I don't have any insight or even an opinion on Kendricks,
but I noticed this in an article about worst FA signings.

Eddie

Matt Verderame wrote
https://www.si.com/nfl/2023/03/24/2023-nfl-free-agency-worst-signings-jimmy-garoppolo
containing the following:

Eric Kendricks, LB, Chargers

Contract: Two years, $13.5 million ($6.75 million guaranteed)

Kendricks signed at free agency’s outset after being cut by the Vikings,
who saved $9.5 million with the release.

While Kendricks was a 2019 first-team All-Pro in Minnesota, he struggled
mightily last year in coverage. The question is whether that’s because
of former defensive coordinator Ed Donatell or Father Time.

Regardless, signing Kendricks while allowing Drue Tranquill to sign a
one-year deal worth $3 million with an extra $2 million in incentives is
shocking. Especially when one considers Tranquill, 27, is four years
younger than Kendricks and is coming off a year of 146 tackles, five
sacks and excellent coverage.

And, as a final insult, Tranquill signed with the AFC West–rival Chiefs.

Kendricks might find new life in a different scheme, but Tranquill would
have been the better signing.

So the Chargers paid more for less.

ReneG wrote:
> So the Chargers paid more for less.
>

Three things:

(1) Kendricks' cap number for this season is only $4 million:

https://overthecap.com/player/eric-kendricks/3893

It's $9.25M for next season, which means he will only be here for this
one season.

(2) The Chargers probably expected Drue to receive a much better
contract than the low-ball offer from the Chiefs. And even that $5M is
in fact more than the Chargers will be paying Kendricks this season.

(3) Kendricks is a better run defender than Tranquill according to
commentators, and I think that was a factor.

--Robin

Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:

> ReneG wrote:
>> So the Chargers paid more for less.
>>
>
>
> Three things:
>
> (1) Kendricks' cap number for this season is only $4 million:
>
> https://overthecap.com/player/eric-kendricks/3893
>
> It's $9.25M for next season, which means he will only be here for this
> one season.

That's the wrong way to look at it.

He is getting paid $6.75M this season, and $6.5M next season.

The Chargers put $2.75M on cap layaway, that they accrue next season
regardless of whether he is still on the team. Essentially a sunk cost.

Kendricks has both pay and a marginal cap charge of $6.5M next year.
$6.5M is the right number for deciding whether they will keep him.

Eddie Grove wrote:
> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>> ReneG wrote:
>>> So the Chargers paid more for less.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Three things:
>>
>> (1) Kendricks' cap number for this season is only $4 million:
>>
>> https://overthecap.com/player/eric-kendricks/3893
>>
>> It's $9.25M for next season, which means he will only be here for this
>> one season.
>
> That's the wrong way to look at it.
>
> He is getting paid $6.75M this season, and $6.5M next season.
>
> The Chargers put $2.75M on cap layaway, that they accrue next season
> regardless of whether he is still on the team. Essentially a sunk cost.
>
> Kendricks has both pay and a marginal cap charge of $6.5M next year.
> $6.5M is the right number for deciding whether they will keep him.
>

However you want to slice it, they are paying him $4M this season.

Next season they are playing him $9.25M if they keep him and $2.75M in
dead money if they don't.

My point is that it's extremely unlikely that he will be on the team
next season, so he is in effect a one-season rental.

--Robin

Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:

> Eddie Grove wrote:
>> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> ReneG wrote:
>>>> So the Chargers paid more for less.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Three things:
>>>
>>> (1) Kendricks' cap number for this season is only $4 million:
>>>
>>> https://overthecap.com/player/eric-kendricks/3893
>>>
>>> It's $9.25M for next season, which means he will only be here for this
>>> one season.
>>
>> That's the wrong way to look at it.
>>
>> He is getting paid $6.75M this season, and $6.5M next season.
>>
>> The Chargers put $2.75M on cap layaway, that they accrue next season
>> regardless of whether he is still on the team. Essentially a sunk cost.
>>
>> Kendricks has both pay and a marginal cap charge of $6.5M next year.
>> $6.5M is the right number for deciding whether they will keep him.
>>
>
>
> However you want to slice it, they are paying him $4M this season.

No, they are paying him $6.75M this season. The $2.75M cap deferral is a
bureaucratic *TEAM* obligation, not a player obligation. The media
always get this wrong. I don't know why. It's not complicated.

> Next season they are playing him $9.25M if they keep him and $2.75M in
> dead money if they don't.

Which means, next year he costs an additional $6.5M if they keep him.
The decision whether to keep him is whether they think he is worth an
additional $6.5M. The deferred $2.75 cap hit is entirely irrelevant to
the decision whether to keep him next year.

> My point is that it's extremely unlikely that he will be on the team
> next season, so he is in effect a one-season rental.

He is *cheaper* next season than he is this season. So unless you think
his play is trending toward a real decline, it is most likely a 2 year
deal.

Eddie Grove wrote:
> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>> Eddie Grove wrote:
>>> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> ReneG wrote:
>>>>> So the Chargers paid more for less.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Three things:
>>>>
>>>> (1) Kendricks' cap number for this season is only $4 million:
>>>>
>>>> https://overthecap.com/player/eric-kendricks/3893
>>>>
>>>> It's $9.25M for next season, which means he will only be here for this
>>>> one season.
>>>
>>> That's the wrong way to look at it.
>>>
>>> He is getting paid $6.75M this season, and $6.5M next season.
>>>
>>> The Chargers put $2.75M on cap layaway, that they accrue next season
>>> regardless of whether he is still on the team. Essentially a sunk cost.
>>>
>>> Kendricks has both pay and a marginal cap charge of $6.5M next year.
>>> $6.5M is the right number for deciding whether they will keep him.
>>>
>>
>>
>> However you want to slice it, they are paying him $4M this season.
>
> No, they are paying him $6.75M this season. The $2.75M cap deferral is a
> bureaucratic *TEAM* obligation, not a player obligation. The media
> always get this wrong. I don't know why. It's not complicated.
>
>> Next season they are playing him $9.25M if they keep him and $2.75M in
>> dead money if they don't.
>
> Which means, next year he costs an additional $6.5M if they keep him.
> The decision whether to keep him is whether they think he is worth an
> additional $6.5M. The deferred $2.75 cap hit is entirely irrelevant to
> the decision whether to keep him next year.
>
>> My point is that it's extremely unlikely that he will be on the team
>> next season, so he is in effect a one-season rental.
>
> He is *cheaper* next season than he is this season. So unless you think
> his play is trending toward a real decline, it is most likely a 2 year
> deal.
>

Actually, you're right, the entire bonus is payable now but is spread
over the term of the contract for cap purposes, so the Chargers are
paying him $6.75M, as you say, in actual dollars this season.

However, his cap number for 2024 remains $9.25M, which I can't see the
Chargers taking on. They can release him, take a dead money charge of
$2.75M, and save $6.5M.

--Robin

Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:

> However, his cap number for 2024 remains $9.25M, which I can't see the
> Chargers taking on. They can release him, take a dead money charge of
> $2.75M, and save $6.5M.

They've *already* taken on the $2.75M charge for next year.
It is inevitable and unavoidable. That's a sunk cost.
It does not make him any cheaper or more expensive this year or next.

What they really did is to spend $2.75M on someone else this year,
using money that would otherwise have been budgeted for next year.
Attaching that spend to Kendricks is meaningless bureaucracy,
except if by some chance he gets suspended this year or next
it may affect the amount he loses in pay.

The salary cap system is a simple system for forcing everyone to use
basically the same budgets. It works. The talking heads want sensational
numbers so they misrepresent everything.

For practical purposes, dead money is a complete red herring for individuals.
I want to call it *disingenuous* to include dead cap in most charts, but
everybody does it because ... well there's no good reason, but they do
it. I guess it shows how badly you get hurt if you cut Deshaun Watson
prematurely, but 4+ year deals is about the extent to which it matters.

The main thing that matters is cash flow.

The cash flow next year is $6.5M. That's all that matters for Kendricks.