Deebo Samuel requests trade

[cinci4life]

49ers gave Deebo permission to seek a trade. Another name for Bengals to consider if it doesn't work out with Tee.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/43764535/49ers-grant-wr-deebo-samuel-sr-permission-find-trade

[SunsetBengal]

For the cap experts on here: Does Samuel's back loaded contract come with him, or does SF get stuck with a good portion of it?

[George Cantstandya]

(02-09-2025, 05:10 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: For the cap experts on here: Does Samuel's back loaded contract come with him, or does SF get stuck with a good portion of it?

I may be wrong but I believe that the 49er's will be on the hook for any prorated signing bonus left and the new team will be responsible for Samuel's base salary and other bonuses like roster and workout bonuses in the contract.  My guess is he'll want to renegotiate a contract with the new team so that of course would change the new team's obligations.

Here is his contract:

https://overthecap.com/player/deebo-samuel/7827

The 49er's would be on the hook for $31 million of dead cap if traded before June 1st and $10.75 million if traded after.  

[SunsetBengal]

(02-09-2025, 05:48 PM)George Cantstandya Wrote: I may be wrong but I believe that the 49er's will be on the hook for any prorated signing bonus left and the new team will be responsible for the Samuel's base salary and other bonuses like workout bonuses, in the contract.

Here is contract:

https://overthecap.com/player/deebo-samuel/7827

The 49er's would be on the hook for $31 million of dead cap if traded before June 1st and $10.75 million if traded after.  

Thanks George, that was very helpful. One more question, what happens to the money in the "void" years? Does a team ultimately get held to account for them under the cap? (I see prorated bonus out in the "void" years)

[George Cantstandya]

(02-09-2025, 05:54 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Thanks George, that was very helpful. One more question, what happens to the money in the "void" years? Does a team ultimately get held to account for them under the cap? (I see prorated bonus out in the "void" years)

As I understand it, and I don't understand it that well, the money in those void years is all on the 49er's.  Also I think once a player is traded or cut that prorated signing bonus money hits the teams books the same year instead of being stretched out over the remaining years. 

As you can see Samuel doesn't have any base salary or other bonuses in those void years.  It is all prorated signing stuff.  Void years are an accounting way of stretching out those prorated bonuses to give a team more cap space.  So it would not affect the new team. But as I stated above (you caught me pre edit   ), he'll most likely want to negotiate a new contract with any team he is traded to.

Here is an article from Over the Cap on void years that certainly explains it better than I understand it.   :)

https://overthecap.com/examining-the-pros-and-cons-of-void-years-for-salary-cap-relief

[SunsetBengal]

(02-09-2025, 06:13 PM)George Cantstandya Wrote: As I understand it, and I don't understand it that well, the money in those void years is all on the 49er's.  Also I think once a player is traded or cut that prorated signing bonus money hits the teams books the same year instead of being stretched out over the remaining years. 

As you can see Samuel doesn't have any base salary or other bonuses in those void years.  It is all prorated stuff.  Void years are an accounting way of stretching out those prorated bonuses to give a team more cap space.  So it would not affect the new team. But as I stated above (you caught me pre edit   ), he'll most likely want to negotiate a new contract with any team he is traded to.

Here is an article from Over the Cap on void years that certainly explains it better than I understand it.   :)

Okay, what you say aligns with what I thought to be true. So a team trading for him will only be responsible for any remaining salary due, which he's pretty much already been paid for this year with the upfront cash upon signing that they had to prorate for eternity. Nice. I wouldn't instantly give him a new deal, he's already been paid for this year, let him earn a new deal the old fashioned way. 

[George Cantstandya]

(02-09-2025, 06:17 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Okay, what you say aligns with what I thought to be true. So a team trading for him will only be responsible for any remaining salary due, which he's pretty much already been paid for this year with the upfront cash upon signing that they had to prorate for eternity. Nice. I wouldn't instantly give him a new deal, he's already been paid for this year, let him earn a new deal the old fashioned way. 

It's also important to keep in mind that while the 49er's will have to eat some dead cap if traded they will also be getting something in return for the trade be it a draft pick(s) or player(s). I don't know how much control he has over any trade as far as what is in his contract but he may want a renegotiation clause as part of the agreement for any trade.  I think he'll want some longer term security with his new team.   Plus the team making the trade will most likely want to because he'll be a free agent in 2026 otherwise.  I'm not sure how much a team will want to give up in trade for a 1 year player. 

[Destro]

He won't get paid here, either.

[SunsetBengal]

(02-09-2025, 06:25 PM)George Cantstandya Wrote: It's also important to keep in mind that while the 49er's will have to eat some dead cap if traded they will also be getting something in return for the trade be it a draft pick(s) or player(s). I don't know how much control he has over any trade as far as what is in his contract but he may want a renegotiation clause as part of the agreement for any trade.  I think he'll want some longer term security with his new team. 

He likely has a "no trade" clause that allows him to veto a move to a situation that he does not see favorable. I like what he's done over the years, but I wouldn't throw new money at him, simply for the privilege of having him on the roster. He could be spent.

(02-09-2025, 06:28 PM)Destro Wrote: He won't get paid here, either.

In a Jay Gruden run Bengal offense, Samuel could easily be a superstar. But in the current situation, I doubt that the Bengals would ever use a dynamic player like Samuel to half of his potential. And you're right, the Bengals likely wouldn't give him a big deal.

[George Cantstandya]

(02-09-2025, 06:33 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: He likely has a "no trade" clause that allows him to veto a move to a situation that he does not see favorable. I like what he's done over the years, but I wouldn't throw new money at him, simply for the privilege of having him on the roster. He could be spent.

I also forgot to mention any team trading for him will most likely also want some assurance of negotiating a new contract because he'll be a free agent in 2026 otherwise.  I don't know if teams will want to trade much for a player only for one year.  He would be fairly cheap salary wise for that team because his base salary and other bonuses are not that much in 2025 but I wonder what a trade for a 1 year rental would look like. 

Overall, I don't think what the 49er's and Samuel will most likely be looking for fits the Bengals right now.

[SunsetBengal]

(02-09-2025, 06:41 PM)George Cantstandya Wrote: I also forgot to mention any team trading for him will most likely also want some assurance of negotiating a new contract because he'll be a free agent in 2026 otherwise.  I don't know if teams will want to trade much for a player only for one year.  He would be fairly cheap salary wise for that team because his base salary and other bonuses are not that much in 2025 but I wonder what a trade for a 1 year rental would look like. 

Overall, I don't think what the 49er's and Samuel will most likely be looking for fits the Bengals right now.

He might be a good fit for a team looking for one last player to make that Superbowl run, but the Bengals are far more than "one player" away, roster wise. Though, if used properly, I love the dynamic he brings to the WR position, however the Bengals don't have the OL to get him the rushing yards that he was able to achieve with SF.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(02-09-2025, 06:33 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: In a Jay Gruden run Bengal offense, Samuel could easily be a superstar. But in the current situation, I doubt that the Bengals would ever use a dynamic player like Samuel to half of his potential. And you're right, the Bengals likely wouldn't give him a big deal.

He hasn't been that player for 3 years.

He broke 1 tackle on his 42 rushing attempts last year. He's never had very good hands.

He's basically WR Peyton Hillis. One big season in his 3rd year and then nothing special before or after. If he's not a superstar in Kyle Shanahan's very offensively friendly offense, there's not going to be others out there who can magically make him better.

[SunsetBengal]

(02-09-2025, 09:05 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: He hasn't been that player for 3 years.

He broke 1 tackle on his 42 rushing attempts last year. He's never had very good hands.

He's basically WR Peyton Hillis. One big season in his 3rd year and then nothing special before or after. If he's not a superstar in Kyle Shanahan's very offensively friendly offense, there's not going to be others out there who can magically make him better.

I hadn't realized that he'd fallen off like that. I guess once you watch someone do the things that he did that season, that's the impression you have of who he is and how he plays. It's not like you can unsee that stuff.