Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Dissecting Nick Diaz's Positive Drug Test

More Cap Learnin'

Two weeks ago, we looked at how teams manage their salary cap. Since the Hawks have not yet signed all of their players, let's take a look at how teams generally structure deals for players taken in the second day of the draft. J.I. Halsell, the FO salary cap guru, is about to drop some knowledge all over you. I'll try to encapsulate the general gist of the piece, but do read it through in its entirety; I learned something and you just might too.

In terms of the mechanics of the deal, the first-round contracts are the most complex. Second-round contracts are not as complex as first-rounders; however, second-round contracts are structured differently than those of rounds three through seven. Contracts for third- through seventh-rounders all have pretty much the same structure, with the only difference being the duration of the contract.

Teams either sign their second-day picks to three- or four-year deals. While the shorter deals are cheaper up front, the fourth year provides teams with an extra year of team control over their players. For players that don't pan out, the fourth year is disadvantageous from a team perspective. Staving off free agency for another year is quite valuable if a player does produce, however.

Years one through three of both contracts are for a minimum annual salary; in year four, though, things get interesting. In Year Four of the four-year rookie contract, there is a salary escalator that, in the majority of instances, allows the player's salary of $565,000 in 2012 to adjust to the restricted free agency Original Round Tender (in 2012 this amount is $1,308,000) if they achieve certain performances in the first three years of the contract. Additionally, some clubs allow for escalation to other dollar amounts or other RFA levels such as the First Round Tender (in 2012 this amount is $2,846,000). The performance mechanism to induce the escalation is a combination of the player's participation percentage and the club's improvement in one of three negotiated statistical categories.

Beyond the percentage of plays a draftee plays in, teams generally have to make statistical improvements in some categories for the player to earn more money. If the team stinks and continues to stink, the player's contract won't get escalated. What I find interesting is that the difference in the number of years is not a player-by-player decision or even a year-to-year decision by teams. A handful of teams only negotiate three-year deals with their later picks, and the rest only negotiate four-year deals. The Seahawks are in the four-year group. Isn't learning fun?

Comment 5 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

More interesting than I thought it'd be.

I would rather be in the 4-year group, than the 3-year group, but yeah, that is interesting that teams don’t employ variance there. It does make some kind of sense; to use 4 year contracts specifically for the hope of keeping a guy under a cheaper contract, should he actually produce, and then have one of your 3-year guys be the guy that produces, would feel pretty dumb.

Maybe there’s some positions that 1) don’t produce as many starters in the second day, and 2) conclusions on their chances of a meaningful career are by and large made up before the end of the third year, and 3) if they did work out, you’d likely have to restructure anyway, that would make sense to only give 3-year deals to.

Like 2nd day QBs. They’re a long-shot to begin with. If they work out, like really work out, and you know that before the beginning of the 4th year, ala Tom Brady, you’re gonna hafta pony up and there’s little chance of savings for that final year. On the other hand, since it’s more likely than more of them won’t work out, a 3-year deal gives you enough time to evaluate whether to give them more time to develop, or if they are clearly not going to make it, by then, one year of modest savings.

I realize NFL contracts not being guaranteed makes most of this moot, but there is still a dead money cost of cutting players.

by jacobstevens on Jun 18, 2009 2:19 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

SEA!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Avatar_small
The Official Field Gulls OT Thread - In Which We Gush About Our Favorite TV Shows

Recent FanPosts

Photo_on_2011-10-14_at_23
Jim Harbaugh Vs. Pete Carroll
Small
Nation Wide Mock Draft
Small
Could Dre Kirkpatrick be the key to our 2012 draft?
Einstein_www-txt2pic-com_small
Seahawks QB Situation: Not a Defense for Tarvaris Jackson
Small
Team Needs - The National Perception of Seattle
Small
2012 Mock Draft, Version 1.0
Walshrun_small
Super Bowl XLVI Reaction: New England Patriots
Small
My Friend has a Friend who works for Nike...
208114_505637750968_23709013_30160241_9483_n_small
GM John Schneider On The Ideal QB
Bodypaint_small
Delocated ad

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managing Editor/Lead Writer

284430_601240951600_44900771_32958650_2317286_n_small Danny Kelly

Staff Writers/Editors

Screen_shot_2011-01-05_at_9 Scruffy Lefty

Small BrianL

Avatar_small Benne

Olympiabeer_small Tyler Jorgensen

Hatersgonnahate_small Thomas Beekers

Profilepic_small DJ C-Raig

897267_o_small Kenneth Arthur

Halloween_mobster_small Jacson Bevens

Photo__1__small Charlie Todaro

Staff Writers

Small Joshua Kasparek

Mail Matt Erickson

Davis_small Davis Hsu

Profile2_small Rob Staton

208114_505637750968_23709013_30160241_9483_n_small Scott Enyeart

Elephant_pink_clothes_small Chris Sully

Seattle_seahawk_white_1600_reasonably_small_small Derek Stephens

Osprey1_small Ben Harbaugh

Easleystreet2_small ChadDavis45

Bu_fb_2_small Daniel Hill