method man Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 If he does not restructure his contract I believe we should trade this guy for at least a late first rounder and many teams will oblige. First of all he does not deserve over a 10 mil cap number with him no longer being the blindside protector (brunell is left handed). With all the cleared cap, we will be in a cap heaven and will have a really good chance of resigning smooty during training camp (as he is in the last year of this deal). we would be easily be able to fix all our problems. Plus brandon winey may turn out to be a great near-pro bowl left tackle with the tutelage of joe bugel. if you guys are not confident about winey then we can use that first rounder on nat dorsey or the falling shawn andrews who has been a disappointment at the combine. Not sure about salary cap trade stuff but pretty sure by trading samuels we will be clearing cap. By trading samuels, we will be showing sexton who is in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 First of all, we take a cap hit by trading Samuels away. Even if we didn't, just exactly who do we replace him with? And don't say someone like Brandon Winey. Yeah, he did well in the three games he replaced Samuels, but he ain't no Samuels by a longshot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCS:BraveCaringSoul Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 First of all he does not deserve over a 10 mil cap number with him no longer being the blindside protector (brunell is left handed). You mean the preseason is over and Gibbs has announced Brunnell as the starter? I must have been hibernating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Actually, I thought if we did trade Samuels the cap hit would largely balance off with the base salary and it would be a fairly small hit. That may be incorrect though. In any case, if the draft falls oddly, say having Taylor go in the Top 4, leaving Gallery there at No. 5, I'd immediately talk to Detroit, Cleveland and Atlanta about Samuels for one of those picks and I'd consider making it in the 15 minute buffer. That won't happen and by the end of the year we might be glad it didn't if Bugel gets him back to his level of excellence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishtw Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 How big of a hit do we take if we trade him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor The Invincible Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 While we're at it, why don't we trade Jansen, Gardner, and Arrington away also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Its really hard to get a true handle on Samuels dead cap hit, because he has restructured his contract on a couple of prior occasions, and some of the escalators and so forth were not public information. But I have a hunch when the Skins go back to smash-mouth football, that Samuels will return to the pro bowl. I think its too premature to just dump Samuels based on the ridiculous blocking schemes that Spurrier devised last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ummagumma Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 There is $4.3M left over from the original SB. $1.4ish for 3 years... There is $2.5M left over from redo. $825K for 3 years... So, at least, an immeadiate hit of 6.8M if cut now... Plus there is a 2nd redo that probably adds another $1M...it's hard to decipher. Buddha has Samuels listed as making $5.1M in base, plus at least $2.2 M in this years prorated SB. It appears you'd have to wait until June 1 and then accept a minimum $5M hit on next year's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 My rough calculation is that we take a $1.5M cap hit for Samuels. Remember, he converted around $3.3M salary into bonus money last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Note: when you trade a player, the bonus accelerates in one fell swoop. There's no such thing as a split hit, much less a post June 1 split. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Originally posted by inmate running the asylum But I have a hunch when the Skins go back to smash-mouth football, that Samuels will return to the pro bowl. I think its too premature to just dump Samuels based on the ridiculous blocking schemes that Spurrier devised last year. And same with you always saying Ramsey might be the next "Rob Johnson" for holding on to the ball - also too premature based on the ridiculous blocking schemes :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thinker Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 The problem with the Skins trading any player is that we really have poor depth. We really don't have any marketable star with a proven solid backup behind him. Who's the extra guy on the oline, rb, te, qb (we need two), dline, lb, cb, or s? The only place you could argue is wr - as has been done extensively previously re: Gardner and McCants etc. Though it should be noted: McCants is a RFA, Patrick Johnson is an ufa, Jacobs caught <5 balls last year, Russell - HAH!, So it's frankly a risk to even trade Gardner without knowing how the situation will play out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Originally posted by ramseyskins And same with you always saying Ramsey might be the next "Rob Johnson" for holding on to the ball - also too premature based on the ridiculous blocking schemes :laugh: I will agree with you Ramseyskins, it is too premature to say whether Ramsey will turn out to be another Rob Johnson. Thats why I mentioned it only as a possibility and not a statement of fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Originally posted by thinker The problem with the Skins trading any player is that we really have poor depth. We really don't have any marketable star with a proven solid backup behind him. Who's the extra guy on the oline, rb, te, qb (we need two), dline, lb, cb, or s? The only place you could argue is wr - as has been done extensively previously re: Gardner and McCants etc. Though it should be noted: McCants is a RFA, Patrick Johnson is an ufa, Jacobs caught <5 balls last year, Russell - HAH!, So it's frankly a risk to even trade Gardner without knowing how the situation will play out. Most teams have this problem too, so the Skins are really not any different with the salary cap. If we had some real quality backups, they would be ****ing soon for not playing, and we would have to eventually get rid of them one way or the other. We do have depth at RB. Not heavy duty type RB depth. But you could plug in Canidate or Betts or even Cartwright and get a 100 yards here and there for a few games. So that isn't all bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
method man Posted February 25, 2004 Author Share Posted February 25, 2004 Originally posted by BCS: BadContractSexton You mean the preseason is over and Gibbs has announced Brunnell as the starter? I must have been hibernating. if i was a betting man, i would bet a whole lot on brunell becoming starter. i can see the ramsey-brunell situation becoming like the montana-young situation in SF more than a decade ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
method man Posted February 25, 2004 Author Share Posted February 25, 2004 Originally posted by Skeletor The Invincible While we're at it, why don't we trade Jansen, Gardner, and Arrington away also. First of all are you suggesting that Rod Gardner is essential to this franchise by listing him up there? Yeah why not trade him. Samuels is overrated due to the fact that he is a former no. 3 overall pick. you guys want "young, hungry" players right? one of these guys is winey. we can get a lot for samuels because the LT position for most teams is the most coveted position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 I don't think we really want to renegotiate with Samuels now. Although that money might be nice to have, I'd estimate we don't need it. Even without it on March 3, we'll be about $12-13million below the cap which'd probably be enough to go crazy (maybe not as crazy as Snyder would like but still...). Next year, his outstanding cap hit (potential dead-money) would be less than his salary, meaning he'd probably have no leverage unless he has a stellar year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidPennSkin Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 Samuels' contract has been renegotiated twice since he originally signed it, so it is not easy to figure out what the cap hit will be if he is cut. The result of the renegotiations was to defer cap hits until later years. Now, the later years are upon us and we face an unpleasant cap situation. I've found 3 sources of data, '>Warpath Insiders, '>Buddha's tables, and '>TheHogs.net, which seem to agree on the following data for the next 3 years for Samuels: It isn't clear just what the "other cap charges" (OTC) are, but they will probably be part of the dead cap hit if Samuels were cut. If we assume that the OTC are indeed part of the cap hit that the Skins would have to pay if he were cut, we have the following cap hits if he were cut at various times: From this it may be seen that if we cut Samuels before June 1, 2004, it would cost more of a cap hit in 2004 than he will cost if he plays next year. Waiting until after June 1, 2004 to cut him would spread the cap hit over 2004 and 2005, but the total would be the same. The most likely scenario is that we play him in 2004, and if he won't renegotiate after the 2004 season, cut him after June 1,2005. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 Ramsey is not a Rob johnson he held on to the ball because spurrier wanted the perfect big play every play and while he played there were not any hot reads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.