Photo

BSL: Ravens Off-season Pt.2: Extensions


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#1 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,318 posts

Posted 13 January 2015 - 07:05 PM

http://baltimorespor...ion-candidates/

 

Taking a look at extensions for two major players in order to clear up some tight cap space.


  • BSLChrisStoner likes this
@BSLMikeRandall

#2 JohnnyK27

JohnnyK27

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,905 posts
  • LocationWestminster

Posted 13 January 2015 - 08:39 PM

Someone told me Webb was just extended. He and Ngata need to be redone.

#3 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,169 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:00 PM

Someone told me Webb was just extended. He and Ngata need to be redone.

Webb wasn't extended, he was restructured. He already has a lot of dead money tied to him and with his seemingly declining play, an extension does not seem like a good idea.

 

Ngata is an obvious candidate to extend now. Yanda and potentially Jimmy Smith make sense as well. They are both high end players who the Ravens would like to stick around for a long time. Extending them not only alleviates some cap in the short term, but keeps them in Baltimore for the long haul.


@gabefergy

#4 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,318 posts

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:21 PM

Webb wasn't extended, he was restructured. He already has a lot of dead money tied to him and with his seemingly declining play, an extension does not seem like a good idea.
 
Ngata is an obvious candidate to extend now. Yanda and potentially Jimmy Smith make sense as well. They are both high end players who the Ravens would like to stick around for a long time. Extending them not only alleviates some cap in the short term, but keeps them in Baltimore for the long haul.



I mentioned it in the article. Maybe im wrong when it comes to the rules, but Smith is guaranteed about $6.9M once the new league year starts in March. If he is guaranteed that money, like any other extension, the guaranteed money from the previous contract is tacked on to the first year of the new deal. So if he gets extended, you take the $6.9M, add $1M in base salary, at least a couple mil for the signing bonus, his cap number would climb upwards over $10M.

If thats the rules, its not a move the Ravens should make on a tight cap. But to re-sign him before FA starts in 2016. Thats the move I guess.

Unless the Ravens extend him before March, then does that $6.9M go away because it isnt guaranteed yet at that point?
@BSLMikeRandall

#5 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,169 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:28 PM

I mentioned it in the article. Maybe im wrong when it comes to the rules, but Smith is guaranteed about $6.9M once the new league year starts in March. If he is guaranteed that money, like any other extension, the guaranteed money from the previous contract is tacked on to the first year of the new deal. So if he gets extended, you take the $6.9M, add $1M in base salary, at least a couple mil for the signing bonus, his cap number would climb upwards over $10M.

If thats the rules, its not a move the Ravens should make on a tight cap. But to re-sign him before FA starts in 2016. Thats the move I guess.

Unless the Ravens extend him before March, then does that $6.9M go away because it isnt guaranteed yet at that point?

I don't think that is the case with Smith. My understanding is the money is guaranteed only in case of injury so that the Ravens can't just cut him if his foot isn't healing properly or something along those lines. If they agree to a new contract, the previous tender is essentially moot, just like when dealing with a Franchise tag. They should be able to structure a contract however they like to decrease his salary cap hit.


@gabefergy

#6 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,818 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:30 PM

I really wish this team would extend guys earlier.

Yes, we do a good job of keeping the guys we want to keep but they are always up against the cap. Be good to lock up guys earlier and allow for more flexibility later.
@BSLRobShields

#7 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,169 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:33 PM

I really wish this team would extend guys earlier.

Yes, we do a good job of keeping the guys we want to keep but they are always up against the cap. Be good to lock up guys earlier and allow for more flexibility later.

The flip side of that is that rookie contracts are the best value for the team, so extending players earlier means you are paying them more faster.


@gabefergy

#8 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,818 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:35 PM

The flip side of that is that rookie contracts are the best value for the team, so extending players earlier means you are paying them more faster.


True although you can't extend them for a while.

Still, I would rather pay half the guaranteed money for the long term.
@BSLRobShields

#9 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,318 posts

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:47 PM

I really wish this team would extend guys earlier.


Yes, we do a good job of keeping the guys we want to keep but they are always up against the cap. Be good to lock up guys earlier and allow for more flexibility later.



Which guys do you mean?

The earlier you do it, the more guaranteed money you owe the guy in the new contract. I mean, for example to extend Webb earlier rather than later. He has $8.5M in game checks each year coming his way if he plays out his contract for two years, three with the club option. Hes not going to leave that money on the table in an extension that doesn't guarantee him getting that money up front. If you guarantee him $25M in an extension, thats a large contract going with it, and is he worth a second large contract?

Especially in a year like this where there is no benefit to releasing him, the Ravens dont have an upper hand to offer an extension with less money based on his recent play. So they will wait until next year where they can extend him for $16M guaranteed, and its a little more cap friendly for an able but declining DB turning 30.
@BSLMikeRandall

#10 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,818 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:53 PM

Guys like KO and Wagner come to mind.
@BSLRobShields

#11 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,169 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:59 PM

Guys like KO and Wagner come to mind.

So you would rather extend them after 3 years and guarantee them on the team for years, ideally at a slightly lower cost, than letting them play that extra year on the rookie deal? That would certainly help in terms of guaranteeing they stay on the team and could potentially garner a cheaper contract, but it also means paying more earlier in the players career. 


@gabefergy

#12 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,818 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 13 January 2015 - 10:07 PM

So you would rather extend them after 3 years and guarantee them on the team for years, ideally at a slightly lower cost, than letting them play that extra year on the rookie deal? That would certainly help in terms of guaranteeing they stay on the team and could potentially garner a cheaper contract, but it also means paying more earlier in the players career. 


Yep...plus, why do you have to pay them more on that rookie deal? Why not just sign them to an extension?
@BSLRobShields

#13 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,169 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 13 January 2015 - 10:23 PM

Yep...plus, why do you have to pay them more on that rookie deal? Why not just sign them to an extension?

I doubt that is a move the player would agree to. An extension usually comes with a pretty large amount of guaranteed money, at least partially in a signing bonus. I guess it could be worked so that the money doesn't kick in until the next year, but if I am a player heading into my 4th year, why would I sign an extension that didn't give me anything? I would think most players would bet on themselves to have a good final season and command an even larger deal. If they aren't getting paid up front there is little incentive to sign an extension.


@gabefergy

#14 Dupin

Dupin

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,651 posts

Posted 13 January 2015 - 10:38 PM

I'd prefer KO proving he can stay healthy now before extending him, since he's had injury issues the past two years.  I'd rather have him locked up than a lot of our other guys though, I value a strong OL in front of Joe.  This is wear consistency should help, with Kubiak coming back and Monroe hopefully healthy.



#15 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,818 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 13 January 2015 - 10:51 PM

I doubt that is a move the player would agree to. An extension usually comes with a pretty large amount of guaranteed money, at least partially in a signing bonus. I guess it could be worked so that the money doesn't kick in until the next year, but if I am a player heading into my 4th year, why would I sign an extension that didn't give me anything? I would think most players would bet on themselves to have a good final season and command an even larger deal. If they aren't getting paid up front there is little incentive to sign an extension.

Security...injuries are so likely that getting that guaranteed money is a good thing.

And of course, KO and Wagner know this all too well.
@BSLRobShields

#16 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,169 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 14 January 2015 - 01:38 AM

Security...injuries are so likely that getting that guaranteed money is a good thing.

And of course, KO and Wagner know this all too well.

How many teams extend players after 3 years? Honest question here. I am curious if it ever happens.
@gabefergy

#17 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,318 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 06:16 AM

How many teams extend players after 3 years? Honest question here. I am curious if it ever happens.



Off the top of my head the Ravens did with Webb. I think the Packers as well with Nelson but im not 100% sure on that one. I think it's common if your rookie doesnt accrue four years of service time to become a UFA. After three years he would be a restricted free agent. Thus you offer him a tender and another team can put in on offer sheet for the player and you lose him that way if you dont match the offer. If you think he is too good to offer the low tender for a fourth year salary and think that an offer sheet would be out of your budget considering the cap space, you sign your guy to a good contract.

I guess thats the thought process.
@BSLMikeRandall

#18 Biggsy

Biggsy

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,912 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 06:42 AM

I really wish this team would extend guys earlier.
Yes, we do a good job of keeping the guys we want to keep but they are always up against the cap. Be good to lock up guys earlier and allow for more flexibility later.


I feel like the Ravens are a victim of their own success. We draft extremely well, which in turn means we are consistently against the cap. When you draft well and hit on a few draft picks every year, you consistently have to pay to keep those drafted players. So therefore your cap number stays high. Seattle will run into that problem in a year or two.

Kind of off subject, but a good friend and I always get into debates on comp picks. He says they are BS. But the exact reason I said above, is the reason they need to exist. The salary cap basically punishes a team for consistently drafting well. You have a draft where you nail 3 or 4 studs, 4 years down the road you have to cut ties with one or two of them. You consistently draft horses that play themselves to big contracts, and eventually the cap forces you to lose some of them. That's where comp picks try and even things out. Your forced to lose a Ben Grubbs, or a Haloti Ngata, and you get a 3rd rounder to try and replace him.

Maybe it's because I'm a fan of a team that drafts consistently well, but I think it would be very unbalanced if you were forced to lose players you drafted and developed and got nothing back.

#19 jkough1

jkough1

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,426 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 08:22 AM

It may not be a splashy off-season for Baltimore but we're either going to retain Smith/McPhee and get depth of guys that are cut. Or we're going to get extra comp picks, cap space for carry over and get depth of guys that are cut.

 

Despite the big $9 mill in dead money from Rice, we're in surprisingly good shape on the cap if you ask me. Sure we're up against it but we've got a good to very good team depending on who you ask. You don't do that with the Jags cap number.

 

I know it sounds like we're right up against the cap but a RB, TE, CB, S and WR of the mid-tier veteran type that can be had after cuts should get this team back.

 

The continuity next year is going matter. We'll bring the same rushing guys in the front 7, the same offensive line, essentially all the 3/4 WRs will be back and know the system. And if Webb/Smith are both healthy they'll be back together having already been comfortable with Pees and the system. I think that continuity is going to help us surprise some next year, even if we don't (and we won't) have a flashy offseason.



#20 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,313 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 10:16 AM

So you would rather extend them after 3 years and guarantee them on the team for years, ideally at a slightly lower cost, than letting them play that extra year on the rookie deal? That would certainly help in terms of guaranteeing they stay on the team and could potentially garner a cheaper contract, but it also means paying more earlier in the players career. 

 

You aren't going to get any guys to have a lower cap hit after signing an extension, even in the first year, than the 4th year of their rookie deal typically pays them.  1st round guys would be the only possible exception.

 

Look at recent 2nd round picks.  Timmy Jernigan's cap hit in his 4th year will be $1.39M.  Arthur Brown's cap hit in his 4th year will be $1.13M.  Courtney Upshaw's cap hit will be $1.69M in his 4th year.  Torrey Smith's cap hit this year (his 4th) was $1.08M.  3rd and later round picks have even lower cap hits.

 

I support the idea of identifying guys you'd like to extend beyond their rookie deals and trying to get them signed after their 3rd seasons are over.  But a cap reduction in that 4th season is not one of the potential benefits.  You should still be able to save money compared to extending them after their 4th season, of course you have to weigh that against the risk of them not having a strong 4th year.  It's possible Torrey would have been more expensive to extend a year ago than he would be right now, for example.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners