Mango
-
Posts
8,751 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mango
-
-
31 minutes ago, Beck Water said:
I will just say I am not following your reasoning on this point.
I do know that you understand the cap.
I'm sure that you understand there's no such thing as a "post june 1" designation for a trade as there is for a cut, where the team's obligations for this season void but the cap stays on the books until post- june 1 ( a trade can actually occur on or after June 1 of course, but the team incurs the obligation of all this season's guarantees)
So can you explain what you mean by the statement "Diggs nets us $19M in total cap dollars in 2024 if we cut/trade him after June 1"?
If we cut him today with a post-June-1 designation, Check.
If we trade him after June 1 - that entirely depends upon whether and how much of his then fully-guaranteed $18.5M salary the trade partner takes on OR if he's cut after today, upon whether he has offset language in his contract which precludes "double dipping" and offers us relief to the extent of any salary in a new contract he signs
I'm also puzzled by the "in theory Diggs could give us $24M more dollars if we don't touch the $19M this year".
I think this isn't a way contract impacts on the cap are usually viewed, perhaps for good reason.
The Bills save $19M cutting or trading Diggs post June 1 per both Spotrac and OTC.
I am unsure what the confusion is over the post June 1 trades or stipulations in Diggs contract. In a trade the receiving team picks up his contract. Yes. But there is no “how much they are willing”. The NFL isn’t the NHL, you can’t barter what costs to keep in house and what you don’t.. You either take the contract or you don’t make the trade.
Worth noting that because of Diggs restructure the receiving team can cut Diggs more or less whenever they want for next no zero cap implications. His cap number for the receiving team would be right around 16th in the league among WR. That decent value with almost no commitment.
The $24M I’m talking about is rolling over the $19M. (Assuming they don’t spend it)
-
16 minutes ago, Nephilim17 said:
Hey Mango, my brain hurts doing the math (or is it the hangover?)...
Are you suggesting we roll over the cap savings to 2025 if we cut him June 1? If so, what does that mean for 2024? Do we have to eat dead cap this year? If so, I don't think we have the room to do so without some massive restructures, which many don't want.
So how does that work?
Diggs nets us $19M in totally cap dollars in 2024 if we cut/trade him after June 1.If we don’t spend any of that money in the 2024 season it rolls over to 2025.
His immediate effect on the 2025 cap if we cut/trade him on June 1 is +$5M.
In theory Diggs could give us $24M more dollars if we don’t touch the $19M this year.
Forget the dead cap number. The key is the delta between dead cap and cap hit on the roster.
10 minutes ago, Nephilim17 said:But @Mango brings up the point, I think, that don't just look at dead cap, look at the NET savings of dead cap vs paying his salary.
And I think Mango says that cutting him saves us NET $5 million next year but if we roll over the $19 million in 2024 savings to 2025, that NET savings then is $24 million with Diggs off the roster ($5 million net in 2025 + the rollover of $!9 million savings from 2024 to 2025).
So we would have an extra $24 million next year if he's gone. Mango, did I get that right?
Nailed it!-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, Warriorspikes51 said:
Door #1 - TRADE
Door #2 - Restructure
Door #3 - His fashion line
If Diggs is moved I think it will be post June 1. We get $19M for this season and $5M for 2025. BUT!!! That $19M can be rolled over if we don't sign any expensive vets twisting around out there. A post June 1 trade with minimal 2024 spend would mean we could roll most of that $19M over to 2025 ultimately giving us $25M extra next year. It would go a long way in extending Taron, Rousseau, Brown, and Douglas.
-
7 hours ago, Nephilim17 said:
A post-June 1 trade or release saves $19 million in 2024 according to Spotrac, but hits us in 2025:
2024 Dead Cap: $8,849,000
2024 Cap Savings: $19,005,0002025 Dead Cap: $22,247,000
Kind of but no.
Diggs cap hit on the roster in 2025 is $27M. A post June 1 trade/cut would save us $5M against the cap. Yes he take up $22M not being in the roster. But he’d cost us $27M off of it.
The interesting thing is that if Diggs is a post June 1 move and we sit tight on our roster we would roll that $19M over to 2025. In theory he could add $24M cap dollars next season.
I would not be shocked if Diggs is a post June 1 move to reset the cap. Because he was restructured the Bills have eaten so much of his bonuses that any team trading for him would get the 16th highest paid WR with next to zero cap implications if they want to cut him.
With Rousseau, Douglas, Taron, and Spencer Brown coming do it is a tempting move.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, GoBills808 said:
I thought trading him after May would save $19M against the cap
I thought trading him after May would clear $19M in cap space
You are correct. A June 1 move would clear $19M7 hours ago, Nephilim17 said:I don't see how we can trade him now the. We're $2 million over, Diggs would account for $31 million dead cap and we still need money for other vets and the rookies.
I think there's smoke but no fire.
If we are $2M over the cap and we trade Stef this instant we would only be $5M over the cap.
This has been belabored all offseason. Yes Stefs dead money is $31M. But keeping him on the roster is $28M.
The change in cap isn’t the dead money. The change in cap is the delta between his cap hit on the roster and cap hit off of it. So $3M.
-
26 minutes ago, london_bills said:
I was going to say this. Maybe he's looking for attention
Maybe? Lol.
-
1
-
-
50 minutes ago, mjt328 said:
Isn't it possible for a team to trade for a player, then also agree to absorb the dead-cap hit?
I thought the Browns did something like that a few years back.
No it is not. The cap hit is the cap hit.
The Browns in that example had a ton of space so they took on Brock Osweiler and his dumb contract for a 2nd round pick. But they didn't barter what cap number to take off of the Houston Texans books. His number was his number. Cleveland then immediately cut him loose. They more or less purchased a 2nd round pick.-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Goin Breakdown said:
He thought about it but the thought....wudever
Relax, Diggs is a lot of things but he isn't a Philadelphian. Watch yourself buddy!
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Bray Wyatt said:
Except spelling whatever
Sometimes Diggs goes fishing for controversy, drops something fairly innocuous, but also sort of not, then points at everybody and says "why are you guys always like this".
There is a strong possibility that in the next 24 hours his IG is a picture of him in the Caribbean with the caption "Ready for water*" and somewhere in the comments he says "why does everybody keep making a bid deal about typos. None of you have ever had a typo?"-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
Just now, SCBills said:
It’s not a 1 for 1, but I see the WR room as follows:Diggs (outside)
Samuel (slot)
RD1 or RD2 WR (outside)
Shakir (inside/outside)
We can move all of them around, but if we draft a guy high, I think Shakir becomes a heavy use WR4 rotating in all over the field.
Right but you directly compared Davis to Samuel and their roles are not comparable. Signing Samuel does not upgrade Davis. I guess I am not only responding to you, but so much of this thread is talking about Samuel upgrading Davis that I am sort of responding to everybody.
QuoteDiggs = Diggs
Shakir = Shakir
Samuel > Davis
Hollins > Harty
Worth noting that Harty was our starting slot receiver for most of the season. Shakir took the job towards the end/in the playoffs. Samuel is certainly an upgrade to Harty. Shakir has been outplaying the guys in front of him for some time now.
I am all for adding more talent, and this signing is definitely that, but the constant veteran leapfrogging of some of our draft picks is a little weird. I am pretty high on Shakir and think he may actually be better than Samuel given full time starter duties/reps.-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, DrDawkinstein said:
For real.
The retirement might be the headline, but the real story is what is going on behind the scenes.
The restructure itself didnt make sense considering he was going into the last year of his contract. So where are you even kicking that can?
But then that would mean the Rams knowingly handed him an extra $14M on his way out. I guess that can be justified for a HoF player who stuck with the team his entire career. But damn. I have some questions for Les Snead.
Totally spitballing, but maybe they did do him a solid on this one?
It is kind of a restructure, but kind of like Douglas they basically just added a void year. Curious if maybe they wanted AD to be able to announce his own retirement so they restructured then he announced? Or maybe there is some benefit to the order of operations? Like maybe it was advantageous to the cap to restructure then retire rather than have a retirement settlement?
-
18 minutes ago, Mango said:
I googled that to double check and the very first thing that came up was this article from Sports Illustrated. It was written/released 1 hour ago. Talk about a guy getting it wrong. Sheesh.
So weird. What went on here? I believe most contracts have restructure language pre-built in so it isn't something they likely needed to discuss with him.
There have been some rumored trade speculation around Donald the last few years. Nothing saying he has requested one, but it has definitely been a topic on most sports shows. Curious if he wanted one last go at a ring this year and the restructure guaranteed that he could not be moved so he called it quits.
Trouble wrapping my head around this. Something must have happened internally.
-
23 minutes ago, SCBills said:
This is such an indictment of last years room, but I think you’re correct.Diggs = Diggs
Shakir = Shakir
Samuel > Davis
Hollins > Harty
Diggs is a year older, but Shakir entering Year 3 should be coming into his own. Gabe Davis is a solid WR, but not what we need .. his skillset is just far too inconsistent and limited in the passing game. Hollins isn’t anything amazing, but he is a big target down the field who is capable of making a few catches per game if you need him.
We’re an early round WR investment away from having a room with the potential to exceed the Diggs, Beasley, Sanders, Davis year.
Samuel doesn't play on the outside. He is a slot guy through and through. Comparing him to Davis doesn't make any sense. Two very different roles in the offense.
You would want to compare him to Shakir in last years offense.
All that said everybody knows the plan is to get a WR to play on the outside in Davis spot. But if there are some growing pains Shakir is a pretty versatile guy who absolutely can play in both positions effectively. I think he has some Robert Woods in him as well.
I like the Samuel signing, but we also seem to get these mid-tier FA to block our draft picks at times. Samuel and Shakir seem to be an example of that. Shakir is in a good spot to take on more responsibility in the offense and we just signed his replacement in the slot and the entire world knows that we are going to take an outside guy early.
We need more WR talent. I get it. But also we blocked playing time for Shakir and Hodgins (who both flashed when given reps) with Curtis Samuel, Deonte Harty, and Isaiah McKenzie (to an extent).
-
2
-
-
47 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:
They just restructured him too
I googled that to double check and the very first thing that came up was this article from Sports Illustrated. It was written/released 1 hour ago. Talk about a guy getting it wrong. Sheesh.
QuoteBack to the plus side, the restructure essentially confirms that Donald will indeed be back for 2024
-
16 minutes ago, SCBills said:
“Chiefs never give Mahomes any WR help”
Tyreek Hill
MVS
RD2 Pick
Trade for a former RD1 Pick
Juju
RD2 Pick
Hollywood Brown
All while having an All-Time Tight EndNot all of that has worked out, but this narrative has.. and will always be.. hilarious
It’s worth noting that they commit to a lot of interchangeable small speedy inside guys. Even without Tyreek they don’t miss much. They never have anybody with size on the outside with much of any production.
This is partially why I thought the Davis criticism was over blown. Not that we don’t need more weapons. But we have seen a number of offenses built around the TE and crisp route running. Diggs/Kincaide is a good enough pairing going forward. We need role players outside of 1 or 2 super stars. Davis is tremendously valuable as a role player. Big strong and speedy on the outside, with enough physicality to be a great run blocker.
-
20 hours ago, Draconator said:
Dane is a quality corner. He has certainly had a good cast around him and that helps. But he has had long stretches where he is absolutely lights out and top end QBR, passer rating, yards, TD's etc when targeted. Like real life CB1 numbers. He has also struggled a bit here and there. $7M AAV is reasonable. I am way higher on Dane than I ever was on Wallace.
We have done well with CB depth as of late. Losing Dane will hurt with how many DB's McD likes on the field.-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, Draconator said:
Reverse pipeline
It is the only way the universe will let him play here long term. We will trade a 6th for him by training camp.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Don Otreply said:
Knock knock knock….
who is it?
who is it, who?
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, CaliBills said:
He just wants to get setup in Miami to retire in that area because that is where his ole lady wanted to be.
Get set up? Because that is where she wanted to be? That is where they have both lived for years. Fairly certain his family just came up on game day and we’re not here 24/7 September-December. -
27 minutes ago, 78thealltimegreat said:
His new deal says he’ll make 59.4 million dollars this year 12 more then Josh so yeh Josh is underpaid
You originally said Dak made $60M per. I said no he didn't. The top end of his cap number is $60M.
Now it is "Dak is making $60M this year so Josh is underpaid".
I don't know what you are trying to argue here. Josh needs an extension to help level out his cap number. Teams don't want to commit $60M in cap dollars to a single player. Dak's stupid cap hit has nothing to do with Josh Allen.
-
Josh Allen is elite. Stef is elite (But may or may not be declining.)
I think we have less elite individuals but we do have some elite groups. I think the TE and LB rooms are elite even if neither would have an individual who would be considered "elite" (maybe Milano). I think Poyer and Hyde were an elite pairing but not elite individuals.-
1
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, 78thealltimegreat said:
That’s still a bargain Dak Prescott is about to get 60 mill a year from Dallas
No he isn't. He has one year where his cap hit is $60M.
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/dak-prescott-19089/
-
2 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:
I think there is an extension coming in the next 365 days. No way the Bills take a $56M hit next year. And that is pre-restructure. I would not be shocked if one comes before TC starts.
-
1
-
2
-
-
14 minutes ago, The Wiz said:
He's legal in Canada.... I think.
Edmunds just named valedictorian at Sweet Home HS. Here’s to the graduating class of 2024!-
4
-
Bills Cap Status - Approx $4.25 under cap 4/03/2024 (added roster change summary)
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Looking ahead we started this offseason predicting the teams 2025 cap situation would be around $25M under. As of this AM on Spotrac our 2025 cap number is already $10M OVER.
Moving on from Von next year helps. They can restructure Allen again. Plus some roll over will make up for that.
But I cannot help but think the regime is tempted to move on from Diggs as a post June 1 cut/trade to free up $19M with the possibility of rolling all or most of it over into 2025. Then they get another $5M in relief the following year.
If they feel they can get some rookie production in camp from their first pick, Kalil can flash on the outside to fill Davis' role, and Samuel in the slot it may give them the cajones to roll into the offseason with that group.