Shawn Springs: A Modest Proposal for 2007

[goldenster95]

So, Springs won't take a paycut from his $7M salary this year, huh?

Okay, how about this compromise . . . we guarantee part of his salary (which is all he gets this year) in lieu of cutting him after June 1 when most positions will be filled and cap money gets a lot thinner . . . for instance, he agrees to cut his salary by $3M, but the 'Skins guarantee the remainder of it . . .

That way, the 'Skins save $3M in cap space, any cap consequences are limited to this year alone, and Springs gets a nice guaranteed pay day without having to move anywhere and risk diminished market demand and money for his services . . .

Just a thought.

[909997]

i think the contract should have a clause where it says he has to play all 16 games to get the 7 mil

if he misses more then 2 games because of injury we takes 3 mil out

[boobiemiles]

If it was only so simple.

[Kurd Cudins]

Great, so next year it will cost us an additional $3.25 million to release him. The cap consequences are not just limited to this year. This is a poor idea.

[909997]

If it was only so simple.

it is

but its kinda hard to convince your star player to take a paycut when u overpay for all these freeagents.

[goldenster95]

Great, so next year it will cost us an additional $3.25 million to release him. The cap consequences are not just limited to this year. This is a poor idea.

Huh? Not because of what you'd do under my proposal. My point is that guaranteeing his salary this year won't screw us additionally beyond this season.

[Kurd Cudins]

Huh? Not because of what you'd do under my proposal.

What? Springs base salary this year is $4.875. Which means if we guarantee the WHOLE thing, it is then prorated over the life of the contract. This year, would be a hit of $1.625, with $3.25 spread out evenly over the next two years. If we release Springs next offseason, we would have to pay that extra $3.25 million.

Edit: If we DON'T release him next offseason, his cap hits the next two years will be.

2008: $9.109

2009: $10.109

Like I said this a bad idea.

[Blackest Eyes]

I think he is too greedy to do that. Then again, I guess being injured all the time does amount to a lot in medical bills.

[BoBoCTiberius]

So, wait, Shawn Springs eats babies? I knew there was a reason I never liked that guy.

[Mr. S]

knowing Springs signing bonus would explain a lot. I think he had a 6 year deal total, so half of his bonus has already been counted for. No matter what he is gone after 2007 with those high salary numbers coming up. I can pretty much bet itll be cheaper to cut/trade him then, or after June 1st this year.

[goldenster95]

What? Springs base salary this year is $4.875. Which means if we guarantee the WHOLE thing, it is then prorated over the life of the contract. This year, would be a hit of $1.625, with $3.25 spread out evenly over the next two years. If we release Springs next offseason, we would have to pay that extra $3.25 million.

Edit: If we DON'T release him next offseason, his cap hits the next two years will be.

2008: $9.109

2009: $10.109

Like I said this a bad idea.

I thought Springs' base was $7M. If not, I stand corrected. If it's around $5M, just guarantee $3M and save $2M in cap space. As for guaranteeing salaries, I don't think those are amortized. If memory serves me correctly, the only thing that's spread out are signing bonuses.

[DiscoBob]

So, Springs won't take a paycut from his $7M salary this year, huh?

Okay, how about this compromise . . . we guarantee part of his salary (which is all he gets this year) in lieu of cutting him after June 1 when most positions will be filled and cap money gets a lot thinner . . . for instance, he agrees to cut his salary by $3M, but the 'Skins guarantee the remainder of it . . .

That way, the 'Skins save $3M in cap space, any cap consequences are limited to this year alone, and Springs gets a nice guaranteed pay day without having to move anywhere and risk diminished market demand and money for his services . . .

Just a thought.

This wouldn't work. The cap hit to cut him now is 7.5 mil or 2.5/5.0 after June 1st, regardless of what his salary is/would be this coming year. So guaranteeing any portion of his salary this year or any other year will only increase the cost to cut him. If we gauarantee 3mil this year, his cap hit would be 10.5 mil or after June 1st 5.5/5.0.

We need to either keep him at his current pay and then cut him next year after June 1st (if we can find a suitable replacement) and take cap hits of 2.5/2.5 in 2008/2009.

OR

Restructuring his deal into a new four year contract that equals the current payouts under his existing deal (4.9, 5.0, 6.0) over the next 3 years. A 5yr/23.1 with 5 mil guaranteed would accomplish this and reduce our cap hits to 5.5, 6.35, 6.55, and 7.25 over the next four years. After 2 more years he could be a june 1st cut and cost us 2.5/2.5 in 2009/2010.

[Kurd Cudins]

I thought Springs' base was $7M. If not, I stand corrected. If it's around $5M, just guarantee $3M and save $2M in cap space. As for guaranteeing salaries, I don't think those are amortized. If memory serves me correctly, the only thing that's spread out are signing bonuses.

No. Ok. NO! :doh: . No, yes they are. Yes, but when you guarantee a base salary it BECOMES a signing bonus.

[goldenster95]

This wouldn't work. The cap hit to cut him now is 7.5 mil or 2.5/5.0 after June 1st, regardless of what his salary is/would be this coming year. So guaranteeing any portion of his salary this year or any other year will only increase the cost to cut him. If we gauarantee 3mil this year, his cap hit would be 10.5 mil or after June 1st 5.5/5.0.

We need to either keep him at his current pay and then cut him next year after June 1st (if we can find a suitable replacement) and take cap hits of 2.5/2.5 in 2008/2009.

OR

Restructuring his deal into a new four year contract that equals the current payouts under his existing deal (4.9, 5.0, 6.0) over the next 3 years. A 5yr/23.1 with 5 mil guaranteed would accomplish this and reduce our cap hits to 5.5, 6.35, 6.55, and 7.25 over the next four years. After 2 more years he could be a june 1st cut and cost us 2.5/2.5 in 2009/2010.

If we go with my proposal, we don't cut him this year, so there's no issue with a post-June 1 release. At any rate, if we do cut him before June 1 this year, his *net* cap hit would be $2.5M, not $7.5M since you've got to take into consideration that we'll be wiping out his salary when cutting him.

Also, I don't think guaranteed salaries are pro-ratable, but I'll have to check on that. Even if they were, $3M pro-rated over the remainder of his contract is not that big of a deal at all.

[goldenster95]

No. Ok. NO! :doh: . No, yes they are. Yes, but when you guarantee a base salary it BECOMES a signing bonus.

Are you sure? I'll have to check the CBA again. Guaranteeing a salary certainly is the functional equivalent of a signing bonus, but I'm not sure it's exactly the same thing as contemplated by the CBA.

Even if it is, guaranteeing $3M of Springs salary this year won't mean a whole lot if it's pro-rated over his contract. I.e., the equivalent of a $3M signing bonus isn't a big deal.

[Kurd Cudins]

Are you sure? I'll have to check the CBA again. Guaranteeing a salary certainly is the functional equivalent of a signing bonus, but I'm not sure it's exactly the same thing as contemplated by the CBA.

Even if it is, guaranteeing $3M of Springs salary this year won't mean a whole lot if it's pro-rated over his contract. I.e., the equivalent of a $3M signing bonus isn't a big deal.

You still aren't getting it. By doing what you are proposing we are making something harder to do that MUST be done. Springs MUST be cut next offseason. There are no if's about this. Under your plan, we are simply making that more costly. The reason we are at an impass with Springs is because he KNOWS we have to cut him next year and he wants long-term security. Guaranteeing this omeny will only make it more likely we cut him next year, which is not what he, or we are looking for. The numbers and analysis of this plan all point to it being a bad idea. Let it go.

[goldenster95]

Sean Taylor Is God,

You are correct, sir. Guaranteed salaries are treated just the same as signing bonuses under the CBA. CBA Art. XXIV, Section 7((8)(iv)(8) ("Any salary advance paid on a guaranteed basis"). However, a $3M signing bonus/guaranteed salary is not that big of a deal.

[goldenster95]

You still aren't getting it. By doing what you are proposing we are making something harder to do that MUST be done. Springs MUST be cut next offseason. There are no if's about this. Under your plan, we are simply making that more costly. The reason we are at an impass with Springs is because he KNOWS we have to cut him next year and he wants long-term security. Guaranteeing this omeny will only make it more likely we cut him next year, which is not what he, or we are looking for. The numbers and analysis of this plan all point to it being a bad idea. Let it go.

It won't make it that more costly. Yes, Springs, like everyone else, has a shelf life, and that may come around sooner (like this season) rather than later. But this is a compromise where you can save cap money this year and take a little ding next year. $3M is NOT that big of a deal.

[OWUeagleMD]

So, wait, Shawn Springs eats babies? I knew there was a reason I never liked that guy.

Nice.

[DiscoBob]

If we go with my proposal, we don't cut him this year, so there's no issue with a post-June 1 release. At any rate, if we do cut him before June 1 this year, his *net* cap hit would be $2.5M, not $7.5M since you've got to take into consideration that we'll be wiping out his salary when cutting him.

Also, I don't think guaranteed salaries are pro-ratable, but I'll have to check on that. Even if they were, $3M pro-rated over the remainder of his contract is not that big of a deal at all.

Couple points:

Why would Springs cut his salary this year in exchange for it being guaranteed? Even if he is a June 1 cut, he will get paid, so their is not a huge advantage

His current cost to cut is 7.5 million based on his original signing bonus. So we don't have to pay him the 4.9 mil, but we do have to replace him. So to come out even, we would need to replace him with an equal caliber player for less than a 4.9 mil cap hit in 2007. Where do we find such a player in FA when Clements set the bar so high?

Nice sig by the way....

[gobigred]

I am so tired of talking about Springs contract there is no one out there who can even walk in his shoes. Why don't you start a thread like get off Springs and get on John Hall why is he still here?

[fish]

So, wait, Shawn Springs eats babies? I knew there was a reason I never liked that guy.

Nice! :applause: :notworthy :laugh:

[Redshu]

I am so tired of talking about Springs contract there is no one out there who can even walk in his shoes. Why don't you start a thread like get off Springs and get on John Hall why is he still here?

Um....he was released.:doh:

[Kurd Cudins]

Um....he was released.:doh:

Actually, he's still on the team. Don't ask me why.

[goldenster95]

Couple points:

Why would Springs cut his salary this year in exchange for it being guaranteed? Even if he is a June 1 cut, he will get paid, so their is not a huge advantage

His current cost to cut is 7.5 million based on his original signing bonus. So we don't have to pay him the 4.9 mil, but we do have to replace him. So to come out even, we would need to replace him with an equal caliber player for less than a 4.9 mil cap hit in 2007. Where do we find such a player in FA when Clements set the bar so high?

Nice sig by the way....

Because he'd potentially fetch much less when the need for CBs and the available money to spend on them rolls around later in the off-season when he is cut. That's why he's pining for the 'Skins to make a decision now, rather than later. (Remember Daryl Gardener and him getting cut late in the offseason a while back? We got him for a song.)

As for his replacement, I'm saying we ought not to cut him. If we do have to replace him, I'd go with Rogers and Smoot. Don't know how you feel about that, but I think that's adequate to hold up under GW's blitzing schemes. As for depth, that's an issue. I think that Travis Fisher or others are out there that can fill in as a #3 CB though. Hey, even Ade Jimoh is okay as nickel back.

Thanks for the props on the sig. lol