Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: In Defense of Howie
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
I understand the concern about our cap situation for this year.

I also understand the concern that we did nothing for our D.

Here's my best guess as to how our current cap breaks down:

Available cap per OTC = 5.045M
Cuts for rookie signings = 4.320M
Total cap after draft cuts = 9.365M
A few things to note:

The OTC starting point is assumed to be good. They appear to have up to date salary escalators for Peters, Bradham, Barbre, Sturgis etc that SPOTRAC does not.

It appears that their 5.045M starting point is net of the 6.839M rookie pool allocation but not of the add back for the cap savings for the cuts needed to make room to sign those players.

To use a conservative cap figure, take 540K x 8 spots needed for the picks = 4.320M. To the extent any cuts are for higher priced players (likely), then the cuts offset increases as does our available cap space.

I think it is fair to assume that at least two of Mathews, Kendricks and Kelce will be gone.

Here is the net cap savings for this year under a trade or regular cut (they are the same) or a June 1st designation cut. Teams are allowed two June 1st designated cuts per year.

Name........Trade/Reg.........June 1st
Mathews........4.0................4.0
Kendricks.......1.8................5.0
Kelce.............3.8................5.0

So if they cut a min of two, and use the max of two June 1sts, this frees up a min of 9M. That gets us to 18.4M. If you trade all three, then it frees up 9.6 M, which also gets us above 18M.

We will have plenty of cap room. Not sure there will be many worthy defensive contributors to be signed after the draft, but we'll have money. I think there are a few borderline starters, solid backups that can be had after the draft even if we can't find a draft partner. Again, R-E-L-A-X, we will have cap.

It is hard not to see that the offense needed more help than the D last year, so the emphasis on O is understandable. I know we lost some guys on D. Logan at 8M? Barwin at his deal? Settling for McKelvin or Carroll? No thanks on all four. Would anyone do any of these?

There's nothing saying we won't go heavy D in the draft. I'd be surprised if we didn't draft a DE, DT, LB and two CBs in our top six picks, plus heavy emphasis in UDFA, where we may pluck some depth or two.

I think we'll be OK.

Joegrane
quote name='nephillymike

"I also understand the concern that we did nothing for our D.

Maybe Schwartz told Howie that he'd prefer to select "his guys" in the draft"

...

"It is hard not to see that the offense needed more help than the D last year, so the emphasis on O is understandable.

They needed one #1 WR and two starting CBs. They have to address RB due to the injury and cap hit of R Matthews. So I think the needs balance out


"I know we lost some guys on D. [Bennie] Logan at 8M?

That is crazy $!


"Barwin at his deal?

6.5$mil I see--too rich for me or the Eagles modest cap.

"Settling for McKelvin or Carroll? No thanks on all four. Would anyone do any of these?

McKelvin, maybe as a mentor for the two high-round rookie CBs. I can't believe what Carroll got from Dallas.


"There's nothing saying we won't go heavy D in the draft. I'd be surprised if we didn't draft a DE, DT, LB and two CBs in our top six picks, plus heavy emphasis in UDFA, where we may pluck some depth or two.

I won't be surprised if Howie scoops up a bottom of the barrel veteran CB but I hope they draft two CBs in first three rounds.

I'm okay with R Matthews on a new contract if he is healthy enough for a Three-headed-monster rotation somewhat like Duce S, C Buckhalter and B Westbrook.

"I think we'll be OK.

On offense yes, if J Peters and D Sproles stay reasonably healthy. CW will have LOTS of great weapons and should have a solid OLine.

However, I have no idea how the D will keep anyone out of the Endzone with the less potent pass rush and rookie CBs.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 23 2017, 11:02 PM) *
I understand the concern about our cap situation for this year.

I also understand the concern that we did nothing for our D.

Here's my best guess as to how our current cap breaks down:

Available cap per OTC = 5.045M
Cuts for rookie signings = 4.320M
Total cap after draft cuts = 9.365M
A few things to note:

The OTC starting point is assumed to be good. They appear to have up to date salary escalators for Peters, Bradham, Barbre, Sturgis etc that SPOTRAC does not.

It appears that their 5.045M starting point is net of the 6.839M rookie pool allocation but not of the add back for the cap savings for the cuts needed to make room to sign those players.

To use a conservative cap figure, take 540K x 8 spots needed for the picks = 4.320M. To the extent any cuts are for higher priced players (likely), then the cuts offset increases as does our available cap space.

I think it is fair to assume that at least two of Mathews, Kendricks and Kelce will be gone.

Here is the net cap savings for this year under a trade or regular cut (they are the same) or a June 1st designation cut. Teams are allowed two June 1st designated cuts per year.

Name........Trade/Reg.........June 1st
Mathews........4.0................4.0
Kendricks.......1.8................5.0
Kelce.............3.8................5.0

So if they cut a min of two, and use the max of two June 1sts, this frees up a min of 9M. That gets us to 18.4M. If you trade all three, then it frees up 9.6 M, which also gets us above 18M.

We will have plenty of cap room. Not sure there will be many worthy defensive contributors to be signed after the draft, but we'll have money. I think there are a few borderline starters, solid backups that can be had after the draft even if we can't find a draft partner. Again, R-E-L-A-X, we will have cap.

It is hard not to see that the offense needed more help than the D last year, so the emphasis on O is understandable. I know we lost some guys on D. Logan at 8M? Barwin at his deal? Settling for McKelvin or Carroll? No thanks on all four. Would anyone do any of these?

There's nothing saying we won't go heavy D in the draft. I'd be surprised if we didn't draft a DE, DT, LB and two CBs in our top six picks, plus heavy emphasis in UDFA, where we may pluck some depth or two.

I think we'll be OK.


The question is whether they rid themselves of Kendricks or Kelce and there i no guarantee they will. They have gone all in on offense so it stands to reason they will not cut Kelce who is their best center right now. Wiz may be in the running but not a sure thing. On the D they are very thin at LB AND DT AND CB AND DE.

It is hard to gauge which site offers the best and most accurate cap picture. When you look at the cap hit listed on each site and calculate the associated column you will find they are les than a million apart..... For the top 51 one site has the cap hit at 158+ and the other is 159+.

I think Spotrac has the most detailed breakdown of the 2 when you view the entire page
The Eagles now have nearly 15 million in dead money.....add in the rookie pool and you are in the high 170s. It is pretty easy stuff. subtract the cuts to accomodate the rookies signed and you may get 2-4 million back.

OTC's numbers are pretty close to spotrac until you get to the summation which they do not show their work for.
Zero
I'm not a numbers guy, but I think there are a two relevant points to look at: Roseman IS a numbers guy, a very good one; and, the FO undoubtedly has a plan. There's no basis to know if it's a good one, but I'm sure they have one and the presence of Joe Douglas offers some hope that it is a reasonable plan. The overhauled personnel department and that Roseman has said he will lean on them is an important thing to watch this year.

They invested quite a bit in Wentz. When seeing all of the highly regarded college QBs who fail at this level because they have either been mismanaged or don't have talent around them, it's easy to see why they'd make it a priority to protect their investment by using resources there. As an acknowledged DKD I notice that every year in TC the defense seems to gel faster than the offense. Expanding that to team building, I'd guess it's not too different and if I'm right, it's another reason to have initial focus there.

There is no guarantee they'll let Mathews, Kelce and Kendricks go but most logic points that way. Mathews was good when he played but lived to his history of being injury prone and had issues with ball security. Stocking up on the OL, touting Seumalo at C, resigning a vet C most everyone believed to be moving on and watching Kelce's play decline, especially in a system that apparently needs a bigger body all seem to point to his departure. Kendricks played what, 20% of the downs last year? He was taking bad angles and overrunning plays with some regularity. He is a monster when he blitzes but Schwartz doesn't blitz often. Looking at their salaries and the team's cap situation, it will be surprising if they're on the team in August. Kelce's replacement is likely already on the team, Mathews' and Kendricks' replacements will probably be rookies so there shouldn't be a relevant cap hit other than dead money.

Here's another thing to look at and where the personnel acquisition should be focused in the next year or two. 9 offensive players are 28 or over, 5 defensive players and 2 key ST players. Looking at what they've done and seeing Graham and Jenkins aging in addition to existing holes on the D seems to mean that defense could be the focus for a while.
Foles, Nick QB 28
Smith, Torrey WR 28
Wisniewski, Stefen G/C 28
Kelce, Jason C 29
Mathews, Ryan RB 29
Barbre, Allen G/T 32
Celek, Brent TE 32
Sproles, Darren RB 33
Peters, Jason T 35

Brooks, Ron CB 28
Curry, Vinny DE 28
Graham, Brandon DE 28
Jenkins, Malcolm S 29
Maragos, Chris S 30

Dorenbos, Jon LS 36
Jones, Donnie P 36




nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 24 2017, 12:35 AM) *
The question is whether they rid themselves of Kendricks or Kelce and there i no guarantee they will. They have gone all in on offense so it stands to reason they will not cut Kelce who is their best center right now. Wiz may be in the running but not a sure thing. On the D they are very thin at LB AND DT AND CB AND DE.

It is hard to gauge which site offers the best and most accurate cap picture. When you look at the cap hit listed on each site and calculate the associated column you will find they are les than a million apart..... For the top 51 one site has the cap hit at 158+ and the other is 159+.

I think Spotrac has the most detailed breakdown of the 2 when you view the entire page
The Eagles now have nearly 15 million in dead money.....add in the rookie pool and you are in the high 170s. It is pretty easy stuff. subtract the cuts to accomodate the rookies signed and you may get 2-4 million back.

OTC's numbers are pretty close to spotrac until you get to the summation which they do not show their work for.


The big difference between the two sites is the starting points, beginning cap available.

OTC has 179M, SPOTRAC has 175M. That should be just the league cap plus carryover from last year, both which should be known. No idea why different. I imagine that adjustments for LTBE bonus not earned credits go in here also. Hard to tell because SR has them as 0 and OTC doesn't show the detail.

The next smaller difference of about a million is that OTC has higher numbers for some because of contract escalators. I've heard Peters got a half mill bump and they show it where SR does not.

It shouldn't be that tough to be accurate when that's what they do!
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 24 2017, 06:42 AM) *
The big difference between the two sites is the starting points, beginning cap available.

OTC has 179M, SPOTRAC has 175M. That should be just the league cap plus carryover from last year, both which should be known. No idea why different. I imagine that adjustments for LTBE bonus not earned credits go in here also. Hard to tell because SR has them as 0 and OTC doesn't show the detail.

The next smaller difference of about a million is that OTC has higher numbers for some because of contract escalators. I've heard Peters got a half mill bump and they show it where SR does not.

It shouldn't be that tough to be accurate when that's what they do!


the question is why trust OTC when it has a cap number that makes no sense. We know the cap number is 167 + rollover which is 7.6 million.....Spotrac would seem in line with that. That is all the difference in the world. I looked line by line at the salary differences but in the end the numbers come close in the aggregate. Oddly the OTC number is 1.5 million higher for cap hits so their number for available cap room makes no sense.

It seems pretty clear that the spotrac numbers seem the most accurate. The lack of signing any defensive help indicates it is, otherwise the Eagles could have signed a guy like Claiborne. I am a little amazed at all the whistling past the graveyard. I wish I was wrong but I can;t see it.
Joegrane
The age of quite a few important players is why I think Howie is in win-now mode.

QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 24 2017, 05:14 AM) *
...

Here's another thing to look at and where the personnel acquisition should be focused in the next year or two. 9 offensive players are 28 or over, 5 defensive players and 2 key ST players. Looking at what they've done and seeing Graham and Jenkins aging in addition to existing holes on the D seems to mean that defense could be the focus for a while....


Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 24 2017, 06:14 AM) *
I'm not a numbers guy, but I think there are a two relevant points to look at: Roseman IS a numbers guy, a very good one; and, the FO undoubtedly has a plan. There's no basis to know if it's a good one, but I'm sure they have one and the presence of Joe Douglas offers some hope that it is a reasonable plan. The overhauled personnel department and that Roseman has said he will lean on them is an important thing to watch this year.

They invested quite a bit in Wentz. When seeing all of the highly regarded college QBs who fail at this level because they have either been mismanaged or don't have talent around them, it's easy to see why they'd make it a priority to protect their investment by using resources there. As an acknowledged DKD I notice that every year in TC the defense seems to gel faster than the offense. Expanding that to team building, I'd guess it's not too different and if I'm right, it's another reason to have initial focus there.

There is no guarantee they'll let Mathews, Kelce and Kendricks go but most logic points that way. Mathews was good when he played but lived to his history of being injury prone and had issues with ball security. Stocking up on the OL, touting Seumalo at C, resigning a vet C most everyone believed to be moving on and watching Kelce's play decline, especially in a system that apparently needs a bigger body all seem to point to his departure. Kendricks played what, 20% of the downs last year? He was taking bad angles and overrunning plays with some regularity. He is a monster when he blitzes but Schwartz doesn't blitz often. Looking at their salaries and the team's cap situation, it will be surprising if they're on the team in August. Kelce's replacement is likely already on the team, Mathews' and Kendricks' replacements will probably be rookies so there shouldn't be a relevant cap hit other than dead money.


I think there is a ton of evidence that they are going to cut Matthews, they have not said a word about him when every beat writer has written that he is gone, unlike when the same was done about Kelce. I am curious as to why they did not cut Kendricks and designate him a june 1 cut. That cost them a lot of money for a guy you see destined for the street.

Also, if those 3 guys go than the savings found there can't be doubled by allowing for additional cap savings realized in cuts to sign draft picks. I see your point about age....there are lots of places they need to look to the future.
Joegrane
Because they know Hicks' history of poor health. They are about winning this year and recognize he could be a valuable, although overpriced, veteran backup.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 24 2017, 11:30 AM) *
...I am curious as to why they did not cut Kendricks and designate him a june 1 cut. That cost them a lot of money for a guy you see destined for the street.

...

Reality Fan
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Mar 24 2017, 01:06 PM) *
Because they know Hicks' history of poor health. They are about winning this year and recognize he could be a valuable, although overpriced, veteran backup.


That is my point....I don't think they cut him...which is another huge blow to your cap theory. I don't necessarily think that it is Hicks health concerns, he was healthy all year last year, but they are so thin at LB as it is.
Zero
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 24 2017, 01:09 PM) *
That is my point....I don't think they cut him...which is another huge blow to your cap theory. I don't necessarily think that it is Hicks health concerns, he was healthy all year last year, but they are so thin at LB as it is.

Possibly, but it's surprising that almost every reporter covering the Eagles says he's most likely gone by TC.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 24 2017, 03:12 PM) *
Possibly, but it's surprising that almost every reporter covering the Eagles says he's most likely gone by TC.


I hope and pray they just get rid of him. The most common theme was that they could not get a ham sandwich for him so they kept him hoping to trade him later. Worse case there is that he only costs 1.6 this year. That is the biggest hope because he will kill the cap this year if traded. He will count 4.8 against it in a trade.

It just seems to me that Howie is stumbling through this. I am sure he has a plan, I just can't figure out what the hell it is.
Phits
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 24 2017, 02:31 PM) *
It just seems to me that Howie is stumbling through this. I am sure he has a plan, I just can't figure out what the hell it is.

It helps that Howie has all the necessary information required. The rest of us don't have the specifics necessary to understand what the plan is and whether it can work.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 24 2017, 09:56 AM) *
the question is why trust OTC when it has a cap number that makes no sense. We know the cap number is 167 + rollover which is 7.6 million.....Spotrac would seem in line with that. That is all the difference in the world. I looked line by line at the salary differences but in the end the numbers come close in the aggregate. Oddly the OTC number is 1.5 million higher for cap hits so their number for available cap room makes no sense.

It seems pretty clear that the spotrac numbers seem the most accurate. The lack of signing any defensive help indicates it is, otherwise the Eagles could have signed a guy like Claiborne. I am a little amazed at all the whistling past the graveyard. I wish I was wrong but I can;t see it.


I have an idea s to why.

It's possible that Spotrac did not account for the add back of LTBE bonuses that didn't happen in 2016 and get reversed out in the new cap year, thus creating more cap room. I say this because they have a line in their detail that says adjustments and it is zero. I believe that this is where the reversing LTBE would normally go and it may be they didn't include it. Also, I believe they had us in the negative before we made moves for Foles and you can't be negative once the new year kicked in in early March so that had to be wrong at that point in time. The fact that they had us in the negative had to be wrong. Also, when you add back the savings for cutting players to make room for the draftees, the NFLPA and OTC are fairly close to each other while Spotrac is way off. Lastly, it was Spotrac last year that was off in our bet and OTC was correct, much to my chagrin, costing me the loss in the Bradford bet. sad.gif

I'll hitch my wagon to OTC. I may go off the cliff, but I'll go off thinking I have 5M more in cap space. !!
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 24 2017, 06:24 PM) *
I have an idea s to why.

It's possible that Spotrac did not account for the add back of LTBE bonuses that didn't happen in 2016 and get reversed out in the new cap year, thus creating more cap room. I say this because they have a line in their detail that says adjustments and it is zero. I believe that this is where the reversing LTBE would normally go and it may be they didn't include it. Also, I believe they had us in the negative before we made moves for Foles and you can't be negative once the new year kicked in in early March so that had to be wrong at that point in time. The fact that they had us in the negative had to be wrong. Also, when you add back the savings for cutting players to make room for the draftees, the NFLPA and OTC are fairly close to each other while Spotrac is way off. Lastly, it was Spotrac last year that was off in our bet and OTC was correct, much to my chagrin, costing me the loss in the Bradford bet. sad.gif

I'll hitch my wagon to OTC. I may go off the cliff, but I'll go off thinking I have 5M more in cap space. !!


I am trying to find some information on this but I am pretty sure that is part of the rollover. And please remember, if you are cutting Kelce and Kendricks and Matthews you can't count those as cap savings AND use those 3 spots to calculate savings from cuts to sign drafted players.....damn accountants!!!..lol Foles' cap hit is only 1.6 and I think that Ertz adjustment freed up the space for that. I wish there was one definitive site that was reliable so we would have a little certainty. Technically the Eagles only need to have their top 51 stay under the cap until the regular season starts.

It is actually fun to try to figure it out.
nephillymike
One thing that at first puzzled me, but there may be some reasons.

If it is reasonable that two of the three of Mathews, Kelce and Kendricks will be gone, and if Howie knows that's reasonable, then why wouldn't he have cut them while there were still good FA's available and the cap space would have come in real handy? If he was planning to trade them, he would have had a real good idea early on in his talks with other GM's a good idea of what their value was.

Kelce and Kendricks could have been cut at any time.

Even Mathews could be cut while injured and it would have resulted in cap savings of about $3M instead of the $4M if they wait until cleared.

Why would Howie play it out this way?

1. He really sees Mathews, Kelce and Kendricks as contributors that are worth the contracts they have.

2. He sees at least two of them as gone, but didn't want to have the cap space during FA, for concern of setting fans expectations as a team who can buy more FA's.

3. He sees at least two of them are gone, but thinks their trade value between now and the beginning of training camp is greater than what their money could have bought in FA.

4. Because of past spending sprees, the team has overspent versus historical practices last year, and he needs to pay back some of that by exercising more restraint this year than last year. The way to do that, is not have cap space in FA as a reason to not do as much as you can, make the cuts after the draft and bank the unspent cap for future years and to pay back some of the over spending of last few years.

5. Howie didn't realize this and just blew it.

IMO, #'s 1 & 5 are unlikely. #2,3 & 4 are possible. I don't see #3 as being reasonable, as the quality of players early in FA and more than what is available after the drat or the value of any picks received in a trade.

I'm guessing 2 or 4.

Anyone?
Reality Fan
This is a guy who spent 7 million on Chase Daniel and you think 1 or 5 unlikely?

if it is not 1 or 5 than I go with 3. I think 2 or 4 unlikely.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 25 2017, 11:08 AM) *
This is a guy who spent 7 million on Chase Daniel and you think 1 or 5 unlikely?

if it is not 1 or 5 than I go with 3. I think 2 or 4 unlikely.


Ouch!

"This is a guy who spent 7 million on Chase Daniel and you think 1 or 5 unlikely?"

That's a spot for a "drop the microphone" emoji if I ever heard one!

Well, if you go with #3, do you think it will play out as getting us more than the cap space in FA could have gotten us?

Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 25 2017, 12:26 PM) *
Ouch!

"This is a guy who spent 7 million on Chase Daniel and you think 1 or 5 unlikely?"

That's a spot for a "drop the microphone" emoji if I ever heard one!

Well, if you go with #3, do you think it will play out as getting us more than the cap space in FA could have gotten us?


Well Kendricks will cost us more in cap space with a trade as far as I can see so maybe he cuts him AFTER paying him the extra money and Kelce is traded and Matthews cut so I guess I would say no to the trade part.....I honestly have no idea what the hell he is doing.
Eyrie
There would be no point to paying Kendricks his roster bonus and then cutting him, so I think he'll be here next year.

Cutting Mathews is just a matter of time.

There have been too many positive comments from the team about Kelce so I expect he'll stay for another year, unless there is another Bridgewater/Bradford scenario.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Mar 26 2017, 05:04 AM) *
There would be no point to paying Kendricks his roster bonus and then cutting him, so I think he'll be here next year.

Cutting Mathews is just a matter of time.

There have been too many positive comments from the team about Kelce so I expect he'll stay for another year, unless there is another Bridgewater/Bradford scenario.

Why would they possibly pay a disgruntled player who plays approx 20% of the defensive snaps that kind of money?

It makes no sense to me.

Is Schwartz gonna change and start blitzing him?

I don't get it.
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 26 2017, 08:36 AM) *
Why would they possibly pay a disgruntled player who plays approx 20% of the defensive snaps that kind of money?

It makes no sense to me.

Is Schwartz gonna change and start blitzing him?

I don't get it.

Agree. Schwartz isn't a dummy though, maybe he's thinking he'll adjust the defense to his talent ... that would be an interesting development in this town. wink.gif

In 2018 his base salary is $5.85m and his cap hit is $7.6m. That's not bad for a starting LB, so if they can find a way to play him to his strengths and he plays well he either improves the defense or his trade value is increased. I wouldn't be surprised if Schwartz does blitz more with their CB situation. We're so used to coaches who insist on fitting players to scheme maybe these guys will take a more logical approach and it's one more hole that doesn't need to be filled.
Eyrie
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 26 2017, 01:36 PM) *
Why would they possibly pay a disgruntled player who plays approx 20% of the defensive snaps that kind of money?

It makes no sense to me.

Is Schwartz gonna change and start blitzing him?

I don't get it.

It makes no sense to me either, particularly given our cap situation, but the fact is that someone has decided that Kendricks will be worth spending all that money on or they wouldn't have done so.
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.