2021 GMO General Discussion Thread

Question for all the contract wizards:

In 2020, De'Vondre Campbell signed a 1 year contract with the Cardinals but the contract included 4 additional voided years to be used for prorating his signing bonus. Currently, he shows up on the active contracts list with a cap hit of $4,000,000.

Because his contract was voided, he also shows up as a UFA and is eligible to be signed elsewhere in free agency.

What's the best way for me to account for him?

• Remove him from my active contracts and enter his $4M as dead money ???

And if I end up re-signing him as a UFA, simply delete the $4M in dead money?

 

The dead cap of $4mil can only be changed if his contract were changed/renegotiated.

Being that the original contract has been voided, even if he were to be resigned in FA the $4mil hit remains separate from the new contract.

 

So, if I were to re-sign him as a UFA, I would need to add $1M (the prorated portion of his voided contract due in 2021) to whatever I signed him for ?

 

Correct.

The remainder would continue on the current structure.

 

No the full $4M stays on this year’s cap regardless. Once the void kicked in it all accelerated onto this year’s cap. This was the same thing I had to deal with with Tom Brady last year...the only way to have kept that $4M spread out would’ve been to sign him to a new deal before the void occurred.

 

That's what I recalled from last year. Except, OTC shows a $1M cap hit for the next 4 years.

 

Weird. Sportrac shows him just this year for 4m...I’m solidly like 93.6% sure that’s correct and otc needs to update

 

I believe it’s all dependent on the language within the contract.

I think it was Brees original extension that had bonus money prorated for 2 years after the void date that did not all shift to the immediate following season if they let it expire, so there are mechanisms to extend cash.

EDIT: The language in Drew’s contract does make it so that the voided years stay on the cap until 2023.

 

After looking into the details within the contract, @Underdog is correct.

All $4mil goes against the cap once the contract is voided. However, that has not yet happened. The deal doesn’t expire until the 5th day after the Super bowl (12th).

 

Well then . . . I think I'll just account for it as dead money. I'm certainly not going to bid on him as a UFA and then add $4M to my bid if successful. All he's doing is taking up a roster spot.

 

That's it in a nutshell - once the dead money triggers, there's no way to change it. For the real-life team to avoid the cap hit, they'd have to do something with a new contract before the old one voided.

 

Philly, Carolina and San Fran here. Eagles likely aren't looking to do much this exercise but if you want someone come asking. I am likely not looking for any big moves for SF but Carolina could see some action if someone wants to make a deal. McCaffery and Moore are not moving. I am still deciding on what to do with Curtis Samuel and a tag or tag and trade is not out of the picture.

 

Hey guys! Hope everyone’s doing well in this crazy year. Dolphins are checking in and will make some moves later today or tomorrow. That being said, we have plenty of picks to trade for some of your disgruntled veterans so if you wanna shoot me a PM and discuss a trade go for it! Good luck guys

 

Are we allowed to use a restructure/extension on a player acquired via trade, and if so how would the new number be determined given that the cap hit would be different from what OTC calculates them for with their current teams?

 

Thinking about this . . .

[Insert Buffering Wheel here} ​

 

I have to double check something so let me brew a cup and I’ll get back to you both in about 30 minutes.

 

Okay . . .

If you trade for a player - you're actually trading for his contract, right? So, assuming your trade partner hasn't already restructured or extended the contract, I don't see any reason (within the GMO rule set) why you couldn't.

However - IF your trade partner had already restructured or extended the player's contract - then you're taking on the new salary cap hit.

Let's see how @Tim weighs in after mainlining his caffeine.

 

Because the team trading the player away is eating all of the prorated bonus money, the team receiving the player can still extend/restructure him based on the current contract's base salary and get some cap relief.

However, it has to be based on the least financial gain possible for the team receiving the player whether extension or restructure. That means the team receiving the player will need to choose the lesser of two evils when it comes to restructure or extension, and use the least amount of savings for either of those two options available in the remaining contract regardless of the year indicated for that savings.

The reason being is pretty simple - there are situations where the extension would actually put the player's contract in a negative value in relation to the team's gain.

In order for this to keep dollars in proper columns, the team receiving the player bases their savings off of the base salary, not the cap number. The cap number is no longer relevant post-trade as the team sending the player has paid the prorated bonus prior to the players moving off of the roster.

 

Yep, this is something that has to be included in any rule we shape for this.

 

Hmmm.... wouldn't the team trading the player away be the team taking the bulk of the hit? Restructures typically convert huge chunks of salary to prorated bonus, so a team doing a restructure would be reducing the base but jacking up the potential dead money.