Reworking deals?
 

So I'm screwing around with the salary cap calculator. I can get this team in a decent-enough position to stay beneathe the cap by about $3,000,000 if I:

(a.) Extend Alex Smith by about $15m/year.
(b.) Re-sign Schwartz to about $2.5m/year.
(c.) Re-sign McCluster to about $3m/year.
(c.) Re-sign Jordan and Powe to minimals.
(d.) Extend Berry to about $8m/year, lowering his cap number by about $4m.
(e.) Restructure Hali, which hurts our cap in 2015, but not fatally if handled in the other contracts, lowering his cap number in 2014 by about $4m.

There's still two deals on this team, after all this adjusting, that are vastly out of whack to their value. Bowe is at $12m/year, and Flowers is at $10m/year. (We can temporarily overlook Sean Smith's $5m/year & Fasano's $4m/year.)

How often do players rework their deals, if it's clear they're outsized contracts?

Suppose the Chiefs approach Bowe and Flowers and argue that they need to rework their deals to come out to about $8m/year and $6.7m/year, respectively. How common is it that players agree to something like that?

Last offseason, TJax reworked his deal to lower his cap number from $14m to $4m.

Bowe and Flowers could, ostensibly, threaten to hold out or demand a trade/release. But the Chiefs do have a starting corner-caliber player in Cooper, and the Chiefs could easily spend their 1st rounder on a WR, so it's not clear how much of an advantage that is.

The Chiefs, on the other hand, could cut either player, save about $10m in capspace doing it, and it's virtually impossible that Bowe or Flowers would find a better deal on the open market than what we're offering ($8m/year and $6.7m/year, respectively).

So the Chiefs have more leverage, right?

FYI, if the Chiefs follow all the steps I outlined above, and were able to rework both Bowe and Flowers' deal as I suggested, that would put the Chiefs $8m under the cap, which would allow them to chase down a premier WR or S. Or whatever value we could score.

In order to get either of those guys to rework their deal, I feel like there'd have to be a legitimate chance of the Chiefs cutting either guy. That doesn't seem to match up with reality to me.

No berry deal rework? I would think an extension rework for him would help and get Houston locked in.

Flowers rework his deal last time.

Cut Chase Daniel - saves $1.4M
converting $4M of Berry's base salary this year to roster bonus also shaves another $2M off the cap.

We could be at $6.4 M under with these moves, which allows us some options signing anyone else's free agents.

Jamaal Charles may want a better contract because of his big season. So that may throw a monkey wrench in the cap plans

yea I'm not sure how going up to multiple players and saying we aren't going to necessarily cut you guys, but we want all of you to rework your deals gives them any leverage.

in the case of Jackson they probably said, restructure and get most of this money or we cut you and you lose all of it. And his agent probably knew he wasn't going to see that as a FA last season, so it benefited him.

As I understand it, restructuring base salary into roster bonus doesn't affect the player at all. In fact, it's actually better. Instead of getting "game checks," that money comes in one lump sum.

It's better for the player.

you're going to be asking CHunt to cut some heavy checks up front then. Does he do it?

He restructured. He didn't take any hit at all.

That's different than what I'm suggesting.

If Flowers keeps his current numbers and shows little to no improvement next year, he's gone in 2015.

If we get a solid player over the top that won't leave our corners exposed we'll have a top 5 secondary.

Your Daniel hate is ridiculous. He proved to be a very capable backup in the San Diego game and it will likely cost more than the $1.4M you save to replace him. I suppose you want to draft a rookie and bump Bray up to number 2? Who says that Bray is ready for that? If Alex goes down, I want to know that the offense will be in capable hands until he returns. I'm not giving that up to save a measley $1.4M

They should rework Derrick Johnson's deal. He's nearly a $4.5 mill cap number. Cutting Fasano would save a million. Chase Daniel has way too high a deal for a backup QB. Cutting Succop would save nearly a million. Devito is the only other place we could look to cut cap #.

So if Chase Daniels contract is way too big for a backup, could someone please provide numbers that would be acceptable? Starting QB's are getting as much as #20M per year, but the average has got to be at least $10M. Chase's contract is $10M over 3 years. That seems about right to me. I believe Casshole got more to go to Minnesota, and Orton got way more to go to Dallas. Excluding guys who are on rookie contracts, what is the average backup getting in the NFL?

Capable backup QBs are very important.

Chase's contract is one of the few deals on this team that makes sense.

What if the drop off Daniel to bra is only 10% as a player would you take that money for a playmaker opposite Bowe making both bday and smiths job easier?

That's a big what if. But let's play. If the dropoff is only 10%, then sure. It's a smart move. But what if Bray is our next Croyle? Do you want to lose every game he starts to save $1.4M in cap space?

Daniel is a bargain.

It may not be that big of an if. The kid has all the physical talent. And came from from some horrible coaching.

I guess it depends on how you see it. To me #2 is your future #1 not your forever #2.

Well, Bray would have to actually prove it, for one.

I have no problem with Bray as the backup......as long as he has shown that he can succeed in the role. But until he does, I say Daniel needs to stay.

He wouldn't be paying any more than he would anyway.

A restructure just takes the players base salary and pays a portion of it up front and that amount can be saved off the current years cap number and spread evenly through the course of the players contract.

In just Bowe, Hali and Berrys deals there is over 23 million in base salary to work with.

This is hilarious. It's way worse than fantasy football. In fantasy football, you manage players you've pseudo-drafted to start each week to track their statistics and convert their actual productivity to a points system for your respective league.

For this? You have silly software working with unknown numbers dealing with phantom agents to sign pipe dream contracts. It's hysterical. I'm going to laugh all day Sunday.

I think I remember one of the announcers saying in a game, that Chase was the highest paid backup quarterback in the nfl. not sure If I had one too many brews and misheard. but if it's true, I definitely don't think he's the second best backup QB in the league, and shouldn't be paid as such.

Orton's number is 4,377,500 for next year. Daniel is a functional backup don't get all the hate and I am not even a Missouri fan.

I don't get it either. I asked the question previously. What salaries are other backup quarterbacks in the NFL not on rookie contracts getting paid? Your answer on Orton is the only answer I got, and it supports my view. I have yet to see anyone provide an answer that shows that he is overpaid.

Chase Daniel, prior to the final regular season game this past season, had taken only 3 snaps more than I have in regular season games.

He was an undrafted free agent whose only NFL game experience was presseason games.

That is why he is overpaid.

He's only overpaid until Alex Smith goes down with injury. All backups are overpaid because they are basically just insurance.
Posted via Mobile Device

No, he's overpaid.

There are no 'untils'.

You earn your second contract based on your performance during your first contract.

He did jack.

He showed that he could capably fill in last season playing with a bunch of backups against a San Diego team playing for their playoff lives. That alone makes him worth his contract in my opinion. If Alex goes down, I want to know that the next man in line can step in and not miss a beat. It's not like he's getting starter money or anywhere close. Hell. is contract plus Alex's contract is still way less than Casshole was played. I guess we could get Quinn back for less. Is that what you want?

You asked why he is overpaid.

I answered.

What he did after he received the contract he hadn't earned is irrelevant.

So because Brees stayed healthy while he was in New Orleans, he is overpaid? I guess using that logic, the Packers should've never paid Rodgers. After all, Favre never got hurt, what had he proved until the point of Favre's first retirement?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Source says Terrell Suggs&#39; $12.4 million salary-cap figure reduced significantly. Compromise reached. Details not in yet, both sides happy</p>&mdash; Aaron Wilson (@RavensInsider) <a href="https://twitter.com/RavensInsider/statuses/435223616721276928">February 17, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>



Think this helps KC with Hali?

So I gues you think he should've been signed for league minimum? Because Brees never missed any games? He got a start last year. He played well. Now he has showed why Reid and Dorsey thought he was worth what they paid him. If he was getting $5M/ year or more, I could see the complaints. But 3 years $10 seems fair to me.

Hopefully, cause we are in about the same place there

I'm fairly certain Rodgers 2nd contract didn't come up until he had 2 years in as the Pack| starter.

But that is just another irrelevant argument.

Dorsey and Reid's faith might be justified, eventually, but one game doesn't justify it.

He didn't earn thar contract.

Everything else is irrelevant bull shit.

So what do you think would be a fair contract?

Come on Milk. you know athletes are paid all the time on potential and not just past performance. that's how the game works.
Posted via Mobile Device

Yeah, but Daniel was an UDFA and, as Milk said, prior to week 17 of this season he'd taken less than a handful of meaningful snaps in the NFL.

What potential are they seeing?

So where would it put us if Jenkins could replace Avery and Donnie gets cut?

3 years, 6 mil, and frankly, I'm being generous.

They are paid on potential coming out of college, not on 2nd contracts.

Rodgers was a first round pick prior to the new rookie wage scale I believe. I'm pretty sure that he was already recieving more than Chase's deal on his rookie contract. What had he done prior to that to earn his contract. I'm having trouble finding current info, but I see that back in 2008 we paid Huard $2.6M and he was middlle of the pack. That was 5 years ago.

If Reid wanted him that's enough for me...it's not like Reid doesn't know anything about QB's.

Rookies are paid on potential.

2nd contracts are based on previous NFL production.

I found some cap numbers. Orton $4.3M, Fitzpatrick, $4.1M, Drew Stanton $3.6M, just to name a few.

So potential based on play at the college level, where the rules are different and the talent level isn't close is worth millions, but potential based on sitting behind a top 5 QB in the league for his career is totally worthless? I'm sure that Chase didn't learn a thing practicing every week in New Orleans. If he had been able to get a few starts, we wouldn't have got him for so little. He probably would've gotten a starting gig getting paid twice as much.

Matt Flynn.

Matt Flynn was definitely overpaid. He was also signed with the intentions of him being the starter. Once he lost the starting job he was cut due to the size of his contract. But had he been on a 3 year $10M contract, he would probably still be in Seattle. I'm not seeing how just saying Matt Flynn helps make your point. Daniels contract isn't a fraction of what his was.If anything, Matt Flynn makes my point that Daniel is not overpaid.

Paying free agents based on what they've done in the past will get you in trouble, pay for the future

Meh, I say let Hali play out his contract. No need to restructure him. I'd rather just take his contract completely off the books in 2 years than milk it out over 5 years when he's past his prime. A lot of players go off the books in past 2015, so I think you can sign a guy like Houston with the understanding that the big triggers are guaranteed payouts for his 3rd year.

Matt Flynn spent 3 years learning behind the best QB in the NFL.

What exactly did he get from all that learnin'?

Nice concept, but it doesn't work that way.

A $26M contract. Duh.
LMAO

Seriously though, he got an undeserved contract. Nobody disputes that. But 3 years $10M is a far cry from 3 years $26M. That's my point. Daniel got a fair deal.

You can't show me a 5' tall, 300 lber to prove that a 5' tall 200 lber isn't fat.

If teams were intelligent, it would. Actually, the better teams do it that way, toa. Certain extent

What the better teams do is draft well and use free agency to find role players.

They still, however, pay those role players market value based on previous production.

Not necessarily. They don't pay those last contract players based on a career. They pay guys who still have something left or still have a lot left.

It could be argued either way on what they're being paid for.

Dorsey and Reid saw something to make them think he was worth it. I think they may know a thing or 2 more about QB evaluation than us. We could've probably re-signed Quinn for less. But I would much rather have Daniel myself.

I would say playing fairly well in that one game shows why they gave him the contract.

The contract he got before he took any regular season games with us is irrelevant once he performed well in his role. Your argument is invalid otherwise.

Cassel got a 2 year $7.4M deal in Minnesota. He voided it thinking he could get more. Who would you rather have?

But this is ChiefsPlanet...we know best...just ask.

Peyton Manning never re-works his contract. It's worked out well so far...

They probably did see something, and are no doubt better at evaluation.

But that isn't the point.

Chase Daniel did exactly jack in his 3 years in New Orleans, except collect splinters on his ass to earn the money the Chiefs paid him.