Chiefs sign Bennie Logan

[Urc Burry]

Per Terez... 1 year deal

[Sandy Vagina]

Originally Posted by TimBone

Good point.

Tiger, please keep your gay porn in the pictures forum. If need be, you can create your own Alex homo-erotica thread.

Please link thread to Sandy via pm, as well. Thank you.

Quality moderation at work here, CP. Great job.

[TimBone]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Impact, 3-down zeros are exceptionally valuable and hard to find.

Big bodied run-stuffers that will play maybe 50% of our defensive snaps? Not so much.

We aren't looking at using Logan as a gap-splitting presence. He's going to be told to just stand there and occupy space. No, that's not tough to find.

It's like peak DJ vs. Joe Mays. DJ makes is position valuable because how well he's able to play it. But if you don't have an elite guy there, it doesn't make sense to spend a bunch of money on a limited player at a less critical position.

I guess that all makes sense. I just remember talk about how Baltimore (and particularly Ray Lewis) was so successful in the 3-4 because they were able to find those elite 0 techs that bring the whole picture together.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by staylor26

Bennie Logan is a better run stuffer than Poe. We would all probably be okay with brining Poe back on this deal. It's a one year deal. Who gives a shit?

With the rollover rules, even overpaying for a single year is a big deal.

Moreover, football is essentially the exact opposite of baseball with its hard cap and non-guaranteed money. In baseball, there's literally no such thing as a bad 1-year contract. It can't hurt you long-term (no cap) and with no spending floors, there's nothing that's going to drive leaguewide spending inexorably forward. So a long-term deal that's 100% guaranteed isn't going to necessarily be a bargain in a year or two and if it isn't, you're still stuck with it.

Whereas in football, a long-term deal serves so many purposes. It allows you to shift cap. It gives you the opportunity to keep a guy below market if he performs. If he doesn't, it's non-guaranteed money so you cut him loose. In baseball, you pay a larger AAV to get a guy on a shorter term deal. In football, the exact opposite should be the case. If all you're getting is a single year out of it, you damn sure shouldn't be paying the market AAV for that year. It's why guys that are on the tag and sign a deal inevitably sign for less in AAV than that tag year would've been (and why their first year cap figure always drops).

Giving Logan an $8 million AAV without any sort of ability to capitalize on it if he DOES rebound to 2015's level is all risk with little upside.

That's why I don't think there's a chance in hell that this deal is truly an $8 million contract. If they were going to throw $8 million of this year's cap at somebody, they could've secured a $12 million AAV caliber player on a 3-4 year deal with the ability to shift money down the line and get out of a lot of it (or keep him if he performs).

1/$8 million just doesn't make any sense. Not when Chris Baker's getting 3/$18. I don't buy it.

[temper11]

Originally Posted by Tuckdaddy

Players take pay cuts to play for teams that may actually get them a ring. We don't have a QB that media and players believe can do that. Why do you think the Donkeys are now having FA trouble and the Pats aren't. One of them lost their HOF QB.

I won't derail thread, so this will be my only post, but "Media and fans" don't believe Smith can do that. Not the players or the coaches.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks

Quality moderation at work here, CP. Great job.

Agreed, good to see you are starting to get it.

[ct]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

With the rollover rules, even overpaying for a single year is a big deal.

Moreover, football is essentially the exact opposite of baseball with its hard cap and non-guaranteed money. In baseball, there's literally no such thing as a bad 1-year contract. It can't hurt you long-term (no cap) and with no spending floors, there's nothing that's going to drive leaguewide spending inexorably forward. So a long-term deal that's 100% guaranteed isn't going to necessarily be a bargain in a year or two and if it isn't, you're still stuck with it.

Whereas in football, a long-term deal serves so many purposes. It allows you to shift cap. It gives you the opportunity to keep a guy below market if he performs. If he doesn't, it's non-guaranteed money so you cut him loose. In baseball, you pay a larger AAV to get a guy on a shorter term deal. In football, the exact opposite should be the case. If all you're getting is a single year out of it, you damn sure shouldn't be paying the market AAV for that year. It's why guys that are on the tag and sign a deal inevitably sign for less in AAV than that tag year would've been (and why their first year cap figure always drops).

Giving Logan an $8 million AAV without any sort of ability to capitalize on it if he DOES rebound to 2015's level is all risk with little upside.

That's why I don't think there's a chance in hell that this deal is truly an $8 million contract. If they were going to throw $8 million of this year's cap at somebody, they could've secured a $12 million AAV caliber player on a 3-4 year deal with the ability to shift money down the line and get out of a lot of it (or keep him if he performs).

1/$8 million just doesn't make any sense. Not when Chris Baker's getting 3/$18. I don't buy it.

one point to consider, not that it should be a primary driver for 1 yr $8M head scratcher of a contract, is if he DOES in fact make the most of his prove it 1 yr deal here and sign a good contract elsewhere, we are setup for a potential comp pick.

so if the going rate is $16M for a future 2nd (via the Brownstains), maybe $8M is a bargain for a future 3rd? (i kid of course) just sayin tho...

[O.city]

I'd imagine it's a "up to 8 million" kind of deal, where he only hits that if he throws 8 tds in the superbowl and records 5 sacks and 4 forced fumbles.

[The Franchise]

My guess would be $5 million with incentives.

[TimBone]

How do deals with incentives work, regarding the cap?

[SAUTO]

As long as we don't extend Alex I couldn't care any less how much we pay

[ct]

Originally Posted by TimBone

How do deals with incentives work, regarding the cap?

Incentives are either "likely to be earned" or "unlikely ...". The Unlikely don't count on the cap this year, but do next year if earned. the Likely incentives do count this year.

So with a "down year" last year, they can set incentive levels above what he accomplished last year and theoretically they wouldnt fall into the Likely category.

that's my laymans understanding, please correct if somebody has a better description.

[mcaj22]

Originally Posted by BigMeatballBillay

LOL is that Brian Daboll in your avy?

Alabama is gonna love him

[The Franchise]

Before cuts next year we currently have $12 million in cap room for next year.

If we cut Smith, Hali and DJ next year....our cap room jumps to $44 million.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by ct

Incentives are either "likely to be earned" or "unlikely ...". The Unlikely don't count on the cap this year, but do next year if earned. the Likely incentives do count this year.

So with a "down year" last year, they can set incentive levels above what he accomplished last year and theoretically they wouldnt fall into the Likely category.

that's my laymans understanding, please correct if somebody has a better description.

The problem is that most of the 'likely to be earned' designations are are based on prior years, in fact I think all of them are.

He played a lot of games last year so if they Chiefs offered him 16 games worth of incentives, he played in 12, right? So 12 games worth of them would be considered LTBE and count in advance. I'd imagine they wouldn't have a hard time getting sack and/or 'accolade' incentives designated as 'unlikely' as he's never shown a propensity for pass rushing or pro bowls in the past.

If there's a shot at $8 million, I'd imagine most of that has to be based on unlikely to be earned incentives, perhaps not too different from the deal that Streater signed last year.

[raybec 4]

Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks

Quality moderation at work here, CP. Great job.

Take it easy Sandy Vagina, mods can joke too