|
this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; Originally Posted by Boston Saint Here is another thought/issue I’ve had with Thomas. I understand (not necessarily agree) with the “injuries happen and none of this is his fault” angle. However I’ve not seen or heard of him doing much ...
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-04-2022, 07:37 PM | #51 |
5000 POSTS! +
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Kenner, LA
Posts: 7,848
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
Originally Posted by Boston Saint
I saw him going crazy for Alontae Taylor when he was standing over Adams last week.
|
Latest Blogs | |
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn
Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey
CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey |
11-04-2022, 07:41 PM | #52 |
5000 POSTS! +
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 5,137
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
|
11-05-2022, 06:41 AM | #53 |
10000 POST CLUB
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
|
11-05-2022, 10:37 AM | #54 |
The Professor
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lithonia, GA
Posts: 2,773
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II
Again I don't think that it is possible. With the current contract MT13 counts $28 million against the cap next year. If the Saints want to keep him and they want to free up the money, the only option is a straight pay cut. No player is going to accept that especially with MT13's talent when healthy. There are a number other teams that will roll the dice and pay him a huge new contract with a healthy signing bonus to acquire such talent.
Edit: I think a lot of fans make the mistake of thinking that a restructure or extension or a pay cut is a one sided team option that the player has no input on. As many folks like to tout, the contract is the contract. The player and his representation have to agree to any changes. Typically it happens because both side benefit. The team frees up cap space. The player get guaranteed money in exchange. Take that option away, and the player has no incentive to change anything. That puts the team in a serious cap problem. The only way out of the contract for the team that unilateral is to cut the player. But then the team is still on the hook for any dead bonus money that's paid earlier in the contract. If MT13 plays for the Saints next year, it's under a restructure or an extension. If you don't want that, the only other option is to cut/trade him. There's no having cake (having the player play for you) and eating it too (not having an extension/restructure). It's simply not an option. SFIAH |
Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO
Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good. |
|
11-05-2022, 10:49 AM | #55 |
5000 POSTS! +
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 5,137
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL
What did you think SFIAH about my point on them needing to get below the salary cap by the March deadline. Doesn’t seem that they can wait on a post June date to cut/trade him.
|
11-05-2022, 10:56 AM | #56 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 2,091
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL
I disagree. There is a great precedent for MT’s value on the open market. Victor Cruz was an elite wide receiver with the Giants. Then he had a 3 year period where he was largely injured and flashed potential but could not put it all together. The Giants cut him and the Bears signed him in 2017. He got a 1 year $2 million deal with $500k signing bonus, did not make the team in training camp, and retired. He was a similar age to Michael Thomas now with elite talent when healthy. There are some differences in the situation and you can argue Thomas might have a little more upside than Cruz did then but overall the precedents for a player missing 40 of 50 games over 3 years and then returning to prove worth a big contract are extremely extremely rare and the precedents for a downward spiral are extremely extremely common. If Michael Thomas gets a big contract this offseason I hope and pray its with a division rival because it would be a horrible gamble.
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/chicago-...tor-cruz-8203/ |
11-05-2022, 11:00 AM | #57 |
5000 POSTS! +
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 5,137
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
Originally Posted by BakoSaint
He already HAS a big contract Bako. The question is how to best deal with it. Fortunately we’ve got smarter people than us, like Loomis, to figure it out.
|
11-05-2022, 11:08 AM | #58 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 2,091
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
Originally Posted by Boston Saint
I don’t believe Loomis is smarter than any of us. Most of us would not have given up CGJ for a 5th, given Peat top 5 guard money, traded next years 1st when we didnt have a sure thing at QB, etc.
My point is that Michael Thomas would not be worth anything close to the remaining unguaranteed money on his contract on the open market. The odds of a big comeback with how long he has been out are less than 10%. The Victor Cruz Bears scenario is more likely. So if we cut him he would not get a big deal. If he somehow did, 90% chance its a disaster. If we made a firm ultimatum on cutting his salary or cutting him, a smart agent would have to compare it with his value on the open market which i would guess is something like 1 year $ 8 million with $2 million guaranteed. |
11-05-2022, 11:11 AM | #59 |
The Professor
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lithonia, GA
Posts: 2,773
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
Originally Posted by Boston Saint
There's a post June 1 designation that can be made early in the league year IIRC. Here is an article on the subject:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/a...eir-salary-cap Once that designation is done, the player is treated as if they would be released June 1 even though it's March. In terms of salary cap, the cap designation I believe carries as if the player was released June 1. For MT13 that means that the $15.5 salary would come off the books immediately and the Saints would be responsible for the $11 million remaining with the 2 year split of the dead money. If that's not the case, then the Saints would have to restructure/extend everyone else to carry the full $28 million cap hit for MT13 until June 2nd. It would suck for free agency next offseason if that's the case. It's a tough spot all the way around. But it's only way to get out from under the back end of this contract without an extension or restructure. Contracts are designed this way. If the player is productive, the team restructures/extends. If not, then they have to cut the player and eat the dead money. There really are no other options. MT13's contract was always designed as a 3 year @ $20 million contract. The extra years were in to stretch out the cap hit from the bonuses paid. There was no intention to pay MT13 $15.5 in salary in 2023. Every long term Saints contract is structured this way. The Saints are just going to have to eat it. It was a bad roll of the dice. SFIAH |
Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO
Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good. |
|
11-05-2022, 11:15 AM | #60 |
The Professor
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lithonia, GA
Posts: 2,773
|
Re: Michael Thomas to IR
Originally Posted by BakoSaint
And this is the most interesting question in the entire scenario. What number would that $15.5 million need to be cut down to to keep the player and will the player accept that number?
SFIAH |