ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Let’s talk about the Salary Cap, and teams uses of it (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=357193)

pugsnotdrugs19 02-16-2025 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chargem (Post 17970587)
I'm not sure, but I don't think that's true - if a contract has multiple void years I think the cap hits stay on those years unless the player is cut before the end of the contract.

It’s true unless the player signs an extension. If he does that, then the void hits stay on for the years he’s still with the team.

If he leaves, it all hits your cap at once. Take Josh Sweat for example. If/when he leaves Philly, all his void year hits are going to go on the ‘25 cap.

Rainbarrel 02-16-2025 09:41 AM

Josh Allen's August 2021 contract will be redone. Cap goes up salaries follow

Coochie liquor 02-16-2025 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainbarrel (Post 17970578)
The Eagles won one season. I am unsure of the cohesiveness of the team as a whole. Players and coaches

As an organization in the last 8 years they’ve been to 3, and won 2 also beat Brady and Mahomes. In last 8 years. KC has been to 5 and won 3 (plus B2B)

pugsnotdrugs19 02-16-2025 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainbarrel (Post 17970595)
Josh Allen's August 2021 contract will be redone. Cap goes up salaries follow

It will be and should be, but Buffalo’s cap still isn’t in a great place. Lot of bad extensions they can’t get out of with any real tangible benefit.

Beane has to nail his next draft class or risk falling behind the top of the AFC as the roster’s best players continue to age out.

That’s where Veach has been pretty masterful. Hasn’t paid everybody — see Tyreek, Sneed for example — so the cap is healthy short and long term. Also hasn’t had any awful draft classes in at least five to seven years.

Just keep doing what you’ve been doing and if you make good picks, it’s AFCCG year after year. If you have a bad class, you aren’t ****ed because you haven’t abused your cap either.

I guess what I mean by that is, if Veach did have a disaster draft — say anything resembling 2018-2020 — the cap is in a place where he can correct for that error the following offseason.

Couch-Potato 02-16-2025 10:06 AM

Question. If we can manipulate our player contracts to take advantage of future cap increases, then why do you suggest trading our guys for more picks? Why not sign our best and do better with the picks we have? Or trade down to accumulate more picks?

Rainbarrel 02-16-2025 10:08 AM

Sounds like the Eagles are better drafters than budgeters. Wentz's backup caught them off guard. Good job

pugsnotdrugs19 02-16-2025 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato (Post 17970637)
Question. If we can manipulate our player contracts to take advantage of future cap increases, then why do you suggest trading our guys for more picks? Why not sign our best and do better with the picks we have? Or trade down to accumulate more picks?

If people haven’t realized it by yet, the Eagles won this championship through the draft first and foremost. As did we win all ours that way.

They aren’t in that spot without Jalen Carter, Nolan Smith, Quinyon Mitchell, and DeJean. Period.

Again, they had a $17m AAV pass rusher as a healthy scratch in the Super Bowl. A guy they just signed! And he couldn’t get on the field over Nolan Smith.

BigRedChief 02-16-2025 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chargem (Post 17970576)
You can say it shouldn't be allowed, but it benefits the teams, because they get cap flexibility, and it benefits the players because they get bigger contracts and more money. Who do you think is going to put a stop to this?

They should set a % of the cap that can be pushed past a playing days. If not, we will see more and more teams use the dead cap to help now and then have a "tank" year,

That wont be good for football. Basically the same strategy the small market teams in baseball are forced to use to even have a chance once in a decade.

Coach 02-16-2025 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19 (Post 17970631)
I guess what I mean by that is, if Veach did have a disaster draft — say anything resembling 2018-2020 — the cap is in a place where he can correct for that error the following offseason.

Just was about to say this. It takes a disciplined approach and having far-ahead plans and different scenarios.

Coach 02-16-2025 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19 (Post 17970641)
If people haven’t realized it by yet, the Eagles won this championship through the draft first and foremost. As did we win all ours that way.

They aren’t in that spot without Jalen Carter, Nolan Smith, Quinyon Mitchell, and DeJean. Period.

Again, they had a $17m AAV pass rusher as a healthy scratch in the Super Bowl. A guy they just signed! And he couldn’t get on the field over Nolan Smith.

I don't know if this would fit, so correct me if I am wrong. I am just throwing this one out as an example from my perspective.

When Tyreek was about up to get paid in 2022, the Chiefs had a dilemma to either:

A) Make Tyreek the most expensive WR in the league (due to his speed) on a 4 year / $120 million. Not going to go all technical/specifics/backloading/frontloading, etc., we will just use the "average" of $30 million a year. That takes up a big chunk of the cap one way or another, especially if you need to consider Pat Mahomes contract and Chris Jones will need to get paid eventually (which Jones did in 2023 "renegotiation" and a new deal in 2024).

or

B) Trade the player while his value is still high to get similar or better value in return. The old saying is that it is better to trade an asset while its value is high, even if it stays high in the following year or two, because eventually, it will depreciate.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/...ent%20McDuffie.

The Chiefs went option B, traded Hill to Miami who he signed a 4 year / $120 million. The Chiefs received a first-round pick, a second-round pick, two fourth-round picks, and a sixth-round pick. The Chiefs used this no. 29 pick and Miami's 2022 4th-round pick to trade up for cornerback Trent McDuffie, which was a hit.

The bad of course was the Chiefs traded the Dolphins' second-round pick to the Patriots, receiving picks No. 54 and No. 158. They used pick No. 54 to draft WR Skyy Moore and used No. 158 to trade up in the fifth round for OT Darian Kinnard. Unfortunately, this didn't pan out, especially on Moore's case.

But the wild-card here is when the Chiefs traded Miami's 2023 fourth-round pick as part of a package to move up from No. 63 to No. 55 to select WR Rashee Rice. Rice does show flashes of greatness, but the injury and off-field issue remains to be seen.

Finally, that 6th round pack was traded to Dallas for the 5th pick in 2024, which was a lineman Hunter Nourzad, OL, Penn State.

htismaqe 02-16-2025 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chargem (Post 17970576)
You can say it shouldn't be allowed, but it benefits the teams, because they get cap flexibility, and it benefits the players because they get bigger contracts and more money. Who do you think is going to put a stop to this?

It violates the spirit of the league's sacred cow - parity. Eventually they will crack down on it.

Or the cap will stop going up and these teams' bill will come due all at once.

crayzkirk 02-16-2025 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chargem (Post 17970576)
You can say it shouldn't be allowed, but it benefits the teams, because they get cap flexibility, and it benefits the players because they get bigger contracts and more money. Who do you think is going to put a stop to this?

I said that it seems like it shouldn't be allowed because it, IMO, is against the intent of the cap. Allowing teams to overspend and then, like in 2020 when Covid hit, the league gave the Saints a way out of it and remain competitive despite their mistakes. Since the cap goes up every year, it doesn't seem to be the risk that it used to be.

IMO, this affects the competitive balance by forcing other teams to do the same and again, IMO, it's similar to what teams in other sports do which allow them a competitive advantage over teams that choose not to do this.

Do we want the NFL to return to the pre-salary cap era where certain teams bought up the talent? Shall we turn the NFL into MLB where teams that spend the most win the most?

RunKC 02-16-2025 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19 (Post 17970592)
It’s true unless the player signs an extension. If he does that, then the void hits stay on for the years he’s still with the team.

The Chiefs did this very thing with Chris Jones. We gave him $6.75M in new money 2 years ago. They added 4 void years on his deal but it only added $3.4M of dead cap after the 2023 season, giving the Chiefs a total of $4M on the books so far for 2024. Then they gave him a new deal to balance it out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19 (Post 17970592)
If he leaves, it all hits your cap at once. Take Josh Sweat for example. If/when he leaves Philly, all his void year hits are going to go on the ‘25 cap.

This is exactly why I don’t like this approach. Josh Sweat is projected to have $17 million of dead money paid to him moving forward. They already have a little over $29 million in dead cap already and will almost assuredly have the $9.98 million owed to Sweat added onto that for 2025.

That’s almost $39 million dedicated to players not playing on your team. That’s a truly terrible way for us to stay competitive. This board freaked out enough paying Frank Clark dead money.

Chargem 02-16-2025 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 17970696)
It violates the spirit of the league's sacred cow - parity. Eventually they will crack down on it.

Or the cap will stop going up and these teams' bill will come due all at once.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crayzkirk (Post 17970707)
I said that it seems like it shouldn't be allowed because it, IMO, is against the intent of the cap. Allowing teams to overspend and then, like in 2020 when Covid hit, the league gave the Saints a way out of it and remain competitive despite their mistakes. Since the cap goes up every year, it doesn't seem to be the risk that it used to be.

IMO, this affects the competitive balance by forcing other teams to do the same and again, IMO, it's similar to what teams in other sports do which allow them a competitive advantage over teams that choose not to do this.

Do we want the NFL to return to the pre-salary cap era where certain teams bought up the talent? Shall we turn the NFL into MLB where teams that spend the most win the most?

I don't see how it's against parity or competitive balance if all teams have access to it.

Should we ban trading draft picks just in case some teams are too good at valuing picks and end up finding a competitive edge from it?

htismaqe 02-16-2025 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chargem (Post 17970720)
I don't see how it's against parity or competitive balance if all teams have access to it.

Should we ban trading draft picks just in case some teams are too good at valuing picks and end up finding a competitive edge from it?

All teams don't have access to it. It's basically a high interest credit card and only teams that are cash flush can pay the monthly payments. It flies in the face of competitive parity.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.