| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BEASToftheEAST4
Joined: 01 Nov 2007
Posts: 2633
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
StLunatic88
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 7252
Location: How good is your Good?
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 1:13 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
I dont have anywhere else to put this, so Ill share it in here with Jrry's mock, as it does involve all Mock drafters.
We will be able to sing guys this off season, we just have to pull off some contract magic. Snead will make some space this year (anywhere between $15-$30 million depending on bonuses and who we want to cut) but next year we we only have about $90 million committed to current players. That means we are already looking at $30 million under the cap if it stays absolutely flat again. (They are getting more TV money but it wont be a massive jump) But I would expect around a $5mil bump, So before we cut anyone we are already looking at about $35 million in cap room next year before this offseason even starts.
I know we will add some new contract & Draft picks but this is as we sit here today. We will also have the contracts of Harvey Dahl & Quintin Mikell (could be cut this off season) that could add atleast $11mil or more in cap space for 2014.
So all Im saying is we have room to sing guys that we want, because we have the available room we need next year, Even with bringing our guys back, signing Draft picks & adding 2 decent Free Agents, we could still be looking at Cap room of $25+ million going into the 2014 offseason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 32772
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| StLunatic88 wrote: | I understand this thought of cutting Dahl. Its a relatively new one that has started to float about through Ram fans, but it is just as unlikely to happen as it is the wrong reaction. He is only $4mil against the cap, as well as a prime candidate to restructure as he has no guaranteed money left.
He is THE guy that Fisher wants on this team. He is a leader and the attitude that they want throughout the entire roster. He has been pretty good for us, and anyone that wants to say he was bad just isnt paying attention. He constantly has to try & overcompensate for Barry Richardson, just like he has do for both sdes of him last year.
Yes he is getting older, yes he got hut, and no he isnt the Monster inside that he once was. But to think they are just going to cut ties with him doesnt seem likely. His current contract has 2 years left at a total of $8 million (including a $500,000 roster bonus next year), I think a restructure as such could happen:
3 years - $11 million ($3mil guaranteed)
Y1- $3m base *guaranteed*
Y2- $3m base + $1m roster bonus
Y3- $3m base + $1m roster bonus
We tack on an extra year & $3mil more of false money to make it look good, that could be earned if he rebounds next year. We commit to him for this year, and guarantee him some money that he has none of right now. and by moving some money around we save us a million that can help with the depth of the team.
If we add a real RT and upgrade with Warmack at LG, this line with Dahl's mentality & leadership would be NASTY. |
See below. I don't think Dahl is worth anywhere near his salary. I love his attitude and the way he plays the game but paying him that much money because of his attitude and not his play is a bad business decision.
| StLunatic88 wrote: | I dont have anywhere else to put this, so Ill share it in here with Jrry's mock, as it does involve all Mock drafters.
We will be able to sing guys this off season, we just have to pull off some contract magic. Snead will make some space this year (anywhere between $15-$30 million depending on bonuses and who we want to cut) but next year we we only have about $90 million committed to current players. That means we are already looking at $30 million under the cap if it stays absolutely flat again. (They are getting more TV money but it wont be a massive jump) But I would expect around a $5mil bump, So before we cut anyone we are already looking at about $35 million in cap room next year before this offseason even starts.
I know we will add some new contract & Draft picks but this is as we sit here today. We will also have the contracts of Harvey Dahl & Quintin Mikell (could be cut this off season) that could add atleast $11mil or more in cap space for 2014.
So all Im saying is we have room to sing guys that we want, because we have the available room we need next year, Even with bringing our guys back, signing Draft picks & adding 2 decent Free Agents, we could still be looking at Cap room of $25+ million going into the 2014 offseason. |
By cutting Dahl, SJ, Williams and Mikell, we'll clear around 20 million off the books. That'll give us enough to sign a Tier A FA or sign a Tier B and a Tier C FA.
I don't foresee us wanting to push much money onto the cap next year despite our cap room.
| Flatlyner wrote: | Honestly not my favorite mock from you Jrry, which could be attributed to my little research on Johnson, but I think I'd still rather have T.Williams. And then back to back smaller WR's in the 2nd and 3rd, not a big fan of that either.
It is something different though, I'll give you that, though, different doesn't necessarily mean better. |
I don't understand the issue with small WRs. I don't care about getting big WRs. I care about getting effective WRs. But I'll leave you with this, Stedman Bailey led the NCAA with 25 receiving TDs this year. You read that right, 25.
I think Bailey and Wheaton can be very effective players for us so I'm not concerned about size. Do you think Mike Martz was concerned because Faulk was 5'11", Holt was 6'0" and Bruce was 6'0"?
| BEASToftheEAST4 wrote: | | Don't understand why we would let Harvey Dahl go |
Why? Without him in the final 2 weeks, we gave up 0 sacks and Jackson averaged around 4.5 yards per carry. The OL saw no drop off.
Why are we paying the guy 4 million when his backups can play at the same level?
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
S-jax39
Joined: 23 Aug 2010
Posts: 5767
Location: [D]MV
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I was bugging out Lunatic because I thought you were talking about the other Dahl. 
_________________
| SwiftTexan wrote: | | Chris Long has not been a difference maker on defense.......Chris Long is an above average starter and nothing more. |
#Yeezus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flatlyner
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 4519
Location: WESTCOAST
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | | Flatlyner wrote: | Honestly not my favorite mock from you Jrry, which could be attributed to my little research on Johnson, but I think I'd still rather have T.Williams. And then back to back smaller WR's in the 2nd and 3rd, not a big fan of that either.
It is something different though, I'll give you that, though, different doesn't necessarily mean better. |
I don't understand the issue with small WRs. I don't care about getting big WRs. I care about getting effective WRs. But I'll leave you with this, Stedman Bailey led the NCAA with 25 receiving TDs this year. You read that right, 25.
I think Bailey and Wheaton can be very effective players for us so I'm not concerned about size. Do you think Mike Martz was concerned because Faulk was 5'11", Holt was 6'0" and Bruce was 6'0"?
|
Do I think he was concerned with having 3 Hall of Fame caliber players near or under 6'? No, are Wheaton and Bailey Hall of Fame caliber players at this point? No. They are very similar to several players already on the team. And throw the Faulk size out, that is typical size or taller then most RB's, which we are not even discussing at the moment.
I'm not saying I don't like the choices in WR's, rather, I like them both, LOVE Wheaton in fact (PAC 12 country here so got to watch a lot of him) I just wouldn't take either before the 3rd with this years depth.
And while Stedman had all those TD's, is he a redzone threat in the NFL at 5'10 190lbs? Probably not.
Just not huge on this particular mock myself.
_________________
RIP Deacon Jones |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flatlyner
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 4519
Location: WESTCOAST
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| S-jax39 wrote: | | I was bugging out Lunatic because I thought you were talking about the other Dahl. |
Same here, I kept reading the part that said "He is THE guy that Fisher wants on this team" and I broke out in a cold sweat
_________________
RIP Deacon Jones |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 32772
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Flatlyner wrote: |
Do I think he was concerned with having 3 Hall of Fame caliber players near or under 6'? No, are Wheaton and Bailey Hall of Fame caliber players at this point? No. They are very similar to several players already on the team. And throw the Faulk size out, that is typical size or taller then most RB's, which we are not even discussing at the moment. |
They are prospects. When Holt was drafted with Pick #6 in 1999, our top WRs were 6'0" Isaac Bruce, 5'10" Az Hakim and 6'0" Ricky Proehl. Do you think he cared then that Holt wasn't a "big" WR?
Faulk was used...quite effectively...as a WR.
Who are Bailey and Wheaton similar to? I guess you could argue Wheaton is similar to Givens but they're different players...even still, most people here think Givens is/will be our best WR so why wouldn't we want another guy like him?
Bailey isn't similar to any of our WRs.
| Quote: | | I'm not saying I don't like the choices in WR's, rather, I like them both, LOVE Wheaton in fact (PAC 12 country here so got to watch a lot of him) I just wouldn't take either before the 3rd with this years depth. |
I wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger on Wheaton in the 2nd.
| Quote: | | And while Stedman had all those TD's, is he a redzone threat in the NFL at 5'10 190lbs? Probably not. |
He was in college. A big time red-zone threat. He'll still be a red-zone threat in the NFL. But you want to know what the biggest threat there is in the red-zone? Having so many capable WRs that any of them could get the ball. Look at Calvin Johnson...biggest red-zone threat in the NFL had the same amount of TDs as Brandon Gibson. Why? Probably because teams doubled him at the goal-line.
So while having 1 huge WR that is a red-zone mismatch is great...having 3 or 4 WRs who are legit threats is much better. And that's what I'm building.
Look at the Packers. You can never have too much WR talent. Wheaton, Givens and Bailey...yea, none are taller than 6'0" but all are extremely fast, extremely hard to cover 1 on 1, have sky high potential and all have the ability to win iso match-ups. Then you have Quick who if he develops offer us the big WR that you desperately want. Pettis, who developed into a red-zone threat this year in the slot. And Hartline who was a very productive possession WR.
Our WR depth would be amazing. We'd have explosiveness/speed, we'd have size, we'd have YAC ability and we'd have guys who can catch the football. Give Sam all the weapons you can.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flatlyner
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 4519
Location: WESTCOAST
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Problem is, you spoiled me with the T. Williams/Austin mock.
Having to settle for Wheaton and Bailey is less appealing IMO. Picked later though, so its a two sided coin.
_________________
RIP Deacon Jones |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 32772
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Flatlyner wrote: | Problem is, you spoiled me with the T. Williams/Austin mock.
Having to settle for Wheaton and Bailey is less appealing IMO. Picked later though, so its a two sided coin. |
Well yea but we vastly improve Sam's protection. 
I think either combination would be quite successful too. 
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
