2020 Salary Cap Situation

[tynimiller]

I don’t know the pay situation with Linsley

I don’t know the pay situation with Linsley either. Regardless, if Ruiz is sitting there at #30 it would be hard to pass on him. WR and OL are the biggest needs, so a lot will depend on how many impact WRs are also available at #30. Personally, I’d take a WR at #30 and deal with OL in the 2nd round, but it would be an interesting dilemma for Gluten come draft night.

I have Ruiz pegged as a top 10/15 talent in this year's draft. A run on QBs, WRs and what some say OTs this scenario could actually play out...

 

[Heyjoe4]

I have Ruiz pegged as a top 10/15 talent in this year's draft. A run on QBs, WRs and what some say OTs this scenario could actually play out...

Would you take Ruiz over a WR in round 1?

 

[tynimiller]

Would you take Ruiz over a WR in round 1?

Outside of a Jeudy or Lamb I personally would yes, and not think twice. This WR class is DEEP, the iOL class is not IMO...and Ruiz is a one every 4 year type iOL IMO.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Outside of a Jeudy or Lamb I personally would yes, and not think twice. This WR class is DEEP, the iOL class is not IMO...and Ruiz is a one every 4 year type iOL IMO.

All good points. And OLinemen tend to have a more immediate impact on a team, where a WR takes time to develop. That’s just my reaction, not based on any stats.

 

[tynimiller]

All good points. And OLinemen tend to have a more immediate impact on a team, where a WR takes time to develop. That’s just my reaction, not based on any stats.

Oh don't get me wrong I think you pick Ruiz, there is still quite a few WRs that instantly boost our WR room and can help greatly in the second round...Pittman, Claypool, Aiyuk, V Jefferson, Gabriel, Bryant...at minimum one of them will be there and other like Hill, Hamler, even the falling Laviska and Higgins might find themselves available mid to late 2nd (we trade up or stay...).

 

[Heyjoe4]

Oh don't get me wrong I think you pick Ruiz, there is still quite a few WRs that instantly boost our WR room and can help greatly in the second round...Pittman, Claypool, Aiyuk, V Jefferson, Gabriel, Bryant...at minimum one of them will be there and other like Hill, Hamler, even the falling Laviska and Higgins might find themselves available mid to late 2nd (we trade up or stay...).

I’d be ecstatic with Ruiz at #30 and Higgins at #62. I’m not sure Ruiz will still be on the board, pretty sure Higgins will be there.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It's not that RBs are not important enough. Jones, a player with a modest load for a starting RB, accounted for 37% of team touches in 2019, 285 of 767. It ranges up to McCaffrey accounting for 52% of his team's touches in 2019.

Don't sign running backs to second contracts until after the 4th. season.

There's no doubt McCaffrey was the most valuable running back in the league last season but according to PFF he ranked only 137th in wins above replacement among all players in the entire league though.

That indicates it wouldn't be extremely tough to find an adequate replacement for him or any other RB.

It might make sense in some cases to sign a running back to a second contract but there's definitely no reason to offer $10 million a year.

My guess is that the Cowboys will ultimately regret the Zeke deal, same with McCaffrey when he is resigned (although McCaffrey can catch, so IMO he’s better than Zeke, just not $16 mil/year better).

The Panthers re-signed McCaffrey to a four-year, $64 million extension this week.

Anyone know the timing of Linsley's pay this year.

Linsley will be paid a bonus of $350K for participating in offseason workouts. His base salary of $7.65 million becomes fully guaranteed if he's on the roster in week 1. In addition he receives $31,250 for each game he is active this year for a possible total of $500K.

That means the Packers could save $8.15 million in cap space by releasing him before the start of the regular season.

 

[Heyjoe4]

There's no doubt McCaffrey was the most valuable running back in the league last season but according to PFF he ranked only 137th in wins above replacement among all players in the entire league though.

That indicates it wouldn't be extremely tough to find an adequate replacement for him or any other RB.

It might make sense in some cases to sign a running back to a second contract but there's definitely no reason to offer $10 million a year.



The Panthers re-signed McCaffrey to a four-year, $64 million extension this week.



Linsley will be paid a bonus of $350K for participating in offseason workouts. His base salary of $7.65 million becomes fully guaranteed if he's on the roster in week 1. In addition he receives $31,250 for each game he is active this year for a possible total of $500K.

That means the Packers could save $8.15 million in cap space by releasing him before the start of the regular season.

Thanks for the update on McCaffrey, I hadn’t seen that yet. Well, now we should anticipate that Jones is going to want well over $10 mil/year. That’s still too much IMO. Gluten will likely use a later pick on a RB, or at least he should. Or he could decide that Jones is just too important to MLF’s scheme, meaning someone else has gotta go. Can’t pay everyone what they want (or will get in FA).

 

[HardRightEdge]

There's no doubt McCaffrey was the most valuable running back in the league last season but according to PFF he ranked only 137th in wins above replacement among all players in the entire league though.

That indicates it wouldn't be extremely tough to find an adequate replacement for him or any other RB.

It might make sense in some cases to sign a running back to a second contract but there's definitely no reason to offer $10 million a year.

I couldn't find the PFF WAR rankings or anything more than vague descriptions of this black box methodology, but I did find a note where they ranked his as the top WAR running back over his first 3 seasons but only the 34th. ranked player in WAR, in a tie with his teammate D.J. Moore over his first 2 seasons:

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-the-case-for-trading-christian-mccaffrey.

I find a couple of clues as why McCaffrey (and running backs in general) rank low in PFF league WAR.

"Nearly all of a running back’s touches come at or behind the line of scrimmage, making it more difficult to produce efficient offense on those plays."

That's runs and passes, which applies especially in McCaffrey's case, a guy who had 1,005 receiving yards with 1,019 yards after catch. There are a lot of catches behind the line of scimmage imbedded in those numbers.

The problem with taking PFFs WAR as an indication of importance of the RB position is that it begs the question, "why have a running back at all?" Add another blocker or WR most or all of the time, why doncha, and run the ball little or none at all? Clearly there is a dynamic between the objective of a play likely to produce short yards and those where a passing play objectives is chunks of yards. Perhaps we can best sum up the use of RBs in successful offenses as tactical, not strategic.

The McCaffrey problem is one of overuse. Featuring him (or any RB) on this high a percentage of plays is not a formula for winning. 4.8 yards per rushing attempt might look good, but how does it compare to 7 or 8 yards per pass attempt, the vast middle range for QBs? McCaffrey's 7.1 yards per target falls low in that QB range and well below decent WRs. Runs and screens have their important place in the game, but there is a limit to how frequently they should be run, and the yards per carry is bound to drag down PFF's purported efficiency as described above.

In the end, WAR is a measure of performance relative to the average player at his position. Here we find agreement. There's a reason high draft capital is not often spent on RBs. Skill sets and productivity are tightly clustered around the average NFL range. There is even a theory extant that RB performance is strongly differentiated by how well the offensive line performs.

Through Dec. 6 last season, PFF ranked McCaffrey as the 1st. ranked fantasy player in the league which goes to a point I harp on, fantasy points do not translate to winning football. So in all of this, why would Carolina pay McCaffrey this money? It's bowing to the fans. He was already the face of the franchise so now they're paying him. If you're going to lose a lot of games you need something or somebody to keep the fans engaged and in the seats.

So, yes, I would not pay a running back $10 mil per year for his tactical value, injury risk and the relatively low draft capital needed to find an adequate replacement.

If one must extend a RB going into his 4th. season, which would not be my preference, the Chargers had the right idea with Ekeler, a Jones comparison that has been cited in these pages. We could quibble over whether Jones is worth $8 mil/year or Ekeler's $6 mil/year, but the critical point is that in year 4 of Ekeler's new deal, his 7th. season, his dead cap drops to $1.5 mil with a cap savings of $5.75 mil, an easy out after his 6th. season. Getting out after 5 years would not be onerous, with $3 mil in dead cap. In short, don't commit past a RB's season 6 in a second contract.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I couldn't find the PFF WAR rankings or anything more than vague descriptions of this black box methodology, but I did find a note where they ranked his as the top WAR running back over his first 3 seasons but only the 34th. ranked player in WAR, in a tie with his teammate D.J. Moore over his first 2 seasons:

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-the-case-for-trading-christian-mccaffrey.

I find a couple of clues as why McCaffrey (and running backs in general) rank low in PFF league WAR.

"Nearly all of a running back’s touches come at or behind the line of scrimmage, making it more difficult to produce efficient offense on those plays."

That's runs and passes, which applies especially in McCaffrey's case, a guy who had 1,005 receiving yards with 1,019 yards after catch. There are a lot of catches behind the line of scimmage imbedded in those numbers.

The problem with taking PFFs WAR as an indication of importance of the RB position is that it begs the question, "why have a running back at all?" Add another blocker or WR most or all of the time, why doncha, and run the ball little or none at all? Clearly there is a dynamic between the objective of a play likely to produce short yards and those where a passing play objectives is chunks of yards. Perhaps we can best sum up the use of RBs in successful offenses as tactical, not strategic.

The McCaffrey problem is one of overuse. Featuring him (or any RB) on this high a percentage of plays is not a formula for winning. 4.8 yards per rushing attempt might look good, but how does it compare to 7 or 8 yards per pass attempt, the vast middle range for QBs? McCaffrey's 7.1 yards per target falls low in that QB range and well below decent WRs. Runs and screens have their important place in the game, but there is a limit to how frequently they should be run, and the yards per carry is bound to drag down PFF's purported efficiency as described above.

In the end, WAR is a measure of performance relative to the average player at his position. Here we find agreement. There's a reason high draft capital is not often spent on RBs. Skill sets and productivity are tightly clustered around the average NFL range. There is even a theory extant that RB performance is strongly differentiated by how well the offensive line performs.

Through Dec. 6 last season, PFF ranked McCaffrey as the 1st. ranked fantasy player in the league which goes to a point I harp on, fantasy points do not translate to winning football. So in all of this, why would Carolina pay McCaffrey this money? It's bowing to the fans. He was already the face of the franchise so now they're playing him. If you're going to lose a lot of games you need something or somebody to keep the fans engaged and in the seats.

So, yes, I would not pay a running back $10 mil per year for his tactical value, injury risk and the relatively low draft capital to find an adequate replacement.

If one must extend a RB going into his 4th. season, which would not be my preference, the Chargers had the right idea with Ekeler, a Jones comparison that has been cited in these pages. We could quibble over whether Jones is worth $8 mil/year or Ekeler's $6 mil/year, but the critical point is that in year 4 of Ekeler's new deal, his 7th. season, his dead cap drops to $1.5 mil with a cap savings of $5.75 mil, an easy out after his 6th. season. Getting out after 5 years would not be onerous, with $3 mil in dead cap. In short, don't commit past a RB's season 6 in a second contract.

This an interesting argument HRE. I‘do actually be ok with paying Jones a max of $8 mil/per. And it’s logical based on your argument.

But FA doesn’t revolve as much around logic as it does teams willing and able to overpay for a position. From the RBs perspective, it therefore makes sense to see what the market is actually paying. Ekeler and McCaffrey are at extremes along a straight line. Given his production, and comparing his output against guys like McCaffrey, there would be plenty of teams willing to bid Jones up well north of $10 mil/year. No RB is “worth” that kind of money, but the market is the market. The best strategy then is to draft a RB almost every year. I mean Jones was taken in the 5th round I think.

This is the reality we live in, where $$$ replace logic. Looking ahead (and assuming we have a season), if Jones continues at his current level of production, he’ll easily command north of $10 mil/year. I’ve said it before - overpaying for an NFL RB is like overpaying in MLB for a pitcher. The positions are extremely important to a team’s success. The positions are also the most likely to face injury. If we lose Jones, we lose Jones.

I also think the running game is a necessary component of every team’s game plan, from tactical and strategic points of view. GB will likely lose Jones in FA next year. Gluten needs to draft a replacement this year, rolling the dice a bit in the process.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Well, now we should anticipate that Jones is going to want well over $10 mil/year. Or he could decide that Jones is just too important to MLF’s scheme, meaning someone else has gotta go. Can’t pay everyone what they want (or will get in FA).

The Packers definitely shouldn't let one of their core free agents walk away next offseason to overpay for Jones.

I couldn't find the PFF WAR rankings or anything more than vague descriptions of this black box methodology, but I did find a note where they ranked his as the top WAR running back over his first 3 seasons but only the 34th. ranked player in WAR, in a tie with his teammate D.J. Moore over his first 2 seasons:

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-the-case-for-trading-christian-mccaffrey.

Here's the tweet I took the information from:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Given his production, and comparing his output against guys like McCaffrey, there would be plenty of teams willing to bid Jones up well north of $10 mil/year.

I'm fine with another team offering Jones $10 million per season as long as the Packers don't match it.

I’ve said it before - overpaying for an NFL RB is like overpaying in MLB for a pitcher. The positions are extremely important to a team’s success.

Actually overpaying for a running back is terrible idea as it's pretty easy to adequately replace his production.

 

[Mondio]

At this point i'm planning on Jones being gone after this year. I would never pay 10 million+ per for a RB in today's NFL and though Jones is obviously very talented, I just don't think it's a position to heavily invest in anymore.

 

[Heyjoe4]

The Packers definitely shouldn't let one of their core free agents walk away next offseason to overpay for Jones.



Here's the tweet I took the information from:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

I'm fine with another team offering Jones $10 million per season as long as the Packers don't match it.



Actually overpaying for a running back is terrible idea as it's pretty easy to adequately replace his production.

Yep, you’re singing to the choir on overpaying RBs. I mean Jones was taken in the 4th round, I think, or 5th. And while this is just a gut reaction on my part, there doesn’t seem to be strong correlation between RB performance in college versus the pros. In the case of Jones, it was the opposite.

I’d rather see Gluten retain Bak and Clark if that means letting Jones walk in 2021. Again, ya can’t keep everyone.

 

[gopkrs]

Actually overpaying for a running back is terrible idea as it's pretty easy to adequately replace his production.

I'm not for overpaying anyone. But to say it is pretty easy to replace his production is just not correct. I really enjoy watching him and hope we can keep him. Never seen someone try as hard as he does in pass pro. I don't look forward to searching and spending draft picks looking for the replacement.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Yep, you’re singing to the choir on overpaying RBs. I mean Jones was taken in the 4th round, I think, or 5th. And while this is just a gut reaction on my part, there doesn’t seem to be strong correlation between RB performance in college versus the pros. In the case of Jones, it was the opposite.

I’d rather see Gluten retain Bak and Clark if that means letting Jones walk in 2021. Again, ya can’t keep everyone.

I'm not for overpaying anyone. But to say it is pretty easy to replace his production is just not correct. I really enjoy watching him and hope we can keep him. Never seen someone try as hard as he does in pass pro. I don't look forward to searching and spending draft picks looking for the replacement.

I do like Jones - he’s extremely versatile and valuable. The problem is the accelerating salaries for RBs. Jones isn’t that far behind McCaffrey in total production, and McCaffrey just signed for 4 years at $16 mil/year.

The Packers will have to bring out the wallet for Clark, and rightly so for a 24 y/o guy with his production. Bak will need to be resigned as well. Probably the only way to keep Jones is a) let Bak walk and b) pay Jones around $13-14 mil/year. Now Bak is clearly on the back nine of his career, so does Gluten let him go now to pay Jones?

It’s a very tough choice. If Gluten is very active in the draft with OTs, we’ll have an idea of what he’s thinking for next year.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It’s a very tough choice. If Gluten is very active in the draft with OTs, we’ll have an idea of what he’s thinking for next year.

I'm sure he's always thinking about the current year and the next.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yep, you’re singing to the choir on overpaying RBs. I mean Jones was taken in the 4th round, I think, or 5th. And while this is just a gut reaction on my part, there doesn’t seem to be strong correlation between RB performance in college versus the pros. In the case of Jones, it was the opposite.

Jones was actually an extremely productive running back in college (1,773 rushing yards, 7.7 yards per carry, 17 touchdowns in his last year). He dropped to the fifth round because he played for a small college at UTEP and had some injury concerns.

I'm not for overpaying anyone. But to say it is pretty easy to replace his production is just not correct. I really enjoy watching him and hope we can keep him.

I like watching Jones as well but there's no reason to pay him market value as it's the fact that running backs are easier to adequately replace than most other positions.

I do like Jones - he’s extremely versatile and valuable. The problem is the accelerating salaries for RBs. Jones isn’t that far behind McCaffrey in total production, and McCaffrey just signed for 4 years at $16 mil/year.

McCaffrey is definitely a tier above Jones but the Panthers will all but guaranteed regret paying him that kind of money.

 

[gopkrs]

I like watching Jones as well but there's no reason to pay him market value as it's the fact that running backs are easier to adequately replace than most other positions.

Don't agree with that "fact." Special RBs are, well, special.

 

[OldSchool101]

Don't agree with that "fact." Special RBs are, well, special.

I’m with you on that. While I do agree that GB shouldn’t pay into double digits for him (we’ve yet to see his final year) the Packers where very fortunate to find him that late in day 3. He’s been a refreshing surprise.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Don't agree with that "fact." Special RBs are, well, special.

They don't add a significant amount of wins above their replacements though. While they're fun to watch there's no reason to spend big bucks on any of them.

 

[gopkrs]

They don't add a significant amount of wins above their replacements though. While they're fun to watch there's no reason to spend big bucks on any of them.

I use to think that back when also. And then I saw how much Dorsey Levens meant to the Packer offense after he was out half the season. It can make a big difference. You try to make a deal. If you can't... btw, who adds significant amount of wins? OTs, DTs, centers, DBs,? And how in the world can you determine that?

 

[mradtke66]

who adds significant amount of wins? OTs, DTs, centers, DBs,? And how in the world can you determine that?

Typically it's looking back at stats. Correlate performance with wins and then try to make future predictions. It's not perfect, but it's the best we've got.

Over simplified, teams that lead the league in rushing tend not to make it to the playoffs, for example. Teams with good passing offenses do.

That said, it's not necessarily that you don't have a good running game. It's that passing offenses average more yards per play, more points, etc etc. So even if you had Bo Jackson and Aaron Rodgers in the same backfield, you'd still throw more than you run.

Past that, it's more art that science, albeit a sliding scale. If passing is more valuable to offenses, the defenders that stop the pass are more valuable than defense. Ergo Edge and Cornerbacks. To counter that, you need offensive tackles to stop those good edge players. Etc.

Then we have a little bit of scarcity built in as well. Quarterback is probably the most important and there aren't 32 good quarterbacks in the league at any one time. So they are drafted high and good ones paid well.

Similarly with Edge and OT. There aren't 64 good ones in the league at each time.

From there the scale starts to slide. Backs are common and there isn't statistical evidence that they add to wins. The get shafted. Lots of college OTs that can't hack it at the pro level, but can survive inside where they'll get more help and aren't left on islands. Thus Guards and Centers are less valued that OT.

On the super extreme end we have fullbacks. Many teams don't even have one.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I use to think that back when also. And then I saw how much Dorsey Levens meant to the Packer offense after he was out half the season. It can make a big difference. You try to make a deal. If you can't... btw, who adds significant amount of wins? OTs, DTs, centers, DBs,? And how in the world can you determine that?

Here's an explanation of PFF's wins above replacement model:

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-what-is-pff-war-and-why-it-shows-russell-wilson-is-the-mvp

As I've posted earlier Christian McCaffrey was only ranked 137th among all players in that category last season while being the most valuable running back.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Here's an explanation of PFF's wins above replacement model:

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-what-is-pff-war-and-why-it-shows-russell-wilson-is-the-mvp

As I've posted earlier Christian McCaffrey was only ranked 137th among all players in that category last season while being the most valuable running back.

In watching one of PFF's podcasts, the guys mentioned that this AWS machine learning application, yada, yada, values coverage defenders over pass rushers while determining that OLs get low WAR valuations along with RBs. We don't know what this black box is doing, they will never tell us, and if it is actually machine learning they would not be able to tell us precisely even if they wanted to.

That said, they mentioned that Brees' and Brady's success in getting the ball out quick neutralizes the value of pass blocking and that coverage helps pass rushing more than the other way around. We can futher deduce that devaluing RBs spills over into devaluing run blocking, that running the ball is subject to some law of diminishing returns, while the success of these QBs has come with sometimes dodgy pass blocking grades.

Behind the veneer of complexity, I believe the conclusions are rooted in some basic statistics that accumulate and reinforce game after game: You can hand the ball to a McCaffrey or a Jones and they will average 4.8 or 4.6 yards per carry. Or you can throw the ball and average 6 or 7 yards per pass play after adjusting for sacks. Even Kyle Allen, with an exceptionally high sack rate, averaged 5.47 on passes minus sacks.

Does PFF have a runaway alogothim? To some degree perhaps but there is a point to be taken. The successful stategies are centered on throwing the ball and defending the pass. Running the ball is a tactical support to the passing game, and I don't think I have to count the ways running the ball is predominantly a tool for setting up the pass in today's game. Yeah, you can go overboard and get gashed all day on the ground , and if everybody started playing 6 corner dime on every play the algo would start swinging the other way.

But I think the message is clear even if it is perhaps overbaked to one degree or another: Spend your money on QBs, WRs and coverage players, run the ball tactically, and get the ball out quick a lot to neutralize your deficiencies.

 

[gopkrs]

All of that just does not take into consideration that you are playing a particular team on a particular day and the ball bounces one way or the other. Game planning is of course necessary but you have to adjust to the game being played, which includes a few variables
It is good to use all the stats in the world of course to pick a player in the draft but you can't always pigeon hole a player because of times and lifting weights. I would hope our scouts can do a good job just using these stats as a secondary tool. The primary tool being tape. Of course, it is easier just to look up stats on the computer. I just don't think they will ever tell the whole story except maybe on Madden.