MiamiJet Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 I hope Bullitt doesn't mind me stealing his stuff, but this article can be appreciated by all of us Jets fans. It appears, like some of you suggested, that the Jets would be interested in dealing for Putz. Seems like a 3rd is what is being discussed, which might not be so bad, when you consider that if Putz is traded, Denver might assume the cap hit, leaving us with a very makable deal. Terry might be a genius after all, having full knowledge of Denver's cap situation and lack of draft picks. They lack a 3rd, 4th and 5th. We give them our 3rd, and get the TE AND cap friendly deal we wish. Anyway, I've rambled on long enough. http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/Features/Free+Agency/2005/news031005.htm AFC West Joe Linta, the agent for restricted free-agent TE Jeb Putzier, told PFW Thursday morning that a trade appears to be in the works that would send his client to the Jets, who signed him to a five-year, $12.5 million offer sheet last week. The Broncos exercised their right of first refusal Thursday and chose to match the Jets' offer, but now they may deal him to New York. We Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomShane Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 I'd be mucho happy if we get a deal done for a TE quickly. A 3rd for a starter is not a bad deal at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 Excellent news. I think a 4th is fair. If we go any higher than that I'll probably be angry, but either way, Putzier is definitely the better choice than any of the free agent TE's we can get. Besides, we'd get him for the cheap deal that we offered him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Papi Green Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 i'm all for this guy but the 4th and 5th is outta the question, I'd prefer a 4th but if we have to do a 3rd at least we know what we are getting as opposed to the unknown of a pick so I could live with it but the beauty of it is having him so cheap yet he's happy because he gets the entire 2.5 mill immediately when traded and we have nothing but 500k in year 1 and 500k in year 2 for a high caliber starting TE that we desperately need well played TB if it works out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjets Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 do it terry......NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smizzy Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 This Guy has grown on me this last week,I want Jeb in Green & White. Get this deal done ASAP terry,this offeanse needs a quality TE,this guy is on the brink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjets Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 all he needs to do is catch the ball (unlike becht) and this offence will be that much better....WEAPONS BABY ,WEAPONS.............. This Guy has grown on me this last week,I want Jeb in Green & White. Get this deal done ASAP terry,this offeanse needs a quality TE,this guy is on the brink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Troll Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 I WOULD give up a third for Putzier, but wouldn't it have been nice if Terry had frontloaded the contract and we could've gotten him for a 6? Another f-up by Bradway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Papi Green Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 I WOULD give up a third for Putzier, but wouldn't it have been nice if Terry had frontloaded the contract and we could've gotten him for a 6? Another f-up by Bradway. not really now instead of 1.5 mill and 2 mill we have him for 500k per and it would only cost a 3rd pick, not bad if money was a concern for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiamiJet Posted March 11, 2005 Author Share Posted March 11, 2005 I WOULD give up a third for Putzier, but wouldn't it have been nice if Terry had frontloaded the contract and we could've gotten him for a 6? Another f-up by Bradway. True, Troll, that would've been preferable, but with the contract done this way, Denver can assume the cap hit, giving us an easy contract to get rid off if he busts. We dump him in a year or two and suffer nothing. This deal also gives us room enough to sign some free agents and our draft picks. Yes, I'd rather give up the 6th than the 3rd, but I guess you'd have to weigh which deal is better: A 6th round pick plus a cap hit the next two years, OR a 3rd and no hit? I don't think Terry f'd up like we originally though....imho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 I think playing the cap was more important than playing the draft. If we give Putzier a deal that Denver doesnt match, then we are probably spending too much cap space on Putzier and kept from getting somebody else we wanted. Rather, Bradway offers a cheap deal, hoping for a miracle, expecting otherwise, and gives up a 4th rounder to get him, which would have probably been used on a TE anyways. I like Bradway's thinking here. Essentially, I'd prefer to give up a 4th and keep some much needed cap space rather than give up a 6th and give up a cap-straining offer. Also, this gives us some freedom, because we can be the ones to decide what price we are willing to give up, putting Denver in the tough spot by possibly being forced to pay someone they didnt necesarilly want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Troll Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 Increasing Putzier's salary by half a million dollars would have made it impossible for Denver to match. Where could we possibly have gotten half a million more dollars? How about by letting go of Wayne Chrebet and Reggie Tongue. I'm glad two past their prime wastes of a roster spot may end up costing us a third round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 Good news.....Thx Miami. Bradway showing signs of some nice advance thinking here if we get something done. Would love if it's a 4th but I guess a 3rd would be o.k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 Sign Fiedler, trade for Putz and sign Tony Williams. Comeon TB!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 and sign Nick Harper What happened to Samari Rolle, Gary Baxter, Ty Law, and Fred Smoot being on the Jets ''to-do list''? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiamiJet Posted March 11, 2005 Author Share Posted March 11, 2005 I think playing the cap was more important than playing the draft. If we give Putzier a deal that Denver doesnt match, then we are probably spending too much cap space on Putzier and kept from getting somebody else we wanted. Rather, Bradway offers a cheap deal, hoping for a miracle, expecting otherwise, and gives up a 4th rounder to get him, which would have probably been used on a TE anyways. I like Bradway's thinking here. Essentially, I'd prefer to give up a 4th and keep some much needed cap space rather than give up a 6th and give up a cap-straining offer. Also, this gives us some freedom, because we can be the ones to decide what price we are willing to give up, putting Denver in the tough spot by possibly being forced to pay someone they didnt necesarilly want. Myt houghts exactly. To me, Terry's deal makes sense, especially if he's able to land Putzier for a 3rd or 4th. We still need a T on both sides of the ball. Terry has to keep the coffers open incase someone becomes available or a deal is made that's too hard to pass up. We could've had Putz outright, without giving up picks, but suppose Pryce was dealt, freeing up valuable cap space, allowing Denver to match. What then? We would have little chance of getting him, since Denver would be reluctant to take a big cap hit on a trade. If Denver did decline the offer, we would get Putz, but lower our cap room, and possibly hurt our chances of reeling in a player cut after June 1st or even before. It's not as bad as you think, Troll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob D Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 not really now instead of 1.5 mill and 2 mill we have him for 500k per If a trade does go through, I believe his cap numbers will be $1.3m and $1.8m in the first two years. This is assuming the 2006 roster bonus of $1.5m is transferred in the trade, which I'm not 100% sure about. (Where is Flowtrain when you need him? ). The only money Denver is definitely responsible for is the $1m signing bonus, which would be pro-rated against the cap at $200k per year if he stays there. If they trade him now then they take a $1m hit this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Papi Green Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 If a trade does go through, I believe his cap numbers will be $1.3m and $1.8m in the first two years. This is assuming the 2006 roster bonus of $1.5m is transferred in the trade, which I'm not 100% sure about. (Where is Flowtrain when you need him? ). The only money Denver is definitely responsible for is the $1m signing bonus, which would be pro-rated against the cap at $200k per year if he stays there. If they trade him now then they take a $1m hit this year. i always thought all of the guaranteed money gets accelerated whether it be signing bonuses or roster bonuses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiamiJet Posted March 11, 2005 Author Share Posted March 11, 2005 No Papi, I think he's right. Damn that sounded gay as hell... Ah, no MPG, I think Rob might be right. Only the signing bonus takes immediate effect, since Putz never had an opportunity to make a roster spot in 2006. He gets no bonus for that, so Denver only gets the signing bonus hit. Regardless, it benefits Putz anyway, because he still gets his money, and should more than likely be on the roster next season. This is even better. Denver doesn't take much of a hit in trading him to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob D Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 i always thought all of the guaranteed money gets accelerated whether it be signing bonuses or roster bonuses A signing bonus is accelerated if a player is cut or traded in the middle of a contract, but a roster bonus is not. In fact, the reason many players become cap casualties at this time of year is because teams are avoiding payment of a roster bonus. The roster bonus is only paid if the player is on the roster on the specified date. For example, Wayne Chrebet received a $250k (?) roster bonus earlier this month. These payments only count against the cap in the year they are paid, unlike a signing bonus which is spread out over the life of the contract. The question I asked was whether or not the Jets become responsible for the $1.5m roster bonus in 2006 if they trade for Putzier, since he is no longer on the roster of the team who gave him the contract (Denver). I would think the answer is yes, or else the player would not be very happy about $1.5m going missing from his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Papi Green Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 A signing bonus is accelerated if a player is cut or traded in the middle of a contract, but a roster bonus is not. In fact, the reason many players become cap casualties at this time of year is because teams are avoiding payment of a roster bonus. The roster bonus is only paid if the player is on the roster on the specified date. For example, Wayne Chrebet received a $250k (?) roster bonus earlier this month. These payments only count against the cap in the year they are paid, unlike a signing bonus which is spread out over the life of the contract. The question I asked was whether or not the Jets become responsible for the $1.5m roster bonus in 2006 if they trade for Putzier, since he is no longer on the roster of the team who gave him the contract (Denver). I would think the answer is yes, or else the player would not be very happy about $1.5m going missing from his contract. ok, so then why do they say taht 2.5 mill is GUARANTEED when only a mill is the signing bonus? how can it not be guaranteed then, thats what gets me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob D Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 This is even better. Denver doesn't take much of a hit in trading him to us. They would take a hit of $1m if they trade him. This is why I think it will take at least a 3rd round pick to complete this possible trade. They could have received a 6th rounder with no cap hit if they failed to match, so the question is: How much higher a pick do the Jets have to offer the Broncos to make a $1m cap hit worthwhile? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob D Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 ok, so then why do they say taht 2.5 mill is GUARANTEED when only a mill is the signing bonus? how can it not be guaranteed then, thats what gets me I agree that it's a misnomer to call a roster bonus 'guaranteed money' before it is paid. I don't know whether or not the league officially calls it guaranteed money. Maybe it's just the media? I suppose the only justification is that once it has been paid, the entire bonus counts against the cap. A salary on the other hand, is not necessarily guaranteed. So if you cut a player eight games into the season then only half of his salary is charged to the cap, but any roster bonus already paid that year will still be charged in full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Papi Green Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 I agree that it's a misnomer to call a roster bonus 'guaranteed money' before it is paid. I don't know whether or not the league officially calls it guaranteed money. Maybe it's just the media? I suppose the only justification is that once it has been paid, the entire bonus counts against the cap. A salary on the other hand, is not necessarily guaranteed. So if you cut a player eight games into the season then only half of his salary is charged to the cap, but any roster bonus already paid that year will still be charged in full. we need an official ruling here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetfanmack Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 I'd give up a 4th, but I'd be very hesitant to give up a day 1 pick for Putzier. He plays a pretty unimportant position and is still very unproven. I see a relationship with Justin McCareins in the way he missed a year due to injury and had a mini-breakout the year he becomes an RFA, especially in YAC. But Putzier still is being paid a lot of money for such an unproven player and he has proven so little...a 3rd seems too much. If we can keep our 3rd round pick, we can grab our OT, SS, and CB with those picks and possibly a DT. I really hope that Jones or Cavka is ready... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 I'd give up a 4th, but I'd be very hesitant to give up a day 1 pick for Putzier. He plays a pretty unimportant position and is still very unproven. I see a relationship with Justin McCareins in the way he missed a year due to injury and had a mini-breakout the year he becomes an RFA, especially in YAC. But Putzier still is being paid a lot of money for such an unproven player and he has proven so little...a 3rd seems too much. If we can keep our 3rd round pick, we can grab our OT, SS, and CB with those picks and possibly a DT. I really hope that Jones or Cavka is ready... I agree with this. Putzier, as much upside as he has, is not worth a # 3. Think about it, would you rather have him over, say, a Ryan Moats, Ernest Shazor, or Junior Rosegreen? I think not. If Denver wants more than a 4th, I say no thanks and look to either sign Ken Dilger or Freddie Jones, or even (gasp) give Chris Baker a chance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiamiJet Posted March 11, 2005 Author Share Posted March 11, 2005 Good thoughts all around, but it's pretty much moot. Denver has said that Putz will not be traded. We now have to look in another direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.