I think you are right. I look at it like this.
All teams play by the same rules. Therefore, any team can choose to "manage" the cap the way we do, if they want. When the cap goes up, it goes up for all teams, too.
On a yearly basis we have more money committed that most other teams. When managing the cap in this fashion, thats will be the case more often than not.
With the understanding that any team can choose to do what we do, with most having more cap space that we have, it puts us at a disadvantage versus the others. Thats what it's ultimately about. It's not about how we are able to manage the cap, it's about our ability to compete with others. Saying "we didn't want that guy" or something similar, will in many cases be driven by our ability to sign that person. Having to settle for players at lesser financial commitments would appear to mean that you are settling for the players the other teams passed on. Unless they are all wrong, you're probably watering down the depth, and possibly core players too, by going that route.