Chiefs News: Look for the Chiefs to pull preseason games from KCTV5 next year. Chris Jones' camp is softening a little on demands - Tyreek Hill's extension will happen at some point. Jones' deal could get some front loading to help with Mahomes' WHALE, $200+ mil future deal.
— Chiefs Kingdom Editorial Board (@1_ChiefsKingdom) July 16, 2019
Anyone that says "Jones deal could be frontloaded to help with Mahomes" isn't to be taken seriously because it doesn't work that way in the rollover era.
If you frontload it, you eat into rollover credits that could've been carried over and still provided the same amount of salary cap relief for Mahomes deal. It's 6 in one hand, half dozen in the other.
Frontloading may be on the table, but it has nothing to do with the Mahomes contract. It's a different way for Jones to get more guaranteed money in the first 3 years. It's a way his camp may be looking to 'soften their demands' while still giving him lifetime security.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Anyone that says "Jones deal could be frontloaded to help with Mahomes" isn't to be taken seriously because it doesn't work that way in the rollover era.
If you frontload it, you eat into rollover credits that could've been carried over and still provided the same amount of salary cap relief for Mahomes deal. It's 6 in one hand, half dozen in the other.
Frontloading may be on the table, but it has nothing to do with the Mahomes contract. It's a different way for Jones to get more guaranteed money in the first 3 years. It's a way his camp may be looking to 'soften their demands' while still giving him lifetime security.
Those two concepts are unrelated.
Yeah, frontloading makes a ton of sense for Okafor or Sammy Watkins. These are guys you overpay because you want to draft their replacement. If we sign jones and frontload it, it's because we don't want him here too long after mahomes comes in because we don't think we should afford him. And I don't think the Chiefs are there right now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Yeah, frontloading makes a ton of sense for Okafor or Sammy Watkins. These are guys you overpay because you want to draft their replacement. If we sign jones and frontload it, it's because we don't want him here too long after mahomes comes in because we don't think we should afford him. And I don't think the Chiefs are there right now.
Frontloading makes no sense at all for Sammy Watkins. They needed to backload that deal precisely BECAUSE they intend to draft his replacement so you cut him before the big money hits.
The theory is that you frontload someone like Jones because you want to keep him for the duration of the deal and in years 3-4-5 when his base is lower, it makes your cap cleaner for a Mahomes extension. It's a sound theory but it ignores the rollover credits for unused cap space. By frontloading (let's say $12 million from years 3-4-5) you've plowed another $12 million into years 1 and 2. All that extra $12 million did was eat up cap space in years 1 and 2 that would've been a 1 for 1 carryover into years 3 and beyond.
Don't do it at all and nothing changes. You've instead built that $12 million into cap credits that raise your cap in year 3 by that very same $12 million which can then be used to pay the very same money to Mahomes. Meanwhile you've also left the threat of Jones getting cut as he reaches his bigger payouts over his head, encouraging him to continue to play hard.
Frontloading makes nearly no sense in any capacity unless it encourages the player to take a lower AAV. And frankly, it should, because frontloaded money acts as guaranteed money.
So the reason he's doing it has nothing to do with freeing up money for Mahomes - it makes no difference either way. The reason he'd be doing it is to create more up-front security. His agents can pitch it to the fans that way if they'd like, but that's not how the cap works in the rollover era. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Frontloading makes no sense at all for Sammy Watkins. They needed to backload that deal precisely BECAUSE they intend to draft his replacement so you cut him before the big money hits.
They did backload it in terms of cap space. I thought it was a great deal.
Year 1-$7.8 million
Year 2-$19.2 million
Year 3-$21 million-($14 million saved if cut/$7 million dead space)
If he balls out this year, we could easily trade the guy for a 2nd rd pick and also save $14 million with only 1 year of dead money. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
They did backload it in terms of cap space. I thought it was a great deal.
Year 1-$7.8 million
Year 2-$19.2 million
Year 3-$21 million-($14 million saved if cut/$7 million dead space)
If he balls out this year, we could easily trade the guy for a 2nd rd pick and also save $14 million with only 1 year of dead money.
Exactly, that was the point I was making.
'Zilla cited the exact WRONG person to talk about frontloading - backloading was easily and obviously the way to go with him for the very reasons we've seen. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Frontloading makes no sense at all for Sammy Watkins. They needed to backload that deal precisely BECAUSE they intend to draft his replacement so you cut him before the big money hits.
The theory is that you frontload someone like Jones because you want to keep him for the duration of the deal and in years 3-4-5 when his base is lower, it makes your cap cleaner for a Mahomes extension. It's a sound theory but it ignores the rollover credits for unused cap space. By frontloading (let's say $12 million from years 3-4-5) you've plowed another $12 million into years 1 and 2. All that extra $12 million did was eat up cap space in years 1 and 2 that would've been a 1 for 1 carryover into years 3 and beyond.
Don't do it at all and nothing changes. You've instead built that $12 million into cap credits that raise your cap in year 3 by that very same $12 million which can then be used to pay the very same money to Mahomes. Meanwhile you've also left the threat of Jones getting cut as he reaches his bigger payouts over his head, encouraging him to continue to play hard.
Frontloading makes nearly no sense in any capacity unless it encourages the player to take a lower AAV. And frankly, it should, because frontloaded money acts as guaranteed money.
So the reason he's doing it has nothing to do with freeing up money for Mahomes - it makes no difference either way. The reason he'd be doing it is to create more up-front security. His agents can pitch it to the fans that way if they'd like, but that's not how the cap works in the rollover era.
Sorry, think we're talking about frontloading in two different ways. I'm talking about frontloading as in prorated cap. Get all your cap hits out of the way on the front end so they're easy to cut by year 3. Most free agents we've signed have overpaid base salaries but very low bonus money. [Reply]
Originally Posted by :
Chiefs News: Look for the Chiefs to pull preseason games from KCTV5 next year. Chris Jones' camp is softening a little on demands - Tyreek Hill's extension will happen at some point. Jones' deal could get some front loading to help with Mahomes' WHALE, $200+ mil future deal.
— Chiefs Kingdom Editorial Board (@1_ChiefsKingdom) July 16, 2019
Don't you still have to pay out 90% of your cap or you have to pay all the members of your team extra on their salary to get up to that threshold? Not sure the Chiefs are in any danger of that being an issue but that could also be a reason to front load. [Reply]
