Colts cap space updates (merge / update)

[csmopar]

Sometimes the available cap left includes what you need for your draft picks. So I'm not sure if the numbers we are told we have left includes or excludes what we need (around 5 mill) to sign our draft picks.

Yep. All the cap figure I've seen are subtracting 4.8 million for draftees.

[dw49]

Yep. All the cap figure I've seen are subtracting 4.8 million for draftees.

 

So we should have around 10 mill to spend on signings and figuring about 2.5 mill to save for the year ?

[NewColtsFan]

Ah. Yes, still plenty of room to work, if they want.

 

I'm not sure where you're seeing this?

 

Stampede says we've got $7.2 Mill.     Some here are saying 10 Mill.

 

The point is we don't seem to want anymore.

 

Player after player that we've been rumored interested in are signing with other teams for "make good 1-year deals"  or what seem like below market value deals.      So, apparently we're not interested.

 

We appear to be looking to sign some guys at some positions for veteran minimums like Adams last year,  or we hope to solve our problems with the draft.

 

Good luck with that.

 

If we have a strategy,  I'm not seeing it.

 

The last few days have been disappointing and even a little disturbing.

[Deano1818]

I'm not sure where you're seeing this?

Stampede says we've got $7.2 Mill. Some here are saying 10 Mill.

The point is we don't seem to want anymore.

Player after player that we've been rumored interested in are signing with other teams for "make good 1-year deals" or what seem like below market value deals. So, apparently we're not interested.

We appear to be looking to sign some guys at some positions for veteran minimums like Adams last year, or we hope to solve our problems with the draft.

Good luck with that.

If we have a strategy, I'm not seeing it.

The last few days have been disappointing and even a little disturbing.

I think it's a great strategy so far.....

If we draft a NT ...... With everything else we have done, we will better than we were last year

[Superman]

I'm not sure where you're seeing this?

 

Stampede says we've got $7.2 Mill.     Some here are saying 10 Mill.

 

The point is we don't seem to want anymore.

 

Player after player that we've been rumored interested in are signing with other teams for "make good 1-year deals"  or what seem like below market value deals.      So, apparently we're not interested.

 

We appear to be looking to sign some guys at some positions for veteran minimums like Adams last year,  or we hope to solve our problems with the draft.

 

Good luck with that.

 

If we have a strategy,  I'm not seeing it.

 

The last few days have been disappointing and even a little disturbing.

 

If they don't want to make anymore moves, that's one thing. But if they do, they can release Donald Thomas for $3.25m. They could even restructure Vontae Davis' roster bonus for another $4m. Of course, Cherilus is the controversial one, but that would be another $4m.

 

And of course, the top 51 number is the compliance number. With Langford and Richardson (I believe his cap hold sticks until the grievance is decided), we're at $8.7m, by my calculations. With the three moves above, that can go up to $20m.

 

I can't speak to the strategy. I think there's lots of DL/OL in the draft, and I bet that's part of what Grigson wants to do. And while the draft is light on safeties, there are a couple that are worthwhile prospects. I really like this draft, so things will look different in May.

 

But yeah, I haven't liked the past couple days. I thought we'd do a little more. There are still some interesting names out there. I don't think we're interested, but Wisniewski is still available, just as a prime example. Ron Parker hasn't signed. It seems like everyone in the NFL is on the trade market. So if something shakes free, one way or the other, the Colts can make a move.

[dw49]

I'm not sure where you're seeing this?

 

Stampede says we've got $7.2 Mill.     Some here are saying 10 Mill.

 

The point is we don't seem to want anymore.

 

Player after player that we've been rumored interested in are signing with other teams for "make good 1-year deals"  or what seem like below market value deals.      So, apparently we're not interested.

 

We appear to be looking to sign some guys at some positions for veteran minimums like Adams last year,  or we hope to solve our problems with the draft.

 

Good luck with that.

 

If we have a strategy,  I'm not seeing it.

 

The last few days have been disappointing and even a little disturbing.

 

 

What he means is it's pretty easy to fit another expensive guy in. You can cut Thomas , Louis and or Cribbs. You can restructure V Davis. You can do a deal with a 1 mill salary in 2015 say for 4 years with a 10 mill signing bonjus. That would be a 2015 cap hit of 3.5 mill. 

 

Your right if you just look at what's left in the 2015 cap but what he means we can easily make the room. As far as "not wanting to do more" , none of us know that.

 

 

Opps... sorry SM post was not up when I wrote this

[csmopar]

So we should have around 10 mill to spend on signings and figuring about 2.5 mill to save for the year ?

From what I've seen on numerous sites, yes.

[Buck Showalter]

 

The last few days have been disappointing and even a little disturbing.

 

Disappointing???

don't tell that to Gore & AJ...

 

Disturbing???

LOL... cause Suh, Fairly, & Knighton weren't signed???

 

I think Colts dodged a bullet in all 3 cases actually...

Grigs & co. know more than we do, & are more patient too, which is a good thing now...

I'm sure there is a plan, I doubt Grigson & Pags are sittin' around playin' madden drinkin' yoo hoos & eatin' moon pies...

[NewColtsFan]

What he means is it's pretty easy to fit another expensive guy in. You can cut Thomas , Louis and or Cribbs. You can restructure V Davis. You can do a deal with a 1 mill salary in 2015 say for 4 years with a 10 mill signing bonjus. That would be a 2015 cap hit of 3.5 mill. 

 

Your right if you just look at what's left in the 2015 cap but what he means we can easily make the room. As far as "not wanting to do more" , none of us know that.

 

 

Opps... sorry SM post was not up when I wrote this

 

Yes,   we CAN do all that.....

 

But at this point,  what's the point?     There's no one left to buy....

[NewColtsFan]

If they don't want to make anymore moves, that's one thing. But if they do, they can release Donald Thomas for $3.25m. They could even restructure Vontae Davis' roster bonus for another $4m. Of course, Cherilus is the controversial one, but that would be another $4m.

 

And of course, the top 51 number is the compliance number. With Langford and Richardson (I believe his cap hold sticks until the grievance is decided), we're at $8.7m, by my calculations. With the three moves above, that can go up to $20m.

 

I can't speak to the strategy. I think there's lots of DL/OL in the draft, and I bet that's part of what Grigson wants to do. And while the draft is light on safeties, there are a couple that are worthwhile prospects. I really like this draft, so things will look different in May.

 

But yeah, I haven't liked the past couple days. I thought we'd do a little more. There are still some interesting names out there. I don't think we're interested, but Wisniewski is still available, just as a prime example. Ron Parker hasn't signed. It seems like everyone in the NFL is on the trade market. So if something shakes free, one way or the other, the Colts can make a move.

 

 

As I shared in another post,  yes,   we can do all those things.....

 

But hasn't the horse already left the barn?

 

If we did as you suggest,  who are we buying now?     Haven't the players we wanted gone elsewhere?

 

And if there's someone out that we still want for serious money,  wouldn't we have already done what you suggest?   Wouldn't we have made those moves to clear cap space?    And yet we haven't.

 

I'm not sure there's enough talent in the draft to solve our defensive issues.   I would've thought more in free agency....

 

Banking on the draft for a lot of immediate impact when we're drafting at the bottom of each round doesn't seem promising to me.

 

Just sayin....

[dw49]

Yes,   we CAN do all that.....

 

But at this point,  what's the point?     There's no one left to buy....

Just Greg Hardy and we know that signing has it's issues. So yes , there is not a lot left out there other than a couple "low end" starting safeties and Wilford. None of those 3 guys should require any major tweaks to the cap.

[Superman]

As I shared in another post,  yes,   we can do all those things.....

 

But hasn't the horse already left the barn?

 

If we did as you suggest,  who are we buying now?     Haven't the players we wanted gone elsewhere?

 

And if there's someone out that we still want for serious money,  wouldn't we have already done what you suggest?   Wouldn't we have made those moves to clear cap space?    And yet we haven't.

 

I'm not sure there's enough talent in the draft to solve our defensive issues.   I would've thought more in free agency....

 

Banking on the draft for a lot of immediate impact when we're drafting at the bottom of each round doesn't seem promising to me.

 

Just sayin....

 

The bolded is impossible to answer. We'll see what happens. But there are plenty of players available. Plenty.

 

My point was only that the Colts aren't relegated to the sidelines. Anything they want to do, they probably can. If we wanted to do an offer sheet for Justin Houston, we probably could. If we wanted to trade for Evan Mathis, we could. If they wanted to take a run at Greg Hardy, they could. I doubt either of those things happen, but we're not backed into a corner with no options.

 

On defense, to me, ILB was always a draft proposition; we have two starters already. I thought we'd make a run at a safety -- and there are still a couple out there -- but the safety market was weak. Depth and prospective starters at DL are available in the draft.

[ColtStronger]

Sometimes the available cap left includes what you need for your draft picks. So I'm not sure if the numbers we are told we have left includes or excludes what we need (around 5 mill)  to sign our draft picks.

I didn't know that.  Let me know if you find out for sure, because in that instance we have plenty of money to sign Hardy or Wilfork.  However, I still haven't heard news on Hardy (and that ruling was suppose to be in prior to 4 PM upon the start of Free Agency.  I would figure the available cap wouldn't factor in that money needed in reserves for FA, because it is derived from total cap - cap spent.

[dw49]

I didn't know that.  Let me know if you find out for sure, because in that instance we have plenty of money to sign Hardy or Wilfork.  However, I still haven't heard news on Hardy (and that ruling was suppose to be in prior to 4 PM upon the start of Free Agency.  I would figure the available cap wouldn't factor in that money needed in reserves for FA, because it is derived from total cap - cap spent.

 

Just looking at Spotrac and here's how I read it. With what we need to sign the draft picks , it has us at 11,600,000. I don't see the Lankford contract , so take about 4 mill off that. Your down to 7. It also appears to me that they have removed the 3.2 for TR and we know that is being disputed. I don't know if they are allowed to use that now. So unless I'm reading wrong and I could be , we could be as low as about 4 mill at this point. We could spend the draft money (about 4.5 mill ) now , so in any event the Colts could still make a significant signing and structure it with a small 2015 hit or restructure V Davis or make a couple cuts.

 

Anyway .. the number I come up with is lower than what others have been reporting....

[ColtStronger]

Just looking at Spotrac and here's how I read it. With what we need to sign the draft picks , it has us at 11,600,000. I don't see the Lankford contract , so take about 4 mill off that. Your down to 7. It also appears to me that they have removed the 3.2 for TR and we know that is being disputed. I don't know if they are allowed to use that now. So unless I'm reading wrong and I could be , we could be as low as about 4 mill at this point. We could spend the draft money (about 4.5 mill ) now , so in any event the Colts could still make a significant signing and structure it with a small 2015 hit or restructure V Davis or make a couple cuts.

 

Anyway .. the number I come up with is lower than what others have been reporting....

Thanks for the explanation.  Trent's contract being void does not add to the cap yet, because he just appealed the decision.  If the league rules he isn't awarded that money, then we will get the money back, but until then, it isn't our money. 

[backshoulderfade]

Just looking at Spotrac and here's how I read it. With what we need to sign the draft picks , it has us at 11,600,000. I don't see the Lankford contract , so take about 4 mill off that. Your down to 7. It also appears to me that they have removed the 3.2 for TR and we know that is being disputed. I don't know if they are allowed to use that now. So unless I'm reading wrong and I could be , we could be as low as about 4 mill at this point. We could spend the draft money (about 4.5 mill ) now , so in any event the Colts could still make a significant signing and structure it with a small 2015 hit or restructure V Davis or make a couple cuts.

Anyway .. the number I come up with is lower than what others have been reporting....

Just so you know, spotrac has accounted for draft picks in their figures.

[dw49]

Just so you know, spotrac has accounted for draft picks in their figures.

 

Yes , and their figures show us at 11.6 mil after the dead money , top 51 salaries and draft pool. Don't you have to take TR's money out and also they don't have lank ford;s contract listed.

 

Our adjusted cap is 152. Our top 51 contracts are 131. Dead money is 4.8 . Draft pool 4.4 Lankford and TR is around 7.5 

 

That by y figures only leaves us around the 4 million $ mark. Can you look at Sportrac and find what I'm messing up ? As I said the figures I see have us with more room that that.

[dw49]

Thanks for the explanation.  Trent's contract being void does not add to the cap yet, because he just appealed the decision.  If the league rules he isn't awarded that money, then we will get the money back, but until then, it isn't our money. 

 

 

Yes.. I mean 99.99999 % in my opinion you are right and Indy would have to wait before they could use that 3.2 mill in cap room. makes no sense for them to use it and maybe have to revisit after an unfavorable ruling and then get under the cap.

[dw49]

The bolded is impossible to answer. We'll see what happens. But there are plenty of players available. Plenty.

 

My point was only that the Colts aren't relegated to the sidelines. Anything they want to do, they probably can. If we wanted to do an offer sheet for Justin Houston, we probably could. If we wanted to trade for Evan Mathis, we could. If they wanted to take a run at Greg Hardy, they could. I doubt either of those things happen, but we're not backed into a corner with no options.

 

On defense, to me, ILB was always a draft proposition; we have two starters already. I thought we'd make a run at a safety -- and there are still a couple out there -- but the safety market was weak. Depth and prospective starters at DL are available in the draft.

 

 

Take a look at spotrac . I see us having only about 4.5 mill when you take out 3.2 for TR and around 4 for the missing Langford contract. This # is lower than I've been reading.

[backshoulderfade]

Yes , and their figures show us at 11.6 mil after the dead money , top 51 salaries and draft pool. Don't you have to take TR's money out and also they don't have lank ford;s contract listed.

Our adjusted cap is 152. Our top 51 contracts are 131. Dead money is 4.8 . Draft pool 4.4 Lankford and TR is around 7.5

That by y figures only leaves us around the 4 million $ mark. Can you look at Sportrac and find what I'm messing up ? As I said the figures I see have us with more room that that.

Odd? It says the top 51 cap space is 16 million for me, without including Langford's contract and with Trent's cap hit gone which would leave us around 8-9.

I'm just walking home from work. When I get home I am going to add it all up myself.

[dw49]

Odd? It says the top 51 cap space is 16 million for me, without including Langford's contract and with Trent's cap hit gone which would leave us around 8-9.

I'm just walking home from work. When I get home I am going to add it all up myself.

 

 

Take a closer look and you'll see the 16 mill is "without " the draft pool. They give both with and without. The # they give right above that is  11, 643,573. If you add the (approx) 4.5 draft pool to that you get your #.

 

I mentioned to SM to look at it also.

[backshoulderfade]

Take a closer look and you'll see the 16 mill is "without " the draft pool. They give both with and without. The # they give right above that is 11, 643,573. If you add the (approx) 4.5 draft pool to that you get your #.

I mentioned to SM to look at it also.

Doesn't say that on the mobile site. Apologies.

[SteelCityColt]

 

But yeah, I haven't liked the past couple days. I thought we'd do a little more. There are still some interesting names out there. I don't think we're interested, but Wisniewski is still available, just as a prime example. Ron Parker hasn't signed. It seems like everyone in the NFL is on the trade market. So if something shakes free, one way or the other, the Colts can make a move.

Just to say I echo your thoughts, I've not been particularly impressed with who we've sighed. Gore I love as a player (49ers are kinda my 2nd/NFC team) so I'm happy to have him but I also recognise he's an aged RB. As much as he defies the odds and the doomsaying every year it's going to catch up. Johnson, all depends how much he has in the tank. Cole I think we overpayed but we certainly needed pass rushing help. As usual though it does seem the financial structure of these deals is very cap management friendly.

Disappointed but at least we've not put any millstones around our neck, I'm willing to reserve a fuller judgement till after the draft. After all it's not like roster building is a series of mutually exclusive events, it's a continual process....

Stick to the process

[dw49]

Doesn't say that on the mobile site. Apologies.

 

 

No apologies necessary. I'm not even sure somehow I'm not screwing up something. Like I said , I have not seen a figure that has us at 4.5 mill right now and that's what I'm getting.

[backshoulderfade]

No apologies necessary. I'm not even sure somehow I'm not screwing up something. Like I said , I have not seen a figure that has us at 4.5 mill right now and that's what I'm getting.

Just had a look at OTC too and it seems to be something else entirely, 15 million inc. Langfords contract. The only reasonable conclusion I can come to is that these sites are nonsense.

[dw49]

Just to say I echo your thoughts, I've not been particularly impressed with who we've sighed. Gore I love as a player (49ers are kinda my 2nd/NFC team) so I'm happy to have him but I also recognise he's an aged RB. As much as he defies the odds and the doomsaying every year it's going to catch up. Johnson, all depends how much he has in the tank. Cole I think we overpayed but we certainly needed pass rushing help. As usual though it does seem the financial structure of these deals is very cap management friendly.

Disappointed but at least we've not put any millstones around our neck, I'm willing to reserve a fuller judgement till after the draft. After all it's not like roster building is a series of mutually exclusive events, it's a continual process....

Stick to the process

 

 

If you really look at what these FA's went for this year , it's hard to say we overpaid for any of our guys. I'm not saying you have no reason to have your doubts on how these guys might perform , but just look at what DB's went for. There was just too much money out there to get any bargains. Teams were very frugal last year and stuck by "market prices" they seemed to eatablish. You had that making big roll overs and plus the cap increases. Also teams like Oakland and Jack had to spend or be in violation of the CBA rue that makes teams spend a certain % of the cap. 

[dw49]

Just had a look at OTC too and it seems to be something else entirely, 15 million inc. Langfords contract. The only reasonable conclusion I can come to is that these sites are nonsense.

 

How about if you take the draft pool and TR's 3.2 out of that. It also doesn't have Mike Adams contract.

 

But if I add and subtract draft pool , dead money etc , I'm having a hard time making the 2 sites match. So I guess I just have to say dunno...

[backshoulderfade]

How about if you take the draft pool and TR's 3.2 out of that. It also doesn't have Mike Adams contract.

But if I add and subtract draft pool , dead money etc , I'm having a hard time making the 2 sites match. So I guess I just have to say dunno...

I literally went through every contract. Added dead money and draft picks myself. Accounted 3.2 for Trent and 4 for Langford.

4.49 million give or take. Yes, top 51.

Looks like you are correct. Near 8 million with trent cap space in that case.

[chrisfarley]

I literally went through every contract. Added dead money and draft picks myself. Accounted 3.2 for Trent and 4 for Langford.

4.49 million give or take. Yes, top 51.

Looks like you are correct. Near 8 million with trent cap space in that case.

what do you mean top 51

[dw49]

I literally went through every contract. Added dead money and draft picks myself. Accounted 3.2 for Trent and 4 for Langford.

4.49 million give or take. Yes, top 51.

Looks like you are correct. Near 8 million with trent cap space in that case.

 

 

I just looked closet at over the cap and it has us at around the figure the media has been reporting . 8 But yeah sportrac  seems to be indicating that approx 4.6 figure and it's less clear how over the cap is computing...

[backshoulderfade]

what do you mean top 51

Only the top 51 cap hits on the roster count during the offseason.

[backshoulderfade]

I just looked closet at over the cap and it has us at around the figure the media has been reporting . 8 But yeah sportrac seems to be indicating that approx 4.6 figure and it's less clear how over the cap is computing...

Yeh after adding up all the cap hits, plus dead money, draft picks, projected KL contract and the Trent cap hit I came to the same conclusion. With draft pick money and TR cap space it is around the 12 mill that Mike Wells tweeted the other day.

[chrisfarley]

Only the top 51 cap hits on the roster count during the offseason.

ok, thanks, another question, if we sign some more FreeAgents and go over the cap, is that allowed as long as we trim the cap by a certain date?

[backshoulderfade]

ok, thanks, another question, if we sign some more FreeAgents and go over the cap, is that allowed as long as we trim the cap by a certain date?

I believe there is a certain period you are given to conform with the cap after the paperwork is submitted to the NFL.

[dw49]

Yeh after adding up all the cap hits, plus dead money, draft picks, projected KL contract and the Trent cap hit I came to the same conclusion. With draft pick money and TR cap space it is around the 12 mill that Mike Wells tweeted the other day.

 

 

Then I guess that's the # if Wells tweeted that. I was thinking the # being circulated was about 7 mill left after all that. But maybe that was not subtracting the TR money. 

[backshoulderfade]

Then I guess that's the # if Wells tweeted that. I was thinking the # being circulated was about 7 mill left after all that. But maybe that was not subtracting the TR money.

That was stampede blue. I trust what you said, which I confirmed through my calculations, over that SB article TBH.

For anyone who wants to know anything about how the cap works this is a really good resource http://www.askthecommish.com/SalaryCap/faq.aspx

[ColtRider]

Just to say I echo your thoughts, I've not been particularly impressed with who we've sighed. Gore I love as a player (49ers are kinda my 2nd/NFC team) so I'm happy to have him but I also recognise he's an aged RB. As much as he defies the odds and the doomsaying every year it's going to catch up. Johnson, all depends how much he has in the tank. Cole I think we overpayed but we certainly needed pass rushing help. As usual though it does seem the financial structure of these deals is very cap management friendly.

Disappointed but at least we've not put any millstones around our neck, I'm willing to reserve a fuller judgement till after the draft. After all it's not like roster building is a series of mutually exclusive events, it's a continual process....

Stick to the process

"I'm willing to reserve judgement till after the draft." Wise choice Grasshopper!;) Wise choice. It is a continual process like you said. I'm pretty darn sure that after the draft and before the season starts ColtsNation will be stoked like no other season before the franchise moved to Indianapolis.

[Luck_Is_Skilled]

What I wouldn't give to have spent the last week shadowing Grigson.

[SteelCityColt]

If you really look at what these FA's went for this year , it's hard to say we overpaid for any of our guys. I'm not saying you have no reason to have your doubts on how these guys might perform , but just look at what DB's went for. There was just too much money out there to get any bargains. Teams were very frugal last year and stuck by "market prices" they seemed to eatablish. You had that making big roll overs and plus the cap increases. Also teams like Oakland and Jack had to spend or be in violation of the CBA rue that makes teams spend a certain % of the cap.

I think overall from a pure cap perspective we've been good in FA under Grigson, the guys we have paid he's left escape routes in the contracts so we can cut loose if they don't work out.

Now you could question the level of talent we've brought in, or the talent evaluation, but we shouldn't really be looking to find talent in FA. I do think think there is a lot of pressure on Grigson to hit on his first rounder this year.

[esmort]

All those cuts make sense except Walden.  We still don't have anyone to replace him.

 

It makes no sense to restructure Davis's contract.  You restructure a contract you guarantee more money in the future for cap space now.  Davis's big cap hit is this year. . . this is by design so that we have cap space for extensions next year.

 

Also and I can't emphasize this enough. . . Davis is OUTPLAYING his current contract.  The dude is playing on Revis/Sherman level. . . We have zero right to ask him to take a pay cut.  

 

Restructuring almost always results in the player getting more money, so if anything he would probably be getting a raise not a cut.