many off season posts having to do with the offseason shaping of the Pats 2014 roster, usually include the caveat, "I would re do Vince". Seems, assuming health, everyone wants Vince back on a contract that does not tax the cap. Can it be done?
Vince will be 33 years old on Nov 4th 2014
If the Pats do nothing with Vince's contract, he is owed a base salary of $7.5M. While Vince already has his bonus in his pocket, for salary cap purposes, Vince's signing bonus will count an additional $3.6M against the cap in 2014. Vince also had an additional $500k in bonuses in his contract language based on "work out and inventives". Lets assume that as weight related, and playing a certain amount of snups per season. For the sake of this excercise, due to injury, lets assume Vince did not attain those incentives.
Therefore, Vince currently counts against the cap for 2014 at $11.1M.
If Vince is cut, he will count against the cap $3.6M in dead money. BY cutting Vince the Pats save $7.5M in 2014
Does Vince wish to play in 2014? Lets assume yes. Do the Pats want him back? Lets assume yes.
The Pats could cut Vince, and resign him for the Vet minimum, which is about $1M. Combined with the bonus of $3.6M, Vince would be on the books for $4.6M. WOuld Vince come back and put himself thru rehab, camp and another season for $1M? Doubtful.
THe PAts could take the $11.1M owed Vince and convert it into another signing bonus and sign Vince to 3 more years. (risky at 33 years old). Thay could then pay Vince a base salary each year of $1-2M, meaning Vince is counted against the cap over he next 3 years $4.7M. I am sure that Vince would do that. But would the Pats?
FOr sure the figures put forth probably are the low end and high end of a potential deal. Maybe some common ground can be found in between. But the decision to simply "re do Vince" is not so easy at 33 years old coming off injury.