There are 78 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Paraag Marathe: "Our Level of Spending on Defense is not sustainable over time"

Originally posted by BrianGO:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Back of envelope, this gives us about $40m in cap room for the 2013-2014 offseasonPlus roll-overs. We might have $10m – $15m+ in rollovers from 2013 with this plan, so we could conceivably have $45m – $50m in salary cap space.

$45m to $50m to front-load new contracts for Kaepernick, Crabtree, and Aldon Smith.


Exactly. Front-loading is key.

That makes the most sense, unless that player is Darrelle Revis and he gets most of the $$ at the beginning then comes begging for a new contract once the money starts declining at the end of the contract.
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by BrianGO:
2 + 2 = 4

Basically, and I think the article touches on this, you have two types of players, those you pay a LOT, and those you pay at a discount / bargain price. Players on their rookie contract (assuming they are good) play at rock bottom prices. Other players, like McDonald, J Smith, Brown, play at solid discount prices, compared with what they do.

Paying fair price, for good solid players, is nearly impossible to do these days (at least if you want a Super Bowl contending team). RJF, Whitner, Manningham, Walker; those are all good solid players who any team would want, the problem is, they are in that salary range that eats up too much cap space.

Over the next two years, we are going to have to release a large chunk of our team, maybe over half, just to keep the players we already have signed, and the young super stars who will be due contracts (Kap, Aldon).

Yes - you keep your core and don't give anyone else a contract.

*** This is why I'm sorta shocked we gave Carlos Rogers his contract.


I was shocked we gave Ahmad Brooks the contact we did at the time, but it worked out because of the fact Bowman took a home town discount. Rogers contract won't last pas next off-season. This year, we don't save enough to let him go, so we might as well keep him this year. Certain players however, are simply too expensive to keep for another 10 sec: Goldson, Goodwin, Akers. I would be completely shocked to see any of them on the team next year. We need their cap room to front load some contracts.
Originally posted by BrianGO:
I was shocked we gave Ahmad Brooks the contact we did at the time, but it worked out because of the fact Bowman took a home town discount. Rogers contract won't last pas next off-season. This year, we don't save enough to let him go, so we might as well keep him this year. Certain players however, are simply too expensive to keep for another 10 sec: Goldson, Goodwin, Akers. I would be completely shocked to see any of them on the team next year. We need their cap room to front load some contracts.

Rogers also provides vet leadership
Originally posted by BrianGO:
I was shocked we gave Ahmad Brooks the contact we did at the time, but it worked out because of the fact Bowman took a home town discount. Rogers contract won't last pas next off-season. This year, we don't save enough to let him go, so we might as well keep him this year. Certain players however, are simply too expensive to keep for another 10 sec: Goldson, Goodwin, Akers. I would be completely shocked to see any of them on the team next year. We need their cap room to front load some contracts.

Eh, no. Brooks is a younger player - he just screwed up early in his career.

They gave him that deal when he was 26, and it pays $6m per year.

And I can totally see him blowing up next year with sacks.
Originally posted by NinerBuff:
That makes the most sense, unless that player is Darrelle Revis and he gets most of the $$ at the beginning then comes begging for a new contract once the money starts declining at the end of the contract.


If we sign Revis, in three years our team will consist of, some linebackers, a WR, a CB, and a QB. All super stars, but greatly outnumbered.
Everyone has seen this, right? We're getting a ton out of our players. Note: Ignore Willis because his performance-based value with $15.6m -- the highest on the team...but his contract was loaded for 2012.

Undervalued

1. Joe Staley, Offensive Tackle

It's incredible really that the 49ers are getting such good value from their franchise tackle. He finished 2012 our top ranked left tackle on the strength of his rather incredible run blocking. Simply put, there aren't many offensive linemen in the league who makes as many key blocks in the run game as Staley, who would also wind up with a positive pass blocking grade.

2012 Cap Hit: $2.5m2012 Performance Based Value: $13.8mValue Differential: +$11.3m

2. Aldon Smith, Linebacker

While his sack numbers may have inflated the level of his performance in the eyes of some, that doesn't mean the 49ers didn't get a tremendous amount of production for a relatively small part of their cap. Smith led all 3-4 outside linebackers with 70 combined sacks, hits and hurries as he transitioned to a full-time, every-down role. Not quite as explosive as his rookie year, but plenty good.

2012 Cap Hit: $3.3m2012 Performance Based Value: $12.9mValue Differential: +$9.7m

3. NaVorro Bowman, Linebacker

The contract of Bowman is only going to produce bigger cap hits, but for 2012 it cost the 49ers a little over $2m and he needed only a fraction of the season to earn that. Our seventh-ranked inside linebacker had his usual good year in the run game, even if his second half of the season didn't quite match the first half.

2012 Cap Hit: $2.2m2012 Performance Based Value: $10.3mValue Differential: +$8.1m

4. Tarell Brown, CB – Cap: $1.8m, PBV: $9.1m, Value Differential: $7.3m
5. Ahmad Brooks, LB – Cap: $2.9m, PBV: $9.4m, Value Differential: $6.6m
6. Colin Kaepernick, QB – Cap: $1.2m, PBV: $7m, Value Differential: $5.8m
7. Anthony Davis, OT – Cap: $3.2m, PBV: $8.7m, Value Differential: $5.5m
8. Alex Boone, OG – Cap: $900k, PBV: $5.8m, Value Differential: $4.9m
9. Ray McDonald, DE – Cap: $3.6m, PBV: $7.5m, Value Differential: $3.9m
10. Chris Culliver, CB – Cap: $600k, PBV: $4.4m, Value Differential: $3.8m

Overvalued

1. Isaac Sopoaga, Nose Tackle

It's not just that the 49ers are paying Sopoaga a ridiculous amount for a guy who played 30.3% of the team's defensive snaps — it's that he's not even that good. The defensive end turned nose tackle offers nothing as a pass rusher, but it's his inability to make plays in the run game that stands out. Aubrayo Franklin he is not.

2012 Cap Hit: $4.9m

2012 Performance Based Value: $825k

Value Differential: -$4.1m

2. Alex Smith, Quarterback

Who knows how this would have played out if Smith had actually played the whole season, because while he wasn't lighting it up, he was playing well enough to turn his 501 snaps into a +7.0 grade. Then along came Colin Kaepernick and ensured the end of the Alex Smith Era in San Fran was near. For a quarterback his cap hit wasn't all that bad, but only if he started every game.

2012 Cap Hit: $9.3m

2012 Performance Based Value: $5.6m

Value Differential: -$3.6m

3. Donte Whitner, Safety

For all the impressive displays on the 49ers' defense, one guy who didn't stand out for the right reasons was the former Bill, Whitner. He gave up more touchdowns than any other safety in the league (eight) and missed more tackles than you'd like (12). An area for this team to improve.

2012 Cap Hit: $4.4m

2012 Performance Based Value: $1.3m

Value Differential: -$3.1m

4. Patrick Willis, LB – Cap: $17.8m, PBV: $15.6m, Value Differential: -$2.2m
5. Dashon Goldson, S – Cap: $6.1m, PBV: $5m, Value Differential: -$1.2m
6. Vernon Davis, TE – Cap: $6.8m, PBV: $5.8m, Value Differential: -$1.1m
7. A.J. Jenkins, WR – Cap: $1.3m, PBV: $400k, Value Differential: -$900k
8. Carlos Rogers, CB – Cap: $4.8m, PBV: $3.9m, Value Differential: -$900k
9. Brandon Jacobs, RB – Cap: $1.5m, PBV: $700k, Value Differential: -$900k
10. Delanie Walker, TE – Cap: $1.9m, PBV: $1.1m, Value Differential: -$800k



https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/03/04/performance-based-value-san-francisco-49ers/
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Eh, no. Brooks is a younger player - he just screwed up early in his career.

They gave him that deal when he was 26, and it pays $6m per year.

And I can totally see him blowing up next year with sacks.


I thought it was more than that (like 9 mil per). If it is only 6 mil then I would consider that a discount price for him.
Originally posted by BrianGO:
I thought it was more than that (like 9 mil per). If it is only 6 mil then I would consider that a discount price for him.

6 years, $37m...but I'm seeing conflicting sources. Some are saying 6/44 while others are saying 6/37. AB83's site, Ninercaphell.com, says 6/37

And as you can see above, Brooks was one of the best bargains on the entire team.
[ Edited by nickbradley on Mar 4, 2013 at 3:43 PM ]
I thought what Demoff said at the end was very odd: "We have all stopped looking at where you spend. It is, 'How do you accumulate the best players regardless of position?'"

I think this is not applicable to a team like the current 49ers who have an abundance of good players and have to be selective in choosing who they want to retain.

It was my thinking that in the salary cap era, you have to identify how you want to build your team and in doing so, identify where you are willing to spend more. Using the 49ers as an example, I would think that the defensive front 7 and O-line are most important to what they want to do (and of course QB). So, the O-line takes on more importance than the RB position. We saw Gore, LMJ, Hunter all succeed behind a well built O-line. We saw the DBs look good behind a fantastic front 7 (until injuries).

With that in mind, letting Crabtree walk while using the money to retain Iupati, ADavis, ASmith, extend Staley, etc. might be what we see. This is a drastic example to illustrate the point I'm trying to make. If I had a fantastic O-line, and as a GM I placed high value in having a great O-line, I would settle for less from the RB and WR position, provided I have a good QB (which the 49ers do). Baalke may disagree with what Demoff said in the quote above. If Baalke holds his front 7 in higher regard, then Baalke can't retain Goldson, because he has to think about whether he wants to retain Aldon next season. If Baalke holds his O-line in higher regard than the RB/WR positions, then he may not retain Crabtree because he would rather retain Iupati, ADavis, or extend Staley and go with a solid but unspectacular WR.
Originally posted by thl408:
I thought what Demoff said at the end was very odd: "We have all stopped looking at where you spend. It is, 'How do you accumulate the best players regardless of position?'"

I think this is not applicable to a team like the current 49ers who have an abundance of good players and have to be selective in choosing who they want to retain.

It was my thinking that in the salary cap era, you have to identify how you want to build your team and in doing so, identify where you are willing to spend more. Using the 49ers as an example, I would think that the defensive front 7 and O-line are most important to what they want to do (and of course QB). So, the O-line takes on more importance than the RB position. We saw Gore, LMJ, Hunter all succeed behind a well built O-line. We saw the DBs look good behind a fantastic front 7 (until injuries).

With that in mind, letting Crabtree walk while using the money to retain Iupati, ADavis, ASmith, extend Staley, etc. might be what we see. This is a drastic example to illustrate the point I'm trying to make. If I had a fantastic O-line, and as a GM I placed high value in having a great O-line, I would settle for less from the RB and WR position, provided I have a good QB (which the 49ers do). Baalke may disagree with what Demoff said in the quote above. If Baalke holds his front 7 in higher regard, then Baalke can't retain Goldson, because he has to think about whether he wants to retain Aldon next season. If Baalke holds his O-line in higher regard than the RB/WR positions, then he may not retain Crabtree because he would rather retain Iupati, ADavis, or extend Staley and go with a solid but unspectacular WR.

He's basically taking over a team that is so bad that going BPA at all positions is the best route to take
Originally posted by thl408:
I thought what Demoff said at the end was very odd: "We have all stopped looking at where you spend. It is, 'How do you accumulate the best players regardless of position?'"

I think this is not applicable to a team like the current 49ers who have an abundance of good players and have to be selective in choosing who they want to retain.

It was my thinking that in the salary cap era, you have to identify how you want to build your team and in doing so, identify where you are willing to spend more. Using the 49ers as an example, I would think that the defensive front 7 and O-line are most important to what they want to do (and of course QB). So, the O-line takes on more importance than the RB position. We saw Gore, LMJ, Hunter all succeed behind a well built O-line. We saw the DBs look good behind a fantastic front 7 (until injuries).

With that in mind, letting Crabtree walk while using the money to retain Iupati, ADavis, ASmith, extend Staley, etc. might be what we see. This is a drastic example to illustrate the point I'm trying to make. If I had a fantastic O-line, and as a GM I placed high value in having a great O-line, I would settle for less from the RB and WR position, provided I have a good QB (which the 49ers do). Baalke may disagree with what Demoff said in the quote above. If Baalke holds his front 7 in higher regard, then Baalke can't retain Goldson, because he has to think about whether he wants to retain Aldon next season. If Baalke holds his O-line in higher regard than the RB/WR positions, then he may not retain Crabtree because he would rather retain Iupati, ADavis, or extend Staley and go with a solid but unspectacular WR.

Also, this is what analytics are for.

I think we can re-sign Crabtree no problem.
Originally posted by BrianGO:
Originally posted by NinerBuff:
That makes the most sense, unless that player is Darrelle Revis and he gets most of the $$ at the beginning then comes begging for a new contract once the money starts declining at the end of the contract.


If we sign Revis, in three years our team will consist of, some linebackers, a WR, a CB, and a QB. All super stars, but greatly outnumbered.

ya 6 on 11 doesn't bode well. What I was saying is Revis is the type of player that a front loaded contract may come back to bight you. I do not suggest we sign him.
Originally posted by thl408:
I thought what Demoff said at the end was very odd: "We have all stopped looking at where you spend. It is, 'How do you accumulate the best players regardless of position?'"

I think this is not applicable to a team like the current 49ers who have an abundance of good players and have to be selective in choosing who they want to retain.

It was my thinking that in the salary cap era, you have to identify how you want to build your team and in doing so, identify where you are willing to spend more. Using the 49ers as an example, I would think that the defensive front 7 and O-line are most important to what they want to do (and of course QB). So, the O-line takes on more importance than the RB position. We saw Gore, LMJ, Hunter all succeed behind a well built O-line. We saw the DBs look good behind a fantastic front 7 (until injuries).

With that in mind, letting Crabtree walk while using the money to retain Iupati, ADavis, ASmith, extend Staley, etc. might be what we see. This is a drastic example to illustrate the point I'm trying to make. If I had a fantastic O-line, and as a GM I placed high value in having a great O-line, I would settle for less from the RB and WR position, provided I have a good QB (which the 49ers do). Baalke may disagree with what Demoff said in the quote above. If Baalke holds his front 7 in higher regard, then Baalke can't retain Goldson, because he has to think about whether he wants to retain Aldon next season. If Baalke holds his O-line in higher regard than the RB/WR positions, then he may not retain Crabtree because he would rather retain Iupati, ADavis, or extend Staley and go with a solid but unspectacular WR.


You're right. You make a good point.

I think its similar to when Singletary said every player is equally important, including the quarterback. It sounds nice to say, but in reality, I am sure they value having a top WR more than having a, for example, a top G. Let me just say it, I think Crabtree is much more valuable to this team than Iupati. A guard is not as valuable. They are very valuable, but not AS valuable. That is my opinion.

I think that comment was made because of the fact that they ended up signing two super star middle linebackers. I think Willis and Bowman are exceptions to the rule. They are too good to let walk. They are a bit of a special situation.
I can't imagine letting Crabtree walk and keeping a DB or a G over him. I don't anticipate Baalke thinking like that.
Like it alot
Originally posted by AmpLee:
We have Crabtree then two guys with significant injuries (the better of the two in Manningham worse off than KW), then Jenkins who was unable to make an impact last year. We are VERY thin at WR and badly need a number 2 to compliment Crabs. Safety, while I agree we have some young guys who MAY be able to step in, we are losing 2 starters in your ideal offseason. We need to draft a ballhawking stud, but I'm willing to wait on safety (unless we lose both of our starters) as it sounds like a deep class. If Tavon Austin is available for our first selection, he fills two huge needs (KR/PR and deep threat WR) and starts from day one.

Exactly. If the good 3-4 DE prospects are gone at 31, it would be wise to go with Austin, Rogers, or Patton. Basically a guy that can come in and potentially be a #1 or #2 receiver. We have a guy that would make a nice pair along with Crabtree and defenses would have to respect his speed. That still leaves 4 more picks between the 2nd and 3rd rounds that could be spent on defense, all of which don't necessarily have to be spent on defense. We are set at LB and would only need depth, so I don't foresee any high picks there unless there is GREAT value. On the defensive line, we need a NT that can start and a 3-4 DE. However I believe there is a possibility that the quality 3-4 DE prospects could be gone. After that, we could take a corner and a safety. With our extra picks, I can see us packaging picks to move up for another pick in the 3rd or 4th. I've heard there is a new draft value chart, but I haven't seen it. Using the old chart however our two 5ths and 6ths could move us up near the top of the 4th (pick 100), which would be a great spot depending on who falls. The only risk is that we may miss out on drafting that kicker .