Has the NFL ever had an NBA-style salary dump trade? (1 Viewer)

[bengalbuck]

A pretty regular occurrence in the NBA is to see a team give up a draft pick, usually a 1st rounder, to another team to simply take an overpaid player off of their hands. For example, a couple years ago the Bulls traded the #17 pick in the draft and Kirk Hinrich (due $9 million) to the Washington Wizards for a future conditional 2nd round pick (the conditions were unlikely to ever be met, so it was basically Hinrich and the 1st rounder for nothing). Wiz got a "free" first rounder to help rebuild and the Bulls freed up cap space to pursue FAs and added Carlos Boozer, Kyle Korver, etc.

With the Jets in cap hell and the contracts of both Sanchez and Holmes guaranteed next year, would it make sense for the Jets to trade a draft pick and Sanchez to a team well under the cap for nothing?

Maybe send the Chiefs Sanchez and a 3rd round pick for a 2014 6th rounder...

For the Chiefs, they'd have to spend $9M on Sanchez, but they get a valuable 3rd round pick basically just for cash and add a good young player for their rebuilding efforts. Sanchez could be a backup and/or start some games early as they get a rookie QB ready to go.

For the Jets, it would get rid of a huge headache and also free up a little bit of cap space so that they can get an extension for a key guy like Revis. Maybe the financial savings would be more valuable than a pick in the middle of the 3rd round...

Anyway, have there been any trades like this before? Would it make sense in this specific case due to the fact that the contracts were stupidly guaranteed?

Anyway

 

[Borat]

No, you can't trade dead cap space in the NFL.

 

[bengalbuck]

No, you can't trade dead cap space in the NFL.

This wouldn't be a trade of dead cap space. It would be a trade of Sanchez (and his guaranteed contract). The Jets would get cap space simply by not having to pay Sanchez his 2013 salary.

 

[coolnerd]

No, you can't trade dead cap space in the NFL.

This wouldn't be a trade of dead cap space. It would be a trade of Sanchez (and his guaranteed contract). The Jets would get cap space simply by not having to pay Sanchez his 2013 salary.

The trade would create dead cap space for the pro-rated amount if signing bonus that Sanchez or whoever recieved at sigining bonus. also, why would any GM give any asset for a bad contract for a QB no better than Quinn or Cassell.

 

[packseasontix]

No, you can't trade dead cap space in the NFL.

This wouldn't be a trade of dead cap space. It would be a trade of Sanchez (and his guaranteed contract). The Jets would get cap space simply by not having to pay Sanchez his 2013 salary.

There is a reason those teams don't have a full cap usually, either A they are opening up space for their free agents in the next couple years or the owner is trying to save money. The NBA is full of moronic owners who are willing to take on over paid salary from time to time.Also its all about depth, you can play an NBA season with what 6-7 players? In the NFL you need a lot more depth and need to utilize every pick to fill out a full team of 52 players that all add to the team. A 3rd round pick could be starting for you and be your next centerpiece for the next 10 years. In the NBA a 17th pick will most likely just be a piece that is nice but doesn't matter much its all about the stars.

 

[Insein]

Also, why would someone trade to get a guy from the team when they could just wait till he's cut and then negotiate a new contract with that player?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

the jets would obviously save money, but I don't think they'd save much cap space.

plus, that seems like an assload of money to pay for a 3rd.

I think these teams that are way under the cap are that way for a reason.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Also, why would someone trade to get a guy from the team when they could just wait till he's cut and then negotiate a new contract with that player?

they aren't trading to get the guy -- he's saying they trade to get the pick, and have to take this crappy contract as payment.this is a little bit of a reach, but in a certain sense kc did this in the cassel trade when they also took vrabel.

 

[packseasontix]

Also, why would someone trade to get a guy from the team when they could just wait till he's cut and then negotiate a new contract with that player?

they aren't trading to get the guy -- he's saying they trade to get the pick, and have to take this crappy contract as payment.this is a little bit of a reach, but in a certain sense kc did this in the cassel trade when they also took vrabel.

Ya except Cassel could be looked at as a 1st round pick not 3rd. Doubtful you would ever see this, cap space and draft picks are worth too much to rebuilding teams.

 

[Beerguzzler]

Just a completely different salary cap system. All NBA contracts are pretty much guaranteed which makes a significant difference, not to mention there needs to be a similar dollar amount going to and from the clubs.

 

[flranger]

Just a completely different salary cap system. All NBA contracts are pretty much guaranteed which makes a significant difference, not to mention there needs to be a similar dollar amount going to and from the clubs.

Pretty much this. If the Jets were to cut Sanchez, all they would have to pay is next years salary since it is now guaranteed but not the remaining three years/40million (approx). If it was an NBA contract, cutting Sanchez would result in the Jets paying all four remaining years.In the basketball deals you mention, the teams were on the hook for years of bad contracts. Whether the player played for the team or was cut, the salary was still due. Same thing in baseball.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

apples and oranges.

plus Sanchez is worthless, why wouldnt anyone want him? jsut draft someone, they will be cheaper and better. Hell trade for Mallet or Kirk Cousins.

Holmes has some value I imagine, but he is worth like a 4th rounder probably

 

[ROCKET]

GB the NFL system. It's not perfect but light years ahead of MLB and the NBA. I just hope Goodell doesn't try to ruin that too

 

[BoltBacker]

Just a completely different salary cap system. All NBA contracts are pretty much guaranteed which makes a significant difference, not to mention there needs to be a similar dollar amount going to and from the clubs.

Not to mention the NBA has a soft cap which seems to me defeats the purpose of a cap in the first place. Only the richest teams are willing to pay the heavy penalty for going over the cap.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Doesn't trading a player bring the same cap hit as cutting him?

 

[RUSF18]

Doesn't trading a player bring the same cap hit as cutting him?

Normally yes, due to the advancement of previously paid, but pro-rated for cap purposes, bonuses to the year in which the player is cut. But in the case of Sanchez and his guaranteed contract, they'd be removing that large chunk from their cap.eta: No shot it works unless they're willing to send much more than a 3rd along with him. This would be a better strategy in a league where teams have more difficulty in spending to the cap floor, like the NHL (remember them?).

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The OP asks a good question. I don't think most people are understanding it.

If the Jets trade Sanchez, they save a bunch of cap space in 2013. Something like an extra $1 or $2 million hits them because of the prorated signing bonus, but they save his $8+ million salary, so they come out ahead by trading him (but not by cutting him).

The other team wouldn't do the trade because they want Sanchez. The other team would do the trade because they want a third-round pick. (I think it would have to be a first-rounder at a minimum, myself.)

No, you can't trade dead cap space in the NFL.

But you can trade Mark Sanchez.

The trade would create dead cap space for the pro-rated amount if signing bonus that Sanchez or whoever recieved at sigining bonus. also, why would any GM give any asset for a bad contract for a QB no better than Quinn or Cassell.

It would create a million or two of dead cap space for the Jets while freeing up $8+ million of cap space. The Jets come out ahead in terms of cap space by trading him (but not by cutting him).A GM wouldn't be giving up an asset for taking on Sanchez. He'd be getting an asset for taking on Sanchez.

Also, why would someone trade to get a guy from the team when they could just wait till he's cut and then negotiate a new contract with that player?

A team wouldn't get an extra third-round (or first-round, or whatever it takes) draft pick by signing Sanchez after he's cut.

Just a completely different salary cap system. All NBA contracts are pretty much guaranteed which makes a significant difference, not to mention there needs to be a similar dollar amount going to and from the clubs.

Pretty much this. If the Jets were to cut Sanchez, all they would have to pay is next years salary since it is now guaranteed but not the remaining three years/40million (approx). If it was an NBA contract, cutting Sanchez would result in the Jets paying all four remaining years.In the basketball deals you mention, the teams were on the hook for years of bad contracts. Whether the player played for the team or was cut, the salary was still due. Same thing in baseball.

Sanchez's contract is effectively a one-year contract at this point. It's fully guaranteed for 2013. You can think of it as a one-year NBA contract.

plus Sanchez is worthless, why wouldnt anyone want him?

An empty coke can is also worthless, but if you offer me a third-round pick to take an empty coke can off your hands, I'd do it. (Sanchez is worth much less than an empty coke can, of course, so it would probably take a first-round pick rather than a third-round pick. But there is some price that makes it worthwhile to trade for Sanchez.)

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Doesn't trading a player bring the same cap hit as cutting him?

No. If they trade him, the Jets don't take a cap hit for his 2013 salary. If they cut him, they do.

 

[Joe Summer]

1. could the Jets trade cash along with Sanchez, or could they agree to just pay part of Sanchez' 2013 salary?

I do not believe teams can trade cash with players (although I believe they used to let you do that for trading players or picks for a coach). I am pretty sure you can't have a player getting paid from more than one team (ie, Jets pay half, Chiefs pay have).

2a. could the Jets minimize their cap hit by restructuring Sanchez's contract (with Sanchez's permission) before cutting him? (For example, what if they gave him $4.5 million in 2013 and $4.5 million in 2014, instead of just $8.25 million in 2013?)

Yes, both sides could restructure, but it wouldn't make any difference. Normally, teams would convert how things are recorded to spread out the cap hit, but that only works if the player stays on the same team so they can shift the cap hit across many years. By cutting him, teams have to take the cap hit all in one season. Bottom line, the Jets would still have to eat the cap hit (which apparently would be $17.1 million).2b. could the Jets restructure Sanchez's contract to make it more appealing to another team?Whoever has Sanchez will have to pay him $8.25 million next year, so unless Sanchez opts to void the guarantee for that money, then the new team would be stuck paying it. I guess if they want to work out a new deal to extend his contract they could do so, but that would probably mean Sanchez would have to convert his guaranteed money into a signing bonus. And the new team would have to want to keep Sanchez or they would take the cap hit all at once by cutting him.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Doesn't trading a player bring the same cap hit as cutting him?

No. If they trade him, the Jets don't take a cap hit for his 2013 salary. If they cut him, they do.

Two questions:1. could the Jets trade cash along with Sanchez, or could they agree to just pay part of Sanchez' 2013 salary?

I don't know if they can trade cash. They can agree to pay part of Sanchez's salary, in which case the portion that they pay counts against the Jets' salary cap instead of the other team's (I believe). If they trade cash instead (which the other team would use to pay Sanchez's salary), if that's allowable, I'm not sure what the salary cap ramifications would be.

2a. could the Jets minimize their cap hit by restructuring Sanchez's contract (with Sanchez's permission) before cutting him? (For example, what if they gave him $4.5 million in 2013 and $4.5 million in 2014, instead of just $8.25 million in 2013?)2b. could the Jets restructure Sanchez's contract to make it more appealing to another team?

They can restructure his contract with his permission, but I'm not sure that $4.5 + $4.5 is better for the Jets than $8.25 + $0. They may just want to clear their books as soon as possible instead of being affected for multiple seasons. But yes, I believe Sanchez could give up some guaranteed money in 2013 in exchange for taking more guaranteed money in 2014. I'm not sure what kind of restructuring would make the contract less unappealing to another team, short of converting some of the guaranteed salary into a signing bonus to be paid by the Jets.

 

[Quibbler]

What teams will be under the salary floor next year? Sanchez's expiring contract + a pick could look good to a team that needs to add salary next year, but is still early in a rebuilding process.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

The OP asks a good question. I don't think most people are understanding it.If the Jets trade Sanchez, they save a bunch of cap space in 2013. Something like an extra $1 or $2 million hits them because of the prorated signing bonus,

they just gave him an $8m signing bonus this year.show your math, plz.

 

[cvnpoka]

Just a completely different salary cap system. All NBA contracts are pretty much guaranteed which makes a significant difference, not to mention there needs to be a similar dollar amount going to and from the clubs.

Not to mention the NBA has a soft cap which seems to me defeats the purpose of a cap in the first place. Only the richest teams are willing to pay the heavy penalty for going over the cap.

the soft cap restricts how much money teams are able to shell out to free agents. a team is not allowed simply pay over the cap to sign a free agent.the soft cap does give some big market teams the advantage of trading for high priced players, or going over the cap to sign their own players and suffering the luxury tax.

 

[GregR]

Doesn't trading a player bring the same cap hit as cutting him?

No. If they trade him, the Jets don't take a cap hit for his 2013 salary. If they cut him, they do.

Two questions:1. could the Jets trade cash along with Sanchez, or could they agree to just pay part of Sanchez' 2013 salary?

I don't know if they can trade cash. They can agree to pay part of Sanchez's salary, in which case the portion that they pay counts against the Jets' salary cap instead of the other team's (I believe). If they trade cash instead (which the other team would use to pay Sanchez's salary), if that's allowable, I'm not sure what the salary cap ramifications would be.

I asked Andrew Brandt if NFL teams can include cash in trades and he said no.

 

[GregR]

The OP asks a good question. I don't think most people are understanding it.If the Jets trade Sanchez, they save a bunch of cap space in 2013. Something like an extra $1 or $2 million hits them because of the prorated signing bonus,

they just gave him an $8m signing bonus this year.show your math, plz.

Before the extension, he was going to have a $14.25 million cap hit in 2012, including $11.75m in salary. As part of the extension, the Jets converted $8m of that $11.75 to a signing bonus, which is the bonus you are (I assume) referring to.In addition, Sanchez receives a fully guaranteed $8.25m salary in 2013. That is the $8m that is being referred to as money that could be saved by getting another team to take him in trade before it comes due.Edit to add: Here are the exact figures remaining. He has an $8.9m cap hit that would escalate if he's cut or traded. Then there is the $8.25m guaranteed salary mentioned above that either the Jets have to pay (if cut) or another team (if traded). So if they cut him, Sanchez is a $17.1m cap hit. If they trade him and get another team to pay the salary, he's an $8.9m cap hit and an $8.25m cap savings (compared to cutting him).

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

The OP asks a good question. I don't think most people are understanding it.If the Jets trade Sanchez, they save a bunch of cap space in 2013. Something like an extra $1 or $2 million hits them because of the prorated signing bonus,

they just gave him an $8m signing bonus this year.show your math, plz.

You are confusing two different contract terms in the $8m range.Before the extension, he was going to have a $14.25 million cap hit in 2012, including $11.75m in salary. As part of the extension, the Jets converted $8m of that $11.75 to a signing bonus, which is the bonus you are (I assume) referring to.In addition, Sanchez receives a fully guaranteed $8.25m salary in 2013. That is the $8m that is being referred to as money that could be saved by getting another team to take him in trade before it comes due.

which one of us are you talking to?I understand they'd save the 2013 in salary ---- what would they accrue in accelerated bonus?because it wouldn't be '1 or 2m' hitting them.

 

[bengalbuck]

apples and oranges.plus Sanchez is worthless, why wouldnt anyone want him? jsut draft someone, they will be cheaper and better. Hell trade for Mallet or Kirk Cousins. Holmes has some value I imagine, but he is worth like a 4th rounder probably

Here's where I disagree. You can't just look at the player and ignore the contract. In my opinion, Holmes has negative trade value at this point due to a high guaranteed salary. I'd argue the Jets would have to give something of value to a team simply to take Holmes and his contract off of their hands. That is definitely the case with Sanchez. If he was a FA, there is zero chance he'd get a guaranteed $9m contract.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I think people are incorrect in saying there wouldn't be a cap hit if the Jets trade Sanchez. Madden football tells me that's not true.

Also, there's this slightly more reliable source.

A trade of Sanchez would still count $8.9 million toward the Jets’ salary cap next season, and the team probably also would have to pay a sizable portion of the $8.25 million he’s guaranteed in 2013, said Andrew Brandt, a former NFL executive and now an ESPN business analyst.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-20/jets-face-17-1-million-salary-cap-hit-if-mark-sanchez-leaves.html

 

[bengalbuck]

The OP asks a good question. I don't think most people are understanding it.

If the Jets trade Sanchez, they save a bunch of cap space in 2013. Something like an extra $1 or $2 million hits them because of the prorated signing bonus,

they just gave him an $8m signing bonus this year.show your math, plz.

You are confusing two different contract terms in the $8m range.Before the extension, he was going to have a $14.25 million cap hit in 2012, including $11.75m in salary. As part of the extension, the Jets converted $8m of that $11.75 to a signing bonus, which is the bonus you are (I assume) referring to.

In addition, Sanchez receives a fully guaranteed $8.25m salary in 2013. That is the $8m that is being referred to as money that could be saved by getting another team to take him in trade before it comes due.

which one of us are you talking to?I understand they'd save the 2013 in salary ---- what would they accrue in accelerated bonus?

because it wouldn't be '1 or 2m' hitting them.

From what I understand, if the Jets cut Sanchez, it would be approximately a $16 million cap hit.In my opinion, the most likely scenario is that they restructure his 2013 salary and convert about $6 or $7 million to a bonus, leaving a guaranteed salary of around $2 million. They could then trade him for a 7th rounder and the team getting him would only be on the hook for $2 million. The Jets would still have to deal with a $14 million cap hit....what I suggest would lead to a cap hit of something like $7 million instead. Still a tough blow for the Jets, but much more manageable than trying to put together a team while facing a $14-$16 million cap hit....

It is clear that Sanchez, with his contract, has "negative" trade value. That is a very common thing in other sports, but something you very rarely see in the NFL since most annual salaries are not guaranteed so the guy just gets cut.

This is a pretty unique situation and I wouldn't be shocked to see a unique outcome, thus why I think something like what I suggested is potentially a possibility and you could see an asset with a positive trade value (a Jets draft pick) sent out in a trade along with Sanchez and his negative trade value to balance things out...

 

[GregR]

I edited an earlier post to put this in but it was already getting quoted before the edit made it through, so I'll just repost so it isn't missed:

Here are the exact figures remaining. He has an $8.9m cap hit that would escalate if he's cut or traded. Then there is the $8.25m guaranteed salary mentioned above that either the Jets have to pay (if cut) or another team (if traded).So if they cut him, Sanchez is a $17.1m cap hit. If they trade him and get another team to pay the salary, he's an $8.9m cap hit and an $8.25m cap savings (compared to cutting him).

 

[Matt Bitonti]

reading this thread, the best outcome for the Jets is to keep Sanchez, and have him compete with a vet. If and when he loses that competition they pay him to ride the pine. All of this talk about the Jets giving a pick or restructuring (more bonus) is nonsense.

 

[RUSF18]

If I'm a team desperate enough at QB where I'd consider bringing in Sanchez and paying him all that money, instead of receiving a 3rd round pick, I'd rather trade a 3rd, get Alex Smith, and pay him the same amount.

 

[Warrior]

reading this thread, the best outcome for the Jets is to keep Sanchez, and have him compete with a vet. If and when he loses that competition they pay him to ride the pine. All of this talk about the Jets giving a pick or restructuring (more bonus) is nonsense.

He'll end up being a VERY overpaid backup QB for the Jets, behind some mediocre QB that beats him out.No chance he gets traded, very unlikely he gets cut.The guaranteed $ is a sunk cost...the actual cost to keep him as a backup as opposed to cutting him is very reasonable. Not many Econ majors on these boards.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I edited an earlier post to put this in but it was already getting quoted before the edit made it through, so I'll just repost so it isn't missed:

Here are the exact figures remaining. He has an $8.9m cap hit that would escalate if he's cut or traded. Then there is the $8.25m guaranteed salary mentioned above that either the Jets have to pay (if cut) or another team (if traded).

So if they cut him, Sanchez is a $17.1m cap hit. If they trade him and get another team to pay the salary, he's an $8.9m cap hit and an $8.25m cap savings (compared to cutting him).

absolutely there'd be a cap savings by trading him vs cutting him, as they'd obviously save the 2013 salary both in cash and cap, but that's a big leap to assume they'd cut him.the question would be keeping him vs 'paying' a team to take him in a trade.

the benefit to bribing some other team with a draft pick would be mostly cash savings and very little cap savings.

 

[Quibbler]

One other problem with the NBA analogy, is that non-lottery picks in the NBA aren't that valuable. NBA teams are more than willing to trade away a late 1st round pick to make a bad salary go away. I don't think that would fly in the NFL, especially with the new CBA's rookie wage scale.

If the Jets were to trade Sanchez along with their 1st round pick, they'd effectively be selling that pick for 8.25 million in cap space. Given that they ought to be rebuilding anyway, I suspect the Jets would rather keep the pick and pay Sanchez for another year than lose the pick for cap relief.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

One other problem with the NBA analogy, is that non-lottery picks in the NBA aren't that valuable. NBA teams are more than willing to trade away a late 1st round pick to make a bad salary go away. I don't think that would fly in the NFL, especially with the new CBA's rookie wage scale.

If the Jets were to trade Sanchez along with their 1st round pick, they'd effectively be selling that pick for 8.25 million in cap space. Given that they ought to be rebuilding anyway, I suspect the Jets would rather keep the pick and pay Sanchez for another year than lose the pick for cap relief.

only that's not true.they'd be selling the pick for 8m cash.

edit: but the greater point probably being nfl teams need to fill out a 53 man roster, if you don't count the practice squad, so draft picks probably have a greater intrinsic value.

 

[Quibbler]

One other problem with the NBA analogy, is that non-lottery picks in the NBA aren't that valuable. NBA teams are more than willing to trade away a late 1st round pick to make a bad salary go away. I don't think that would fly in the NFL, especially with the new CBA's rookie wage scale.

If the Jets were to trade Sanchez along with their 1st round pick, they'd effectively be selling that pick for 8.25 million in cap space. Given that they ought to be rebuilding anyway, I suspect the Jets would rather keep the pick and pay Sanchez for another year than lose the pick for cap relief.

only that's not true.they'd be selling the pick for 8m cash.

edit: but the greater point probably being nfl teams need to fill out a 53 man roster, if you don't count the practice squad, so draft picks probably have a greater intrinsic value.

Ok, sure. Call it cash, if you prefer (*). The question is, is 8.25 million a good deal for a 1st round NFL draft pick? I suspect it's not. From a quick google, there doesn't seem to be much analysis on the monetary value of NFL picks, but this article http://liveballsports.com/2010/06/26/fnqb-how-much-is-a-draft-pick-worth-part-ii/ suggests a first rounder was worth over $30 under the old CBA (and the new CBA makes them even more valuable). Even if you're not convinced by that guy's methods, it's still probably worth considerably more than 8 million.

(*) EDIT: I suspect the cap relief is worth more to the Jets than the cash, seeing as they are up against the cap and need to resign a bunch of guys. But maybe I'm wrong about that.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

One other problem with the NBA analogy, is that non-lottery picks in the NBA aren't that valuable. NBA teams are more than willing to trade away a late 1st round pick to make a bad salary go away. I don't think that would fly in the NFL, especially with the new CBA's rookie wage scale.

If the Jets were to trade Sanchez along with their 1st round pick, they'd effectively be selling that pick for 8.25 million in cap space. Given that they ought to be rebuilding anyway, I suspect the Jets would rather keep the pick and pay Sanchez for another year than lose the pick for cap relief.

only that's not true.they'd be selling the pick for 8m cash.

edit: but the greater point probably being nfl teams need to fill out a 53 man roster, if you don't count the practice squad, so draft picks probably have a greater intrinsic value.

Ok, sure. Call it cash, if you prefer (*). The question is, is 8.25 million a good deal for a 1st round NFL draft pick? I suspect it's not. From a quick google, there doesn't seem to be much analysis on the monetary value of NFL picks, but this article http://liveballsports.com/2010/06/26/fnqb-how-much-is-a-draft-pick-worth-part-ii/ suggests a first rounder was worth over $30 under the old CBA (and the new CBA makes them even more valuable). Even if you're not convinced by that guy's methods, it's still probably worth considerably more than 8 million.

(*) EDIT: I suspect the cap relief is worth more to the Jets than the cash, seeing as they are up against the cap and need to resign a bunch of guys. But maybe I'm wrong about that.

I'd hope so

 

[Quibbler]

One other problem with the NBA analogy, is that non-lottery picks in the NBA aren't that valuable. NBA teams are more than willing to trade away a late 1st round pick to make a bad salary go away. I don't think that would fly in the NFL, especially with the new CBA's rookie wage scale.

If the Jets were to trade Sanchez along with their 1st round pick, they'd effectively be selling that pick for 8.25 million in cap space. Given that they ought to be rebuilding anyway, I suspect the Jets would rather keep the pick and pay Sanchez for another year than lose the pick for cap relief.

only that's not true.they'd be selling the pick for 8m cash.

edit: but the greater point probably being nfl teams need to fill out a 53 man roster, if you don't count the practice squad, so draft picks probably have a greater intrinsic value.

Ok, sure. Call it cash, if you prefer (*). The question is, is 8.25 million a good deal for a 1st round NFL draft pick? I suspect it's not. From a quick google, there doesn't seem to be much analysis on the monetary value of NFL picks, but this article http://liveballsports.com/2010/06/26/fnqb-how-much-is-a-draft-pick-worth-part-ii/ suggests a first rounder was worth over $30 under the old CBA (and the new CBA makes them even more valuable). Even if you're not convinced by that guy's methods, it's still probably worth considerably more than 8 million.

(*) EDIT: I suspect the cap relief is worth more to the Jets than the cash, seeing as they are up against the cap and need to resign a bunch of guys. But maybe I'm wrong about that.

I'd hope so

Oops, 30 Million

 

[Donnybrook]

I believe most teams would rather go with a rookie than spend that kind of money on Sanchez.. He is less tradable than Peyton Manning was when he was with Indy.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I believe most teams would rather go with a rookie than spend that kind of money on Sanchez.

Of course, but that's not the choice that was proposed.The trade would be Sanchez plus a draft pick for a six-pack of beer. Really cheap beer. So it's not Sanchez or a rookie. It's Sanchez and a rookie.

 

[Bri]

This happens.

Years ago, there were behind the scenes promises made for the expansion drafts that a better(but not great) player would be left unprotected if they drafted this high salary guy.

In current NFL, the media may run with it as trading for a veteran to teach youngsters or new coach bringing in his veteran for leadership.

Also, players aren't guaranteed of any longevity with a team. When GMs started to spread out the bonus against the cap(like 12 million going 2 mil each of 6 years) the agents felt they were assuring their player of at least staying six years. It's obviously imperfect and no guarantee but you want a little warmth n fuzziness at contract time. People often forget free agents gotta go talk to their wife n family about moving; moving again in 2 years won't "fly" with them and they know that. Anyhow, spreading out the bonus against the cap seemed to lessen this unloading of contracts.

There's backloaded and frontloaded deals.

Previous CBA, I believe they began this amnesty of sorts (it just seemed so) . It happened at the end of the year, where teams used up every drop of cap space before the new year began. So they could have player Y play and pay his salary all year, then dump him n eat the bonus in February, then mid february they were free n clear because the bonus was applied to the last year. This was a debatable issue, I don't recall if it still exists.

Injured players are treated differently. I don't recall exactly how. There are medical releases in February too. A player's (certified) agent can negotiate an injury settlement that is a percent of the contract. I'd guess 50% as norm. I always thought some were sprained ankle settlements but not something that can be proven.

Brett Favre's retirement was a point of contention with the cap. I don't recall exactly how. Seau and Pats may have done the same, I can't recall.

These loopholes clever GMs figured out make it less likely to have to ask a team to take on a salary.

 

[Donnybrook]

I believe most teams would rather go with a rookie than spend that kind of money on Sanchez.

Of course, but that's not the choice that was proposed.The trade would be Sanchez plus a draft pick for a six-pack of beer. Really cheap beer. So it's not Sanchez or a rookie. It's Sanchez and a rookie.

Correction it Sanchez, a rookie pick and about negative 5 M to spend on free agents. It would have to be a very good pick to make it worth it.

 

[RUSF18]

I believe most teams would rather go with a rookie than spend that kind of money on Sanchez.

Of course, but that's not the choice that was proposed.The trade would be Sanchez plus a draft pick for a six-pack of beer. Really cheap beer. So it's not Sanchez or a rookie. It's Sanchez and a rookie.

The Jets are also desperate for young talent. One of the reasons they're in such bad shape right now is not only from failing to hit on many high draft picks, but also from trading away so many picks to acquire veteran players. You may not expect much from a 3rd round pick on a one-off basis, but continually having fewer chances to stock up with mid round picks collectively worsens you as a team. Especially when it's combined with not getting starting-caliber players in the 1st and 2nd.

 

[cstu]

We haven't seen this much in the past since most deals were signing bonuses. However, now that teams are signing more guaranteed deals with low signing bonuses I can see salary dump trades happening.

 

[cstu]

One other problem with the NBA analogy, is that non-lottery picks in the NBA aren't that valuable. NBA teams are more than willing to trade away a late 1st round pick to make a bad salary go away. I don't think that would fly in the NFL, especially with the new CBA's rookie wage scale.

If the Jets were to trade Sanchez along with their 1st round pick, they'd effectively be selling that pick for 8.25 million in cap space. Given that they ought to be rebuilding anyway, I suspect the Jets would rather keep the pick and pay Sanchez for another year than lose the pick for cap relief.

A 1st would obviously be too much, but what about a later pick? He's still a very good backup QB, which is worth something to a team. Let's say he's really worth $3.25M as a backup, that leaves $5M left for a team to justify overpaying him. Looking at the salaries for rookies last year, $5M is about what the Rams are paying Janoris Jenkins (the #38 pick) over 4 years. I think getting a rookie for 4 years for $5M is worth more than $5M in cap space so even a 2nd would be too much.

A better way to look at it would be what free agents cost, for example Mario Manningham signed a 2 year, $7.4M deal with the 49ers. Figure out what draft pick would Manningham have been worth if he was traded by the Giants with two years left on his contract and you have roughly what $5M in cap space is worth. My guess would be a middle round pick, say 4th or 5th.

Like you said the Jets are rebuilding and taking the cap hit is less important than keeping the draft picks. However, if a team was a contender and facing this situation it might be beneficial to make the deal.

 

[cracKer]

Remember, it's the Jets, and unless they found someone who knew how to use this new found cap space wisely they'd be right back in the same situation. Just hope that Braylon Edwards doesn't have a big game to end the year, they'll be looking to hand him an extension.

The NBA is an entire different monster where one player can make/break a franchise and teams start clearing in advance for expected free-agent classes. Really seems to backfire more often than not

 

[GregR]

One other problem with the NBA analogy, is that non-lottery picks in the NBA aren't that valuable. NBA teams are more than willing to trade away a late 1st round pick to make a bad salary go away. I don't think that would fly in the NFL, especially with the new CBA's rookie wage scale.

If the Jets were to trade Sanchez along with their 1st round pick, they'd effectively be selling that pick for 8.25 million in cap space. Given that they ought to be rebuilding anyway, I suspect the Jets would rather keep the pick and pay Sanchez for another year than lose the pick for cap relief.

A 1st would obviously be too much, but what about a later pick? He's still a very good backup QB, which is worth something to a team. Let's say he's really worth $3.25M as a backup, that leaves $5M left for a team to justify overpaying him. Looking at the salaries for rookies last year, $5M is about what the Rams are paying Janoris Jenkins (the #38 pick) over 4 years. I think getting a rookie for 4 years for $5M is worth more than $5M in cap space so even a 2nd would be too much.

A better way to look at it would be what free agents cost, for example Mario Manningham signed a 2 year, $7.4M deal with the 49ers. Figure out what draft pick would Manningham have been worth if he was traded by the Giants with two years left on his contract and you have roughly what $5M in cap space is worth. My guess would be a middle round pick, say 4th or 5th.

Like you said the Jets are rebuilding and taking the cap hit is less important than keeping the draft picks. However, if a team was a contender and facing this situation it might be beneficial to make the deal.

I was going to make the "who could you have for that money" comparison before, though was looking at the overall $8m it would cost. That is around the average annual salary of the contracts recently signed by Ray Rice, Matt Forte, Antonio Brown and Matt Flynn.

 

[comfortably numb]

One other problem with the NBA analogy, is that non-lottery picks in the NBA aren't that valuable. NBA teams are more than willing to trade away a late 1st round pick to make a bad salary go away. I don't think that would fly in the NFL, especially with the new CBA's rookie wage scale.

If the Jets were to trade Sanchez along with their 1st round pick, they'd effectively be selling that pick for 8.25 million in cap space. Given that they ought to be rebuilding anyway, I suspect the Jets would rather keep the pick and pay Sanchez for another year than lose the pick for cap relief.

A 1st would obviously be too much, but what about a later pick? He's still a very good backup QB, which is worth something to a team. Let's say he's really worth $3.25M as a backup, that leaves $5M left for a team to justify overpaying him. Looking at the salaries for rookies last year, $5M is about what the Rams are paying Janoris Jenkins (the #38 pick) over 4 years. I think getting a rookie for 4 years for $5M is worth more than $5M in cap space so even a 2nd would be too much.

A better way to look at it would be what free agents cost, for example Mario Manningham signed a 2 year, $7.4M deal with the 49ers. Figure out what draft pick would Manningham have been worth if he was traded by the Giants with two years left on his contract and you have roughly what $5M in cap space is worth. My guess would be a middle round pick, say 4th or 5th.

Like you said the Jets are rebuilding and taking the cap hit is less important than keeping the draft picks. However, if a team was a contender and facing this situation it might be beneficial to make the deal.

I was going to make the "who could you have for that money" comparison before, though was looking at the overall $8m it would cost. That is around the average annual salary of the contracts recently signed by Ray Rice, Matt Forte, Antonio Brown and Matt Flynn.

Just was thinking of this guy Not sure if the contract could work

Make any sense to deal say

Sanchez/3rd

for

Flynn

?

Sanchez goes to back up Wilson with old coach Pete Carroll

They can cut him after 1 year or restructure?

Seattle gets a 3rd

Flynn gets a shot at a starting gig?

That make any sense?

 

[GregR]

One other problem with the NBA analogy, is that non-lottery picks in the NBA aren't that valuable. NBA teams are more than willing to trade away a late 1st round pick to make a bad salary go away. I don't think that would fly in the NFL, especially with the new CBA's rookie wage scale.

If the Jets were to trade Sanchez along with their 1st round pick, they'd effectively be selling that pick for 8.25 million in cap space. Given that they ought to be rebuilding anyway, I suspect the Jets would rather keep the pick and pay Sanchez for another year than lose the pick for cap relief.

A 1st would obviously be too much, but what about a later pick? He's still a very good backup QB, which is worth something to a team. Let's say he's really worth $3.25M as a backup, that leaves $5M left for a team to justify overpaying him. Looking at the salaries for rookies last year, $5M is about what the Rams are paying Janoris Jenkins (the #38 pick) over 4 years. I think getting a rookie for 4 years for $5M is worth more than $5M in cap space so even a 2nd would be too much.

A better way to look at it would be what free agents cost, for example Mario Manningham signed a 2 year, $7.4M deal with the 49ers. Figure out what draft pick would Manningham have been worth if he was traded by the Giants with two years left on his contract and you have roughly what $5M in cap space is worth. My guess would be a middle round pick, say 4th or 5th.

Like you said the Jets are rebuilding and taking the cap hit is less important than keeping the draft picks. However, if a team was a contender and facing this situation it might be beneficial to make the deal.

I was going to make the "who could you have for that money" comparison before, though was looking at the overall $8m it would cost. That is around the average annual salary of the contracts recently signed by Ray Rice, Matt Forte, Antonio Brown and Matt Flynn.

Just was thinking of this guy Not sure if the contract could work

Make any sense to deal say

Sanchez/3rd

for

Flynn

?

Sanchez goes to back up Wilson with old coach Pete Carroll

They can cut him after 1 year or restructure?

Seattle gets a 3rd

Flynn gets a shot at a starting gig?

That make any sense?

What can they get for Flynn from another team?Could they do better than a 3rd plus losing $8m in salary cap?