2023 Cowboys Free Agency

p1_

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
26,801
Well he only played 4 games. Which of those did he start at LT? I'd have to go back and watch because I honestly don't remember which of those games he actually played LT or RT. Our run game went down pretty dramatically after Steeles injury.
He struggled on the right side, far from elite.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
53,428
His cap hit right now is 17 million. I'm seeing if cut his cap hit becomes 8 million in dead money, which means we'd save 9 million against the cap. Which is a little over 1 million more than McGovern got AAV.
That's the wrong way to do the math. The only thing you should really look at is what you save. What you save is 13.6 mil. The 8 in dead cap you're talking about is already there. You can't save that. You can only pick which years you want it to hit. Which can be done by designating June 1st and Yada Yada. Or take the hit knowing you save the extra 4 mil off next years cap. Either way the real savings is 13.6 mil.

Not cutting him means he counts 4 mil against your cap next season. So really keeping him leaves a total of 21.6 mil hitting your cap this year and next. (He isn't actually under contract for 2024, I'm assuming it's an automatic void year) or you cut him and 8 counts over that span.
 

p1_

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
26,801
Brings 8 snaps in the most important game of the year. :picard
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
38,214
That's the wrong way to do the math. The only thing you should really look at is what you save. What you save is 13.6 mil. The 8 in dead cap you're talking about is already there. You can't save that. You can only pick which years you want it to hit. Which can be done by designating June 1st and Yada Yada. Or take the hit knowing you save the extra 4 mil off next years cap. Either way the real savings is 13.6 mil.

True about June 1 but I don't think it would be wise to push dead money into the following year also just so they could try to justify overpaying McGovern.

I think you're wrong on the rest. If he's cut this off-season, the accelerated cap hit is 8 million. That's what he costs if he's cut. If he's not cut or restructured he costs 17 million. Which means they'd save 17-8=9 million against the cap by cutting him. If they signed McGovern they'd have spent almost 8 million of that. They'd save about 1 million by swapping Tyron for McGovern.

The 13 million you're talking about is his base salary but you can't go just by that because you have to account for his guarantees still yet to charge against the cap which is I believe about 4 million this year plus 4 million next season (i.e. 4 mil plus 4 mil equals 8 mil cap hit they'd have to account for between this year and next).
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
53,428
True about June 1 but I don't think it would be wise to push dead money into the following year also just so they could try to justify overpaying McGovern.
What you're missing is that by keeping Tyron you are pushing 4 mil of dead money into 2024 already. It's why 13.6 is the actual number. See what I'm saying now?
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,807
I saw how many new posts were in this thread and I thought we might have actually done something worthwhile, and then I saw it was just two lawyers arguing, and it made more sense. :unsure
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
53,428
You also know McGovern will probably count only 4 or 5 mil in year one of that contract. But I also think that's the wrong way to look at a cap. There is just money moved to future years to do that.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
38,214
What you're missing is that by keeping Tyron you are pushing 4 mil of dead money into 2024 already. It's why 13.6 is the actual number. See what I'm saying now?

If you're strictly talking about June 1st sure, but we weren't talking about that until your last post when you brought it up, so my cap savings calculation wasn't wrong. You're just adding June 1 into the equation now which is fine, that's one route they could go (although I don't agree with doing that either).
 
Top Bottom