Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Cut Chris Samuels

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-23-2005, 12:36 PM   #16
Camp Scrub
 
tallestskinsfanever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 25
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

I say cut him and let Ray Brown play left tackle!! Seriously though, with the Coles situation we have now....i say we cut Samuels and get what we can for coles.
tallestskinsfanever is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 02-23-2005, 01:40 PM   #17
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 34
Posts: 8,218
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramseyfan
Given that cutting Samuels will cost us about $2,500,000 and we lack solid depth at tackle, I think we should wary of letting the guy go. Free agents of Samuels' caliber don't come around often and given Gibbs' system, we need the best offensive linemen we can afford.
According to my numbers, cutting Samuels would save around $4 million against this season's cap. You could surely fit Antonio Pierce into $4 million, and you would have some room to spare for use on a WR like Mason. If you were only saving $2.5 million by cutting him like you're suggesting, I'd agree with you, but I think it saves a bit more.
Schneed10 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 01:50 PM   #18
Playmaker
 
sportscurmudgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,159
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

I don't think nearly as highly of Chris Samuels as others here do. He is a good LT but not outstanding. And in no way is he worth a cap number of $&M or more.


HOW-EVAH (as Stephen A. Smith would say), before you cut him you damned well be 100% sure that you have a COMPETENT replacement for him for the following reason:

Next year Patrick Ramsey will be the full time QB. Patrick Ramsey is right handed and so the LT guards his blind side AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, Patrick Ramsey is like a cigar store Indian back there. If the LT is getting beaten five times a game, Ramsey is not likely to make it to Thanksgiving.


So, the FO has itself an interesting sonundrum to solve here. But the key to all this is to have that replacement LT in hand before Chris Samuels is tossed overboard.

Oh, I forgot, the stud that the Skins signed who was going to be able to play every OL position and challenge for a starting job just got cut. The Vaughn Parker Era is over.
__________________
The Sports Curmudgeon
www.sportscurmudgeon.com
But don't get me wrong, I love sports...
sportscurmudgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 01:51 PM   #19
Playmaker
 
celts32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hackettstown NJ
Age: 42
Posts: 2,656
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

Samuels is more important to the Redskins long term success than Pierce. Pierce did a very nice job, but the biggest reason the Redskins defense was good is Greg Williams not any particular player. I am not ready to hope a 2nd year late round draft pick can start at LT which is the second most important position on the team. Samuels contract sucks, but he is a player I can not see the Redskins winning without next season. I would not release him under any circumstances. I would release Lavar Arrington before Samuels and Lavar is my favorite current player on the team.

I thought we were trying to rebuild and develop Ramsey here, yet we are talking about throwing an unproven player out there to protect his blind side? Come on now. The Redskins cap is not in great shape by any means, but Samuels is way to important to release.
celts32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 02:09 PM   #20
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 79,506
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

I don't think anybody is questioning what Samuels brings to the table as a player, he's a top 10 player at his position, closer to top 5 when healthy and motivated.

BUT, and this is what it all boils down to, is he worth a $9M charge against the cap this season?

If anybody can justify that please feel free.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 02:16 PM   #21
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 34
Posts: 8,218
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

I think I have more faith in Molinaro than does the average bear.

We talk about having a good replacement in hand before tossing aside a guy like Samuels, but that kind of thinking subscribes to the very thinking that has plagued the Redskins ever since Dan Snyder took over. Dan Snyder wants the known commodity, he wants to make a splash and make sure he's got a good name at every position; because in Snyder-World, names win games.

If we're going to get past the acquisitive habits we've developed since Snyder took over, we have to be willing to develop players in-house. Truth is, we don't know what Molinaro is, because he's not a name. Only Gibbs & Bugel know if the dude has any promise.

So it comes down to that. How good is Molinaro? And nobody here can say he's no good, because they haven't seen enough of him. If you're writing him off without ever giving him a chance, then you're not getting any closer to doing things the way the Pats & Eagles do things.

All that said, I have no idea if Molinaro is any good. It will be up to Gibbs to decide if he's good enough. But I guess I'm just saying I have faith in Gibbs to develop players in-house a lot better than Norv, Marty, or Spurrier.

And as an aside, I think Pierce was the MVP of the defense this past season, with Griffin and Washington tied in a very close 2nd. But that's an argument for another thread.
Schneed10 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 02:20 PM   #22
Playmaker
 
celts32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hackettstown NJ
Age: 42
Posts: 2,656
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

The Redskins are not currently over the cap. The only reason they would cut him this year would be so that they have more money to sign other free agents. I don't see any free agents available including our own free agents that mean more to the Redskins success in 2005 than Chris Samuels does.

I know we all agree that Samuels is a real good player. I think we don't agree on just how important he is to the Redskins 2005 success. If Ramsey gets constant pressure from his blind side he simply will not develop as a QB, plain and simple. I am not willing to play lets hope games with the LT & QB positions. If the Redskins need cap room and can't get the restructuring done then they need to find it elsewhere not by cutting Samuels.
celts32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 02:21 PM   #23
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,502
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10
And as an aside, I think Pierce was the MVP of the defense this past season, with Griffin and Washington tied in a very close 2nd. But that's an argument for another thread.
Like this one:

http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread...ight=defensive (Season Awards: Defensive MVP)
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 02:22 PM   #24
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 79,506
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

We're not over the cap but we're not far under it right now either, and we have a list of guys we need to get signed. A couple million in cap room isn't going to cut it for the entire offseason.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 02:47 PM   #25
Playmaker
 
celts32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hackettstown NJ
Age: 42
Posts: 2,656
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

Quote:
Originally Posted by offiss
That does it for me $9M I would cut him in a heart beat, if we look at Samuels objectivly and forget about where he was drafted it's a no brainer, if Samuels was a low draft pick nobody would be talking about him as a top tackle, but because he was drafted so high we all look at him as fullfilling that draft position, well he hasen't! We saw 2 season's ago a nobody named Brandon Whiney come in and do a better job than Samuel's, I say we have to put Wilson and Molinaro to work this season, they will have their problem's at times but so does Samuel's, Samuel's is not a fighter he's not aggresive he's the big daddy of offensive linemen, it sound's like these kid's are fighter's that's what we need up front.

We can take his $9M work out a deal with Cole's trade him off and still get what we need, I have no desire whatsover to bring Samuel's back for anything close to what he's been making
Samuels gave up like 1 sack all year. He's one of the best in the game. His name was rarely called during a ame which means he was doing his job. And check the salary charts because LT's get some of the biggest contracts in football after QB's.

Many people on this board would cut him for cap reasons which is one thing, but you are the first to actually question his ability as a player.

The Redskins need to buckle down and get this restructuring done. I am sure they are lowballing him and trying to get the hometown discount that they always expect from thier own players. Samuels is no dummy, he sees what other top LT's are getting and he is not going to do a deal unless it's fair to him. Samuels has no reason not to do a deal if they are offering him the right amount of money. He has already said he is open to a restructuring so obviously the Skins are just not getting it done.
celts32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 02:55 PM   #26
Robert Griffin III
 
Monksdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Leesburg, VA
Age: 33
Posts: 1,495
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

I would caution against saying that Samuels should be cut. We spend money on some really mediocre talent. I dont see Samuels as being mediocre, and he is an anchor on our line.

Look at this way. Imagine that we didnt have him, that we had Jim Molinaro starting last season. And that Samuels name comes up on the free agent wire this offseason. You tell me how much Dan Snyder would pay to get him, I guarantee you its atleast what we are paying him now, before we re-structure.

Simply put, Chris Samuels will be our starting left tackle next year. Thats an easy bet.
__________________
Robert Griffin III
Monksdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 02:59 PM   #27
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 34
Posts: 8,218
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

I definitely wouldn't pay him what Walter Jones from Seattle got, 7 years 50 million. No way. I'd pay him about what Jansen got, plus a bit for inflation. Like 6 years $30 million.

You definitely overrate him, Celts. He's not one of the best in the game. He hasn't made a Pro Bowl in a few years now. Here's how I'd rate the LTs around the league:
1) Jonathan Ogden
2) Walter Jones
3) Orlando Pace
4) Willie Roaf
5) Tra Thomas
6) Tarik Glenn
7) Flozell Adams
8) Chris Samuels

Flozell Adams got 5 years, $25 million, with a $10 million signing bonus last year. I'd pay Samuels something comparable to that. Don't overrate him, or you'd just end up overpaying him.
Schneed10 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 03:14 PM   #28
Playmaker
 
celts32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hackettstown NJ
Age: 42
Posts: 2,656
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10
I definitely wouldn't pay him what Walter Jones from Seattle got, 7 years 50 million. No way. I'd pay him about what Jansen got, plus a bit for inflation. Like 6 years $30 million.

You definitely overrate him, Celts. He's not one of the best in the game. He hasn't made a Pro Bowl in a few years now. Here's how I'd rate the LTs around the league:
1) Jonathan Ogden
2) Walter Jones
3) Orlando Pace
4) Willie Roaf
5) Tra Thomas
6) Tarik Glenn
7) Flozell Adams
8) Chris Samuels

Flozell Adams got 5 years, $25 million, with a $10 million signing bonus last year. I'd pay Samuels something comparable to that. Don't overrate him, or you'd just end up overpaying him.
I would probably put him maybe 6th or 7th on that list, but you still have him 8th in a 32 team league. That's not to shabby. I would say your top 4 are clearly better and he is in the mix with the other 4 somewhere. Also I think Spurriers pass blocking schemes hurt his production for a couple years. The OL as a whole was completely confused as to what to do with Spurrier as coach. However, I never said he was the best LT in the game I just said he was one of the best your rankings agree with my assessment.
celts32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 03:20 PM   #29
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 34
Posts: 8,218
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

Quote:
Originally Posted by celts32
I would probably put him maybe 6th or 7th on that list, but you still have him 8th in a 32 team league.
OK fine, make him 6th or 7th on the list. Pay him $36 million over 6 years, which comes out to $6 million a year. But if you're saying he's worth keeping on the roster at the $9 million cap hit he's got this year, then you're overrating him.

Gotta restructure, or cut.
Schneed10 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2005, 03:22 PM   #30
Playmaker
 
celts32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hackettstown NJ
Age: 42
Posts: 2,656
Re: Cut Chris Samuels

Quote:
Originally Posted by offiss
Wrong, every person who say's he's not worth the money is questioning his ability. We threw wr screen's all year how do give up a sack with that? Then you have his run blocking I hope you noticed all year when we needed tough yard's we didn't run in his direction alway's the right side, not that we succeeded but that's where we tried to run.

I have no doubt Samuels will be easily replaced, that's our biggest problem as a team to many overvalued player's with fat paycheck's.
Saying that you can't afford to carry a 9 million dollar cap figure and saying a player is not good or worth the money are completely different things. You could probably change the scenario and give any other player on the team the same 9 million dollar cap figure and they would be making the same point about releasing him. I didn't take any other post on this chain to mean that samuels was not a real good player. Everyone else who posted on this chain can correct me if I am wrong.

As to why the Redskins chose to run in certain directions I have no idea. I didn't notice any pattern of success running away from Samuels. I do know if the Redskins thought Samuels was an over rated or underperforming player they simply would have cut him already and not even tried to restructure. He has the worst cap contract on the team, the easy thing is to cut him and move on. Obviuosly they must think he's pretty good also.
celts32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.33454 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25