Final in depth Salary Cap update by the Cover 1 crew

[Billl]

1 hour ago, Aussie Joe said:

im assuming the only time you watched Douglas play this year for the Bills was when he was playing injured against the Chiefs in the playoffs?
 

He played great during the season … he will be the first person they extend ..

I’ve seen him plenty. More importantly, I’ve seen enough CBs to know that age 30 is when you replace them rather than sign them to new contracts.  If he were a star, that would be one thing.  I’d still disagree with it, but I would understand.  Douglas isn’t a star, though.  He was a solid player who was the second best CB on the Packers who were happy to get a top 100 pick for him and his $9 million cap hit in 2024.  Guys like him grow on trees.  There’s no reason to give up a third round pick for him and then give him a new contract when you’ve literally got a 22 year old CB who you just traded up in the first round to get 18 months ago sitting on the bench.

[GASabresIUFan]

8 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

Maybe at age 27 Bates will be a better option than Morse at age 32.   That's often how it works.   But for $8M difference if it's close, it's enough.   I also like Anderson's potential(another OT kicked inside like Morse and Bates) and I even think maybe McGovern might be a better center option longer term if the Bills decide to go with a more physical left guard in 2025.   They aren't bereft of options at center like they are at RT behind Brown, for instance.

Maybe, but do you think that Beane, with so much to do to fix the Dline, Safety and WR, is going to make a huge change to the one area of his team that he doesn't need to alter? 

[Aussie Joe]

Just now, GASabresIUFan said:

I'm hoping he slips to the 80's.  I'm hoping the Bills trade down in the first to pick up an extra 3rd.  With that extra 3rd, and if we get lucky, Van Pran will be sitting there for us to take with the acquired pick.

 

https://www.drafttek.com/nfl-trade-value-chart.asp

 

It will take two trades to get into the 80s.  

1  - Buffalo trade 28 & 206 to Ari for 35 & 90

2 - Buffalo trade 90 & 162 to Cleveland for 85 & 228

 

Yes I can see that as a possibility…although Van Pran could be a lot of teams second C  , so it wouldn’t surprise if he goes even before 60…

 

We both know the Bills need a long term C preferably on a rookie deal sooner rather than later…

 

But I have WR, DE and DT higher  up the needs list in 2024 …

 

If you want to bring a guy in to learn a year behind Morse/ Bates for a year , then that’s a Day 3 luxury 

 

If you want to spend a Top 80 pick, then it should be on a player with at least some path to being a year 1 starter… 

[Aussie Joe]

1 minute ago, Billl said:

I’ve seen him plenty. More importantly, I’ve seen enough CBs to know that age 30 is when you replace them rather than sign them to new contracts.  If he were a star, that would be one thing.  I’d still disagree with it, but I would understand.  Douglas isn’t a star, though.  He was a solid player who was the second best CB on the Packers who were happy to get a top 100 pick for him and his $9 million cap hit in 2024.  Guys like him grow on trees.  There’s no reason to give up a third round pick for him and then give him a new contract when you’ve literally got a 22 year old CB who you just traded up in the first round to get 18 months ago sitting on the bench.

If he was a star he would be getting a lot more than $8m a year…

 

Even at 30 years old, he is going to be the best CB on the roster going into the new season .. He was arguably one of their Top 5 players the second half of last season after he arrived … i would love for CB1 to be their No 1 pick instead … but you gotta live in reality …

[GASabresIUFan]

11 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

Yes I can see that as a possibility…although Van Pran could be a lot of teams second C  , so it wouldn’t surprise if he goes even before 60…

 

We both know the Bills need a long term C preferably on a rookie deal sooner rather than later…

 

But I have WR, DE and DT higher  up the needs list in 2024 …

 

If you want to bring a guy in to learn a year behind Morse/ Bates for a year , then that’s a Day 3 luxury 

 

If you want to spend a Top 80 pick, then it should be on a player with at least some path to being a year 1 starter… 

I think the needs at DT and Safety are going to be lessened by free agency.  I don't think Beane wants to head into the season with a rookie at D Jones' slot or in Hyde's slot, but you never know.  

 

The only rookie starter I see for the Bills next season is at WR2 unless a draft pick shines in camp at S or DT and supplants the signed FA.  From my standpoint, getting an Edge, DT, C, OT, and or S all could (should?) be early picks, but come after the WR2 in level of necessity.  Getting the vets as starters for a year or two in FA allows Beane the luxury of picking the BPA from those 5 positions instead of simply drafting for need.

[Aussie Joe]

5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFan said:

I think the needs at DT and Safety are going to be lessened by free agency.  I don't think Beane wants to head into the season with a rookie at D Jones' slot or in Hyde's slot, but you never know.  

 

The only rookie starter I see for the Bills next season is at WR2 unless a draft pick shines in camp at S or DT and supplants the signed FA.  From my standpoint, getting an Edge, DT, C, OT, and or S all could (should?) be early picks, but come after the WR2 in level of necessity.  Getting the vets as starters for a year or two in FA allows Beane the luxury of picking the BPA from those 5 positions instead of simply drafting for need.

Lessened by guys on 1 year deals maybe … but eventually they gotta get WR, DT and DE in the draft … they got three guys signed there at the moment on the  D Line …

 

Im not worried about S enough to be spending a Top 100 pick there

Edited February 17 by Aussie Joe

[GASabresIUFan]

21 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

Im not worried about S enough to be spending a Top 100 pick there

Really?  The only 2 on the roster are the aging (and slowing) Poyer and the resurrected Hamlin.  We need two safeties at a minimum.  A FA starter for a year or two and at least one from this draft to either supplant Poyer or the FA by 2025.  There 4 very talented safeties in this draft who will go in the top 75 in Bullock, Bullard, Kinchens, and Nubin.  The Bills need to grab one of them if they can.  

[Aussie Joe]

Just now, GASabresIUFan said:

Really?  The only 2 on the roster are the aging (and slowing) Poyer and the resurrected Hamlin.  We need two safeties at a minimum.  A FA starter for a year or two and at least one from this draft to either supplant Poyer or the FA by 2025.  There 4 very talented safeties in this draft who will go in the top 75 in Bullock, Bullard, Kinchens, and Nubin.  The Bills need to grab one of them if they can.  

This is the same argument I just made about the D line …we know they got several needs elsewhere as well and only two picks in the Top 75 … they can’t use those two picks everywhere … I put WR DE and DT over  Safety to utilise those picks 

[BADOLBILZ]

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFan said:

Maybe, but do you think that Beane, with so much to do to fix the Dline, Safety and WR, is going to make a huge change to the one area of his team that he doesn't need to alter? 

 

Beane's tendency has been to try to retain EVERYONE.  He once even offered and gave Star Lotulelei and Vernon Butler pay cuts after they'd screwed him with poor effort in prior seasons.   He's been a sucker for pay cuts.   Which I think mostly just disincentive players to buy-in.   So that is the regard where I agree that I'm not certain he will move on from guys like Morse and White.

 

But I don't think going from Morse to Ryan Bates is a "huge" change.   Bates best position was long viewed as center and they paid him starting money in FA and he probably would have been the starting left guard last season had Torrence not fallen to their spot in round 2.   Not like they don't have a promising solution in place to replace the pretty average Morse(who was probably their worst or second worst starting OL last season).

 

And they need the cap space to address those other lesser stocked positions you mentioned.    Which is the larger point.

Edited February 17 by BADOLBILZ

[GASabresIUFan]

1 minute ago, BADOLBILZ said:

And they need the cap space to address those other lesser stocked positions you mentioned.    Which is the larger point.

You can accomplish the cap savings and keep both Morse and Bates by extending Morse with a void year or two and by restructuring Bates's deal.  Those two moves could save about 5-6 in cap and Beane retains his starter and his depth. 

 

As I said previously, I'd extend Morse, trade Bates, and draft Van Pran.

[Dr. Who]

47 minutes ago, GASabresIUFan said:

Really?  The only 2 on the roster are the aging (and slowing) Poyer and the resurrected Hamlin.  We need two safeties at a minimum.  A FA starter for a year or two and at least one from this draft to either supplant Poyer or the FA by 2025.  There 4 very talented safeties in this draft who will go in the top 75 in Bullock, Bullard, Kinchens, and Nubin.  The Bills need to grab one of them if they can.  

You're forgetting Cole Bishop. If they go WR and DT in the first two rounds, they could all be gone by #99. 

[BADOLBILZ]

4 minutes ago, GASabresIUFan said:

You can accomplish the cap savings and keep both Morse and Bates by extending Morse with a void year or two and by restructuring Bates's deal.  Those two moves could save about 5-6 in cap and Beane retains his starter and his depth. 

 

As I said previously, I'd extend Morse, trade Bates, and draft Van Pran.

 

 

I think the Cover 1 people have given some fans the impression that re-structuring contracts doesn't ALWAYS come at the expense of the future cap by implying that the Bills cap situation is just naturally going to get better.   

 

The Bills will have to work and make some tough decisions to make it better.    They weren't very forthright about that.   Thompsett knows better but as anyone who saw that video knows,  they are a very sentimental group.       

 

I'm not interested in guaranteeing Morse base salary by distributing it over void years and missing that opportunity to save $8M asap and move on.............Nor am I interested in doing extensions for Morse or Bates.   Ideally neither is on the roster by 2025 so I don't want to have another $10M+ in dead cap tied up in them in 2025.

 

I'm done with running it back with all of these guys that were 6-5 at midseason 2 of the past 3 seasons and looked tired in the playoffs in each of the past 3.

 

Time for a re-tool.   And a good draft year to have playing time opportunities available instead of all being blocked by over-priced vets.

 

[Dr. Who]

3 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I think the Cover 1 people have given some fans the impression that re-structuring contracts doesn't ALWAYS come at the expense of the future cap by implying that the Bills cap situation is just naturally going to get better.   

 

The Bills will have to work and make some tough decisions to make it better.    They weren't very forthright about that.   Thompsett knows better but as anyone who saw that video knows,  they are a very sentimental group.       

 

I'm not interested in guaranteeing Morse base salary by distributing it over void years and missing that opportunity to save $8M asap and move on.............Nor am I interested in doing extensions for Morse or Bates.   Ideally neither is on the roster by 2025 so I don't want to have another $10M+ in dead cap tied up in them in 2025.

 

I'm done with running it back with all of these guys that were 6-5 at midseason 2 of the past 3 seasons and looked tired in the playoffs in each of the past 3.

 

Time for a re-tool.   And a good draft year to have playing time opportunities available instead of all being blocked by over-priced vets.

 

I think Alec Anderson ought to be a real consideration at C.

[Coach Tuesday]

12 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I think the Cover 1 people have given some fans the impression that re-structuring contracts doesn't ALWAYS come at the expense of the future cap by implying that the Bills cap situation is just naturally going to get better.   

 

The Bills will have to work and make some tough decisions to make it better.    They weren't very forthright about that.   Thompsett knows better but as anyone who saw that video knows,  they are a very sentimental group.       

 

I'm not interested in guaranteeing Morse base salary by distributing it over void years and missing that opportunity to save $8M asap and move on.............Nor am I interested in doing extensions for Morse or Bates.   Ideally neither is on the roster by 2025 so I don't want to have another $10M+ in dead cap tied up in them in 2025.

 

I'm done with running it back with all of these guys that were 6-5 at midseason 2 of the past 3 seasons and looked tired in the playoffs in each of the past 3.

 

Time for a re-tool.   And a good draft year to have playing time opportunities available instead of all being blocked by over-priced vets.

 

I keep thinking about how fun it would be to find like 3 young WRs, rookies or younger FAs, who can come in as a group and develop together with Josh for the next 3-5 years.  Sort of like what the Packers have done.  Find some cheap, fast talent on offense and let them grow together.

[billsfan_34]

19 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

Your last sentence is an interesting point.  I go back and forth on this.  On the one hand, in 2021 after Tre was injured, we won 4 games with Levi Wallace and Dane Jackson playing CB and the two we lost (the wind tunnel NE game and the OT loss to Tampa) were arguably more gaps in run D than coverage.  One could make an argument that McD's defense has been able to plug-n-play CBs and not miss a beat (Dane Jackson, Christian Benford, etc). 

Some people have said that we run a very CB friendly scheme.

 

But then I have to ask whether having a 2020/early 2021 level Tre White would have made a difference in the 13 second game or in this year's playoff loss to KC where we were starting a hampered Rasul Douglas and Dane Jackson at CB.  L'Jairus Sneed has become a true shutdown corner and McDuffie is also high grade and that clearly made a difference in all KC's playoff games this season and the Championship.  So clearly at some point and against the best teams, the quality of the DBs does make a difference.

 

To your first point: after an Achilles tear, it's not Tre's mind I'm so worried about.  It's objectively a hard injury to return from.  One study says 57% RTP, with a decrease in performance noted especially for defensive players.  That was 2010 to 2016, so medicine and rehab do improve all the time and hopefully it's better now.  Apparently there are all sorts of objective metrics that decrease (the downward force the athlete can exert to jump or plant or change direction for example.

 

 

Thanks for the kind words, I'm glad you found it useful.

 

It would not shock me if the Bills cut Tre because they assess him as not being able to return at a high level.  It would not shock me if they kept him, either.

I think there's a significant chance of either, and only the people working with Tre on his rehab really know.

For sure! This one is tough to call 😊

23 hours ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

 

Never happen.  Players typically take injury settlements when they were placed on IR, but have now fully recovered and can then get money from the team giving them the settlement, and then basically double dip and sign with another team.  In White's case there is effectively no IR list in the off season and he wouldn't be ready to play right now anyway.  For those reasons, can't see the injury settlement coming into play here unless he's still not ready to go in Sept, but was healthy by say November and won't happen till then either.

Intersting - seems we have fewer options 😢

[ALF]

Bills have 22 FA and still -$51.8M cap

[SCBills]

Rasul Douglas X timeline is… interesting. 

[billsfan_34]

On 2/16/2024 at 9:12 PM, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

Because until he can pass a physical he can't be cut.  So come March 11th or whatever the exact day is, all his bonuses kick in and the Bills are on the hook for that, but they also can't cut him as I stated unless he can a pass a physical which is not likely.  So why would White agree to a pay cut unless he's somehow rewarded? 

 

The Bills can cut him later on, but by then they would have had to have cut a couple other players to get under the cap in March.  And for White he then got the money from the Bills in March and can then sign later on with another team.

 

So put all these things together, I'd say White can dictate terms pretty well.

Paycut not cut…two different things. 

[GunnerBill]

I just watched some of the video and they say a lot of things that are not actually correct. I question whether they all understand the cap as well as they give the impression they do. 

 

For example the Diggs conversation. They say "well if we traded him after June 1 this year sure it opens up $19m in 2024 space but it eats up $22m of our $31m of current cap space for 2025. WRONG. The $31m already accounts for $9m of what would be the $22m total dead money because that is guaranteed money that accounts on the cap in 2025 whatever happens. The additonal $13m would accelerate to the 2025 cap if we traded him post 1 June this year. I don't think the difference affects the decision around whether you trade him or not particularly. But it is just an example of where these guys speak with authority and fans are taking them as gospel and not everything they are saying is accurate. There were a couple of others in the 25 mins I listened to but that one stood out. They consistently make the mistake of thinking all dead cap money is new money you are adding onto cap hits and some of that money is already baked in. 

[PBF81]

On 2/16/2024 at 3:55 PM, julian said:

Run his contract decisions by his wife ? lol my goodness 

 

Tells his agent to call his wife.

 

Who knows, maybe his agent is his wife.  

 

 

[Dr. Who]

2 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Tells his agent to call his wife.

 

Who knows, maybe his agent is his wife.  

 

 

Ultimately, that is probably often the case.

[SoonerBillsFan]

On 2/16/2024 at 2:28 PM, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Those guys think Diggs will still be a 100 catch WR. Did they not watch how Brady deployed him? 
 

 

I would rather have 1 80+ catch guy and 4 60+ catch guys.  

[John from Riverside]

19 hours ago, Billl said:

I’ve seen him plenty. More importantly, I’ve seen enough CBs to know that age 30 is when you replace them rather than sign them to new contracts.  If he were a star, that would be one thing.  I’d still disagree with it, but I would understand.  Douglas isn’t a star, though.  He was a solid player who was the second best CB on the Packers who were happy to get a top 100 pick for him and his $9 million cap hit in 2024.  Guys like him grow on trees.  There’s no reason to give up a third round pick for him and then give him a new contract when you’ve literally got a 22 year old CB who you just traded up in the first round to get 18 months ago sitting on the bench.

Moronic absolutely moronic
 

Douglas was playing fantastic

[BuffaL0L0k0]

On 2/16/2024 at 2:34 PM, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I would like to have Daquan Jones back but I think he probably signs with the Chicago Bears right away in free agency.  

 

I was told by a reliable source that he packed up his entire household in Buffalo after the season and moved everything to Nashville............he could have waited on that if he thought he might have to stay in Buffalo.       

 

 

Maybe DQJ only needed a warm place in between winter ad training camp in 716 raea code...?

[No_Matter_What]

21 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I think the Cover 1 people have given some fans the impression that re-structuring contracts doesn't ALWAYS come at the expense of the future cap by implying that the Bills cap situation is just naturally going to get better.   

 

The Bills will have to work and make some tough decisions to make it better.    They weren't very forthright about that.   Thompsett knows better but as anyone who saw that video knows,  they are a very sentimental group.       

 

I'm not interested in guaranteeing Morse base salary by distributing it over void years and missing that opportunity to save $8M asap and move on.............Nor am I interested in doing extensions for Morse or Bates.   Ideally neither is on the roster by 2025 so I don't want to have another $10M+ in dead cap tied up in them in 2025.

 

I'm done with running it back with all of these guys that were 6-5 at midseason 2 of the past 3 seasons and looked tired in the playoffs in each of the past 3.

 

Time for a re-tool.   And a good draft year to have playing time opportunities available instead of all being blocked by over-priced vets.

 

This and 100x this.

 

Beane needs to get tougher and start cutting a little bit more than before. He also needs to stop creating best overall roster with quality backup everywhere. It costs us a lot of money. Cut some people, don't fill every hole, gamble a little, draft good and then fill holes with $1.7M and less contracts for players still being free.

 

I love Morse but we need to get younger and cheaper. Otherwise we will have the same $50M over the cap problem this time next year.

Edited February 18 by No_Matter_What

[Nephilim17]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I just watched some of the video and they say a lot of things that are not actually correct. I question whether they all understand the cap as well as they give the impression they do. 

 

For example the Diggs conversation. They say "well if we traded him after June 1 this year sure it opens up $19m in 2024 space but it eats up $22m of our $31m of current cap space for 2025. WRONG. The $31m already accounts for $9m of what would be the $22m total dead money because that is guaranteed money that accounts on the cap in 2025 whatever happens. The additonal $13m would accelerate to the 2025 cap if we traded him post 1 June this year. I don't think the difference affects the decision around whether you trade him or not particularly. But it is just an example of where these guys speak with authority and fans are taking them as gospel and not everything they are saying is accurate. There were a couple of others in the 25 mins I listened to but that one stood out. They consistently make the mistake of thinking all dead cap money is new money you are adding onto cap hits and some of that money is already baked in. 

I'm not 100% clear on this but this is what Spotrac says regarding a Diggs post-June 1 trade:

2024 Dead Cap: $8,849,000
2025 Dead Cap: $22,247,000

2024 Cap Savings: $19,005,000

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/stefon-diggs-16872/#:~:text=Current Contract,average annual salary of %2424%2C000%2C000.

 

So if the Cover 1 guys say there's $22 million in 2025 dead cap hit, Spotrac agrees, as per above.

Are you saying something different? I think you're suggesting that the total available cap space in 2025 is higher than they suggest if this happens. I don't know the 2025 cap space as of now (with no Diggs trade) but it seems pretty definitive that a post-June 1 Diggs trade negatively impacts the 2025 cap — whatever that number is — by $22 million.

Let me know if I'm not reading your comments correctly.

Edited February 18 by Nephilim17

[SoonerBillsFan]

7 hours ago, Dr. Who said:

Ultimately, that is probably often the case.

At least it's not his mom.

[GunnerBill]

37 minutes ago, Nephilim17 said:

I'm not 100% clear on this but this is what Spotrac says regarding a Diggs post-June 1 trade:

2024 Dead Cap: $8,849,000
2025 Dead Cap: $22,247,000

2024 Cap Savings: $19,005,000

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/stefon-diggs-16872/#:~:text=Current Contract,average annual salary of %2424%2C000%2C000.

 

So if the Cover 1 guys say there's $22 million in 2025 dead cap hit, Spotrac agrees, as per above.

Are you saying something different? I think you're suggesting that the total available cap space in 2025 is higher than they suggest if this happens. I don't know the 2025 cap space as of now (with no Diggs trade) but it seems pretty definitive that a post-June 1 Diggs trade negatively impacts the 2025 cap — whatever that number is — by $22 million.

Let me know if I'm not reading your comments correctly.

 

$22m is the right number. What I am saying is that $9m of that $22m is already baked in. He costs that if he plays. He costs that if he doesn't. So starting from "at the moment we have $31m of space in 2024 and cutting Diggs would eat $22m of that" is wrong. It would eat $13m of that. Because the other $9m is already accounted for in 2025 before you work out the cap space figure. 

Edited February 18 by GunnerBill

[ControllerOfPlanetX]

If we get rid of Diggs, then we have no Diggs.

[John from Riverside]

I’m going to go on the assumption that last year was an down year for digs who has been good every year of his NFL career I don’t want to get rid of him. They should do something to make his cap hit  more palatable

 

If you put a legitimate talent opposite of digs, it would definitely help the whole situation

[Nephilim17]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

$22m is the right number. What I am saying is that $9m of that $22m is already baked in. He costs that if he plays. He costs that if he doesn't. So starting from "at the moment we have $31m of space in 2024 and cutting Diggs would eat $22m of that" is wrong. It would eat $13m of that. Because the other $9m is already accounted for in 2025 before you work out the cap space figure. 

Thanks for helping me understand (I think).

I assume the $9 million is his bonus money, which he get if he plays and which we eat if we get rid of him. So the $31 million of cap space is not impacted by this $9 if he stays or goes. 

And trading Diggs post June 1 saves us $19 million this year and costs us an extra $13 million against the cap as opposed to keeping him in 2025.

Not the end of the world if we trade him post June 1 — if we got some worthwhile assets in return (good vet player with lower cap hit or a high pick). Not saying we should, just that the post-June 1 numbers don't prohibit it. That said, his replacement cost, even as a number 2 in 2025 would have to be factored into the equation. So if we replace him with a $10 million vet #2, it's costing us $23 million more to get that new player rather than keeping Diggs in 2025.

 

If that number is correct, I don't see the point. Unless a cheap rookie replaced him and offered better production.

 

[GunnerBill]

8 hours ago, Nephilim17 said:

Thanks for helping me understand (I think).

I assume the $9 million is his bonus money, which he get if he plays and which we eat if we get rid of him. So the $31 million of cap space is not impacted by this $9 if he stays or goes. 

And trading Diggs post June 1 saves us $19 million this year and costs us an extra $13 million against the cap as opposed to keeping him in 2025.

Not the end of the world if we trade him post June 1 — if we got some worthwhile assets in return (good vet player with lower cap hit or a high pick). Not saying we should, just that the post-June 1 numbers don't prohibit it. That said, his replacement cost, even as a number 2 in 2025 would have to be factored into the equation. So if we replace him with a $10 million vet #2, it's costing us $23 million more to get that new player rather than keeping Diggs in 2025.

 

If that number is correct, I don't see the point. Unless a cheap rookie replaced him and offered better production.

 

 

Yep, you got it. And agree it doesn't impact the decision on keep or cut. But was just an example of where what they were saying was somewhat misleading.

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

15 hours ago, Nephilim17 said:

I'm not 100% clear on this but this is what Spotrac says regarding a Diggs post-June 1 trade:

2024 Dead Cap: $8,849,000
2025 Dead Cap: $22,247,000

2024 Cap Savings: $19,005,000

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/stefon-diggs-16872/#:~:text=Current Contract,average annual salary of %2424%2C000%2C000.

 

So if the Cover 1 guys say there's $22 million in 2025 dead cap hit, Spotrac agrees, as per above.

Are you saying something different? I think you're suggesting that the total available cap space in 2025 is higher than they suggest if this happens. I don't know the 2025 cap space as of now (with no Diggs trade) but it seems pretty definitive that a post-June 1 Diggs trade negatively impacts the 2025 cap — whatever that number is — by $22 million.

Let me know if I'm not reading your comments correctly.

 

That's what I see from OverTheCap

 

He's the shorthand: it's like getting a deferred monthly payment so long as you pay a minimum. The key word is "deferred"

 

Any cap space freed up by a June 1st release or trade is immediately counted as dead cap for 2025.

 

Now, maybe the Bills roll that all over, and just use it as stopgap roster FA money. But it *absolutely* effects the 2025 cap.

 

The viability of a June 1st release is really only for a Russel Wilson like situation: the Broncos know he's not the guy, know they are going to need to rebuild and that it's going to be a fire sale for the next two years, so yeah, why not end the experiment two years early? 

[BarleyNY]

On 2/17/2024 at 3:21 PM, Nephilim17 said:

The podcast alluded to the Bills wanting to shift to more man coverage this year.

 

I don't recall McD saying that or reading it in any articles thus far. Anyone able to comment?

last season McDermott blitzed a lot more than we did under Frazier. More M2M coverage is needed if we’re going to continue to do that. 

[SoCal Deek]

I'm no Cap expert, but this version of the Bills is not like the drought-era version where it was clear that guys were coming to WNY for an easy pay-day with little, to no chance of football success. Fast forwarding to 2024.....There's something wrong somewhere in the Locker Room, Front Office, or Coaching Staff if/when guys like Diggs don't want to play in Buffalo where a playoff run is a virtual lock. So, I'm of the mindset to keep him, along with the rest of the already under-contract 'talent', reworking their contracts, with the Front Office convincing these veterans that reducing today's paycheck allows the Team to acquire more talent around them, while spreading their compensation over a longer number of tax years. A true win-win.

[Magox]

On 2/16/2024 at 2:46 PM, GASabresIUFan said:

I looked at his list and the Athletic’s list and there are 13 guys they agree have potential cap savings, but not necessarily on what to do. Both ended up with 70 million in cap savings.  They both looked at restructuring Allen, McGovern, Knox, Milano and Bates.  They also agreed on extensions for Dawkins, Douglas and T. Johnson.  Where they disagreed on how to get the cap savings was Harty, Hines, White, Poyer and Morse.  Tompsett suggests pay cuts for all 5 players.  Hines and Harty may take a cut, but Poyer and Morse won’t.  White may take a cut, but I doubt that as well. The Athletic suggests extensions for White and Morse using void years and non-guarantees (White) to get the cap down and a restructuring for Poyer.  Personally, I’d move on from both Harty and Hines and save 8.7 million.  Both are easily replaced.

 

Tompsett also suggested looking at restructuring Diggs since he isn’t going anywhere for the next 3 years, releasing Martin, a pay cut for Neal and restructure for Oliver.  These moves could potentially save another 20+.  
 

Re-signing D Jones was the panels highest priority.  Others mentioned Edwards, Floyd, Ty Johnson, Epenesa (although he’s probably too expensive to re-sign) and Dane Jackson or Rapp.  
 

They also mentioned Elliott at RB and Mooney at WR.  

 

Agree with the restructuring of Allen, McGovern, Milano and Bates.  Add Oliver to this list

 

Agree with extending Dawkins, Douglass and T. Johnson  Possibly Morse

 

Ask for pay cut from - Knox, Harty and White

 

Cut from team -  If White doesn't take pay cut, cut him, cut Hines

 

Leave as is - Diggs and Miller  (You only restructure guys you are fairly certain that will be with you the following year and neither in my view are certain)

 

Re-sign - D. Jones, Edwards, Ty Johnson, Epenesa and Dane Jackson    (Possibly RAPP if they don't pick one up in FA)

 

External FA positions to heavily consider:   Safety, DE, IDL and WR.

 

 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

17 hours ago, ControllerOfPlanetX said:

If we get rid of Diggs, then we have no Diggs.

It’ll be just like any playoff game vs KC or Cincinnati.

[John from Riverside]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

It’ll be just like any playoff game vs KC or Cincinnati.

First, we have to get to the playoff game

[MR8]

18 hours ago, Nephilim17 said:

I'm not 100% clear on this but this is what Spotrac says regarding a Diggs post-June 1 trade:

2024 Dead Cap: $8,849,000
2025 Dead Cap: $22,247,000

2024 Cap Savings: $19,005,000

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/stefon-diggs-16872/#:~:text=Current Contract,average annual salary of %2424%2C000%2C000.

 

So if the Cover 1 guys say there's $22 million in 2025 dead cap hit, Spotrac agrees, as per above.

Are you saying something different? I think you're suggesting that the total available cap space in 2025 is higher than they suggest if this happens. I don't know the 2025 cap space as of now (with no Diggs trade) but it seems pretty definitive that a post-June 1 Diggs trade negatively impacts the 2025 cap — whatever that number is — by $22 million.

Let me know if I'm not reading your comments correctly.

 

I think this looks right, but the bigger problem here is if you trade digs post June first, what do you replace him with? You can't designate a player as a post June first trade, you have to actually trade him after June 1st. Unlike if you're cutting somebody you can designate them.

 

This means you're trading away your number one receiver after the draft and all of the worthwhile free agents have signed. If this is the course the bills choose to take, you're freeing up some cap space this year you're taking a huge chunk of cap space away next year, and you're losing stuff on digs. The assets you will get back are all in 2025 and beyond. You have to already have a solution for number one wide receiver, number two wide receiver, and depth across that position group on the roster before you make that move.

 

Honestly it's a very tricky proposition with the salary cap situation you're finding yourself in already. Unless they draft wide receivers in like the first second and fourth rounds, I just don't see how you could possibly get on number one and a number two WR added to the roster and make digs expendable.

[BuffaloRebound]

Post June 1 trade seems unrealistic.  Teams make their big moves before the draft.  And I’m not sure how a 2025 draft pick helps the Bills very much.  The options are to cut him before his 2024 salary becomes guaranteed on march 14th or keep him.  I suppose a 3rd option is somebody gives Bills enough trade compensation that they eat the full $31m in dead cap this year, but can’t see that happening.  Diggs seems like he’s being a good soldier so far this off-season so Id be inclined to keep him.