Ouch! Costly Loophole for the Niners

[flyerhawk]

SF isn't willing to trade him for a mid round pick to this point. The problem with trading him to Denver is that they don't have a 3rd round pick this year. So, if the Broncos refuse to give up their end of the 2nd round pick, the next pick to offer is 2 rounds later, nearly a 5th rounder. That won't get it done.

Or you go with a 2017 pick.

 

[jarntt]

So Denver can pay him $1.00 and SF would have to pay the rest? Classic.

Well, that is fair value for what we have seen the last two years...

 

[shopson67]

Or you go with a 2017 pick.

Remembering that future picks are typically devalued by a round in trades, that would mean a future 1st or 2nd if they're asking for a 2nd or 3rd this year.

 

[jarntt]

PFT doesn't know what they are talking about.

2) SF could cut him and not pay him too. You can cut injured players during the offseason. The only way they would have to pay him is if was going to miss actual time because the injury. Kaepernick is scheduled to be healthy by the start of training camp. The rule is meant to protect cash not calendar dates. If Kaepernick isn't healthy enough to play because of the injuries suffered in SF then he could go back after his money. But if he is healthy enough to open training camp, SF wouldn't have to pay him.

PFT quote from OP: According to Profootballtalk, the 49ers could still be on the hook for Colin Kaepernick's entire salary even if he's cut before the April 1 deadline.

 

[flyerhawk]

Remembering that future picks are typically devalued by a round in trades, that would mean a future 1st or 2nd if they're asking for a 2nd or 3rd this year.

Yup. Most likely they would push for a 2nd in the 2017 draft.

None of us really now what the market is for Kaep. Or if the Niners really want to trade him.

 

[ducky]

PFT quote from OP: According to Profootballtalk, the 49ers could still be on the hook for Colin Kaepernick's entire salary even if he's cut before the April 1 deadline.

Here are quotes directly from the article:

"The trio of offseason surgeries to Kaepernick (including a left shoulder procedure that landed him on IR in November) may have already tied the team’s hands as to the $11.9 million in salary owed to Kaepernick in 2016. Technically guaranteed for injury only until April 1, if the 49ers were to cut him while still injured they likely would owe him the money — even if Kaepernick later becomes healthy."

It's the 2nd paragraph of the article and the entire premise of the article.....and it is completely false.

Every single contract in the NFL is guaranteed if the player is injured. Kaepernick's deal isn't unique in anyway. That guarantee only last as long as the player can not play football again though. Meaning that Kaep would need to miss the entire season because of these injuries for the 49ers to be on the hook for all the money. If these injuries prevented him from playing football ever again, he would get the entire contract.

Just to give you an idea of how off base it is. Arian foster contract that Houston just cut him from was guaranteed for injury in the EXACT same way that Keap's was. Yet Houston just cut him. So does that mean that they owe him that? Of course not because he is going to be healthy and playing football in the fall.

It's just another one of PFT's legal posts that is COMPLETELY off base.

 

[Manster7588]

What Manster said makes no sense. If the Niners were to cut Kaep before April 1st they would likely pay nothing unless it was determined that he couldn't actually play. Signing with another team would make it pretty clear that he could and the Niners would be off the hook. Furthermore, Kaep would then be a FA and could go wherever he wanted. His cap hit would be far worse for the Broncos in that regard than if they traded for him.

IF as stated in the PFF article that SF is on tap to pay Keap's 2016 salary Denver can sign him for the league minimum and SF would have to pay the rest of his 2016 salery. The $1.00 was obviously a joke, if you can't see that, there's no hope for you.
Again it's an IF because the article say COULD be on the hook for his salary.

 

[ducky]

Yup. Most likely they would push for a 2nd in the 2017 draft.

None of us really now what the market is for Kaep. Or if the Niners really want to trade him.

49er's are going to keep him unless teams start offering a 1st this year + future picks IMO.

Kelly and Baalke need Kaep to come back and be good in Kelly's offense for them to give him up for anything less.

 

[ducky]

IF as stated in the PFF article that SF is on tap to pay Keap's 2016 salary Denver can sign him for the league minimum and SF would have to pay the rest of his 2016 salery. The $1.00 was obviously a joke, if you can't see that, there's no hope for you.
Again it's an IF because the article say COULD be on the hook for his salary.

And Kaep could walk into 49ers training facility tomorrow, slip on a wet floor, break his neck and the 49er's would be on the hook for every penny of the entire contract.

That is only slightly less likely than the scenario that PFT is floating.

 

[Duffman]

SF isn't willing to trade him for a mid round pick to this point. The problem with trading him to Denver is that they don't have a 3rd round pick this year. So, if the Broncos refuse to give up their end of the 2nd round pick, the next pick to offer is 2 rounds later, nearly a 5th rounder. That won't get it done.

Denver has a 3rd this year, they don't have a 4th(expect for a comp pick that can't be traded.)

 

[jarntt]

Here are quotes directly from the article:

"The trio of offseason surgeries to Kaepernick (including a left shoulder procedure that landed him on IR in November) may have already tied the team’s hands as to the $11.9 million in salary owed to Kaepernick in 2016. Technically guaranteed for injury only until April 1, if the 49ers were to cut him while still injured they likely would owe him the money — even if Kaepernick later becomes healthy."

It's the 2nd paragraph of the article and the entire premise of the article.....and it is completely false.

Every single contract in the NFL is guaranteed if the player is injured. Kaepernick's deal isn't unique in anyway. That guarantee only last as long as the player can not play football again though. Meaning that Kaep would need to miss the entire season because of these injuries for the 49ers to be on the hook for all the money. If these injuries prevented him from playing football ever again, he would get the entire contract.

Just to give you an idea of how off base it is. Arian foster contract that Houston just cut him from was guaranteed for injury in the EXACT same way that Keap's was. Yet Houston just cut him. So does that mean that they owe him that? Of course not because he is going to be healthy and playing football in the fall.

It's just another one of PFT's legal posts that is COMPLETELY off base.

What I'm saying is they said COULD. Then you said COULD. In what you quoted in this post they do use the term "likely" which is false, but they also say "may have already tied the team's hands" which can end up true. Hence the

 

[huskers1217]

Report: 49ers will keep Kaepernick unless they’re “blown away” with a trade offer

 

[flyerhawk]

IF as stated in the PFF article that SF is on tap to pay Keap's 2016 salary Denver can sign him for the league minimum and SF would have to pay the rest of his 2016 salery. The $1.00 was obviously a joke, if you can't see that, there's no hope for you.
Again it's an IF because the article say COULD be on the hook for his salary.

A couple of things.

1. If Kaepernick is healthy enough to sign a contract then the Niners aren't going to be on the hook for his salary for the year.
2. Even if that were somehow the case, Kaep would be a free agent. Why would he sign a league minimum deal with anyone?

 

[Manster7588]

And Kaep could walk into 49ers training facility tomorrow, slip on a wet floor, break his neck and the 49er's would be on the hook for every penny of the entire contract.

That is only slightly less likely than the scenario that PFT is floating.

The Red Skins kept RG3 in street clothes in fear of injury and guaranteeing his 2016 salary, if Keap can show he's injured from the 2016 season, SF very well COULD be on the hook for his 2016 salary if he's released today.

 

[Manster7588]

A couple of things.

1. If Kaepernick is healthy enough to sign a contract then the Niners aren't going to be on the hook for his salary for the year.
2. Even if that were somehow the case, Kaep would be a free agent. Why would he sign a league minimum deal with anyone?

Ratliff was released by Dallas because he was too injured to play, then turned around and signed with and played for Chicago.

 

[redseat]

Can confirm, I would totally be ok with this. And if anyone could pull this off, it's probably Elway.

Very true

 

[flyerhawk]

Ratliff was released by Dallas because he was too injured to play, then turned around and signed with and played for Chicago.

Ratliff was cut by the Cowboys in the middle of the season. How is that relevant?

 

[Manster7588]

Ratliff was cut by the Cowboys in the middle of the season. How is that relevant?

He was cut because he claimed he couldn't play do to injury, a few days later he signed with Chicago and played. It's relevant because clauses in some contracts guarantee salary if a player is injured. Hence the reason Washington kept RG3 off the field last season, they weren't gonna risk him being injured guaranteeing his 2016 salary. It's not that hard to understand. Kaep had off season surgeries to fix injuries from 2015, the NFLPA can argue his salary is guaranteed because of that.

 

[flyerhawk]

He was cut because he claimed he couldn't play do to injury, a few days later he signed with Chicago and played. It's relevant because clauses in some contracts guarantee salary if a player is injured. Hence the reason Washington kept RG3 off the field last season, they weren't gonna risk him being injured guaranteeing his 2016 salary. It's not that hard to understand. Kaep had off season surgeries to fix injuries from 2015, the NFLPA can argue his salary is guaranteed because of that.

They can. And if Kaep misses time next year then it is a pretty good argument. But if the Niners cut him Thursday and he signs with the Broncos next month, the Niners won't owe him a dime.

The Cowboys didn't owe Ratliff any money. They stopped paying his checks when they cut him.

 

[Manster7588]

They can. And if Kaep misses time next year then it is a pretty good argument. But if the Niners cut him Thursday and he signs with the Broncos next month, the Niners won't owe him a dime.

The Cowboys didn't owe Ratliff any money. They stopped paying his checks when they cut him.

Your right about Ratliff not being owed money, I miss-remembered, I remember Jerry talking about going after some of the money, but it was money already paid. Anyhow, if Kaep's contract has an injury guarantee the 49ers may be on the hook if he plays there or not. That is the basic fact the article points out.