Looks cheap! Love it!
2024 $1.76
2025 $2.63
2026 $4.85
Then some void years
7 Likes
Thank you 49ers 
5 Likes
crazy pills on the whole Brock Wright thing *
2 Likes
It’s reduced his cap hit, and there’s an out after two years.
We should get the 49ers to negotiate more of our contracts
14 Likes
49ers must have thought the Lions didn’t really want Wright.
As I said when it when it was announced. There was no real way for them to structure a 3 year, $12M contract with only $6M guaranteed that would make it that much more expensive than the 1 year $3M tender.
The contract saves cap space in the 1st two years and by year 3 the contract will actually be cheap if Wright is still a TE2 or they can cut him.
5 Likes
Looking at it again, it’s not quite to straight forward to match it. There’s a $2.25 million option bonus in 2025 which messes with the figures a bit.
2024 - cash paid $4.6m, cap hit $1.8m
2025 - cash paid $3.7m, cap hit $2.6m ($2.8m dead cap if cut)
2026 - cash paid $3.7m, cap hit $4.8m ($3.9m dead cap if cut, $0.9m cap saving)
2027 - void year, cap hit $2.8m
OTC has different numbers for dead cap because they aren’t assuming that the option bonus is taken up, even though for him to be cut in 2026 the bonus would have had to be taken up in 2025. I don’t know why they do it that way, it’s a bit stupid if you ask me.
Anyway, they way the 49ers structured it makes it not great to get out of at any point. I mean it’s not terrible because it’s not a huge contract, but my first analysis wasn’t quite correct.
1 Like
Yea it’s basically pointless to cut him under this contract. Which is fine. I dont see them finding 2 better TEs in the next 2 years.
Still a fairly cheap contract over all.
So his cap # is cheaper than his tagged amount
for this year and next year
Thanks 9ers!!
4 Likes
The Niners really thought the Lions wouldn’t match THAT?Thanks for doing the negotiation for Holmes I guess.
1 Like
It is more expensive than the $3M tender. Wright is paid $4.6M in year one, if he’s cut that’s what he made. 
2 Likes
Good deal. He’s a solid guy that is of the more “complete TE” variety. Still like the potential of James Mitchell as more of a pass catcher, then Zylstra rounds it all out, so any position we don’t have to spend a draft pick on, I’m good with it.
3 Likes
It’s more expensive in cash flow but these teams aren’t concerned with that for this sized contract. It’s about cap flexibility. And this contract gives them more cap space than tendering the next two years as long as they plan to keep Wright for the next couple of years.
1 Like
Cash is all teams are concerned with. It’s fans that think the cap hits are important. This contract was structure by the 49ers who need cap flexibility.
Cap flexibility for the Lions is kind of irrelevant, we are in extremely good cap shape and this contract will expire well before we have any issues. When the Lions looked to match Wright’s offer sheet, the cap hits were irrelevant. The guarantees and the cash payout structure is whats important.
2 Likes
Appreciate that
The Lions are not hurting for cash and their cash position is in very good shape. You are correct, the cap situation is also in very good shape because they are careful in how it’s managed. There are a few large extensions in the plans and they also like to maintain flexibility for unforseen needs.
As I said, there was no way to structure a 3 year, $12M, $6M guaranteed contract to make it substantially more expensive than a $3M tender for a player the Lions liked.
As long as the Lions don’t mind keeping Wright for the next 2 or 3 years this is good for Wright and the Lions.
I’m not sure if you understand that if he plays one year and is cut, we pay him $4.6M and $4.6M is going to count against the cap, whether it’s this year or next. That’s 53% more than $3M, that is substantial. And it’s $4.15M/yr if cut after year 2 and $4M if he plays out the contract. $4M/yr is 33% more than the $3M RFA tender. No matter how you look at the numbers, it’s a substantial increase over the tender.
It has nothing to do how the cap (accounting) has been managed. It has to do with the fact that we’ve built through the draft and have been very prudent with our cash/APY spending.
3 Likes
They arnt going to cut him so that worry is pointless.
Yes team/ownership/players (Sheila and rod wood) cares about Cash. But the league/ roster and fans (Brand and Dan) care about cap.
Hes gonna be on the roster till his contract is up. They arnt going to go out and get 2 more TE better than him.
And the fords arnt hurting for money. They can pony up 4.5m for him this year
1 Like
That is 100% wrong.
Fans are concerned about the cap and that’s driven by the media’s lack of understanding the difference between cash and accounting. Brad/Dan/Rod/Sheila are concerned with the cash and their budget. The cap consequences have no bearing on what Brad and Dan have to spend within their budget.
PHI, NO, SF, etc have to consider cap consequences, but we are no where near that.
1 Like
You left off this part of my post.
You are playing with percentages on relatively small contract numbers.
It’s $1M/yr more on avg. NFL teams regularly burn millions of dollars on signing bonuses on undrafted free agents they don’t expect to make the team. Also, the Lions obviously “LIKE” Wright and plan to “keep him for 2 or 3 years” so 1 year contracts will increase each year (his pay has gone up every year and he is entering his prime) likely pushing past $4M in the next two years. So no this contract is not a substantial increase over the tender over 3 years for a player you Like and plan to retain.
Managing the cap is organizational and not just accounting. It involves player acquisition (draft and Free Agent), contract structure, succession planning.
Yes the Lions primarily build through the draft, but they also have intelligent free agent signings and short term flexible contract structures that don’t box them in to keeping unwanted players or carrying a lot of dead cap.
So yes “Managing the Cap” is very important.
1 Like
That’s not true though. There’s a section of the media who like to hang their hats on “cash over cap” in order to stand out from the crowd and in the hope that their name gets attached to a new moneyball type strategy, but the cap is definitely meaningful.
The Chargers didn’t cut Mike Williams and trade Keenan Allen because of cash considerations, they made those moves because of those players’ cap hits. The Bills didn’t cut Poyer, White, Morse and others on the eve of free agency because of cash reasons, it was their cap hits that were the problem. The Saints aren’t strapped for cash every offseason, they’re strapped for cap space. Every year there are cap casualties, and teams make moves they otherwise wouldn’t make because of cap issues.
I would suggest it’s the opposite. A GM doesn’t care about the cash, but what he cares about is manipulating the cap hits so as to allow him to spend as much cash as possible. A lot of NFL teams could afford to sign whoever they like in free agency, the Cowboys for example, but there’s no way to make all those cap hits fit under the salary cap.
It sounds really cool and new age to talk about cash over cap but while the salary cap is linked to cap hits then cap hits will always be a serious consideration for GMs.
1 Like