The art of the 1-year deal

[chad2coles]

7 minutes ago, Hael said:

A lot of people here are assuming that Douglas is the one pushing for these one year contracts.   Maybe true, and maybe that’s what he wants.
However, I think that’s a somewhat suspect assumption.

 I see a lot of teams and FA contracts this year that are just like ours, which implies to me that it’s the players and their agents banking on the fact that the cap will explode.

What about last offseason’s deals? Fant, Lewis, and GVR were all essentially 1 year deals. 

[kevinc855]

1 hour ago, isired said:

That's kind of the point though - you want your draft picks, at least in the top 4-5 rounds on the field, or at least on the roster.

Or I guess on a roster, somewhere in the league, if you're the guy that drafted them but not the guy that released them.

The Hackenbergs and Polites etc. are a bad look, and have a negative effect on the team for a few years.

So does the James Morgan’s 

[AFJF]

On 3/19/2021 at 11:52 AM, Integrity28 said:

I’ve been looking real close at how these one year deals might fit into a larger strategy.

Here are some of my thoughts, and I’d love to hear other thinking on it:

1. Fills immediate need with starters and depth, a result of bad drafting for 10+ years

2. Sets us up every year to lose the 4-5 guys with 1-year contracts in FA, thereby helping the comp pick formula

3. Uses cap space for the current year, but is off the books the following years, thereby setting us up to always be well-positioned with cap space 

4. Releases us from drafting for need

5. Gives us a trial run with players that we can always extend if you strike gold

I get the disappointment many have with the modest moves we’re making, but it is nice to see there’s a clear philosophy/strategy driving these decisions. Agree with it or not, fine. I just don’t believe we’ve ever had that. 

The bold is how I see it.  Sure, at some point it may net a draft pick or two but not any time soon.

Most important thing is bringing guys in for a look to see if they can do enough to justify a long term deal.  I'm thinking Jarrad Davis and Lemarcus Joyner are the perfect guys to bring in for a  year.  Could see either (or both) playing well enough to get a longer deal next offseason.

[Lizard King]

On 3/19/2021 at 9:58 AM, kevinc855 said:

The 1 year deal theory led to 2-14 this year

Love your optimism though

However JD is on a SIX year deal. Keep that in mind. 

[Jet Life]

8 hours ago, kevinc855 said:

Totally glossing over the fact those picks weren’t on the field are we 

Yes, those multiple top picks weren’t on the field because they were busts. Most aren’t even in the NFL. Which is why we stink

[Lizard King]

On 3/19/2021 at 11:26 AM, SAR I said:

If Saleh confirmed that CJ Mosley is bought-in and returning to the team and signed the likes of Richard Sherman, and then do likewise with the offense, I would withdraw my criticism of Joe Douglas and give him my enthusiastic support.

But the way it stands now, all the quality veterans are off the market, we added young players with potential, and all that's left are very young players in the draft and the very young leftovers who weren't drafted.  It feels like last year.  But tougher since the roster is going to be learning a new playbook.

SAR I

Let me get this straight. The offense is returning and the receivers are good for the first time in decades. CJ is still A Jet. The biggest hole this team has at the moment is a punter. 

[Jet Life]

8 hours ago, SAR I said:

The Maccagnan Jets finish 6-2, have a 7-9 season.

Douglas trades or releases all known playmakers and replaces them.

The Douglas Jets open 0-8, have a 2-14 season.

That's what happened.  Don't let them re-write history.

SAR I

Those Maccagnan Jets were something special 

[isired]

A lot of people here are assuming that Douglas is the one pushing for these one year contracts.   Maybe true, and maybe that’s what he wants.
However, I think that’s a somewhat suspect assumption.
 I see a lot of teams and FA contracts this year that are just like ours, which implies to me that it’s the players and their agents banking on the fact that the cap will explode.

I think its both - 1 year contracts are usually cap killers, but because of the shrinking of the cap, teams just don't have the $$ - so a 1 year deal for the cut rate they're paying is club-friendly. And players want to bet on themselves with the big money that shoukd be available next year. But I agree, its not just a Joe D thing.

[Ghost]

Comp picks do not apply to us. They apply to teams that have great depth with players ready to replace those 1-year players in house. 
 

If we lose one of them, we’re probably going to pursue one in FA. Thus eliminating the comp pick strategy. 
 

What bothered me the absolute most is the fact he was not even interested in Linsley. I don’t know much about him but from everything I’ve researched, he is a top 5 center in the league. Our offensive line has not improved whatsoever and that is an issue. 
 

So he got Lawson and I loved that signing. I almost wish he would’ve pursued another pass rusher to completely eliminate that position of need. Now we need one or two offensive lineman and another pass rusher. 

[Jetsfan80]

On 3/19/2021 at 9:46 AM, Rhg1084 said:

The downside is obviously if a player performs well under that contract he now immediately becomes a free agent and will be do for a larger pay day

Well that’s where comp picks come into play.  You WANT some of those guys to end up signing big contracts elsewhere.

[Jetsfan80]

 

[GREENBEAN]

19 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

I thought maybe since it’s part of JN’s social media content??? I dunno. Hahaha

lol.  gotcha.   Yeah, it was more of a stoic Dan akroyd "we've got Scmods" delivery.   

[SAR I]

9 hours ago, Lizard King said:

Let me get this straight. The offense is returning and the receivers are good for the first time in decades. CJ is still A Jet. The biggest hole this team has at the moment is a punter. 

The receivers are "good", they are not "great".  The "great" receivers went elsewhere and/or Douglas didn't draft last year.

CJ is still a Jet only on paper.  It remains to be seen if he actually will play for the Jets ever again or even wants to take another snap again.  He hasn't played football for real since December 2018.

Straight?

SAR I

[SAR I]

9 hours ago, Jet Life said:

Those Maccagnan Jets were something special 

Compared to the Douglas Jets, umm, yes unfortunately.

SAR I

[slats]

18 hours ago, chad2coles said:

The reason teams backload deals is because they know the cap goes up every year.  Frontloading deals like Douglas is doing gives you flexibility if the signing doesn't work out, but it also doesn't take full advantage of the cap space we have.  A dollar committed to a future higher cap is worth less than a dollar committed to the current lower cap.  If you're confident in the players you're signing, you can maximize cap value.  Who are the guys Douglas is saving '22 cap room for?  They aren't on the roster.  There's definitely no one at guard or cornerback that should be taking up cap space that could be used to improve those positions this offseason.

Maybe Douglas is concerned that Jarad Davis is going to turn into Fred Warner and command a huge contract.  If only the NFL allowed teams to sign players for more than 1 year...

Are you one of those guys who likes to run a balance on their credit cards, too? 

The Jets still have over $30M in cap space right now. That's good for fourth most in the league. Half the league has less than $8M, and six teams are still over according to: https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space/ 

Joe Douglas has enough room that he doesn't have to borrow from future years in the form of big signing bonuses. That's the smart way to do it if you can. Unlike the Steelers adding three or four phantom years to JuJu's deal just to fit it under the cap this year. And the beauty of it is that if he found himself in need of some quick cap space, he has many contracts that could be easily restructured to get it. Convert Carl Lawson's $7.8M roster bonus into a signing bonus and -boom!- there's an instant $5.2M in additional 2021 cap room. But if he doesn't need it now, why borrow from the future? 

The Jets are in a great position financially right now and will be one of only a few teams who continue to add players over the next month or so as the free agent dollars dry up around the league. Guys who hoped/expected to cash in -but didn't- taking another one of Joe's one year deals and hoping to cash in next year. 

You can complain about the players he's bringing or not bringing in, but there's no valid complaint about the way he's doling out contracts. 

[JustInFudge]

On 3/19/2021 at 7:52 AM, Integrity28 said:

I’ve been looking real close at how these one year deals might fit into a larger strategy.

Here are some of my thoughts, and I’d love to hear other thinking on it:

1. Fills immediate need with starters and depth, a result of bad drafting for 10+ years

2. Sets us up every year to lose the 4-5 guys with 1-year contracts in FA, thereby helping the comp pick formula

3. Uses cap space for the current year, but is off the books the following years, thereby setting us up to always be well-positioned with cap space 

4. Releases us from drafting for need

5. Gives us a trial run with players that we can always extend if you strike gold

I get the disappointment many have with the modest moves we’re making, but it is nice to see there’s a clear philosophy/strategy driving these decisions. Agree with it or not, fine. I just don’t believe we’ve ever had that. 

I like the thread but I would argue a few of these points:

1. I dont think significant impact players sign 1 year deals and the term "starter" is an interesting choice of words.  Being a starter for the Jets really means nothing.  And if you actually did sign a starter and they perform above expectations; the cost to resign just went up.

2. Every team has attrition.

3. Only actual positive I see to this strategy

4.  Couldnt disagree more with this sentiment, a player on a 1 year deal does not make you set at said position.  If anything, a smart GM is properly looking ahead at their yearly attrition and looking to create depth. 

5. Again, not that easy, you have no control over said player and they feel no loyalty to a GM who gave them a year deal and if they exceed expectations, it's that much harder to resign.

Here the down side to it;

1.  When you're awful Football team like the NY Jets and have one of the worst rosters in the league, you need to build a foundation. 1 year deals are the opposite of building a foundation.

2.  A 2 year deal with an out in year 2, is IMO 10000x more effective because you actually do have some control and leverage.  If you're not playoff team and said player didnt love their time with the Jets, when we're sitting and 2-12 next year, they're looking for a new team.

3.  You have a few years now to observe the 1 year deals have worked for JD and thus far, they've done the team no good, except giving them cap space to sign 2nd rate players and more sh*tty players on 1 year deals.

 

 

[Integrity28]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

I like the thread but I would argue a few of these points:

1. I dont think significant impact players sign 1 year deals and the term "starter" is an interesting choice of words.  Being a starter for the Jets really means nothing.  And if you actually did sign a starter and they perform above expectations; the cost to resign just went up.

2. Every team has attrition.

3. Only actual positive I see to this strategy

4.  Couldnt disagree more with this sentiment, a player on a 1 year deal does not make you set at said position.  If anything, a smart GM is properly looking ahead at their yearly attrition and looking to create depth. 

5. Again, not that easy, you have no control over said player and they feel no loyalty to a GM who gave them a year deal and if they exceed expectations, it's that much harder to resign.

Here the down side to it;

1.  When you're awful Football team like the NY Jets and have one of the worst rosters in the league, you need to build a foundation. 1 year deals are the opposite of building a foundation.

2.  A 2 year deal with an out in year 2, is IMO 10000x more effective because you actually do have some control and leverage.  If you're not playoff team and said player didnt love their time with the Jets, when we're sitting and 2-12 next year, they're looking for a new team.

3.  You have a few years now to observe the 1 year deals have worked for JD and thus far, they've done the team no good, except giving them cap space to sign 2nd rate players and more sh*tty players on 1 year deals.

 

 

Yep, I agree on all of this. I wasn’t arguing on behalf of it, as much as exploring what the strategy might be.

I’m frankly at a loss. I genuinely believed that this FA market had players that weren’t typical jags who get overpaid. We landed one. Lawson. 

I didn’t want the world. Just seize the opportunities when they are there.

[chad2coles]

7 hours ago, slats said:

Are you one of those guys who likes to run a balance on their credit cards, too? 

The Jets still have over $30M in cap space right now. That's good for fourth most in the league. Half the league has less than $8M, and six teams are still over according to: https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space/ 

Joe Douglas has enough room that he doesn't have to borrow from future years in the form of big signing bonuses. That's the smart way to do it if you can. Unlike the Steelers adding three or four phantom years to JuJu's deal just to fit it under the cap this year. And the beauty of it is that if he found himself in need of some quick cap space, he has many contracts that could be easily restructured to get it. Convert Carl Lawson's $7.8M roster bonus into a signing bonus and -boom!- there's an instant $5.2M in additional 2021 cap room. But if he doesn't need it now, why borrow from the future? 

The Jets are in a great position financially right now and will be one of only a few teams who continue to add players over the next month or so as the free agent dollars dry up around the league. Guys who hoped/expected to cash in -but didn't- taking another one of Joe's one year deals and hoping to cash in next year. 

You can complain about the players he's bringing or not bringing in, but there's no valid complaint about the way he's doling out contracts. 

"The Jets are a great position financially right now," and in the same terrible position they were in to start the season at the offensive line and even worse in the secondary.  I understand the cap works, and I understand that the Jets have had the opportunity to improve 2 of their weakest position groups (o-line and secondary) through free agency and haven't done it. 

So while you enjoy our great financial position and don't think there's a valid complaint about the way Douglas is doling out contracts, he hasn't doled them out to anyone that's going to make an impact in either of those positions.  If he took advantage of signing bonuses and the certainty that the salary cap goes up every year, maybe the Jets would have a starter at either guard position instead of Lewis/GVR/Feeney or a starting caliber corner or nickelback going into the draft.

As for the credit card question, it has nothing to do with Douglas failing at free agency 2 years in a row.  If you knew as much about finance or the salary cap as you think you do, you wouldn't be asking stupid questions like that.

[RutgersJetFan]

The problem is if you're only hitting on 1-2 guys per draft then employing efficiency strategies becomes pointless. Idzik tried the same thing with accumulating picks and he was right on the money with it, but if you whiff on every guy it's all for naught. Douglas did not draft a deep class last year, so if the Jets were ever going to overpay on some guys, this was the year to do it. 

[RutgersJetFan]

8 hours ago, slats said:

Joe Douglas has enough room that he doesn't have to borrow from future years in the form of big signing bonuses. 

Borrow for what? The Jets have one guy (Maye) they have to pay right now and literally nobody else for the foreseeable future. Who exactly do they have coming up that they need to worry about cap space with 2 years from now? Williams is the next guy up and he's not a FA until 2024. If the plan is to fill in the gaps with the George Fants of the league in the meantime to maintain cap space they don't need then Woody is most certainly still running the show. 

[slats]

6 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Borrow for what? The Jets have one guy (Maye) they have to pay right now and literally nobody else for the foreseeable future. Who exactly do they have coming up that they need to worry about cap space with 2 years from now? Williams is the next guy up and he's not a FA until 2024. If the plan is to fill in the gaps with the George Fants of the league in the meantime to maintain cap space they don't need then Woody is most certainly still running the show. 

I’m not sure what you’re arguing here. Is it that he should’ve made the MacTanny sized splash? 
 
As for where he is right now, why not keep as much money in this contracted cap year as he can? He doesn’t have to borrow, so why should he? Whatever happens this year or next, having more cap space to operate in the future is always good. Should he shock the **** out of me and trade for Watson, that’s some cap space he’ll need right there. If he drafts -and hits!- on a QB this year, wouldn’t you want an abundance of cap space to build around him next year? 
 
Financially, he’s doing it in a very smart way. Obviously, it comes down to what it looks like on the field. 

[GREENBEAN]

On 3/21/2021 at 8:28 AM, JiF said:

I like the thread but I would argue a few of these points:

1. I dont think significant impact players sign 1 year deals and the term "starter" is an interesting choice of words.  Being a starter for the Jets really means nothing.  And if you actually did sign a starter and they perform above expectations; the cost to resign just went up.

2. Every team has attrition.

3. Only actual positive I see to this strategy

4.  Couldnt disagree more with this sentiment, a player on a 1 year deal does not make you set at said position.  If anything, a smart GM is properly looking ahead at their yearly attrition and looking to create depth. 

5. Again, not that easy, you have no control over said player and they feel no loyalty to a GM who gave them a year deal and if they exceed expectations, it's that much harder to resign.

Here the down side to it;

1.  When you're awful Football team like the NY Jets and have one of the worst rosters in the league, you need to build a foundation. 1 year deals are the opposite of building a foundation.

2.  A 2 year deal with an out in year 2, is IMO 10000x more effective because you actually do have some control and leverage.  If you're not playoff team and said player didnt love their time with the Jets, when we're sitting and 2-12 next year, they're looking for a new team.

3.  You have a few years now to observe the 1 year deals have worked for JD and thus far, they've done the team no good, except giving them cap space to sign 2nd rate players and more sh*tty players on 1 year deals.

 

 

I just have a comment toward your #5.  In the event a player signs a 1 yr deal I would not imagine teams were beating on their heads with rolled up long term contracts. The 1 year deal is the opportunity.  And most likely the best one they received. Therefore creating s sense of appreciation adnf loyalty toward the guy who placed them in a position to thrive and get the long term offers. 

It's the kind of situation where a week 12 contract proposal is well received. 

[JustInFudge]

10 minutes ago, GREENBEAN said:

I just have a comment toward your #5.  In the event a player signs a 1 yr deal I would not imagine teams were beating on their heads with rolled up long term contracts. The 1 year deal is the opportunity.  And most likely the best one they received. Therefore creating s sense of appreciation adnf loyalty toward the guy who placed them in a position to thrive and get the long term offers. 

It's the kind of situation where a week 12 contract proposal is well received. 

Fair.  I'm sure it's situational but sure...maybe there is some thought to let them have the first offer.  That said, do you have an example of where it happened?  Certainly doesnt happen here.  Like, Poole comes to mind, he was on a 1 year deal, out played it, then they signed him to anther, 1 year deal.

[Jets Voice of Reason]

Serious question, where is this cap space flexibility supposed to be going for the Jets in the next 2-3 years with what most likely is going to be an expanding cap with the new tv deal?

[GREENBEAN]

On 3/19/2021 at 8:00 AM, Irish Jet said:

OG	Josh Andrews	Indianapolis Colts	April 2[21]	1 year, $1.048 million
CB	Pierre Desir	Indianapolis Colts	April 2[22]	1 year, $3.750 million
ILB	Patrick Onwuasor	Baltimore Ravens	April 6[25]	1 year, $2.000 million
WR	Breshad Perriman	Tampa Bay Buccaneers	April 1[26]	1 year, $6.500 million
RB	Frank Gore	Buffalo Bills	May 5[28]	1 year, $1.050 million
QB	Joe Flacco	Denver Broncos	May 22[29]	1 year, $1.500 million

Way to strike gold. Ryan Kalil from the previous season too. Another gem.

Bad signings are bad signings no matter how long they are. Douglas has been awful and his cheapskate short term policy is at the heart of it. But people defended the above group at the time and now they're desperately trying to rationalise this. Can't possible consider that maybe Joe Douglas just isn't all that good at this. 

tHat group fits into the OP's comments perfectly. perriman had one of his best seasons too. 

the main issue with the group as a whole was injury and schematic ineptitude.  outside of Desir, i see this the exact opposite way as you do. i think it's the perfect way to build the foundation through the draft. Holdover types that if they hit, great. if they don't move on. 

[isired]

5. Again, not that easy, you have no control over said player and they feel no loyalty to a GM who gave them a year deal and if they exceed expectations, it's that much harder to resign.
 

I think that's less true this year- with a big expansion salary cap coming, if a player wasn't going to break the bank, many wanted a 1 year deal, from what's been reported.


But I like the 2 year deal as well.

[The Crusher]

On 3/19/2021 at 11:26 AM, SAR I said:

If Saleh confirmed that CJ Mosley is bought-in and returning to the team and signed the likes of Richard Sherman, and then do likewise with the offense, I would withdraw my criticism of Joe Douglas and give him my enthusiastic support.

But the way it stands now, all the quality veterans are off the market, we added young players with potential, and all that's left are very young players in the draft and the very young leftovers who weren't drafted.  It feels like last year.  But tougher since the roster is going to be learning a new playbook.

SAR I

To be fair the playbook during the Gase  regime wasn’t really worth learning anyways, 

[dcJet]

Trust the Process.

JD is going full Sixers.  

[GREENBEAN]

On 3/23/2021 at 10:20 AM, JiF said:

Fair.  I'm sure it's situational but sure...maybe there is some thought to let them have the first offer.  That said, do you have an example of where it happened?  Certainly doesnt happen here.  Like, Poole comes to mind, he was on a 1 year deal, out played it, then they signed him to anther, 1 year deal.

Poole only signed one extension I believe. 

It's kind of a newer philosophy here. At this point all we can do is talk about the potential as there isn't that much data to pull from.  I think J. Davis has some legit potential to be one that ends up in the category of a golden nugget.  But we'll have to see about that and what Saleh can get out of him. 

[CanadaSteve]

On 3/19/2021 at 7:54 AM, jetstream23 said:

Last year the art of the 1-year deal lead to the fart of a 2-win season. Let’s see if the results are any better in 2021.

That's what happens when the last two GM's over the course of 6 NFL drafts (53 picks to be exact) we only have 5 players remaining, not because of the art of the 1-year deal.