Jump to content

Bills restructure Diggs contract; create 7.8. Mill in cap space

YoloinOhio
 Share

Recommended Posts

scuba guy Veteran

scuba guy

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

 

What about the prevailing tax rate?  Maybe it's better to get it now before NYS leg raises taxes on ultra wealthy.  So maybe the Bills did him a bit of a favor in the long run here.  

The tax rate for all pros is actually less than the 45percent for 7 figures people and nys person income tax I believe is the 2nd highest to CA in the country 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 394
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Blokestradamus
Blokestradamus

You have to make moves like this when you pay franchise long snapper money.

Brennan Huff
Brennan Huff

Clear up some space to trade for JJ Watt

YoloinOhio
YoloinOhio

Posted Images

3rdand12 Hall of Famer

3rdand12

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, ngbills said:

Personally I see better ways to spend the money. But at the same time - covering Diggs and a healthy Jones? With Beasley, Davis and Sanders...

and Davis and McKenzie and that new RB. I am sure Moss look improved in all areas after a proper offseason

 and Devin will improve his game. Both surely are working on the passing game as well.


we might already be loaded at catching options.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, BarleyNY said:

I get that such a situation can look bad, but it’s not bad from a cap perspective as the two year hit is the same.  You might be pointing at a team using the extra space to overextend itself and that would definitely create problems.  The potential other issue I saw on the Steelers years ago.  They’ve been restructuring a lot of players like this for years.  Usually it’s worked out fine, but they have had players underperform (due to getting paid and phoning it in, getting off the juice, getting old, etc.) whom they couldn’t cut right away.

 

In general as long as a team is responsible it’s good to kick cap down to future years.  One benefit is that future cap hits are discounted by the percentage of the increase in cap.  Obviously 2020 threw a wrench in this, but for example if the cap rose a steady 5% per year then signing bonus hits would be discounted by 5% every year.  A $4M SB on a 4 year deal would show $1M each season, but due to the 5% annual cap increase they would be equivalent to $1M, $950k, $902.5k and $857.4K.  So you can see why teams love to utilize this to their advantage. 


yup- only gets you in trouble when you do it with a guy that doesn’t work out to sign another flop. 
 

but signing two bad players is a problem regardless.

 

restructures make the player happy and add flexibility for the GM. It’s win win, generally speaking 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boxcar RFA

Boxcar

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, The Dean said:

 

Actually, I thought you might have been claiming solid knowledge on Diggs' reasons/motivation for agreeing to the extension*. That or you were just being a cynic who likes to introduce some dark clouds into the bit of sunshine this news brought.

 

But I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Since you didn't claim to have any special friendship,  or business association with Diggs, how would you have any idea what he considered or his motivations? Obviously helping the team make a nice signing this year helps the team. Why might that not be a factor in Diggs decision?

 

*It was mentioned some restructures MIGHT not require a players consent. Even if that were the case, I doubt the Biils would just impose it without dealing with Diggs first. 

It could have been a factor. At the end of the day, though, I was just pushing back against the narrative that he was making a sacrifice for the team. He didn't make a sacrifice, I don't expect him to, but I'm not going to go out of my way to praise him for essentially accepting most of his yearly salary all at once rather than in weekly installments.

 

The fact that they are making cap room is exciting, I don't think I was taking away from that at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
97bills Veteran

97bills

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Canadian Bills Fan said:

 

 

I know but I think of Tyreek Hill who said "once Im signed, Im signed" and that he wouldnt restructure 

 

Nice to not have that problem 

Wait till those Feet slow down he might look at it different

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JMF2006 Veteran

JMF2006

Posted
Posted

I cannot see adding another big $$$ receiver especially an old one that plays more than 11 games a year in domes or warm weather.

 

The Bills are loaded at WR.

 

CB2 and TE or a QB killer DE are what they need right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Putin Veteran

Putin

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, BillsDude said:

Is anyone following Pegula's plane? Please update, so I can determine our next Bill. Thanks.

Bills mafia close to the airports  in ATL & Philly will need hourly updates on this thread, 

thank you 

Edited by Putin
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thurman#1 Hall of Famer

Thurman#1

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, teef said:

interesting.  can this have anything to do with a new josh contract?

 

 

Best guess so far.

 

I'd expect a few cheap contracts a million or two on a CB or two maybe, a TE maybe. Money for signing the one or two draftees we haven't signed yet, and then hopefully signing Josh and Tremaine late in the season if things go well, and keeping an injury replacement fund.

Edited by Thurman#1
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillsDude Rookie

BillsDude

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, Putin said:

Bills mafia close to the airports  in ATL & Philly will need hourly updates on this thread, 

thank you 

 

Great! Mafia, Get er done. Congratulate our newest Bills with the loudest ovation. Throw in some Bills gifts for them too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jletha RFA

jletha

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, 78thealltimegreat said:

Agreed and supposedly Hodgins looks really good in mini camp 

Hodgins looking good in mini-camp means absolutely nothing. If Jones is available for a decent price you get him. This is silly logic

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buffalo03 Veteran

Buffalo03

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, 78thealltimegreat said:

He took a paycut to begin with and then you’d have to resign Julio and that will be very expensive 

Not necessarily resign him but restructure. This is the year. If you're gonna go for it, do it now. Josh's contract is really gonna kick in next season

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thurman#1 Hall of Famer

Thurman#1

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

No need to be torn the cap is skyrocketing within a few years, plenty of money to go around...potentially will be up over $100 million in 5 years

 

 

Need. Yes it'll skyrocket in a few years. But till that happens in 2023, we're going to be cutting it close.

 

We are already close to the cap next year, and moves like this one will make it even closer next year, though perhaps he won't spend a fairly large part of that money.

 

Next year, now that we made the Diggs move we have $3.9M left above the cap. If he doesn't spend some, that part will roll over and that'll help. 

 

This stuff matters.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jletha RFA

jletha

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, 78thealltimegreat said:

You don’t have the money for Julio even after the restructure 🙄

the cap is very nebulous. Just restructure, move money around. Im not saying itll happen, just that having Hodgins and Sanders on the team looking "good in camp" should NEVER stop you from adding Julio Jones in an all-in year like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thurman#1 Hall of Famer

Thurman#1

Posted
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

Cut Addison, then we do. Not sure why he's still on this team anyway

 

 

'Cuz he's top four and probably top two among the DEs, at least that's how it looks right now. And also because virtually all his salary this year is guaranteed, and cutting him would save us about $0.17M.

10 minutes ago, jletha said:

the cap is very nebulous. Just restructure, move money around. Im not saying itll happen, just that having Hodgins and Sanders on the team looking "good in camp" should NEVER stop you from adding Julio Jones in an all-in year like this.

 

 

Beane - thank goodness - doesn't believe in "all-in" years. He believes in long-term competitiveness. 

 

9 hours ago, NoSaint said:

 

restructures make the player happy and add flexibility for the GM. It’s win win, generally speaking 

 

 

 

They make the player happy, they add flexibility for the GM THIS YEAR, and take away flexibility from the GM NEXT YEAR. Worth remembering that. There's a cost.

Edited by Thurman#1
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BarleyNY All Pro

BarleyNY

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

They make the player happy, they add flexibility for the GM THIS YEAR, and take away flexibility from the GM NEXT YEAR. Worth remembering that. There's a cost.

It’s worth noting that restructuring only takes away flexibility next season if the additional space created this season is spent this season.  What isn’t spent rolls over and that washes.  Usually at least some is spent like that, but sometimes space is just created  for emergency spending in the event of injuries, etc.  In the case of Diggs restructuring the Bills need some of that space to get through the season.  That includes some emergency fund money which will roll over if unused. 

 

Also sometimes spending this year on things like retaining players long term can keep a team from having to sign free agents in the future.  That can be a net cap gain, depending on the contracts and FA market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thurman#1 Hall of Famer

Thurman#1

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

It’s worth noting that restructuring only takes away flexibility next season if the additional space created this season is spent this season.  What isn’t spent rolls over and that washes.  Usually at least some is spent like that, but sometimes space is just created  for emergency spending in the event of injuries, etc.  In the case of Diggs restructuring the Bills need some of that space to get through the season.  That includes some emergency fund money which will roll over if unused. 

 

Also sometimes spending this year on things like retaining players long term can keep a team from having to sign free agents in the future.  That can be a net cap gain, depending on the contracts and FA market.

 

 

Yes, that's right. If they create $10M in space this year and only spend $5M, they'll have the other $5M rolled over to next year.

 

I don't think they got the money because they need it next year, though it's an interesting idea. That would mean borrowing money from next year and the year after to not spend this year so it's available next year in 2022. It'd make sense in as much as they're borrowing around $4M from 2023, but that's pretty small potatoes to be worrying about so far in advance. They need at least some of it this year, even if it's only as an emergency fund this year, as you say. 

 

IMO, though, they'll be bringing in a couple of low- to lower-mid-level FAs at spots like CB and TE.

 

Agreed with your last paragraph too.

 

Edited by Thurman#1
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slippery Rubber Mats RFA

Slippery Rubber Mats

Posted
Posted (edited)

The way I look at this is: what couldn't they do at the old number (3+mil)?

 

They need to pay Rousseuueoeu ~2. That would leave them with a million plus, so basically no flexibility at all after that.

 

Now they'll have around 9 mil to work with. I could see a vet CB around 5-6mil plus rooks. Leaving them 3+ to do business with after that.

 

Ertz seems like he could fit in instead of the CB with some cash left on the table to pay Greg and have about the same amount left over as before.

 

 

Edited by Tom Donahoe, GM
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

'Cuz he's top four and probably top two among the DEs, at least that's how it looks right now. And also because virtually all his salary this year is guaranteed, and cutting him would save us about $0.17M.

 

 

Beane - thank goodness - doesn't believe in "all-in" years. He believes in long-term competitiveness. 

 

 

 

They make the player happy, they add flexibility for the GM THIS YEAR, and take away flexibility from the GM NEXT YEAR. Worth remembering that. There's a cost.


nope. If you don’t use it you can just carry the unspent cap over. How they use the funds May limit flexibility but the signature itself 100% only creates more flexibility.

 

put another way, if I tell you that you can have 20 up front to spend how you wish or 4 dollars a week for 5 weeks, you blowing the $20 on worthless objects wouldn’t mean you had less flexibility by choosing it.

 

beane just dropped the 20 in his checking account and has the freedom to pursue a $20 opportunity now or save it for later.

Edited by NoSaint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
simpleman RFA

simpleman

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, Virgil said:

This isn’t true.  Bonuses are considered supplemental income and are taxed at a higher rate.  Some companies may not code it the right way, which is why you haven’t seen it.  
 

If you go to the IRS site, they break it down more.  
 

I used to get bonuses all the time and the tax rate was closer to 40-42%

Don't know what you are trying to prove. The article you quoted talks about withholding rates. Again, withholding is not a final tax.  At the end of the year the actual tax bill is calculated and your taxes are paid based on that final calculation. The bonus income is not taxed at a higher rate, it is just withheld at different rate. Your only extra loss because of the higher withholding is any loss of interest paid between the time of the withholding, and your filing of the years return and any tax refund issued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Big Turk Hall of Famer

Big Turk

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Need. Yes it'll skyrocket in a few years. But till that happens in 2023, we're going to be cutting it close.

 

We are already close to the cap next year, and moves like this one will make it even closer next year, though perhaps he won't spend a fairly large part of that money.

 

Next year, now that we made the Diggs move we have $3.9M left above the cap. If he doesn't spend some, that part will roll over and that'll help. 

 

This stuff matters.

 

There are plenty of moves that can be made prior to that...Allen and Edmunds will likely get long term extensions that are very cap friendly for the first 2 years which would likely save us at least $25 million off the cap next year.

 

We are all playing checkers while Beane and Co. are playing chess.

Edited by Big Turk
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...