wgbeethree Posted May 29, 2019 Share Posted May 29, 2019 41 minutes ago, Leader said: its my thinking that individual player production weighed against "market conditions" will put a cap on a given players salary increases. This is the issue. Literally everything in the history of quarterback deals in the cap era suggests this is wrong. X=1/5Y with X being the top QB salary and Y being the salary cap has been approximately the formula since day one in this system. It hasn't changed in 25 years. There's no reason to think it will without a major change to that system. That's the way it's always been so that's the way it'll always be without some sort of major paradigm shift isn't foolproof but it's by far the safest bet. Unless there is a huge change in the next CBA there is no reason IMO to think QB salaries will plateau unless/until the cap does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted May 29, 2019 Author Share Posted May 29, 2019 (edited) 20 minutes ago, wgbeethree said: This is the issue. Literally everything in the history of quarterback deals in the cap era suggests this is wrong. X=1/5Y with X being the top QB salary and Y being the salary cap has been approximately the formula since day one in this system. It hasn't changed in 25 years. There's no reason to think it will without a major change to that system. That's the way it's always been so that's the way it'll always be without some sort of major paradigm shift isn't foolproof but it's by far the safest bet. Unless there is a huge change in the next CBA there is no reason IMO to think QB salaries will plateau unless/until the cap does. What I meant by saying "its my thinking that individual player production weighed against "market conditions" will put a cap on a given players salary increases" A quick and fast example: the Cowboys are considering what to extend Dak at..... They may be holed up in their office hunched over an equation like you've created - or - they might be considering his past performance and weighing how it projects into the future. Other teams have been making similar judgements on a whole spectrum of players / positions. Edited May 29, 2019 by Leader Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgbeethree Posted May 29, 2019 Share Posted May 29, 2019 21 minutes ago, Leader said: What I meant by saying "its my thinking that individual player production weighed against "market conditions" will put a cap on a given players salary increases" A quick and fast example: the Cowboys are considering what to extend Dak at..... They may be holed up in their office hunched over an equation like you've created - or - they might be considering his past performance and weighing how it projects into the future. Other teams have been making similar judgements on a whole spectrum of players / positions. I'm confused. That's a completely different thing. If what you're saying is players get paid based on their ability and how they compare to others.... Well duh. That's obvious. Nobody is going to argue against that. It goes without saying. What they get paid is absolutely based on their perceived value. That's not going to be capped at some random number though but instead it's going to continue to be based on the amount of cap total teams will spend on them which for the top quarterback is about 20%. The rest of the quarterbacks will get paid less according to where teams feel they fall along the hierarchy of available players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted May 29, 2019 Author Share Posted May 29, 2019 24 minutes ago, wgbeethree said: I'm confused. That's a completely different thing. If what you're saying is players get paid based on their ability and how they compare to others.... Well duh. That's obvious. Nobody is going to argue against that. It goes without saying. What they get paid is absolutely based on their perceived value. That's not going to be capped at some random number though but instead it's going to continue to be based on the amount of cap total teams will spend on them which for the top quarterback is about 20%. The rest of the quarterbacks will get paid less according to where teams feel they fall along the hierarchy of available players. Dont know what you'd be confused over. I've been thinking and saying the same things for some time now. Regardless. The point has been made. Interestingly, a (current) listing of top tier QB spending / cap expenditure: 2019 NE - 15.55% DET - 15.90% MN - 16.10% WA - 15.70% GB - 14.45% 2020 ATL - 19.40% PIT - 19.14% GB - 18.59% MN - 16.79% DET - 16.74% 2021 ATL - 19.16% GB - 18.16% PIT - 17.76% SEA - 17.00% DET - 15.94% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted May 29, 2019 Share Posted May 29, 2019 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondoggle Posted May 29, 2019 Share Posted May 29, 2019 I think you would need the projected cap increases in 2020 and 2021to make a direct comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted May 30, 2019 Author Share Posted May 30, 2019 53 minutes ago, Boondoggle said: I think you would need the projected cap increases in 2020 and 2021to make a direct comparison. Not extrapolating the data in any real way. Just posted it for interest sake. It represents current QB contracts (including backups) and projected increases - but its all subject to readjustment as backups may get cut or become UFAs in 2020/2021. The drivers of the %'s increases are the recent extensions signed by Ryan, BB, AR and Wilson - which will increasing in 2020/2021. ARs peak season salary wise doesnt hit till 2022 - 37M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 LaFleur to IR, bring in McCarthy for the vet minimum stop gap solution. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 13 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: LaFleur to IR, bring in McCarthy for the vet minimum stop gap solution. That's not the Packer way, we'll just promote some Joe Blow off the practice squad. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 4 hours ago, Packerraymond said: That's not the Packer way, we'll just promote some Joe Blow off the practice squad. Or some Hack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted June 3, 2019 Author Share Posted June 3, 2019 NFL . Com: In his first year in Green Bay, Jimmy Graham wasn't the red-zone weapon the Packers hoped they were acquiring with a big-money contract. The tight end is aware of the dissatisfaction after a frustrating season that saw him score just two touchdowns. "Obviously last year was disappointing for everybody. I'm not used to losing. I don't think anybody here is, you know?" Graham said Sunday at his charity cornhole tournament. "And for me, it was not a good year. I'm completely focused on putting my best foot forward and being the player that I am: Scoring in the red zone and being that big threat on third down. I mean, I gotta get back to that. And I take it serious. It's something that eats at me every single day, not making the playoffs and sometimes not making the plays that I should have. So you better believe I'm gonna be ready." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uffdaswede Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 I think Graham will be fine this year. Article didn't mention if Esera Tuaolo won Graham's charity tournament again this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted June 4, 2019 Share Posted June 4, 2019 On 5/29/2019 at 2:57 PM, Leader said: What I meant by saying "its my thinking that individual player production weighed against "market conditions" will put a cap on a given players salary increases" A quick and fast example: the Cowboys are considering what to extend Dak at..... They may be holed up in their office hunched over an equation like you've created - or - they might be considering his past performance and weighing how it projects into the future. Other teams have been making similar judgements on a whole spectrum of players / positions. I think the Cowboys are trying to figure out how to keep Prescott, Cooper and Elliott. In the end, if they overpay Prescott and give him 30 a year, then it's either Cooper or Elliott and I think Elliott will be down the road. They are trying to figure out a way to keep them all but with Lawrence's contract, I don't see it happening. As a Cowboy hater, I hope they give Prescott the 30 a year. He's not worth half that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted June 4, 2019 Share Posted June 4, 2019 9 minutes ago, Golfman said: I think the Cowboys are trying to figure out how to keep Prescott, Cooper and Elliott. In the end, if they overpay Prescott and give him 30 a year, then it's either Cooper or Elliott and I think Elliott will be down the road. They are trying to figure out a way to keep them all but with Lawrence's contract, I don't see it happening. As a Cowboy hater, I hope they give Prescott the 30 a year. He's not worth half that much. Youd rather the cowboys pay 30 million for an average QB than 30 million for a running back and average receiver? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted June 4, 2019 Share Posted June 4, 2019 1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Youd rather the cowboys pay 30 million for an average QB than 30 million for a running back and average receiver? I really wouldn't want to pay any of them what they will ultimately command, but I wouldn't call Cooper's play in Dallas last year average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.