Off-season: Expected and Surprise Cuts

[ngbills]

1 hour ago, Rc2catch said:

Kroft had 14 targets for the season. 
Why is that? 
Is he never open? 
Are they only using Knox as the receiving tight end? 
Kroft is quite big would he not be useful in the red zone? 
Why do you care how much money he makes? 
Keeping him does not hinder any other signings the team wants to make, nor does it hinder any draft prospect they may want to draft. 
They are not signing all the top free agents they don’t need to clear more money off the books do they? What hurt does it cause to take Kroft to camp and possibly into the regular season? They signed Kroft to a nice contract in case they didn’t get much talent for the position, he was hurt and Knox kind of flashed some serious mismatch talent. I could see the argument Knox made him expendable and no longer needed, but then why would you sign another big money free agent tight end to hinder knoxs development? 

 

2 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

Kroft was plagued by injury most of the season IIRC, a "high ankle sprain" I think, which seems to be an injury that takes a while to recover from.   He only played in 11 games, starting 3.  If he can stay healthy and contribute like so many TEs are doing these days, $6 million would be cheap, so I think that the Bills should give him at through TC to prove he can earn his pay, even if they were to sign somebody like Hooper. 

 

Why are you -- and others -- so worried about Terry Pegula's wallet that you want to cut players when they don't need to be cut just to save relatively few dollars?  There's not some unwritten law somewhere that says that the Bills are only allowed to have 1 good starting-caliber WR or TE or RB, but that seems to be what many Bills fans assume. You cannot build a perennial playoff team with real Super Bowl aspirations by surrounding a few quality players with bottom feeder talent, and good/decent talent costs more than poor talent.  I'm sure the DeBartolo/York or Hunt families aren't quibbling about their profit margins right now.

If your going after Hooper or Henry then you are moving on from Kroft. You dont allocate your salary with over $20M to TE's.

 

If you believe in Know then what is left for Kroft? Know makes Kroft expendable.

 

My view is you need to upgrade from Know and Kroft with a Hooper or Henry. Knox can still have a significant role along with a more legit weapon at TE.

 

Money paid to a player impacts what other players can be brought in. I dont care about the actual money the Pegulas spend or make. Its about the construction of the roster of the Bills. I am lobbying to save to spend more. Not save so the Pegulas can buy another jet or whatever. Not sure where anything I am saying leads one to believe I want bottom level talent. I would say keeping Kroft and Smith over going after Hooper is more along the bottom feeder mentality. 

 

[Reed83HOF]

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001098424/article/falcons-trudging-along-in-austin-hooper-negotiations

 

"The reality of right now is we are trudging along," Falcons general manager Thomas Dimitroff said Tuesday, per the team's website. "After the Super Bowl week, we'll continue to see how we're moving forward. At this point, there's no updates on Austin."

 

 

Jesse James received $22.6 million over four years and $10.5 million guaranteed at signing from Detroit, and Jared Cook signed a two-year deal in New Orleans with an average annual value of $7.5 million in 2019. Given his youth and production, Hooper should see more than that.

 

Atlanta could choose to place an estimated $11 million franchise tag on Hooper, but that seems unlikely. The highest-paid tight end in 2020 is currently slated to be Jimmy Graham in Green Bay ($10M).

 

It is an easy choice to move on from Kroft. With most of our signings last offseason, we structured the contracts so easy to get out of and this is one where we should.

[Mark Long Beach]

I honestly don't really know how good Hooper is.  He can catch, but can he block?  I don't really want a slot receiver disguised as a TE.

 

But I do know that I'd LOVE to have Knox my TE2 paired with a fantastic TE1.   If we had two very good two way TEs?  Man... That's one way to thrive.

 

If one is available for only 3m more expensive than Kroft?  SIGN ME UP!

[Hapless Bills Fan]

30 minutes ago, Mark Long Beach said:

Except Long ISN'T paid peanuts.   His contract is ~$4.2 mil per year.   He was definitely an overpay for insurance.   We did a couple overpays this offseason to make sure that we could field a full and competent team.   And it worked.   

 

Look at how Long’s contract is structured. (I’m having trouble pasting the link in, Overthecap or Spotrac Spencer Long)

His cap number is $3.2M in 2020.  He’s due a $300k team option before the start of the league year, but there is very little guaranteed.   He’s only $1.5M in salary (guaranteed at the start of the new year) and the rest is per-game roster bonuses and incentives.  He’s got less than $700k in amortized signing bonus, so we can bring him into camp and it only costs us $1M to part ways if he doesn’t make the grade during camp.

 

It’s actually a pretty creative way to give a vested vet (whose salary will guarantee if he’s on the roster Day 1) a good but incentivized contract, in exchange for an early signing.  

 

30 minutes ago, Mark Long Beach said:

We were desperately short of NFL talent in a few areas and "overpaid" a couple times to fix it. 

 

Long was an early signee and offered us significant flexibility as an experienced C and G.

Similarly we overpaid for Morse (largest C contract in NFL) who's good not not phenomenal.  

 

In general, liking your points that we overpaid some guys and brought in multiple ‘shots on goal’ to shore up weak areas like OL and TE and ensure competition. 

Little nit, in terms of largest contract, Morse is now something like 6th.  He’s the 2nd highest paid center in AAV and guaranteed $$.  Again, the way it’s structured given the big guarantees is pretty decent though; we can get out of it after this year for the amortized signing bonus (not insubstantial, but $5.5M moderate for the 3rd year of a $44.5M contract 

 

I like it too.

 

 

 

[Mark Long Beach]

6 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Look at how Long’s contract is structured. (I’m having trouble pasting the link in, Overthecap or Spotrac Spencer Long)

His cap number is $3.2M in 2020.  He’s due a $300k team option before the start of the league year, but there is very little guaranteed.   He’s only $1.5M in salary (guaranteed at the start of the new year) and the rest is per-game roster bonuses and incentives.  He’s got less than $700k in amortized signing bonus, so we can bring him into camp and it only costs us $1M to part ways if he doesn’t make the grade during camp.

 

It’s actually a pretty creative way to give a vested vet (whose salary will guarantee if he’s on the roster Day 1) a good but incentivized contract, in exchange for an early signing.  

 

 

Thanks for the clarification on Long's contract.   I knew we had an out, but it's even better than I remember.   But he's still not cheap to KEEP through the year.  I'm all for keeping him through camp to see his value to the team.

 

Quote

In general, liking your points that we overpaid some guys and brought in multiple ‘shots on goal’ to shore up weak areas like OL and TE and ensure competition. 

Little nit, in terms of largest contract, Morse is now something like 6th.  He’s the 2nd highest paid center in AAV and guaranteed $$.  Again, the way it’s structured given the big guarantees is pretty decent though; we can get out of it after this year for the amortized signing bonus (not insubstantial, but $5.5M moderate for the 3rd year of a $44.5M contract 

 

I like it too.

 

?

[ColoradoBills]

4 minutes ago, Mark Long Beach said:

 

Thanks for the clarification on Long's contract.   I knew we had an out, but it's even better than I remember.   But he's still not cheap to KEEP through the year.  I'm all for keeping him through camp to see his value to the team.

 

 

?

 

I see Long going to camp.  IF it looks like his need is diminished due to other players I can see his contract easily traded for a pick.

To me it's a win win to keep him till then.

[Mark Long Beach]

28 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001098424/article/falcons-trudging-along-in-austin-hooper-negotiations

 

"The reality of right now is we are trudging along," Falcons general manager Thomas Dimitroff said Tuesday, per the team's website. "After the Super Bowl week, we'll continue to see how we're moving forward. At this point, there's no updates on Austin."

 

 

Jesse James received $22.6 million over four years and $10.5 million guaranteed at signing from Detroit, and Jared Cook signed a two-year deal in New Orleans with an average annual value of $7.5 million in 2019. Given his youth and production, Hooper should see more than that.

 

Atlanta could choose to place an estimated $11 million franchise tag on Hooper, but that seems unlikely. The highest-paid tight end in 2020 is currently slated to be Jimmy Graham in Green Bay ($10M).

 

It is an easy choice to move on from Kroft. With most of our signings last offseason, we structured the contracts so easy to get out of and this is one where we should.

 

Thanks for the link on Hooper.  

 

I am all for having two top end TE's!   I want a great two-way TE though, not a slot receiver in disguise.  I think that's what we need to make a great and versatile ground and pound game.

 

But top $ free agency acquisitions are risky.  Also, they are not inline with the best practices of McBean & Co.   They've stated that they'd prefer to draft and resign the best of their own.  Since they are still a young franchise, I think they would have to be REALLY sold on this guy (or any other top $ guy).  They're still working on building and establishing a culture and set of best practices.  That doesn't work if you're regularly breaking the rules.

 

 

 

 

[Reed83HOF]

25 minutes ago, Mark Long Beach said:

 

Thanks for the link on Hooper.  

 

I am all for having two top end TE's!   I want a great two-way TE though, not a slot receiver in disguise.  I think that's what we need to make a great and versatile ground and pound game.

 

But top $ free agency acquisitions are risky.  Also, they are not inline with the best practices of McBean & Co.   They've stated that they'd prefer to draft and resign the best of their own.  Since they are still a young franchise, I think they would have to be REALLY sold on this guy (or any other top $ guy).  They're still working on building and establishing a culture and set of best practices.  That doesn't work if you're regularly breaking the rules.

 

 

 

 

Austin Hooper career stats

 

Austin Hooper 2019 stats compared to other TEs

 

Edit: Knox was ranked #32

 

Sweeney was #43

Kroft was #78

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by Reed83HOF

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:

All fine and dandy. Except what happens if hooper and Henry aren’t available?  Or don’t want to sign here? Then you’ve cut Kroft for nothing and just made more depth issues possibly. 
I have zero cares if he plays here or not, my issue is with fans constantly crying about money players make especially in situations like this where Krofts salary does not impact anything. They can swing for hooper and if he signs they can cut Kroft or someone at a later date. There’s 90 million in cap. You don’t need to cut anyone until preseason. Roster bonuses etc etc sure they may choose to make some cuts but it doesn’t make sense to gamble on signing free agents (especially the biggest names at their position) to replace them. Like counting your chickens before they hatch. 

 

Kroft’s contract is structured to make a later date (OTAs or training camp) expensive for the Bills.  He would escalate from being a $1.6M dead cap hit (up until 3/22) to being a $4.35M dead cap hit.  You can see the purpose from the player’s POV.  If the team is going to move on, the player wants to be on the market poised for the 2nd tier of FA signings, not left to wait until just before the season when other team’s cap $$ are largely allocated.  That’s the....5th day of the new league year I think.

 

We have the chance to pursue a FA TE in the early days of FA and then make logical decisions from there.  But in Kroft’s case, just understand he is a significant impact to postpone a roster decision.

[ColoradoBills]

8 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:

All fine and dandy. Except what happens if hooper and Henry aren’t available?  Or don’t want to sign here? Then you’ve cut Kroft for nothing and just made more depth issues possibly.
I have zero cares if he plays here or not, my issue is with fans constantly crying about money players make especially in situations like this where Krofts salary does not impact anything. They can swing for hooper and if he signs they can cut Kroft or someone at a later date. There’s 90 million in cap. You don’t need to cut anyone until preseason. Roster bonuses etc etc sure they may choose to make some cuts but it doesn’t make sense to gamble on signing free agents (especially the biggest names at their position) to replace them. Like counting your chickens before they hatch. 

 

IF Beane wants to pursue one of them he has about 5 days to get a deal in place and then he could cut Kroft before the guarantees set in.

[Motor26]

49 minutes ago, Mark Long Beach said:

 

Thanks for the link on Hooper.  

 

I am all for having two top end TE's!   I want a great two-way TE though, not a slot receiver in disguise.  I think that's what we need to make a great and versatile ground and pound game.

 

But top $ free agency acquisitions are risky.  Also, they are not inline with the best practices of McBean & Co.   They've stated that they'd prefer to draft and resign the best of their own.  Since they are still a young franchise, I think they would have to be REALLY sold on this guy (or any other top $ guy).  They're still working on building and establishing a culture and set of best practices.  That doesn't work if you're regularly breaking the rules.

 

 

 

 

 

They have 90 million in cap space. They went 10-6 last year. Some of the players they have drafted do not need to be resigned, and upgrades can be made in free agency. 

[Mark Long Beach]

3 minutes ago, Motor26 said:

 

They have 90 million in cap space. They went 10-6 last year. Some of the players they have drafted do not need to be resigned, and upgrades can be made in free agency. 

For sure!    But spending top dollar on free agents isn't their style.  I think they'll do it, but it's not their nature.  

 

We've got 5 Days if we want a new TE before making a decision on cutting Kroft.  It gets much more expensive after that to release him.

[ngbills]

1 hour ago, Mark Long Beach said:

 

Thanks for the link on Hooper.  

 

I am all for having two top end TE's!   I want a great two-way TE though, not a slot receiver in disguise.  I think that's what we need to make a great and versatile ground and pound game.

 

But top $ free agency acquisitions are risky.  Also, they are not inline with the best practices of McBean & Co.   They've stated that they'd prefer to draft and resign the best of their own.  Since they are still a young franchise, I think they would have to be REALLY sold on this guy (or any other top $ guy).  They're still working on building and establishing a culture and set of best practices.  That doesn't work if you're regularly breaking the rules.

 

 

 

 

 

36 minutes ago, Motor26 said:

 

They have 90 million in cap space. They went 10-6 last year. Some of the players they have drafted do not need to be resigned, and upgrades can be made in free agency. 

 

32 minutes ago, Mark Long Beach said:

For sure!    But spending top dollar on free agents isn't their style.  I think they'll do it, but it's not their nature.  

 

We've got 5 Days if we want a new TE before making a decision on cutting Kroft.  It gets much more expensive after that to release him.

I am not liking the the focus on the resigning or extending our own. I know its just talk but all the we have so many guys coming up on contracts comes across as a cop out on using the $90M in cap space they have. What is the point of creating all that cap space if its only used to resign our own guys? Yes you hvae some players you need to lock up but that statement only applies if your team is good enough. We have a ton of upgrading that is still needed. Keeping our own does not solve that problem. 

[GreggTX]

On 1/18/2020 at 3:04 AM, ngbills said:

Expected:

Trent Murphy ($8.95 cap hit / $1.75M dead cap)

Spencer Long ($4.1M cap hit / $700k dead cap)

 

Surprise:

Star Lotulelei ($10.1M cap hit / $7.8M dead cap)

Tyler Kroft ($6.4M cap hit / $1.6M dead cap)

Lee Smith ($3.25M cap hit / $1M dead cap)

Steven Hauschka ($3M cap hit / $1.25M dead cap)

Pat Dimcarco ($2.35M cap hit / $500k dead cap)

Andre Roberts ($2M cap hit / $500k dead cap)

TJ Yeldon ($1.9M cap hit / $250K dead cap)

 

Lotulelei isn't going anywhere with that $7.8 million dead cap. Lee Smith isn't going anywhere either. He was signed as a blocking TE and he continues to be just that at a high level. People just don't like him because he doesn't catch a lot of passes. Why cut Dimarco? Are we going to draft a FB? He's adequate. Roberts isn't going anywhere...period. Hauschka only leaves if we draft a rookie kicker that blows him away in preseason -- very unlikely. That said, he'll get some competition this Summer.

Edited January 24, 2020 by GreggTX

[Thurman#1]

13 hours ago, ngbills said:

 

 

I am not liking the the focus on the resigning or extending our own. I know its just talk but all the we have so many guys coming up on contracts comes across as a cop out on using the $90M in cap space they have. What is the point of creating all that cap space if its only used to resign our own guys? Yes you hvae some players you need to lock up but that statement only applies if your team is good enough. We have a ton of upgrading that is still needed. Keeping our own does not solve that problem. 

 

 

 

You act like bringing in new guys is the only purpose of a cap. It's a very videogame-reminiscent focus on change and keeping things moving. More fun.

 

But not what has brought about NFL success.

 

They've made clear what their goals are. Not to get good as soon as possible. Not to make big splashes. Not to churn contracts and certainly not to spend all their money. Their goal is to be a team that consistently competes for championships. Consistently. So you look at the teams that do that, teams like the Steelers, the Pats, the Pack, the Ravens and one or two others. What is their approach? They aren't the teams that make big splash signings. They aren't the ones that spend all their cap space as soon as they can. They're financially conservative, and they all share those same two or three core beliefs:

 

- build through the draft, supplement with mid-level and low-level FAs

- prioritize signing your own guys ... you already know they fit and you give continuity a huge boost

- maybe don't completely rule out splash signings, but if you do them do them infrequently. Look at those teams, how many make a splash signing more often than every five or six years?

 

That's how those teams operate. It's industry best practice. And it's what our FO have said is their philosophy, again and again and again.

 

Root for a different approach if you want, but you're spitting into the wind.

Edited January 24, 2020 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

On 1/22/2020 at 10:00 AM, artmalibu said:

Cutting Star makes on sence this year 7.8 dead to save 2.2.  Some people are acting like he cant play.  If he could be replaced for 2.2 great, but I would bet it would take 5 plus to replace him.  2021 it could become a serious conversation with a 5 million savings. 

 

 

Agreed that cutting Star makes no sense this year, financially or on the field. But you wouldn't even save $2.2 mill. Star's dead cap is $7.8 but they would only cut $7.675M from the cap ($6.425M in salary plus $1M [combination of roster bonus and Per Game Active Bonus] plus $250K workout bonus). Cutting Star would cost them $125K this year.

 

And if he's still on the team in mid-March, he gets the $500K roster bonus then and it costs them $625K in sum, instead of $125K to cut him.

 

Would make zero sense unless you replaced him with someone as good or better, and doing so would mean costing more money.

 

The OP posted two figures for each guy, cap hit and dead cap. But cap hit isn't what you use if you're figuring the impact on the cap to cut a guy.

[Thurman#1]

On 1/23/2020 at 8:18 AM, ngbills said:

 

You dont need to spend $6M on a guy that will catch 10 balls all season.

 

 

 

You're calculating all of this wrong, for all of these guys.

 

If you want to know how much cap relief/charge it will be to cut a guy you DON'T subtract dead money from cap space. That's entirely misleading.

 

You subtract dead money from the sum total of all they will pay him in cash that year. That's usually salary plus roster bonus plus workout bonus and any other bonuses ... but NOT the amortized portion of the signing bonus. That already counts as part of the dead cap.

 

Kroft's actual total saved would be around $5.1 mill saved, not $6 mill.

 

Lotulelei's total saved would ... wait ... nothing would be saved. You have them saving $2.3 mill when it would actually cost them around $125K, unless he's still on the roster till the league year opens when he receives his roster bonus and in that case it would cost them $625K.

[Lurker]

22 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

Kroft's actual total saved would be around $5.1 mill

 

That's enough for me in a heartbeat if if helps them snag Hooper.  Come up with an additional $5 million some place else and we'd have one of the best TE rooms in the AFC.   

 

As this playoff season has shown, teams with mutiple good/great TE's are where its at now--Ravens, Titans, 49ers and Chiefs.     The WR help can come in the draft.    But fix the TE hole now and the Bills go into 2020 as a legit AFC contender, certainly in the division and even in the conference...

[SoTier]

17 hours ago, ngbills said:

 

If your going after Hooper or Henry then you are moving on from Kroft. You dont allocate your salary with over $20M to TE's.

 

If you believe in Know then what is left for Kroft? Know makes Kroft expendable.

 

My view is you need to upgrade from Know and Kroft with a Hooper or Henry. Knox can still have a significant role along with a more legit weapon at TE.

 

Money paid to a player impacts what other players can be brought in. I dont care about the actual money the Pegulas spend or make. Its about the construction of the roster of the Bills. I am lobbying to save to spend more. Not save so the Pegulas can buy another jet or whatever. Not sure where anything I am saying leads one to believe I want bottom level talent. I would say keeping Kroft and Smith over going after Hooper is more along the bottom feeder mentality. 

 

 

You are missing the point that Rc2catch and I are advocating that the Bills shouldn't get rid of Kroft just to clear cap space and/or current salary without having somebody better already signed.   Teams have to be at/under the cap when the season starts, not during preseason.

• The Bills have plenty of cap space and don't seem to be likely to pursue many high priced FAs.  I think that they may give out 1 expensive contract to 1 key player with the rest of their signings being much more modest just as in 2019. 
• Targeting a particular FA doesn't mean that a team lands that player. 
• Just because a rookie played well in his first season doesn't mean that he will continue to improve.  Many good looking rookies disappear after their initial season.
• Moreover, if the Bills really "believe in Knox", then why pursue another, much more expensive, TE in FA?  It might be wiser for the Bills to go with Knox and Kroft and look to upgrade other positions where they have a real need like WR and RB.

 

 

[SoTier]

2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

You act like bringing in new guys is the only purpose of a cap. It's a very videogame-reminiscent focus on change and keeping things moving. More fun.

 

But not what has brought about NFL success.

 

They've made clear what their goals are. Not to get good as soon as possible. Not to make big splashes. Not to churn contracts and certainly not to spend all their money. Their goal is to be a team that consistently competes for championships. Consistently. So you look at the teams that do that, teams like the Steelers, the Pats, the Pack, the Ravens and one or two others. What is their approach? They aren't the teams that make big splash signings. They aren't the ones that spend all their cap space as soon as they can. They're financially conservative, and they all share those same two or three core beliefs:

 

- build through the draft, supplement with mid-level and low-level FAs

- prioritize signing your own guys ... you already know they fit and you give continuity a huge boost

- maybe don't completely rule out splash signings, but if you do them do them infrequently. Look at those teams, how many make a splash signing more often than every five or six years?

 

That's how those teams operate. It's industry best practice. And it's what our FO have said is their philosophy, again and again and again.

 

Root for a different approach if you want, but you're spitting into the wind.

 

Totally agree.  The biggest reason for the Bills failures during the first 16 years of the 21st century was because they did not keep the good young players they developed.  It significantly impacted the draft because they too frequently used their first and second round draft picks to fill the holes they created by either trading/not re-signing their best young veterans.

 

For myself, I'd like to see the Bills add a quality WR in FA because they need one immediately -- they still need to determine if Allen truly is a franchise QB, and giving him better targets is the best way to do that -- and the draft is always risky.   After that, I think that they'd probably do much better upgrading the middle and bottom of the roster with FAs rather than sinking most of their cap space into a couple of big names.