Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Gin and Juice

Let's talk about restructuring player contracts!

42 posts in this topic

There's no possible way for Beason to restructure his contract to have a cap hit of less than $4M + veteran minimum base salary. The bonus has already been paid. It's hitting the salary cap. No way around it. IMO, the sweet spot for both parties is a $2M base. That would make his cap hit the same this year as it would be if we cut him and spread the hit over two years and it's a higher base than he'd likely find on the open market given is injury issues. He wouldn't be a hot commodity. Good deal for both sides.

I agree that we would need to make it something very modest as you suggest. If irc though, he still has $3+ million in guaranteed salary due this year, so they'd have to roll that into the deal.

Just running a few numbers, and thinking about the situation, I still think he's gone when all is said and done. Here are some reasons why:

1) No matter how we structure it, he would still be counting $6 million plus against our cap for at least the next 3 years, and that is with him getting no more than $2 million a year.

2) Jon can still collect that $3+ million without giving in, and then sell himself on the open market.

3) He is now no more than a luxury player for us. Do we really want to have that quantity of cap dollars tied up for several years on a luxury (and high risk due to injuries) player?

When everything shakes out, both parties may well decide to just cut ties post June 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was the GM....and I have no idea if it would even be possible....I'd call a meeting, and explain the cap situation. Then tell everybody that, for the good of the team, there were gonna be 10-12 % cuts across the board. If you wanna see growth, give a little back. Then see where everyone stood.

This might be the worst idea I've ever heard. Seriously. For one, the rookie contracts are set in stone. You can't touch them. Veteran minimum contracts are already bare bones. Not everyone on the team is overpaid, so why should they take a cut? Our cap problems honestly come down to just a handful of players - notably Beason, Williams, Stewart, Gamble, Gross, Godfrey, CJ, and James Anderson. The Gamble, Gross, and Anderson situations are pretty simple IMO - they either restructure or they get cut. Period. Godfrey is actually relatively cheap for one more season, then he either restructures or he's gone. The others get more complicated due to the cap implications. If everyone and their agents want to play ball, it's actually a pretty easy fix. If agents and/or players want to play hard ball, we're stuck between a rock and a hard place. Hopefully players want to be here, because they're agents aren't dumb. They know the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was the GM....and I have no idea if it would even be possible....I'd call a meeting, and explain the cap situation. Then tell everybody that, for the good of the team, there were gonna be 10-12 % cuts across the board. If you wanna see growth, give a little back. Then see where everyone stood.

how would you feel if your boss did that at your job? This is a business first and foremost these guys wouldn't stand for that,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside since we're on the subject, there are conflicting reports on how unallocated cap dollars are handled for post June 1st cuts.

We all know those dollars are spread over 2 years. It is usually assumed they are divided equally, i.e. $6 million in 2013 and $6 million in 2014. However, I have seen a number of reports in the media that it is divided differently, with the original cap hit taken in the first year, and the balance in year 2. Again, using Beason as an example, the charge would be around $4 million in 2013 and $8 million in 2014.

Does anyone have a definitive reference that answers this question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that we would need to make it something very modest as you suggest. If irc though, he still has $3+ million in guaranteed salary due this year, so they'd have to roll that into the deal.

Just running a few numbers, and thinking about the situation, I still think he's gone when all is said and done. Here are some reasons why:

1) No matter how we structure it, he would still be counting $6 million plus against our cap for at least the next 3 years, and that is with him getting no more than $2 million a year.

2) Jon can still collect that $3+ million without giving in, and then sell himself on the open market.

3) He is now no more than a luxury player for us. Do we really want to have that quantity of cap dollars tied up for several years on a luxury (and high risk due to injuries) player?

When everything shakes out, both parties may well decide to just cut ties post June 1.

I think the Panthers make it work because cutting him next year gets A LOT more feasible than cutting him this year. There's a lot more savings to be had. I think it just makes sense for both sides. Beason shows he's valuable as a starting OLB and can stay healthy, then he can restructure and stay and keep the majority of his money. If he can't stay healthy, then he's gone either way. Win/win situation for both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside since we're on the subject, there are conflicting reports on how unallocated cap dollars are handled for post June 1st cuts.

We all know those dollars are spread over 2 years. It is usually assumed they are divided equally, i.e. $6 million in 2013 and $6 million in 2014. However, I have seen a number of reports in the media that it is divided differently, with the original cap hit taken in the first year, and the balance in year 2. Again, using Beason as an example, the charge would be around $4 million in 2013 and $8 million in 2014.

Does anyone have a definitive reference that answers this question?

I don't. I was assuming it was allocated equally, but it may not be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Panthers make it work because cutting him next year gets A LOT more feasible than cutting him this year. There's a lot more savings to be had. I think it just makes sense for both sides. Beason shows he's valuable as a starting OLB and can stay healthy, then he can restructure and stay and keep the majority of his money. If he can't stay healthy, then he's gone either way. Win/win situation for both sides.

But put yourself in Jon's shoes. He has $3+ million guaranteed from us in 2013. He could at least get vet min elsewhere so add in another $750,000 roughly. That is at least $4 million (probably more) and he almost certainly could find someone to let him compete for the starting MLB spot. If he has a great year (and you know that is what Jon expects) then he signs a big deal with the new team.

So why would he stay here and play for less, especially when he knows he has no shot to play MLB? I don't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I just think with the cap hit situation, the Panthers aren't going to be willing to eat a bunch of dead cap space if they can possibly keep Beason for not much more. Hopefully TD can talk him into being willing to work a deal. Worked out pretty well for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I just think with the cap hit situation, the Panthers aren't going to be willing to eat a bunch of dead cap space if they can possibly keep Beason for not much more. Hopefully TD can talk him into being willing to work a deal. Worked out pretty well for him.

I fully agree the Panthers can't offer much more than you've suggested, and even at that, I'm not sure it's the right thing to do, as it's Luke's D now. As you suggest, we'll just have to wait and see, but if I were a betting man, my money goes on him being gone (mutual decision between the club and Jon).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be the worst idea I've ever heard. Seriously. For one, the rookie contracts are set in stone. You can't touch them. Veteran minimum contracts are already bare bones. Not everyone on the team is overpaid, so why should they take a cut? Our cap problems honestly come down to just a handful of players - notably Beason, Williams, Stewart, Gamble, Gross, Godfrey, CJ, and James Anderson. The Gamble, Gross, and Anderson situations are pretty simple IMO - they either restructure or they get cut. Period. Godfrey is actually relatively cheap for one more season, then he either restructures or he's gone. The others get more complicated due to the cap implications. If everyone and their agents want to play ball, it's actually a pretty easy fix. If agents and/or players want to play hard ball, we're stuck between a rock and a hard place. Hopefully players want to be here, because they're agents aren't dumb. They know the situation.

That's kinda the point I was getting at....Bring up the "Across the board" idea -factoring in the rookie/vet caps-just to see if the guy making nothing wants to be here and help out, and see if the "Untouchables" are willing to take a cut. Personally, I'd think that DWill wants to restructure, just to keep himself, Stewie, and Tolbert together. Beast better read the writing on the wall. Gross has been here long enough to understand. "I want to be in Charlotte" only works if there's a line of people willing to pay you more to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy making veteran minimum or on a rookie contract can't help out. The vet is making the bare minimum allowed under the collective bargaining agreement and rookie can't renegotiate.

I'm sure there are plenty of veterans in every training camp in the NFL who would be more than willing to take less than the veteran minimum in order to not lose their job to a lesser paid rookie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was a player I wouldn't take a pay cut. Screw that haha. The man in charge all these years handed out fat contracts to everyone. Why would I give mine back?

Some of guys are getting cut. Sorry bout it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites