Change of linebackers and the fact they were so paranoid about not making plays in coverage that all they did was slant the defense away from prioritizing the run to prioritizing the pass. Now if they can just figure out how to do both without sacrificing one over the other...........
Thing is though 18M guaranteed on say a 4 year deal frontloaded is worth 9M/per to me to keep him. You can cut him after 2 years without any dead money....win-win...
The increased amount rule only works for concurrent tags. He was tagged in 2012, no tag in 2013, and then again in 2014. It should be the base rate for 2014, not the 120%
I would encourage people not to get lost in accounting accruals with respect to salary cap accounting. The NFL has removed barriers allowing cap space to be freely transferrable from one year to the next. Now what matters most is following the actual money changing hands. 18M guaranteed is 18M guaranteed. Plus whatever salaries he makes in 2014 and 2015 which would probably be an additional 4M (at least). If you cut him after those two years you'll have paid the man 22M for two years of services. That's like giving him the franchise tag two years in a row. Expensive. Again, follow the money that has changed hands and divide it by the years of service provided by the player. That is all that is important. Stuff can be manipulated and shifted around from one year to the next but is subject first and foremost to what you've spent. So that's what you should track.
Is that what Grimes is looking for though ?? I don't think so...I think he sees himself as elite. Although he's close, he's not exactly there, IMHO, but it has to do with where HE thinks he is...
It looks like in 2012 Drew Brees filed grievance over being franchise tagged, on the issue of 120% (2nd time with the Saints) versus 144% (3rd time tagged in his career) that he actually won. Apparently the new CBA vaguely says "any club". Going by this, I'm going to say that i'd expect Grimes to do the same and get the 120% which puts the number at $13.6 million http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...ees-wins-franchisetag-grievance-vs-nfl-saints Edit: I guess the only wiggle room between Grimes and Brees situation is that Brees was facing concurrent tags and Grimes has not. It'll probably go to arbitration though.
And if arbitration is looming, how long does that process take? Is that something the Dolphins can afford to delay? That incremental difference. the 120% vs the regular franchise tag # for CB's, is what $2.6m ish? That's a lot of cap space to not know where it's going until the arbitrator makes the ruling.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ior-tags-make-it-impossible-to-tag-him-again/ Beyond that if you check any Arizona board they are also under the belief that Dansby would be tagged as a 3rd timer.
2014 PROJECTED FRANCHISE NUMBERS POSITION $126.3 MILLION $128 MILLION SALARY CAP PERCENTAGE Cornerback $11,238,000 $11,389,000 8.9 percent Defensive end $12,455,000 $12,623,000 9.86 percent Defensive tackle $9,168,000 $9,291,000 7.26 percent Linebacker $10,878,000 $11,024,000 8.61 percent Offensive line $11,109,000 $11,258,000 8.8 percent Punter/kicker $3,377,000 $3,423,000 2.67 percent Quarterback $16,060,000 $16,276,000 12.72 percent Running back $9,060,000 $9,182,000 7.17 percent Safety $8,008,000 $8,116,000 6.34 percent Tight end $6,698,000 $6,788,000 5.3 percent Wide receiver $11,520,000 $11,675,000 9.12 percent
Deangelo Hall just signed with Washington for 4 years around 5 million a season and he's 30. Grimes is better and I bet he is saying that as well. Grimes is probably looking for a similar length of a deal and more money.
The reason to sign Grimes to a four-year deal, even if the deal's per-year average is the same as the amount of the one-year franchise tag, is that you amortize the guaranteed money over the life of a deal. The cap number of a $30M deal with $18M guaranteed is $4,5M per year for the guarantee, plus the salary for each season. If you release the guy after two years, you don't pay his salaries on those remaining years, but the remaining amortization of the guarantee comes due—$9M. However, you can choose to spread that hit over two seasons—and we're back to $4.5M per year. Franchising Grimes this season would count $11M or so against the cap; his cap number on a deal as I described (which is similar to the DeAngelo deal) would be $4.5M plus probably the NFL veteran minimum for his years of experience, which I'm not sure exactly but would probably be around $1.5M. So, total cap number: ~$6M instead of $11M.
Bottom line is if you signed him to your hypothetical deal then cut him after year two, you paid him about $22 million for 2 years of service, which is $11 million per year. That's two franchise tags or thereabouts. You're caught up in how much time you can spread that cap hit around. But that is irrelevant. Cap space is freely transferrable from year to year. $22 million taken out of your coffers is $22 million taken out of your coffers. To get only 2 years of fading service for that $22 million is a bad deal. Incidentally I arrive at the $22 million by taking the $18 million guaranteed and then a hypothetical (but typical) salary structure wherein the first year salary is around the veteran's minimum ($1 million) and then the second year number jumps up and appreciates every year. It's a very typical contract structure and with these numbers would involve paying the guy about $4 million in salary over 2014 and 2015, in addition to the $18 million in guaranteed money.
So, it's six of one/half a dozen of the other; except that in your scenario, you're paying cash for all six, whereas in mine you're spreading out the cost. And cap is transferrable, but only that which you don't use; if you use all your cap because you signed a bunch of O-Linemen plus paid $11M to franchise a guy instead of saving $5M on that guy and transferring that to next year, then you aren't gaining anything.
It's freely transferrable front to back AND back to front. The salary cap system has always been freely transferrable in the manner that allows teams to "borrow" against future salary caps in order maximize present day salary caps. This is why teams have been in the practice of escalating cap figures in player contracts each year of the deal. It's why you expense only a portion of the guaranteed money this year instead of the whole thing. All these things are methods of transferring future cap space into the present. What changed is now cap space from the present is also freely transferrable to the future. That means that all barriers have been removed. Budgeting is not about getting caught up in thiking $22 million paid for 2 years of service is OK because you get to spread it out over 4 years. Now that salary cap space is freely transferrable in BOTH directions, budgeting is about you having approximately $1,588.6 million to spend over the next 10 years (assuming a salary cap CAGR of 5%) and you deciding to spend $22 million of it for 2 years of service provided by a potentially fading Brent Grimes. How you structure the accounting of that expense is irrelevant. It's $22 million for 2 years of service which represents 1.4% of your total 10 year budget. You'd paying a guy $11 million a year for 2 years. Is that worth it? The accounting is irrelevant.
If the Dolphins were to give Grimes a hypothetical 4 year deal worth $30 million total with $18 million guaranteed, and they were to cut Grimes loose halfway through the contract, the Dolphins would be doing exactly that. We're discussing the pros and cons of franchising him versus giving him that hypothetical deal.
I understand the conversation, I am just wondering if Grimes goes to the open market, who would pay him $11 this year or $11 a year?
Franchising was necessary. He is the only legit DB we have on the team. All the rest are sometimes good, sometimes quite suspect. Soliai and Starks are good news if they hit the market, but there should be a number of DT's hit the market which means we may get one just as suitable if not better suited. Or, we might be able to sign Soliai. Of course, it would be great to replace the two LBs. But, we have Patterson's contract to dump and that may help.
The Philadelphia Eagles are CB poor and salary cap rich. Philly is also Brent Grimes hometown. The Browns are also filthy with cap room and may entertain the idea of having a power tandem of shutdown corners in Haden and Grimes. The Raiders have more money and cap space than they will probably be able to spend. If it is just money that Miko wants, they have it to burn in Oakland.
Are you asking what other team would give him a $30 million, 4 year contract with $18 million guaranteed? If that's not what you're asking then no I don't think you really do understand the conversation.
Here is some data based on corners being 30 years old. From 2008 to 2012 there were 40 corners who graced the gridiron at 30 years old. Those 40 corners took a total of 20628 snaps. By the time they were 31 years old (which is 2014, for Brent Grimes) they took 13268 snaps (64% of what they did at 30 years old). Of the 30 corners who took snaps at 30 years old from 2008 to 2011 (which means they were eligible to take snaps as 32 year olds in 2013), their snaps at 30 years old dropped from 15710 snaps to 7395 (47%) by the time they were 32 years old. In total there were 17 of these corners who were full time players at the time they were 30 years old, like Brent Grimes. Their snap counts dropped to 80% at 31 years old and 65% at 32 years old. But perhaps the most disturbing is that the cumulative PFF grade of the 13 of those guys who were 32 years old or better by 2013...went from +59.0 at 30 years old to +50.4 at 31 years old...all the way to -23.6 at 32 years old. That's a HUGE dropoff at 32 years old. The dropoff at 31 years old is bolstered by Charles "Peanut" Tillman going from a +11.4 grade in 2011 to a +23.8 grade in 2012. For the rest of the guys (12) they went from +47.6 down to +26.6 and then -17.1. The data is frightening and I think that's why you want to show some caution about giving Brent Grimes a long term deal. If the market dictates that he should make $30 million over 4 years with $18 million guaranteed...I would pass on that in favor of the franchise tag.
I don't think you can take that into negotiations because of the individuality of the circumstance, and I think if you follow that script to negotiate with, you will wind up lowballing certain players that don't fit the majority.
That is some extremely interesting data. As CB is so tough of a position to pick up in the NFL, there seems to be a very MID period where it is almost the only time CBs produce. Unlike RBs which tend to produce early and middle but not late. Corner is just a very tough position to acquire and keep around.
CK, the snap count is a little discouraging, but the grades are really disturbing. Obviously there are exception but MAN! it's arrogant to think you can buck the odds. Not sure where I stand on Grimes now.
That's...kind of the point. They were able to play football at 30 years old. Many of them weren't able to play football anymore by 31 or 32 years old.
Consider especially that: A) Brent Grimes is undersized for a corner, B) He has anything BUT a clean medical file, and C) He was NOT as good in 2013 as he was in 2011 which suggests his fading process has already begun.
So easy to say he's "heart and soul" and had a great year and was a leader and have DJ talk about his training and care for his body, but dang. So do you figure he's good next year and lock him up for just a year w/ a tag? That's a lot of money.
It depends on how the negotiations are going to be honest. I would cap the guaranteed money I offer him in the long term contract at the franchise amount. In other words, I don't object to the 4 years, $30 million total price level but the guaranteed money would be capped at $11 to $12 million which is the same amount he'd be guaranteed for 2014 if he were tagged. And honestly if they balk at that then I start looking at other options in free agency. You can always circle back when he discovers teams aren't anxious to give a bunch of money to an undersized 31 year old that is two years removed from a torn Achilles. This is a hard business but this is something that should have been anticipated when he was originally signed last off season. It's why ultimately it would have been a better idea to make a play for someone younger like Keenan Lewis who played really well with the Saints this year. I liked the Brent Grimes signing but you always knew the move had limited upside potential.
How so? He had more ints and PBUs in 2013 and allowed less TD passes. The passer rating into his coverage was about the same. 66 in 2013, 62.9 in 2011. Not much of a fading process IMO. He also played in 426 more snaps in 2013 than in 2011.
