Next Year's Cap Situation

From my understanding of the numbers we have, I felt our "sh*t or get off the pot" year is coming up in 2008. Although it's going to be impossible to field a team w/o any restructuring that year, we already have a pretty rough cap situation in 2009. I'd have to run the numbers with a lot more projections and guessing to test this hypothesis, but I'm concerned that if we push too much more money into that year (either restructuring or big FA contracts), the sky will indeed fall in 2009. I feel that we have the power right now to take measures to avoid that. But to avoid the sky falling situation in 2009, concessions have to be made prior to 2008. Some at least. I'm sure one of us will look over the numbers for 2009 sometime down the road, and I may turn out to be totally and utterly wrong, but I just don't see the cap potential to pick up a solid starter in FA at any point over the next two years and still be able to get 51 contracts in under the cap including our draft picks.

And yes, the more I think about it Springs probably won't be a Redskin next year. These are the type of moves that will lighten the future burden. I know we need Griffin and Washington to be competitive next year, but I do feel that barring a pro bowl type year from either, restructuring them to keep them around for one more year would only breed more financial problems for that tricky 2009 season.

It's also interesting that we have pretty much the entire offense (Cooley being the exception) locked up with so much guarenteed money that we can't even afford to disassemble it. All the roster changes over the next three years are going to be defensive.

To be honest, I went into this analysis thinking the 2008 situation was going to be much much worse. But some key veteran cuts after this season will give us the cap space we need to at least stop the buck right here. I don't think this will prevent us from being competitive in 2008.

Unless Springs restructures, we won't be able to handle a 9 million dollar cap hit this year. If he does, I could see Lloyd or Arch getting the boot.

I'm thinking Springs is the one that will be traded, and we'll ride into 2007 with both Arch and Lloyd.

But regarding the '08 cap, the Skins can easily clear the room in 2008, there are so many ways to restructure contracts to make that happen. But you're right, it will bring much pain in 2009.

But can you see the team releasing a bunch of veteran, core guys in Gibbs' last season under contract (2008)? No way, Jose. They'll restructure and keep the team intact for him. Then he'll gracefully exit knowing that 2009 is going to bring oodles of salary cap pain.

Unless Springs restructures, we won't be able to handle a 9 million dollar cap hit this year. If he does, I could see Lloyd or Arch getting the boot.

Just to note, cutting Lloyd or Archuleta would bring a $9 million cap hit, but they're already on the books for $2.5 million each. So the incremental hit is only $6.5 million. So if we cut one of them, that would eat up all but $3.5 million of our remaining space (assuming we have $10 million right now). We could fit rookies under $3.5 million.

But I still think that extra space is reserved for taking the Springs hit now, signing Bly, and signing rookies.

But can you see the team releasing a bunch of veteran, core guys in Gibbs' last season under contract (2008)? No way, Jose. They'll restructure and keep the team intact for him. Then he'll gracefully exit knowing that 2009 is going to bring oodles of salary cap pain.I think you are right, and this is what I'm afraid of.

Just to note, cutting Lloyd or Archuleta would bring a $9 million cap hit, but they're already on the books for $2.5 million each. So the incremental hit is only $6.5 million. So if we cut one of them, that would eat up all but $3.5 million of our remaining space (assuming we have $10 million right now). We could fit rookies under $3.5 million.

But I still think that extra space is reserved for taking the Springs hit now, signing Bly, and signing rookies.

I would have to say you cut Arch Deluxe over Llyod. Although I am not a fan of either Arch Deluxe has a injured back and is done as a effective player - at least with Lloyd he is healthy and there is a chance that he can play somewhat effectively.

I would have to say you cut Arch Deluxe over Llyod. Although I am not a fan of either Arch Deluxe has a injured back and is done as a effective player - at least with Lloyd he is healthy and there is a chance that he can play somewhat effectively.I would go the other way if I had to make a decision. Here's why:

1) Archuleta is far more capable of earning a starting role, and thats at a position thats tougher to fill. Lloyd could play the third receiver, but we could probably get better production from James Thrash.

2) If both were to fail to earn starting jobs, Arch can play teams. Lloyd can't.

I would go the other way if I had to make a decision. Here's why:

1) Archuleta is far more capable of earning a starting role, and thats at a position thats tougher to fill. Lloyd could play the third receiver, but we could probably get better production from James Thrash.

2) If both were to fail to earn starting jobs, Arch can play teams. Lloyd can't.

Gtripp -

I don't like either and I wish we could effectively cut both and move on as a team in the same year but from your analysis it would be hard to cut Llyod, Springs and Arch.

Also, what is your opinion on this - whenever teams trade for future picks it always seems that the team gaining the near term pick always gives the other team more picks - example - when we traded to move up in the Rocky deal we had to give up more picks to do this because we were trading future picks for present picks. Maybe a solution is we trade some current picks to gain additional picks in those years like 2008 or 2009. I know that it may take some years to develop those players but maybe you just chalk those to truely be "rebuilding" and while those young guys develop the team can also be ridding itself of salary cap dead money from all the cuts we will need to eventually make?

Gtripp -

I don't like either and I wish we could effectively cut both and move on as a team in the same year but from your analysis it would be hard to cut Llyod, Springs and Arch.

Also, what is your opinion on this - whenever teams trade for future picks it always seems that the team gaining the near term pick always gives the other team more picks - example - when we traded to move up in the Rocky deal we had to give up more picks to do this because we were trading future picks for present picks. Maybe a solution is we trade some current picks to gain additional picks in those years like 2008 or 2009. I know that it may take some years to develop those players but maybe you just chalk those to truely be "rebuilding" and while those young guys develop the team can also be ridding itself of salary cap dead money from all the cuts we will need to eventually make?That's correct, we can't possibly get rid of both of them. In fact, if we don't get rid of either or one of them right now, the earliest we can get rid of them is after the 2008 season.

With your other point, that certainly seems to be a plausible idea, but I doubt we go that route. For the next two seasons, our only method of acquiring quality players will be through the draft. So the best balance would probably be to use the picks we are given on the best available defensive talent. I would start with a DT this year, who by next year becomes the lynchpin of the defensive line, and re-evaluate our defensive situation before the draft next year.

You don't expect to see any return on draft investment until a player's second season, so we probably don't want to be trading back years into the future and delaying the rebuilding process. DT looks to be a big trouble area in the near (2008) future, so I would spend our top 10 pick this year on a DT like Okoye or Branch, and hope to be able to pick up a second rounder which can become a defensive end. That'd be the best case scenario because Wynn, Daniels, nor Griffin appear likely to return next year.

The key to turning this all around is to cut any defensive player who isn't in our future plans as soon as possible.

I would have to say you cut Arch Deluxe over Llyod. Although I am not a fan of either Arch Deluxe has a injured back and is done as a effective player - at least with Lloyd he is healthy and there is a chance that he can play somewhat effectively. Must have missed something when did Arch injure his back first I've herd of this?

Good gouge. If you are correct, then the FO should have seen this coming. Maybe Tom Cruise can use is magic power to help rebuild a team thats been rebuilding for several years.

That's correct, we can't possibly get rid of both of them. In fact, if we don't get rid of either or one of them right now, the earliest we can get rid of them is after the 2008 season.

With your other point, that certainly seems to be a plausible idea, but I doubt we go that route. For the next two seasons, our only method of acquiring quality players will be through the draft. So the best balance would probably be to use the picks we are given on the best available defensive talent. I would start with a DT this year, who by next year becomes the lynchpin of the defensive line, and re-evaluate our defensive situation before the draft next year.

You don't expect to see any return on draft investment until a player's second season, so we probably don't want to be trading back years into the future and delaying the rebuilding process. DT looks to be a big trouble area in the near (2008) future, so I would spend our top 10 pick this year on a DT like Okoye or Branch, and hope to be able to pick up a second rounder which can become a defensive end. That'd be the best case scenario because Wynn, Daniels, nor Griffin appear likely to return next year.

The key to turning this all around is to cut any defensive player who isn't in our future plans as soon as possible.

I would also think from your analysis that it will be at least a couple more quiet offseasons until the dead cap money is out of the system - which to me is not a bad thing.

One more question - do you think this year was an off year as to what players were getting - it just seemed like a lot of "average" players were getting contracts that were reserved for superstars. I wonder how teams like the 49ers and Bills look like now as far as their salary cap room in future years.