Can a capologists chime in?? With 59 Million in cap space for 2017, why not sign Garropolo

Originally posted by crabman82:

Ur post right above knocked glennons deal of 45 mil down to 16 for 1 year, presumably based off the language in the contract no? U guys get so hung up on the unofficial # when it reaches 3 digits. Its very possible its a 100 mil deal. But i never said 100 mil guarantee now did i?

All about the guaranteed cash I agree

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
It will be hard to lure a free agent QB here. We had to make this move to jump start this rebuild. It was a good move.

You nailed it!

He will make way more than others expect because as a free agent some franchise will overspend. If he is purely after money that will matter. Even if he's not his agent will play that angle as he should.

What if he comes out and plays like s**t? He loses a lot of money that way too. Him being young I would think he would take a a fair deal. By that I mean 17-21 a year.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
It will be hard to lure a free agent QB here. We had to make this move to jump start this rebuild. It was a good move.

You nailed it!

lol, nailed it after the fact

but its also part false. We could have landed any FA even a chance at the top FA Kirk. But are those FA QBs worth or the best option, most likely not

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
My question from the other thread (didn't see this one)

We carry unused cap space for one year after right? So if we were $50mil under cap this year we get $50mil extra next year?

I'm thinking we massive front load his deal. Then less the remaining years so we can build a team around him.

Ding ding ding this is my point. Go ALL IN, if you front load the deal the team will have the flexibility to build a team around him. Front load the deal, accept he is the best you are going to get for 5 years and go for it. His contract and performance will be tied directly to Lynch and shannahans remaining 5 years

Originally posted by 9erred:

Ding ding ding this is my point. Go ALL IN, if you front load the deal the team will have the flexibility to build a team around him. Front load the deal, accept he is the best you are going to get for 5 years and go for it. His contract and performance will be tied directly to Lynch and shannahans remaining 5 years

He's 26? 8 year deal baby lol

They are going to see what they got before talking contract. If he blows them away right off the bat expect a mega contract soon. If he takes a bit to acclimate expect one in the off. If he's slow and not really buying in expect the tag to get another season to evaluate.

Seems pretty simple to me....

Originally posted by 9erred:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
My question from the other thread (didn't see this one)

We carry unused cap space for one year after right? So if we were $50mil under cap this year we get $50mil extra next year?

I'm thinking we massive front load his deal. Then less the remaining years so we can build a team around him.

Ding ding ding this is my point. Go ALL IN, if you front load the deal the team will have the flexibility to build a team around him. Front load the deal, accept he is the best you are going to get for 5 years and go for it. His contract and performance will be tied directly to Lynch and shannahans remaining 5 years

It makes no difference whether or not the deal is front loaded to our cap flexibility 5 years from now if the total value of the contract is the same. Front loading the deal just means we carry forward less cap space as rollover, but we have a lower obligation in future years (they offset).

If we offer him 5 years $105 million and the deal is front-loaded, we have the same flexibility 5 years from now as if we offer him 5 years $105 million and the deal is back-loaded.

The argument for front loading or offering more guaranteed money would be that it may allow you to save a little money on the total $, because the team is taking on more risk (as opposed to the player taking on risk). Players should also value money earned up front higher than future earnings, because they can invest it and earn ~5-10% (on average) a year (not sure how many players factor this in in reality).

If we go all in on Garopollo and front load the deal with a lot of guaranteed money to get the cheapest possible total deal size (maybe 5 years $100 million with high guarantees), we'll set ourselves back if he sucks. We benefited from offering Kaepernick a back-loaded contract with low guarantees, because we were able to move on from him and save a bunch of cash.

Players want their guarantees spread throughout the contract to help ensure they capture the non-guaranteed portion.

Originally posted by susweel:

Cuz Jimmy want $20 million per season. Jimmy likes money

Me too

Originally posted by gold49er2183:

Originally posted by susweel:
Cuz Jimmy want $20 million per season. Jimmy likes money

Me too

Me three

Originally posted by Draftology:
Players want their guarantees spread throughout the contract to help ensure they capture the non-guaranteed portion.

This is true, but the more important piece of contracts is how the non-guaranteed amounts are structured. Players would prefer the non-guaranteed amounts to be as small as possible and as short term as possible to avoid the risk that they underperform their salary which is the basis for getting cut (once you're worth less than the amount the team saves by cutting you, you're at risk of being cut). And there's the time value of money argument where players are better off getting paid earlier (doesn't apply to signing bonuses, because the player receives those right away even though the cap hit is spread out).

Example:
A player is signed through 2018 with a non-guaranteed salary of $5 million and a prorated bonus of $10 million in 2018. If the player is worth less than $5 million, the team cuts him.

The same player is signed through 2018 with a non-guaranteed salary of $5 million and no bonus. If the player is worth less than $5 million, the team cuts him.

The $10 million of prorated bonus in this example is a sunk cost. The team will owe that in 2018 regardless of whether or not they cut the player. The guarantee doesn't impact the decision to cut a player unless we're talking about cutting a player who has years of bonuses remaining on his contract and the team considering cutting him isn't willing to take the cap hit for those future bonuses next season (you're required to when you cut a player).

It's in the best interest of the team and player to spread out signing bonuses over the length of a contract or 5 years (the league allows you to spread it out over a max of 5 years or the length of the contract, whichever is smaller). As a player, this provides the team incentive to keep you early on so they don't take the cap hit for the remaining bonus next season (there's a small chance that a team may keep you even if you're underperforming your salary to avoid taking the cap hit from future bonuses next season). As a team, this gives you more flexibility in the short run while not impacting your future cap, because you roll over any saved cap room. And if you do decide to cut a player, you're still in the same cap space situation you would have been had you taken the cap hit from the bonus earlier.

👉🏼

Originally posted by AB81Rules:

After today's moves, the 49ers now have $59,121,034 in cap room now, and a projected $61,252,770 in 2018 on a $178M projected cap.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by 9erred:
Ding ding ding this is my point. Go ALL IN, if you front load the deal the team will have the flexibility to build a team around him. Front load the deal, accept he is the best you are going to get for 5 years and go for it. His contract and performance will be tied directly to Lynch and shannahans remaining 5 years

He's 26? 8 year deal baby lol

I'd make it a 7-year deal through age 32.