PDA

View Full Version : Legwold- RMN Bronco Inbox



Traveler
02-21-2008, 08:37 AM
Should answer concerns about Javon Walker's contract and salary cap ramifications.

February 20, 2008
Working the what-ifs

The pre-combine Inbox is open for business. With the best draft hopefuls in Indy, the offseason is in full swing.

With that, off we go . . .

Anthony Marshall in Atlanta gets a pre-combine Inbox off with one sent on by a few others in recent weeks . . .

Q: What exactly are the cap ramifications if the Broncos cut Javon Walker? I've also heard there is some type of "poison pill" clause in the contract. Would you find out how much would the team have to pay him if he is cut outright and how much he'll get because of the clause?

A: By cap rules, to release Walker it would escalate remaining bonus calculations on the remainder of the contract to this year's salary cap – about $8 million worth of cap space.

His cap figure for '08, under his current deal, is scheduled to be $7.05 million. That's not that big of a difference on the bookkeeping side.

That cap hit is so big because releasing a player far closer to the beginning of the deal than to the end will always have a bigger impact on the cap. And Walker, if an option year is exercised, next month, has a deal that could run through 2011 – four more seasons.

And with that kind of cap hit and the Broncos, in the form of owner Pat Bowlen, having already said cash and cap management is an issue right now, a team would have to be very committed to the idea of releasing a player who was a 1,000-yard receiver in '06.

It would not be quality cap management to sign a player to a deal as big as the one Walker got and release him two years later. And Bowlen has talked a great deal, since season's end, about how teams have to effectively manage both their cap space and cash to make it into the Super Bowl mix.

He had the majority of the team's impact plays on offense that season. Last season his knee was a problem and heading into the upcoming season that will certainly be the question mark that follows him until he shows he is healthy.

That knee and his contract's current format make him difficult to trade as well. The contract does include a cash payment to Walker – some I know in the league have said it's more than $1 million and could even approach $2 million – if the Broncos don't exercise a $3.4 million portion of the $5.4 million worth of bonuses he's due in the first week of March

So, status quo means the Broncos would pay him a $3.4 million option bonus, and he would get a $2 million roster bonus as well in the first week of March.

To keep him and not exercise the option year of the deal (2011) with the option bonus would cost them cash payments of a $2 million roster bonus and what could then be as much as a $2 million "non-exercise'' fee. So it's pretty close to even there.

To release him saves them the immediate cash out of their pocket, but they instantly lose $8 million worth of cap space. They could release him after June 1 to spread that out over two years, but they will have already paid him the cash under the current deal.

They could try to trade him, but teams are going to want to look at that knee, and because contracts go with the player in a trade, few teams I've just tossed it out to over the last few weeks are going to be willing to take the deal with Walker under that scenario.

Sure, the Broncos weren't thrilled Walker kept alluding, following the season, to the idea he wanted out if he couldn't be used more in the offense. Just like they weren't thrilled he publicly demanded the ball more during the season on the day before he left for Houston for knee surgery.

But Walker has tried to mend the fences some. The Broncos would certainly like him to re-do the deal, but it's difficult to get anyone in any job to surrender money that has already been negotiated.

The Broncos could try to make it an incentive-driven deal, but Walker's representatives are going to know that Brandon Marshall looks like Jay Cutler's No. 1 receiver – the two have already worked out together extensively – so any "lead the team'' clauses are going to be a risk from their point of view.

And yet if they do want to trade him – and there hasn't been much buzz about that among the general managers I've spoken with around the league – they could tell Walker it would be easier to move him if he reworked his deal.

So, a complicated affair to be sure. There are many inside the team who say history has shown the team can have two 1,000-yard receivers and a quality running game, so there would be room for Walker and Marshall to co-exist in the offense.

The bigger issue in terms of releasing him would be what happens after.

The Broncos, from Shanahan on down, do not want Brandon Stokley to have to be an every-down receiver on the outside because of his age and injury history. They believe Stokley's impact will be greatest if he is a spot player in the slot.

His body wore down last season filling in for the injured Walker and Rod Smith on the outside, and they believe he missed time down the stretch with a knee injury because of it. That only serves as more incentive, to them, to watch his playing time more carefully in '08 if they have that luxury.

Releasing Walker would leave a significant hole in the depth chart that may cost plenty to fill in free agency, even more than keeping him does – the cost of not only the cap hit of releasing a player with up to four years left on his deal, but also the hefty expense of signing a good enough player to replace him.

Suddenly that roster spot goes from an $8 million cap hit to a $13 million cap hit to sign a good enough player in a high-priced market to replace him.

Receiver is also not routinely a position that offers immediate help in the draft – those players often take longer to integrate, on average, into an offense. Guys, even the elite, struggle to get open, struggle with defensive backs who are routinely stronger and often just as fast.

Each year, the production of the rookie receiver classes, as a whole, are routinely below the expectations brought on by their draft position. Only a handful of guys have been 1,000-yard receivers as rookies over the last two decades.

And in the last 22 seasons a wide receiver has been the league's offensive rookie of the year just three times – Carl Pickens, Randy Moss and Anquan Boldin. Over that same span running backs have won the award 16 times.

That's the difference between immediate impact and not immediate impact.

That's also why even considering releasing Walker with his current deal is such a difficult idea for the Broncos. Nothing is ever totally off the board in the Shanahan regime, but it's a difficult proposition to simply cut him.

http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/broncos/archives/2008/02/working_the_wha.html#more

PatricktheDookie
02-21-2008, 09:52 AM
Probably the best piece I've read on Javon this year.

Traveler
02-21-2008, 09:53 AM
Probably the best piece I've read on Javon this year.

Agree!

nevcraw
02-21-2008, 09:56 AM
If they can get walker back in, then they can focus on DL,LB, and safety..

BOSSHOGG30
02-21-2008, 10:01 AM
Sounds like this was written by a guy who wants to keep Walker. He never mentions anything about team chemistry or where exactly Javon's mental attitude is at this moment.

If we do keep Walker, we better have a guy on our roster anyways just incase that knee does go... chances are pretty high that it will.

Traveler
02-21-2008, 10:09 AM
Sounds like this was written by a guy who wants to keep Walker. He never mentions anything about team chemistry or where exactly Javon's mental attitude is at this moment.

I disagree with you here. I think he was just doing what the reader asked. Layout the terms of Javon's contract and identify the ramifications to the team by keeping, trading, or releasing him. Nothing more, nothing less IMO.

As for determining his mental state, unless he's talked directly with Javon, just how would he make that determination?


If we do keep Walker, we better have a guy on our roster anyways just incase that knee does go... chances are pretty high that it will.

DUH!;) J/K

WARHORSE
02-21-2008, 03:54 PM
Denver will move to make his contract more palatable, and the incentives wont be on production but playing time. What he points out is true, and we arent going to find a player in the draft to take the place of Walker, and make an impact right away. If we need a fast guy who can simply run the fly route, bring Ashley back. I dont see him making Martz roster.

Walker, if healthy, can be outstanding. Shanny will definitely talk to him about his maturity.

Looks to me like chances are he stays.

I prefer that if hes healthy. It allows us to focus on other areas.

BigSarge87
02-21-2008, 04:56 PM
I agree, if we improve the OL, Jay gets more time to find him down the field, he could have a good year also. The idea of having two 1,000yd recievers get's me hard...core excited for next year.

IF HE STAYS HEALTHY

Hoshdude7
02-21-2008, 05:22 PM
If its just Brandon next year and Stokley, we are in trouble.

nevcraw
02-21-2008, 09:03 PM
If its just Brandon next year and Stokley, we are in trouble.

Went to to the AFC championship game w/ Rod, Ms. Lelie and the Putz.
Even if they signed no one else I'd give the slight nod to this group to the 05' corp.

and correction, it would be Brandon, Stokley, and a healthy Scheftler. I also expect Glenn Martinez to be in the mix next year. Must be the :beer:

pnbronco
02-21-2008, 11:28 PM
Went to to the AFC championship game w/ Rod, Ms. Lelie and the Putz.
Even if they signed no one else I'd give the slight nod to this group to to to the 05' corp.

and correction, it would be Brandon, Stokley, and a healthy Scheftler. I also expect Glenn Martinez to be in the mix next year. Must be the :beer:

That feels so long ago and really wasn't. Some good food for thought. We won the Super Bowl with Mac, Rod and Shanon. So I really hope Walker comes back and both he and Brandon have an outstanding year along with Stokley and Tony.

Tned
02-24-2008, 08:13 PM
Legwold seems to discuss three options:


Keeping Walker
Trading Walker
Releasing Walker, before the roster/option bonuses are due


Another consideration is that if they pay Walker the option bonus, that will be considered a 'signing bonus', which will result in the money being deferred, but also meaning that nexts years cap hit will be similar to this one.

If he has an $8 million cap hit if he is released now, that means there is $2.66 million a year in bonus money remaining to be counted in '08, '09 and '10. If they exercise the 2011 option for $3.4 million, that will be spread over '08, '09, '10 and '11 at $850k a year.

So, if they keep him this year, he will get paid. $2.1 million in salary, a $2 million roster bonus and either a $3.4 million option for 2011 or a $1-2 million buy out bonus for not excersizing the 2011 year.

This means that he will be paid cash between $5.1 and $6.1 million if the Broncos don't excise their option for 2011 and will pay him $7.5 million ($2.1 salary, $2 million roster, $3.4 million option) if they do exercise the 2011 option.

So, they clearly save some a bunch of cash (up to $7.5 million) if he is cut this week, and they get the salary cap hit out of the way.

However, Legwold makes it seem like it will be a wash to get rid of him, except for the fact that the Broncos will have to spend money to replace him.

It looks like Walkers cap number this season would range from $6-8 million, depending on whether or not the Broncos excercise the option on 2011, so in a way it is a wash. However, the big downside to paying him $7.5 million this year, is the problem that if his knee isn't healthy, not only will Bowlen have spent $7+ million in cash, but if they release Walker next year they will take a $4.5-5.5 million cap hit next year.

Also, there is a lot of talk about potential trades, but in terms of cap hit, the Broncos still take the same $8 million cap hit when they trade him, so unless they get a quality player or pick in return, trading him isn't a huge improvement over releasing him, as they Broncos still have to count the $8 million in '08 whether he is released or traded.

Basically, any scenario where Walker isn't healthy and playing another two years for the Broncos is a bad one for the Broncos.

Hoshdude7
02-24-2008, 08:20 PM
Legwold seems to discuss three options:


Keeping Walker
Trading Walker
Releasing Walker, before the roster/option bonuses are due


Another consideration is that if they pay Walker the option bonus, that will be considered a 'signing bonus', which will result in the money being deferred, but also meaning that nexts years cap hit will be similar to this one.

If he has an $8 million cap hit if he is released now, that means there is $2.66 million a year in bonus money remaining to be counted in '08, '09 and '10. If they exercise the 2011 option for $3.4 million, that will be spread over '08, '09, '10 and '11 at $850k a year.

So, if they keep him this year, he will get paid. $2.1 million in salary, a $2 million roster bonus and either a $3.4 million option for 2011 or a $1-2 million buy out bonus for not excersizing the 2011 year.

This means that he will be paid cash between $5.1 and $6.1 million if the Broncos don't excise their option for 2011 and will pay him $7.5 million ($2.1 salary, $2 million roster, $3.4 million option) if they do exercise the 2011 option.

So, they clearly save some a bunch of cash (up to $7.5 million) if he is cut this week, and they get the salary cap hit out of the way.

However, Legwold makes it seem like it will be a wash to get rid of him, except for the fact that the Broncos will have to spend money to replace him.

It looks like Walkers cap number this season would range from $6-8 million, depending on whether or not the Broncos excercise the option on 2011, so in a way it is a wash. However, the big downside to paying him $7.5 million this year, is the problem that if his knee isn't healthy, not only will Bowlen have spent $7+ million in cash, but if they release Walker next year they will take a $4.5-5.5 million cap hit next year.

Also, there is a lot of talk about potential trades, but in terms of cap hit, the Broncos still take the same $8 million cap hit when they trade him, so unless they get a quality player or pick in return, trading him isn't a huge improvement over releasing him, as they Broncos still have to count the $8 million in '08 whether he is released or traded.

Basically, any scenario where Walker isn't healthy and playing another two years for the Broncos is a bad one for the Broncos.


Maybe...somehow...Walker were to go missing...

Tned
02-24-2008, 08:28 PM
Maybe...somehow...Walker were to go missing...

That would do it, but about anything short of that, him retiring or playing for the next couple years will be bad for the Broncos.

OB
02-24-2008, 08:45 PM
Well its nice to finally understand and know what the true $$$ impact of JW contract

I def. think he could be an impact player sans injury - but I think Shanny and them will take his mental capacity (ie him wanting to play here) into consideration if/when they make their choice

IF Javon wants out of Denver that bad I would hope he'd be willing to wheel n deal :whoknows:

Good read though :2thumbs:

Lonestar
02-24-2008, 08:47 PM
That would do it, but about anything short of that, him retiring or playing for the next couple years will be bad for the Broncos.


Wonder who approved of this poison pill contract?

hamrob
02-24-2008, 09:17 PM
I think Walker is hurt. Reminds me of TD in terms of the injury. He still has all the confidence in the world...but the knee is jacked up! I just don't think he'll regain his past form again. He could decide to take the year off...have the surgery and rehab...then come back in a year...hopefully more healthy...but truly, I think his best days are behind him.

Tned
02-24-2008, 09:38 PM
Wonder who approved of this poison pill contract?

It really isn't a poison pill, it is a standard NFL contract these days.

Based on the way Javon played his first year, when it appeared his injury was behind him, it looked like the Broncos front office were geniuses for taking the chance on Walker. Then, after having a very good first year, the knee becomes a chronic problem, and so does Walker's contract.

Dean
02-24-2008, 11:16 PM
I hope that the Broncos can trade him to get something for hime. If they have to just release him, they might choose to release him now and file him as a post June first cut (new last year). They could avoid part of this year's signing bonus that way. This would depend upon whether the Broncos want to take the cap hit this year or next.

Tned
02-24-2008, 11:24 PM
I hope that the Broncos can trade him to get something for hime. If they have to just release him, they might choose to release him now and file him as a post June first cut (new last year). They could avoid part of this year's signing bonus that way. This would depend upon whether the Broncos want to take the cap hit this year or next.

I was thinking the same thing, but when and read that section of the CBA a few hours ago, and as I read it, the clause only applies to players in their second to last year of their contract. Meaning, if the last year of a players contract was '09, then the team could release him before June '08 and still designate him a June 1st cut and split the cap hit over two years.

However, unless I was reading that wrong, it ONLY applies to players in the second to last year of their contract, and Walker has three years left. So, as I read the CBA, it doesn't apply to Walker.

I had actually written a post earlier today talking about how Legwold left out that option, and then when I grabbed the CBA to look up the exact clause, I discovered it doesn't appear to apply here.

gobroncsnv
02-25-2008, 12:02 AM
Would be cool if the NFL would allow the dollars paid to a player who has to sit out because of injury not count as part of the cap. Enough injuries happen in this league, it's just the nature of a violent game. But while it wouldn't be right to allow a team to cut a player (and his contract) due to injury, it's also not right that the money paid to the player (for his PERFORMANCE on the field) still counts against the team. Seems like they should have someone working on this.

Lonestar
02-25-2008, 12:05 AM
Would be cool if the NFL would allow the dollars paid to a player who has to sit out because of injury not count as part of the cap. Enough injuries happen in this league, it's just the nature of a violent game. But while it wouldn't be right to allow a team to cut a player (and his contract) due to injury, it's also not right that the money paid to the player (for his PERFORMANCE on the field) still counts against the team. Seems like they should have someone working on this.

then Belichick would put scumbags on IR for the hell of it.. OH Moss has a stubbed toe.. lets get rid of the cap value..

Bronco9798
02-25-2008, 12:11 AM
This whole Javon situation just needs to get settled and get it out of the way. Whoever thought when we signed him that this would turn into a mess so soon. Just when you think you have a great tandem at the WR position it goes to crap.

Requiem / The Dagda
02-25-2008, 12:41 AM
Trades can't happen until this Friday, so obviously don't expect anything until then. Tampa and Washington seem interested, and Atlanta might give Denver a 7th for Mike Bell. Hope it all happens.