2014 Free Agency Thread

[happyrid]

I'm the Bengals GM in a mock offseason over at Football's Future. So I've been looking at Bengal contracts and the cap situation pretty closely. The Bengals have a lot of cap space and should have freedom to be proactive in free agency. For instance they only have about 34 players under contract for 2015 currently but have more than 60 mil in cap space available for that season (plus any carryover). Any rookies who make the team in 2014 will be under contract for 2015 at second year salaries.
 
 In the mock the Bengals re-signed Collins ahead of free agency (probably too cheaply), outbid other teams to keep MJ, tendered Vinnie Rey at 2nd round level, let Hawkins and Sanzenbacher enter free agency. Only Bengal FA we wanted back that we lost was Mays but got Jeron Johnson instead for same money. Added Jason Campbell, Vonta Leach, Rashad Jennings, Brian de la Puente, Jerome Simpson, Jacoby Jones, Dan Connor, Cortland Finnegan. Re-signed Ghee, Pollak, Hawkins, Sanzenbacher. Getting ready for the draft with about 14 mil in cap space. We exercised the 2015 option on Green and will try to get an extension for Burfict before we're done.
 
 Anyway the point of this isn't to pat myself on the back but to point out that the Bengals have plenty of cap space to be active in free agency if they want to. They apparently don't plan to be active but using the cap as an excuse is bogus. We gave MJ a 9 mil per year offer, de la Puente cost 4.8 mil, AJ's tag will put him on the books for 2015 at a bit over 10 mil, we'll offer Burfict a contract comparable to what Bowman and Willis are making. At QB the plan is to keep Dalton on his 2014 salary, sign a vet backup (Campbell as it turned out), and draft a rookie QB. If Dalton plays well in both the regular and post seasons in 2014 then we extend him or tag him. Plenty of cap space to do so. 

Nice work. That is well done from the Bengals perspective.

I agree with you to a certain extent that the Bengals probably have a bit of money to make some moves in FA. I absolutely think that they would be able to find a way to keep MJ if he only cost $9M for example. However, in the real world, I think he is going to cost closer to $15M.

I think if they strike out on MJ, which looks likely, they will mostly focus on bringing in a handful of bargain guys and trying to keep Collins. Probably a bargain RB and WR/return man. The one position they may focus on if they miss out on MJ is a replacement DE. There are a lot on the market and they might end up all being overpriced. Or maybe after a week when the crazy money has been spent, they can get a guy who is a notch or 2 below MJ for like $6M.

The one thing that I do think is legit is that we do have a lot of starters and key backups who will be FAs next offseason. We would be wise to extend as many of those guys as we possibly can because they certainly won't be cheaper this time next year. We have a ton of talented young guys who are going to start getting expensive really soon.

[MichaelWeston]

I am thinking that when those guys get extensions, their cap numbers are going to go up a lot in 2014. So it isn't necessarily saving money to carry forward for future years, but saving money for later this year.

That is what happened with Geno and Carlos in 2013, so that when FA ended in 2013, it looked like we still had a lot of money to spend but in the end when those extensions were signed, we ended up pretty close to the cap.

So for example, Vontaze has a cap number of less than $1M as of today. He is going to get a big signing bonus if he signs and even though it will be spread out over multiple years, it will still bump his 2014 cap number way up. So if he goes from $500,000 cap number as of now to like $7M, that is another $6.5M less cap space that we have this year.

If both AJ and Vontaze sign this summer, they could easily eat up $15 million of the $30M or whatever of cap space we currently have.

Then why do it? Pay them when we have the money to pay them.

[Zins30]

Do all of these estimates everyone is working from include the $8-$10m we carried forward from last season? I get they a couple big extensions would cost a pretty penny but no one seems to be mentioning that piece of the puzzle. Am I missing something here??

[happyrid]

Do all of these estimates everyone is working from include the $8-$10m we carried forward from last season? I get they a couple big extensions would cost a pretty penny but no one seems to be mentioning that piece of the puzzle. Am I missing something here??

 

I think that if you count the 3 RFA tenders we just made (but not the Pollak deal, since we don't know the cost), we are at around $115M. Which is about $17M below the cap. If you then add the $8.6M we carried over, we are about $25M under the adjusted cap with the carryover.

 

Assuming Pollak makes about $2M a year (?) and that we save $10M or so for rookies/injuries (some of which might end up getting carried over to 2015), that should leave us with $12 or $13M to play with. 

 

I would guess about half of that will go toward an extension for AJ or Vontaze, so the talk of only having $7M or whatever to really go after FAs doesn't seem that crazy to me. 

 

I also think that if we were to keep MJ (which I doubt) we might have to free up some cap space by cutting a few vets. BJGE would save around $3M. James Harrison would save a couple million. Really not a whole lot of fat to trim though in terms of cutting guys and I am guessing they aren't going to really make any cuts until after the draft when they see what positions they were able to address there. 

[Bengals1181]

 

I think that if you count the 3 RFA tenders we just made (but not the Pollak deal, since we don't know the cost), we are at around $115M. Which is about $17M below the cap. If you then add the $8.6M we carried over, we are about $25M under the adjusted cap with the carryover.

 

Assuming Pollak makes about $2M a year (?) and that we save $10M or so for rookies/injuries (some of which might end up getting carried over to 2015), that should leave us with $12 or $13M to play with. 

 

I would guess about half of that will go toward an extension for AJ or Vontaze, so the talk of only having $7M or whatever to really go after FAs doesn't seem that crazy to me. 

 

I also think that if we were to keep MJ (which I doubt) we might have to free up some cap space by cutting a few vets. BJGE would save around $3M. James Harrison would save a couple million. Really not a whole lot of fat to trim though in terms of cutting guys and I am guessing they aren't going to really make any cuts until after the draft when they see what positions they were able to address there. 

 

 

they were in the $101-102M range before the RFA tenders and Pollak. Figure Pollak takes up another $2-$2.5M.

 

So I imagine they are around $26M.  To answer Zins point, I don't think it ended up being as much as $8-$10M like they intended, as the Atkins and Dunlap deals kind of ate into the AJ/Dalton fund a little.  I'd have to check to see exactly how much it was.

 

 

Another thing to keep in mind that none of us are factoring in are performance escalators and incentives for certain players.  I honestly don't know which ones have them and have earned them, but that can be a factor.  There are players on the teams who will get raises that we don't even know about.  In some years they can have as much as $8M in performance escalators across the team.  

 

 

Other than setting aside money for draft picks that they don't really need to (as most of that will come from the people they cut and replace with the draft picks), the Bengals aren't as shady with the cap as some people like to think.  We just don't know all the variables.

 

They're pretty straight forward with it.  They set aside money for draft picks (which usually rolls back into their roll forward sum), they set aside money for in-season injuries (which is smart and why some teams get in cap trouble), and lately they've set aside money for upcoming extensions.

[coup000]

They also have $9 million in roster bonuses to Dunlap and Atkins due this month that could very easily be amortized over the remainder of their contracts. Would make a ton of sense now that we know the cap will be going up by quite a bit. As of right now that entire 9M will hit our cap this year.

[sparky151]

Setting aside 10 mil for rookies and injured players is ridiculous. The team's rookie pool will probably be 5-6 million dollars but that's just a sub-limit of the cap space, not a separate category in addition to 53 veteran players. The rookies will take the place of vets and will probably have a net cost of 2 mil or less. Possibly even negative if a couple higher paid guys are cut in favor of rookies. 

 

 We will undoubtedly lose players to IR during the season but their replacements will either come from a practice squad or off the street. Those guys are cheap. The bottom of the roster guys are on split contracts meaning if they go on IR they cost less than their full salary. It's unlikely the Bengals will overpay some veteran to come out of retirement. So 3-4 mil for replacements is fine. If we run out of cap space mid-season a vet like Hall or Whitworth can be restructured to free up a few mil in space as needed.

 

Pollak's deal has been reported as 3 years/5 mil base with pay of up to 2.5 mil if he becomes a regular starter. So his 2014 cap number is probably a bit less than 1.7 mil since he probably gets at least small raises during the contract and he wasn't a regular starter in 2013. 

[Bengals1181]

Setting aside 10 mil for rookies and injured players is ridiculous. The team's rookie pool will probably be 5-6 million dollars but that's just a sub-limit of the cap space, not a separate category in addition to 53 veteran players. The rookies will take the place of vets and will probably have a net cost of 2 mil or less. Possibly even negative if a couple higher paid guys are cut in favor of rookies. 

 

 We will undoubtedly lose players to IR during the season but their replacements will either come from a practice squad or off the street. Those guys are cheap. The bottom of the roster guys are on split contracts meaning if they go on IR they cost less than their full salary. It's unlikely the Bengals will overpay some veteran to come out of retirement. So 3-4 mil for replacements is fine. If we run out of cap space mid-season a vet like Hall or Whitworth can be restructured to free up a few mil in space as needed.

 

Pollak's deal has been reported as 3 years/5 mil base with pay of up to 2.5 mil if he becomes a regular starter. So his 2014 cap number is probably a bit less than 1.7 mil since he probably gets at least small raises during the contract and he wasn't a regular starter in 2013. 

 

 

 

for draft picks I agree, for injured players, not at all.  The Bengals are very smart to set aside money for injuries.  Its part of why they never get themselves in cap trouble.  You see some teams get in cap trouble because they don't save any money for a rainy day.  So they go over the cap during the season, and wonder why come early march they are in cap hell and have to cut or restructure veterans to get under the cap.

 

It's not nearly as cheap as you pretend it to be.  A couple of years ago, I believe the year they lost all the linebackers, the Bengals spend something like $7M on in-season roster replacements.  So the fact that they set aside $3-4M for inseason injuries is really quite smart.  And if they happen to have any left over, they roll it over to next season.

 

It's just smart business.

[MichaelWeston]

 

 

for draft picks I agree, for injured players, not at all.  The Bengals are very smart to set aside money for injuries.  Its part of why they never get themselves in cap trouble.  You see some teams get in cap trouble because they don't save any money for a rainy day.  So they go over the cap during the season, and wonder why come early march they are in cap hell and have to cut or restructure veterans to get under the cap.

 

Don't you only pay your top 51 players according to the cap? How much do injury replacements usually cost?

[Bengals1181]

Based on accounting their statistics via information acquired through reports, other financial sites and a spreadsheet, the crew at Rotoworld lists the Cincinnati Bengals available cap space at $26,850,957. OverTheCap.com confirms that number. Neither have taken into account Mike Pollak's recently signed three-year deal. Spotrac, a site specifically designed to track salaries for all major sports, lists the Bengals cap space at $27,554,960.

However, the $26.851 million number isn't exactly what the Bengals will have available to write blank checks on unrestricted free agents.

Upwards to $15 million of that is already earmarked to other areas -- $4.3 million on restricted free agents, $4.5 million to the rookie pool, another (approximate) $6 million for injuries and in-season free agents. That leaves roughly $12 million for free agents and extensions with players entering the final year of their rookie contracts.

 

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2014/3/10/5490460/bengals-are-26-851-million-under-the-2014-salary-cap

[coup000]

Dehner puts them at $110M in salary right now. Which is where he is getting his 23M number. That 23M also doesn't include the rollover amounts.

 

I'm still not sure how he gets to 110M without the RFAs though. But at least he gave clarification on how he got from the widely quoted 29M down to the 23M number he says the Bengals are using. He also calls the rollover the "Carson rollover pad", any idea why?

[Bengals1181]

Dehner puts them at $110M in salary right now. Which is where he is getting his 23M number. That 23M also doesn't include the rollover amounts.

 

I'm still not sure how he gets to 110M without the RFAs though. But at least he gave clarification on how he got from the widely quoted 29M down to the 23M number he says the Bengals are using. He also calls the rollover the "Carson rollover pad", any idea why?

 

 

when they traded Carson and Chad, it freed up roughly $10M (I think it was actually closer to $12M) in cap space that they started saving for future AJ and Dalton extensions.

[Orange 'n Black]

 

 

when they traded Carson and Chad, it freed up roughly $10M (I think it was actually closer to $12M) in cap space that they started saving for future AJ and Dalton extensions.

 

I know we all want to see the Bengals sign some good players, but this is a reminder - the team has a long-term salary plan it's been using at least since 2011. If the team is saying they're only going to spend $6m in FA, then that's all they have budgeted. We can pick nits over the details but it's not much more than speculation.

[MichaelWeston]

 

Based on accounting their statistics via information acquired through reports, other financial sites and a spreadsheet, the crew at Rotoworld lists the Cincinnati Bengals available cap space at $26,850,957. OverTheCap.com confirms that number. Neither have taken into account Mike Pollak's recently signed three-year deal. Spotrac, a site specifically designed to track salaries for all major sports, lists the Bengals cap space at $27,554,960.

However, the $26.851 million number isn't exactly what the Bengals will have available to write blank checks on unrestricted free agents.

Upwards to $15 million of that is already earmarked to other areas -- $4.3 million on restricted free agents, $4.5 million to the rookie pool, another (approximate) $6 million for injuries and in-season free agents. That leaves roughly $12 million for free agents and extensions with players entering the final year of their rookie contracts.

 

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2014/3/10/5490460/bengals-are-26-851-million-under-the-2014-salary-cap

 

 

If other teams have less money available in their cap, how do they do it?

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2014-03-09/sports/sfl-a-look-at-each-nfl-teams-cap-space-heading-into-free-agency-20140308_1_carolina-panthers-dallas-cowboys-new-orleans-saints

[coup000]

 

If other teams have less money available in their cap, how do they do it?

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2014-03-09/sports/sfl-a-look-at-each-nfl-teams-cap-space-heading-into-free-agency-20140308_1_carolina-panthers-dallas-cowboys-new-orleans-saints

By borrowing from future years. There are a ton of mechanisms available to allow you to pay out huge amounts of cash that don't hit the cap until later. The Bengals are on the extreme conservative side of using these, which means we will probably never have a salary cap purge. It also means that any team that is using them has a resource advantge over us in those years they are borrowing against the future cap. I think being on the conservative side is the way to go, but once a window opens up I do think it makes sense to borrow againt the future to push the team over the top. So far the Bengals haven't done that at all really.  

[|SF2|]

Basically, there are 3 types of GMs: 

 

1. Those who will swing for the fences for short term glory knowing they will have a 2-3 window to try and reach the promised land but will eventually have to blow it up:  I see New Orleans, Seattle and Dallas in this group as well as Pittspuke more recently.  Some have success some fail in epic fashion i.e. Dallas.

2. Those who continuously try and manage the cap to be relevant at all times:  I see us and a team like New England here.

3.  Fucked up franchises.  You know the names.

 

I simply don't see us signing MJ to a big contract given the recent strategy we have adopted.  Nothing to do with my personal feelings, I would love to keep him but it won't be for an outrageous sum me thinks.

[coup000]

Basically, there are 3 types of GMs: 

 

1. Those who will swing for the fences for short term glory knowing they will have a 2-3 window to try and reach the promised land but will eventually have to blow it up:  I see New Orleans, Seattle and Dallas in this group as well as Pittspuke more recently.  Some have success some fail in epic fashion i.e. Dallas.

2. Those who continuously try and manage the cap to be relevant at all times:  I see us and a team like New England here.

3.  Fucked up franchises.  You know the names.

 

I simply don't see us signing MJ to a big contract given the recent strategy we have adopted.  Nothing to do with my personal feelings, I would love to keep him but it won't be for an outrageous sum me thinks.

Three of those teams in #1 have won or been in super bowls recently. I don't think it's fair to a team like NO, Seattle or even Pitt to group them with a team like Dallas or Washington. All 3 of the teams in #1 that have won, started off by drafting very well, keeping their core guys and then supplementing those guys with some free agents. That is a smart process and what I would like the Bengals to look like. It is one thing to be aggresive with the cap within a plan (NO, Seatle, Balt, Pitt), it is another to spend wildly on anyone and everyone (Dallas, Miami, Washington)

 

NE is an outlier because they have a coach/QB combo that is one of the best in history. We do not. Therefore we need a more talented roster overall (which we have) than a team like NE does. Not to mention they are ruthless in cutting vets as soon as they show any decline, which we do not. If we continue to just churn our current roster: Draft well, lose some guys, keep most guys than we've probably come pretty close to our ceiling. At some point you have to make a push (creating space in the present by borrowing from the future), which is what Seattle did this year. And teams like Pitt and Balt have done in the past.

 

We don't belong in any conversation with the top teams yet, we have a talented roster, but that roster hasn't done anything yet. We had talent in 2005 too and what appeared to be a bright future and that all came crashing down.

[sparky151]

 

 

for draft picks I agree, for injured players, not at all.  The Bengals are very smart to set aside money for injuries.  Its part of why they never get themselves in cap trouble.  You see some teams get in cap trouble because they don't save any money for a rainy day.  So they go over the cap during the season, and wonder why come early march they are in cap hell and have to cut or restructure veterans to get under the cap.

 

It's not nearly as cheap as you pretend it to be.  A couple of years ago, I believe the year they lost all the linebackers, the Bengals spend something like $7M on in-season roster replacements.  So the fact that they set aside $3-4M for inseason injuries is really quite smart.  And if they happen to have any left over, they roll it over to next season.

 

It's just smart business.

We lost a ton of linebackers one season but that was back in 2007. It was unfortunate that the injuries were concentrated in a single position group.

 

But the team knows going into the season that injuries are part of the game. We'll probably put 12 or more players on IR during the season. But as mentioned, some guys get reduced amounts on IR. Larry Black, the DT injured on Hard Knocks didn't get paid the same as Jayson DiManche, another undrafted rookie who made the 53. The replacements for injured guys usually come from the practice squad or street free agents, guys who are happy to sign minimum benefit veteran contracts (which count at a reduced number on the cap). Of course the replacement players contracts are prorated for the weeks they are on the roster. IR designations are most common late in the year, partly due to wear and tear but mostly to the short time remaining in the season. Teams will put a guy with a sprained ankle on IR week 15 or 16 so they can sign another guy to carry into next year. So even if we end up with 20 guys on IR it might still only be 100 weeks or so of replacements required. 7 full season guys gives you 112 weeks. At rookie minimum, they would cost under 3 mil or if some are vets perhaps 3.5 mil. That's an ample amount. While there are advantages to carrying forward unused cap space, we should recognize that there is an opportunity cost involved. 

[|SF2|]

Three of those teams in #1 have won or been in super bowls recently. I don't think it's fair to a team like NO, Seattle or even Pitt to group them with a team like Dallas or Washington. All 3 of the teams in #1 that have won, started off by drafting very well, keeping their core guys and then supplementing those guys with some free agents. That is a smart process and what I would like the Bengals to look like. It is one thing to be aggresive with the cap within a plan (NO, Seatle, Balt, Pitt), it is another to spend wildly on anyone and everyone (Dallas, Miami, Washington)

 

NE is an outlier because they have a coach/QB combo that is one of the best in history. We do not. Therefore we need a more talented roster overall (which we have) than a team like NE does. Not to mention they are ruthless in cutting vets as soon as they show any decline, which we do not. If we continue to just churn our current roster: Draft well, lose some guys, keep most guys than we've probably come pretty close to our ceiling. At some point you have to make a push (creating space in the present by borrowing from the future), which is what Seattle did this year. And teams like Pitt and Balt have done in the past.

 

We don't belong in any conversation with the top teams yet, we have a talented roster, but that roster hasn't done anything yet. We had talent in 2005 too and what appeared to be a bright future and that all came crashing down.

Everything you posted REINFORCES my argument.

 

I said it was a strategy not a guarantee of success.   Any strategy you adopt better include COMPETENT player selection, excellent coaching and a feasible timeline.   Dallas and New Orleans have acted in the same way but New Orleans has made WAY better decisisons.  Sean Peyton was one of them.  Brees another while Dallas sank huge money into Romo.  Washington recycled a coach who had not been relevant for over a decade and failed. 

 

Dallas has had plenty of talent in recent years to be VERY good but the saga that surrounds the coaching staff and how they implemented the strategy I described doomed them. 

 

Comparing us to New England makes sense.  New England is NOTORIOUS for not resigning older, still very capable but over priced vets and so are we.  I don't have a problem with that.  And lets be honest, how good would the Bengals have been over the last 3 years with Belichek in charge over Marvin?

[Oldcat]

 

Comparing us to New England makes sense.  New England is NOTORIOUS for not resigning older, still very capable but over priced vets and so are we.  I don't have a problem with that.  And lets be honest, how good would the Bengals have been over the last 3 years with Belichek in charge over Marvin?

 

Belichek would have been suspended for life for taping other teams practices if he coached for us.

[|SF2|]

 

Belichek would have been suspended for life for taping other teams practices if he coached for us.

LOL, probably but I said last 3 years, not past 12.

[coup000]

Everything you posted REINFORCES my argument.

 

I said it was a strategy not a guarantee of success.   Any strategy you adopt better include COMPETENT player selection, excellent coaching and a feasible timeline.   Dallas and New Orleans have acted in the same way but New Orleans has made WAY better decisisons.  Sean Peyton was one of them.  Brees another while Dallas sank huge money into Romo.  Washington recycled a coach who had not been relevant for over a decade and failed. 

 

Dallas has had plenty of talent in recent years to be VERY good but the saga that surrounds the coaching staff and how they implemented the strategy I described doomed them. 

 

Comparing us to New England makes sense.  New England is NOTORIOUS for not resigning older, still very capable but over priced vets and so are we.  I don't have a problem with that.  And lets be honest, how good would the Bengals have been over the last 3 years with Belichek in charge over Marvin?

No, it doesn't. Spending wildly when you don't have the talent on the roster to begin with is stupid. Spending money to supplement your already talented roster is smart. Free agents can get you over the hump, they can't make a crappy team good. Dallas has been over rated, top heavy and thin this whole time. The best teams have good depth, which they haven't ever really had. Dallas doesn't belong in the same sentence with NO, Pitt or Balt just like we don't belong in the same sentence as NE....yet.

 

Honestly, if Belicheck were our coach I expect we would have won at least 2 playoff games in the past 3 years. Possibly more.

[MichaelWeston]

No, it doesn't. Spending wildly when you don't have the talent on the roster to begin with is stupid. Spending money to supplement your already talented roster is smart. Free agents can get you over the hump, they can't make a crappy team good. Dallas has been over rated, top heavy and thin this whole time. The best teams have good depth, which they haven't ever really had. Dallas doesn't belong in the same sentence with NO, Pitt or Balt just like we don't belong in the same sentence as NE....yet.

 

Honestly, if Belicheck were our coach I expect we would have won at least 2 playoff games in the past 3 years. Possibly more.

 

Letting Michael Johnson go doesn't jive with how we normally do things. The only star player we have let go without a kung fu grip was Jonathan Joseph. Everyone else we have opened the check book for. I'm not a big lets go sign a bunch of other team's free agents guy, I think we play things right there. I am a big lets re-sign our own blue chip players in their prime at nearly any cost guy. That's my frustration with this situation. 

[JBandJoeyV]

 
Letting Michael Johnson go doesn't jive with how we normally do things. The only star player we have let go without a kung fu grip was Jonathan Joseph. Everyone else we have opened the check book for. I'm not a big lets go sign a bunch of other team's free agents guy, I think we play things right there. I am a big lets re-sign our own blue chip players in their prime at nearly any cost guy. That's my frustration with this situation. 

I understand your frustrations. But putting 1/5 (closer to 1/4 actually) of your cap in 3 guys on the dline is a lot, and that's essentially what it would be if you pay mj 12 mil a year.

I just think it's tough to justify being that heavily weighted in one position group.

Not that I'm against resigning him, just that I'd be okay spending that money elsewhere.

[B.A.B.]

Seattle built through the draft. The majority of their star players in defense were drafted within the past 3-4 yrs. Dunno who was saying they swing for the fences, but they've done it the smart way for a while now.

 

There are certain players that I see can be removed to save some cash and maybe free up something to get a playmaker in here. BJGE doesn't deserve the 3 million he'd be making this year. 3.4 YPC with no special teams gets you league minimum if that. Show him the door. Peko's time might be up as well. He'll be making almost 4 million next year, and we could get at least his production by throwing one of our young guys in there next to Geno and shoring up the line with another pick. Get a RB in free agency, because nobody is getting big money at that position this year. An upgrade to BJGE would still most likely make less than he is right now.