(03-04-2016, 05:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So the Ravens got s player to replace Ngata who played for free?

if you cut a player that creates dead money you still have to pay another player to replace him.

Fred, the dead money was created when he signed the contract, not when they cut him. There was going to be $7.5M of dead money if he was on their roster or not. On the roster he had a cap hit of $16M. Off the roster, a cap hit of $7.5M. By trading him they saved $8.5M to use on other players and got a couple of draft picks for a player they were going to lose. Sometimes you have to pick the least shitty of two shitty choices. Faced with the same decision, which would you have chosen?  I know they didn't replace him with someone who played for free. 

(03-04-2016, 05:34 PM)BengalChris Wrote: The information is out there you just have to know where to find it.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cincinnati-bengals/cap/

You can see the basic data you need at this link. You will note that Peko's contract has no dead money in it, so cutting Peko would save the team 3.75M. But I don't see them doing that because he's a leader on the team and his replacement is nowhere on the roster. They won't cut him and hope a draft pick can fill that roll. They'll keep Peko and hopefully draft a NT to be his eventual replacement.

From scanning through the list of contracts, the ones that I see that could be cut and replaced are Nugent, Hawk and Hunt. But I doubt the team cuts Hawk unless there's a viable alternative drafted. With Burfict out for 3 weeks, the team will feel it needs Hawk in the fold.

The team has plenty of cap space, it just isn't going to use all of it and that's really the issue fans have. Even if they roll over some to next year, there's still plenty left to work with, but won't use it.

In 2015 we used most of our cap space, except $8M and we rolled over $7.5M of that. But we also resigned AJ last year and we had $4.8M is dead money in 2015. This year we only have $192K. So that's $4.6M more to work with. But, if we don't use it, it does no good.

I know it is unlikely they release him and that he doesn't have dead money. Just more or less checking I understand how the process works. 

(03-04-2016, 05:34 PM)BengalChris Wrote: The information is out there you just have to know where to find it.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cincinnati-bengals/cap/

You can see the basic data you need at this link. You will note that Peko's contract has no dead money in it, so cutting Peko would save the team 3.75M. But I don't see them doing that because he's a leader on the team and his replacement is nowhere on the roster. They won't cut him and hope a draft pick can fill that roll. They'll keep Peko and hopefully draft a NT to be his eventual replacement.

From scanning through the list of contracts, the ones that I see that could be cut and replaced are Nugent, Hawk and Hunt. But I doubt the team cuts Hawk unless there's a viable alternative drafted. With Burfict out for 3 weeks, the team will feel it needs Hawk in the fold.

The team has plenty of cap space, it just isn't going to use all of it and that's really the issue fans have. Even if they roll over some to next year, there's still plenty left to work with, but won't use it.

In 2015 we used most of our cap space, except $8M and we rolled over $7.5M of that. But we also resigned AJ last year and we had $4.8M is dead money in 2015. This year we only have $192K. So that's $4.6M more to work with. But, if we don't use it, it does no good.

Hawk played 26% of the snaps last season and he didn't play when Vontaz was out for 8 weeks,  Peko can be replaced by a combination of draft pick and deshawn Williams. Those two guys are easily replaceable. 

(03-04-2016, 04:17 PM)jowczarski Wrote: The biggest frustration isn't necessarily the cap number NOW. It's the refusal to add additional cap space by cutting the right players. The biggest criticism of the Bengals is they are very loyal to certain players and have never shown the foresight to look at the current, under-contract guys and see where they could upgrade.

That’s true – when based on the entirety of the league. The way the team looks at it is this – they’re selling all these guys on hey, sign here for less money up front in roster bonuses, or to spread your signing bonus over 3-5 years – because you’ll be here in 5 years to collect all of it. Go to Team B for “45 million” but they’ll cut you after a year or two and you’ll only collect $10 of it and have to pay back some money. So, that’s what you’re selling. But if you just go ahead and cut Leon Hall or Domata Peko or whoever at the end of the day, the players will say ‘eff you, you don’t keep your word, you cut guys anyway.’ It’s either/or. And the Bengals would rather keep Hall and Peko around for that last year to prove their point, to validate their tough negotiating tactic, vs. having to get into the game of false money up front.

This loyalty approach is so frustrating. Players and situations change. For example, Leon is no longer the player he was when he signed that contract. Rather than cut or restructure his contract to better use that $ for the sake of the team, we're stuck with a faded player and can't allocate that money to make improvements. So it hurts us in 2 ways, really.

I like how the Bengals have been drafting and I like that they retain (most of) their own, but this "loyalty in exchange for low money up front" seems like it really keeps us from replacing bad players with better ones via free agency. For a team that has been stuck in a playoff rut for so long, you'd think they'd consider altering their approach - if only for a year.

Of course, we all know how stubborn Mike Brown is.

(03-04-2016, 06:53 PM)J24 Wrote: Hawk played 26% of the snaps last season and he didn't play when Vontaz was out for 8 weeks,  Peko can be replaced by a combination of draft pick and deshawn Williams. Those two guys are easily replaceable. 

Every team in the league passed on Williams last year when we waived him.  How does a guy who can not even earn a roster spot in the NFL just step in and replace a guy who took 50% of the snaps on one of the best defense in the league?

It is not that easy to just plug in guys off the street in order to save a little money.

(03-04-2016, 04:42 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I don't know what their cap hits would be this year, but the incentive to sign a long term deal is injury and guaranteed money.  If they get hurt this year it will diminish the value of the next contract.  It's a risk benefit thing.  Is the risk of injury worth the benefit of a potentially higher pay day next year?  Or does the benefit of slightly less guaranteed money outweigh the risk of injury diminishing their next contract even more?

The long term deal would have more guaranteed money than the 5th year option affords. Benefit to the player.
The salary cap hit will reduce in 2016 if the player agreed to a long term contract by the proration of the signing bonus. Benefit team (and player by big pay day ).

There is zero reason to not extend these players. By team or by player.

(03-04-2016, 01:40 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Thank you.  That is the salary cap accounting details which the Bengals never put out with the smoke and mirrors.

Let's say the Bengals draft a 1st round DT and release Peko.  Peko's cap savings would be roughly $3.5M +/-.  Right?  D.J. Humphrey was drafted 24th last year with rookie cap hit of $1.6M.

That's roughly, a ball park $2M cap savings (just to make the math easy for me.)  That cap savings will damn near cover the rest of your rookie pool, correct?  Please let me know if I'm wrong.  Thanks.

The 1st round pick generally displaces a below average salary on the team which costs more. Dj humphries was 24th overall last year and had a $1.6 salary cap hit.
The 2nd round pick also displaces a below average salary on the team and costs a little more. 54th overall selection Ameer Abdullah had a $755k salary cap hit.
Generally, from the 3rd round pick on, the added salary and the lost salary are a push. 86th overall pick David Johnson had a $595k salary cap hit.

Basically, the entire rookie class adds about $2.0 million to our salary cap, especially when drafting 24th overall.

(03-04-2016, 04:25 PM)Stormborn Wrote: Jim, honestly, picture yourself as a fan, reading that your team is likely refusing to appropriately compensate the loss of a key weapon because they want a late 4th round pick in the next year's draft.
Doesn't it pain you to write stuff like this? Because the truth hurts.

Aj green
Tyler Eifert
Marvin jones
Gio Bernard
Mo sanu

Sanu may be the 5th receiving option.
Marvin jones is either the 3rd or 4th behind Gio.

(03-04-2016, 04:51 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: As far as the possible Newhouse comp pick. I always follow these very closely and there is a site that goes into great detail every year about comp picks and are usually pretty accurate. This year they say we will be eligible for a pick for him but likely won't land one because of the large number of players who qualify their old teams for comp picks. With only 32 comp picks to be had it appears Newhouse was so far down the list that he wasn't one of the top 32 qualifying FA losses. Just in case anyone was interested, and it's not set in stone but it's a pretty good bet we don't get one this year.

I have read that new houses 14 nfl starts will also factor into the compensatory pick equation.

Though his salary was small, his starts and snap count was big.

How pathetic was THAT offensive line!!!

(03-04-2016, 04:56 PM)Stormborn Wrote: Dumb excuse. We can get him at appropriate value, and still be fine in the cap.

Sometimes going just over your set value to retain or bring in important assets is well worth it, but the FO will never know because change sucks. 

Maualuga s salary hit was $7 million 3 years ago, $4 million last year, and $3.7 this year.

The bengals seem to overpay some and don't others.

The logic is their own, and it often doesn't make sense to others.

(03-04-2016, 09:45 PM)Bengalfan11164 Wrote: Aj green
Tyler Eifert
Marvin jones
Gio Bernard
Mo sanu

Sanu may be the 5th receiving option.
Marvin jones is either the 3rd or 4th behind Gio.

You know what happens when secondary options get downgraded?

Your primary options become more in focused for defenders.

If the Bengals are doing so well at the top why aren't players willing to sign here for less money to try for a ring like Denver and NE?

(03-04-2016, 09:45 PM)Bengalfan11164 Wrote: Aj green
Tyler Eifert
Marvin jones
Gio Bernard
Mo sanu

Sanu may be the 5th receiving option.
Marvin jones is either the 3rd or 4th behind Gio.

Bengals regular season receiving stats for 2015
AJ Green 86 catches for 1,297 yards averaging 15.1 yards per and 10 TDs with 1 FUM
Marvin Jones 65 catches for 816 yards averaging 12.6 yards per and 4 TDs with 0 FUM
Tyler Eifert 52 catches for 615 yards averaging 11.8 yards per and 13 TDs with 0 FUM
Gio Bernard 49 catches for 472 yards averaging 9.6 yards per and 0 TDs with  1 FUM
Mo Sanu 33 catches for 394 yards averaging 11.9 yards per and 0 TDs with 1 FUM

I believe Marvin Jones was the #2 receiving option except in the red zone where Eifert got more looks.

(03-04-2016, 11:55 PM)BengalChris Wrote: Bengals regular season receiving stats for 2015
AJ Green 86 catches for 1,297 yards averaging 15.1 yards per and 10 TDs with 1 FUM
Marvin Jones 65 catches for 816 yards averaging 12.6 yards per and 4 TDs with 0 FUM
Tyler Eifert 52 catches for 615 yards averaging 11.8 yards per and 13 TDs with 0 FUM
Gio Bernard 49 catches for 472 yards averaging 9.6 yards per and 0 TDs with  1 FUM
Mo Sanu 33 catches for 394 yards averaging 11.9 yards per and 0 TDs with 1 FUM

I believe Marvin Jones was the #2 receiving option except in the red zone where Eifert got more looks.

You are correct. Marvin Jones was the #2 option.

The Bengals have enough money to extend Marvin Jones.
I think that the Bengals SHOULD extend Marvin Jones.

I don't know what Marvin Jones feels his ($) value is, but it is far from the AJ Green value ($15 million per).

If Marvin Jones wants $7 million per, then the Bengals should re-sign him.
If Marvin Jones wants $10 million per, then I don't know if there is wisdom in re-signing him.

Is Marvin Jones as good (valued) as Randall Cobb? $10 million per? I don't think so.
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay-packers/randall-cobb/

Per game, Marvin Jones averaged 4 targets, 51 yards, 12.6 ypc, 1/4 TDs, & 2 First Downs.

This in a year that the Bengals deliberately (and successfully) started not forcing the ball to AJ Green and with a very sub-par rushing attack.

I like Marvin Jones and extending him would really open up the draft. But, I just don't know how great he is.

Discussing Sanu is just more of the same logic above. Sanu is probably equitable to the Andrew Hawkins contract ($3.4 per), though Hawkins wasn't worth what the Browns paid him.
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cleveland-browns/andrew-hawkins/

(03-04-2016, 10:52 PM)Atomic Orange Wrote: If the Bengals are doing so well at the top why aren't players willing to sign here for less money to try for a ring like Denver and NE?

Which players on Denver & New England signed for less money to stay?

New England lost both of their starting CBs in Free Agency last year. Revis & the guy that left to go to the Broncos.
The Patriots traded their olinemen to the Bucs that WOULDN'T take a pay cut.

Brock Osweiler hasn't signed with the Broncos.
Peyton Manning hasn't offered to take a pay cut; he re-structured his contract last year and earned every penny back by winning the Super Bowl.

Who has taken a discount on these teams?

(03-05-2016, 01:41 PM)Bengalfan11164 Wrote: Which players on Denver & New England signed for less money to stay?

New England lost both of their starting CBs in Free Agency last year.  Revis & the guy that left to go to the Broncos.
The Patriots traded their olinemen to the Bucs that WOULDN'T take a pay cut.  

Brock Osweiler hasn't signed with the Broncos.
Peyton Manning hasn't offered to take a pay cut; he re-structured his contract last year and earned every penny back by winning the Super Bowl.  

Who has taken a discount on these teams?

That would be Aqib Talib, who Revis actually replaced. The other starting CB who left with Revis was Brandon Browner, who signed with the Saints.

I think you have a bit of a point (that players rarely take discounts to pursue championships), but Revis and Browner probably aren't the best examples to use. Both signed with the Pats for cheap in order to chase a ring. They got their rings, so they went back to pursuing $$$.

(03-05-2016, 02:29 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: That would be Aqib Talib, who Revis actually replaced. The other starting CB who left with Revis was Brandon Browner, who signed with the Saints.

I think you have a bit of a point (that players rarely take discounts to pursue championships), but Revis and Browner probably aren't the best examples to use. Both signed with the Pats for cheap in order to chase a ring. They got their rings, so they went back to pursuing $$$.

Revis received from the Patriots a $10 million signing bonus, $500k per game bonus ($8 million regular season +$1.5 million post-season). So, Revis was $19+ million.
Where in this contract do you see a discount?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/patriots/2014/03/13/darrelle-revis-new-england-contract-confirmed/6364995/

All these players left the Patriots in Free Agency. So no discount to the home team.

Browner signed a 3 year - $17 million contract. Not too cheap.

(03-05-2016, 03:04 PM)Bengalfan11164 Wrote: Revis received from the Patriots a $10 million signing bonus, $500k per game bonus ($8 million regular season +$1.5 million post-season).  So, Revis was $19+ million.  
Where in this contract do you see a discount?  
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/patriots/2014/03/13/darrelle-revis-new-england-contract-confirmed/6364995/

All these players left the Patriots in Free Agency.  So no discount to the home team.  

Browner signed a 3 year - $17 million contract.  Not too cheap.

10 million in signing bonuses isn't big.
he had 1.5 million in base salary. 

So roughly 11.5 guaranteed.
For Revis in 2014, that's dirt cheap.

The other 9.5 you bring up, is all earned by playing. If he gets hurt, he doesn't get that money. 
That's the risk you take signing with a team almost assured to be a lock for the AFC Championship. 

(03-04-2016, 10:52 PM)Atomic Orange Wrote: If the Bengals are doing so well at the top why aren't players willing to sign here for less money to try for a ring like Denver and NE?

Cause those teams actually won a ring.

(03-05-2016, 01:41 PM)Bengalfan11164 Wrote: Which players on Denver & New England signed for less money to stay?

New England lost both of their starting CBs in Free Agency last year.  Revis & the guy that left to go to the Broncos.
The Patriots traded their olinemen to the Bucs that WOULDN'T take a pay cut.  

Brock Osweiler hasn't signed with the Broncos.
Peyton Manning hasn't offered to take a pay cut; he re-structured his contract last year and earned every penny back by winning the Super Bowl.  

Who has taken a discount on these teams?

Tom Brady has continuously taken less money so the team could sign other players. (for less money than they would want from other teams)

In a way it's cheating the cap.

..and then the other examples Shake mentioned. There's probably  few more  but i'm sick today and don't feel like putting in the effort.