Bills restructure Tre White; create cap space

[No_Matter_What]

3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Not necessarily.  Bear in mind that Spotrac has the Bills at -3.4M in cap space

That's without the Matakevich restructure, so maybe -2.4M afterwards.

 

This is after Trubisky, Wallace, and Taiwan Jones but without McKenzie

At a guess, they have a couple offers out (I think they may want Dean Marlow and Darron Lee said he had an offer sheet)

McKenzie's cap hit is said to be $1.15.  Call it maybe another $3.45M for all 3 of those guys those guys

 

So $5.8-ish million needed to stay in the "black" on cap with the above

$1.5M for rookies

$7.3-ish needed just for that

 

Restructuring White to free up $7.5M, fundamentally could just be enough to keep us "in the black" on current committments and give us a bit to sign rookies

 

I don't see Ertz in here, nor another guy who costs $5-6M on cap

 

That's not to say the Bills can't make that happen, by re-structuring Dion.  It's just to reiterate what I said yesterday - since the NFL won't allow teams to carry a negative cap, Feliciano's contract and the rest of these guys going through meant someone restructured that Spotrac hadn't caught up with yet.

 

I think math is little better than you present it. There was a talk about Sanders' void year which I don't see on Sportrac.

 

Also, if McKenzies hit is §1.15mill, then it affects cap space for less than 0.5mill. Same goes for other two guys you mention.

 

I might be wrong but this seems too much money for just vet mins. I am not expecting anything big though. We'll see. 

[CaptnCoke11]

30 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:

A little late in the game for that kinda push dont ya think?

Ike who? lol

Boetger (spelling).  He needs to sign his tender before the hit comes off the cap.  He’s 2 million+

[BillsShredder83]

3 minutes ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

Boetger (spelling).  He needs to sign his tender before the hit comes off the cap.  He’s 2 million+

Dunno why i keep forgetting his first name. Was thinkin FA. makes sense

[Big Turk]

18 minutes ago, todd said:

 
could be, but I think Beane sees the value in spreading the cap hit out. Allows him to get paid, but also allows flexibility for the future. We’ve seen so many teams hamstrung from competing by the QB’s contract. One of the reasons the Cheatriots were able to compete for so long is because Brady kept his hit low. 

 

Not with the meteoric rise in the Salary Cap coming within the next 5 years there won't be...

[Freddie's Dead]

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 minutes ago, No_Matter_What said:

I think math is little better than you present it. There was a talk about Sanders' void year which I don't see on Sportrac.

 

Also, if McKenzies hit is §1.15mill, then it affects cap space for less than 0.5mill. Same goes for other two guys you mention.

 

I might be wrong but this seems too much money for just vet mins. I am not expecting anything big though. We'll see. 

 

Good points all, I did not take into account pushing a couple of $0.815M - $0.82M cap hits out of the 51-highest, since that's where we are now, and good point on the Sanders reported "void year" of $1.375M (Overthecap has it, though not quite correctly, one has to do math).  That means signing McKenzie only counts about $0.34M.

 

The fundamental point is: since Spotrac shows us at >$3.4M negative cap before signing McKenzie, that money has to have already come from somewhere.

 

Of course, adding in Sanders void year to Matakevich extension, that's now $2.3M.  If there are a couple other "accounting tricks" in some of the signings or, if (say) AJ Klein also renegotiated his roster bonus into signing bonus for $0.9M....it's possible that there could be $3.8M of space already buried in the contract details of our current signings.  Hmmm.

[eee1776]

19 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

I dunno. I don't do Facebook, Twitter, all that social media. Does that mean it's suspect? It was just a joke, in any event.

By now you know its real.

[Bray Wyatt]

28 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Not necessarily. 

 

Spotrac has the Bills at -$3.4M in cap space

That's without the Matakevich extension, so maybe -2.4M afterwards (a 2 year contract that pays him the same could easily shave $1M off this year's cap)

This is after Trubisky, Wallace, Taiwan Jones, and Hollister signings but without McKenzie

At a guess, they have a couple offers out (I think they may want Dean Marlow and Darron Lee said he had an offer sheet)

McKenzie's cap hit is said to be $1.15.  Call it maybe another $3.4M for McKenzie, plus Marlow and Lee or similar "value" FA pickups at LB and safety.

 

$5.8-ish million needed to stay in the "black" on cap with the above

$1.5M for draft picks

----------------------------------

$7.3-ish needed just for that

 

Restructuring White to free up $7.5M, fundamentally could just be enough to keep us "in the black" on current commitments or maybe 2 more "value" FA pickups, and sign rookies

 

I don't see Ertz in here, nor another guy who costs $5-6M on cap

 

That's not to say the Bills can't make a bigger signing happen, by re-structuring Dion or others.  It's just to reiterate what I said yesterday - since the NFL won't allow teams to carry a negative cap, Feliciano's contract and the rest of these guys going through, meant that someone already restructured that Spotrac hadn't caught up with yet.

 

 

Thought I read that he is getting paid that, but his cap hit is only like 335k or something like that as it knocks someone out of the top 51 and that was the difference

[billsherd]

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

So he doesn't want to be resigned?

[machine gun kelly]

16 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

I must break you!

 

Go for it.  Never go wrong with a rocky quote.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 minutes ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

Thought I read that he is getting paid that, but his cap hit is only like 335k or something like that as it knocks someone out of the top 51 and that was the difference

 

Yes, I missed that.

[Don Otreply]

42 minutes ago, BillsFan1988 said:

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying fire these guys and I know no gm is perfect but that doesn't give him a pass for doubling down on the most expensive Dline in the NFL for minimum results.

 

McBeane has done a great job since they've been with the Bills but that doesn't give them a complete pass from criticism. I'm just very disappointed in the lack of movement on the DLINE . 

 

You can’t have it both ways, our Front office is top notch league wide in player acquisition over the last three years, in fact there was a thread  in the past month ish that showed the rankings of all teams on this, we are the only team that was top three in every category and tops overall. 
 

Folk gotta get over their misguided expectations of perfection, it is just never ever going to happen, that you can bank on that.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

41 minutes ago, No_Matter_What said:

I think your math failed you somehow

that’s bad. 

[BillsFan1988]

1 minute ago, Don Otreply said:

 

You can’t have it both ways, our Front office is top notch league wide in player acquisition over the last three years, in fact there was a thread  in the past month ish that showed the rankings of all teams on this, we are the only team that was top three in every category and tops overall. 
 

Folk gotta get over their misguided expectations of perfection, it is just never ever going to happen, that you can bank on that.

U got to be kidding me expecting they do some reconstruction do the DLINE is not asking for perfection. I can come up with way more if we want to get into perfection for example trading up for Cody Ford instead of taking DK Metcalf but I'm not expecting perfection . What I am expecting is when there's a weakness that needs to be corrected as in our vastly overpaid DLINE then they do something about it. 

[Punching Bag]

1 hour ago, BillsFan1988 said:

Is that a can I see being kicked down the road. Lol. 

 

Anybody play kick the can as a kid?  I did and did a misstep resulting in turning ankle and spraining it.  Kicking the can is dangerous!

[dave mcbride]

34 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

Not with the meteoric rise in the Salary Cap coming within the next 5 years there won't be...

Apparently,  that's not going to happen in 2022 and 2023. Maybe in 2024 though. From Peter King:

 

Three points to make: In 2020, a year when the owners lost about $4 billion due to COVID-related issues, players made 100 percent of their scheduled compensation. NBA players had their pay cut by 25 percent to finish the 2019-20 season; MLB players played a shortened 60-game schedule and made a pro-rated 37 percent of their scheduled pay. And when the total revenue of the league went down by $4 billion, obviously the cap, which is based on current revenues for the upcoming season, would go down accordingly. The league and players reached an agreement to spread the cap losses over three years. So the 2021 cap figure fell from the projected $198 million to $182.5 million, with the caps in 2022 and 2023 absorbing the rest of the lows from the COVID season.

There’s nothing sinister about it. If you take in $4 billion less than projected, it’s going to impact the cap, and instead of taking the hit all in one season and pushing the cap down to $155 million for 2021, the compromise of spreading the losses over three years was reached.

2. I think I won’t be surprised if there’s an element in the 2022 cap that allows teams to use a future year or years as a “bank” to borrow from. Because there’s no way the cap’s going to skyrocket next year, and I doubt in 2023 either. My guess is it goes up $8 million, maybe, next year, and then $12 million in 2023. If I’m right, by 2023 lots of teams that pushed bigger 2021 deals than they could afford will need room desperately.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/03/22/nfl-free-agency-tv-deal-fmia-peter-king/

[Rk_Bills86]

37 minutes ago, todd said:

 
could be, but I think Beane sees the value in spreading the cap hit out. Allows him to get paid, but also allows flexibility for the future. We’ve seen so many teams hamstrung from competing by the QB’s contract. One of the reasons the Cheatriots were able to compete for so long is because Brady kept his hit low. 

 

I should maybe clarify. The thread title is misleading - there was no restructure to Tre's contract - we only exercised an option that was already built in - that spread 7.5 million across later years while removing it from this years cap hit.

 

Back to JA - there is no reason to have any of his next contract value hit this season. He is under his rookie contract - we have the option to grab him for a 5th year at 23 million if we don't get a contract done. While I expect us to use the same option in Dawkins contract to get more cap space if needed (there is a chance we missed the window to do this? not sure if I read that there was actually a set date to decide on exercising the option prior to), it will not be for JA.

 

I understand your view of "Brady did it" for all those years. Let's get a few things out of the way here.

 

1) Beane clearly knows how to structure contracts - we have had 1 truly bad contract in the last 4 years.

2) JA cap hit when he dos get his extension won't be too bad. The cap will go back up in the following years. 

3) Brady is an extreme outlier when it comes to taking less money "for the team" and it has less to do with him and more to do with his situation. How many other players in the league are NOT the one bringing in the majority of the money in their relationship/family. Brady is not the bread winner - it's very easy to say, yeah, i'll take less money on a multi-million contract because my wife makes more than me and due to that I can afford to value winning over financial security for my family. 

4) There are so many ways to spread the cap hit. Worst case we use the Jerry Jones method where the team retains the right to at anytime create a signing bonus for a value and implement it (Dak and others have this - it lets them choose a value and just write it off over 5 years at the whim of the team). There is the revival of the team option bonus - see Tre and Dawkins. There is also the voidable years that where never going to be used except in extreme situations that allows for a less controlled version of the signing bonus rules for cap offsetting.

5) The Mahomes extension that has an absurd amount of yrs and pay on it is a prime example of the type of contract we should look to implement as the size and depth of wiggle room in it is great for bot the player and the team. Both sides know that it is unlikely that Mahomes will play out the entirety of that contract with A) restructures [already happened] and/or B) both just agreeing to a "new" contract years down the line. 

[Big Turk]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

Apparently,  that's not going to happen in 2022 and 2023. Maybe in 2024 though. From Peter King:

 

Three points to make: In 2020, a year when the owners lost about $4 billion due to COVID-related issues, players made 100 percent of their scheduled compensation. NBA players had their pay cut by 25 percent to finish the 2019-20 season; MLB players played a shortened 60-game schedule and made a pro-rated 37 percent of their scheduled pay. And when the total revenue of the league went down by $4 billion, obviously the cap, which is based on current revenues for the upcoming season, would go down accordingly. The league and players reached an agreement to spread the cap losses over three years. So the 2021 cap figure fell from the projected $198 million to $182.5 million, with the caps in 2022 and 2023 absorbing the rest of the lows from the COVID season.

There’s nothing sinister about it. If you take in $4 billion less than projected, it’s going to impact the cap, and instead of taking the hit all in one season and pushing the cap down to $155 million for 2021, the compromise of spreading the losses over three years was reached.

2. I think I won’t be surprised if there’s an element in the 2022 cap that allows teams to use a future year or years as a “bank” to borrow from. Because there’s no way the cap’s going to skyrocket next year, and I doubt in 2023 either. My guess is it goes up $8 million, maybe, next year, and then $12 million in 2023. If I’m right, by 2023 lots of teams that pushed bigger 2021 deals than they could afford will need room desperately.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/03/22/nfl-free-agency-tv-deal-fmia-peter-king/

 

Projected caps are to increase by 20 million, 20 million and 30 million over the next 3 years

[Mango]

1 hour ago, Rk_Bills86 said:

 

JA will get an extension - not a new contract that has any monetary value effect for this season. The earliest this would hit our cap would be next year. 

 

The whole point of extending him now, is spreading that signing bonus across years he doesn't have a huge salary. Mahomes is the most recent example. His bonus money is literally the same for the next 4 or 5 years but he is only making like $900k in salary.

So you are kind of right, extending Josh does not change his base salary. But he would absolutely get a massive signing bonus that would take effect as soon as he signs on the dotted line and spread over the length of the contract. But no QB is signing a long term extension with say a $40M signing bonus and waiting 365 days to get said bonus. If he breaks his leg, tears his ACL, etc. he is toast and loses that money. There is literally no player benefit in doing what you are saying, It would never happen. 

[Rk_Bills86]

2 minutes ago, Mango said:

So you are kind of right, extending Josh does not change his base salary. But he would absolutely get a massive signing bonus that would take effect as soon as he signs on the dotted line and spread over the length of the contract. But no QB is signing a long term extension with say a $40M signing bonus and waiting 365 days to get said bonus. If he breaks his leg, tears his ACL, etc. he is toast and loses that money. There is literally no player benefit in doing what you are saying, It would never happen. 

 

No player cares about a signing bonus - especially when talking about as large of a contract as JA is going to command - the only number that matters of Guaranteed Money. That's it. Now - having a signing bonus is nice, because it's money now, but these aren't people choosing to take a lump sum vs deferred payments on lottery winnings over 30 years. The second Cousin's signed his first Vikings contract, the power of gtd money became king for all superstar players.

 

There are literally no players that would option for a signing bonus over a much larger guaranteed money value because it offers FAR greater protection and overall value. As a matter of fact, why would ANY player that wasn't a far lower tier care about signing bonus.