|
Post by canadasteve on Feb 21, 2015 10:00:51 GMT -5
While the projected cap is now looking like a possibility of $143 million, giving the Jets currently about $41 million space (and $51 if we cut Harvin), next year is even MORE ridiculous. If Harvin is cut this year, his salary is off the book for 2016. D'Brick will either have to restructure in 2016, or face a potential cut. He would count $5 million in dead money, but he would save over $9 million cap space. It's pretty much a guarantee he will restructure, because his dead money in 2017 is only $1 million compared to a $14 million cap savings. Nick Mangold's contract for 2016 and 2017 are fully non-guaranteed That would mean about $8.5 million saved in 2016, and $9.5 million in 2017. I am also presuming they will eat $1 million for Breno in 2016 and save almost $4 million What does this mean? Well, with Harvin and Bruno cut, and IF both D'Brick and Mangold were deemed expendable for 2016, we would have almost $100,000,000 in cap space WITHOUT the cap going up a dime. You read that right....$100 million dollars I think it is safe to say, the New York Jets will be investing in some of their own young players, and spending some money in free agency.
|
|
|
Post by Ff2 on Feb 21, 2015 11:47:16 GMT -5
Which young players do you see the jets investing in?
|
|
|
Post by thebigragu on Feb 21, 2015 12:03:43 GMT -5
Which young players do you see the jets investing in? Which young players do you see the jets investing in?
|
|
|
Post by sec.101row23 on Feb 21, 2015 12:36:09 GMT -5
Not sure how that number is even relevant, you are using a cap number based on NO player additions for THIS year.
|
|
|
Post by Paradis on Feb 21, 2015 13:07:45 GMT -5
Not sure how that number is even relevant, you are using a cap number based on NO player additions for THIS year. i think the message is that we can spend this year and sign those guys like Wilk to extensions without having to worry about setting ourselves up for regret in 2016... namely I;m thinking - getting TWO corners (Maxwell, Cromarie), a WR (Crabtree) and potentially an impact OLB like Huges, or Worilds.... and maybe have a little leftover for Spiller
|
|
|
Post by maury77 on Feb 21, 2015 14:24:16 GMT -5
Not sure how that number is even relevant, you are using a cap number based on NO player additions for THIS year. i think the message is that we can spend this year and sign those guys like Wilk to extensions without having to worry about setting ourselves up for regret in 2016... namely I;m thinking - getting TWO corners (Maxwell, Cromarie), a WR (Crabtree) and potentially an impact OLB like Huges, or Worilds.... and maybe have a little leftover for Spiller Would we be able to re-up Sheldon next offseason? It might allow us to front load his extension.
|
|
|
Post by choon328 on Feb 21, 2015 16:56:45 GMT -5
This is what I've been saying. And the Jets are actually $51 million under the cap after cutting Chris Johnson. They would over $61 million under if they released Harvin. Lets say they re-structure Harvin this year and give him $7 million per year over 3 years you're still looking at at least $54 million in cap space. The Jets only have to allocate less then $6 million for the draft. So now the Jets have $48 million to spend in re-signing Wilkerson and bringing in FA's. There is no reason why Wilkerson shouldn't have an extension by the start of FA, and I'm hoping they front load his base salaries for this year and next year so towards the end where the cap space will be more limited he will have a small number there. You also have to remember that Wilkerson is only 25 which means he will still be near his prime when he's looking for another deal. I will be extremely disappointed if the Jets don't bring in the 2 CB's, one of which should be Maxwell, a true cover free safety, speed rushing OLB, MLB, some depth at DE behind Richardson and Wilkerson, a starting LG (Iupati), starting WR, true blocking TE, capable starting RT to compete with Breno for this year, capable starting RB to split with Ivory and a veteran QB to compete with Geno and whoever else. We have the money to do all of those things with ease. If they need to overspend a little then so be it b/c they have a ton of money they need to spend next year anyway and spending a little more this year will ease the pain of having to dole out big contracts again next year. The Jets should not lose any FA's b/c of money, if that happens I will be disappointed.
|
|
|
Post by rangerous on Feb 22, 2015 9:01:19 GMT -5
the thing is teams still have to spend up to a certain percentage of the cap so some contracts may go overboard. let's hope maccagnen doesn't go for all the shiny players.
|
|
|
Post by Jet Nut Sauce on Feb 22, 2015 10:42:46 GMT -5
Not sure how that number is even relevant, you are using a cap number based on NO player additions for THIS year. No additions and no replacements for the players who come off the books this year. No draft picks signed and no expiring contracts picked up. Even of this was true how is not using 50 mil this season, not giving a CS a full roster etc better than rolling it into next year? What does that do for you?
|
|
|
Post by 20andout on Feb 22, 2015 13:03:22 GMT -5
Not sure how that number is even relevant, you are using a cap number based on NO player additions for THIS year. No additions and no replacements for the players who come off the books this year. No draft picks signed and no expiring contracts picked up. Even of this was true how is not using 50 mil this season, not giving a CS a full roster etc better than rolling it into next year? What does that do for you? This math is also leaving us with only two offensive linemen
|
|
|
Post by canadasteve on Feb 22, 2015 22:48:57 GMT -5
The point for all this is, as Paradis pointed out, we have a BOAT load of cash to spend over the next two years. With smart free agency signings, and extending guys that we want here for the long haul and build around, the team is actually in a pretty good position. Now, the key, as it has been for, oh, I don't know, two decades or more now, is to find someone who can actually play under centre.
|
|
|
Post by Paradis on Feb 23, 2015 1:25:04 GMT -5
The point for all this is, as Paradis pointed out, we have a BOAT load of cash to spend over the next two years. With smart free agency signings, and extending guys that we want here for the long haul and build around, the team is actually in a pretty good position. Now, the key, as it has been for, oh, I don't know, two decades or more now, is to find someone who can actually play under centre. Where do you sit on the Qb situation this year? I'm curious. Winston/Mariota ain't happening (let's just say), so what do you prefer to be company line moving forward?
|
|
|
Post by canadasteve on Feb 23, 2015 9:38:11 GMT -5
The point for all this is, as Paradis pointed out, we have a BOAT load of cash to spend over the next two years. With smart free agency signings, and extending guys that we want here for the long haul and build around, the team is actually in a pretty good position. Now, the key, as it has been for, oh, I don't know, two decades or more now, is to find someone who can actually play under centre. Where do you sit on the Qb situation this year? I'm curious. Winston/Mariota ain't happening (let's just say), so what do you prefer to be company line moving forward? If Mariota is sitting at six, do you draft him? I don't know. It just seems sometimes the Jets are snake-bitten at the QB position. We don't draft Marriota and he goes to the HOF. We do draft him, he plays right away, and has his confidence destroyed because the help around him right now, and is eaten alive by the media and fan-base for not being Tom Brady from day one. The ONLY way I would draft him is if the Jets signed a vet and let that vet and Smith battle it out. Mariota holds a clipboard for a year. There would be NO chance of him seeing the field. Ideally, if he was sitting at six, we could trade him to Philly and get Nick Foles AND a first next year. PERFECT WORLD? We use our money to extend Mo, looks like we can keep Snacks, fill out two CB situations, RB, Sam Bradford would be released and we signed him to a two year deal, and Brandon Bridge (or Bryce Petty) would be available in the 4th-5th round, and we drafted him and let him sit and learn for two years. While everyone is exited about the money we have, eventually, all these players need to get paid. It would be great to give Mo an extension and give him a good chunk this year and next. Same with some of our FA signings. But we don't want to spread too much money out over, say, 2018, 2019, 2020, and have the same cap issues we did a few years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Jet Nut Sauce on Feb 23, 2015 11:23:29 GMT -5
The point for all this is, as Paradis pointed out, we have a BOAT load of cash to spend over the next two years. With smart free agency signings, and extending guys that we want here for the long haul and build around, the team is actually in a pretty good position. Now, the key, as it has been for, oh, I don't know, two decades or more now, is to find someone who can actually play under centre. Where do you sit on the Qb situation this year? I'm curious. Winston/Mariota ain't happening (let's just say), so what do you prefer to be company line moving forward? Hard to say given you have no clue if Mariota will be sitting at six for us.
|
|
|
Post by choon328 on Feb 23, 2015 21:39:50 GMT -5
Where do you sit on the Qb situation this year? I'm curious. Winston/Mariota ain't happening (let's just say), so what do you prefer to be company line moving forward? Hard to say given you have no clue if Mariota will be sitting at six for us. It was a hypothetical question that stated what would you do with the QB situation if Winston and Mariota were gone by 6. My answer is the same as the majority. You bring in a guy like Shaun Hill or Hoyer to compete with Geno, maybe draft a developmental QB in the last 3 rounds and hope you hit the lottery with him.
|
|