Mark Vader Posted February 24, 2020 Posted February 24, 2020 On 2/18/2020 at 7:48 PM, Reed83HOF said: Oh boy
H2o Posted February 24, 2020 Posted February 24, 2020 18 hours ago, Lurker said: May as well keep Lawson who's younger, cheaper (even with a new deal) and also had 6.5 sacks... This is my thought. Lawson had 6.5 sacks to Ngakoue's 8 sacks, but on 320 less defensive snaps. Lawson has turned into a solid, well-rounded DE for this team and I for one hope we keep him.
YoloinOhio Posted February 24, 2020 Author Posted February 24, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, H2o said: This is my thought. Lawson had 6.5 sacks to Ngakoue's 8 sacks, but on 320 less defensive snaps. Lawson has turned into a solid, well-rounded DE for this team and I for one hope we keep him. Would it be possible to sign both? Money-wise? Release Murphy, keep Hughes. Edited February 24, 2020 by YoloinOhio 1
Lurker Posted February 24, 2020 Posted February 24, 2020 2 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: Would it be possible to sign both? Money-wise? Release Murphy, keep Hughes. Probably won't tie up that kind of cap room on the DL (Ngakoue, Lawson, Star, Hughes, Oliver)...
John from Riverside Posted February 24, 2020 Posted February 24, 2020 I personally would like to see Shaq Lawson come back..... 1
H2o Posted February 24, 2020 Posted February 24, 2020 2 hours ago, YoloinOhio said: Would it be possible to sign both? Money-wise? Release Murphy, keep Hughes. Not with Ngakoue trying to get $22,000,000 per. I can't see us signing him alone, more or less he and Lawson. I think re-signing Lawson and us going edge in the draft is more likely.
YoloinOhio Posted February 24, 2020 Author Posted February 24, 2020 19 minutes ago, H2o said: Not with Ngakoue trying to get $22,000,000 per. I can't see us signing him alone, more or less he and Lawson. I think re-signing Lawson and us going edge in the draft is more likely. Probably right
Malazan Posted February 24, 2020 Posted February 24, 2020 The guy's numbers have been declining. He's only broken double digit sacks once and wants 22 mill a year. I said before, he will be a 'regret' contract. He will get paid and won't live up to it. People on here roasted me for that opinion before, but how you get to paying him the highest DE salary for a guy whose numbers are closer to Lawson and Jordan Jenkins than they are to the top 10 guys in sacks makes little sense.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 24, 2020 Posted February 24, 2020 On 2/23/2020 at 3:00 PM, BringBackOrton said: That’s the player Buffalo needs to be in on. Package some of our picks to get him here. If he’s going to be a cap casualty, he shouldn’t be too pricey at his current contract. Agree, would love to see Calais Campbell here. He's 33 and it would be a one-year rental (FA in 2021) unless a re-up is part of the trade deal. Wonder what the Jags would want for him though?
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 24, 2020 Posted February 24, 2020 On 2/23/2020 at 12:39 PM, Foxx said: i would not be opposed this. 2020 NFL Free Agency: Predicting landing spots for every PFF top-50 free agent 26. EDGE YANNICK NGAKOUE – BUFFALO BILLS Projected contract: 4 years, $19.5 million per year ($57 million guaranteed) Considering the Jaguars are currently over the cap, seeing Yannick Ngakoue on another squad in 2020 seems likely. Things could change with cuts, but for now, Buffalo, which owns the third-most cap space, would be the likeliest landing spot for Ngakoue. With Shaq Lawson set to hit free agency and Lorenzo Alexander retiring, Buffalo has nearly half of its total edge pressures to replace this offseason. Ngakoue has produced top-20 pass-rush grades in each of the past three seasons and could play the 6/7-tech role Lawson played. Ngakoue has been pretty vocal he wants $22M/yr. So 4 years/$88M I could be wrong, but when Beane said "we're not likely to be players at the deep end of the FA pool as we were last year", I kind of feel he meant "don't expect me to go making a player the highest or 2nd highest at his position like I did with Morse" 1
BringBackOrton Posted February 24, 2020 Posted February 24, 2020 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Agree, would love to see Calais Campbell here. He's 33 and it would be a one-year rental (FA in 2021) unless a re-up is part of the trade deal. Wonder what the Jags would want for him though? I’m not sure much unless there are a lot of teams in on trading for him. Cutting him gives them nothing. They’d take something pretty reasonable I imagine. The bigger issue is does Campbell hold out without a restructure. I’d say probably. Edited February 24, 2020 by BringBackOrton
MiltonWaddams Posted February 27, 2020 Posted February 27, 2020 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Bubba Gump said: I haven’t chimed in on this thread until now. This is the guy that I would pick out of all of the D lineman available on the market this year to take this defence to the next level. Dump Murphy and sign Yannick and re-sign Shaq. A top 4 DE of Jerry, Yannick, Shaq and Darryl Johnson would work for me in 2020. Of course, it isn’t my money So.... edit: Just saw his contract demands of reputedly 22 million per year. It may not be my money, but that’s way over paying for his production. If someone gives him that, they’re seeing something that nobody else in the league is seeing. Edited February 27, 2020 by MiltonWaddams
YoloinOhio Posted February 27, 2020 Author Posted February 27, 2020 Sounds like he will be tagged along with Judon. Word is that Clowney and Dante Fowler will be the guys not tagged.
Thurman#1 Posted February 28, 2020 Posted February 28, 2020 (edited) On 2/16/2020 at 9:27 PM, GunnerBill said: I will answer your questions: 1) that isn't quite the equation. The first red text should read "amortised signing bonus" rather than "unamortised". 2) yes they do. 3) I am not. The way you work out the cap savings of cutting someone is to work out the total cap hit first. So everything counts in that sum. Then imagine you have two pots one marked "dead money" and one marked "savings". You then break down the total you ended up with from your first sum by putting each constituent part of it in one of the two pots. In Dareus's case in the "savings" pot you would have: $9.5m base salary $10m roster bonus $500k workout bonus In the "dead money" pot you would have: $2.5m amortised signing bonus. It isn't counting it twice in the same equation at all. You start by building the total cap hit up of its constituent parts. And then the second part of the process is breaking it down again: they are essentially two different sums. Gunner, I totally see that you are not applying it twice. In fact, if you're saying that to find the total cap impact you must now take what you're calling the "savings pot" and then subtract from it the "dead money pot," then you're saying what I'm saying. That makes sense to me, with the proviso that total cap hit is only important if the guy is still on the team. When he's cut the two figures can't be added, as the "saved money" is now subtracted from the cap since it's not paid, whereas the "dead money pot," is still applied to the cap (though depending on the "Post June 1st Release" designation, a bunch of the money may be applied next year, though it's not relevant for Dareus). Adding them together as positive numbers at that point makes no sense at all. The other folks talking about this here, on the other hand, have the "saved pot" as $22.5M, precisely because they include what you do and then also add in the unapplied portion of the amortized signing bonus there. And then also use the same money again, over in dead cap. The way you're doing it, though, the saved money is essentially all of the unspent money, the pluses, the money you expected to spend but can now save. And the dead money is all of the minus money, the money you must apply to the salary cap now. So if you want to calculate the total cap impact of cutting a guy (not just the impact on one year but the total impact on team cap), you take the savings pot and you subtract the dead money pot. And that leaves you with a total cap impact of $17.5M. I'm not just looking at this year's impact, as many of them appear to be doing. I'm looking at the total impact of cutting the guy. $17.5M. Am I misrepresenting what you said? Edited February 28, 2020 by Thurman#1
thebandit27 Posted February 28, 2020 Posted February 28, 2020 14 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said: Gunner, that's how I break it down too. It's not how Hap and the others do, but it's how I do. Unless I read you wrong, you agree with me and not them. I spoke very poorly about what was amortized and unamortized. My fault. The signing bonus is originally amortized, but the part of the amortized bonus that has not yet been applied to the cap is what the other folks are using twice. But you aren't. Looks to me like you're using my equation rather than theirs, unless I'm missing something. I believe I'm totally following and agreeing with everything you've said so far. You've got the savings pot (which doesn't account for the bonus) and you've got the dead money pot that does account for the bonus, as dead money. Same as me. They on the other hand have the "saved pot" as $22.5M, precisely because they include what you do and then also add in the unapplied portion of the amortized signing bonus there. And then also use the same money again, over in dead cap. The way you're doing it, though, the saved money is essentially all of the pluses, the money you expected to spend but can now save. And the dead money is all of the minus money, the money you must apply to the salary cap now. So if you want to calculate the total cap impact of cutting a guy (not just the impact on one year but the total impact on team cap), you take the savings pot and you subtract the dead money pot. And that leaves you with a total cap impact of $17.5M. I'm not just looking at this year's impact, as many of them appear to be doing. I'm looking at the total impact of cutting the guy. $17.5M. Am I misrepresenting what you said? Whether he agrees with you or not, the cap reduction is $20M. First line of the article: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28779947/jaguars-decline-2020-option-defensive-tackle-marcell-dareus%3fplatform=amp
GunnerBill Posted February 28, 2020 Posted February 28, 2020 25 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said: Gunner, that's how I break it down too. It's not how Hap and the others do, but it's how I do. Unless I read you wrong, you agree with me and not them. I spoke very poorly about what was amortized and unamortized. My fault. The signing bonus is originally amortized, but the part of the amortized bonus that has not yet been applied to the cap is what the other folks are using twice. But you aren't. Looks to me like you're using my equation rather than theirs, unless I'm missing something. I believe I'm totally following and agreeing with everything you've said so far. You've got the savings pot (which doesn't account for the bonus) and you've got the dead money pot that does account for the bonus, as dead money. Same as me. They on the other hand have the "saved pot" as $22.5M, precisely because they include what you do and then also add in the unapplied portion of the amortized signing bonus there. And then also use the same money again, over in dead cap. The way you're doing it, though, the saved money is essentially all of the pluses, the money you expected to spend but can now save. And the dead money is all of the minus money, the money you must apply to the salary cap now. So if you want to calculate the total cap impact of cutting a guy (not just the impact on one year but the total impact on team cap), you take the savings pot and you subtract the dead money pot. And that leaves you with a total cap impact of $17.5M. I'm not just looking at this year's impact, as many of them appear to be doing. I'm looking at the total impact of cutting the guy. $17.5M. Am I misrepresenting what you said? It is your last para I don't agree with. Why are you taking the dead money away again? It has already been subtracted once from the total contract $22.5m - $2.5m dead money. It's a $20m saving.
CommonCents Posted February 28, 2020 Posted February 28, 2020 On 2/27/2020 at 6:58 AM, YoloinOhio said: Sounds like he will be tagged along with Judon. Word is that Clowney and Dante Fowler will be the guys not tagged. I liked Fowler coming out of school, I wonder what type of deal he is looking at. He would be worth a roll of the dice if he isn’t inking a top flight deal.
Thurman#1 Posted February 28, 2020 Posted February 28, 2020 21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: It is your last para I don't agree with. Why are you taking the dead money away again? It has already been subtracted once from the total contract $22.5m - $2.5m dead money. It's a $20m saving. Aargh. I edited to try to make it clearer. And you've already posted. Sorry. I'll try again. The $22.5M, the "original cap hit," is a sum that only makes sense when the guy is on the team. When he's on the team, all $22.5M is applied to the cap. From the perspective of the team, all $22.5M is positive, it's added to the cap, both what you are calling the "savings pot" and what will become the "dead money pot," though it's not dead money till he's cut. All positive. That's no longer true when he's cut. When he's cut, the dead money is still positive. It's still applied to the cap. But the salary, roster bonus and workout bonus are NOT applied to the cap anymore. They're negatives, and must be subtracted from what the old cap was. They work against that amortized but unapplied portion of the bonus. Now, how can you take subtract $20M (salary, roster and workout bonuses) saved from the cap and add $2.5M applied to the cap and come up with $22.5M? Or rather a negative (saved) $22.5M? Put another way, everyone here clearly agrees that the salary, roster bonus and workout bonus equal $20M and are NOT applied to the salary cap anymore since the cut. They are savings. So $20M has been saved without in any way accounting for the dead money. And yet people are saying that the total cap impact is $20M, the same $20M. Before considering the dead money, the saved money is $20M and after considering the dead money, the saved money is the same? How is that possible? Is the dead money not any factor on how much is saved and spent when you cut a guy? Still willling to apologize big-time if someone can explain this to me sensibly. But I just learned I have another big project that I have to work on through early Monday your time, so I won't be able to reply till then.
Recommended Posts