Saints could get to $14.61 million under the cap without restructuring Derek Carr, after Saints salary cap potentially increases by $5M (19 Viewers)

[Rouxble]

So can a team restructure a partial amount? Restructure some to get us cap compliant, then cut him and take the hit June 1?

Definitely more than two options for that contract. Another would be to give Carr a bonus in exchange for taking a pay cut, and then put a poison pill in the contract that ensures we release him.

 

[Elvis]

The Belichik Patriots would have moved on from Latt 2 years ago. They paid Brady, they chopped off vets, even still productive. QB rules!

Unfortunately for us, Carr isn't Brady and our vets are declining in production. The ideal solution is to take the two year approach to getting rid of both.

QB this year is easier to replace with a guy with upside on the roster or free agency than it is to replace 4-5 older vets at various positions. If we had someone that could play in place of Tyrann, we'd have done it. If we had someone who could play in place of Cam, we'd have done it. And I could keep going. But we didn't and we're not likely to this year. We don't have enough money or draft picks to replace them all.

So you start with QB instead because Rattler, a single draft pick or a vet minimum free agent can fill the roster spot. And the savings from releasing Carr will help fill the other spots next year when there is already more space. Where kicking his $30m salary in 2025 to 2026 gives us less room to do either.

 

[Taker597]

So can a team restructure a partial amount? Restructure some to get us cap compliant, then cut him and take the hit June 1?

Good question


Does June 1st designation cancel out roster bonus/Salary guarantee date? Or do we have to cut him outright?

 

[livefromDC]

I am talking about adding a key piece or two and replacing some role players, not to go on some wild $100 million spending spree.

A Mekhi Becton, a good big WR and/or tight end, a run stuffer, re-sign a Chase Young, an adequate safety is what I am talking about. Not signing a bunch of top rated free agents and then overspending on other guys just to meet minimum spend thresholds.

I don’t think it’s accurate to say we haven’t maximized. We literally just signed the league’s highest paid free agent two seasons ago (for better or for worse) at a time we had no money.

THIS. What the Saints will likely do is what the Saints have always done. They aren't going to do what Washington tried to do in the early 2010s but they aren't going to tank or sit out free agency and just rely on the draft. This means signing mostly mid-tier FAs to fill needs in free agencies and spending big on occasion to sign a player the coach wants despite the appearance that they have no money under the salary cap. If I was forced to predict 2 things the Saints will do, it would be this:

1. We're going to see Kellen Moore and his staff get rid of players that we didn't see moving in favor of players what we didn't predict the Saints would be interested in. While we are still stuck on the current picture of the Saints, the new staff will have no such loyalty and it will be evident throughout the entire first off season up until final cut down. We have NO idea what this staff will value, but Loomis will help them bring their vision to life.

2. Try to win games.

 

[Elvis]

Definitely more than two options for that contract. Another would be to give Carr a bonus in exchange for taking a pay cut, and then put a poison pill in the contract that ensures we release him.

This bribing solution has been my favorite solution so far. It's actually brilliant.

Give him $5-10m guaranteed right now to lower his base to vet minimum. Then cut him with a June 1st designation. He gets the cash and the ability to go get a new contract. We only have to carry $27-32m until June instead of the full $51m. Split his dead money over two years.

 

[Mojomajik9]

I don’t think moving on from Carr means the team is all in on tanking. It means we’re starting a new chapter with Moore at the helm and we’re going to make the changes he wants to build the team to his liking. The fans want to move on. There’s just no benefit of keeping Carr one more season. The cap implications could be even worse next season if they do decide to trot him out one more year.

For whatever reason the Carr experiment failed here. The team didn’t seem to gel around him and it just feels off. It also could be a stumbling block for Moore as he attempts to rebuild team culture and buy in. If everyone knows Carr is a lame duck this season what does that do to the team? Again it just feels off.

If they do move on I don’t think you can accuse them of tanking if they bring in a QB competition. Maybe they draft a guy like Dart, Milroe or the Syracuse QB to compete with Rattler. They could also bring in a decent vet. There’s options and it’s not waiving the white flag to go ahead and rip the bandaid off.

 

[texasjefe]

Unfortunately for us, Carr isn't Brady and our vets are declining in production. The ideal solution is to take the two year approach to getting rid of both.

Indeed. Carr needs to go now.

My point about the Patriots was that they moved great productive vets like Lawyer Milloy and Richard Seymour early to protect their cap and HoF QB. I know the comparisons are not clean, but when you look at the vets they moved on from, and the free agents they brought in that were huge in their winning Super Bowls, it's easy to see why they won alot of rings with Brady, when we were always a player or two short or screwed trying to win a 2nd Super Bowl.

 

[texasjefe]

Elvis, one more thing, 30 years ago, my first date with my bride-to-be was an Elvis Costello concert. Pump it up.

You might think I'm lying and my first date was an Elvis Presley concert.

 

[St. Widge]

THIS. What the Saints will likely do is what the Saints have always done. They aren't going to do what Washington tried to do in the early 2010s but they aren't going to tank or sit out free agency and just rely on the draft. This means signing mostly mid-tier FAs to fill needs in free agencies and spending big on occasion to sign a player the coach wants despite the appearance that they have no money under the salary cap. If I was forced to predict 2 things the Saints will do, it would be this:

1. We're going to see Kellen Moore and his staff get rid of players that we didn't see moving in favor of players what we didn't predict the Saints would be interested in. While we are still stuck on the current picture of the Saints, the new staff will have no such loyalty and it will be evident throughout the entire first off season up until final cut down. We have NO idea what this staff will value, but Loomis will help them bring their vision to life.

2. Try to win games.

I think cutting or trading Carr fits into the above. In fact, if Moore wants to move on from Carr, then it fits into the above better than keeping him.

But, I will say that it's been 3 years since we signed a lot of mid-tier free agents when we signed Mathieu, Jarvis Landry, Sunders, Marcus Maye, and Nathan Shepherd. Since then we've only really signed Carr and a mid-tier deal for Chase Young. And the Young deal was only a one year deal. The rest of the free agents we signed wre low priced guys. There has been clear evidence of belt tightening from Loomis.

 

[St. Geezy]

I think cutting or trading Carr fits into the above. In fact, if Moore wants to move on from Carr, then it fits into the above better than keeping him.

But, I will say that it's been 3 years since we signed a lot of mid-tier free agents when we signed Mathieu, Jarvis Landry, Sunders, Marcus Maye, and Nathan Shepherd. Since then we've only really signed Carr and a mid-tier deal for Chase Young. And the Young deal was only a one year deal. The rest of the free agents we signed wre low priced guys. There has been clear evidence of belt tightening from Loomis.

So we signed a lot of guys in 2022, signed the highest paid free agent in 2023 and a handful of role players (Williams and Saunders to name a couple), and in 2024 we declared we wanted to dial it back some prior to that offseason.

I don’t understand how you can say this belt-tightening has been more than a one year thing, which coincided with Loomis’ 2024 declaration.

 

[Swampy Saint]

This bribing solution has been my favorite solution so far. It's actually brilliant.

Give him $5-10m guaranteed right now to lower his base to vet minimum. Then cut him with a June 1st designation. He gets the cash and the ability to go get a new contract. We only have to carry $27-32m until June instead of the full $51m. Split his dead money over two years.

I keep seeing this over and over by many posters and I'm confused.

We cut Carr and still have to pay dead money after he's gone.
Meanwhile, Carr is the best QB on the roster. Pay money to the best QB you have on the roster not to be here.
Unless they plan on signing another veteran for yet even more money.
I don't see a veteran out there who's going to come cheap. More money problems ensue.

And I'm not even close to being a Carr fan.

Help me out here.

 

[St. Widge]

So we signed a lot of guys in 2022, signed the highest paid free agent in 2023 and a handful of role players (Williams and Saunders to name a couple), and in 2024 we declared we wanted to dial it back some prior to that offseason.

I don’t understand how you can say this belt-tightening has been more than a one year thing, which coincided with Loomis’ 2024 declaration.

Loomis said the same thing the year he signed Mathieu and Landry. I think those guys becoming available when he did not expect it, made him stretch things out that year. The next year, he tried to trade for Watson and when that fell through he felt his only option was Carr because he still thought that roster had a shot. Despite that, he did not go out and sign mid-tier guys to support Carr. Instead, he stayed with a mediocre at best OL and WRs. Then last year he only signed Young to a bigish deal and that was only for one year. And they traded away Lattimore, because they didn't want to pay his big salary. His injury history had something to do with it, but if they were still all in, they would have kept him and gambled on his getting healthy like the Commanders, who are more or less all in right now, did.

That is vastly less then the Saints did in the years that they had Brees and Payton and they never would have let their best starting CB go during that time period. So I don't see how you can't see the belt tightening.

 

[St. Geezy]

Loomis said the same thing the year he signed Mathieu and Landry. I think those guys becoming available when he did not expect it, made him stretch things out that year. The next year, he tried to trade for Watson and when that fell through he felt his only option was Carr because he still thought that roster had a shot. Despite that, he did not go out and sign mid-tier guys to support Carr. Instead, he stayed with a mediocre at best OL and WRs. Then last year he only signed Young to a bigish deal and that was only for one year. And they traded away Lattimore, because they didn't want to pay his big salary. His injury history had something to do with it, but if they were still all in, they would have kept him and gambled on his getting healthy like the Commanders, who are more or less all in right now, did.

That is vastly less then the Saints did in the years that they had Brees and Payton and they never would have let their best starting CB go during that time period. So I don't see how you can't see the belt tightening.

I consider this past year as intentional belt-tightening, sure. We just disagree on the previous two years. We were clearly making the big moves we thought we needed to make at a time we thought we had a “Ready to win now” type of roster.

 

[St. Widge]

I consider this past year as intentional belt-tightening, sure. We just disagree on the previous two years. We were clearly making the big moves we thought we needed to make at a time we thought we had a “Ready to win now” type of roster.

I agree that the first year Loomis went back on what he said the plan was. The second year he kind of did it again for Carr but I think it was because he didn't expect Carr to be available. But, he didn't spend much other money that year so but sure, he didn't really tighten the belt. But last year was a clear indication to me that he was getting serious about resetting the cap. And I don't think that is going to change this year. They could wait to cut Carr until next year, but my preference would be to do it now to give Moore additional time to find his QB and to give us more money next year to build the roster instead of kicking the cans a bunch this year which I don't think we are going to do anyway.

 

[Elvis]

I keep seeing this over and over by many posters and I'm confused.

We cut Carr and still have to pay dead money after he's gone.
Meanwhile, Carr is the best QB on the roster. Pay money to the best QB you have on the roster not to be here.
Unless they plan on signing another veteran for yet even more money.
I don't see a veteran out there who's going to come cheap. More money problems ensue.

And I'm not even close to being a Carr fan.

Help me out here.

No need for confusion. Lattimore is on the books this year. Michael Thomas is on the books this year, Jameis Winston is still on the books this year. They were not part of the teams future but contracts have certain obligations and the cap has rules. Paying Carr a few million to go away and get us more 2025 cap space for free agency would be just another cap/contract maneuver.