Shout out to Crazy Canuck!!

celts32 · 10-20-2004, 03:09 PM

Personally I think losing Samuels would be devastating. A solid O-line is the foundation of any good football team. I don't want to lose either player but if the choice is Samuels or Smoot than I would have to choose Samuels. A solid LT is so hard to find. I would franchise Smoot and try and trade him if it comes to that. Hopefully they can find a way to keep both though.

CrazyCanuck · 10-21-2004, 01:29 PM

I considered starting a 2005 Cap thread, but didn't want to appear like I've given up hope on 2004 (cuz I haven't). But since you guys brought it up here are a few interesting cap issues for 2005.

1. Samuels - His cap hit in 2005 will be close to $10M. IMO Samuels will have to restrucutre or he'll be gone. If I had to guess I would say he'll be gone. He is tradeable since the team that acquires him wouldn't have to worry about any dead money for him. His new team would sign him to a deal of their own. So I think he will have market value. Even if he restructures with us I'm still not sure we can afford him, given other guys we want to sign. Plus when Jansen comes back it would make the loss of Samuels a little easier to swallow. PS - cutting or trading Samuels next year would leave us with about $6M in dead money, which can all go to 2005 cap or be split up ($3M in 2005, $3m in 2006).

2. Smooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooot - His contract is up at the end of this year and I think most of us want to see him re-signed for the long-term. I figure we'll have to pay him somewhere between Springs and Champ (hopefully closer to Springs). I'd expect something in the neigbourhood of $2-3M cap hits for the first couple years, then around $5m in the later years. I don't think "franchise tagging" him makes much sense, since we'll have to offer him the average of the top CBs. Can't remember exactly what the tag price was for Bailey but I think it was in the $6-$7M range. Any deal we sign him to could be made much more cap friendly, at least in the short-term.

3. Ramsey - PR is signed through 2006 at a very affordable price. Getting Ramsey a new deal in 2005 probably isn't priority one for the Skins, but should definitely be considered IMO, especially given Brunell's play. Signing PR next year would also show the team's committment to him as the QB of the future. I guess a lot of this will be determined by Gibbs and the potential he sees (or doesn't see) in PR.

4. Gardner - Gardner stands to make about $2M in 2005, which is the final year on his contract. 50/50 seems to fit well in Gibbs offense, but I'd be surprised if we'd tried to re-sign him. I'm a big fan of Gardner but the fact is there are other young guys we want to sign and WR is probably the one position where we have a lot of depth. For that reason I see us trading Gardner next year, probably for draft picks. I'm hoping he can put up some big numbers this year to raise his market value. I think if he has a good year we could get a first rounder for him or maybe a 2 and a 3.

5. Wynn - He is scheduled to make $4M in 2005. The dead money if we release/trade him will be $1.75M, almost all of which can be pushed back to 2006 if we choose. I think Wynn will be gone after this year.

6. Pierce - His contract is up after this year. To be honest I'm not sure what he will demand in the offseason, or what we'd be willing to pay him. We'll have to wait and see. Other guys who fall into this category include Salave'a, Kenyatta, Sellers, Lott, Marshall.

7. Other - Some other potential 2005 cap casualties: Noble, Bowen, Rasby (gone), Raymer, Haley, Friedman, and maybe even Thrash.

Summary - According to my calculations, if we were to field the identical team we have now in 2005, we'd go about $4M over the cap, not including any new contracts we add (ie Smoot). So we will have to make some cuts somewhere. The first guys to go IMO will be: Samuels, Gardner, Wynn, and probably a few from #7. All in all I think we're ok for 2005, but 2006 will be tricky.

CrazyCanuck · 10-21-2004, 01:40 PM

Also, you can add Hasselbeck to #6.

CrazyCanuck · 10-21-2004, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bedlamVR

A quick question what kind of hit/relife would we get for loosing players like Morten, McCants and even Barlow next year?

For Morton, McCants, and Barrow, it will cost us more in dead money to release them than it will cost to keep them, so I see us keeping all 3, unless they don't factor into the team's plans at all.

diehardskin2982 · 10-21-2004, 01:47 PM

Both Samuels and Smoot have been offered as trade bait in the past. I personally feel that smoot will stay if Williams stays at the end of the season. Samuels will stay if he's offered a good long term contract. Smoot wil also stay... he wouldn't be fanchised because of monster contracts of cb like Bailey has inflated the amount they are paid.
Pierce will stay because he florished in the system. plus we'll let go of Barrow

offiss · 10-21-2004, 01:59 PM

OK, Now I am going to start some controversy, I say the biggest cap problem that we have is Lavar, paying a LB the kind of money we pay him for the production he bring's is insane, we could fill his spot in a heartbeat, and have similar production under William's system, in fact Pierce on the outside and Barrow or another capable MLB inside and we would be as good or better, and we would have a lot more money to improve the rest of the team, don't know what kind of a cap hit we would take trading him, but I do know he is 1 of the most overated, and overhyped player's in the NFL. I also agree with Canuck on Samuel's, I don't believe his play support's his salary, he's good, not great, but he will want top dollar and I don't think he's worth it, if Jansen comes back at full strength, I could see us moving him to the left side, if he can handle Strahan, he can handle anyone coming off the left side as well.

That Guy · 10-21-2004, 02:07 PM

barrow is gonna retire soon, its a big risk dumping lavar, who btw, didn't get that great of a deal i don't believe.

next year wynn brunell and samuels are going to be the most overpaid... barrow too if he doesn't play.

MTK · 10-21-2004, 02:42 PM

I'm not sure of the #'s but I don't think trading LaVar would be a very smart move cap wise.

I think keeping Samuels will be a high priority, Smoot as well.

offiss · 10-21-2004, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm not sure of the #'s but I don't think trading LaVar would be a very smart move cap wise.

I think keeping Samuels will be a high priority, Smoot as well.

That's the one prob. he just signed a new deal I imagine it would hit us pretty hard. To bad.

sportscurmudgeon · 10-21-2004, 03:33 PM

Many thanks to Crazy Canuck for his tutorial.

You da man!!

JWsleep · 10-21-2004, 03:55 PM

Great post, Canuck. Keep up the great work!

CrazyCanuck · 10-21-2004, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm not sure of the #'s but I don't think trading LaVar would be a very smart move cap wise.

Lavar's contract has been reworked so many times it's hard to be sure of the numbers. But from what I can tell he'll be here for a while. The earliest I can see the Redskins even considering trading/cutting LA would be prior to the 2007 season.

PS - Thanks to all for the kind remarks!

cpayne5 · 10-21-2004, 10:34 PM

I think JG likes LaVar. I believe he's called him a 'Redskin' in the past. I can see LaVar playing here until he gets old, believes he deserves more than he's worth, and goes elsewhere.

SmootSmack · 10-21-2004, 10:42 PM

Canuck seems to be avoiding the most pressing question....what do we about Ade when his contract expires after next season, do we franchise him?

That Guy · 10-22-2004, 08:39 PM

how dare you question ade's loyalty... such treason should afford one a quick execution. Ade is the NFL's best player and shall be paid as such. We never needed samuels smoot or lavar that much anyways.

10-21-2004, 01:47 PM	#20
diehardskin2982 Another Year, another mess. Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,581	Both Samuels and Smoot have been offered as trade bait in the past. I personally feel that smoot will stay if Williams stays at the end of the season. Samuels will stay if he's offered a good long term contract. Smoot wil also stay... he wouldn't be fanchised because of monster contracts of cb like Bailey has inflated the amount they are paid. Pierce will stay because he florished in the system. plus we'll let go of Barrow __________________ That got ugly fast

10-21-2004, 03:33 PM	#25
sportscurmudgeon Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,159	Many thanks to Crazy Canuck for his tutorial. You da man!! __________________ The Sports Curmudgeon www.sportscurmudgeon.com But don't get me wrong, I love sports...

10-21-2004, 03:55 PM	#26
JWsleep Propane and propane accessories Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Houston, TX Age: 55 Posts: 4,719	Great post, Canuck. Keep up the great work! __________________ Hail from Houston!

10-21-2004, 10:34 PM	#28
cpayne5 Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,807	I think JG likes LaVar. I believe he's called him a 'Redskin' in the past. I can see LaVar playing here until he gets old, believes he deserves more than he's worth, and goes elsewhere. __________________ "It's not about what you've done, but what's been done for you."

10-21-2004, 10:42 PM	#29
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Canuck seems to be avoiding the most pressing question....what do we about Ade when his contract expires after next season, do we franchise him? __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

10-20-2004, 03:09 PM	#16
celts32 Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Hackettstown NJ Age: 53 Posts: 2,665	Personally I think losing Samuels would be devastating. A solid O-line is the foundation of any good football team. I don't want to lose either player but if the choice is Samuels or Smoot than I would have to choose Samuels. A solid LT is so hard to find. I would franchise Smoot and try and trade him if it comes to that. Hopefully they can find a way to keep both though.

10-21-2004, 01:29 PM	#17
CrazyCanuck Serenity Now Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,008	I considered starting a 2005 Cap thread, but didn't want to appear like I've given up hope on 2004 (cuz I haven't). But since you guys brought it up here are a few interesting cap issues for 2005. 1. Samuels - His cap hit in 2005 will be close to $10M. IMO Samuels will have to restrucutre or he'll be gone. If I had to guess I would say he'll be gone. He is tradeable since the team that acquires him wouldn't have to worry about any dead money for him. His new team would sign him to a deal of their own. So I think he will have market value. Even if he restructures with us I'm still not sure we can afford him, given other guys we want to sign. Plus when Jansen comes back it would make the loss of Samuels a little easier to swallow. PS - cutting or trading Samuels next year would leave us with about $6M in dead money, which can all go to 2005 cap or be split up ($3M in 2005, $3m in 2006). 2. Smooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooot - His contract is up at the end of this year and I think most of us want to see him re-signed for the long-term. I figure we'll have to pay him somewhere between Springs and Champ (hopefully closer to Springs). I'd expect something in the neigbourhood of $2-3M cap hits for the first couple years, then around $5m in the later years. I don't think "franchise tagging" him makes much sense, since we'll have to offer him the average of the top CBs. Can't remember exactly what the tag price was for Bailey but I think it was in the $6-$7M range. Any deal we sign him to could be made much more cap friendly, at least in the short-term. 3. Ramsey - PR is signed through 2006 at a very affordable price. Getting Ramsey a new deal in 2005 probably isn't priority one for the Skins, but should definitely be considered IMO, especially given Brunell's play. Signing PR next year would also show the team's committment to him as the QB of the future. I guess a lot of this will be determined by Gibbs and the potential he sees (or doesn't see) in PR. 4. Gardner - Gardner stands to make about $2M in 2005, which is the final year on his contract. 50/50 seems to fit well in Gibbs offense, but I'd be surprised if we'd tried to re-sign him. I'm a big fan of Gardner but the fact is there are other young guys we want to sign and WR is probably the one position where we have a lot of depth. For that reason I see us trading Gardner next year, probably for draft picks. I'm hoping he can put up some big numbers this year to raise his market value. I think if he has a good year we could get a first rounder for him or maybe a 2 and a 3. 5. Wynn - He is scheduled to make $4M in 2005. The dead money if we release/trade him will be $1.75M, almost all of which can be pushed back to 2006 if we choose. I think Wynn will be gone after this year. 6. Pierce - His contract is up after this year. To be honest I'm not sure what he will demand in the offseason, or what we'd be willing to pay him. We'll have to wait and see. Other guys who fall into this category include Salave'a, Kenyatta, Sellers, Lott, Marshall. 7. Other - Some other potential 2005 cap casualties: Noble, Bowen, Rasby (gone), Raymer, Haley, Friedman, and maybe even Thrash. Summary - According to my calculations, if we were to field the identical team we have now in 2005, we'd go about $4M over the cap, not including any new contracts we add (ie Smoot). So we will have to make some cuts somewhere. The first guys to go IMO will be: Samuels, Gardner, Wynn, and probably a few from #7. All in all I think we're ok for 2005, but 2006 will be tricky.

10-21-2004, 01:40 PM	#18
CrazyCanuck Serenity Now Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,008	Also, you can add Hasselbeck to #6.

10-21-2004, 01:59 PM	#21
offiss Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ] Age: 60 Posts: 3,097	OK, Now I am going to start some controversy, I say the biggest cap problem that we have is Lavar, paying a LB the kind of money we pay him for the production he bring's is insane, we could fill his spot in a heartbeat, and have similar production under William's system, in fact Pierce on the outside and Barrow or another capable MLB inside and we would be as good or better, and we would have a lot more money to improve the rest of the team, don't know what kind of a cap hit we would take trading him, but I do know he is 1 of the most overated, and overhyped player's in the NFL. I also agree with Canuck on Samuel's, I don't believe his play support's his salary, he's good, not great, but he will want top dollar and I don't think he's worth it, if Jansen comes back at full strength, I could see us moving him to the left side, if he can handle Strahan, he can handle anyone coming off the left side as well.

10-21-2004, 02:07 PM	#22
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,553	barrow is gonna retire soon, its a big risk dumping lavar, who btw, didn't get that great of a deal i don't believe. next year wynn brunell and samuels are going to be the most overpaid... barrow too if he doesn't play.

10-21-2004, 02:42 PM	#23
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,544	I'm not sure of the #'s but I don't think trading LaVar would be a very smart move cap wise. I think keeping Samuels will be a high priority, Smoot as well.

10-22-2004, 08:39 PM	#30
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,553	how dare you question ade's loyalty... such treason should afford one a quick execution. Ade is the NFL's best player and shall be paid as such. We never needed samuels smoot or lavar that much anyways.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Shout out to Crazy Canuck!!

Locker Room Main Forum