2009 Redskins Roster - Cap Burdens

[celts32]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

it has nothing to do with Rogers ability and everything to do with Vinnys desire to accumulate draft picks to make up for the fact that he wasted a 2nd rounder on the bum that is Jason Taylor. Its a PR move, plain and simple.

Well I don't see the PR boost in trading away one of your few young players that produce. Trading a young starting quality CB for a 2nd or 3rd round pick is assinine. CR gets a bad rap from skins fans because he can't catch, but overall he is a good player at one of the harder positions in the league to fill. Trading CR will be another entry in the long list of reasons to fire Vinny...

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by celts32

Well I don't see the PR boost in trading away one of your few young players that produce. Trading a young starting quality CB for a 2nd or 3rd round pick is assinine. CR gets a bad rap from skins fans because he can't catch, but overall he is a good player at one of the harder positions in the league to fill. Trading CR will be another entry in the long list of reasons to fire Vinny...

thats because youre smart... and beleive it or not, most fans arent. The redskins PR machine will "spin" it that 1) Rogers wanted out and said he wouldnt resign here and he was becoming a "lockerroom cancer"; 2) Springs is in the best shape of his career and expects to start every game in 2009; 3) We have more pressing needs at corner; 4) Justin Tryon/Byron Westbrook/Materral Richardson is poised to have a breakout year...

Theres any of a million different reasons they could spin the reason for trading rogers.

[SouperMeister]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

it has nothing to do with Rogers ability and everything to do with Vinnys desire to accumulate draft picks to make up for the fact that he wasted a 2nd rounder on the bum that is Jason Taylor. Its a PR move, plain and simple. Vinny has one more year to prove his worth or Danny is going to fire him AND zorn. I fully expect us to be very active in FA and in doing trades this offseason. Vinny needs as much "ammunition" as possible.

I honestly wouldnt be surprised if we use our 2010 1st rounder in a trade to get a 2009 2nd rounder either. Vinny will probably spin it as saying "theres so much talent" in the 2009 draft that a 2nd rounder this year will be the same as a 1st rounder next year... the same type of BS he used in an attempt to convince us that Devin Thomas, Fred Davis, and Malcom Kelly all had "first round grades."

Vinny's real title should be Master of Spin.

[SouperMeister]

Randle El is seriously overpaid for a borderline #2/#3 receiver. The mistakes of the disastrous 2006 offseason are still coming home to roost. ARE might have more value if we utilized him as a "Wildcat" QB several plays per game. If the young receivers drafted last year don't step up, we are in big, big trouble offensively.

[redskinjim]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

Randle El is seriously overpaid for a borderline #2/#3 receiver. The mistakes of the disastrous 2006 offseason are still coming home to roost. ARE might have more value if we utilized him as a "Wildcat" QB several plays per game. If the young receivers drafted last year don't step up, we are in big, big trouble offensively.

offense is going to suck until a big time playmaker steps up.while watching santana moss drop a sure touchdown in the game against the 49ers i thought why do we have to stick with the present wr core. anybody could drop that damn pass

[RobH4413]

We definitely need some assistance from those rookies...

I think it's pretty unanimous that we need more help at line on both sides of the ball then anywhere else at this time. Addressing this position via draft might make the most sense, but that is too much to ask for in one draft to have impact next season. We'll need cap space for some FA's on the line, as much as that sucks.

I think we stay status quo at DE, and use first pick at DT.

WR we probably have to stay put at, especially given the way the cap looks, which to me isn't the end of the world. Banking on the rookies to step up seems like a necessary strategy.

Our o-line is probably where we need the most help, especially on the right side. Taking the hit to get rid of Jansen makes sense to me... I don't ever want to see him take the field again, and if that means making a sacrifice then so be it (Just curious, would cutting Jansen, "waterfall" into another hit in 2010?). Sucks, but I really think he's done.

[GusFrerotte]

Taylor, Springs, JC and Washington are all up for renewal after '09 with hefty cap hits if released. A lot of "scrubs" are also up for renewal in '09: Batisite, Heyer, Montgomery from the O line. Thrash, Yoder, plus Wilson, Buzbee, and ALexander, all from the D line. Most of the "scrubs" carry a low penalty cap if cut, so some of those guys will be the sacrificial lambs come draft day. I say just ride out the "stars" and don't resign them, with the exception of JC if he does show improvement.

[KI Skins Fan]

Using CrazyCanuck's excellent spreadsheet, here are the primary opportunities for cap savings: Jason Taylor $8.5M, Shawn Springs $6.0M, Marcus Washington $4.5M, Phillip Daniels $2.3M. Total = $21.3M.

IMHO, if we cut all four of these players, it wouldn't hurt our defense one bit. Then we could use the cap space to sign young FA offensive linemen to rebuild our OL.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

We need to get rid of Moss and/or ARE. They cost roughly the same to trade as they do to keep. If we could get a 3rd rounder for Moss or a 5th rounder for ARE, we should do it.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

We need to get rid of Moss and/or ARE. They cost roughly the same to trade as they do to keep. If we could get a 3rd rounder for Moss or a 5th rounder for ARE, we should do it.

I guess if the goal is to make the team worse, that would make sense.

I have a hard time seeing how getting rid of a starting player for a 3rd round pick while gaining no cap space in the process would benefit the team.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Those who have been around the Warpath long enough know that Crazy Canuck tends to jump into action around this time of year, meticulously minding the Redskins' salary cap numbers. I love to take a look at his spreadsheets, found at the link in my signature, because they can tell you so much about the team's offseason plans.

As I did last year, I'll eventually start a thread projecting some of the contract and roster moves the team will likely make. As a prelude to that detailed look, below is a list of the players you can be assured will be Redskins in 2009, for better or worse.

CrazyCanuck's "release fee" tab is extremely helpful. (Click here, then click the Release Fee tab at the bottom). The 2009 column shows the cap number for the player in 2009. The "R Fee" column just to the right shows what the cap number would be if we cut or traded that player. Essentially, if the R Fee number is lower, we could save money by jettisoning the guy.

The Redskins are over the cap as of right now, and will work to get under it. To that end, they will make cuts, trades, restructure offers and extension offers. But one thing they'll hesitate to do is cut or trade anyone whose R Fee is higher than their 2009 cap number. This does not rule out the possibility by any means - JLC has mentioned on Redskins Insider the possibility of Carlos Rogers being traded. The Redskins could move forward with such a transaction, but Rogers makes the list below because trading him would cause the 'Skins to carry $3.9 million on their books instead of the current $2.4 million.

Because of these financial considerations, it makes the Redskins more likely to carry these guys in 2009:

Chris Cooley
Counts $3.0 million on the roster
Counts $11.1 million if cut or traded

Clinton Portis
Counts $5.6 million on the roster
Counts $13.3 million if cut or traded

Randy Thomas
Counts $4.9 million on the roster
Counts $9.5 million if cut or traded

Jon Jansen
Counts $3.4 million on the roster
Counts $6.2 million if cut or traded

LaRon Landry
Counts $5.4 million on the roster
Counts $7.6 million if cut or traded

London Fletcher
Counts $4.3 million on the roster
Counts $6.3 million if cut or traded

Carlos Rogers
Counts $2.4 million on the roster
Counts $3.9 million if cut or traded

Ladell Betts
Counts $2.0 million on the roster
Counts $2.8 million if cut or traded

Antwaan Randle El
Counts $6.1 million on the roster
Counts $6.7 million if cut or traded

Santana Moss
Counts $6.7 million on the roster
Counts $7.2 million if cut or traded

Andre Carter
Counts $6.6 million on the roster
Counts $6.8 million if cut or traded

Chris Samuels
Counts $9.3 million on the roster
Counts $9.4 million if cut or traded

Most of these players are guys we absolutely want to see in Burgundy & Gold in 2009, so this initial post is much to do about nothing. But Jon Jansen and Randy Thomas are two declining players who the Redskins are likely stuck with in 2009.

In future posts and threads, we'll look at cuts and restructures the Redskins are likely to make in the offseason.

I'm not sure who is doing these contracts but why in the world is it going to cost money to cut Jansen? Didn't the team realize that he might be in
decline at this point of his career? Increasing his chances of being cut??

Also it appears we're stuck with two guys that are not worth the money they're getting paid. ARE and Andre Carter.

Also could you explain how we're over the cap? Doesn't the cap go up? Is it true that during the playing season we're under the cap? Why all of a sudden are we over it?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I'm not sure who is doing these contracts but why in the world is it going to cost money to cut Jansen? Didn't the team realize that he might be in
decline at this point of his career? Increasing his chances of being cut??

Also it appears we're stuck with two guys that are not worth the money they're getting paid. ARE and Andre Carter.

Also could you explain how we're over the cap? Doesn't the cap go up? Is it true that during the playing season we're under the cap? Why all of a sudden are we over it?

We were indeed under the cap during the 2008 season (as we had to be). The salaries and bonuses paid to players in 2008 were what counted against the 2008 cap. The cap was $116 million.

In 2009 the cap has indeed gone up, we're estimating to about $123 million at this point. But it's the 2009 salaries and bonuses that count now, the 2008 numbers are history. Salaries and bonuses are higher in 2009 than they were in 2008, putting us about $3 million over the cap right now.

Never fear, this is a normal course of business for the Redskins and many other NFL teams. They will have no problem getting well under the cap for 2009.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

We were indeed under the cap during the 2008 season (as we had to be). The salaries and bonuses paid to players in 2008 were what counted against the 2008 cap. The cap was $116 million.

In 2009 the cap has indeed gone up, we're estimating to about $123 million at this point. But it's the 2009 salaries and bonuses that count now, the 2008 numbers are history. Salaries and bonuses are higher in 2009 than they were in 2008, putting us about $3 million over the cap right now.

Never fear, this is a normal course of business for the Redskins and many other NFL teams. They will have no problem getting well under the cap for 2009.

Got it.

[FRPLG]

I continue to shake my head at the Vinny bashing. It isn't enough for most people to bash him for just not being very good. They have to take it to the next level and bash him for basically knowing he ins't any good and doing everything he csn to hide it. Oh except to change the way he does things in a better way. He wouldn't ever do that according to these people. Instead he'd just settle for his suckitude and just try and spin it away. How people work the minds around this convoluted logic baffles me. I had to stop and think about how to actually put it into words because it it so confusing.

[Boston Brave]

I think we only get minor tweaks (2 starting free agents) in 2009. If we get the non-cap year, then the books are cleaned up. I believe the non-cap year is 2010 as of right now provided no owner-union agreement.