2013 Forum Offseason Discussion Thread

[Matthew Jones]

Originally Posted by mightytitan9

If we franchise someone, are we allowed to send you a contract offer to sign them long-term?

I'm going to do one or the other on that, just because I don't like the idea of teams being able to eliminate the entire market for their player before making an offer. If you really want a player, you're going to have to either bid against other teams for them or pay them the franchise tag amount.

[Grizzlegom]

Originally Posted by Matthew Jones

I've been double-checking on the charge vs. savings. Anyways, I think you're overreacting. Off the top of my head, Doug Free has $7 million in savings (of a cap charge over $11 million), I think Miles Austin saves like $6.7 million or so, Jay Ratliff saves $5 million...that's already about $18 million, and if I remember correctly Dallas is $19 million over the cap. Obviously the Cowboys probably won't be active in free agency after indulging over the past few seasons, but with the ability to replenish via the free draft picks and third-wave minimum deals, it's not like it will be impossible to get to 53 players.

Firstly, those numbers assume they are post-June 1 cuts. Their cap savings are significantly less if they are cut before then. Next, if I'm coming off as complaining or anything, I don't mean it to seem that way, I actually like this stuff and I'm having fun trying to figure it all out!

[Matthew Jones]

Originally Posted by Grizzlegom

Firstly, those numbers assume they are post-June 1 cuts. Their cap savings are significantly less if they are cut before then. Next, if I'm coming off as complaining or anything, I don't mean it to seem that way, I actually like this stuff and I'm having fun trying to figure it all out!

Ah, my bad. However, since we're using Rotoworld as the source for all cap savings, I'm willing to grant those savings if you'd like to cut any or all of the players I mentioned. I don't see anything about June 1st on their cap pages, and I've been giving everyone else the Rotoworld savings.

[Matthew Jones]

Originally Posted by DiG

anyone else think cuts should be restricted to players that werent signed in 2013...

I'm letting teams cut those guys because they're almost universally practice squad or "tryout" guys with no guaranteed money, and because teams are having some trouble clearing up cap space. It's not like any of the guys signed in 2013 appear to be more than camp fodder or possibly practice squad players.

[Matthew Jones]

Anyways, let me finish some work I have for NEPatriotsDraft, and then I'll come back in a little bit and update all the cap numbers and the free agent list based on emails I've received while I was teaching this morning.

Also, if people could post something in the media thread about their roster cuts, that would be appreciated, as it keeps people informed about who has entered the free agent pool. Obviously, free agency will be more exciting with a bunch of offers, not players who were released languishing in the pool because no one knew about them.

[Matthew Jones]

Alright, so I've got all the roster moves updated aside from the most recent three teams in my inbox. I'll deal with those in a little bit, and then we should be up-to-date.

[OSUGiants17]

I'm emailing my cuts/RFAs now if that's ok. Sorry it took me so long, been swamped with work

[Matthew Jones]

Originally Posted by OSUGiants17

I'm emailing my cuts/RFAs now if that's ok. Sorry it took me so long, been swamped with work

No problem!

[vidae]

I've been busy. I'm sending my cuts in a few minutes. (Are we only doing cuts now? Franchise tags will come later? Or what?)

But am I reading this right? Whoever offers the most (highest bidder) automatically gets their guy? That's how FA is working?

[Bengals78]

Send in your tags, tenders and cuts all at once or die

[Matthew Jones]

Originally Posted by vidae

I've been busy. I'm sending my cuts in a few minutes.

But am I reading this right? Whoever offers the most (highest bidder) automatically gets their guy? That's how FA is working?

That's what I had in mind regarding free agents. It's tough because I don't want to field a bunch of complaints about how some people offered more money and didn't get a player. I guess I could choose where each free agent goes based on the offers, but that may be a little unfair.

[vidae]

Originally Posted by Matthew Jones

That's what I had in mind regarding free agents. It's tough because I don't want to field a bunch of complaints about how some people offered more money and didn't get a player. I guess I could choose where each free agent goes based on the offers, but that may be a little unfair.

Although I disagreed with a few of the moves BB made, I think that is a lot more fair. Money is a big determining factor for where FAs go, but it isn't the only factor.

[Bengals78]

Originally Posted by vidae

Although I disagreed with a few of the moves BB made, I think that is a lot more fair. Money is a big determining factor for where FAs go, but it isn't the only factor.

Just tell me who you want and I will out bid you for them

[draftguru151]

The exact money with the highest bidder is going to cause a lot more issues than anything BB did. If someone offers a player a million more, even though it's a losing team and a terrible scheme fit, they'll get that player? You can't have blind one round biddings for a player and then have the highest bidder get the player, makes no sense at all.

[Matthew Jones]

Alright then, I guess once everyone sends in their free agent offers, I'll consider them and deduct the average annual value of the signing team's bid from their salary cap.

[jrdrylie]

I disagree with draftguru and Vidae. Money is the most fair way to decide. It is the thing 90% of the players care about most. The Buccaneers suck and they got quite a few free agents last year. Mario Williams went to Buffalo. A few years ago Aarno Kampman went from Green Bay to Jacksonville. NFL players care a lot more about money and a lot less about winning than most people think.

And who is Matthew to decide what these free agents care about most? Does he know that Reggie Bush would rather get 5 million to play for Green Bay than get 6.5 million to play for Arizona? No he doesn't. Only the player knows about their priorities. And there will be a ton of bitching if Matthew subjectively chooses who goes where.

[draftguru151]

Originally Posted by jrdrylie

I disagree with draftguru and Vidae. Money is the most fair way to decide. It is the thing 90% of the players care about most. The Buccaneers suck and they got quite a few free agents last year. Mario Williams went to Buffalo. A few years ago Aarno Kampman went from Green Bay to Jacksonville. NFL players care a lot more about money and a lot less about winning than most people think.

And who is Matthew to decide what these free agents care about most? Does he know that Reggie Bush would rather get 5 million to play for Green Bay than get 6.5 million to play for Arizona? No he doesn't. Only the player knows about their priorities. And there will be a ton of bitching if Matthew subjectively chooses who goes where.

My issue is, what if a player's team bids 5/45 for him, and another team bid 5/48. If I bid the 5/45, I would very likely match the 5/48 for the player, but I wouldn't have that option because there's no negotiation here, just a one time blind bid for a player where the only determination for a player is who bids the most. If there was some type of tiered system for the bidding, or open negotiations, I'd have no issue with money being the biggest factor (which it is, but not the only factor).

[Docta]

Originally Posted by jrdrylie

I disagree with draftguru and Vidae. Money is the most fair way to decide. It is the thing 90% of the players care about most. The Buccaneers suck and they got quite a few free agents last year. Mario Williams went to Buffalo. A few years ago Aarno Kampman went from Green Bay to Jacksonville. NFL players care a lot more about money and a lot less about winning than most people think.

And who is Matthew to decide what these free agents care about most? Does he know that Reggie Bush would rather get 5 million to play for Green Bay than get 6.5 million to play for Arizona? No he doesn't. Only the player knows about their priorities. And there will be a ton of bitching if Matthew subjectively chooses who goes where.

^ This. It's not the NBA. The highest bidder gets the player the majority of the time. Players aren't going to turn down more money because they don't fit into the scheme. Mario Williams is another example.

EDIT: Just saw DG's post. I agree with him on the blind bidding. Agents want the most money for their client. They aren't going to keep offers secret.

[mightytitan9]

Originally Posted by draftguru151

My issue is, what if a player's team bids 5/45 for him, and another team bid 5/48. If I bid the 4/45, I would very likely match the 4/48 for the player, but I wouldn't have that option because there's no negotiation here, just a one time blind bid for a player where the only determination for a player is who bids the most. If there was some type of tiered system for the bidding, or open negotiations, I'd have no issue with money being the biggest factor (which it is, but not the only factor).

I think it should just come down to avg per year. So in that example the 4/45 would be 10.25/yr while the others would be 9/yr etc.

[Matthew Jones]

Originally Posted by mightytitan9

I think it should just come down to avg per year. So in that example the 4/45 would be 10.25/yr while the others would be 9/yr etc.

The problem with that is: would you rather take a three-year deal worth $8 million or a one-year deal worth $3 million? In that regard, the total value looks more important.

[draftguru151]

Messed up the years, it's just 5/45 and 5/48, which would be a difference of 600k a year.

Stop using extremes as examples, I'm talking about less than a million a year difference in contracts when we're basically just using random numbers we come up with our heads as bidding.

[mightytitan9]

Originally Posted by Matthew Jones

The problem with that is: would you rather take a three-year deal worth $8 million or a one-year deal worth $3 million? In that regard, the total value looks more important.

I understand that, that is a larger difference. But 4 or 5 years isnt a big difference. I think there has to be some type of human element, although it may make some people angry it's the only way I really see the blind bidding thing work.

On another forum, I saw where someone places a value range based on a player "Player X wants between 6 and 7.5m a year" you could offer them a 10% decrease or 10% increase so basically that broadened it to 5.4 or 8.25. This at least gave some range and then a small committee (2 or 3) would research offers and make decisions on a criteria.

I know that's a lot more work, and I'm not suggesting we do that but just throwing it out there

[princefielder28]

What if we had a sub-forum part for the mock off-season where a team posts a player and their bid, and the negotiations are open and teams bid between each other?

[Matthew Jones]

Originally Posted by princefielder28

What if we had a sub-forum part for the mock off-season where a team posts a player and their bid, and the negotiations are open and teams bid between each other?

I like the idea, but it has a significant disadvantage for me: time. That method will take a lot longer than the others, and I'm hoping to finish up everything before my schedule gets even more busy. Right now I'm teaching three classes, writing for NEPD, and taking a certification course, and I'll be starting another class and trying to find a job overseas pretty soon.

I think what we'll probably end up doing is making bids via email, and then if the contracts are close, I'll just make a decision on the player's behalf. If any team makes a significantly larger offer, I'll send the player over there.

[RCAChainGang]

Do we just do our own research to see who is a RFA and UFA?