[scottyboy]

Originally Posted by fenikz

How has Calvin Pace been the last few seasons

really, really bad. like total nonfactor

[Monomach]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

It's not like they were quality starters. You can replace them with just about anyone and get the same production.

Right, but the same production isn't going to get them anywhere. That's why I specified "quality" and 2015.

TE and both guards are gonna be tough to re-sign, too.

Prediction of the next big Jets move: one of Santonio Holmes, Cromartie, or Revis gone.

[bigbluedefense]

If you look at it though, those were all defensive players for the most part, and their defense was actually pretty good last year. In fact, I predict their replacements will all be upgrades and an already good defense will get better bc of these cuts (assuming they keep Revis and/or Cro).

Offensively...they will suck no matter what talent they have as long as Sanchez is their qb. There's talent on that offense. The problem is they have a dog **** qb taking snaps under center.

[Monomach]

20th in Rushing Yards per Attempt Allowed
30th in First Downs Allowed by Defensive Penalty
23rd in INTs + 12th in FR

Really, they were only good at half of what a defense does. They can defend the pass (downright beastly at it!), but they can't stop the run, create turnovers, or prevent penalties. That (and Sanchez not keeping the offense on the field) resulted in them being 20th in points allowed.

It's gonna take more than replacing those bad D starters with league-minimum replacements (about all they can afford) and draftees this offseason to get them more than 6-7 wins.

[bigbluedefense]

Originally Posted by Monomach

20th in Rushing Yards per Attempt Allowed
30th in First Downs Allowed by Defensive Penalty
23rd in INTs + 12th in FR

Really, they were only good at half of what a defense does. They can defend the pass (downright beastly at it!), but they can't stop the run, create turnovers, or prevent penalties. That (and Sanchez not keeping the offense on the field) resulted in them being 20th in points allowed.

It's gonna take more than replacing those bad D starters with league-minimum replacements (about all they can afford) and draftees this offseason to get them more than 6-7 wins.

I don't know, it's hard to judge that defense statistically when their offense was so terribly anemic that the defense just crapped out eventually. I can't speak for statistics, but I remember several games where the defense did a damn good job keeping them in the game up to a certain point, then just breaking down bc the offense just gave them no help at all.

Granted, that won't change any next year bc Sanchez is still qb, but the point remains, I think that defense is pretty good considering their circumstances.

[49ersfan_87]

Just saw this article on PFT. Dunno if you accounted for it.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...f-122-million/

A source with knowledge of the situation tells PFT that the team-by-team spending limit will exceed $122 million in 2013.

While a move to $122 million represents an increase of only $1.4 million per team, every dollar helps, given the number of teams in cap trouble.

[Monomach]

Originally Posted by 49ersfan_87

Just saw this article on PFT. Dunno if you accounted for it.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...f-122-million/

Not until we something more than "a source" lol. Right now this list accounts for a 121.5M salary Cap.

[dan77733]

Stupid question but im going to ask it anyway since I want to make sure that im understanding it correctly.

For the 49ers, they have $3.5m in cap room right now but once the new league year starts and their UFA's are no longer on their team, they get that amount of cap room added to the $3.5m, correct?

Reason im asking is because they have 11 players who'll be UFA's on March 12th for a total of $22.898m. Does this amount of $22.898m get added to their current cap room of $3.5m for a total of $26.398m in cap room?

[OzTitan]

As players become FAs they will stop counting against a team's cap so yes a team with $X M cap room right now can change rapidly as soon as the new season starts and contracts are wiped off.

It's a bit more complicated that just figuring out how much they all counted towards the current cap figure and subtracting that though. You have to remember players under contract will likely count more against the cap than they did this season because most contracts increase in cap burden as time goes on. This could quite easily negate any gain in cap by losing players, but teams typically manage this so it isn't a huge shock when it happens.

[Monomach]

Originally Posted by dan77733

Stupid question but im going to ask it anyway since I want to make sure that im understanding it correctly.

For the 49ers, they have $3.5m in cap room right now but once the new league year starts and their UFA's are no longer on their team, they get that amount of cap room added to the $3.5m, correct?

Reason im asking is because they have 11 players who'll be UFA's on March 12th for a total of $22.898m. Does this amount of $22.898m get added to their current cap room of $3.5m for a total of $26.398m in cap room?

Nope. UFAs are already removed from these numbers. This is the 2013 cap number, not 2012. Anything paid to anyone for the 2012 league year is not here. So...no. The 9ers won't be gaining any cap room without getting rid of people who aren't already on their way out due to expiring contracts.

[OzTitan]

Originally Posted by Monomach

Nope. UFAs are already removed from these numbers. This is the 2013 cap number, not 2012. Anything paid to anyone for the 2012 league year is not here. So...no. The 9ers won't be gaining any cap room without getting rid of people who aren't already on their way out due to expiring contracts.

Hrm I always thought the numbers were for right now but thinking about it that wouldn't make much sense as no team should be above the cap right now, so you're right - these are projected numbers for next season so they already account for expired contracts being freed up.

[dan77733]

Originally Posted by Monomach

Nope. UFAs are already removed from these numbers. This is the 2013 cap number, not 2012. Anything paid to anyone for the 2012 league year is not here. So...no. The 9ers won't be gaining any cap room without getting rid of people who aren't already on their way out due to expiring contracts.

So basically, the $3.5m in cap room already takes into account the players who are going to be UFA's on March 12th. Well, this sucks. Time to release some veterans Baalke/Harbaugh.

[49ersfan_87]

Originally Posted by dan77733

So basically, the $3.5m in cap room already takes into account the players who are going to be UFA's on March 12th. Well, this sucks. Time to release some veterans Baalke/Harbaugh.

If they want to trade Alex they can't get rid of his salary until March 12, 4 PM ET. And i'm positive they won't release him until he's been on the trade market for a while.

Which means they can't franchise or even sign Goldson, unless they release/re-structure other veterans. Like releasing Akers, Haralson (about 5-6 total for both i think). Or re-structuring Carlos Rogers, or whoever else they want to. Or they could extend someone and lower their current cap number (Crabtree, Davis, Iupati possibilities). But i think their current cap numbers aren't as big as a future extension.

Good news is once Alex is gone its another 7.5 off the books. If you add that to an approximate 5-6 mil, on top of the 3.5, thats about 16-17 in cap space.

[dan77733]

Originally Posted by 49ersfan_87

If they want to trade Alex they can't get rid of his salary until March 12, 4 PM ET. And i'm positive they won't release him until he's been on the trade market for a while.

Which means they can't franchise or even sign Goldson, unless they release/re-structure other veterans. Like releasing Akers, Haralson (about 5-6 total for both i think). Or re-structuring Carlos Rogers, or whoever else they want to. Or they could extend someone and lower their current cap number (Crabtree, Davis, Iupati possibilities). But i think their current cap numbers aren't as big as a future extension.

Good news is once Alex is gone its another 7.5 off the books. If you add that to an approximate 5-6 mil, on top of the 3.5, thats about 16-17 in cap space.

To me, trying to trade Smith is a bad move. I'll be shocked if any team offers anything higher than a 4th round draft pick and unless other moves are made, thats not worth the possibility of losing Goldson, Walker and to a lesser extent, others.

I think that Baalke is being greedy. It's not like Smith is going to get them a first rounder and with all the draft picks they already have, its not worth the risk of losing Goldson just for a mid round draft pick. Baalke should release Smith, get the extra cap room and franchise Goldson if they cant extend him.

I understand that its a business but considering everything that Smith as gone through as a 49er and how respectful he's been, the team should at the very least, return that respect by releasing him and letting him go wherever he wants.

[P-L]

I know there are rules to prevent heavy back loading of contracts, but is there anything that would stop a team from heavily front loading a contract? Hypothetically, could a team like Cleveland/Cincinnati/Indianapolis sign a top free agent and put a ton of money into the first year to save cap room in future years?

[killxswitch]

Originally Posted by P-L

I know there are rules to prevent heavy back loading of contracts, but is there anything that would stop a team from heavily front loading a contract? Hypothetically, could a team like Cleveland/Cincinnati/Indianapolis sign a top free agent and put a ton of money into the first year to save cap room in future years?

I don't see why not. I'm not so sure it'd be a good idea for the team to do that.

[LonghornsLegend]

Originally Posted by P-L

I know there are rules to prevent heavy back loading of contracts, but is there anything that would stop a team from heavily front loading a contract? Hypothetically, could a team like Cleveland/Cincinnati/Indianapolis sign a top free agent and put a ton of money into the first year to save cap room in future years?

I know I am not a cap expert or anything, but my thinking was the guaranteed money is typically going to be the same on those types of deals anyway which is the primary factor. Then teams typically have small cap numbers the first few years then it balloons up in the later years of the deal which most players never see.


If I'm a GM, that's how I would prefer it. I wouldn't want a guy sucking up 10+ million in his first few years after I had to give up the guaranteed money. I'd be fine with the small cap hit early on then once their play drops off and the cap number escalates then it's time to restructure or cut.