You are here

Jump to content


Photo

CAP strategy thoughts


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 DasSchnitzel

DasSchnitzel

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,653 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill, North Carolina

Posted 09 September 2017 - 06:43 PM

I've been thinking about this and wanted to hear other opinions.

Dallas has approximately 9.4 million in cap space right now according to Over The Cap (https://overthecap.c...dallas-cowboys/). That cap space will be useful as we look to future contract talks. I am not aware of any further cap charges that will come upon Dallas during the 2017 season.

That being said, consider a contract with no impact from 2018 onwards. What is the harm in such a contract?

An established star might not be interested in a one year deal. However, I'm sure someone looking for a fresh start or a chance to boost their market value would consider a one year, high dollar deal on a pretty good team.

I'm looking at the pass-rush-for-hire types, for example, that bounce around teams. Our own Demarcus Ware did something similar but I'm not necessarily talking about someone that high profile and established.

It appears to be a waste of resources to have money in the bank and not consider higher value free agents. A high dollar, one year deal would increase our chances of winning now without impacting our chances of winning later.

#2 LeedsCowboys

LeedsCowboys

    Professional Starter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,838 posts
  • LocationLeeds, England

Posted 09 September 2017 - 06:54 PM

I would not expect in any big FA signings, this has been our mantra for the last few seasons.


darryl-moose-johnston.jpg
 


#3 charleshaleyfan

charleshaleyfan

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,807 posts

Posted 09 September 2017 - 07:05 PM

Trade for Donald for his $1.8 mil contract this year w incentives and bonuses and work in a negotiated price for what he wants to be paid (next year in the last year of his rookie contract) on the condition that he is productive here.

 

Hold on to the rest of the $$ and figure it all out at the end of this season.


give the 2nd & 3rd next year like they did for Haley.  our 2nd round picks have mostly been wastes, anyway.



#4 Blackthorn

Blackthorn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,870 posts

Posted 09 September 2017 - 07:30 PM

How many accounts do you have? Go ahead and reply to yourself and begin it with, "great job Gumbo."

 

Gumpo, the cap does not matter. Jerry can move the cap at any time to sign a player or re-sign a veteran. As far as bringing in anyone, Dallas may could swing a trade for Donald. This would be costly with draft picks and maybe a player like Irving.  Donald and Collins would be lethal in the middle. Imagine the threat up the middle opposing teams would have to deal with. Donald has signed  a deal with the Rams and Dallas would have to make sure that they could sign him and still sign their own players. 

 

However, I am more concerned with signing Martin to a long term deal. Jerry, McClay and Stephen are the experts and I will leave it up to them.

 

Also, I don't want a player for a one year deal. That would be absurd with a player on the team like Dak that is destined to win several Superbowls. Dallas needs to build a dynasty not sign one year vets that are washed up hoping “to try  to catch lightning in a bottle”.

 
Donald is looking at around 114 million dollars. That is a hefty hit on the cap. Throw in a future contract for Dak at 25 million per year and Zeke's 2nd contract at around 10 million per year and then Dallas will be in salary cap hell again. 

 

 

 

 


#5 charleshaleyfan

charleshaleyfan

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,807 posts

Posted 09 September 2017 - 09:03 PM

they once had the Triplets, Haley & Deion on board in the FA era. That is what it's going to take or else we will be having the same conversation for another 20 years.



#6 DasSchnitzel

DasSchnitzel

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,653 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill, North Carolina

Posted 09 September 2017 - 11:11 PM

I don't know who gumbo is. I just think it's interesting we don't offer one year deals to make the most of our cap space.

#7 DasSchnitzel

DasSchnitzel

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,653 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill, North Carolina

Posted 09 September 2017 - 11:34 PM

I would not expect in any big FA signings, this has been our mantra for the last few seasons.

It made sense back then to not spend on big money short deals because our cap wasn't so healthy as to allow it.

Now that we're entering a new season with this much cap space, we have some flexibility. It might be time to modify the strategy because the conditions have changed for Dallas.
  • Olde English 800 likes this

#8 Olde English 800

Olde English 800

    Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 74 posts

Posted 10 September 2017 - 12:17 AM

It made sense back then to not spend on big money short deals because our cap wasn't so healthy as to allow it.

Now that we're entering a new season with this much cap space, we have some flexibility. It might be time to modify the strategy because the conditions have changed for Dallas.

 

Perhaps use the extra cap space and work it into Zach Martin's extension.



#9 ryanaustinh

ryanaustinh

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationFort Worth, TX

Posted 10 September 2017 - 12:55 AM

I've been thinking about this and wanted to hear other opinions.

Dallas has approximately 9.4 million in cap space right now according to Over The Cap (https://overthecap.c...dallas-cowboys/). That cap space will be useful as we look to future contract talks. I am not aware of any further cap charges that will come upon Dallas during the 2017 season.

That being said, consider a contract with no impact from 2018 onwards. What is the harm in such a contract?

An established star might not be interested in a one year deal. However, I'm sure someone looking for a fresh start or a chance to boost their market value would consider a one year, high dollar deal on a pretty good team.

I'm looking at the pass-rush-for-hire types, for example, that bounce around teams. Our own Demarcus Ware did something similar but I'm not necessarily talking about someone that high profile and established.

It appears to be a waste of resources to have money in the bank and not consider higher value free agents. A high dollar, one year deal would increase our chances of winning now without impacting our chances of winning later.

Any unused cap rolls over into the following year, so we get $10 million in credit basically for next year, let' ssay we'd already be set to have $10 million in space again, we would have $20 million.

 

You also don't want to be up against the cap at this time, as players go on IR you may need ton replace them having space allows us to replace an injured player with a veteran  vs. practice squad shopping.  Just using this example, let's say we have a safety injury, would you rather resign Blanton or call up Showers if you needed a start or two in week 13 as we are trying to get playoff seeding?



#10 LeedsCowboys

LeedsCowboys

    Professional Starter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,838 posts
  • LocationLeeds, England

Posted 10 September 2017 - 09:19 AM

Trade for Donald for his $1.8 mil contract this year w incentives and bonuses and work in a negotiated price for what he wants to be paid (next year in the last year of his rookie contract) on the condition that he is productive here.

 

Hold on to the rest of the $$ and figure it all out at the end of this season.


give the 2nd & 3rd next year like they did for Haley.  our 2nd round picks have mostly been wastes, anyway.

 

I am sure Arron Donald would jump all over this, and of course LA are not smart and will easily take a 2nd and 3rd round for Donald or not.

 

I am not sure you understand the reality of what a) a player is looking for and B) teams will want in return for an All Pro DT.


darryl-moose-johnston.jpg
 


#11 DasSchnitzel

DasSchnitzel

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,653 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill, North Carolina

Posted 10 September 2017 - 03:17 PM

Any unused cap rolls over into the following year, so we get $10 million in credit basically for next year, let' ssay we'd already be set to have $10 million in space again, we would have $20 million.

You also don't want to be up against the cap at this time, as players go on IR you may need ton replace them having space allows us to replace an injured player with a veteran vs. practice squad shopping. Just using this example, let's say we have a safety injury, would you rather resign Blanton or call up Showers if you needed a start or two in week 13 as we are trying to get playoff seeding?

It rolls over but we can still use it.

Say we have 10 million now and will free up 10 million more before 2018.

So I can make a one year contract worth 8 million. Then I have 2 million now and at end of season I'm back up to 10 million. Then the 10 million frees up that I was gonna get anyways, and I'm back up to 20 million going into 2018.

As for injury flexibility, nobody gets signed during the season for big money. If they're available in week 8, then they're going to be cheap. We don't need 10 million in unused resources sitting around when we can't rush the passer, can't get an interception, etc. just so we can have more flexibility to sign a guy off the street. I think it could be more wisely used.

#12 QCE

QCE

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 394 posts

Posted 10 September 2017 - 04:49 PM

It rolls over but we can still use it.

Say we have 10 million now and will free up 10 million more before 2018.

So I can make a one year contract worth 8 million. Then I have 2 million now and at end of season I'm back up to 10 million. Then the 10 million frees up that I was gonna get anyways, and I'm back up to 20 million going into 2018.

As for injury flexibility, nobody gets signed during the season for big money. If they're available in week 8, then they're going to be cheap. We don't need 10 million in unused resources sitting around when we can't rush the passer, can't get an interception, etc. just so we can have more flexibility to sign a guy off the street. I think it could be more wisely used.

I don't quite understand what you're saying with the first part.

Say we have 10m right now and sign a player for 8m. And we have 10m available for next year. If we sign that player we have 12m for next year, if we don't sign him we have 20m for next year. A huge difference. I don't think that's what your post above is trying to say, but I could be wrong.

Say we "free up" 10m like you said before next season, that's completely arbitrary to whether or not we sign a player right now.

#13 ryanaustinh

ryanaustinh

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationFort Worth, TX

Posted 10 September 2017 - 07:35 PM

It rolls over but we can still use it.

Say we have 10 million now and will free up 10 million more before 2018.


So I can make a one year contract worth 8 million. Then I have 2 million now and at end of season I'm back up to 10 million. Then the 10 million frees up that I was gonna get anyways, and I'm back up to 20 million going into 2018.

As for injury flexibility, nobody gets signed during the season for big money. If they're available in week 8, then they're going to be cheap. We don't need 10 million in unused resources sitting around when we can't rush the passer, can't get an interception, etc. just so we can have more flexibility to sign a guy off the street. I think it could be more wisely used.

You're not understanding what I'm saying.  Your saying that money would be off the books again next year which is correct.

 

Let's say next years cap is going to be $170 million and we don't spend that $10 million, then our salary cap becomes $180 million.  If you spend it, next years cap stays $170 million.  Or to give you real numbers:

 

Right now we have approx. $9.5 million in space....

 

As of now next year's space is $14.7 million with 39 players., if we only spend $2 million this year, we get a cap credit next year of 7.5 million, that unused money gets ADDED to the $14.7 giving us $21.9 million in space. 



#14 ryanaustinh

ryanaustinh

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationFort Worth, TX

Posted 10 September 2017 - 07:56 PM


As for injury flexibility, nobody gets signed during the season for big money. If they're available in week 8, then they're going to be cheap. We don't need 10 million in unused resources sitting around when we can't rush the passer, can't get an interception, etc. just so we can have more flexibility to sign a guy off the street. I think it could be more wisely used.

As for this part the minimum salaries for players with experience are nearly double a rookie.  Using the same example of Blanton vs Showers...Blanton's salary was 755K  Showers salary would be 465K, a difference of 290K...

 

That difference divided by 16 is roughly 18K per week, last year we ended the year with 9 players on IR and let's say the average number of games a player is on IR for is 10 weeks.  If we replace all 9 IR players with PS scrubs, it would cost us 2.6 million  If we want to replace those vacated spots with even a guy like Blanton instead, it would cost us an additional 1.6 million.

 

So anywhere between 2 and 4 million would be needed to replace injured players depending on the quality of the player you bring in.  If you have a guy like Blanton as an option around I would much rather bring him in than call up Showers if we have an injury.



#15 beware d-ware

beware d-ware

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,436 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 03:40 PM

After seeing Lawrence play last night, we may have to start freeing up some money for an extension. I am skeptical about committing money to a guy as unreliable as D-Law has been, but we need pass rush and he just might be that guy.


 r0nferno6hcknej1omkj.gif


#16 ryanaustinh

ryanaustinh

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationFort Worth, TX

Posted 12 September 2017 - 06:25 AM

After seeing Lawrence play last night, we may have to start freeing up some money for an extension. I am skeptical about committing money to a guy as unreliable as D-Law has been, but we need pass rush and he just might be that guy.

If he gets double digits I think we can tag him and do a show me again year while we kind of "reserve" that type of cap hit for a player like him.

 

If he doesn't hit double digits, we make an offer and let him see if he can get better.



#17 DanAn

DanAn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,759 posts

Posted 13 September 2017 - 11:34 AM

I don't think we should do anything this season and even at the end of the year, I'd be pretty conservative. Actually, the first thing I would do next season is renegotiate Crawford's base salary or cut him. He's not worth his 3-year 21m in base salary and none of it's guaranteed. We'd have to eat his pro-rata bonuses but we've got enough flexibility in cap space to do that, and we might not even need to redo anybody's contact. But if we could get Crawford on a 3-year 12m base salary I'd feel a lot better about him and it would free up 3m a season in cap space.

 

Some ball park figures:

9m carried over (2017)

3m redoing T.Crawford

16m in cap space (2018)

*minus 6.5m on draft picks

*minus 2.5m for roster churn 

Total: 20m

 

Martin: 12m per seasons

Lawrence: 9m per season

Paea: 5m per season

Total: 25m

 

That's probably what I would do and that's on the assumption that Tank and Paea have a really good season. If that is the case though, and we want them back then we're not exactly minted.  I have a feeling though that Tank might be the best pass rusher that makes it to free agency and I'd be reluctant to let him go.  We can fit these three players in with a signing bonus to Martin without any problems but beyond that, we need to be careful about creating unfriendly contracts which just kick the can down the road. I would like us to avoid doing restructures and create some cap space for the future ready for when we have to pay Dak.



#18 northerncowboynation

northerncowboynation

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,174 posts
  • LocationChatham, ontario

Posted 13 September 2017 - 01:53 PM

I've been thinking about this and wanted to hear other opinions.

Dallas has approximately 9.4 million in cap space right now according to Over The Cap (https://overthecap.c...dallas-cowboys/). That cap space will be useful as we look to future contract talks. I am not aware of any further cap charges that will come upon Dallas during the 2017 season.

That being said, consider a contract with no impact from 2018 onwards. What is the harm in such a contract?

An established star might not be interested in a one year deal. However, I'm sure someone looking for a fresh start or a chance to boost their market value would consider a one year, high dollar deal on a pretty good team.

I'm looking at the pass-rush-for-hire types, for example, that bounce around teams. Our own Demarcus Ware did something similar but I'm not necessarily talking about someone that high profile and established.

It appears to be a waste of resources to have money in the bank and not consider higher value free agents. A high dollar, one year deal would increase our chances of winning now without impacting our chances of winning later.

Future contract talks as in 2018 and onwards? I still don't expect Dallas to get involved in any type of FA (unless real cheap and an injury to a key player) in 2017. As far as 2018 and onwards, I think we have a good picture of SJ's view on FA. He has said it many times. Teams pay top dollar for average talent. I don't think we'll go in that direction for awhile with big name FA's. Medium to low range maybe but Thornton was mid-range and look at the end results. Buyer beware!



#19 ryanaustinh

ryanaustinh

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationFort Worth, TX

Posted 14 September 2017 - 07:09 AM

I don't think we should do anything this season and even at the end of the year, I'd be pretty conservative. Actually, the first thing I would do next season is renegotiate Crawford's base salary or cut him. He's not worth his 3-year 21m in base salary and none of it's guaranteed. We'd have to eat his pro-rata bonuses but we've got enough flexibility in cap space to do that, and we might not even need to redo anybody's contact. But if we could get Crawford on a 3-year 12m base salary I'd feel a lot better about him and it would free up 3m a season in cap space.

 

Some ball park figures:

9m carried over (2017)

3m redoing T.Crawford

16m in cap space (2018)

*minus 6.5m on draft picks

*minus 2.5m for roster churn 

Total: 20m

 

Martin: 12m per seasons

Lawrence: 9m per season

Paea: 5m per season

Total: 25m

 

That's probably what I would do and that's on the assumption that Tank and Paea have a really good season. If that is the case though, and we want them back then we're not exactly minted.  I have a feeling though that Tank might be the best pass rusher that makes it to free agency and I'd be reluctant to let him go.  We can fit these three players in with a signing bonus to Martin without any problems but beyond that, we need to be careful about creating unfriendly contracts which just kick the can down the road. I would like us to avoid doing restructures and create some cap space for the future ready for when we have to pay Dak.

The cap space for next year does include Martin's $9 million 5th year option


  • DanAn likes this

#20 PC Principal

PC Principal

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,532 posts

Posted 17 September 2017 - 12:54 AM

Either they get a deal done with Martin this year or the let the excess roll over for the 2018 cap basically paying off Romo's deal and being free to operated like a team with a star QB on a rookie 4th round deal. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users