GB81 Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Art, But doesn't that scenario mortgage us even further in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 GG, No. It doesn't. Arrington is a 24-year-old TWO TIME PRO BOWL PLAYER. You don't mortgage your future by extending and restructuring deals to these types of players. When Arrington is 28 you start to run a risk. But, until then, you can play patty cakes like this for four years and it won't make a lick of difference. You really aren't even putting off a cap hit of consequence here. You might do that if you do the same thing each of the next two or three years. But, I'd guess you'll go to Lavar and Chris next year for another round of restructures so you can add Champ at a big number, and then you'll let it ride for a year or two. We'll see. We'll be clearing millions in dead money we're carrying this year we won't be carrying next. We'll be clearing millions in base contracts to Smith and Wilky next year. Neither has any chance to see those dollars, and because Smith is finally on the last year of his deal, the cap hit against will be as minimal as possible, AND save us about $5 million against next years cap. We've gone over all of this. The cap will be in much better shape next year than it was this year. Now, in 2005 it'll be tight, but, these contracts guarantee a majority of players will be returning even during that year. It'll be around this time you need to start addressing what Arrington's future is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W&M Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Art, I think we are talking about two different things. What you just described isn't really a renogtiated contract. You are simply proposing that the Skins guaranatee a portion of this year's base salary, thus allowing them to pay it upfront like a bonus, and spread it out over the remaining 4-5 years of the contact. I believe they don't even need LaVar's permission to do that. Obviously, the problem with what you just outlines is that it adds another $1.25 mil to his cap figure in each of the succeeding years. And if this mysterous bonus kicks in, that adds almost another $1 mil to each of the remaining years. And if he hits more threshold performance measures, causing more base salary escalators to kick in, his impact will increase even more. And of course, all of this is in addition to the base salary he is already expected to recieve next year, which I believe is already scheduled to be a healthy bump up in pay from the $5-$6 mil he is currently pulling this year. All said, I don't think you disagree that this contract will essentially be unpallaetable next year, particuarly if we fatten it up by guaranteeing a portion of this year's salary. We are essentially in the same position with lavar that we were in with Davis ... but the difference being, it's too early to say good bye to lavar, where Davis is on the decline. If we want to keep Lavar, I see no real way around the fact that he will have to get a new contact before the start of next season. Perhaps we can sequeeze him in next year, and buy ourselves another year before deciding to give him a new contract with a massive $25mil plus bonus ... but I think you would agree, fitting him in next year will be that much harder if we guaranttee his base salary this year. I'm not clammering that the sky is falling or that we're about to plummet into cap hell. But I do agree that, unless the Club is absolutely foolish, and opts to mortgage the entire future by guaranateeing this year's base and next year's base, we will have only two options next year ... cut him, and take a huge hit (by your calcs, the remaining portions of his $11 rookie bonus) or give him a new, franchise, record breaking contract that will lock him into 10% of the teams cap for the next 7 years. And will we know enough about laVar and whether he's worth that much after next season? I simply dont' see any other option but those two, becaue I think it would be suicide to push this years salary and next year's salary into bonus ... Correct me if I'm wrong, but if they end up guaranatteeing this year's salary and next year's salary inorder to make room and keep the team together, wouldn't that defer the following into the future: Deferring this years $6 mill into the remaining 5 years, Deferring next years $8-9 mil into the remaining 4 years, Still dealing with the remaining portions of his current $10-11 mil rookie bonus, Possibly incurring another new $3 mil bonus he may have earned, Thus, in two years, we'd have approximately $17 million in remaining pro-rated bonus (4+7+4+2) if we needed to cut him, or we keep him, and add to this $17 mil accounting figure another $25 mil in a new signing bonus ... which would then spread out the $42 million in combined bonus figures, over the next 7 years ... meaning $ 6 million of his new cap figure would go exclusively to pro-rated bonus, plus his base salary. Which could easily raise him to an $8-$12 mil per year cap figure (or 10%-15% of our cap) Is that the scenario you forecast? If so, that's overly risky in my opinion, and unsustainable. And if he get's hurt ... we are absolutely dead, and would suddenly have a $30-$35 mil of dead cap space to choke on. I say leave his contract alone this year, don't force your hand yet, and then next off-seaon, use your best guess to determine if he's worth that, or if we'd be better off to buy 3-4 difference makers that play several positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB81 Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 W&M--that's where I was coming from. Renegotiating helps this year, but it does not take money away, just defers it to subsequent years. I'm not suggesting the team cut Lavar--I'm just saying that adding money to subsequent years makes cap prospects in the future more difficult. Did you go to W&M (I did)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 W&M, You're right, this is not really a renegotiated deal. It's just altering the method of payment, just as you outlined. The only problem with what you said is discussing him hitting more performance measures. There's not much left. The total, top-end, complete and end all value of the contract is nearly been met and is accounted for when you consider the maximum deal provides an eighth year. Best guess is that there really is only about $3 million or so remaining for Lavar to top out on in terms of incentives. And, I've little doubt that is tied to winning some individual honor greater than the Pro Bowl given the way Lavar talks sometimes . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 GG, When did you go to W&M? If it was fairly recently, did you know a Kenna Mills? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB81 Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Graduated in '99. That name doesn't ring a bell though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdsknbill Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Originally posted by Art Kevin Mitchell is not half the player Trotter is. Trotter's deal isn't one that has impacted Arrington or Champ. Trotter was signed cheaply for a two-time Pro Bowl player. He'd have gotten over $12 million this year had he been free given the Brookings and Lewis deals. No matter though. Arrington and Samuels, under any circumstance you can imagine, were going to be asked to restructure before they came due because they hit every damn incentive written into their rookie deals and THANK THEM FOR IT. Tack Asst. Solo sacks fum rec Jeremiah Trotter 59.0 47 32 0 0 12 game starts in 2002 Kevin Mitchell 68.0 56 13 2 0 16 games 4 starts in 2001 YEP, big difference here Art So you're going to blame Samuels and Arrington for playing well and hitting their respective escalators? That makes alot of sense again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W&M Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 It will be nice if the escalators have finally hit the top floor. In the future, I hope the Front Office finds more precise performance indicators for determining whether to invoke an escalator. Based on what I've seen, simply starting (Ramsey), or even making the pro-bowl (LaVar), doesn't cut it in my mind ... not for someone picked number 2. He's been great, but I'm expecting vintage LT, change the game performance, to merit earning 10% of the cap. Actually, I'm just mad that we are forced to redo his contact so early. I thought the whole point of escalators was to avoid the need to redo a contact before expiracy. Anyway, it remains my wish the skins leave his contract alone this year (i.e,. not borrow $5 mil against the future), thus maintaining some semblance of leverage when we try and hammer out a new contract next season. But still, I don't want to give him the new franchise contract this year, and I'm hoping his performance this year (and the only time he's played in the same defense in consecutive years) answers the question. I'd be happy to give him the franchise contract if he leaves no doubt, but we need to be careful on marrying the team's entire financial future to one player. And once we do it, we have to committ to swallowing that entire contract, base salaries and all, in each of the first 5 years ... without pushing anymore to the back. Oh yeah, and yup, I used to play for William & Mary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom [Giants fan] Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Where are the Jets going to get the cap room to match both Morton and Coles? They will have to do some fancy restructuring of contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Good players get good contracts, Great players get great contracts and unproven players should get the shaft and prove themselves. This theory would not have held up with, say, Gardener, but I will never condone anything that would jeopardize beasts like Champ or Lavar......... PS: My bro went to W&M law............... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Originally posted by rdsknbill Tack Asst. Solo sacks fum rec Jeremiah Trotter 59.0 47 32 0 0 12 game starts in 2002 Kevin Mitchell 68.0 56 13 2 0 16 games 4 starts in 2001 YEP, big difference here Art So you're going to blame Samuels and Arrington for playing well and hitting their respective escalators? That makes alot of sense again Bill, First off, your numbers are somewhat questionable, because in 2001 Mitchell started 13 games. Robert Jones started the rest. Secondly, it is an impossibility for you to seriously characterize Kevin Mitchell and Jeremiah Trotter even in the same realm as players. Mitchell, prior to coming here, had started 12 games in SIX years in the NFL. He got a chance to start here and he was SOOOOO good, as fans, we hoped Robert Jones would be retained and keep the job. Instead, we kept Mitchell and added Trotter, who was a two-time Pro Bowl player and MVP of the defense on his team. Trotter started moderately slowly here, as we all know. He was adjusting to a scheme that was completely different than any he'd played. In his final four full games with us he had 36 tackles. In Mitchell's four starts he had 19 tackles for us this year. That is two players on the same learning curve over approximately the same time frame. Mitchell is a nice, pleasing backup. He always has been. He's not remotely in the ballpark with Trotter. He never has been. He never will be. As for Arrington and Samuels, I don't know what you're talking about. I'm not blaming them for anything. I'm giving them great credit for earning their incentives and therefore more money because of the play they've provided for this team. In fact, I think I said we should THANK them for how well they played instead of complaining about their contracts. Hope that clears up both points for you. Art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Originally posted by IAMBG unproven players should get the shaft and prove themselves. if that's the attitude, they'll probably prove themselves on some other team if you mean prove themselves on the field. --------------------------------------------------------- In 2K, the plan was to get the team to the big game (or at least close to it) for that year and maybe 2K1 then take the cap hell begining in 2K2 or 2K3. Since 2K fell apart, we took it in 2K1, some last year and probably some this year (in that we're on a schedule acclerated by the fact that 2K fell short). Currently we'd be looking at this 2K3, 2K4 and 2K5 with some cap hell begining in 2K6 (and maybe relief in 2K7). Since we recovered (cap-wise) in the scheduled time period with higher risk (older guys whose cap-hit can only be pushed out a little with loads of potential cap damage), I'd see no issue at this time that we can't deal with cap issues as planned along with more likely success in product performance as risk is lower (younger guys whose cap-hit can be pushed out with less damage for a fairly long period). BTW, will someone like LA get cut in a year or two? Well that'd be the number 2 option. Of course, getting 'cap' cut actually means your not worth renegotiating with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiggoDrill Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 As long as LaVar is starting, performing at a Pro Bowl level, and going to Pro Bowls (or getting close), we can afford to pay him highly. Heck, how much does Michael Strahan make? If the Giants can afford it, so can we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 those of you who are against the Coles signing are deluding yourself into thinking that the Redskins are going to present a prolific offense in 2003 merely by bringing Gardner and McCants back and teaming them with another GREEN wide receiver, even if talented, from the draft. it just isn't going to happen. rookies take time to develop. even the best ones. if you trot a wide receivers corps out there where Gardner going into his 3rd year is the greybeard, you are going to end up with uneven performances and a lack of consistent productivity. you combine that with youngsters in the backfield behind Ramsey and we aren't necessarily looking at a team that is ready for the playoffs just yet in my opinion this team and Ramsey desperately needs a playmaker to take the pressure off. The last thing we need is for Ramsey to HAVE to come up with great individual plays every time we need to convert a long first down. Johnson and Russell are unproven at this level. McCants has 20 catches to his credit. Other than Gardner are we sure any of these players will even be in the NFL 2 or 3 years from now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W&M Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Bulldog, I'm sure you already know this, but you are 100% right. Couldn't agree more. I really can't complain about the Cole signing. Maybe it's high, but it ain't much different then Price, so we aren't out of the park. But value aside, Coles brings much more to the table then his talents alone. With him in the line-up, he will greatly facilitiate the development of Ramsey and Gardner ... as each will be able to focus on their niche with Coles doing his part. Nothing would have made me more upset if we traded up, and used the first pick on Rodgers or Jacobs, paid them a similar amount of dough, expecting them to fill the role of a veteran. It takes the best 2-3 years to develop ... and it's not like we have a true stud on the other side to help the rookie out. At least Moss had C.Carter and Reed to help him out his rookie year. If we went into the year expecting a rookie to do what Coles can do, we would have been disappointed in the rookie, Ramsey, and Gardner. When it comes to WR and QB, the draft is not where you look for immediate help. Also, with Coles, Gardner suddenly becomes one of the best 2nd WR's in the league. Also, having two established guys, allows the team to role the dice, and let McCant's prove that he is the better prospect then the more polished D.Thompson. As for Russell and P.Johnson, honestly, lets just hope one of them pans out into a verticle, role play WR. The move for Coles is well thought out, and I like that we focused on him over Price (hard to judge his individual talent with Moulds and Bledsoe involved). My only complaint is manner in which we try and make room for him ... do make some hard decision, or shamelessly borrow against the future, and make an untenable situation with LaVar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 if the Skins don't get Coles (and opt to go via the draft for WR) they must hope they can still land Dyson and/or hope another WR with some experience and speed gets cut after June 1. otherwise, we are going to have another summer of Spurrier complaining about receivers running the wrong routes and being inconsistent :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gridironmike Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Originally posted by Rat_Boy We don't need which cap hit? IMHO, Arrington's cap hits are the ones that are out of hand and unreasonable. I don't want Arrington if he is gonna cost 1/10th of the cap. He aint no Franchise QB. BOOOOO! This post is laced with Rat Poison. Keep Arrington forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdsknbill Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Originally posted by Art Bill, First off, your numbers are somewhat questionable, because in 2001 Mitchell started 13 games. Robert Jones started the rest. Secondly, it is an impossibility for you to seriously characterize Kevin Mitchell and Jeremiah Trotter even in the same realm as players. Mitchell, prior to coming here, had started 12 games in SIX years in the NFL. He got a chance to start here and he was SOOOOO good, as fans, we hoped Robert Jones would be retained and keep the job. Instead, we kept Mitchell and added Trotter, who was a two-time Pro Bowl player and MVP of the defense on his team. Trotter started moderately slowly here, as we all know. He was adjusting to a scheme that was completely different than any he'd played. In his final four full games with us he had 36 tackles. In Mitchell's four starts he had 19 tackles for us this year. That is two players on the same learning curve over approximately the same time frame. Mitchell is a nice, pleasing backup. He always has been. He's not remotely in the ballpark with Trotter. He never has been. He never will be. Art. I see your point on this issue. What happens now Art? Now that Trotter blew his knee last year. What can we expect out of him this year? Not that he did much last year in Lewis' scheme. Hell, Champ had more tackles. Now the D will have to conform to yet another different D scheme. Granted it might not differ to much from last year, but it willl be another scheme. I just hope that all of this BS works itself out and we contend for the division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Bill, First off, Champ played 16 games. Trotter played 12 games. Trotter actually had more tackles than Champ too, so, your point is not especially powerful. Trotter started terribly slowly picking up the new scheme. He wound up with 91 tackles according to ESPN, and he was just starting to make his impact felt, which we kind of knew to expect going in that it would take a little time. Your point about the defense changing to a different scheme again is also false so I can't comment on it. We aren't changing schemes. We aren't changing terminology. We're changing playcallers. Edwards may be more aggressive. He may be less aggressive. But, the principles of the defense, according to the guy who matters (Edwards) will be the same and the terminology will be the same and the learning curve will not be there. How Trotter will do with the knee is yet unknown. That's why we're hoping to bring Mitchell back or sign Darling as a reserve player in case Trotter is slow to get fully recovered. Though, because he is a linebacker he can probably come back sooner from the injury than other types of players could. As long as he has good strength and stability he will probably be available by the start of the season, but, I really have no idea other than the team releasing updates here and there that he's coming along nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BD Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 I went to W&M too. Finished early, last spring, so I was there from 1999 - 2002. Government major. Weird that so many Tribe folks are here. I liked it there. Tim Sullivan irritates me, though. Any of you guys know Charlie Park? BD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SkinsHokie Fan Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 The FO will find a way to bring back Champ, Lavar and Samuels. These are the corner stones along with Ramsey that we are adding guys like Coles and Noble to compliment. They will all finish their careers in Washington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiggoDrill Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 As long as we didn't pay Randy Moss money, who cares? In 3 years Coles' contract will seem average, and Snyder all the wiser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdsknbill Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Originally posted by Art Bill, First off, Champ played 16 games. Trotter played 12 games. Trotter actually had more tackles than Champ too, so, your point is not especially powerful. Trotter started terribly slowly picking up the new scheme. He wound up with 91 tackles according to ESPN, and he was just starting to make his impact felt, which we kind of knew to expect going in that it would take a little time. http://nfl.com/teams/stats/WAS Art check out the link above. How could ESPN and NFL.com be so far off on these stats? They had Champ at 62, while ESPN had him at 68. Whatever. you have your sources and I have mine I guess:?: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins26 Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 I didnt read the whole conversation but if you are argueing over Trotter having more tackles thats stupid because hes a MLB of course he'll have more Champ is out there covering people. I love Trotter and Champ they are both great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.