Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 140

Thread: Who to keep

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,307
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Who to keep



    Those ESPN reports also say that we are 15 million under the cap, which isn't true.




  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,307
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    The numbers and situations you cited here look correct. The difference here seems to be that you believe Flacco will sign his long-term deal quickly and quietly. I do not believe that will happen; I believe he will need to be franchised and that IF the deal gets done this year, it will be no earlier than August or September. Obviously there's a ton of daylight between those two positions (extreme optimism and extreme pessimism, seemingly.)

    I'm not really sure what the most likely scenario in the Flacco contract is, to be honest. I certainly HOPE that you're right, in which case our cap would be in great shape next year. I'm just less optimistic than you, and that's not quantifiable, so maybe things will be clearer as information leaks out about the Flacco contract.
    Please tell me the sense in paying Flacco 20 million on the tag in 2013? That would make zero sense.




  3. #78

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    Please tell me the sense in paying Flacco 20 million on the tag in 2013? That would make zero sense.
    IF it's your only option it makes more sense then losing him and starting over.




  4. #79
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,855
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    Where in the world are you getting your numbers from? The Steelers are only 10.8m over the 2013 cap from every source I can find (ESPN, CBSSports, PFT). Those numbers might not be rock-solid, but they don't even have the worst cap situation in the league in 2013, much less "of all time" (the Saints, Panthers, Cowboys, and Jets are all higher over the cap than Pittsburgh is.)
    They aren't factoring in everything they should.

    Follow my math here (it's a bit jumbled because I am doing this aside from my spreadsheet)

    Polamalu $10.137 +$1.3 from 2012 salary
    Clark $4.25 ($14.387) +$500k
    Colon $7.65 ($22.04) +$4.8 mil
    Roethlisberger $19.595 ($41.632) + $10.7 million from 2012
    Miller $7.958 ($49.59) +$920k from 2012
    Timmons $11.16 ($60.75) +$7.3 million from 2012
    Taylor $9.454 ($70.2) +5.2 million from 2012
    Harrison $10.035 ($80.255) +1 Million
    Woodley $13.24 ($93.475) + $8.3 million from 2012
    Keisel $4.5 ($97.975)
    Brown $6.2 (104.175)
    So right there you have 86% of your salary cap taken up in 11 players.
    You also have $40 million in salary increases from 2012 to 2013. They only have four major salaries coming off the books (Mendenhall, Hampton, Foote, Wallace). Those four players counted about $15 million towards the cap last year. So there is their huge problem.

    Here are a few more players:

    Hood $2.99
    Pouncey $2.53
    Mike Adams $805k
    Decastro $1.78
    Worilds $985k
    Heyward $1.83
    Warren $.925
    Suisham $1.76
    Gilbert $880

    They also are going to have to make decisions on Redman, Dwyer, and Emmanuel Sanders. My guess is that Redman and Dwyer are giving 2nd round RFA tags four around $2 million apiece (since both were undrafted/low round picks). Emmanuel Sanders will likely get a ROD tender and $1.3 million since he was a 3rd rounder.

    Right there is $124.3 million in cap money....or roughly $3 million over the cap. That doesn't sound too bad does it? Well, that's only for 23 players. Now keep in mind that is for their 23 most expensive players (by my count), but they still have to find a way for 28 more players to squeeze into their rule of 51.

    Let's estimate that the average cost of each of those 28 players is $575k (very conservative). This factors in that the other 28 are all players not playing under a veteran contract. That adds $16.1 to the cap.

    Now their cap is at $140.4. It also doesn't factor in rookie upgrades. With the Steelers picking in the mid 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounds. I think that should conservatively add about $2.5 million to the cap, which puts them up at $142.9, which is roughly $22 million over the cap.

    Again, keep in mind that this $22-$25 million estimate is operating under the assumption that not a single veteran FA is added

    There are also a few veterans that could be cut that I didn't factor into the equation because they are relatively low amounts. My $30 million estimate might be a tad high, but it's certainly not anywhere near $10.8 that is being reported. Most of those guys reporting those numbers for the big media outlets don't understand how a salary cap is constructed and likely left factors like RFA/ERFA tenders and rookie cap upgrades out of their equations.

    The problem the Steelers face is that they can't cut Woodley, Timmons, or Roethlisberger because they have a buttload of dead money still ahead in the contracts. Colon would seem to be the most obvious cut, but he has a good bit of dead money too ($6.3 million). With that type of dead money, it would be hard to cut him.

    Even James Harrison, who has the most "cut friendly" contract of all their players, still carries $4.9 in dead money if they release him. Cutting Harrison would save about $5.2 million, but still only gets them $20 million over the cap. They have a lot more cutting or restructuring to do, to the point that a lot of their familiar faces might be gone. If they restructure all these 30-something players, then they just dig themselves a bigger hole for 2014.

    It's an ugly picture and not remotely close to the point where the Ravens are. The Ravens are facing decisions on guys like Vonta Leach ($1.33 in dead money) and Boldin ($1.53 in dead money) and Jameel McCLain ($2.4 in dead money) and Jacoby Jones ($900k in dead money). Should they want to release any/all of this quartet, they would do so with very little dead money penalty. Also, having such little dead money makes it easier to offer them restructures as well.

    The Steelers have robbed Peter to pay Paul for the past two years only to be humiliated by Tebow and then go 8-8. The Ravens have adopted a much more cap sound strategy that has produced 27 wins, a Super Bowl Championship, and a AFC title game appearance.

    The Steelers are a good organization from a front office standpoint, but they were unwilling to make the sacrifices to personnel that Ozzie and Co did, and they are suffering as a result.




  5. #80

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    Please tell me the sense in paying Flacco 20 million on the tag in 2013? That would make zero sense.
    I agree, but the problem is that the team has to designate by (I think) March 4th. And the team has to be under the cap by March 12th. So the plan is to reach a long term deal by then, but that is pretty soon.

    If a deal cannot be made by then, the Ravens either let Flacco hit unrestricted free agency or they apply a franchise tag (presumably to protect Joe while they work on a deal all summer). But a non-exclusive tag allows other teams to negotiate with Flacco and his agent and come to an agreement. Then we would be forced to match that deal or lose Joe (and gain two 1st round draft picks). Only the higher, exclusive tag fully protects Joe from talks with other suitors.

    I any case, neither tag would be applied due to the team's reluctance to sign Joe longterm. Both would be applied as a temporary measure to give more time to work on a deal. That said, it takes two to come to an agreement, and if push came to shove I think the team might go into 2013 with Joe playing for the 1-year non-exclusive tag number. But I agree with you that they would have to avoid at all costs, the prospect of failing to make a deal after applying the exclusive tag.

    I also think that depending on whether some other teams restructure (specifically Roethlisberger, but also Eli and maybe Brady), that exclusive number could fall a bit (in the next month).




  6. #81
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,855
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    The numbers and situations you cited here look correct. The difference here seems to be that you believe Flacco will sign his long-term deal quickly and quietly. I do not believe that will happen; I believe he will need to be franchised and that IF the deal gets done this year, it will be no earlier than August or September. Obviously there's a ton of daylight between those two positions (extreme optimism and extreme pessimism, seemingly.)

    I'm not really sure what the most likely scenario in the Flacco contract is, to be honest. I certainly HOPE that you're right, in which case our cap would be in great shape next year. I'm just less optimistic than you, and that's not quantifiable, so maybe things will be clearer as information leaks out about the Flacco contract.
    Good post. Flacco is the huge variable. Sign him and we are in okay shape in terms of acquiring/re-signing veteran talent. Franchise him and we need to look to our current roster and the draft to find our 53. I think it's in both parties interest to make it happen now. The Ravens need a contract to address other areas of the team. Flacco needs to sign his deal when his value is at an all-time high. My guess is it's gonna be 6 years/$115 million with about $36 in signing bonus and $65 guaranteed money.




  7. #82

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by LukeDaniel View Post
    They aren't factoring in everything they should.

    Follow my math here (it's a bit jumbled because I am doing this aside from my spreadsheet)

    Polamalu $10.137 +$1.3 from 2012 salary
    Clark $4.25 ($14.387) +$500k
    Colon $7.65 ($22.04) +$4.8 mil
    Roethlisberger $19.595 ($41.632) + $10.7 million from 2012
    Miller $7.958 ($49.59) +$920k from 2012
    Timmons $11.16 ($60.75) +$7.3 million from 2012
    Taylor $9.454 ($70.2) +5.2 million from 2012
    Harrison $10.035 ($80.255) +1 Million
    Woodley $13.24 ($93.475) + $8.3 million from 2012
    Keisel $4.5 ($97.975)
    Brown $6.2 (104.175)
    So right there you have 86% of your salary cap taken up in 11 players.
    You also have $40 million in salary increases from 2012 to 2013. They only have four major salaries coming off the books (Mendenhall, Hampton, Foote, Wallace). Those four players counted about $15 million towards the cap last year. So there is their huge problem.

    Here are a few more players:

    Hood $2.99
    Pouncey $2.53
    Mike Adams $805k
    Decastro $1.78
    Worilds $985k
    Heyward $1.83
    Warren $.925
    Suisham $1.76
    Gilbert $880

    They also are going to have to make decisions on Redman, Dwyer, and Emmanuel Sanders. My guess is that Redman and Dwyer are giving 2nd round RFA tags four around $2 million apiece (since both were undrafted/low round picks). Emmanuel Sanders will likely get a ROD tender and $1.3 million since he was a 3rd rounder.

    Right there is $124.3 million in cap money....or roughly $3 million over the cap. That doesn't sound too bad does it? Well, that's only for 23 players. Now keep in mind that is for their 23 most expensive players (by my count), but they still have to find a way for 28 more players to squeeze into their rule of 51.

    Let's estimate that the average cost of each of those 28 players is $575k (very conservative). This factors in that the other 28 are all players not playing under a veteran contract. That adds $16.1 to the cap.

    Now their cap is at $140.4. It also doesn't factor in rookie upgrades. With the Steelers picking in the mid 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounds. I think that should conservatively add about $2.5 million to the cap, which puts them up at $142.9, which is roughly $22 million over the cap.

    Again, keep in mind that this $22-$25 million estimate is operating under the assumption that not a single veteran FA is added

    There are also a few veterans that could be cut that I didn't factor into the equation because they are relatively low amounts. My $30 million estimate might be a tad high, but it's certainly not anywhere near $10.8 that is being reported. Most of those guys reporting those numbers for the big media outlets don't understand how a salary cap is constructed and likely left factors like RFA/ERFA tenders and rookie cap upgrades out of their equations.

    The problem the Steelers face is that they can't cut Woodley, Timmons, or Roethlisberger because they have a buttload of dead money still ahead in the contracts. Colon would seem to be the most obvious cut, but he has a good bit of dead money too ($6.3 million). With that type of dead money, it would be hard to cut him.

    Even James Harrison, who has the most "cut friendly" contract of all their players, still carries $4.9 in dead money if they release him. Cutting Harrison would save about $5.2 million, but still only gets them $20 million over the cap. They have a lot more cutting or restructuring to do, to the point that a lot of their familiar faces might be gone. If they restructure all these 30-something players, then they just dig themselves a bigger hole for 2014.

    It's an ugly picture and not remotely close to the point where the Ravens are. The Ravens are facing decisions on guys like Vonta Leach ($1.33 in dead money) and Boldin ($1.53 in dead money) and Jameel McCLain ($2.4 in dead money) and Jacoby Jones ($900k in dead money). Should they want to release any/all of this quartet, they would do so with very little dead money penalty. Also, having such little dead money makes it easier to offer them restructures as well.

    The Steelers have robbed Peter to pay Paul for the past two years only to be humiliated by Tebow and then go 8-8. The Ravens have adopted a much more cap sound strategy that has produced 27 wins, a Super Bowl Championship, and a AFC title game appearance.

    The Steelers are a good organization from a front office standpoint, but they were unwilling to make the sacrifices to personnel that Ozzie and Co did, and they are suffering as a result.

    What they will do is restructure (further mortgage future) Woodley, Timmons and Roethlisberger. I think they could easily cut Harrison, though it would be a pill.

    Those moves alone get them clear (barely).

    I don't see them signing any serious/veteran FAs.

    I also don't think there is any chance whatsoever they finish 3-13, lol. It would take full year injury to Roethlisberger for me to even consider the possibility, and even then, I think they win 5-6 games.




  8. #83
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,855
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    What they will do is restructure (further mortgage future) Woodley, Timmons and Roethlisberger. I think they could easily cut Harrison, though it would be a pill.

    Those moves alone get them clear (barely).

    I don't see them signing any serious/veteran FAs.

    I also don't think there is any chance whatsoever they finish 3-13, lol. It would take full year injury to Roethlisberger for me to even consider the possibility, and even then, I think they win 5-6 games.
    If they take the further mortgage/compromise the future route, then I think 3-13 is probably a bit of a stretch. The Steelers had no more injuries in 2012 than the Ravens did, perhaps even less. The reason why the Ravens were successful and the Steelers were average came down to depth and depth alone. All teams need it and the 2013 Steelers, unless they hit homer after homer in the upcoming draft, will head into the season with a bunch of old players with nothing proven behind them.




  9. #84
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,855
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who to keep

    I just see 2013 as one of those bottom-dropping out type seasons for the Steelers. Sticky this thread and rub it in my face in 11 months if I'm wrong




  10. #85

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by LukeDaniel View Post
    If they take the further mortgage/compromise the future route, then I think 3-13 is probably a bit of a stretch. The Steelers had no more injuries in 2012 than the Ravens did, perhaps even less. The reason why the Ravens were successful and the Steelers were average came down to depth and depth alone. All teams need it and the 2013 Steelers, unless they hit homer after homer in the upcoming draft, will head into the season with a bunch of old players with nothing proven behind them.
    I agree, but I don't think the "old" players are so bad as to finish 3-13. Both the Steelers and the Ravens had more than your average big injuries last year. That we dealt with them a ton better (miraculously, maybe) doesn't change the fact that the number was above-average.

    So I guess I am saying that a) I don't think they will necessarily face the same number of injuries in 2013 as 2012, and b) even if they do, the extra year of age combined with losing Harrison and a few other guys doesn't subtract 5 full wins from last year.

    Obviously I could be wrong, but I just don't see it.




  11. #86
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,307
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Who to keep

    I think you'll probably see another 8=8 type year, maybe 9-7 or 10-6 and possibly one last run in the play offs depending on Roethlisbergers health.

    The thing is here, everyone every year says "IF BEN CAN STAY HEALTHY, THEY CAN WIN THE SB", but when was the last time Ben actually stayed healthy all through the year? When Jen is healthy he's one of the best players in the league, but even if he does play well next season, the Steelers aren't any where near as good as they were when they went to those SBs.




  12. #87

    Re: Who to keep

    The more I think about it, the more I think maybe Flacco's deal gets done quickly... simply because the FO has literally no leverage whatsoever. There's no point in dragging out a negotiation if you KNOW you have no leverage.

    What can they threaten him with? The tag? If they tag him they will likely have to blow up the team, and that doesn't guarantee them anything other than getting to play the "bet on Flacco failing" game for one more year. They already lost that same bet this year. They also had to watch what happened to the Saints as a result of tagging and alienating their QB over the course of last season.

    I'm actually wondering if the tag is even an option the FO seriously has on the table at this point. Without it, they have only two choices: pay or walk. They won't let him walk, so they have to pay. It really seems that simple. I can only hope Flacco and his agent don't abuse their leverage and kick Ozzie while he's down.




  13. #88

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    The more I think about it, the more I think maybe Flacco's deal gets done quickly... simply because the FO has literally no leverage whatsoever. There's no point in dragging out a negotiation if you KNOW you have no leverage.

    What can they threaten him with? The tag? If they tag him they will likely have to blow up the team, and that doesn't guarantee them anything other than getting to play the "bet on Flacco failing" game for one more year. They already lost that same bet this year. They also had to watch what happened to the Saints as a result of tagging and alienating their QB over the course of last season.

    I'm actually wondering if the tag is even an option the FO seriously has on the table at this point. Without it, they have only two choices: pay or walk. They won't let him walk, so they have to pay. It really seems that simple. I can only hope Flacco and his agent don't abuse their leverage and kick Ozzie while he's down.
    The tag is a bit of leverage. Because they can match any competing offer. And because as much as Joe seems willing to gamble, it is hard to turn down an instant $50M guaranteed and, say, $115M overall, when the alternative is risking injury or a terrible year and signing for the same or a bit less in 2014.

    The tag would be beneficial to the team (vs. the alternative) if Joe was indeed asking for more than anyone else out there would give him. I am not saying that this is the case, but we keep talking how the team has to do whatever Joe wants without addressing the specifics. The team certainly does not have to pay Joe $30M per year just because Joe wants.
    Last edited by Haloti92; 02-06-2013 at 06:49 PM.




  14. #89
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Land of Verdite
    Posts
    13,340
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    The more I think about it, the more I think maybe Flacco's deal gets done quickly... simply because the FO has literally no leverage whatsoever. There's no point in dragging out a negotiation if you KNOW you have no leverage.

    What can they threaten him with? The tag? If they tag him they will likely have to blow up the team, and that doesn't guarantee them anything other than getting to play the "bet on Flacco failing" game for one more year. They already lost that same bet this year. They also had to watch what happened to the Saints as a result of tagging and alienating their QB over the course of last season.

    I'm actually wondering if the tag is even an option the FO seriously has on the table at this point. Without it, they have only two choices: pay or walk. They won't let him walk, so they have to pay. It really seems that simple. I can only hope Flacco and his agent don't abuse their leverage and kick Ozzie while he's down.
    Brees took a cheap deal to come there, less than Miami offered, won the darn city a Super Bowl and they still tried to play games with him about his recent extension.

    The best thing to do, as you eluded to, is to get the inevitable out of the way and give yourself time to sort out the rest of the team from there.
    "When questioned, the Elders explained that they were in search of magical powers. However, they're actually searching for the whereabouts of a certain ring. This ring is a legendary treasure that long ago was known to exist"




  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Land of Verdite
    Posts
    13,340
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who to keep

    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    I think you'll probably see another 8=8 type year, maybe 9-7 or 10-6 and possibly one last run in the play offs depending on Roethlisbergers health.

    The thing is here, everyone every year says "IF BEN CAN STAY HEALTHY, THEY CAN WIN THE SB", but when was the last time Ben actually stayed healthy all through the year? When Jen is healthy he's one of the best players in the league, but even if he does play well next season, the Steelers aren't any where near as good as they were when they went to those SBs.
    Yeah, if Ben gets hurt again, I could see 6 wins, maybe even five, but three? I don't know about all that.
    "When questioned, the Elders explained that they were in search of magical powers. However, they're actually searching for the whereabouts of a certain ring. This ring is a legendary treasure that long ago was known to exist"




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland