|
|
sportscurmudgeon 01-07-2005, 04:48 PM Phillip Buchanon's name has come up a couple of times here. He is not a FA; he is under contract.
He does not like his contract and thinks he deserves more money so he is complaining and asking for a trade.
The next big tackle Buchanon makes will be his first one and he did not have anything resembling a great year. A Bay area Raider fan tell me that Buchanon gets beat deep about twice a game.
So, if the Skins lose Smoot, I doubt that it would be smart for them to trade for (he's under contract, rmemever) a malcontent who gets beaten deep and then start him at CB.
In my opinion, of course...
BrudLee 01-07-2005, 04:54 PM Well said Curmudgeon.
The problem with trading a malcontent (and I'm not saying Smoot is one, but he certainly isn't showing the team much love right now) is that you are likely to get a malcontent in return. In order to get rid of a headache, you usually acquire one.
skins009 01-07-2005, 05:11 PM I disagree I think it is worth it to franchise him. That way even if we can't reach a deal we can have him on the team for next year. You got to remember that next year is real important, its almost like a superbowl run cause we all know about the cap in 2006. I also believe it is important not to just let smoot walk, we can get something for him.
skins009 01-07-2005, 05:12 PM You also got to remember that if smoot is allowed to walk he can sign with any team. And I know of a team that really needs a right cornerback and has lots of cap space. That team is the Dallas Cowboys.
cpayne5 01-07-2005, 05:34 PM Right, but Champ was traded not franchised.
We put the franchise tag on him, then traded him to Denver.
I think it would be worth it to franchise Fred Smoot. If we can't trade him, or sign him, then we'd have to pay him $5-8 million (don't know the exact numbers here). That's not really a cap killer. It's better than letting him leave for nothing.
CrazyCanuck 01-07-2005, 07:11 PM I also think it would be smart to franchise Smoot, but only to trade him.
We won't get 2 first rounders, but we can take less. We might not get anything great in return but anything is better than nothing.
As for keeping him, the tag price will be $7M+, which I think is too expensive.
We put the franchise tag on him, then traded him to Denver.
I think it would be worth it to franchise Fred Smoot. If we can't trade him, or sign him, then we'd have to pay him $5-8 million (don't know the exact numbers here). That's not really a cap killer. It's better than letting him leave for nothing.
you're right about the tag I forgot about that
Defensewins 01-08-2005, 10:01 AM We already have two good CB's in Walt Harris and Shawn Springs.
Walt Harris (cheap- only $955K in 2005) is finally healthy and will have this offseason to improve as opposed to last offseason where he had knee surgery and was just trying to get back to walking much less playing football. When healthy he is a proven good Cb in the NFL and will be better this coming year as oppsoed to last season.
Plus we have these two impressive rookie corners in Garnell Wilds and Rufus Brown.
Add to that a player or two we draft or sign as free agent, we should be fine.
We should not commit to paying Smoot $7m+ next year, he is not a shut down corner, we should not pay him like one.
I hate the fact we will already be be paying in 2005 (if they do not agree to salary redutions) Samules $9.6M, Lavar Arrington $6M, Renaldo Wynn $4M and Mark Brunnell $3.4M next year. These four guys are not worth are not worth $23m. The Redskins could cut these over paid guys and still be just as good as they are now. We played almost the entire season with out Lavar and our defense was still #2 in the NFL. NOw you want to add $7M+ for Smoot? That is crazy, he is not that good.
Defensewins 01-08-2005, 10:11 AM PT.2
We do not need compensation for Smoot. Look at the top 3 teams this year: New England, Pittsburg and Philly. They each lost some important veterans from their D (Philly lost both of their starting CB's) this offseason, replaced them with cheaper players and they still are the best teams in the NFL. Lets not act like Smoot is irreplaceable.
LongTimeSkinsFan 01-08-2005, 12:31 PM I also think it would be smart to franchise Smoot, but only to trade him.
We won't get 2 first rounders, but we can take less. We might not get anything great in return but anything is better than nothing.
As for keeping him, the tag price will be $7M+, which I think is too expensive.
Hmmm an intriguing thought... what would be the prospects of franchising Smoot and trading him for a solid Center or proven pass-rush DE?
|