Restructuring question.

No offense to what your saying but all this Marshall talk cracks me up, like they are going to overpay a mediocre QB because Marshal likes him, good for you Macagnan

 

Marshall could, but the Jets should be very careful. With older players, you don't want to push money down the road. You want their contracts and cap hits getting cheaper, not more expensive as they get older.

Revis' deal can't be touched, nor should it be if it could. They will have the ability to cut him after this season if they want and have a $7.333 cap savings, or after the 2017 season and have an even bigger cap savings. No way we're gonna give that greedy bastid more money.

 

Playere will always agree to restructure. They get the money up front, it's the cap hit that gets deferred. It sounds like you're talking more about a pay cut?

 

to awnser your question... it entirely depends on the players contract. there isnt much restructuring you can do if your contract is already fully gauranteed and backloaded.

Marshall might free up some money, but it wouldnt matter, it would be like a million.

 

Actually we could free up to 4+ million by restructuring Marshall.

 

OK. See if this makes sense. This si the way I understand the cap in very simple terms.

I sign a contract for 5 years, worth $53M. I get a $10M signing bonus. Here is how the contract lays out.

Year Bonus Salary Bonus against cap Cap Hit Dead Money
1 $10 $1 $2 $3
2 $5 $2 $7 $8
3 $10 $2 $12 $6
4 $12 $2 $14 $4
5 $15 $2 $17 $2
​

You see, even though you paid me $13M in the first year, the cat hit is really only $3M. The bonus is spread out evenly over the length of the contract so only $2M counts each year. If you cut me, the rest of the bonus is accelerated. If you cut me after the first year, I will count $8M against the salary cap. Let's say after year 2, you ask me to restructure. You want to turn $9 of my salary into bonus and keep my salary at $1M. I'm ok with that because you give me $9M before the season starts and then only have to pay me $1M throughout the season. Why wouldn't I like that? I get the money up front. I'm not really doing you a favor because I don't lose any money and I get the money sooner. Here is what the new deal would look like.

Year Bonus Salary Bonus against cap Cap Hit Dead Money
1 $10 $1 $2 $3
2 $5 $2 $7 $8
3 $9 $1 $5 $6 $6
4 $12 $5 $17 $10
5 $15 $5 $20 $5

So you reduced my cap hit to $6M in year 3. You saved $6M on the cap to spend on someone else. The problem comes in year 4. You decide I am not worth the $17M cap hit. To cut me, all the rest of the bonus is accelerated and now you have $10M in dead money. You can ask me to restructure again, but the dead money in year 5 just increases. The only relief you have is to ask me to take a pay cut. If I say no, you have the choice of paying me what you owe me or cutting me and having $10M in money that counts against the cap that you can't use. I run the risk of being out of a job, but you've already paid me $26M and I might be able to get another job. Even if you convince me to take a pay cut to $5M in salary, I still count $10M against the cap in year 4. Restructuring is good sometimes, but eventually, you have to pay the fiddler.

 

I think he's talking about restructuring.

For example, if a player has 3 yrs left on his contract and is slated to make $10M in 2016, Macagnan can change his 2016 $10M salary to a signing bonus giving the player his entire 2016 pay up front. Then, since it's now a signing bonus, the $10M gets spread out across the 3 yrs of his contract. Doing this would save the 2016 cap $6.66M, but add $3.3 to 2017/18

 

BEFORE THE RESTRUCTURE: First of all, disregarding the signing bonus, that's a seriously backloaded contract. Also, it doesn't seem like any of the base salary is guaranteed beyond Year 1. Those two things make the contract unrealistic, but technically your numbers are correct.

AFTER THE RESTRUCTURE: There isn't a need to list a dead money figure for Year 3 since you clearly aren't cutting him. Technically, assuming the Year 3 salary is guaranteed now, the dead money hit would be 16M, not 6M. Everything else is correct.

Restructuring is useful if you're in a cap crunch now and are set up to have a surplus in the near future, which actually applies to us right now. Otherwise, restructuring is usually a bad idea.

 

by drafting better. and by hitting on our day 1 draft picks. that is how teams usually do it, outside of the outliers who hit on a brady or a russell wilson later in the draft.

we need our day 1 picks to be pro bowlers and all pros, and we need our later picks to eventually start

 

Realistically you need to hit 3 starters a draft in order to keep up with attrition rates. You need to hit a good special teamer also. One of your starters can be backup for a few years but you need to have him start eventually.

 

I doubt Marshall will restructure. He only has 2 years left on his contract, with this year fully guaranteed. Any extension would come with a pay raise after how much he outplayed his contract last year. Revis' salary is also fully guaranteed this year, and restructuring his contract would ruin it. We're taking a big hit this year to make it reasonable to keep an aging prowl CB on the roster for a few more years.

 

You are correct, but I was trying to make a simple example of how restructuring a contract pushes money down the road.