Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
other teams doing stupid shit helps my team, my team doing stupid shit doesnt help my team. and yes you have to have a QB, but its not like either team is going to do anything of note with either QB, so why not just go cheap and get what you pay for instead of over paying, damaging future roster funds, and still end coming up short? is one and done in the playoffs really that much more satisfying than not making them at all, especially knowing that you are taking away 1 or 2 damn good players in a couple year and got nothing to show for it?
its not really 150 million, its actually 2 years 60 million, so while yes their is can kicking taking place, its for a lot less than what we are looking at with KC, and if I was a fan of the aints, i would be pissed. even if it goes the full 4 years, that works out to be 35 per year, which is likely more than Carr is worth, but how much more will the cap increase over the next 4 years when that 50M number skews the average?
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
Kicking the can down the road isn't always bad, depending on what you're trying to accomplish. There also is an aspect to what your opportunities are to get out of deals. So it has to be graded on a case by case basis. Some teams also are strong believer in the time value of cap space. E.G opening up cap today is worth more on a per dollar basis than that dollar is worth in the future. With the cap continually rising it isn't a bad argument either.
But what I would hold is that kicking the can does not necessarily enable dead money depending on how you terminate the deal. The Tomlinson contract was a bit worse since the Vikings didn't have many opportunities to get out clean and had written a deal that was going to be awfully hard to write an extension on top of.
putting todays money into future un-played years based on the notion of an increasing cap is bad economics. you know that every agent out there knows the cap is up, they know that their players should be getting more, its not like the cap is going up and average player contracts arent going to follow suite. there is no other way to cut it than by overpaying today, we are going to have to take money away from some player in the future, and that very likely will have a negative affect on a future roster at the expense of todays roster, sure there are times that this gamble is worth the risk, but is this Vikings team really worth borrowing from one in 2 or 3 years?
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
Kicking the can down the road isn't always bad, depending on what you're trying to accomplish. There also is an aspect to what your opportunities are to get out of deals. So it has to be graded on a case by case basis. Some teams also are strong believer in the time value of cap space. E.G opening up cap today is worth more on a per dollar basis than that dollar is worth in the future. With the cap continually rising it isn't a bad argument either.
But what I would hold is that kicking the can does not necessarily enable dead money depending on how you terminate the deal. The Tomlinson contract was a bit worse since the Vikings didn't have many opportunities to get out clean and had written a deal that was going to be awfully hard to write an extension on top of.
putting todays money into future un-played years based on the notion of an increasing cap is bad economics. you know that every agent out there knows the cap is up, they know that their players should be getting more, its not like the cap is going up and average player contracts arent going to follow suite. there is no other way to cut it than by overpaying today, we are going to have to take money away from some player in the future, and that very likely will have a negative affect on a future roster at the expense of todays roster, sure there are times that this gamble is worth the risk, but is this Vikings team really worth borrowing from one in 2 or 3 years?
That isn't 100% true since no market follows cap inflation to a 'T'. Yes, the market for QBs may continue to increase in perpetuity with the cap. But that hasn't happened with RBs, off the ball LBs, etc. So effectively paying later in inflation ridden position groups would in a pure math sense play out as advantageous.
I am not saying I agree with the move on Kirks contract. Just making a point for why moving cap into future years isn't some cardinal sin.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
Kicking the can down the road isn't always bad, depending on what you're trying to accomplish. There also is an aspect to what your opportunities are to get out of deals. So it has to be graded on a case by case basis. Some teams also are strong believer in the time value of cap space. E.G opening up cap today is worth more on a per dollar basis than that dollar is worth in the future. With the cap continually rising it isn't a bad argument either.
But what I would hold is that kicking the can does not necessarily enable dead money depending on how you terminate the deal. The Tomlinson contract was a bit worse since the Vikings didn't have many opportunities to get out clean and had written a deal that was going to be awfully hard to write an extension on top of.
Do you think the reworked Cousins deal makes it awfully hard to write an extension?
He has dead money cap hits of 10.25M in 2024 & 2025 plus 4M in 2026 & 2027.
If they decide to do a 2 year 80M extension next year they can give him a 24M signing bonus and salaries of 28M in 2024 & 2025 to have cap hits of 44.25M in those year and then have to eat 20M in 2026.
Quote: @MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
Kicking the can down the road isn't always bad, depending on what you're trying to accomplish. There also is an aspect to what your opportunities are to get out of deals. So it has to be graded on a case by case basis. Some teams also are strong believer in the time value of cap space. E.G opening up cap today is worth more on a per dollar basis than that dollar is worth in the future. With the cap continually rising it isn't a bad argument either.
But what I would hold is that kicking the can does not necessarily enable dead money depending on how you terminate the deal. The Tomlinson contract was a bit worse since the Vikings didn't have many opportunities to get out clean and had written a deal that was going to be awfully hard to write an extension on top of.
Do you think the reworked Cousins deal makes it awfully hard to write an extension?
He has dead money cap hits of 10.25M in 2024 & 2025 plus 4M in 2026 & 2027.
If they decide to do a 2 year 80M extension next year they can give him a 24M signing bonus and salaries of 28M in 2024 & 2025 to have cap hits of 44.25M in those year and then have to eat 20M in 2026.
The 4 year void structure keeps an extension alive. It also allows them to move on with a post-June 1 agreement with Kirk. Effectively they can avoid the money accelerating into 2024 if needed. So given the structure it wasn't an awful way to create cap room considering they'll save other space in retrospect due to avoiding some moves now. E.G kicking money on Dalvin or Harrison's deals.
Only drawback is that it gives Kirk and his reps added negotiating power on an extension since the dead money stay with the Vikings irregardless. So there are still 3 outcome on the table:
- Extension of some sort whether that be in-season or after the current year. Just don't quite see why you would need to wait and see how he performs. Just odd.
- Post June-1 Cut. Basically you end up splitting the dead money $10.25M in 24' and $18.25M in 25'.
- Kirk walks in UFA. All $28.5M accelerates onto the 24' cap but they're out of the contract.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
Kicking the can down the road isn't always bad, depending on what you're trying to accomplish. There also is an aspect to what your opportunities are to get out of deals. So it has to be graded on a case by case basis. Some teams also are strong believer in the time value of cap space. E.G opening up cap today is worth more on a per dollar basis than that dollar is worth in the future. With the cap continually rising it isn't a bad argument either.
But what I would hold is that kicking the can does not necessarily enable dead money depending on how you terminate the deal. The Tomlinson contract was a bit worse since the Vikings didn't have many opportunities to get out clean and had written a deal that was going to be awfully hard to write an extension on top of.
Do you think the reworked Cousins deal makes it awfully hard to write an extension?
He has dead money cap hits of 10.25M in 2024 & 2025 plus 4M in 2026 & 2027.
If they decide to do a 2 year 80M extension next year they can give him a 24M signing bonus and salaries of 28M in 2024 & 2025 to have cap hits of 44.25M in those year and then have to eat 20M in 2026.
The 4 year void structure keeps an extension alive. It also allows them to move on with a post-June 1 agreement with Kirk. Effectively they can avoid the money accelerating into 2024 if needed. So given the structure it wasn't an awful way to create cap room considering they'll save other space in retrospect due to avoiding some moves now. E.G kicking money on Dalvin or Harrison's deals.
Only drawback is that it gives Kirk and his reps added negotiating power on an extension since the dead money stay with the Vikings irregardless. So there are still 3 outcome on the table:
- Extension of some sort whether that be in-season or after the current year. Just don't quite see why you would need to wait and see how he performs. Just odd.
- Post June-1 Cut. Basically you end up splitting the dead money $10.25M in 24' and $18.25M in 25'.
- Kirk walks in UFA. All $28.5M accelerates onto the 24' cap but they're out of the contract.
Is a trade even an option or something that would make sense for the Vikings at this point?
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
Kicking the can down the road isn't always bad, depending on what you're trying to accomplish. There also is an aspect to what your opportunities are to get out of deals. So it has to be graded on a case by case basis. Some teams also are strong believer in the time value of cap space. E.G opening up cap today is worth more on a per dollar basis than that dollar is worth in the future. With the cap continually rising it isn't a bad argument either.
But what I would hold is that kicking the can does not necessarily enable dead money depending on how you terminate the deal. The Tomlinson contract was a bit worse since the Vikings didn't have many opportunities to get out clean and had written a deal that was going to be awfully hard to write an extension on top of.
Do you think the reworked Cousins deal makes it awfully hard to write an extension?
He has dead money cap hits of 10.25M in 2024 & 2025 plus 4M in 2026 & 2027.
If they decide to do a 2 year 80M extension next year they can give him a 24M signing bonus and salaries of 28M in 2024 & 2025 to have cap hits of 44.25M in those year and then have to eat 20M in 2026.
The 4 year void structure keeps an extension alive. It also allows them to move on with a post-June 1 agreement with Kirk. Effectively they can avoid the money accelerating into 2024 if needed. So given the structure it wasn't an awful way to create cap room considering they'll save other space in retrospect due to avoiding some moves now. E.G kicking money on Dalvin or Harrison's deals.
Only drawback is that it gives Kirk and his reps added negotiating power on an extension since the dead money stay with the Vikings irregardless. So there are still 3 outcome on the table:
- Extension of some sort whether that be in-season or after the current year. Just don't quite see why you would need to wait and see how he performs. Just odd.
- Post June-1 Cut. Basically you end up splitting the dead money $10.25M in 24' and $18.25M in 25'.
- Kirk walks in UFA. All $28.5M accelerates onto the 24' cap but they're out of the contract.
Is a trade even an option or something that would make sense for the Vikings at this point?
Its more unlikely now unless the Vikings had the mindset that they wanted to both eat the dead money and pay the $20M in cash. If Kirk were to be traded it would have made more sense to send him with the $20M bonus to another team or find a way to split it with a trade partner.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
Kicking the can down the road isn't always bad, depending on what you're trying to accomplish. There also is an aspect to what your opportunities are to get out of deals. So it has to be graded on a case by case basis. Some teams also are strong believer in the time value of cap space. E.G opening up cap today is worth more on a per dollar basis than that dollar is worth in the future. With the cap continually rising it isn't a bad argument either.
But what I would hold is that kicking the can does not necessarily enable dead money depending on how you terminate the deal. The Tomlinson contract was a bit worse since the Vikings didn't have many opportunities to get out clean and had written a deal that was going to be awfully hard to write an extension on top of.
Do you think the reworked Cousins deal makes it awfully hard to write an extension?
He has dead money cap hits of 10.25M in 2024 & 2025 plus 4M in 2026 & 2027.
If they decide to do a 2 year 80M extension next year they can give him a 24M signing bonus and salaries of 28M in 2024 & 2025 to have cap hits of 44.25M in those year and then have to eat 20M in 2026.
The 4 year void structure keeps an extension alive. It also allows them to move on with a post-June 1 agreement with Kirk. Effectively they can avoid the money accelerating into 2024 if needed. So given the structure it wasn't an awful way to create cap room considering they'll save other space in retrospect due to avoiding some moves now. E.G kicking money on Dalvin or Harrison's deals.
Only drawback is that it gives Kirk and his reps added negotiating power on an extension since the dead money stay with the Vikings irregardless. So there are still 3 outcome on the table:
- Extension of some sort whether that be in-season or after the current year. Just don't quite see why you would need to wait and see how he performs. Just odd.
- Post June-1 Cut. Basically you end up splitting the dead money $10.25M in 24' and $18.25M in 25'.
- Kirk walks in UFA. All $28.5M accelerates onto the 24' cap but they're out of the contract.
Is a trade even an option or something that would make sense for the Vikings at this point?
Its more unlikely now unless the Vikings had the mindset that they wanted to both eat the dead money and pay the $20M in cash. If Kirk were to be traded it would have made more sense to send him with the $20M bonus to another team or find a way to split it with a trade partner.
C'mon Geoff, I know you're just being nice, but you know as well as I do, this was never an option. Teams never trade their perfectly good QB for a seat at the craps table. It would never, could never happen.
Vikings draft a QB, different story, but until then....
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
Kicking the can down the road isn't always bad, depending on what you're trying to accomplish. There also is an aspect to what your opportunities are to get out of deals. So it has to be graded on a case by case basis. Some teams also are strong believer in the time value of cap space. E.G opening up cap today is worth more on a per dollar basis than that dollar is worth in the future. With the cap continually rising it isn't a bad argument either.
But what I would hold is that kicking the can does not necessarily enable dead money depending on how you terminate the deal. The Tomlinson contract was a bit worse since the Vikings didn't have many opportunities to get out clean and had written a deal that was going to be awfully hard to write an extension on top of.
putting todays money into future un-played years based on the notion of an increasing cap is bad economics. you know that every agent out there knows the cap is up, they know that their players should be getting more, its not like the cap is going up and average player contracts arent going to follow suite. there is no other way to cut it than by overpaying today, we are going to have to take money away from some player in the future, and that very likely will have a negative affect on a future roster at the expense of todays roster, sure there are times that this gamble is worth the risk, but is this Vikings team really worth borrowing from one in 2 or 3 years?
That isn't 100% true since no market follows cap inflation to a 'T'. Yes, the market for QBs may continue to increase in perpetuity with the cap. But that hasn't happened with RBs, off the ball LBs, etc. So effectively paying later in inflation ridden position groups would in a pure math sense play out as advantageous.
I am not saying I agree with the move on Kirks contract. Just making a point for why moving cap into future years isn't some cardinal sin.
We are seeing increases at enough other positions that its pretty safe to say that that bigger pie will have plenty of forks digging into it. Enough to say that it's very likely that despite the cap increases will not offset repeated deferred cap hits. Its ok to borrow a little against the future, but the team has been really getting comfortable with it and it is creating issues for building the roster.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
Vikings weren't going to be able to touch that, good for him. Leaves a decent sized hole along the Vikings front 3 and accelerates $7.5M in dead money onto the 2023 cap. Nearly up to $30M in dead money at this point.
Dead money does not matter. Cap space matters.
From what perspective, talking about 2024 or roster building as a whole? Dead money matters quite a bit in the current year.
Dead money counts against the salary cap 100% doesn't it? So $30M in dead money means we effectively have $30M less to spend in the current year?
exactly. dead money is that magic money that leads some to believe that the cap is a myth, that you can just push bonuses and other cap hits into future years and deal with them then, well this is what they turn into.. dead money that becomes somebody elses problem because the players that a GM thought would be worth over spending on, actually werent, he gets fired and the dead caps hits from those players becomes the new GMs problem.
The cap is a myth thing is meant for folks who incorrectly think it's a stone tablet, when in reality it's elastic. Flexible, adjustable, bendable, posable in a hundred dimensions. Dead money isn't etched in stone either. It can be diminished or eliminated altogether with restructures or extensions.
Guess who entered free agency with the most dead money? The Eagles at $46M. Vikings ranked 21st with $3.8M. And, yes, that has since changed with the Thielen and Kendricks release.
it all has to be paid at some point, you can play all the contractual voodoo games you want, but in the end, if its put into a contract and paid out, it will hit the Vikings cap some year. Its not a myth, its called robbing from peter to pay paul, and its really not a good business practice, sure its handy and effective once in a while, but at some point peter wants his and then shit gets really tough, the Vikings are playing closer and closer to that point each year with trying to put a serviceable team around bad contracts that players performance doesnt meet.
But some of you seem to think the Vikings are the only one playing this game. Again, before free agency, the Vikings had $3.8M dead. The Eagles had $46M. Now, after releasing Kendricks and Thielen, the Vikings have $27M and nearly all of that will be gone next season. But we'll likely generate more by then. The point is that it fluctuates wildly each year and it really has little bearing on success or failure. It's not ideal; it's inefficient. But it's just not as crippling as some of you make it sound. It's far more important to have a QB.
Saints were, what, $55M over the cap when they signed Derek Carr to a $150M contract? Guessing you think that was foolish. Can kicking. I'm no Carr fan, but I'll bet you a lutefisk sandwich that the Saints improve quite a bit in 2023. Ya gotta have a QB.
Kicking the can down the road isn't always bad, depending on what you're trying to accomplish. There also is an aspect to what your opportunities are to get out of deals. So it has to be graded on a case by case basis. Some teams also are strong believer in the time value of cap space. E.G opening up cap today is worth more on a per dollar basis than that dollar is worth in the future. With the cap continually rising it isn't a bad argument either.
But what I would hold is that kicking the can does not necessarily enable dead money depending on how you terminate the deal. The Tomlinson contract was a bit worse since the Vikings didn't have many opportunities to get out clean and had written a deal that was going to be awfully hard to write an extension on top of.
Do you think the reworked Cousins deal makes it awfully hard to write an extension?
He has dead money cap hits of 10.25M in 2024 & 2025 plus 4M in 2026 & 2027.
If they decide to do a 2 year 80M extension next year they can give him a 24M signing bonus and salaries of 28M in 2024 & 2025 to have cap hits of 44.25M in those year and then have to eat 20M in 2026.
The 4 year void structure keeps an extension alive. It also allows them to move on with a post-June 1 agreement with Kirk. Effectively they can avoid the money accelerating into 2024 if needed. So given the structure it wasn't an awful way to create cap room considering they'll save other space in retrospect due to avoiding some moves now. E.G kicking money on Dalvin or Harrison's deals.
Only drawback is that it gives Kirk and his reps added negotiating power on an extension since the dead money stay with the Vikings irregardless. So there are still 3 outcome on the table:
- Extension of some sort whether that be in-season or after the current year. Just don't quite see why you would need to wait and see how he performs. Just odd.
- Post June-1 Cut. Basically you end up splitting the dead money $10.25M in 24' and $18.25M in 25'.
- Kirk walks in UFA. All $28.5M accelerates onto the 24' cap but they're out of the contract.
Is a trade even an option or something that would make sense for the Vikings at this point?
Its more unlikely now unless the Vikings had the mindset that they wanted to both eat the dead money and pay the $20M in cash. If Kirk were to be traded it would have made more sense to send him with the $20M bonus to another team or find a way to split it with a trade partner.
C'mon Geoff, I know you're just being nice, but you know as well as I do, this was never an option. Teams never trade their perfectly good QB for a seat at the craps table. It would never, could never happen.
Vikings draft a QB, different story, but until then....
I think they were open minded with Kirk. But no, they didn't seriously consider trading him. But walking him into FA doesn't come across as being overly confident. If he were untouchable they'd give him a long-term extension.
|
