Reading the LG tea leaves

[Toomers]

22 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

I just posted this in another thread but i'll copy here:

not necessarily

You are correct that his cap cost if cut would be $14.9m as opposed to $12.9m if he plays, so on the surface it seem like that is a loss of cap space but its not that simple.  Lets look at making him a June 1 cut next year opposed to keeping him in 2019 and 2020.

2019 cap hit if he plays 12.9m - 2019 dead money if cut 4.9m = 8m savings in cap space

2020 cap hit if he plays 15.9m- 2020 dead money 9.8m = 6.1m savings in cap space

Can we replace his production for $14m over two years.

That example compares his cost compared to keeping him for two more years.

 

What if we decide to just keep him for one more year.

2018 cap hit 12.9m +2019 dead money $9.8m = 22.7m 

if you cut him after his year = 14.9m cap hit for his dead money

Basically if he is cut next summer it will cost us 14.7m in cap space, if he plays next year and then is cut he will cost us 22.7m in cap space. You save 8m in cap space that way.

What if we draft his replacement this year or next

2019 Kalil cap hit if June 1st cut 4.9m + 2019 cap hit of pick 24 this year 2.5m = 7.4m

2020 Kalil cap hit if June 1st cut 9.8m + 2020 cap hit of pick 24 this year 3.1m = 12.9m

As you can see even if you factor in his replacement cost it still cheaper.  7.4m vs 12.9m in 2019, so 5.5m in wsavings.  12.9m vs 15.9m in 2020 so 3m in savings.

People get confused looking at dead money.  That money has already bein paid, there is nothing you can do to reduce it.  It seems bad to have 14.7m in dead money on your books but you have to compare it to the total cap cost if a player stays.

 

 So paying him to not even be here is a good thing. Now we have to use our 1st on LT, who will hardly play, and hope he is the answer. Because LTs taken that late always pan out. While all the other holes are ignored. 

  The dead money is the problem. I don’t care when they paid it. I only care when it affects the cap. And 60% of his guaranteed money doesn’t hit the books until next year. I have no problem understanding the salary cap and the implications of dead money. I’ve been telling everyone since he signed that there wasn’t any “out” and we would regret this for years to come. And sinking draft capital in a desperate attempt to salvage the situation will make it worse. Sad thing is, it may be our only option.

  And you’re assuming savings from money he hasn’t even gotten yet. Paying him one more penny shouldn’t even be under consideration. 

[Moo Daeng]

26 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

I just posted this in another thread but i'll copy here:

not necessarily

You are correct that his cap cost if cut would be $14.9m as opposed to $12.9m if he plays, so on the surface it seem like that is a loss of cap space but its not that simple.  Lets look at making him a June 1 cut next year opposed to keeping him in 2019 and 2020.

2019 cap hit if he plays 12.9m - 2019 dead money if cut 4.9m = 8m savings in cap space

2020 cap hit if he plays 15.9m- 2020 dead money 9.8m = 6.1m savings in cap space

Can we replace his production for $14m over two years.

That example compares his cost compared to keeping him for two more years.

 

What if we decide to just keep him for one more year.

2018 cap hit 12.9m +2019 dead money $9.8m = 22.7m 

if you cut him after his year = 14.9m cap hit for his dead money

Basically if he is cut next summer it will cost us 14.7m in cap space, if he plays next year and then is cut he will cost us 22.7m in cap space. You save 8m in cap space that way.

What if we draft his replacement this year or next

2019 Kalil cap hit if June 1st cut 4.9m + 2019 cap hit of pick 24 this year 2.5m = 7.4m

2020 Kalil cap hit if June 1st cut 9.8m + 2020 cap hit of pick 24 this year 3.1m = 12.9m

As you can see even if you factor in his replacement cost it still cheaper.  7.4m vs 12.9m in 2019, so 5.5m in wsavings.  12.9m vs 15.9m in 2020 so 3m in savings.

People get confused looking at dead money.  That money has already bein paid, there is nothing you can do to reduce it.  It seems bad to have 14.7m in dead money on your books but you have to compare it to the total cap cost if a player stays.

 

I was going to write something similar looking at the various scenarios but lost motivation. This is a good explanation and he doesn't have nearly as bad a contract as people want to portray it as long as he doesn't play dreadfully. The recent decision regarding his bonus conversion was the correct one when you actually look at it in detail.

[AU-panther]

15 minutes ago, Toomers said:

 So paying him to not even be here is a good thing. Now we have to use our 1st on LT, who will hardly play, and hope he is the answer. Because LTs taken that late always pan out. While all the other holes are ignored. 

  The dead money is the problem. I don’t care when they paid it. I only care when it affects the cap. And 60% of his guaranteed money doesn’t hit the books until next year. I have no problem understanding the salary cap and the implications of dead money. I’ve been telling everyone since he signed that there wasn’t any “out” and we would regret this for years to come. And sinking draft capital in a desperate attempt to salvage the situation will make it worse. Sad thing is, it may be our only option.

  And you’re assuming savings from money he hasn’t even gotten yet. Paying him one more penny shouldn’t even be under consideration. 

I’m not assuming anything.  I’m comparing his cap cost playing vs being cut. 

If he is cut next year he will count 14.7 vs the cap. You can spread it out over two years with a Post June 1 cut but it’s the same amount over all.

if he plays in 2019 and then is cut the following year his total cap cost is 22.7m (2019 cap hit of 12.9m + 2020 dead money cap hit of 9.8)

Can you replace his production for 8m?

[heel31ok]

11 hours ago, stirs said:

Connor Williams can play T and G now and can also play Center in time if need be

That makes more sense than drafting OG or C...

[micnificent28]

Is Amini that bad? During is first few years some were praising how he had pro bowl potential. Then injuries derailed him. He's worth a roster spot at the least i say..

[MHS831]

2 hours ago, micnificent28 said:

Is Amini that bad? During is first few years some were praising how he had pro bowl potential. Then injuries derailed him. He's worth a roster spot at the least i say..

i think so.  I watch him because I used to coach OL for a high school--you train yourself to watch your players and not the ball.  He is just not on the same page with the other OL.  He is not smart.  He thinks while playing,   I can tell by watching his head and feet. He is not a good player. 

[unicar15]

I think you have to be hopeful for Moton and not draft an interior linemen day 1. There are too many other talented players to be had when you’ve got a young guy with potential sitting on the sideline. 

Hurney has done a really good job imo setting the team up to just take the best available player. I personally think that is going to be a WR, RB, DB..

[rhyslloyd]

I want to see a true competition, but we all know that if Amini starts (which is not unlikely with Ron), then there was never really a competition.

[rhyslloyd]

58 minutes ago, stbugs said:

So true and sad that we think it is possible. Amini looked like trash when he played. Not sure how Moton’s pass blocking was as a rookie but he looked like a mauler run blocking in jumbo packages. 

Amini really has no business in the league.  He was terrible in his first stint here, and he's not gotten any better in his second.  He has not improved one bit, but he's been around a while, and Ron loves that.

[heel31ok]

1 hour ago, stbugs said:

Not really. I don’t think the tackles are as good as the G/Cs. If Williams was as good a talent as Daniels/Price/Hernandez, he’d be a top 10 pick. Why take a T who isn’t as good a G/C when you have a hole at C in 2019 even if Moton becomes the LG? We don’t actually have a hole at T right now. We could franchise Williams and we’d know for sure we have two starting tackles for 2019 and 2020.

Yes really...because we have a hole at LT which is and has been a historical trouble spot for us...as with Moton it is easier for a OT to move inside ....so you dont lose if, like Moton, they aren't the answer at LT...we desperately need a young guy in the pipeline for LT...I have way less concern for filling the need at C...

[heel31ok]

6 hours ago, stbugs said:

You and I have a different definition of a hole. Ryan is retiring after this year and as much as people like Larsen he’s not a top C. Matt isn’t retiring and Williams can be tagged in 2019.

You also missed my point that IMHO none of the tackles appear to be special and the Gs and Cs do. When I draft in the first, I’d rather take someone who could end up being an all pro rather than a guy who could end up being better than Kalil. The ceilings aren’t close IMHO. Williams busting wouldn’t surprise me but on the other side Daniels being a perennial all pro wouldn’t surprise me. 

we need a LT ...that's the Hole...OG and C are easier tot fill than LT so you should be always working on filling LT...Im not arguing for Williams in particular but for the flexibility of OT/OG instead of OG/C prospects...many times the college OT is the most athletic and can play multiple OL positions...drafting OG/C is almost zero chance for conversion to OT...so drafting outside in gives better chance of covering more positions and is a continual search for quality LT at same time...

[Seoul_Panther]

10 hours ago, stbugs said:

You and I have a different definition of a hole. Ryan is retiring after this year and as much as people like Larsen he’s not a top C. When I draft in the first, I’d rather take someone who could end up being an all pro rather than a guy who could end up being better than Kalil. 

   Its interesting to me how people are so sold on Daniels. Apparently his school/coach has a solid track record for producing OL. His tape is good but how was his level of competition? It surprises me that people are willing to make such bold declarations about him.

  Then there's Larsen. The guy started a majority of games and did fine despite entering the season as a clear backup. PFF if you buy their stats rated him higher than RK.  The Bucs gave a ridiculous contract to the Ravens C Jensen for an equivalent season. Meanwhile poor Larsen seems quickly forsaken. Doesn't seem fair.

  Stating the obvious any prospect has risk attached, and we should take some reassurance from TL having quality starts under his belt on the off chance that we don't pick up one of these all-pro centers.

[Seoul_Panther]

 I get the argument for drafting LT G C. But short of Hernandez or Wynn whoever we draft will be unused in year1 apart from spot duty. I really want to see the Panthers getting their rnd1 pick on the field whoever it is.

[davos]

Truly, I think the unfortunate thing is that both Moton and Williams' best position is RT.  I think both can do well as OGs per their history and type, but you maximize each of their potential at right tackle.

I'm convinced Dion Dawkins was our man but the Bills traded up one spot ahead of us to grab him.  LT could've been solved but Beane took him right out there for us to see. 

Given Sirles started 14 games the last 2 seasons for a playoff team on a line that had to deal with Mike Remmers, I give him an edge unless we grab a guy rounds 1-3.  NFL caliber OGs are found mid rounds, this draft has talent there.  

Also--maybe Mike McGlinchey could be there for us.  It's rare LTs are taken in the late first, but it's happening more and more in recent years.  I like Connor Williams as well (Texas)