Jansen's Future in Doubt?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Here's some more contract details from La Canfora:

Bascially, the Skins will end up cutting Jansen's cap figure from what would have been around $5.4 million to about $1.7, but at a steep price. He had two years left on his deal and as it stands they could very well be re-doing this deal again two years from now given Jon's age and the money associated with the contract.

Instead of making $4.25 in base salary in 2007 - all of which counts against the cap - Jon will make the vet. min of around $720,000 in base salary, but he will get $5 million to sign. So for him, isntead of making $4.25 this season, he's getting $5.7, plus, next March he gets a $5 million option bonus. So that's essentially $10.7 mill guaranteed on this 5 year, $22 million deal.

It makes complete sense for Jon to do this deal. For the Skins, I think it is much riskier. He is 31 and has been hurt a lot the last two years. He's a rock and plays through a ton of stuff, and never missed a game in his career before the Achille's tear in 2004, but still, he's getting up there for a guy in the trenches.

The Skins had to create cap room - again - and essentially bank on restructuring 4-10 deals every offseason. It's a strategy that has not worked to this point. But, according to sources, they made a lot of promises to Jon last year when they convinved him to alter his contract, and assured him he would be rewarded for his time here - he is the longest tenured Skin - in the 07 offseason if he played ball with them in 06. To their credit, they were true to their word, something several players have questioned on their way out of Ashburn in recent years.

Also, the Skins are trying to make a point of tying up key guys after letting "core Redskins" leave in recent years. In reality, however, their last contract with Jansen assured a new deal would be needed by 07 or 08. The way their build their cap, they can''t afford to carry too many players with high base salaries in any one season, and in 2007 the numbers get steep on a bunch of guys (Brunell, Portis, Springs, Griff, Marcus, Wynn, Daniels), so reworking deals was imperative.

Snyder is willing to continually front load deals with new bonuses in order to get various cap numbers lower, and that's a noble gesture, but it's also indicative of a team philosophy that lacks much long-term - or mid-term, vision, because they are always trying to buy their way out of one problem or another. And, to this point, it has precluded acquiring sufficient depth, which can loom large.

In the short term, it helps them get under the cap and begins to free up some space to get Dockery re-signed. Other players will look at this deal and likely expect the same treatment, however. It will be very interesting to watch Springs and Brunell in particular. Both of those restructuring efforts could be tricky.

Good stuff from LaCanfora. Our constant need to restructure is driven by the bonuses we hand out to so many players. We've handed out way more in bonus money than most teams, mainly because we sign the most free agents and draft the fewest rookies.

Drafting gives you the opportunity to find cheap talent and keep them on your books for 3, 4, 5 years with very low cap numbers. A more draft-centric approach would be much more cap-friendly. That to me is the root problem. We never have picks available, so we have to solve all of our problems through free agency. And that just digs us deeper into a salary cap hole.

We can continue to dig out of it. But we'd have more long-term cap flexibility if we had a few fewer free agents, and a few more quality draft picks. The Duckett trade was easily the most aggravating. We lost a 3rd round pick in that one (or at least the equivalent of a 3rd rounder) and for what? Hitting on a quality 3rd rounder sure would help our cap situation over the next few years.

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Here's some more contract details from La Canfora:

Bascially, the Skins will end up cutting Jansen's cap figure from what would have been around $5.4 million to about $1.7, but at a steep price. He had two years left on his deal and as it stands they could very well be re-doing this deal again two years from now given Jon's age and the money associated with the contract.

Instead of making $4.25 in base salary in 2007 - all of which counts against the cap - Jon will make the vet. min of around $720,000 in base salary, but he will get $5 million to sign. So for him, isntead of making $4.25 this season, he's getting $5.7, plus, next March he gets a $5 million option bonus. So that's essentially $10.7 mill guaranteed on this 5 year, $22 million deal.

It makes complete sense for Jon to do this deal. For the Skins, I think it is much riskier. He is 31 and has been hurt a lot the last two years. He's a rock and plays through a ton of stuff, and never missed a game in his career before the Achille's tear in 2004, but still, he's getting up there for a guy in the trenches.

The Skins had to create cap room - again - and essentially bank on restructuring 4-10 deals every offseason. It's a strategy that has not worked to this point. But, according to sources, they made a lot of promises to Jon last year when they convinved him to alter his contract, and assured him he would be rewarded for his time here - he is the longest tenured Skin - in the 07 offseason if he played ball with them in 06. To their credit, they were true to their word, something several players have questioned on their way out of Ashburn in recent years.

Also, the Skins are trying to make a point of tying up key guys after letting "core Redskins" leave in recent years. In reality, however, their last contract with Jansen assured a new deal would be needed by 07 or 08. The way their build their cap, they can''t afford to carry too many players with high base salaries in any one season, and in 2007 the numbers get steep on a bunch of guys (Brunell, Portis, Springs, Griff, Marcus, Wynn, Daniels), so reworking deals was imperative.

Snyder is willing to continually front load deals with new bonuses in order to get various cap numbers lower, and that's a noble gesture, but it's also indicative of a team philosophy that lacks much long-term - or mid-term, vision, because they are always trying to buy their way out of one problem or another. And, to this point, it has precluded acquiring sufficient depth, which can loom large.

In the short term, it helps them get under the cap and begins to free up some space to get Dockery re-signed. Other players will look at this deal and likely expect the same treatment, however. It will be very interesting to watch Springs and Brunell in particular. Both of those restructuring efforts could be tricky.

Good stuff. Thanks Matty. And thanks to Schneed for "keeping em honest".

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

The Duckett trade was easily the most aggravating. We lost a 3rd round pick in that one (or at least the equivalent of a 3rd rounder) and for what? Hitting on a quality 3rd rounder sure would help our cap situation over the next few years.

Although I understand the trade, in hindsight it does suck especially when you think that guys like Dockery and Cooley were 3rd rounders. It would be nice to have a lot more Dockerys and Cooleys on the team.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Good stuff from LaCanfora. Our constant need to restructure is driven by the bonuses we hand out to so many players. We've handed out way more in bonus money than most teams, mainly because we sign the most free agents and draft the fewest rookies.

Drafting gives you the opportunity to find cheap talent and keep them on your books for 3, 4, 5 years with very low cap numbers. A more draft-centric approach would be much more cap-friendly. That to me is the root problem. We never have picks available, so we have to solve all of our problems through free agency. And that just digs us deeper into a salary cap hole.

We can continue to dig out of it. But we'd have more long-term cap flexibility if we had a few fewer free agents, and a few more quality draft picks. The Duckett trade was easily the most aggravating. We lost a 3rd round pick in that one (or at least the equivalent of a 3rd rounder) and for what? Hitting on a quality 3rd rounder sure would help our cap situation over the next few years.

The worst part about it is, our college scouting department seems to know what they are doing. I'd bet that with more picks, and increased responsibility, they would pick their fair share of busts like any team would, but so far we have been pretty accurate when we lock into a guy. Sean Taylor, Carlos Rogers, Jason Campbell, Chris Cooley, Kedric Golston, not to mention our UDFA record consisting of Antonio Pierce, and Lemar Marshall among others.

Just keep a few more picks guys.

[AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace]

Anyone notice on CNNSI's website...it reports Jansen as a DT? haha!