Where did our cap money go??
- Thread starter stang233
- Start date
Maelstrom787
Well-known member
poly1274":15dbyewa said:
Plus all of the tenders that have been extended.
It's not just the few players we signed and tendered. The Hawks under PC and JS are notorious for front loading contracts which can drop our current cap very quickly. They don't back load contracts at all. While some may like that strategy it does hurt signing FA players that cost more than they are willing to spend.
I'm not saying it's good or bad, just giving my two cents as to what happened to our cap money so far this off-season.
I'm not saying it's good or bad, just giving my two cents as to what happened to our cap money so far this off-season.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/EvaninSEA/status/1239991331524501505[/tweet]
jammerhawk
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2007
- Messages
- 10,214
- Reaction score
- 1,814
I have been quietly wondering just exactly where the $ will come from if Clowney or Ngakoue or another top level DE is signed. Have been noting the decreasing available cap numbers with concern on the roster page. Some cuts are going to need to happen or some restructuring of a few deals.
So far the team is simply holding onto most of it’s lower level talent, and hasn’t improved materially. Real FA hasn’t begun yet but there are lots of players on the roster that will compete for interior OLine positions and for TE. I’m wondering if the team isn’t working on a couple of trades?
So far the team is simply holding onto most of it’s lower level talent, and hasn’t improved materially. Real FA hasn’t begun yet but there are lots of players on the roster that will compete for interior OLine positions and for TE. I’m wondering if the team isn’t working on a couple of trades?
FlyingGreg
Active member
There is a difference between available cap space to start free agency and TRUE cap space.
That $50 million number floating around awhile ago only represented the 48 players on the roster at the time. It also doesn't account for practice squad and injured reserve pools. And, you have to carve out some for the upcoming draft class.
So, in reality the Seahawks had a little more than $40 million to "actually spend" come free agency.
Greg Olsen's cap hit is $6.9 million. Jarran Reed's is $9.5 million. B.J. Finney's is $3.5 million. The RFA tenders to Jacob Hollister, Branden Jackson, Joey Hunt and David Moore add up to another almost $10 million. They also agreed to terms with Luke Willson and Malik Turner, who was an Exclusive Rights Free Agent.
It dries up fast.
Now...they can release guys like Ed Dickson (likely), Justin Britt (likely, unless he restructures), Tedric Thompson and Delano Hill to free up another roughly $20 million if they need it.
That $50 million number floating around awhile ago only represented the 48 players on the roster at the time. It also doesn't account for practice squad and injured reserve pools. And, you have to carve out some for the upcoming draft class.
So, in reality the Seahawks had a little more than $40 million to "actually spend" come free agency.
Greg Olsen's cap hit is $6.9 million. Jarran Reed's is $9.5 million. B.J. Finney's is $3.5 million. The RFA tenders to Jacob Hollister, Branden Jackson, Joey Hunt and David Moore add up to another almost $10 million. They also agreed to terms with Luke Willson and Malik Turner, who was an Exclusive Rights Free Agent.
It dries up fast.
Now...they can release guys like Ed Dickson (likely), Justin Britt (likely, unless he restructures), Tedric Thompson and Delano Hill to free up another roughly $20 million if they need it.
Seymour
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2015
- Messages
- 7,459
- Reaction score
- 22
I've posted this several times but once again. Because we have so few players signed, the cap space is a total mirage to begin with. This is the life of living with "1 year deals".
Sgt. Largent
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2012
- Messages
- 25,560
- Reaction score
- 7,613
jammerhawk":2mvbcwpl said:
You answered your own question. Cuts.
The signing of Finney is about as clear as it gets, we're gonna make Britt re-structure or else cut him. Probably the same with KJ.
Attyla the Hawk
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2013
- Messages
- 2,559
- Reaction score
- 47
Seymour":2mrwumkq said:
This is true.
Although I generally approve and am a proponent of filling needs with 1 year deals. I'd rather get those 1 year deals without spending draft capital to do it. But in general, it preserves roster flexibility and in particular, draft flexibility.
Every year, the market is littered with journeyman to still has a season or two left in the tank talent. And those players can be had at a pretty modest price.
Honestly, it is just about the only way for a franchise that sustains success over time to remain competitive. The number of teams that can put together winning records every year over a 5 year span can probably be counted on one hand. They don't have down seasons where they can reload on draft talent. These teams have to game the system in alternative ways. Feasting on 1 year deals keeps the floor of the team solid. And has the byproduct of granting an advantage in the comp pick formulas, if teams are willing to be patient and smart when it comes to the UFA signing period, but also aggressive when presented with quality street FAs when they suddenly hit the market.
Finney and Olsen are those exact kinds of signings. They don't blow your hair back, but those moves have excellent value regarding sound roster building.
John63
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2018
- Messages
- 6,651
- Reaction score
- 149
Fade":b9ul5dgt said:
Not to mention we have 20 million not 15
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/cap/
Nunya
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 497
- Reaction score
- 487
John63":3iymbbr1 said:
You are only looking at the cap space with the Top 51. Cap Space (w/All) is $14,800,559. If the projected Draft Pool reserve is considered, we are at a cap space of $13,271,362
Also, the resent potential signing are not added yet. Neither are the other 20-some players on the roster that we need to either sign or release.
John63
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2018
- Messages
- 6,651
- Reaction score
- 149
Nunya":3ao5hzto said:
no look at the bottom it is broken down with everyone, cap for draf etc.
Nunya
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 497
- Reaction score
- 487
John63":1aldzrf1 said:
Do the math:
"All Contracts" = $183,867,409
"Dead Money" = $970,128
$183,867,409 + $970,128 = $184,837,537 Total (All) does not include "Draft Money"
$199,638,096 (Cap Space) - $184,837,537 = $14,800,559 (same as CAP SPACE (w/All)
"Top 51 Contracts" = $178,247,409
"Dead Money" = $970,128
$178,247,409 + $970,128 = $179,217,537 (same as Total (w/Top 51) does not include "Draft Money"
$199,638,096 (Cap Space) - $179,217,537 = $20,420,559 (same as CAP SPACE (w/Top 51)
You will also notice that there is no cap space listed for Irvin, Ogbuehi, Shell, or Willson. You will also noticed that Clowney, Ansah, Kendricks, Iupti....and many other players on the roster that still need to be signed or released are not in the list.
If only the Top 51 are considered ($178,247,409)....The Dead Money ($971,128)....and the projected Draft Pool ($7,149,197) are considered:
$199,638,096 (Cap Space) - $178,247,409 - $971,128 - $7,149,197 = $13,270,362 which is our actual cap space without considering the latest potential signees (Irvin, Ogbuehi, Shell, or Willson) and the 20+ players that still need to be signed or released.
You don't need a lot of money for rookies.
This is where the salary cap amateurs get it wrong. Rookies are cheaper than vets.
600k rookies will take the spots of $1M vets. You don't need $10M or even $5M for rookies when you're drafting in the late 1st round.
Rookies are cheap and save money. Every rookie you keep past the first 2 rounds is a savings of 200k+ into the millions $$$ depending on what vets get cut.
Yes, there is a hit when the roster goes from top 51 to 53, and then there is the practice squad and IR budgets for sure, but it is so minimal it isn't worth talking about until Seattle gets really up against the cap, which they aren't.
Another element some seem to be completely oblivious to is that Seattle has a lot of big contracts that they will be moving on from in the next 24 months, with not a lot of young players they need to extend. Quill Griffin, Poona Ford after this year (run stuffers are cheap), and not too many more after that.
So the Seahawks have the ability to sign or trade for a couple of big, long term contracts, and fit them in to their 3 year road map quite easily. It's just a matter if they want to do that and the right opportunities come along, not if they have the space to do it. They may want to stay young and continue to try to build through the draft with very minimal Free Agency acquisitions. Which I am generally on board with, with the exception of pass rush.
I am thinking Seattle is going to sign Clowney and then trade for another pass rusher, but we will see.
It's looking a little more compressed than some would think right now, but once Britt, Ed Dickson, and a few other vets get cut/restructured they will have the space if they need it to make a couple of big moves, and still have plenty of cap space for IR & the practice squad.
This is where the salary cap amateurs get it wrong. Rookies are cheaper than vets.
600k rookies will take the spots of $1M vets. You don't need $10M or even $5M for rookies when you're drafting in the late 1st round.
Rookies are cheap and save money. Every rookie you keep past the first 2 rounds is a savings of 200k+ into the millions $$$ depending on what vets get cut.
Yes, there is a hit when the roster goes from top 51 to 53, and then there is the practice squad and IR budgets for sure, but it is so minimal it isn't worth talking about until Seattle gets really up against the cap, which they aren't.
Another element some seem to be completely oblivious to is that Seattle has a lot of big contracts that they will be moving on from in the next 24 months, with not a lot of young players they need to extend. Quill Griffin, Poona Ford after this year (run stuffers are cheap), and not too many more after that.
So the Seahawks have the ability to sign or trade for a couple of big, long term contracts, and fit them in to their 3 year road map quite easily. It's just a matter if they want to do that and the right opportunities come along, not if they have the space to do it. They may want to stay young and continue to try to build through the draft with very minimal Free Agency acquisitions. Which I am generally on board with, with the exception of pass rush.
I am thinking Seattle is going to sign Clowney and then trade for another pass rusher, but we will see.
It's looking a little more compressed than some would think right now, but once Britt, Ed Dickson, and a few other vets get cut/restructured they will have the space if they need it to make a couple of big moves, and still have plenty of cap space for IR & the practice squad.
Nunya
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 497
- Reaction score
- 487
Fade":17e234yb said:
The $7+ million shown as needed for "Draft Money" is based on the AVERAGE contracts over the past few season for the draft picks we have. Yes, rookies are cheaper than veterans, but you still have to pay them...and the early pick will be for more than league minimum.
Nunya":3sfplpta said:
You're leaving out a key point. They have to cut a veteran to make room for them on the roster when it comes time to go to 53 (= cap savings). Meanhwhile 80-90% of rookies will come in under the top 51 in the meantime.
Vets will be cut to make room for the rookies. Vets make more money than rookies.
$7M rookie pool, while $10M+ in vets will be cut to make room for said rookies on the 53 man roster.
TT has a $2.133M in cap savings alone, and will not be on the roster in the not too distant future.
Brandon Jackson also a $2.133M in savings if cut, and right now is a long shot to make the roster.
$4.266M in savings. Just by cutting two scrubs to make way for the rookies. And I could easily keep going.
All the way down to minimal savings like a Jordon Roos being cut for 750k to be replaced by a rookie making 600k.
Rookies are cheap, and save cap space.
Again, 80-90% of the rookies on Seattle's roster this offseason will come in under the top 51. = 0 impact on their cap. And of those rookies that do make the final roster when they go to 53, will be replacing a more expensive veteran, which = cap savings.
Tical21
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2012
- Messages
- 5,541
- Reaction score
- 82
If we draft in our current positions, we are slotted for 9.3 million for rookies.Fade":17fqdmtd said:
Almost like somebody who has tried to repeatedly warn people (and got taken apart for it) that we don't, and won't as long as we have Wilson, have money for a free agent frenzy might have been....I dunno....right? That said, we still can do Griffen and Clowney rather easily. Next year gets tricky but year 1 is no problem.
