I figured as much, I just wanted to trash Claypool.
A worthy pastime.
Somebody wiser than me, help me out:
The Texans gave up a 2nd round pick for Stefon Diggs, who is under contract through 2026. The Texans then gave him a raise for 2024, and cancelled the final 3 years of his contract, allowing him to become a free agent at the end of 2024.
My question is: Why the fuck did the Texans do that?
The only reason I can figure is that they want to appease Diggs’s … let’s call it mercurial … personality. Which would be an incredibly near-sighted, unprofessional, wateful, and stupid thing to do. If your toddler throws a tantrum because he cant have candy for every meal of the day, you dont respond by giving him candy for every meal of the day. If you have to give up all your leverage with a guy who has a proven record of animosity and diva behavior with every single team he’s played for, just to coax him into trying hard, you’ve already lost.
So, please explain to me the Texans’ thinking here.
I would be tempted to say it’s just the Texans being stupid again. But they had a major shakeup recently and got rid of (what I understand to be) the worst pieces in management/front office. And they seemed to be turning things around; last year was a pretty good one with their new young QB who might be the next big star. So I’d like to think there is some actual strategy here and not just Houston screwing everything up again. (Note that this is based on my hope that the team is turning around, not based on real knowledge on my part or anything I’ve read from more knowledgeable people.)
The Texan’s moves this offseason indicate they’re in win-now mode.
If he plays great and gets along and wants to stay, they can offer him an extension. If he becomes a locker room cancer or just doesn’t fit in or anything else, they can cut him anytime and be free and clear.
For Diggs, he can be a free agent in 1 year and sign wherever he wants.
Seems mutually beneficial to me.
Okay, that makes sense to me. And the extra money for 2024 would probably be to help him accept the fact that he has a short contract. It’s insurance against diva behavior rather than pandering to it. (Even though the extra short-term cash seems like appeasement.)
The Texans have some amazing but rough talent in a young WR corps. Bringing in Diggs could go a few ways.
-
Diggs actually feels some pressure – he’s not the defacto WR1 now – and starts living up to his potential without the prima donna attitude.
1a. Diggs serves as an example to the youngsters and helps them gain some lacking maturity -
Diggs continues his diva behavior. Maybe the Texans get some good production anyway, maybe they don’t. But he’s on a hair trigger and gets benched as soon as it’s too much. The Texans have other options.
2a. Diggs serves as a cautionary example to the youngsters that diva behavior won’t be tolerated and no player is more important than the team.
At least, maybe that’s their hope. Seems like an expensive gamble to me.
Which were both options if they still had him under contract. If he plays great, fantastic for them, they have 2 more years of paying him a much lower salary. If he flames out, they cut him. Bills already taking a $31 million in dead cap space for his hissy fits, so they wont be on the hook. The only thing that changes is the Texans no longer have the benefit of having him under contract beyond this year.
But its objectively not. There is no benefit to the Texans to give up all the leverage they have over a guy who has proven himself to be … somewhat unreliable in living up to his contracts.
How is it “insurance against diva behavior”? The Texans are literally giving up any insurance they have against him (having him under contract). Instead, they’re giving him everything he wants and hoping that will somehow spark him to not do what he’s done everywhere else he played.
They won’t have dead cap space after this season that they’d incur if they were to cut him when he was still on contract.
Are you sure about that? Not that I’m saying you’re wrong (because I don’t have information to the contrary), but I don’t see how a team taking on a contract for years can’t have a dead cap for cutting him before the contract ends unless something special was worked out here. My understanding has been that if you trade for a player you normally inherit everything about the existing contract unless you negotiate something new with that player.
" The beauty of when the Texans acquired Diggs, though, is that there is no more guaranteed money left on his deal after 2024. Diggs’ entire base salary of $18.5 million this season is guaranteed, but the Texans can move off of Diggs for nothing in 2025 or later if the partnership doesn’t work out, according to Over the Cap."
From here.
On his previous contract they’d owe him $18.505 million in salary and bonuses in 2025, $19,597,941 in 2026, and $18 million in 2027.
Their leverage is if they want to extend him and he wants to stay, they’re not locked into those numbers, they can negotiate all new numbers, especially for a guy who is “unreliable in living up to his contracts.” At 30 years old he could still be considered in his prime, though the tail end of it, but there are very few 31±year-old WRs in the NFL making more than $14M, and the Texans know it. By my count there’s Mike Evans and Keenan Allen both on a brand new contract, Cooper Kupp, and Davante Adams, unless I’m reading this chart wrong, which I could be.
The team that pays the money has to cap the money. The dead cap for the Bills is the leftover from Diggs’s signing bonus (as far as I can tell - I can’t nail down all the details on Spotrac for some reason). Since none of Diggs’s remaining contract is guaranteed - thus requiring the Texans to pay it - there’s no dead cap possibilities. Only possibility would have been cutting him after the first day of the league year, when the $3.5m would have become guaranteed. Instead, the Texans put that cash in his pocket immediately and voided the rest of the contract. No guaranteed money, no dead cap.
The leverage isn’t for next year - it’s making sure he behaves THIS year. Instead of the “maybe they keep him around next year on his current, not-horrific, contract”, this year is a contract year. Diggs has been put on notice that the issues WILL be detrimental to his future earnings.
That makes sense. I can’t imagine a world where Diggs, if he plays well enough to earn a new contract, would be willing to be paid less than he would have made under his old contract. But maybe that could happen.
Thanks. I can see if the Texans believe they can extend Diggs for less than what he would make under the old contract, getting rid of his contract makes sense.
Personally, I cannot foresee a world where Diggs plays well enough to earn a new contract, yet would accept less than what he had. Especially if the Texans want to pay him for declining productivity while developing Collins, Dell, and Metchie. But its the NFL. Anything can happen.
I only skimmed the subsequent responses, so apologize if this point has already been made, but the rationale that I’ve heard, and which makes some sense, is this. By essentially converting this into a 1 year contract, the Texans will be eligible for a 3rd round compensatory pick if and when he leaves as a FA.
Basically they are hedging their bets. If the marriage is great they’ll extend him and structure the contract the way they want. If Diggs want to.leave and sign a big deal elsewhere they recover a lot of the value given up in trade.
Diggs gets the opportunity to hit the market for one more big payday before he ages out and also gets some extra money this year. All in all this is a win-win move.
The Texans having him under control for 3 seasons isn’t as valuable when he’s being paid a big number. They believe that if he’s happy he’ll resign and nothing was lost. But if it doesn’t work out they won’t have to release him and lose the compensatory pick credit, which is very important.
It’s almost like they made a conditional trade. They gave a 2nd and if it doesn’t work out they get back a 3rd.
Dang, I didn’t even consider this, I forgot about draft compensation. I think that no matter what happens he’d still be worth a good pick at the end of the year.
He doesn’t automatically bring back a compensatory pick if he leaves. Those are based on a net of free agents leaving and being signed, so if they sign someone else to a similar deal (even at a different position) he won’t be worth any comp picks.
“The Texans won’t be able to pick up a compensatory pick should Diggs walk next offseason given that they voided the final three years of his four-year, $104 million extension signed back in 2022 with Buffalo.”
From here.
True. The operating assumption is that the Texans would not be big spenders in FA next year. Of course, if they let Diggs walk and sign a FA for comparable money then it’s essentially a net-zero for the entire transaction. This hedge protects them if Diggs leaves, and they can’t replace him. Since Diggs has a bad track record of diva behavior, this simultaneously keeps him in check and avoids a catastrophe if he turns into AB. If Diggs were a model citizen, this move wouldn’t make sense, but you’d rather have the opportunity of a compensatory pick after the divorce instead of just cutting him and taking a cap hit.
Assuming this is true, then I suppose I’m as lost as everyone. Heard a bunch of people on the socials making this case, but presumably Yahoo and this Jason_OTC guy are more reliable than the loud guys on TikTok.