Just wondering -

The FA we cut this year, does we their bonus still amortize over future years, or do we take a cap hit only this year?

Gebril Wilson, Reggie Tourbor, and Jake Grove would have counted almost $10M against our cap next year, huh?

No, because we cut them when we did there would be no cap it "IF" there is a salary cap next year. I would bet on a salary cap returning to the NFL, but its also not a sure thing.

That is why we had to cut Grove before Sunday, because if we didn't then $13 mill would have been on the Dolphins payroll spread out over the next 4 years because of the wording of his deal. That and he had a bonus clause that went into effect on Sunday when that game kicked off if he was on the team.

So this means that we can give larger bonuses to FAs next year? Seems like a wise move.

lol, if the Dolphins budget is that "tight" that they needed Grove gone to pass out bigger bonuses to free agents next year, then they should close shop and move to LA or something.

I mean seriously, now you are really pushing it with this logic. That extra $2 mill we saved in 2011 really is a drop in the bucket in the big picture

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> lol, if the Dolphins budget is that "tight" that
> they needed Grove gone to pass out bigger bonuses
> to free agents next year, then they should close
> shop and move to LA or something.
>

This makes no sense. You are the only one saying the budget is "tight". Do you even understand what I'm saying? It means we will likely spend more money next year. Not the sign of a strapped organization.


> I mean seriously, now you are really pushing it
> with this logic. That extra $2 mill we saved in
> 2011 really is a drop in the bucket in the big
> picture

More than $2M. If we were to cut Grove next season it would be $6M in bonus money.

If there were a salary cap this year, we would have had close to $10M in dead cap space between Grove, Wilson, and Tourbor. Now we spent that money on Dansby. Good move.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2010 08:59AM by DolfanMike.

I was thinking about this, too. IF there's a salary cap in place in 2011, then we could be among those who are in a very good position relative to other teams in terms of being able to spend in FA.

Brown, Williams & Pennington all (I think) have contracts that expire after 2011, totaling somewhere in the 'hood of $15M salary cap hit. Meanwhile, we've 'eaten-but-ridded-ourselves-of' tons of 2011+ salary cap money with Grove, Smiley, Gerbil, etc.

I'm having a bit of a tough time adding it all up due to lack of perfect data, but I think the only big numbers on the roster in 2011 (at this point) are:
- Long
- Carey
- Marshall
- Dansby
- Will Allen (not likely to be a Phin in 2011 due to IR thing...there's another ~$5M)
- Crowder, Jason Allen & Bell are probably more medium-sized numbers

Everyone else is basically a pretty small number. I realize that if Henne is the real deal, he'll get paid and we'll need to have someone to run the ball, etc. But we could be very well positioned in FA due to some of the stuff that's happened recently.

Risk is that we need Grove, Will Allen& Smiley (or whoever) this year...reward could be that we're in really great shape to build a SB-contending team for the foreseeable future.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2010 09:07AM by tsstamper.

Well before you guys get all "Cap Crazy" and say we are in a good position or bad position for next year. You have to know what the cap will be. Because that is what the owners and NFLPA is fighting over.

So you can't say we are in good cap standing because you don't know what the cap is set at yet.

tsstamper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Risk is that we need Grove & Smiley (or whoever)
> this year....

Right. We didn't NEED these guys.

Some are arguing we did but have failed to notice the fact that they weren't dependable.

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well before you guys get all "Cap Crazy" and say
> we are in a good position or bad position for next
> year. You have to know what the cap will be.
> Because that is what the owners and NFLPA is
> fighting over.
>
> So you can't say we are in good cap standing
> because you don't know what the cap is set at yet.

True, not as a percentage of the cap.

But we can say where we are relative to other teams, and we are in a good spot.

Furthermore, we can make some assumption about the size of the change. It all flows from TV revenue, and that deal isn't changing. If the cap changes it will likely only be a few percentage points, plus an allowance for the expanded roster.

This is true, but that was why I did the 'relative to other teams' bit. I suppose there's a cap that might be implemented that gives us no particular advantage over, say, Dallas who has invested big-to-huge $$$ in every skill position on offense and very handsome salaries to Newman & Ware...and probably others I'm unaware of. Or NYJ who have personified the other side of no cap.

However, I think that the most likely implementation of a cap structure will have us in a pretty decent position relative to other teams because of some of these moves.

It's a good caution not to get cap crazy, but I guess in my mind it looks like the Phins are sort of betting on a cap being in place for 2011 and a rookie pay scale that will help correct some of the imbalance that's in place. They seem to be focusing on the core players - the ones they hope will give us the best sustained chance at a multi-year window of SB opportunity - and letting those on the periphery go for the chance at building at a potential significant advantage in the future.

I don't think it's a bad strategy. And, since it's not my money, I don't see too much wrong with renting Grove & Smiley. They really played well when healthy. Talent evaluation wasn't the problem there. I do have other talent evaluation problems, but outside of White, I don't think they're as egregious as others may think.

tsstamper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is true, but that was why I did the 'relative
> to other teams' bit. I suppose there's a cap that
> might be implemented that gives us no particular
> advantage over, say, Dallas who has invested
> big-to-huge $$$ in every skill position on offense
> and very handsome salaries to Newman & Ware...and
> probably others I'm unaware of. Or NYJ who have
> personified the other side of no cap.
>
> However, I think that the most likely
> implementation of a cap structure will have us in
> a pretty decent position relative to other teams
> because of some of these moves.
>
> It's a good caution not to get cap crazy, but I
> guess in my mind it looks like the Phins are sort
> of betting on a cap being in place for 2011 and a
> rookie pay scale that will help correct some of
> the imbalance that's in place. They seem to be
> focusing on the core players - the ones they hope
> will give us the best sustained chance at a
> multi-year window of SB opportunity - and letting
> those on the periphery go for the chance at
> building at a potential significant advantage in
> the future.
>
> I don't think it's a bad strategy. And, since
> it's not my money, I don't see too much wrong with
> renting Grove & Smiley. They really played well
> when healthy. Talent evaluation wasn't the
> problem there. I do have other talent evaluation
> problems, but outside of White, I don't think
> they're as egregious as others may think.


Great post!

tsstamper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> I don't think it's a bad strategy. And, since
> it's not my money, I don't see too much wrong with
> renting Grove & Smiley. They really played well
> when healthy. Talent evaluation wasn't the
> problem there. I do have other talent evaluation
> problems, but outside of White, I don't think
> they're as egregious as others may think.


Sure it was bad evaluation. Smiley was coming off a major injury in SF. And Grove was always hurt in Oakland. To throw huge money at both guys and expect things to be different was foolish. That was bad evaluation and money spending.

And yes its not my money either, but it is Ross's and at some point he might get sick of blowing this money on players who dont' deserve it and are gone in a year or two.

The money could have been spent better, but I was speaking only of talent evaluation for Smiley and Grove. They both played like talented interior linemen for us when they played. I was especially impressed by Smiley, but Grove was very good, too. We had one of the highest rated running games with Pennington having a not-so-great start to the season last year.

Satele was a weak link on the o-line, and I'm glad he was replaced. I believe that Smiley fast-tracked Long's professional development and helped provide much-needed leadership on the line. I personally would have preferred that we replace Satele with Jason Brown - signed early in the FA season for roughly the same money. For whatever reason, we didn't and still felt the need to upgrade at C so that the big NTs in the East wouldn't push Satele around. Besides a paltry 52 yards rushing against the Jets in NY, we ran very well against AFC East opponents (and NO, SD & Indy) in the first 10 games of the year, so I guess I would say that it 'worked'. It's possible that the lack of relative drop-off from Grove to Berger surprised the coaches a bit. They may have under-valued Berger's talent. But, in Grove's case, it seems like they took a calculated risk and it had some positive and some less-than-ideal results.

If they had known what they had or could get in Berger, they probably wouldn't have paid Grove like they did. I think, philosophically, I have something of a 'to make and omelet you have to break a few eggs' perspective. However, I also get your point that you can't just break eggs left and right without seeing some semblance of an omelet. Since I felt like I saw an omelet in the making, so to speak, I feel that the spending was justifiable - not nearly perfect, but justifiable.

Both Rose and Geathers are inactive today, leaving only Tony McDaniel as a backup at DE. Look for Grant or Douglas, or both, to be brought back next week, proving that those moves were mostly about saving some dollars.