Panthers Ready To Shop At Tiffany's? Not So Fast.

[Ricky Spanish]

For those who aren't familiar, I've been firmly entrenched in the "We have no money to spend so save it for next year" camp the past few years.

This is not the case this year.

This article is all speculation and some of those numbers are a bit higher than what the players will actually demand. You can also spread the cap hit of the contracts out to hit at different years. We have roughly $50 mil right now, that's nothing to sneeze at and completely realistic to work with signing our core guys to longer term contracts, as well as signing a few decent guys here and there. Maybe not JPP or Berry guys, but second tier guys like Cyprien or some other DE. Then again, if it's structured well, I think we could make a run at Berry just because a Safety's contract is much more manageable than a DE's.

Who knows, but money isn't an excuse this offseason. 

[panthers55]

The same rule applies to free agents as signing our own. We could sign Berry on a 5 year deal for 50 or even 60 million and have a cap hit this year of 6 or 7 million. It would go up some year 2 but not above 8-10 and it wouldn't be until year 3 the hit would be big. Even then teams restructure contracts all the time which is how Gettleman managed the cap when it got tight. We can literally sign anyone we want and fit it under the cap as long as the player wants to be here and works with us. Unless Gettleman gets into pissing contests with agents and players over a couple million here and there and we are left with JAGs and starting rookies again at safety and DE and Remmers plays left tackle when Oher doesn't clear the concussion protocol or retires.

[RoaringRiot]

When @stbugs drops knowledge y'all better listen. 

[CPF4LIFE]

1 hour ago, imminent rogaine said:

Meh I don't mind him using these averages or guesses to prove a point. Though I agree that his figures seem a little off, its still a useful tool. He's right that we can use up those funds quickly.  DG probably isn't going to pay a premium to keep Remmers, Addison, or CJ. I do think he will offer them all fair deals to come back and play because each has a role on our team.

We all know the cap gymnastics that GMs have to do; we saw it first hand when DG dug us out of the hole.  I could see Star getting a long-term contract with relatively big signing bonus spread out over it, the same for the Guards when they come due.

 

Simply not spending money is cap gymnastics??

[Nails]

22 minutes ago, RoaringRiot said:

When @stbugs drops knowledge y'all better listen. 

Conversely, please ignore David Newton.

[SOJA]

No way in hell I'm paying Mike Remmers 5.5 million and Gettleman isn't either so I stopped reading there

then I read David Newton and I immediately forgot about the existence of this thread 

[Nails]

4 minutes ago, SOJA said:

No way in hell I'm paying Mike Remmers 5.5 million and Gettleman isn't either so I stopped reading there

then I read David Newton and I immediately forgot about the existence of this thread 

In another article he lists the final argument for keeping Stew that we really don't need the cap space since we are so far under.  Can't make this up.  He is HOF level suck.

[AU-panther]

18 minutes ago, stbugs said:

We've got plenty of cap space, Newton is a moron. He inflated every number, used every worst case and even lied a bit by trying to turn Star's cap hit from the 5th year option with is already included into a contract no GM would sign. 5th year options and RFA tags, etc. are not thrown away in giving out extensions. The GMs and agents already know they have the cheap year built in, it's just the bonus that gets paid early and potentially pro-rated into that 5th year/RFA year. Look at Fletcher Cox's deal, his extension started after his 5th year option, but he got his bonus paid in the 5th year. Philly didn't just say I know we have you under contract in 2016 at $6M, but hey, we'll just give you $17M in 2016 to be nice.

Look at Luke's contract in the fifth year.  His fifth year salary was changed to $1m because of the signing bonus he received as part of the extension.  His cap cost for that year was only $6m.

http://overthecap.com/player/luke-kuechly/1184

The idea that you would add 5-6 million to Stars cap number if he received an extension is unlikely.   Very good chance that it would actually create space.

We do have a lot of our own players coming up for extensions but we do have enough cap space to add outside free agents if we want.  

Can we go crazy? No, but we could afford a big name guy if we want.

With DG though I don't think he is going to spend just to spend.

I said it in another thread but I could see him spending x amount in each of the next two years instead of spending 2x this year.  Wouldn't surprise me at all if we carried over $10+ million.

 

 

[pantherclaw]

The point is, we will be spending money to retain players we should be holding onto. 

There will ve some money availavle for FA. DG will no doubt bring in FA's that will help us. Knowing his history, beyond just with the Panthers, he'll spend on a FA if he feels that player is a missing piece, and he can get that player without over spending. To expect more than one big free agent, is setting yourself up for disappointment. 

 

[RoaringRiot]

48 minutes ago, Nails said:

Conversely, please ignore David Newton.

Can't argue with that.

[RoaringRiot]

3 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Exactly, his fifth year is way lower than the rest because you use that as the we all know the 5th year is cheaper, but we'll get the bonus to you a year early and still build in the cheap year 1 of the new deal. The way Newton proposes it is well, you sign Star to a new contract and pay him $12M per year (which is way too high for a NT anyway) including 2017 and just throw away the cheap year. It doesn't work that way. What's the point of the 5th year option if you throw it away on an extension? It isn't a franchise tag, which is likely close to what the new salary would be, it is likely a way cheaper year especially to players outside the top 10.

I don't think he meant to imply Star would get $12M. I think he just mentioned Star would get a new contract and simply didn't even consider that his current extension is already against the cap space. Not that that's any better.

[RoaringRiot]

2 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Maybe, either way (making the 2017 salary $12M or not realizing it was in the currennt cap), he just took away $6M that he shouldn't have.

Yeah, just totally wrong however you want to slice it. 

[grimesgoat]

12 hours ago, AU-panther said:

Some of those numbers might be a little high.

For example:  Lets say they sign Addison to 4yrs/28m, which is higher than he is forecasting.  Chances are his fist year cost would probably be around $4m.  So that is an extra 2 right there.  Same with Remmers.  Most contracts are back loaded to a degree.

Star is already on the books for $6.7m, even if you give him a long term deal it probably won't be much more of a cap hit in the first year. To put it in perspective Luke's 5th year cap cost after his extension was 6m.

http://overthecap.com/player/luke-kuechly/1184

Chances are if we give Star an extension his cap cost would actually go down.

A couple of million here or there on contracts like Addison or Remmers.  Extra $6m that we don't need for Star because he is already on the books for close to $7m.  That alone puts us back around $22m.  Pay players 52 and 53, pay rookies (the difference between them and who they are replacing), and keep around $5m cushion.   You are back to around $12-14m in cap which is plenty to sign some free agents.  A 5yr/$70m contract can easily come in around $7m for the first year.

Couple of things to remember:

A long term deal for Short would most likely carry a cheaper cap cost next year then his tag number.

A player like Berry would probably have a lower cap cost then someone like Whitworth next year also  The reason being Berry will probably end up signing a long term deal, something like 5yrs/$65m which might have a first year cap cost of $7m.  Whereas Whitworth at his age might only get a 2yr deal worth $22m.  Because it is a shorter deal it could easily carry a higher first year cap cost then Berry's long term deal.

 

As usual, AU-Panther is spot on.  But there is a catch.  Back loading contracts are a risk. Dead money hits can be significant.  Let's take Berry for example.

We sign Berry for 5/$65 with $35 guaranteed.  The guaranteed breaks down as Bonus=$20 and Salary=$15.  Cash flows may look something like this:

Year	Bonus	Guar Sal	Non-Guar Sal	Cap Hit	Dead if cut
2017	4	3	0	7
2018	4	6	2	12	28
2019	4	6	2	12	18
2020	4	0	12	16	8
2021	4	0	14	18	4
	20	15	30	65

Year 1 looks great - $7 mil cap hit.  Year 2 looks like a bargain as well at a $12 mil. hit.  The danger is getting out to year 3 and maybe he's lost a step or has some lingering injuries.  You do not feel like he deserves $8 mil in salary.  Also the $12 mil cap hit looks too high, but the alternative is a $18 mil dead hit.

[AU-panther]

4 minutes ago, grimesgoat said:

As usual, AU-Panther is spot on.  But there is a catch.  Back loading contracts are a risk. Dead money hits can be significant.  Let's take Berry for example.

We sign Berry for 5/$65 with $35 guaranteed.  The guaranteed breaks down as Bonus=$20 and Salary=$15.  Cash flows may look something like this:

Year	Bonus	Guar Sal	Non-Guar Sal	Cap Hit	Dead if cut
2017	4	3	0	7
2018	4	6	2	12	28
2019	4	6	2	12	18
2020	4	0	12	16	8
2021	4	0	14	18	4
	20	15	30	65

Year 1 looks great - $7 mil cap hit.  Year 2 looks like a bargain as well at a $12 mil. hit.  The danger is getting out to year 3 and maybe he's lost a step or has some lingering injuries.  You do not feel like he deserves $8 mil in salary.  Also the $12 mil cap hit looks too high, but the alternative is a $18 mil dead hit.

Most contract are back loaded to some extent.  The reduced 1st year salary is offset by the signing bonus.  The cap hit might be somewhat back loaded but the cash outlay could be somewhat front loaded. 

Also it allows the players salary to increase over time so it stays in line with other players.  If you were to frontload a contract a players future salary would be a lot less then market value and at that point he might hold out.  Sometimes contracts have big numbers in the last few years to make the overall contract seem bigger, even though the player might not really the full amount of the contract.

This back loading can definitely cause you some issues in the future and also limit your flexibility, especially if you go to the extremes or backload too many contracts at the same time.  This is one reason guaranteed money is so important.  Future dead money isn't terrible if it offset by reduced cap cost in earlier years.  You just have to look at the full picture.

A good way to look at a deal is to analyze it on a year to year basis if you were to release the player.  In your example above:

If he is cut after the second year it would cost you a total of $37m = 7m(2017 cap hit) + 12m(2018 cap hit) + 18m(dead money.

$37m for two years = $18.5m per year of service (not good)

If he is cut after the third year it would cost you a total of $39m = 7m(2017 cap hit) + 12m(2018 cap hit) +12m(2019 cap hit) + 8m(dead money.

$39m for three years = $13m per year of service (a lot better).  Even if you have to eat $8m in dead money in 2020 you are probably ok with it since your total cap cost was only $39m for 3 years of service.

Lets say you guarantee less money, $29m consisting of $20m signing bonus and years 1 and 2.  ($35m fully guaranteed at signing seems a bit high to me based on Tyrann Mathieu's contract http://overthecap.com/player/tyrann-mathieu/2450/.

If he is cut after the second year it would cost you a total of $31m = 7m(2017 cap hit) + 12m(2018 cap hit) + 12m(dead money. $31m for two years would be $15.5m for each year of service, which is better than earlier example.  After the third year the number would be the same regardless of which guaranteed amount you went with.

I often hear people say "guaranteed money is all that matters" which really isn't correct.  If a player plays out his contract the guaranteed money is irrelevant.  Guaranteed money comes into play when you decide to release or restructure a player.   Guaranteed money is leverage for a player.