Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: What amazes me
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
Is that you listen to sports guy after sports guy fret about the lack of cap space this team has.

While on the other hand, saying that Barwin, Mathews, Kendricks, Barbre and/or Kelce will be gone, and NONE of them do the damn math and realize how much that revised cap will buy you.

Geez. The cap's been around for years. They should know that only a small part of the cap hit of a contract hits year one.

Even Diddy is fretting.

True, in relative terms, even adjusted after cuts, we will not be top ten in cap space. But that won't come into play until FA #4 or FA#5 and its not like we're going to sign that many anyway.

We're fine.

On the other hand, I've read that the holdup of cutting Mathews and DB Brooks (if they chose to), is that they haven't been cleared of injuries from last year, and if we do cut them before cleared, we eat part of their cap. Not sure when that will happen, but it would suck if it hinders us for too long.
Zero
When did the media begin being reliable?

Add to what you're saying, the team will probably only be looking for one or two starters and use the rest of their FA moves to backfill depth and ST. As we've all said, WR and CB are absolute needs and must be addressed in FA ... ulp, there's a jinx alert. CB is supposed to be ridiculously deep this year so if we get an experienced starter there they should be able to get the second within the first two or three rounds. In fact, they could potentially trade down and add another second and still get the starter they need if a top player like Fournette falls to 14.

Trader Roseman should be able to work this draft to the Eagles benefit if Douglas is the personnel guy we hope he is.
Reality Fan
I think part of it is that you miss 2 key issues. First, removing them basically removes starters who must be replaced and in doing so you need to fill those slots which will eat up less space than they commanded but space nonetheless. Second, cap space is a relative issue...if a team has 25 million in cap space and the majority of the league has 65 million than that team is at a major comparative disadvantage. That is why all those "sports" guys and Diddy are fretting....as should you.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 5 2017, 11:42 AM) *
I think part of it is that you miss 2 key issues. First, removing them basically removes starters who must be replaced and in doing so you need to fill those slots which will eat up less space than they commanded but space nonetheless. Second, cap space is a relative issue...if a team has 25 million in cap space and the majority of the league has 65 million than that team is at a major comparative disadvantage. That is why all those "sports" guys and Diddy are fretting....as should you.


I have not missed those points.

We can fill some of those spots with depth and draft picks to fill. These 8 picks have to take someone spot!!

for example, get rid of Kelce, put Seamalu (sp) in at C, move everyone up on the depth chart and fill in on the back end with either PS players moving up or picks coming in.

As far as the 40M difference in cap space between the two teams, it only matters in the end. For example, if team with 65M only has 30 M of FA who want to go there, the extra 35M doesn't come into play dollar for dollar. If a guy, based on last year's market is worth $10M average, but because of the extra cap room in the league, his market value increases a whopping 20% to 12M per, we still have the resources to compete and sign him for the 12M. If we are a better destination, he comes here. We can do this for the next few FA. However, when we get close to the cap limit on our 4th of 5th FA, we will have to bow out of the bidding on those FA's and those with a lot of cap have a definite advantage. But it won't hit us until a few FA's down the line. We actually have more flexibility than this example shows because with SB's, the cap hit in year one is a lot less that the $10M-$12M shown above, which could push the impact on us to FA #5 or #6. (of course you can't buy 5 top tier FA's with that money, but you can do so with a few uppers and a few middles)
Phits
Yep. Much ado about nothing.

QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 5 2017, 10:41 AM) *
We're fine.

Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 5 2017, 12:00 PM) *
I have not missed those points.

We can fill some of those spots with depth and draft picks to fill. These 8 picks have to take someone spot!!

for example, get rid of Kelce, put Seamalu (sp) in at C, move everyone up on the depth chart and fill in on the back end with either PS players moving up or picks coming in.

As far as the 40M difference in cap space between the two teams, it only matters in the end. For example, if team with 65M only has 30 M of FA who want to go there, the extra 35M doesn't come into play dollar for dollar. If a guy, based on last year's market is worth $10M average, but because of the extra cap room in the league, his market value increases a whopping 20% to 12M per, we still have the resources to compete and sign him for the 12M. If we are a better destination, he comes here. We can do this for the next few FA. However, when we get close to the cap limit on our 4th of 5th FA, we will have to bow out of the bidding on those FA's and those with a lot of cap have a definite advantage. But it won't hit us until a few FA's down the line. We actually have more flexibility than this example shows because with SB's, the cap hit in year one is a lot less that the $10M-$12M shown above, which could push the impact on us to FA #5 or #6. (of course you can't buy 5 top tier FA's with that money, but you can do so with a few uppers and a few middles)



You keep trotting out hypotheticals but you ignore the big picture....it is not one team that has a huge cap advantage over us, it is a majority of the league.....so if a few teams need one position and a few others need another position we are left picking through the rubble. If it were just one of two teams I would agree but when 20+ teams have a big advantage (and most of them have the ability to free up more cap space just like we do) then we have a big disadvantage which is why Diddy worries.....he gets it.
Zero
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 5 2017, 01:04 PM) *
You keep trotting out hypotheticals but you ignore the big picture....it is not one team that has a huge cap advantage over us, it is a majority of the league.....so if a few teams need one position and a few others need another position we are left picking through the rubble. If it were just one of two teams I would agree but when 20+ teams have a big advantage (and most of them have the ability to free up more cap space just like we do) then we have a big disadvantage which is why Diddy worries.....he gets it.

But how many teams will dramatically overpay in a bidding war for a given player? Do the Eagles have enough to "overpay" for two positions of need and have $ left over for a couple of second and third level FA backups?
nephillymike
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 5 2017, 01:40 PM) *
But how many teams will dramatically overpay in a bidding war for a given player? Do the Eagles have enough to "overpay" for two positions of need and have $ left over for a couple of second and third level FA backups?



Bingo!!

Yes. And change the two to three or more.

Even if the salaries go up by an improbable 20%, we're fine for 3-4 free agents. Now paying more than we used to have to pay for four free agents because of the cap space driven salary increases of say 20% will catch up to us, on the 4th or 5th free agent, not the ones before that.

Of course this all assumes Howie makes the cuts he needs to to free up space. If he doesn't, we're screwed in FA and for next year's record. But that is a different animal.

There is a complicated cap reason (would put folks to sleep) that it is in the teams' best interest not to have the player's salaries go up by the increase in the amount of unused cap space. Teams lose some flexibility if it does. It will go up, but by no where near the increase in the unused cap room teams have to spend. More than the increase in te cap, but way less than the increase in cap room available.
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 5 2017, 03:30 PM) *
Yes. And change the two to three or more.

But the point is that no team is going to offer more for, say Jeffery than the Eagles have to spend. So, if they want Jeffery they can overpay for him and still have enough for other players IF they clear some space. They just aren't in a position to go Dream Teaming. wink.gif
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 5 2017, 01:40 PM) *
But how many teams will dramatically overpay in a bidding war for a given player? Do the Eagles have enough to "overpay" for two positions of need and have $ left over for a couple of second and third level FA backups?


Seriously? You think the Eagles are the only team that will "overpay"? The difference is that the eagles would need to do so for 2 positions where as one other team might overpay for one position and another team do the same for the 2nd.....and there are plenty of teams looking for either position. That is the problem, the Eagles are not in a position to outbid any of those teams for either position.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 5 2017, 04:27 PM) *
But the point is that no team is going to offer more for, say Jeffery than the Eagles have to spend. So, if they want Jeffery they can overpay for him and still have enough for other players IF they clear some space. They just aren't in a position to go Dream Teaming. wink.gif


lol....now I am kind of laughing....so no team is going to pay what the eagles will pay? Really? and how do you know that? The difference is that one team may be willing to pay whatever the Eagles pay +1 for a WR and another team may be willing to pay whatever the Eagles offer +1 for a CB and both will still have money left over for other FAs. You hoping that other teams won't pay as much or more does not make it so.
Zero
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 5 2017, 04:38 PM) *
Seriously? You think the Eagles are the only team that will "overpay"? The difference is that the eagles would need to do so for 2 positions where as one other team might overpay for one position and another team do the same for the 2nd.....and there are plenty of teams looking for either position. That is the problem, the Eagles are not in a position to outbid any of those teams for either position.

Hahaha, your forgot -----> dramatically. biggrin.gif And yes, seriously. All praise the Roseman. laugh.gif
nephillymike
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 5 2017, 04:27 PM) *
But the point is that no team is going to offer more for, say Jeffery than the Eagles have to spend. So, if they want Jeffery they can overpay for him and still have enough for other players IF they clear some space. They just aren't in a position to go Dream Teaming. wink.gif


True.

And it isn't only for Jeffrey as our first FA but a few more after that. Then it will get tight and we'll have to bow out.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 5 2017, 04:46 PM) *
True.

And it isn't only for Jeffrey as our first FA but a few more after that. Then it will get tight and we'll have to bow out.


lol....it isn't true at all....it is ignoring economic reality. It is pretty simple....there are 20 plus teams dramatically more money than we have.....some of those teams need a WR, some of them need a CB and not all of them are named Cleveland...all it takes is one of two or three to want the same guys we want at each position and we are outside looking in because, unlike Z's scenario, they may dramatically overpay to fill their need knowing they have plenty left over to sign other FAs.

It is funny to see the GM say they are in a tough spot, the beat guys say they are in a tough spot, NFL pundits saying they are in a tough spot and even Ray Diddinger saying they are in a tough spot but somehow you look at the NFL landscape of comparative cap positions and think they are in good shape. I hope like hell you are right but I don't see it.
Zero
I guess in a month or so we'll have a better idea. cool.gif
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 5 2017, 05:38 PM) *
lol....it isn't true at all....it is ignoring economic reality. It is pretty simple....there are 20 plus teams dramatically more money than we have.....some of those teams need a WR, some of them need a CB and not all of them are named Cleveland...all it takes is one of two or three to want the same guys we want at each position and we are outside looking in because, unlike Z's scenario, they may dramatically overpay to fill their need knowing they have plenty left over to sign other FAs.

It is funny to see the GM say they are in a tough spot, the beat guys say they are in a tough spot, NFL pundits saying they are in a tough spot and even Ray Diddinger saying they are in a tough spot but somehow you look at the NFL landscape of comparative cap positions and think they are in good shape. I hope like hell you are right but I don't see it.


Hey RF..............BOO!

The entire "sky is falling" mantra has been the consistent tune from these people since I can remember. Maybe you buy it every year like the other worry warts but I didn't and i don't. I just get tired of it. Do we have as much in reserve as we used to? No. Are we relatively lower on the cap standings than we usually are? Yes.

If we make the cuts and/or trades that we need to make to do the no brainer cap moves to free up room, will we be able to go out and offer three players mid to upper tier players we want to sign a contract that is competitive with what others offer. At that point, it will come down to what is the best fit for that FA. And we can add a fourth lower tier guy. That part of it is no different than last years, other than where in previous years, we could have signed 5 or more FA's, we can't go that many this year. It won't effect those at the top of our list. And if we don't sign Jeffrey, it doesn't mean we couldn't afford him, it could mean we didn't think he was a good investment at last year's 15M avg per year or this year's $18M per year.

As far as Howie's comments, he is either trying to tamper expectations, or maybe Lurie is on him about the shit moves he made last year and he wants to go back to keeping 10 - 15% of the cap in the till. It is not a true cap constraint. My hope is that it's the former. If it's the latter, then we will be short two decent FA's who could help this team this year.

I will dig up the cap post I had a few weeks ago. That spells out our cap room we should have and it should be plenty.

Lighten up Francis.

We're fine. (unless they don't make the necessary cuts, then we're screwed)
Reality Fan
Mikey...I told you we would be here 3 months ago...between Chip and Howie we have not done a great job....Curry doesn't help but we are in a tough spot until 18 and 19
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 5 2017, 09:14 PM) *
Mikey...I told you we would be here 3 months ago...between Chip and Howie we have not done a great job....Curry doesn't help but we are in a tough spot until 18 and 19



Well, I said that last year would be better record than 2017 but it wasn't necessarily salary cap, but deterioration of talent with not much coming over the hill from draft calvary.

One thing that was a big plus was Peter's play. That helps.
Joegrane
I hope you are right about the cap but I can't say I see it.

If you can't cut an injured player in time to help you during free agency, you are screwed.

I could not find hardly anything about Matthews' surgery.
https://www.thefantasydoctors.com/nfl-injur...neck-dr-parekh/
http://bleacherreport.com/ryan-mathews

Brooks' injury was obviously much earlier in the season but I'm not so sure they'd want to cut him anyway. They need bodies for the secondary! They only have one real CB currently--Mills.

A trade for WR Cooks would be nice but I doubt it will happen.

Cutting Barwin and Barbre might only get you a second tier FA WR and 2nd tear CB plus the resigning of B Logan.

I think Mike previously wrote that Lurie tends to keep 5 mil or more free cap space. Maybe the Eagles do FA deals right up to the cap limit and then cut Matthews later to give them some cap headroom.

QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 5 2017, 10:41 AM) *
Is that you listen to sports guy after sports guy fret about the lack of cap space this team has.

While on the other hand, saying that Barwin, Mathews, Kendricks, Barbre and/or Kelce will be gone, and NONE of them do the damn math and realize how much that revised cap will buy you.

Geez. The cap's been around for years. They should know that only a small part of the cap hit of a contract hits year one.

Even Diddy is fretting.

True, in relative terms, even adjusted after cuts, we will not be top ten in cap space. But that won't come into play until FA #4 or FA#5 and its not like we're going to sign that many anyway.

We're fine.

On the other hand, I've read that the holdup of cutting Mathews and DB Brooks (if they chose to), is that they haven't been cleared of injuries from last year, and if we do cut them before cleared, we eat part of their cap. Not sure when that will happen, but it would suck if it hinders us for too long.

nephillymike
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Mar 5 2017, 11:32 PM) *
I hope you are right about the cap but I can't say I see it.

If you can't cut an injured player in time to help you during free agency, you are screwed.

I could not find hardly anything about Matthews' surgery.
https://www.thefantasydoctors.com/nfl-injur...neck-dr-parekh/
http://bleacherreport.com/ryan-mathews

Brooks' injury was obviously much earlier in the season but I'm not so sure they'd want to cut him anyway. They need bodies for the secondary! They only have one real CB currently--Mills.

A trade for WR Cooks would be nice but I doubt it will happen.

Cutting Barwin and Barbre might only get you a second tier FA WR and 2nd tear CB plus the resigning of B Logan.

I think Mike previously wrote that Lurie tends to keep 5 mil or more free cap space. Maybe the Eagles do FA deals right up to the cap limit and then cut Matthews later to give them some cap headroom.


I'll try to find the article on the injuries and the cap impact.

I never heard of this item before. I always thought you could cut them at any time.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 5 2017, 11:50 PM) *
I'll try to find the article on the injuries and the cap impact.

I never heard of this item before. I always thought you could cut them at any time.


You can't cut/release an injured player until they are cleared to play if I recall correctly...it isot like an injury/waiver settlement in TC. There is more to it, expected time out from said injury, etc but as it stands they can't release their injured players in time to recoup cap space.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 6 2017, 02:12 AM) *
You can't cut/release an injured player until they are cleared to play if I recall correctly...it isot like an injury/waiver settlement in TC. There is more to it, expected time out from said injury, etc but as it stands they can't release their injured players in time to recoup cap space.

Here's the article.

It appears it's the lesser of 50% of their salary or 1,150,000.

http://www.phillyvoice.com/explanation-why...n-released-yet/

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.