Jansen's Future in Doubt?

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

That's the whole point of an extension/restructure - Lower the salary (which is the hard number directly applicable to the cap) by converting it to signing bonus. As Schneed said, he is probably getting vet minimum these first couple years. To say he is taking a "pay cut" by restructuring and refering only to the salary is akin to saying that, because the sun is out, there will be light. Or, in a more simplistic response - Duhhh!!

In fact, if this had been a straight restructure, his "salary" would have been cut by about 3 million as that would have been converted to bonus money and the bonus money then prorated over the remaining contract period. By signing the extension, however, the bonus money gets prorated over a longer period then if he done a straight restructure. Under the straight restructure, and w/out looking a the cap sheets, I expect their would not have been much cap relief.

Thank you for the clarification, Joe Mendes, but I think that most of the people on the site (including me) understand why the team restructures and extends. Of course restructuring the current deal has nothing to do with this scenario and your hypothetical restructuring would be an idiotic move as it would leave the Redskins without a right tackle and with a 4.6 million dollar dead cap hit for '08. "Duhhh!!"

My original comment was that Jansen took a pay cut (meaning he took less money to help out the team). That is a fairly open ended statement so I can understand why Schneed would disagree. Here is the scenario from my perspective:

Jansen was scheduled to make $5.85 MM and $6.35 MM respectively in 2007 and 2008 (if they kept him). Obviously, the team felt that those salaries are too high.

Jansen's last deal was effectively 4 years for $15.428 or $3.86 million per year (pretty reasonable actually).

For argument's sake let's say his new contract was a straight line deal or $4.6M per year. Is that a paycut from 5.85 and 6.35, Yes. Is it a paycut from the context of his old deal, No (but it depends on your viewpoint).

The new deal pays 10 for a bonus. That is a base of 2.2 over 5 years and he gets the minimum for the first two (670M) or an average of 2.87 per year. Well, you don't have to be JoeRedskin to figure out that 2.87 is a paycut from 5.85 and 6.35. Now, the real question is what the salary amount is in years 3 -5. If they in fact pay the league minimum for 1 and 2 that leaves 10.66MM of salary to allocate over 3 years. I am guessing the salaries will be approximately 3 million in year 3, 3.66 million in year 4 and 4 million in year 5. If they keep him for 3 years the effective contract will be approximately 3 years for $ 14.34MM or 4.78 per year.

Is he getting more than he did in his old deal? Yes. Is it less than 5.85 and 6.35? Obviously. Is that a "pay cut". I would say that a difference of 2.98MM and 3.48MM respectively is but I can also see what Schneed is looking at as well. At the end of the day if he signs a deal that lets them pay him the veteran minimum in '07 and '08 that is a huge help to the team with the cap moving higher and higher over time.