Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

I was thinking about this more from a cap space perspective. He'd demand big money, but the guy's a great, YOUNG (relatively speaking) corner. I think he'll be 28. So...would we have the cap space to go after him??

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

i dont see it being a problem, the cap never seems to affect us. I've also read that we're going to be serious contenders in signing clements, so we'll see what happens.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

thatguy, do you know the answer to this? and how old is clements?

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

Yes we'd have the cap space.

1) We currently have $5 million in cap space (though some will need to be used to resign some people).

2) We can free up $9.7 million by cutting the following people:

R Wynn - $2.5 m
M Brunell - $2.3 m
J Hall - $1.5 m
T Vincent - $1.4 m
C Fauria - $1.0 m
M Rumph - $1.0 m

Now not all of those guys will be goners, but some will. We could also create a bit of space by cutting T Collins, J Salave'a, J Thrash and a few others. Not sure if that will happen, who knows. When Duckett voids the last year on his contract, that will save another $700K from my numbers. Safe to say that from cutting guys we currently have on the roster, we'll create anywhere from $5 - $10 million in space.

3) We can free up anywhere between $10-$15 million in cap space just by renegotiating the 2007 base salaries of Jon Jansen, Randy Thomas, Shawn Springs, Marcus Washington, Cornelius Griffin, and Clinton Portis. You still pay them what their contract says, you just give it to them in the form of signing bonus instead of base salary.

So yes, we have the flexibility to do major damage in free agency yet again. Not sure if that's a good thing though. I do want Clements, but beyond that, I don't want to see us acquiring players just because. They better fit what we do.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

If the Redskins were smart, they'd go ahead and resign Chris Cooley to a long-term deal now. I don't want to see him reach the end of his (very inexpensive) deal after the 2007 season and then be a threat to hit the open market.

If he starts to sniff free agency, he's going to either test the free agent market, or demand that the 'Skins pay him market value to keep him. Which should be considerably high.

Resign him now before that happens, and he might relish the opportunity to take a big payday now, even though it's less than what he'd likely get if he waited two more years.

Basically, take a page out of the Eagles' playbook. Draft a player, watch him develop into a good player in two or three years, and resign him long term before he hits the open market. Gee, keeping your homegrown talent. Imagine that.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

thanks alot for the info schneed. i also think sean taylors contract is up after this season. is that right? and i only want clements if he is only 28. if he is older, i say no. and i like your thinking on cooley

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

Clements might be the only major signing worth going after. Other than him, we might pick up some cheap vets, but I'd be happy if there were under 5 new fa's on the team.
Yeah, resign cooley asap. What about Dock?

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=freddyg12;249777]Clements might be the only major signing worth going after. Other than him, we might pick up some cheap vets, but I'd be happy if there were under 5 new fa's on the team.
Yeah, resign cooley asap. What about Dock?[/quote]

under 5? that's wishfull thinking, I'll set the over/under at 36

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=Schneed10;249769]If the Redskins were smart, they'd go ahead and resign Chris Cooley to a long-term deal now. I don't want to see him reach the end of his (very inexpensive) deal after the 2007 season and then be a threat to hit the open market.

If he starts to sniff free agency, he's going to either test the free agent market, or demand that the 'Skins pay him market value to keep him. Which should be considerably high.

Resign him now before that happens, and he might relish the opportunity to take a big payday now, even though it's less than what he'd likely get if he waited two more years.

Basically, take a page out of the Eagles' playbook. Draft a player, watch him develop into a good player in two or three years, and resign him long term before he hits the open market. Gee, keeping your homegrown talent. Imagine that.[/quote]
I've been preaching the Philly way ever since I started posting here. The Eagles almost never allow their young core guys reach free agency. By re-signing core guys early, they get a significant discount. Too bad we didn't have cap space to resign Smoot and Pierce during the 2004 season. If Gibbs ever wakes up to this more effective philosophy to keep a core group intact, I agree that Cooley should be the first guy we offer an extension since his contract runs out after next season. Mike Sellers becomes a free agent at the same time, and I'm sure teams would be willing to give him more than we want to pay if he's allowed to hit the open market.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=freddyg12;249777]Clements might be the only major signing worth going after. Other than him, we might pick up some cheap vets, but I'd be happy if there were under 5 new fa's on the team.
Yeah, resign cooley asap. What about Dock?[/quote]
Dockery is a free agent after this season. The deadline already passed for counting 2006 dollars toward a new contract, but it would still be wise to sign him or risk losing him. If we EVER get back to playing a smashmouth running attack, he's a guy we'd want to keep.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

Yeah, I agree, Sellers and Cooley are a must. Those are two quality teammates that we can't afford to lose. I'd hate for us to get in a battle with other teams over them.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=dmek25;249771]thanks alot for the info schneed. i also think sean taylors contract is up after this season. is that right? and i only want clements if he is only 28. if he is older, i say no. and i like your thinking on cooley[/quote]
Taylor's contract is actually through 2010, and it becomes very cap friendly after this season. [URL]http://www.thewarpath.net/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm[/URL]

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

If I were going to model myself after a team, Philly does not come to mind. They have risen to............some fame in a weak division. Since the complexion of the division is changing, that to has changed. They have sunk back to where they belong. They are notorious for being cheap with their players and it has cost them. There fans are arguably the most?????????? Foul in the NFL. They seem to thrive on that image. I personally do not aspire to that for the Skins

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=Schneed10;249769]If the Redskins were smart, they'd go ahead and resign Chris Cooley to a long-term deal now. I don't want to see him reach the end of his (very inexpensive) deal after the 2007 season and then be a threat to hit the open market.

If he starts to sniff free agency, he's going to either test the free agent market, or demand that the 'Skins pay him market value to keep him. Which should be considerably high.

Resign him now before that happens, and he might relish the opportunity to take a big payday now, even though it's less than what he'd likely get if he waited two more years.

Basically, take a page out of the Eagles' playbook. Draft a player, watch him develop into a good player in two or three years, and resign him long term before he hits the open market. Gee, keeping your homegrown talent. Imagine that.[/quote]

Cooley is definitely a guy that needs to get locked up for the long term. I normally don't get too attached to players, but if we let Cooley walk I'd really be disappointed.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=Hog1;249789]If I were going to model myself after a team, Philly does not come to mind. They have risen to............some fame in a weak division. Since the complexion of the division is changing, that to has changed. They have sunk back to where they belong. They are notorious for being cheap with their players and it has cost them. There fans are arguably the most?????????? Foul in the NFL. They seem to thrive on that image. I personally do not aspire to that for the Skins[/quote]
Show me a team that does a better job of keeping a young core group together? They've had very few misses on that count (letting Derrick Burgess hit free agency and giving Todd Pinkston an extension are the only two bad decisions that come to mind). They've made four appearances in the NFC championship game and a Super Bowl appearance. Let me remind everyone that we haven't won a single playoff game beyond the wild card round since the last Super Bowl run in '91. After years of roaming the desert, yes, I'd be happy for the Skins to achieve what Philly has over the last 5-6 years. Anyone who doesn't see that as an improvement must prefer winning the "paper title" in March, as the Danny aspires to every offseason.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=SouperMeister;249795]Show me a team that does a better job of keeping a young core group together? They've had very few misses on that count (letting Derrick Burgess hit free agency and giving Todd Pinkston an extension are the only two bad decisions that come to mind). They've made four appearances in the NFC championship game and a Super Bowl appearance. Let me remind everyone that we haven't won a single playoff game beyond the wild card round since the last Super Bowl run in '91. After years of roaming the desert, yes, I'd be happy for the Skins to achieve what Philly has over the last 5-6 years. Anyone who doesn't see that as an improvement must prefer winning the "paper title" in March, as the Danny aspires to every offseason.[/quote]

What the Skins have, or have not accomplished is immaterial. I think we can all agree that they have spent to much on player aquisation from time to time.
My point was and is, what have the Eagles really accomplished that have impressed you so much? If they improve........substancially, they can be they can be...............the Buffaloe Bills. They have accomplished all this with NO viable division competition. You can see what they are becoming as the division improves. Wish to be the Pat's. Seahawks, not the ugly sister

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=Hog1;249803]What the Skins have, or have not accomplished is immaterial. I think we can all agree that they have spent to much on player aquisation from time to time.
My point was and is, what have the Eagles really accomplished that have impressed you so much? If they improve........substancially, they can be they can be...............the Buffaloe Bills. They have accomplished all this with NO viable division competition. You can see what they are becoming as the division improves. Wish to be the Pat's. Seahawks, not the ugly sister[/quote]
I blame the Eagles woes of the past two years far more on injuries and the T.O. implosion last season than division improvement. My point is, that we as a fan base are living off past accomplishments from 15+ years ago, because that is all we can hang our hat on. I'll repeat, I'd take Philly's run from 2000-2005 in a heartbeat after years of bottom feeding. During that run, there [B]were[/B] other good teams in the East (2000 Giants won 12, 2002 Giants won 10, 2003 Cowboys won 10). 2004 was the only season Philly had all dogs as division competition. If you want to talk about a team that has had ZERO division competition, look no further than Seattle over the past 2 1/2 years. No other team in the West is over .500 for that stretch. And BTW, I'd also love to accomplish what Buffalo did in the early 90's. We haven't had back-to-back winning seasons since '91-'92. We have no business turning up our noses at anyone's accomplishments. Show me 2 or 3 winning seasons in a row and that would be a massive improvement. But I digress.

As for Clements, I'd prefer to spend any FA money to build up a stud D-line. Does anyone really believe Clements would be a good player with our total lack of pressure from the front four?

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

I wish we went after trevor price when he was availabe instead of garbage like carter. We gotta be patient and go after the truly talented free agents when they are available. And keep those acquisitions few and far between

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

If would not turn up your nose at the Eagles organization and basically anything connected to them, then I cannot make you understand. I personally don't want to win bad enough to mimic that.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

Eagles are a notoriously cheap franchise, and they are very good at not spending money and staying successful. However, that cheap mentality is the reason they havent won a superbowl. Their boldest move was signing TO, and they got to the superbowl, but with a few other big time playmakers they might have actually won it.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

LB kawika mitchell.

espn said he is th best LB in FA this year and we need LB help.

have a look:
[url=http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/kawika_mitchell/]Kawika Mitchell, #50, Linebacker, Kansas City Chiefs[/url]

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[QUOTE=SouperMeister;249783]I've been preaching the Philly way ever since I started posting here. The Eagles almost never allow their young core guys reach free agency. By re-signing core guys early, they get a significant discount. Too bad we didn't have cap space to resign Smoot and Pierce during the 2004 season. If Gibbs ever wakes up to this more effective philosophy to keep a core group intact, I agree that Cooley should be the first guy we offer an extension since his contract runs out after next season. Mike Sellers becomes a free agent at the same time, and I'm sure teams would be willing to give him more than we want to pay if he's allowed to hit the open market.[/QUOTE]

I don't think the Eagles are the cap geniuses everyone makes them out to be. For starters they consistently leave cap money (usually a lot) on the table every year. Snyder may spend his money on the wrong guys but at least he's willing to spend it. The Eagles were hopeless until Andy Reid and (more importantly) McNabb showed up.


[QUOTE=SouperMeister;249788]Taylor's contract is actually through 2010, and it becomes very cap friendly after this season. [URL]http://www.thewarpath.net/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm[/URL][/QUOTE]

His contract is VERY cap friendly over the next few years. This is mainly due to "Deion credits" over the next few years. I hope ST doesn't use that as ammunition if (when) he holds out again. Plus I think we should put together a tape of the thousand deep TDs he's given up in coverage since he got here, and send it to his agent.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=dall-assblows;249825]LB kawika mitchell.

espn said he is th best LB in FA this year and we need LB help.

have a look:
[URL="http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/kawika_mitchell/"]Kawika Mitchell, #50, Linebacker, Kansas City Chiefs[/URL][/quote]

I dunno, have'nt we picked up enough free agents from crappy defenses

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

Just to touch on Sean Taylor real quick, the guy is going to hold out if we dont get him a new contract. If you ask me, he will probaboly do it after this offseason, as well he should. Taylor got some bad advice signing the rookie contract that he did, but when we are paying the guy on the bench to be the highest paid saftey of all time, and Taylor is on the feild making plays, he'll have a problem with it.

As far as Nate Clements, I dont want him. This is exactly what is wrong with this team, we label guys busts after 1 crappy year (imo, Rogers has work, but is solid), Springs is getting older, but he has another good 1-2 years left. Thats time to sign some young talent and try to develop them before we break the bank for someone.

Lastly, if we improve this god awful defensive line, then teams wont be able to run on us to open up the pass, we wont be giving QB's 30 seconds to throwt he football, and that will greatly help our secondary. Signing Deion Sanders in his prime wouldnt help our secondary right now. Every single CB in the league would have gotten beaten on that Galloway play last week. Yes Rogers has played poorly in some games, outside of Minnesota, I have a real hard time looking at him as the problem. I say stick with the secondary that we have, take a look at the linebackers, but fix the damn line. Period. If we fix the line, that makes our LB, and secondary problems better from the get go.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=The Zimmermans;249828]I dunno, have'nt we picked up enough free agents from crappy defenses[/quote]

there defense isn't crappy. it's 13th. plus what the hell are you talking about? in case u haven't noticed, our defense is terrible. it can't hurt at all to give him a shot.

[url=http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/DEF-TOTAL/2006/regular?sort_col_1=4]NFL.com - NFL Stats[/url]

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[QUOTE=The Zimmermans;249780]under 5? that's wishfull thinking, I'll set the over/under at 36[/QUOTE]


I got $100 on over.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

I agree with GMANC. We should focus on the defensive line before we go out and get a brand new secondary. The defensive line is definitely our achilles. We can't stop the run, and there's no rush whatsoever.

I say we add another guy to compliment Griffin, and a legit pass rusher to replace Daniels/Wynn.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[QUOTE=Gmanc711;249829]Just to touch on Sean Taylor real quick, the guy is going to hold out if we dont get him a new contract. If you ask me, he will probaboly do it after this offseason, as well he should. Taylor got some bad advice signing the rookie contract that he did, but when we are paying the guy on the bench to be the highest paid saftey of all time, and Taylor is on the feild making plays, he'll have a problem with it.

As far as Nate Clements, I dont want him. This is exactly what is wrong with this team, we label guys busts after 1 crappy year (imo, Rogers has work, but is solid), Springs is getting older, but he has another good 1-2 years left. Thats time to sign some young talent and try to develop them before we break the bank for someone.

Lastly, if we improve this god awful defensive line, then teams wont be able to run on us to open up the pass, we wont be giving QB's 30 seconds to throwt he football, and that will greatly help our secondary. Signing Deion Sanders in his prime wouldnt help our secondary right now. Every single CB in the league would have gotten beaten on that Galloway play last week. Yes Rogers has played poorly in some games, outside of Minnesota, I have a real hard time looking at him as the problem. I say stick with the secondary that we have, take a look at the linebackers, but fix the damn line. Period. If we fix the line, that makes our LB, and secondary problems better from the get go.[/QUOTE]

I agree comletely. Time to bring in Young cheap players and let them earn their spots. There is a reason buffalo is giving up on Clements...

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=CrazyCanuck;249826]I don't think the Eagles are the cap geniuses everyone makes them out to be. For starters they consistently leave cap money (usually a lot) on the table every year. Snyder may spend his money on the wrong guys but at least he's willing to spend it. The Eagles were hopeless until Andy Reid and (more importantly) McNabb showed up.[/quote]

I'd agree with this. I think they're very smart about identifying the players they want to keep for the long haul, and resigning them early in their careers, and consequently getting them for bargain prices.

Of course, the whole reason you do that is to keep cap figures low for your core, so that you then later have the flexibility to go grab the free agents you need. The Eagles aren't aggressive enough in free agency.

We know Danny Boy and Gibbs aren't shy in pursuing free agents. If they could just be smart about keeping their core together early on in their careers, they'd have even more cap space in the long haul with which to grab free agents.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=Gmanc711;249829]Just to touch on Sean Taylor real quick, the guy is going to hold out if we dont get him a new contract. If you ask me, he will probaboly do it after this offseason, as well he should. Taylor got some bad advice signing the rookie contract that he did, but when we are paying the guy on the bench to be the highest paid saftey of all time, and Taylor is on the feild making plays, he'll have a problem with it.

As far as Nate Clements, I dont want him. This is exactly what is wrong with this team, we label guys busts after 1 crappy year (imo, Rogers has work, but is solid), Springs is getting older, but he has another good 1-2 years left. Thats time to sign some young talent and try to develop them before we break the bank for someone.

Lastly, if we improve this god awful defensive line, then teams wont be able to run on us to open up the pass, we wont be giving QB's 30 seconds to throwt he football, and that will greatly help our secondary. Signing Deion Sanders in his prime wouldnt help our secondary right now. Every single CB in the league would have gotten beaten on that Galloway play last week. Yes Rogers has played poorly in some games, outside of Minnesota, I have a real hard time looking at him as the problem. I say stick with the secondary that we have, take a look at the linebackers, but fix the damn line. Period. If we fix the line, that makes our LB, and secondary problems better from the get go.[/quote]

Nice post G, hopefully not to logical for the Skins.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

Good post, Gmanc. I agree here. Clements isn't gonna fix it, and it feels like another quick fix, big splash move. We need D-line help, and we need to target guys like Marcus Washington--on the rise, but not there yet, etc. Of course, everyone is looking for those guys, but when we did that, it worked.

And we need to re-sign guys, not just to keep continuity, but to show the players we're for real when we say "core redskin." I think the loss of AP, Smoot, and Clark hurt the D and shook their faith in this "core player" idea. That didn't happen on the offensive side of the ball--wonder if Williams and co made those decisions, and Gibbs stayed out of the way there? Is there anyone we miss on offense? (More and more, I am growing skeptical of Williams--maybe this is just an easy way to avoid knocking on St. Joe, but whatever...)

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

Stop with this rogers is gonna improve crap, I don't like the guys attitude, it's not a hardworking improvement type attitude, I bet we could get something good for him right now. He's the only guy on the team I truly dont like as a player and person.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=dall-assblows;249825]LB kawika mitchell.

espn said he is th best LB in FA this year and we need LB help.

have a look:
[URL="http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/kawika_mitchell/"]Kawika Mitchell, #50, Linebacker, Kansas City Chiefs[/URL][/quote]
he is so good that i have never heard of him

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=dall-assblows;249831]there defense isn't crappy. it's 13th. plus what the hell are you talking about? in case u haven't noticed, our defense is terrible. it can't hurt at all to give him a shot.

[URL="http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/DEF-TOTAL/2006/regular?sort_col_1=4"]NFL.com - NFL Stats[/URL][/quote]

It can't hurt???? yes it can, free agency always hurts us, plus that defensive rating is inflated cause the chiefs probably lead the league in offensive possession time due to running larry so many times a game, giving the defense less time on the field to give up yards.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

The more I think about it, the less I like the idea of signing Clements. He's going to command a huge contract. He's also going to be 28; so he's got about 2 years before he starts declining.

Yeah we need help in the secondary, but I'm not going to give up on Rogers just yet and I'm praying that we can find a less expensive alternative on the market or in the draft.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

Yeah, I think our secondary needs should be adressed in the draft, with our second pick possibly. Our first pick should be a MLB, posluzsny, and our later picks should be DTs, while free agency should be used for a DE, but we need better talent evaluation for the DE position before we make a move on that. I just feel that quality DE's are so so hard to find in the draft, many of them are busts.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

I prefer us not think about FA's already. For much of this season we have critisized the FO for it's free agent aqusitions, and with the season just a little over half gone, we're back to the well again. When are we ever going to learn? It certainly wouldn't suprise me if Nate Clements is reading here, he can't wait for Snyder One to land so he can make his haul.

For once I want to see the FO go into the offseason with the mindset, we're going to seek players who will play to get paid, as opposed to those whom you have to pay to play. Our #1 priority should be to improve the D-line first, we have witnessed first hand for the last few years that it's our major weakness. I'm not a GM, or in any way a football expert, but if I were going to start building a team tomorrow, I would start with my offensive, and defensive lines. Every team I can think of that has ever been successful on a sustained basis had both. I repeat, the lines are the heart and soul of your football team, once in order, everything else will take shape.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=dmek25;249855]he is so good that i have never heard of him[/quote]

exactly! you dont need the big names like AA. do you remember when our defense was best? it was when we had no name players like a Antonio pierce and others. we just need some players with level heads and want to play football rather than count there money.

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=Redskins_P;249835]I agree with GMANC. We should focus on the defensive line before we go out and get a brand new secondary. The defensive line is definitely our achilles. We can't stop the run, and there's no rush whatsoever.

I say we add another guy to compliment Griffin, and a legit pass rusher to replace Daniels/Wynn.[/quote]
I also agree , Clements will be of little help without a pass rush . We need two D-Lineman , one pass rusher and one big nasty mountian of a man who can stuff the run . This team needs to stop trading away all these damn draft picks ! At least if you lose a guy that you draft in a few years , you get compensation , when a F/A that you sign leaves or is cut , you end up with a hit on the cap . Not to mention you always have an older team. If Synder and Gibbs keep doing what they are doing , people around the league will be calling us the AZ . Cardinals of the east .

Re: Do We Have A Legit Shot At Nate Clements?
 

[quote=budw38;249925]I also agree , Clements will be of little help without a pass rush . We need two D-Lineman , one pass rusher and one big nasty mountian of a man who can stuff the run . This team needs to stop trading away all these damn draft picks ! At least if you lose a guy that you draft in a few years , you get compensation , when a F/A that you sign leaves or is cut , you end up with a hit on the cap . Not to mention you always have an older team. If Synder and Gibbs keep doing what they are doing , people around the league will be calling us the AZ . Cardinals of the east .[/quote]
Amen! Rebuild the team from the interior lines first. We're getting killed in the trenches, especially on D. Griffin and Golston may be the only current D-linemen who are slam-dunks to return next year. Gibbs should look to draft DE since stud free agent DE's are far more expensive than DT's. Draft either Adams or Moses with the 1st round pick, and look for a run stuffing DT through free agency. Take care of the D-line first, and the entire D will improve (including Carlos Rogers).