It occurs to me that it may make some sense to think about how you allocate your cap resources based on positional value and the development cycles of rookies at a given position. It allows you to easily see what your projected surplus/deficit is likely to be the following year.
For example, if I were to analyze the current roster and factor in historical roster construction:
POS - players on the final 53 - Cap%
QB - 3 - 20%
Patrick Mahomes - 18%
Veteran Backup - 1.5%
Developmental Rookie - 0.5%
RB - 4 - 2.4%
Four Rookies or Vet Minimums - 2.4%
WR - 8 - 13.6%
Two intermediate veterans - 10%
Six rookies, vet mins - 3.6%
TE - 4 - 8.3%
One premium receiving TE - 6.5%
Three rookies, vet mins - 1.8%
OT - 4 - 11.2%
One premium - 8.9%
One early draft choice - 1.1%
Two developmental rookies - 1.2%
IOL - 5 - 3%
Five rookies, vet mins - 3%
EDGE - 5 - 11.2%
One premium - 7%
One Veteran rotator - 1.5%
Two early draft choices - 2.2%
One Developmental Rookie - 0.5%
IDL - 5 - 10.1%
One premium 3T - 7.7%
Four rookies, vet mins - 2.4%
LB - 5 - 3%
Five rookies, vet mins - 3%
DB - 9 - 9.8%
One second-tier safety - 5%
Eight rookies, vet mins - 4.8%
ST - 3 - 3.5%
One Premium kicker - 2.3%
One rookie/vet min Punter - 0.6%
One rookie/vet min long snapper - 0.6%
Now this totals 96.1% and is based on rough estimates based on new contracts and chiefs historical preferences.
I suspect that there are enough cap tricks to actually project consistently getting 110% in "average" cap space just due to the backloaded and unguaranteed nature of NFL contracts.
The 110% - 96.1% gives you about 13.9% in cap fat that you can use to plug holes (Thuney for example) or allocate to value acquisitions/extensions (Tranquill, Townsend for example).
If I apply this logic to the 2024 Roster, using spotrac's 240.5M cap estimate
QB (20% target, 19.4% contract, 1.9% projected, 0.3% overage)
Mahomes - 19.4%
TBD Vet - 1.5% (Buechele RFA tender?)
TBD Rookie - 0.4%
RB (2.4% target, 0.8% contract, 1.2% projected, 0.4% under)
Pacheco - 0.4%
Prince - 0.4%
TBD Two Vet mins/Rookies - 1.2%
WR (13.6% target, 9.4% contract, 4.2% available)
MVS - 5.8% (Cut/Extend?)
Toney - 1%
Watson - 0.9%
Moore - 0.7%
Rice - 0.6%*
Ross (Justyn) - 0.4%
TBD - One/Two intermediate veteran? (depends on MVS?)
TE (8.3% target, 7% actual, 1.2% projected, 0.1% under)
Kelce - 6.5%
Gray - 0.5%
TBD two vet mins/rookies - 1.2%
OT (11.2% target, 11.4% actual, 1.1% projected, 1.3% overage)
Taylor - 10.3%
Niang - 0.6%
Morris - 0.5%
One early draft pick - 1.1%
IOL (3% target, 10.9% contract, 0.6% projected, 8.5% overage)
Thuney - 9.4%
Smith - 0.5%
Kinnard - 0.5%
Humphrey - 0.5%
TBD - vet min/rookie - 0.6%
EDGE (11.2% target, 8% contract, 3.2% under)
Omenihu - 4.6%
Karlaftis - 1.4%
FAU - 1.1%
Kaindoh - 0.5%
Thompson - 0.4%
IDL (10.1% target, 0.4% contract, 9.5% projected, 0.2% under)
Coburn - 0.4%
One premium 3T - 7.7%
Three rookies/vet mins - 1.8%
LB (3% target, 1.4% contract, 1.8% projected, 0.2% overage)
Bolton - 0.8%
Chenal - 0.6%
Three TBD vet mins/rookies - 1.8%
DB (9.8% target, 10% contract, 1.2% projected, 1.4% overage)
Reid - 5.9%
Cook - 0.7%
McDuffie - 1.6%
Williams - 0.5%
Conner - 0.5%
Watson - 0.4%
Jones - 0.4%
Two TBD rookies/vet mins - 1.2%
ST (3.5% target, 1.9% contract, 1.2% projected, 0.4% Under)
Butker - 1.9%
TBD vet min/rookie Punter - 0.6%
TBD vet min/rookie Longsnapper - 0.6%
Unfilled vacancies:
Vet QB - 1.5%
Rookie developmental QB - 0.4%
Two vet min/rookie RBs - 1.2%
One/Two intermediate veteran WRs? (depends on MVS?) - 5/10%
Two vet mins/rookie TEs - 1.2%
One Early Draft Pick OT - 1.1%
One vet min/rookie IOL - 0.6%
One Premium 3T - 7.7%
Three vet min/rookie IDL - 1.8%
Three vet min/rookie LB - 1.8%
Two vet min/rookie DBs - 1.6%
One vet min/rookie P - 0.6%
One vet min/rookie LS - 0.6%
Total Projected Needs: 25.1%
Cap% 100.0
L: Contracts (89.7)
Av. Cap 10.3%
L: Projected Needs (25.1)
Cap resource deficit (14.8%)
No real further thoughts on this, other than the Chiefs appear to be in a minor cap deficit next year that should be easily resolved with a couple minor moves. It was a fun exercise!
[Reply]