Rams create $10mil in cap space

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
17,930
Cap space. You can always fuck with the excel worksheet and create it. Why I don't worry about it.
 

ottoman89

Busch Light slammin, hog farmin, Iowa boy.
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
4,959
Name
Josh Otto
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
Something men do during a midlife crisis.

Oh, we’re not playing Jeopardy?

As for the Commodes EDGE, the problem is that Washington declined his year 5 option, so he’ll be a UFA next offseason.
That certainly is a concern. If we were to somehow take a flier on him and he turns out playing well, it'd be a good problem and could potentially be locked up long term.
 

Rams43

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 20, 2014
Messages
4,141
The Kupp restructure had to happen. For signing rookie class and a little breathing room, if nothing else.

Do you suppose that they might make a tier 2 move or two, now?
 

Allen2McVay

Legend
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
7,894
Name
Jim
Cap space. You can always fuck with the excel worksheet and create it. Why I don't worry about it.
Yeah but reclassifying salary-to-bonus creates cap space short term, while decreasing cap space long term.

The Rams created $12M of cap space in 2022 by converting much of Leonard Floyd's salary-to-bonus. That helped last year but Floyd is on-the-books this year for $19M of Dead-$. Some of that is because of the conversion last year.

A by-product of this Kupp salary-to-bonus conversion is that whatever the Rams' 2024 cap space was yesterday, it's less today. Some of the re-classified money, although paid and received in 2023, will now hit the Rams' 2024 salary cap.
 

I like Rams

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
2,177
That certainly is a concern. If we were to somehow take a flier on him and he turns out playing well, it'd be a good problem and could potentially be locked up long term.
The odds have not been in our favor when gambling with players that we hope might turn out.
 

Allen2McVay

Legend
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
7,894
Name
Jim
Similar to the Rams’ 2023 team, I don’t have high expectations but I am forever hopeful. With regard to the extra cap space, I don’t expect a significant signing but I am hopeful.

Should the Rams bring back John Johnson, I may cry real tears.

I post this because, should that happen, I may need a real hug.
 

PhillyRam

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
6,479
Name
Scott
sounds likely.
train
They don't need $10M for the rookie class as most of that class won't even fall in the top 51 salaries. And outside of Avila, those that do, won't be much higher than the guys they are replacing in the top 51.

So I doubt the rookie class adds more than $3M to the existing cap number, if that.
 

snackdaddy

Who's your snackdaddy?
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
11,046
Name
Charlie
I'm with those who say rookie class and a little breathing room. Just in case they surprise and actually have a winning season approaching the deadline. You never know.
 

Allen2McVay

Legend
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
7,894
Name
Jim
And outside of Avila, those that do, won't be much higher than the guys they are replacing in the top 51.

This is an important point. Not every player under contract counts under the Salary Cap LIMIT.

I have been confused in the past with the exact number ... 51 vs. 53. It's top-51 contracts up until the start of the regular season but I am not sure if it flips to the top-53 contracts in September.

For purposes of this post, it does not matter.

The Rams currently have more than 51 players under contract but only the top-51 apply to the cap-limit. If the 51st player has a 2023 cap hit of $750,000; and the Rams sign a player for a $1M cap-hit, that signing adds $250,000 to the Rams cap-limit because the $1M guy is added but the $750,000 guy comes-off the top-51.

Spotrac shows this well. If you look at the Rams' Spotrac page, you will see all the players currently under contract, along with their 2023 cap hit. At this moment (it could change at any time) Colin Duncan and his $754,000 cap hit is the 51st contract and counts against the Rams 2023 cap-limit.

The 52nd contract has a $753,000 cap hit and belongs to Timarcus Davis but it's crossed-out on Spotrac because, it does not currently count against the Rams cap-limit ... because it's not in the top-51. By-the-way, bonuses paid to all undrafted free agents do count against the cap.
 

Psycho_X

Legend
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
11,323
They don't need $10M for the rookie class as most of that class won't even fall in the top 51 salaries. And outside of Avila, those that do, won't be much higher than the guys they are replacing in the top 51.

So I doubt the rookie class adds more than $3M to the existing cap number, if that.
You're right that it will probably bump a few off the bottom of list but i'd still wager it'll be a net cap loss of $6-7 million when all said and done. We had change to begin with so it'd leave $3-5 million depending on that net loss would be my assumption. Teams like to keep at least $2-3 million in back pocket for season if not a little more. Plus, leaving a chunk of change would be there in the case a trade presents itself during the season like seasons past.

Idk, I'm just guessing here and they could surprise us all. But I just don't see anything crazy happening right now other than maybe a low level veteran free agent or two being brought in.
 

Turducken

Starter
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
536
Two semi‐obvious takes:

Short term, this may mean that Snead sees enough potential in this year's team to set aside a little money for a free agent opportunity.

Long term, it's starting to look more and more like Kupp eventually retires as a full career Ram. His contract (like AD's) makes a trade (for value) unlikely.