Cutting to clear cap space

[wilco_holland]

Posted at 6:06 AM ET, 12/22/2010

Roster analysis: Redskins have plenty of cost-cutting options

By J.I. Halsell

At first, it seemed as though Donovan McNabb's November contract extension was was bringing clarity to his future. But with his benching over the final three games of the season, the veteran quarterback's future is once again uncertain.

What is absolutely certain is that if McNabb is listed as the team's third quarterback for the final two games of the season, he will lose $31,250 for each of those games, because his contract contains a per-game roster bonus provision that is contingent upon him being on the 45-man active roster.

McNabb isn't the only Redskin who may not be in Washington in 2011. By terminating or trading the following players between now and June 1, 2011, the Redskins can save the following amounts of accounted money on a possible salary cap:

• RB Clinton Portis: -$5,645,500

• LB London Fletcher: -$4,900,000

• QB Donovan McNabb: -$4,750,000

• CB DeAngelo Hall: -$4,400,000

• DT Albert Haynesworth: -$3,400,000

• C Casey Rabach: -$3,000,000

• NT Ma'ake Kemoeatu: -$2,500,000

• OG Derrick Dockery: -$1,565,000

• DE Adam Carriker: -$1,420,000

• OG Artis Hicks: -$1,400,000

• DE Phillip Daniels: -$1,250,000

• DE Vonnie Holliday: -$1,250,000

• TE Fred Davis: -$555,000

• DE Andre Carter: $2,909,998

The Redskins have $97.6 million in team salary accounted for in 2011; this, of course, does not account for 2011 free agent signings or draft picks, nor incentives earned by 2010 performance. While it is unlikely that the entire group of players listed above will be released or traded by June 1, the group accounts for $33.1 million of cap savings.

If the Redskins release or trade Andre Carter, then the net difference of his before and after team salary number is actually an increase of $2.9 million. This results from the multiple restructurings of his contract that pushed money out into future years.

Fred Davis is curiously listed above because he's a player with legitimate trade value. Davis -- a non-factor for the majority of the season -- has shown flashes of his potential, particularly in 2009, when he filled in for an injured Chris Cooley. As Davis enters the final year of his rookie contract, the Redskins could trade the athletic tight end for a draft pick(s), and in return, Davis's new team receives a bargain in his base salary of $555,000.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/

-----------------------------------------

Ofcourse we have probaly one of the best FO when you talking about creating salarycap. We know all the tricks to make it work.

But after reading this, who would you cut or try trade?

[Champskins]

Keep Fletch, Hall, Carriker and Davis and Im cool with it! Cut/trade the dead space

[J-bomb]

Cut-Rabach,Kemo,daniels,holliday,Dock or hicks

Trade-haynesworth,davis or cooley,carter,Dmac

Restructure portis, keep fletcher,hall,carriker

[authentic]

Cut-Rabach,Kemo,daniels,holliday,Dock or hicks

Trade-haynesworth,davis or cooley,carter,Dmac

Restructure portis, keep fletcher,hall,carriker

CP is the only one that i disagree with you here. I think he should be released. He doesn't have any trade value and he's not worth restructuring at this point, given that he no longer stay healthy.

[J-bomb]

CP is the only one that i disagree with you here. I think he should be released. He doesn't have any trade value and he's not worth restructuring at this point, given that he no longer stay healthy.

Yea I agree with you it would be no love lost if they do cut him, just thinking maybe they give him another shot in training camp and if he can't prove he can stay healthy cut his ass!

[tr1]

Hmmm...has the CBA been renewed?

I didn't think so.

BTW, I'd suspect McNabb's benching was based on perfomance....and his demotion to 3rd string might have implications on a conditional pick.

I doubt money was even a factor.

[Champskins]

Hmmm...has the CBA been renewed?

I didn't think so.

BTW, I'd suspect McNabb's benching was based on perfomance....and his demotion to 3rd string might have implications on a conditional pick.

I doubt money was even a factor.

nothing wrong with being under the cap, when one is instilled

[kingdaddy]

Hmmm...has the CBA been renewed?

I didn't think so.

BTW, I'd suspect McNabb's benching was based on perfomance....and his demotion to 3rd string might have implications on a conditional pick.

I doubt money was even a factor.

I'm wondering about the conditional pick thing too. We still owe the Eagles a conditional pick and I'm wondering if the benching/demotion impacts that pick?

[Forever21]

Isn't all of this moot because we have no idea what the new CBA is going to look like?

[Command The 414]

the only player on that list I would keep is Fred Davis (and possibility Fletcher).....trade Cooley for some picks or 1 higher pick....other then that all the rest are either to old, or not producing in any way or are exactly what is killing this franchise (players with the me attitude: D.Hall) ...underachieving at it's best

[fdarugar]

• RB Clinton Portis: -$5,645,500

• LB London Fletcher: -$4,900,000

• QB Donovan McNabb: -$4,750,000

• DT Albert Haynesworth: -$3,400,000

• C Casey Rabach: -$3,000,000

• NT Ma'ake Kemoeatu: -$2,500,000

• OG Derrick Dockery: -$1,565,000

• DE Adam Carriker: -$1,420,000

• OG Artis Hicks: -$1,400,000

• DE Phillip Daniels: -$1,250,000

• DE Vonnie Holliday: -$1,250,000

• DE Andre Carter: $2,909,998

• TE Chris Cooley: $$$$$$$$$

I'd be cutting or trading all the above. Makes no sense to trade Davis instead of Cooley. Cooley holds a higher cap number, has higher trade value and is older. Whats his cap number next year?

[HRNY4ZRNY]

Lets Cut-Trade them all...

Even Fletcher... He deserves to play for a team that has a chance of playing in a superbowl.

Lets trade everyone and start over.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I know he's very good and very popular, but if we're going REBUILD, I'd cut Fletcher and start looking for prototypical 34 LBs. Why not?

[authentic]

I know he's very good and very popular, but if we're going REBUILD, I'd cut Fletcher and start looking for prototypical 34 LBs. Why not?

I agree. Samething that the Bucs did with Derrick Brooks and people were all up in arms about it. But now look at where they are.

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

There will be some hard and unpopular decisions made after this season. Everyone be sure to embrace yourselves.

[fdarugar]

There will be some hard and unpopular decisions made after this season. Everyone be sure to embrace yourselves.

I think you mean brace yourselves...

[Bang]

Isn't all of this moot because we have no idea what the new CBA is going to look like?

It most definitely is.

None of these numbers mean anything.

~Bang

[rookieskin]

cause there are only so many players out there.... and i don't know of any that can fill his shoes as well.

Plus there is something HUGE to be said for stable leadership, WHEN the player can produce on the field.

I would be ok with Daniels coming back IF he was the #3 DE NOT a starter.

Portis is too aligned with our old failing ways. Love what you gave us Clinton, but it is time to part paths.

Cooley is almost there as well. Love him as a player, but at this point Davis can do what he can, much cheaper, less injury prone, and younger.

That is what made Monk, and Green so special. Those guys had LEADERSHIP and ON-THE-FIELD contributions will into the twilight of their careers.

[Dukes and Skins]

It most definitely is.

None of these numbers mean anything.

~Bang

Well Goodell has come out and stated that a CBA could be reached by the Super Bowl if things work out right, if that happens and the cap does come to around 130 million then these numbers are very important, but right now with no CBA you guys are right

[paloosa]

I am glad that you all aren't the GM of this team because you want to cut all of the talent out of the team and replace it with what? Not all of the guys listed are the problem with this team but you rather keep a Perry Riley because he cost less even if he isn't performing at the level of a London Fletcher. Most of these guys will still be here. I think that Daniels, Holliday, Kemo and Haynesworth will probably be all gone because of age and character issues more than money. Portis, McNabb, Carriker and Cooley are going to still be here with the remaining ones up in the air with a 50/50 chance of being here next year. I think that we will see a lot of things go down in FA and some wheeling and dealing done in the draft. McNabb will be here competing with Grossman for the starting job and maybe we draft a guy for the future. If we draft him in the first then McNabb is surely gone.

[Dick Edds]

I agree. Samething that the Bucs did with Derrick Brooks and people were all up in arms about it. But now look at where they are.

I agree in theory, but in my uneducated opinion ... Fletcher has way more gas left in the tank than Derrick Brooks did. I still think that Fletch is one of the better LB's in the league, and even in the 34 he is still our surest tackler and makes plays every week. I think he is a guy you make an example of and keep around/reward as a team leader. he doesn't look like he's lost a step. That being said, hopefully we'll draft another 34 LB this year to groom behind him.

Riley and Henson are also intriguing, we can use them all. Look at the Iggles and VaGinats ... they have LB's out tha ying-yang.

Would like to see CP at least back in camp to see if he can earn a roster spot ... partly b/c i am a CP guy, but also because he still knows the system is a great blocker and looked good this year before he got banged up. But I guess that's part of the question, will he be healthy enough to make it through training camp in a full on competition for a roster spot? I'd love to see him get one more shot at playing and retiring as a skin. But i also won't lose any sleep if we out right release him, which I think is most likely to happen. Just win baby! HAIL.

[fdarugar]

I agree in theory, but in my uneducated opinion ... Fletcher has way more gas left in the tank than Derrick Brooks did. I still think that Fletch is one of the better LB's in the league, and even in the 34 he is still our surest tackler and makes plays every week. I think he is a guy you make an example of and keep around/reward as a team leader. he doesn't look like he's lost a step. That being said, hopefully we'll draft another 34 LB this year to groom behind him.

Riley and Henson are also intriguing, we can use them all. Look at the Iggles and VaGinats ... they have LB's out tha ying-yang.

Would like to see CP at least back in camp to see if he can earn a roster spot ... partly b/c i am a CP guy, but also because he still knows the system is a great blocker and looked good this year before he got banged up. But I guess that's part of the question, will he be healthy enough to make it through training camp in a full on competition for a roster spot? I'd love to see him get one more shot at playing and retiring as a skin. But i also won't lose any sleep if we out right release him, which I think is most likely to happen. Just win baby! HAIL.

The problem is Fletch doesn't fit the scheme and niether does Rocky. We have the worst defense in the league for a reason...Cut ties with Fletch and Rocky. Sign a guy like Harris and let Henson and Riley fight it out in camp for the other starting LB spot.

On Portis...You don't pay an RB 5 mil per year to be the last guy on the depth chart. Its time for him to move along.

[Laxpunk2006]

I agree. Samething that the Bucs did with Derrick Brooks and people were all up in arms about it. But now look at where they are.

Fletcher is still playing at a high level, Derrick Brooks was not. I have no problem replacing London Fletcher but we just have bigger holes to fill right now. Fletcher is glue that helps hold this thing we call our defense together. Fletcher is good for the culture in Washington. He knows what it takes to be a winner and he wants to get back to that level. He's willing to hold others accountbale and lead by example. Not only is he a productive player but he has great value to our team beyond that. We already have to replace Rocky so it would be foolish to attempt to upgrade 3 out of our 4 LB spots in one offseason in addition to the holes we have on both lines and beyond. Keep Fletcher for 2011 and look to the following draft for his replacement unless there is an exceptional FA available.

[Forever21]

It most definitely is.

None of these numbers mean anything.

~Bang

Thanks. Not that it isn't always fun to debate anyway.

[authentic]

I agree in theory, but in my uneducated opinion ... Fletcher has way more gas left in the tank than Derrick Brooks did. I still think that Fletch is one of the better LB's in the league, and even in the 34 he is still our surest tackler and makes plays every week. I think he is a guy you make an example of and keep around/reward as a team leader. he doesn't look like he's lost a step. That being said, hopefully we'll draft another 34 LB this year to groom behind him.

But Derrick Brooks had a pretty decent year in '08 which made his release surprising. However, (like the Bucs) you're compelled to make those tough decisions when you're committed to rebuilding your team. And at age 36 (what Fletch will be next season), its just time to stop fighting the inevitable. Dont get me wrong, he's played pretty consistant this year, but its obvious that he's better in the 4-3, and really how far can we get with an undersized and aging MLB in the 3-4.

Would like to see CP at least back in camp to see if he can earn a roster spot ... partly b/c i am a CP guy, but also because he still knows the system is a great blocker and looked good this year before he got banged up. But I guess that's part of the question, will he be healthy enough to make it through training camp in a full on competition for a roster spot? I'd love to see him get one more shot at playing and retiring as a skin. But i also won't lose any sleep if we out right release him, which I think is most likely to happen. Just win baby! HAIL.

I doubt they will want to pay CP all of that money to sit on the bench next season. And we can see that even after a dedicated offseason, his body just can't hold up to a full workload any longer. Actually it makes me feel bad, because i think he would have broken Riggo's record. But (just like Fletch) you have to eventually move on. Let the young cats get thier chance and continue to evaluate and build for the future. And sorry to admit this but neither CP or Fletch are part of the future that we need to win.

---------- Post added December-22nd-2010 at 01:00 PM ----------

Fletcher is still playing at a high level, Derrick Brooks was not. I have no problem replacing London Fletcher but we just have bigger holes to fill right now. Fletcher is glue that helps hold this thing we call our defense together. Fletcher is good for the culture in Washington. He knows what it takes to be a winner and he wants to get back to that level. He's willing to hold others accountbale and lead by example. Not only is he a productive player but he has great value to our team beyond that. We already have to replace Rocky so it would be foolish to attempt to upgrade 3 out of our 4 LB spots in one offseason in addition to the holes we have on both lines and beyond. Keep Fletcher for 2011 and look to the following draft for his replacement unless there is an exceptional FA available.

Brooks had 73 tackles, 1 pick, and a forced fumble in 08. Obviously Fletch's 2010 season is better than Brooks. But I don't think Brooks' skill were deminishing to the point where he couldn't come back for another season. It was just that the organization realized that it was time to go in another direction (younger and cheaper). Similar to our situation at this point. And really, how long do you keep a player based on the merit of "leadership"? Fletch will be 36 and like other aging players, you at some point need to part ways instead of waiting for them to retire. And the kind of competitor Fletch is, he may want to play until he's 40. But is that really in the best interest of the long-term goals of the organization?