Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 34
  1. Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by TL24x7 View Post
    The $2.8M figure was arrived at by Brian after including a $4M placeholder for Earl Thomas' grievance. A source told me today not to worry about the placeholder. Perhaps Thomas has changed his mind and did not file. Several sources have indicated that there are multiple instances deemed detrimental to the team. The fact that a player with Thomas' resume remains unsigned suggests that there's just too much baggage.

    Stanley is a possibility for an extension but I have a feeling that won't happen during the season. Peters restructure probably gets the Ravens another $4M. Ngakoue can't be extended now. He's a franchised player and while he took a haircut to accommodate a trade, he still can't be extended.

    So if the Ravens don't have to worry about Earl's $4M placeholder and if they restructure Peters, there's still some money in play.
    Thanks great update





  2. Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    And I’m just saying they are wrong because that’s now how the cap works in this league.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I thought you could in trade scenarios as long as you came into cap compliance in a certain timeframe, but maybe I'm reading this wrong or this doesn't exist in the new CBA.

    From RSR article "The short answer is that teams can’t because the league approves all contracts and would not approve a contract that would result in a team going over the Cap. If a team were to go over the Cap because of the acceleration of unaccounted-for bonus pro-rations due to the trade or release of a player, the CBA mandates that the team has 7 days to come into Cap compliance. That would mean that the team would have to find a way – likely via the restructure or release of another player – to come into Cap compliance."





  3. #15

    Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    A team can’t go over the cap, the NFL nullifies any move that would cause a team to do so.
    I .e. The Ngakue trade would not have been allowed had it put us over. There is no such thing as getting “back under”.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    This is MOSTLY true - but there is a specific set of circumstances where it it possible: If a team trades or releases a player currently under contract, causing previously-paid bonuses to accelerate against the cap, and this pushes the team over the limit, the team can stay over the cap for up to 7 days before it has to get back into compliance.

    That is immaterial for this discussion, though. We are currently under the cap, because we have to be, regardless of what Spotrac or Overthecap might say.
    "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but NOT to their own facts" - Daniel P. Moynihan





  4. #16

    Re: What’s up with the cap?






  5. Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by TL24x7 View Post
    The $2.8M figure was arrived at by Brian after including a $4M placeholder for Earl Thomas' grievance.
    Is this tweet from Brian inaccurate then (emphasis mine)?
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian McFarland
    This is accurate to an extent. The Ravens had $8M & once Ngakoue is added, that drops to $2.8M. But, that's before Thomas' grievance is factored in. The $5M referred to below has nothing to do w/ the grievance, that's his 2020 Signing Bonus proration which was already counting.
    https://twitter.com/RavensSalaryCap/...45491633655808

    I've also checked Brian's spreadsheet (link here: https://russellstreetreport.com/salarycap/), and while the $4m for Thomas is included in the Total Dead Money ($27,967,238), it does not seem to be included in the $195,735,778 total for Total Cap Player Under Contract (79), which is what Brian uses to calculate the $2,850,420 remaining cap space.


    edit: Brian confirmed last night that the $2.8m does not include the $4m grievance money: https://twitter.com/RavensSalaryCap/...83745688346626 seemingly because neither the NFL or NFLPA have applied it to their calculations
    Shared Google Folder with Ravens spreadsheets, nextGen charts, and more! Please share my content! (attribution to Twitter requested)

    Knight of the Kingdom of Perfect Play, Student of The Bill James School of Stamping Out Bullshit. Main Sources: PFR, particularly the Play Index; for cap stuff, RSR's Brian McFarland (secondary: OverTheCap, Spotrac)





  6. Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Is a Peters restructure a good idea? Probably whole different thread. But it's the only thing I see us really doing at this point if we make another move





  7. #19

    Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by John Reglarperson View Post
    The Browns have a starting Free Safety, Sendejo. When targeted, opposing QBs have a passer rating of 158.1. The Browns have done nothing to upgrade. Thomas is available, as are Reid and Clinton-Dix. I have no idea why, when the Browns are #31 in passing yards given up, and the free safety is so terrible, they don't get Thomas or someone else.
    Tony's post answers why ET remains unsigned
    Bleed Purple but don't be a homer





  8. #20

    Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by TL24x7 View Post
    The $2.8M figure was arrived at by Brian after including a $4M placeholder for Earl Thomas' grievance. A source told me today not to worry about the placeholder. Perhaps Thomas has changed his mind and did not file. Several sources have indicated that there are multiple instances deemed detrimental to the team. The fact that a player with Thomas' resume remains unsigned suggests that there's just too much baggage.

    Stanley is a possibility for an extension but I have a feeling that won't happen during the season. Peters restructure probably gets the Ravens another $4M. Ngakoue can't be extended now. He's a franchised player and while he took a haircut to accommodate a trade, he still can't be extended.

    So if the Ravens don't have to worry about Earl's $4M placeholder and if they restructure Peters, there's still some money in play.
    Appreciate the insight. Interesting to say the least
    Bleed Purple but don't be a homer





  9. #21

    Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReedInTheWind View Post
    I thought you could in trade scenarios as long as you came into cap compliance in a certain timeframe, but maybe I'm reading this wrong or this doesn't exist in the new CBA.

    From RSR article "The short answer is that teams can’t because the league approves all contracts and would not approve a contract that would result in a team going over the Cap. If a team were to go over the Cap because of the acceleration of unaccounted-for bonus pro-rations due to the trade or release of a player, the CBA mandates that the team has 7 days to come into Cap compliance. That would mean that the team would have to find a way – likely via the restructure or release of another player – to come into Cap compliance."
    Doesn't apply here: We haven't traded or released anyone. We traded FOR Ngakoue, but that could not trigger this specific exemption
    "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but NOT to their own facts" - Daniel P. Moynihan





  10. #22

    Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReedInTheWind View Post
    I thought you could in trade scenarios as long as you came into cap compliance in a certain timeframe, but maybe I'm reading this wrong or this doesn't exist in the new CBA.

    From RSR article "The short answer is that teams can’t because the league approves all contracts and would not approve a contract that would result in a team going over the Cap. If a team were to go over the Cap because of the acceleration of unaccounted-for bonus pro-rations due to the trade or release of a player, the CBA mandates that the team has 7 days to come into Cap compliance. That would mean that the team would have to find a way – likely via the restructure or release of another player – to come into Cap compliance."
    That is if they trade away a player, not for a player.

    If the Saints were to trade Michael Thomas or Atlanta were to trade Matt Ryan.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





  11. #23

    Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReedInTheWind View Post
    Is a Peters restructure a good idea? Probably whole different thread. But it's the only thing I see us really doing at this point if we make another move
    While it’s never a “good idea”, It’s not a bad idea. We’d rather not, as it’s a very flat contract, but restructuring only makes it a more normal contract structure for a guy we like and should be nonissue to keep for a few years.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





  12. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    near Asheville, NC
    Posts
    24,696

    Re: What’s up with the cap?

    Quote Originally Posted by Desert Raven View Post
    If Dallas doesn’t even want ET that says a lot.
    There's something about that guy that we don't know about, even now.





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
  •  
Link To Mobile Site
var infolinks_pid = 3297965; var infolinks_wsid = 0; //—->