Bills just signed their DT 7% of the cap

[slimjasi]

34 minutes ago, Facts said:

You're looking at 1 single year, not the contract average.

Teams front load and backload deals all the time. We are talking about over the whole average of the contract what is the %. 

He has ranged from 6% to 14% over the years, but his average is only 8%.

In NFL HISTORY there has only been 1 IDL player EVER who had 10% or more over the course of a contract. In the history of the NFL. All time.

I've researched this so much I could write a dissertation on the topic.

So an 8% average is totally ok, but 10% or more is blasphemy?

Why die on this hill? You can do all the research you want, buddy. The argument is cheeks. 

[jamesr]

You keep talking about "what Q wants" as if (a) it's a known value target than some notional range and ( he's going to get it.

Negotiation is where you start high, they start low, and you meet in the middle.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[Hex]

47 minutes ago, Facts said:

Sounds like what someone would say when they can't refute the argument.

Smart teams don't pay interior d-line men 10%+ of the cap. They just don't.

 

Smart teams don’t put things out of the question because of some arbitrary or just general standard that may not apply to the team. 
Q might be a DT, but he’s a very valuable one. He’s the face of the defense. The defense was visibly worse without him. As @slimjasi (I think) said, you pay impact players, and while an interior DLer is normally not an impact player, Q is.

[Facts]

4 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

So an 8% average is totally ok, but 10% or more is blasphemy?

That's a huge difference. 2% of hundreds of millions of dollars is a big deal.

It's the difference between being able to afford top linemen to protect Rodgers or not. (just an example, insert any premium position here)

Personally, I would never want to go above 7.5%. Thats my cap. 

4 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

 

Why die on this hill? You can do all the research you want, buddy. The argument is cheeks. 

When you have to resort to "the argument is cheeks", you know you have no basis.

[Facts]

Just now, Hex said:

Smart teams don’t put things out of the question because of some arbitrary or just general standard that may not apply to the team. 
Q might be a DT, but he’s a very valuable one. He’s the face of the defense. The defense was visibly worse without him. As @slimjasi (I think) said, you pay impact players, and while an interior DLer is normally not an impact player, Q is.

Q is a great player.

That is not in question. He is excellent.  No argument.

But his 10% could be spent FAR more wisely at other positions.

[Facts]

5 minutes ago, jamesr said:

You keep talking about "what Q wants" as if (a) it's a known value target than some notional range and ( he's going to get it.

Negotiation is where you start high, they start low, and you meet in the middle.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

Well yeah. I'm going based off of what Q wants.

If we get him for 8%, but he wanted 11%, i'm fine with that. 

But I am talking about what he is asking for and how it would be not wise to pay that.

[Barry McCockinner]

6 minutes ago, Hex said:

Smart teams don’t put things out of the question because of some arbitrary or just general standard that may not apply to the team. 
Q might be a DT, but he’s a very valuable one. He’s the face of the defense. The defense was visibly worse without him. As @slimjasi (I think) said, you pay impact players, and while an interior DLer is normally not an impact player, Q is.

I agree q is very valuable but sauce is the most important player on the defense and the face.

We had q in 2021 when the defense sucked. We didn't have sauce. Sauce is one of 3 single points of failure on the 2023 Jets with arod and gdub being the other 2.

[slimjasi]

24 minutes ago, Facts said:

This is not my rule.

it's a league wide STANDARD.

The rest of the league only pays their ENTIRE INTERIOR D-LINE 7.5% of the cap.

Lol

[Jetsfan4life90]

Q >>> Ed Oliver 

That's the difference and why your argument is already a losing one.

But like Aaron Rodgers texted Schefter, "nice try tho"

[Sperm Edwards]

13 minutes ago, Facts said:

This is just basic math. No one is including Jones' amortization with his rookie contract. His contractual value to the cap is 8%. What Q wants is over 10%. 

You look at the entire contract as a percentage of the cap. Only one player EVERRRRRR (IDL) has gotten that sweetheart deal. And that player is a first ballot HOF who is a freak of nature.

Wrong.

I've already worked the future numbers for Q.

If he gets what he wants, it will take a $80M cap increase for us to just BREAK EVEN at 10%.

For him to get to 8% (like Chris Jones) it would take a $100M cap incrase.

On average, across NFL history, it has taken a DECADE or more to go up $100M.

Q's contract won't be a decade long and therefore he will NEVER outrun the 10%.

So no, I am not looking at y1 for Q. I am looking at the entirety of the contract!

Nope. It doesn't work like that and you're way, way off on the expected cap increases. Like, not even in the ballpark. Literally nobody else expects the cap increases to come to a screeching halt and rise by just 4% per year. 

Also you haven't explained where you got your % numbers from. Whether you're using contract average every year or individual-season cap hit, either way you're either wrong on the front end or the back end.

The above fuzzy math further ignores that QW's actual cap hit still won't be 10% of the cap anyway by the time he's in y1 of this extension next year (this year would be year zero, in a sense; they don't tear up his current lower-money year for '23 and replace it with $25MM).

This year he's way under and will remain so whether they lower his current cap # or not. Next year will be y1 of the extension & his cap # certainly won't be $25MM. Maybe in the $15MM range, but too early to tell. That'll be 6% of next year's expected $250-260MM cap. After that it'll balloon, but so will the salary cap.

Given the big $ for the current CBA kicking in starting next year, from there the salary cap will continue to jump by ~10%/year.

Even if it's $250MM (no one expects it this low) then 10% increases the coming years of a 4-year extension would look like:

• 2024 = $250MM
• 2025 = $275MM
• 2026 = $303MM
• 2027 = $333MM

Average salary cap 2024-2027 = $291MM. So a $25MM average would be 8.6%.

And this is a conservative expectation of the cap increases. OTC predicts it even higher:

• 2024 = $256MM
• 2025 = $282MM
• 2026 = $308MM
• 2027 = ? (hasn't estimated yet, but based on his #s it'd be north of my more conservative guess).

This isn't an old CBA that inched up at ~$10MM/year, starting in the $120MM range. The percentage increases were kept artificially low the prior couple years (not to mention from covid) and next year is the first one there will be a big jump under this CBA.

[Jetsfan4life90]

2 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

I agree q is very valuable but sauce is the most important player on the defense and the face.

We had q in 2021 when the defense sucked. We didn't have sauce. Sauce is one of 3 single points of failure on the 2023 Jets with arod and gdub being the other 2.

The defense went to sh*t when Q was out.

[Jetsfan4life90]

1 hour ago, Facts said:

Sounds like what someone would say when they can't refute the argument.

Smart teams don't pay interior d-line men 10%+ of the cap. They just don't.

 

They do if they're actually great/elite at their position. Most DT's often just aren't worth a whole lot because they're average.

[Barry McCockinner]

4 minutes ago, Jetsfan4life90 said:

The defense went to sh*t when Q was out.

What do you mean week 15 when we held them to 13 until they hit a miracle TD on 4th down late in the 4th to win?

[Sperm Edwards]

20 minutes ago, Facts said:

The best thing about this is... we will all find out who is right eventually.

All we need is TIME.

In a couple years, may of you will be saying "Facts was right".

And the rest of you will be pretending like you never argued with me about it.

I will pretend nothing of the sort. You are dead-wrong here, and I invite you to necro this thread.

I'll happily make any sig or charity bet you want. 

You're not going to even be in the ballpark, starting with your expectation that the cap to rise by just $10MM/year for the next decade (presumably this means you predict the salary cap will be $235MM in 2024; you'll be off by somewhere between $15-25MM for next year alone). 

[Facts]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I will pretend nothing of the sort. You are dead-wrong here, and I invite you to necro this thread.

I'll happily make any sig or charity bet you want. 

You're not going to even be in the ballpark, starting with your expectation that the cap to rise by just $10MM/year for the next decade (presumably this means you predict the salary cap will be $235MM in 2024; you'll be off by somewhere between $15-25MM for next year alone). 

I'm down for a bet.

But the bet isn't if the Jets do something stupid. That's a given. We WILL sign him to a dumb contract.

The bet will need to be if we regret that contract is 2-3 years.

[BCJet]

29 minutes ago, Facts said:

This is just basic math. No one is including Jones' amortization with his rookie contract. His contractual value to the cap is 8%. What Q wants is over 10%. 

You look at the entire contract as a percentage of the cap. Only one player EVERRRRRR (IDL) has gotten that sweetheart deal. And that player is a first ballot HOF who is a freak of nature.

Wrong.

I've already worked the future numbers for Q.

If he gets what he wants, it will take a $80M cap increase for us to just BREAK EVEN at 10%.

For him to get to 8% (like Chris Jones) it would take a $100M cap incrase.

On average, across NFL history, it has taken a DECADE or more to go up $100M.

Q's contract won't be a decade long and therefore he will NEVER outrun the 10%.

So no, I am not looking at y1 for Q. I am looking at the entirety of the contract!

Can you explain "break even" to me in this particular context?

To me a players contract isnt a balance sheet. If we pay QW whatever number you want, for arguments sake $25/4 years - $100 million, and he gets 5 sacks a year its a loss. If he gets 15 sacks a year its a win - thats the "breakeven" not the % of allocation to a moving number that is influenced by other players salaries.

[Jetsfan4life90]

28 minutes ago, Facts said:

The best thing about this is... we will all find out who is right eventually.

All we need is TIME.

In a couple years, may of you will be saying "Facts was right".

And the rest of you will be pretending like you never argued with me about it.

Barring injury or Q mailing it in after a big contract, you won't be lol. 

[Jetsfan4life90]

2 minutes ago, Facts said:

I'm down for a bet.

But the bet isn't if the Jets do something stupid. That's a given. We WILL sign him to a dumb contract.

The bet will need to be if we regret that contract is 2-3 years.

We won't barring injury or he somehow mails it in after a big contract (which can happen to any player at any position)

[Jetsfan80]

 

34 minutes ago, Facts said:

This is just basic math. No one is including Jones' amortization with his rookie contract. His contractual value to the cap is 8%. What Q wants is over 10%. 

 

11 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Nope. It doesn't work like that and you're way, way off on the expected cap increases. Like, not even in the ballpark. Literally nobody else expects the cap increases to come to a screeching halt and rise by just 4% per year. 

Also you haven't explained where you got your % numbers from. Whether you're using contract average every year or individual-season cap hit, either way you're either wrong on the front end or the back end.

The above fuzzy math further ignores that QW's actual cap hit still won't be 10% of the cap anyway by the time he's in y1 of this extension next year (this year would be year zero, in a sense; they don't tear up his current lower-money year for '23 and replace it with $25MM).

This year he's way under and will remain so whether they lower his current cap # or not. Next year will be y1 of the extension & his cap # certainly won't be $25MM. Maybe in the $15MM range, but too early to tell. That'll be 6% of next year's expected $250-260MM cap. After that it'll balloon, but so will the salary cap.

Given the big $ for the current CBA kicking in starting next year, from there the salary cap will continue to jump by ~10%/year.

Even if it's $250MM (no one expects it this low) then 10% increases the coming years of a 4-year extension would look like:

• 2024 = $250MM
• 2025 = $275MM
• 2026 = $303MM
• 2027 = $333MM

Average salary cap 2024-2027 = $291MM. So a $25MM average would be 8.6%.

And this is a conservative expectation of the cap increases. OTC predicts it even higher:

• 2024 = $256MM
• 2025 = $282MM
• 2026 = $308MM
• 2027 = ? (hasn't estimated yet, but based on his #s it'd be north of my more conservative guess).

This isn't an old CBA that inched up at ~$10MM/year, starting in the $120MM range. The percentage increases were kept artificially low the prior couple years (not to mention from covid) and next year is the first one there will be a big jump under this CBA.

[BCJet]

20 minutes ago, Facts said:

Q is a great player.

That is not in question. He is excellent.  No argument.

But his 10% could be spent FAR more wisely at other positions.

What other positions?  We have 2 legitimate edge rushers on rookie contracts. We have an elite WR and potentially elite RB on rookie contracts.  We have an elite CB on a rookie contract.

Where would you like to allocate the QW savings while also looking to replace 12 sacks and dominant run defense?

[slimjasi]

8 minutes ago, Facts said:

That's a huge difference. 2% of hundreds of millions of dollars is a big deal.

It's the difference between being able to afford top linemen to protect Rodgers or not. (just an example, insert any premium position here)

You write this as if it’s your money. Even if I accept your math, letting one of your most important players go over 2% or your allotted cap space is madness. 

Again, the whole point is to allot more cap space to your more valuable players. Guys who make an impact (there’s that word again) and help you win games. QW is one of those guys. That’s where the “only spend big on premium/impact positions” stuff comes from. 

But the problem with your stance is that you are too stubbornly tying yourself to positional value - without properly weighing that QW isn’t a typical DT - he’s a dominant one. He’s our best pass rusher and he’s one of the two great players this defense has.   When he’s on, he’s a game-wrecker. If it helps, think of him as playing the “game-wrecker” position. Need a big sack in late December to clinch the division? He’s the one guy on the roster most likely to get that done for you. 

The other thing you are ignoring is that QW was just voted team MVP. This is a young group with a good locker room looking to win big NOW. They aren’t going to shortchange the one player who the rest of the team thinks is the most valuable. Just not happening. 

[Facts]

21 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Nope. It doesn't work like that and you're way, way off on the expected cap increases. Like, not even in the ballpark. Literally nobody else expects the cap increases to come to a screeching halt and rise by just 4% per year. 

I never said 4%.

Historically, it takes a decade for NFL cap to increase 100M.

That's 10% per year.

Which is what it would it take for Q's desired contract to reach 8%.

21 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Whether you're using contract average every year or individual-season cap hit, either way you're either wrong on the front end or the back end.

Sure I have. Literally multiple times.

AAV yearly numbers. For example, Chris Jones is $20M per year.

21 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The above fuzzy math further ignores that QW's actual cap hit still won't be 10% of the cap anyway by the time he's in y1 of this extension next year (this year would be year zero, in a sense; they don't tear up his current lower-money year for '23 and replace it with $25MM)

The math is super simple.

Q is said to want $25-$30M per season average.

Let's use $27.5M for a middle ground.

To be at 10%, the cap would have to rise to $275M.

That's $27.5M / 0.1  = 275M

The cap is currently at $225M, so that would be a $50M increase.

Historically, it takes 6 seasons for the cap to go up $50M.

Therefore, if Q signed a 6 year contract (for example), then at the END of his 6 year contract, the final year, (MAYBE) we would reach 10%. So, we would have Q for ONE season at 10%, and the average of the contract would be likely 12 or 13%.

To be at 8% (where Jones is), the cap would have to go up $118 million.

That would take over a decade.

[Facts]

8 minutes ago, BCJet said:

Can you explain "break even" to me in this particular context?

To me a players contract isnt a balance sheet. If we pay QW whatever number you want, for arguments sake $25/4 years - $100 million, and he gets 5 sacks a year its a loss. If he gets 15 sacks a year its a win - thats the "breakeven" not the % of allocation to a moving number that is influenced by other players salaries.

The term breakeven was just used to establish 10% of the salary cap as the baseline.

[Facts]

8 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

You write this as if it’s your money. Even if I accept your math, letting one of your most important players go over 2% or your allotted cap space is madness. 

The cash is not the relevant portion. Its the cap %. 2% is a lot. The majority of the roster is under 2%.

[slimjasi]

12 minutes ago, Facts said:

The cash is not the relevant portion. Its the cap %. 2% is a lot. The majority of the roster is under 2%.

Yes, the majority of the roster isn’t our best pass rusher coming off an all-pro/team MVP year. 

[undertow]

I wish everyone would stop playing salary cap expert in their basements...same people told me we needed to cut Lawson, Davis, Tomlinson to get under the cap this year.... just pay Q and stfu. lol

[BCJet]

34 minutes ago, Facts said:

The term breakeven was just used to establish 10% of the salary cap as the baseline.

Ok.  What I think is missing with your argument is that the "pieces" (and I dont like calling players that, its just a reference) arent static, they change.

QWs allocation cant be looked at just against the money, its against not only his production but to fit this discussion against the other players.  Every time you have a player making less then their position or performance dictates that allows you to spend more somewhere else because JD isnt running this for P&L, he has a cap floor and ceiling with the goal being winning.

Every dollar we "save" with GW and Sauce on rookie deals can be allocated elsewhere - like paying Rogers an obscene amount to hopefully win a SB and to pay our young stars coming off their rookie deals.

[Beerfish]

IF we pay Quinnen the huge bucks which we will that f'cekhr better take another step and be remarkable.  Every time we pay someone they almost immediate go into  the tank. 

Paid?  More playing time, more sacks, more impact plays.

[neckdemon]

2 hours ago, Facts said:

 

I've researched this so much I could write a dissertation on the topic.

That's kinda sad....you have nothing better to do?

[The Crusher]

3 hours ago, Lith said:

He is at 12.83% right now.  And he was at 14% last year when they won the SB

Yeah but that’s not ten is it? 

 

[BCJet]

50 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

IF we pay Quinnen the huge bucks which we will that f'cekhr better take another step and be remarkable.  Every time we pay someone they almost immediate go into  the tank. 

Paid?  More playing time, more sacks, more impact plays.

What is the next step?

QW was second in sacks for all IDL - 12.5 to chris jones 15.5.  Jones had 5 more TFL but 5 less total tackles.  

What else do you want?   The truth is it would be ok if he took a step back to 10 sacks a year for the life of the contract, thats how rare it is for an IDL to be that good.

[Joe W. Namath]

The Bills are frauds.  They were outplayed by skylar thompson in the playoffs last year.  We will beat them twice this year and I wouldnt be surprised if both games arent close.

Joe D, please dont use the lousy bills as a blueprint for anything.

[doitny]

58 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

Paid?  More playing time, more sacks, more impact plays.

this

whats the problem with letting him play out his last year of his contract? for years people here were killing him for his first 3 years and now after one good one they want to back up the bank truck and give him whatever he wants.

at least lets see if he can give us another really good year.

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, Jetsfan4life90 said:

They do if they're actually great/elite at their position. Most DT's often just aren't worth a whole lot because they're average.

Bingo.

It's a worthy debate to argue whether QW is truly a great/elite DT and worthy of a # 2 DT money.

It's NOT a worthy debate to argue "Good teams don't spend X % on X position".  They can and they do if the player is worth it.  Period.  

[jgb]

3 hours ago, Facts said:

 

On average, across NFL history, it has taken a DECADE or more to go up $100M.

You need a remedial course on percentages. We keep telling you these things but you just steamroll ahead ignorantly.