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.