Under the Cap: Reviewing the Mega-Money Deals

by J.I. Halsell

Ten days into the uncapped year of 2010, we have seen that the spending frenzy that some anticipated with the removal of the salary cap has not materialized. This development is in line with conversations I had with cap guys prior to the new league year in which they said they anticipate teams operating not too differently from previous years in 2010 . Moreover, we saw teams such as the Steelers and Falcons come out in the media, whether directly or indirectly, saying that they were going to impose their own "internal" salary cap. My hunch at the time was that these teams were in line with the majority of teams, as most teams err on fiscal conservatism in a normal salary cap environment. Given the uncertainties surrounding an uncapped year and how the NFL would interpret the rules in this new environment, this sense of conservatism would only be heightened. An unimpressive lineup of unrestricted free agents due to the uncapped year didn't help spur any spending.

As the league year commenced, we saw players like defensive end Julius Peppers [1], linebacker Karlos Dansby [2], safety Antrel Rolle [3], and cornerback Dunta Robinson [4] sign very lucrative contracts. However, these signings would have occurred at their respective price points even if there were a salary cap. None of these teams spent money well in excess of the players' market values as top-tier free agents at their positions, as the tables below illustrate.

The table below shows that, from a guarantee-per-year perspective, by giving Peppers $7 million per year, the Chicago Bears felt that he was on par with pass rushers DeMarcus Ware [6] of the Cowboys and Terrell Suggs [7] of the Ravens, who both received $6.7 million per year. However, Ware and Suggs were 27 years old and 26 years old, respectively, when they signed their six-year deals. Given his age, it's slightly concerning that the Bears gave the 30-year-old Peppers a similar six-year term. Although, as Peter King of SI.com pointed out, the Bears can get out of the Peppers deal before Feb. 10, 2011, while only having paid Peppers $20 million ($19.9 million of guaranteed money plus $100,000 workout bonus). The $22.1 million of his guaranteed money is guaranteed only for injury up until that date.

The table below compares newly minted Dolphins linebacker Karlos Dansby [2]'s per-year average to 2009's prized free-agent linebacker Bart Scott [8] of the Baltimore Ravens. Dansby and Scott have moved the premier inside linebacker market to the $22-million guaranteed mark. However, Dansby's deal provides the player with slightly more guaranteed money on a slightly shorter contract. If you're 49ers Pro Bowl linebacker Patrick Willis [9], then you're anticipating an extension in the near future of roughly $5 million guaranteed per year, given Dansby's $4.4 million guaranteed per year. On a five-year extension, this would put Willis at $25 million guaranteed. Further, given Seahawks linebacker Aaron Curry [10]'s $5.7 million guaranteed per year, Willis could command up to $28.5 million guaranteed on a 5-year deal.

The Antrel Rolle [3] contract with the Giants sparked debate regarding whether or not it was the most lucrative safety contract in NFL history. This debate highlights the importance of gauging the total value of a contract versus the number of years a player is committing himself to a team. It also highlights how short memories are. To the former point, when looking at Rolle's value relative to the number of years he has contractually obligated himself to, one will see that Rolle's average per year is $7.4 million. This average per year trails the $7.9 million per year of Rolle's former teammate Adrian Wilson [11] and trails the $7.5 million per year of the Steelers' Troy Polamalu [12] and Colts' Bob Sanders [13]. To the latter point of short memories, Rolle's $37 million total value, not only falls short of Sanders' $37.5 million but also falls short of the Ravens' Ed Reed [14]'s total new money value of $38.1 million on a contract he signed nearly four years ago. Also forgotten in this debate is the Cowboys' Ken Hamlin [15], who got $37.5 million on his 2008 contract, which realistically is actually $39 million in value when you factor in easily achievable log escalators in the contract.

Falcons cornerback Dunta Robinson [4]'s contract provides a team salary number (formerly known as a cap number) of $12 million in 2010. In subsequent years, his team salary numbers are $6.5 million, $7.75 million, $8.75 million, $10.75 million, and $11.25 million. By giving Robinson a guaranteed roster bonus of $7 million in lieu of a signing bonus of the same amount, the Falcons are taking the full amount of $7 million on their books in the current year instead of doing so over the term of the contract. If Robinson becomes a bust, the club's exposure to higher dead money is mitigated by usage of the roster bonus. While mitigating their team salary risk, the Falcons were still able to make Robinson the second-highest paid corner in the league along with the Eagles' Asante Samuel [16] (they are both behind Oakland's Nmandi Asomugha).

In years past, we would see lucrative free-agent contracts signed through the first week of the league year. This year, due to the watered-down market, we saw the lucrative contract period only last through a weekend. The contracts discussed above were all signed between March 6 and March 8. The second tier of free agents are now signing deals, but accordingly, none of these deals are going to put any of these players in the top ten of their respective positions. The next group to keep an intriguing eye on are this year's crop of restricted free agents (RFAs). As I've written previously, there has been very little movement in the RFA market historically. However, now that we know at what level all RFAs have been tendered (hat tip to Mac's Football blog [17] ), we can do some "tea leaf reading" and see what players are truly viable candidates to move via restricted free agency.

As a salary cap guy, when I weigh the risk in giving up a draft pick for an RFA, I see the option as being between an inexpensive third-round draft pick or lower versus an established player who I'm going to have to pay more than a draft. It is this thinking that often precludes teams from giving up draft picks for RFAs. However, given the talent in this year's RFA pool, teams could be slightly more willing to make the exchange.

As you look at the list above, you'll notice four quarterbacks who can be had for a third-round pick and one at a fifth-round pick. Given the failure rate of young quarterbacks out of college, a club may be willing to give up a mid-round pick for a quarterback, such as a Kellen Clemens [18] or Tarvaris Jackson [19], who not only has had the opportunity to learn for three years at the NFL level, but even start a few games over the course of his career. Now are you likely to find your next franchise quarterback in this group? Probably not, but you probably would not have found your next franchise quarterback with the third-round pick you gave up in order to acquire one of these players either.

An interesting name on the above list who can be had for a fifth-round pick is Steelers cornerback William Gay. Last week, due to his significant playing time and low base salary, Gay received the fourth highest performance-based paycheck in the league at $325,607. Perhaps, Gay can add to his offseason earnings via an offer sheet from another team.

When looking at where players have been tendered, keep in mind that these tenders tell you how much a club values a player. For example, in lieu of giving running back Cadillac Williams [20] the more lucrative first-round tender or first- and third-round tender, the Bucs chose to extend the original-round tender, which is for less money and would only give the Bucs a second-round pick if he were to leave as an RFA. The tea leaves tell you that the Bucs are willing to part with Williams. Given their willingness to take a second-round pick via restricted free agency for Williams, they would probably be willing to take a mid- to late-round pick for Williams in a trade. In all likelihood, a second-round pick is way too steep for another club, so the trade scenario is the more likely option for Williams to move teams. This scenario highlights that the above players can move teams not just for the RFA compensation they've been tendered at, but can also move for slightly less via trade.

Similar to Williams, fellow 2005 first-round picks Carlos Rogers [21] and Marcus Spears [22] are very much on the trade market, as indicated by their original-round tenders.

Follow J.I. Halsell on Twitter: @SalaryCap101 [23]