more Saints hilarity

[Captain Morgan]

not only do they only have 2.5 mill in cap space....guess who leads the league in dead money....to the tune of a whopping 31 million dollars

 

Spotrac ‏@spotrac  26m26 minutes ago

NFL Team Dead $ 1. #Saints: 31M 2. #Falcons: 25M 3. #Eagles: 15M

[Hammerin'Cameron34]

Two threads on the same thing. Threads need to be merged and re-titled "Saints, Falcons, lead league in dead money"

[DaveThePanther2008]

So in another words they will be our bitch again in 2016.

[General_Purr]

Someone explain what dead money means

[TheSpecialJuan]

lol

[top dawg]

24 minutes ago, General_Purr said:

Someone explain what dead money means

I have always assumed that it's money that is still owed a player, even though said player is no longer on your team. You're still on the hook for it, meaning that it counts against your cap for a certain period (whether it be a year or years depending on how the player's contract is structured).

Edit: BTW, I guess it's "dead money" because you aren't getting anything for your money. 

[Icebox]

Dead money is typically not still "owed" to the player. Typically, it's money that has already been paid to the player in the form of a signing bonus.

I think it would be more accurate to say that it is money that counts against the salary cap for a player that is no longer on the roster.

[cbarrier90]

13 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I have always assumed that it's money that is still owed a player, even though said player is no longer on your team. You're still on the hook for it, meaning that it counts against your cap for a certain period (whether it be a year or years depending on how the players contract is structured).

 

9 minutes ago, Icebox said:

Dead money is typically not still "owed" to the player. Typically, it's money that has already been paid to the player in the form of a signing bonus.

I think it would be more accurate to say that it is money that counts against the salary cap for a player that is no longer on the roster.

Correct on both counts.

To use a real life example close to home, the Panthers started out owing Charles Johnson 16 million or so this upcoming season. By releasing him, they got rid of that 16 million but still had to pay 4 million or so against the cap to do it, meaning CJ cost 4 million in dead money.

So while his re-signed contract says 3 million, we are really paying him about 7 million this season. Dave saved 9 million in cap room and didn't lose anything. That's why that move was so great.

[rodeo]

5 hours ago, Hammerin'Cameron34 said:

Two threads on the same thing. Threads need to be merged and re-titled "Saints, Falcons, lead league in dead money"

Why?

[sharkkiller]

17 minutes ago, cbarrier90 said:

 

Correct on both counts.

To use a real life example close to home, the Panthers started out owing Charles Johnson 16 million or so this upcoming season. By releasing him, they got rid of that 16 million but still had to pay 4 million or so against the cap to do it, meaning CJ cost 4 million in dead money.

So while his re-signed contract says 3 million, we are really paying him about 7 million this season. Dave saved 9 million in cap room and didn't lose anything. That's why that move was so great.

Not quite correct.

"dead money" is a term that means the money is still on the books after the player is gone. the money was already paid to the player in the form of bonuses. Signing bonuses are lump sums that are paid at the beginning of the contract, but are spread equally throughout the length of the contract. for example:

$16 million signing bonus = $4 million each year for 4 years of contract

If player is cut after two years, the remaining $8 million immediately hits the salary cap. Unless it is a post June 1st cut, then it can be spread over the next 2 years. 

So in the case of Charles Johnson, we are only paying him $3 million, not $7 million. The $4 million is dead money, and was paid to him at the start of the contract.

[Mother Grabber]

looks like the found enough for another mediocre LB

Saints agreed to terms with LB James Laurinaitis, formerly of the Rams.

Although Laurinaitis put up gaudy "tackle" stats in St. Louis, he's long been one of the most overrated players in the league. He finished 59th among 60 qualified inside linebackers in Pro Football Focus' 2015 grades, and dead last against the run. Still only 29 years old, Laurinaitis would be best viewed as veteran depth in New Orleans. The Saints' linebacker corps is weak enough, however, that Laurinaitis will probably be given a legitimate chance to start.

[SCP]

I don't know if it's Sean Payton's face, a certain milquetoast foam shoe collecting Spaniard, the ridiculous Who Dat Nation garbage from 6 years ago,or the overall dislike I have for Saint fans, but seeing this kind of news makes me smile inside.

[R0CKnR0LLA]

24 minutes ago, Mother Grabber said:

looks like the found enough for another mediocre LB

Saints agreed to terms with LB James Laurinaitis, formerly of the Rams.

Although Laurinaitis put up gaudy "tackle" stats in St. Louis, he's long been one of the most overrated players in the league. He finished 59th among 60 qualified inside linebackers in Pro Football Focus' 2015 grades, and dead last against the run. Still only 29 years old, Laurinaitis would be best viewed as veteran depth in New Orleans. The Saints' linebacker corps is weak enough, however, that Laurinaitis will probably be given a legitimate chance to start.

ranked 59th out of 60 and injury prone LOL

they sure know how to scout defensive talent down there in NO

[TheSpecialJuan]

17 minutes ago, R0CKnR0LLA said:

ranked 59th out of 60 and injury prone LOL

they sure know how to scout defensive talent down there in NO

!