Offseason Discussion Thread - Page 13

nobodyinparticular · 02-09-2012, 08:29 PM

So with the Routt release, I feel it's important the Raiders fully gut the bloated contracts on the defensive side of the ball. The Raiders have handed out 4 huge contracts recently on the defensive side of the ball--Routt, Seymour, Wimbley and Huff--and none of them have lived up to their contracts. If you get rid of one, I think you get rid of them all. Or make them take a real pay cut not a restructure that converts money to a signing bonus.

Cut List:
Richard Seymour ($15 mill total--$7.5 base salary plus $7.5 roster bonus)
Kamerion Wimbley (playing out a nearly $50 million contract at $10/yr)
Michael Huff ($9.8 mill total--$5.8 base plus $4 roster bonus)
John Henderson ($4 mill base)
Chris Johnson ($3.5 mill base)
Hiram Eugene ($2.25 mill base)

Richard Seymour has a $15 million cap number this year, $7.5 million of which is in his base salary. It is not yet fully clear if his roster bonus will is a guaranteed bonus or not. Either way, considering the signing bonus, cutting him would save money, but not the full $15 million. Seymour has been a good player for the Raiders. He has brought in some memorable performances and been a disruptive player in the middle at times. However, Seymour dealt with injuries that sapped him of his strength and explosion last year. He was mostly non-existent for the final 10 games of the season as a result. He was certainly out-played by Tommy Kelly last season and a case could be made that the same was true in 2010. Combine the lack of on-field productivity with the many high-profile personal fouls that crippled the Raiders defense and Seymour's value to the Raiders is slipping. Moving forward, Seymour may still have something left in the tank, but the Raiders have to consider the possibility of a fresh start on the defensive side of the ball. He certainly should not be a Raider with his current contract structure. In the end, I think this has to go hand in hand with cutting Routt.
Ruling: Take a paycut of at least $5 million or get cut

Kamerion Wimbley was the reason the Raiders beat the Chargers to get to 5-4 with Palmer at the helm. If he doesn't sack Rivers 4 times that game, the Raiders move to sub-.500 and probably end the season with double-digit losses (considering momentum and team morale). However, in Wimbley's 15 other games, he amassed only 3 total sacks and only 1 in the final 7 games. He was a big part of the problem with Oakland's defense down the stretch last year--unable to bring pressure as a blitzer or with his hand in the dirt and unable to cover as a 'backer. He is not worth the $50 million deal by any stretch of the imagination. Wimbley is not worthless, but he isn't worth this deal by any means.
Ruling: Cut the contract in half or get cut

Michael Huff is the final piece to the puzzle here. Huff is reportedly set to make $5.8 million in base salary and another $4 million on a roster bonus due March 16. Of the 4 big defensive contracts, I would be most willing to keep Huff at a reduced rate, but he would still need to take a significant pay cut. Huff provides versatility, depth and a veteran presence to the secondary. He can play corner, FS, a littler SS and cover the slot man. The past few years, the Raiders have either used Huff or Mike Mitchell to shadow opposing TEs at times, and it frequently works well with Huff. Still, Huff is not worth a $9.8 million cap number this year.
Ruling: Cut that cap number in half without backloading the money at all and you're safe. Otherwise, hit the road.

John Henderson has a $4 million contract for the 2012 season even though he spent much of the season on the trainers table. I would not be opposed to having him back with the Raiders, but and closer to $1 million cost.
Ruling: Cut the money or we'll cut you

Chris Johnson had his moments in the 2010 season, but 2011 was a different matter as he really went through the gauntlet last season. He dealt with an injury in training camp, ineffectiveness, the loss of a family member, and a flare-up of the injury from training camp. The injury is a problem in and of itself--who knows if Johnson's hamstring will ever let him play again, but Johnson was not effective enough to warrant this money. This would be the 3rd CB the Raiders have lost in 2 years (with Nnamdi and Routt gone), but it has to be done
Ruling: We can fit you in for $1 million, otherwise, you can go.

Hiram Eugene signed a pretty hefty contract last offseason before Huff was signed. This was taken to mean Huff would not return with Raiders. However, just a few days later, the Raiders signed Huff to a ridiculous contract. And Eugene never played a down for the Raiders in 2011, lost to a season-ending injury in preseason. He is a great gunner on special teams and provides depth at FS, but the injury suffered may greatly affect his ability to play the game.
Ruling: Return at vet minimum with incentives or walk.

I want you but we need to talk:
Aaron Curry ($5.76 mill base)
Rolando McClain (3rd year of 5yr $40 million deal)
Tommy Kelly ($6 mill base)

Aaron Curry was the first trade the Raiders made after Al Davis' passing. He actually played fairly well with the team. He was solid, but unspectacular. There was a noticeable difference in the Raiders' ability to stop the run to the outside as well as covering RBs out of the backfield after he came in to replace Quentin Groves as WLB. Still, Curry had a few mental lapses throughout the year both against the run and the pass to go along with a few personal foul penalties that hurt the Raiders tremendously (although some were admittedly borderline) and he is being paid as a top performer at his position. I would not be opposed to keeping him around on a new contract, but his cap number needs to be cut in half.
Ruling: Let's work out a new deal. Say 4 years, $12-13 mill?

I'm a lot higher on Rolando McClain than a lot of people. I look at him and see a guy who plays incredibly well coming downhill. He hits hard and he cleans up at the pile better than any MLB the Raiders have had in a long time. McClain even shows good range going side to side, but the problem is when you have him turn his back on the QB. I saw the Raiders man him up on a TE down the seam with no help over the top far too many times last season. I fully believe a scheme change can potentially help McClain most of all. Still, the fact remains that McClain is getting paid far too much for what he has done to this point, especially considering his indiscretions off the field. The fact that both Curry and McClain are in this discussion on their rookie deals shows the need for the rookie wage scale that was instituted this offseason in the new CBA.
Ruling: Let's work on a restructure that may extend the contract a year, but we need you to take a small pay cut.

Tommy Kelly has actually played very well the past two seasons, racking up sacks as well as getting a good push up the middle and stuffing the run well even when he doesn't get any stats for it. Still, that $6 million Kelly is due this season tightens up the cap space quite a bit. Let's re-work a deal, maybe extend it a little further and see if we can get a little more space for this offseason.

Bottom line: It's time to undo the past salary cap faux pas, especially those 4 god awful contracts handed out last offseason.

Considering the Raiders have the young players under contract to absorb most of these cuts will help the cause. I would foresee a front 4 of Shaughnessy-Houston-Kelly-Bryant with Trevor Scott and another DE rotating in. In the secondary, the Raiders would then have the money to re-sign Tyvon Branch. Mike Mitchell would ideally be the 3rd S and play in the big packages at SS.

On the offensive side of the ball, I see the need for paycuts coming from Palmer, McFadden and DHB. None of them will (nor should they) be cut, but a little re-structuring here and there for DMC and DHB would go a long way while Palmer's $12.5 million is just far too much.

Complex · 02-09-2012, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Goosemahn

Yeah, it's gonna be interesting to see what happens. We're one of the few teams who kept a really consistent defense over the years, and by preserving the chemistry and whatnot, the defense got really expensive.

Five years ago, this was the starting defense:

LE Aaron Smith
NT Casey Hampton
RE Brett Keisel

ROLB James Harrison
ILB James Farrior
ILB Larry Foote
LOLB LaMarr Woodley

CB Ike Taylor
FS Ryan Clark
SS Troy Polamalu
CB DeShea Townsend

Only new starters were Timmons and Willie Gai, both who were already on the roster.

I think that by the end of NEXT season (summer of 2014), Hampton, Farrior, Foote, Clark, Keisel, and maybe even Harrison will all be gone.

I wouldn't mind Harrison.

Jughead10 · 02-09-2012, 08:44 PM

That raiders post seems way too optimistic. Guys don't restructure without taking the money into guarantees that will just delay your problem. You'd be better off straight cutting most of those guys. Maybe a few them you can get back on the cheap.

It's a shame you have to look in restructuring young guys still on their rookie contract. The downfall of drafting average players with high picks under the old draft scale system.

nobodyinparticular · 02-09-2012, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

That raiders post seems way too optimistic. Guys don't restructure without taking the money into guarantees that will just delay your problem. You'd be better off straight cutting most of those guys. Maybe a few them you can get back on the cheap.

It's a shame you have to look in restructuring young guys still on their rookie contract. The downfall of drafting average players with high picks under the old draft scale system.

That's my point. Obviously I didn't portray my point of view well enough, but the first list was meant to be the "cut" list. In no way would I expect any one of those players back next year.

In the place of an older player like Henderson, we have seen players willing to take actual pay cuts in order to stick around. The other time you see those paycuts would be in the event a player is on a contract they no longer deserve such as a Carson Palmer. If he were on the open market, he might be lucky to get half the amount he is scheduled to get now. He is the only player I fully expect to see get paid less than he is currently scheduled to be paid.

Mr. Goosemahn · 02-09-2012, 09:19 PM

So this is pretty cool, but I don't want to start a thread just for this:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46326110

zachsaints52 · 02-09-2012, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Goosemahn

So this is pretty cool, but I don't want to start a thread just for this:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46326110

Because of twitter, I personally get to talk to my favorite player too, Mike Karney. He is such a laid back guy, one day I truly plan on seeing if we could hang out and have a workout session.

Complex · 02-09-2012, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nobodyinparticular

Michael Huff is the final piece to the puzzle here. Huff is reportedly set to make $5.8 million in base salary and another $4 million on a roster bonus due March 16. Of the 4 big defensive contracts, I would be most willing to keep Huff at a reduced rate, but he would still need to take a significant pay cut. Huff provides versatility, depth and a veteran presence to the secondary. He can play corner, FS, a littler SS and cover the slot man. The past few years, the Raiders have either used Huff or Mike Mitchell to shadow opposing TEs at times, and it frequently works well with Huff. Still, Huff is not worth a $9.8 million cap number this year.
Ruling: Cut that cap number in half without backloading the money at all and you're safe. Otherwise, hit the road.

I want him so bad if he gets cut. Hopefully he isn't as soft as his former teammate Michael Griffin. Some idiot on SI said he we might franchise him ugh.

BeerBaron · 02-09-2012, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Complex

I want him so bad if he gets cut. Hopefully he isn't as soft as his former teammate Michael Griffin. Some idiot on SI said he we might franchise him ugh.

Once again, I think you overestimate the overall safety talent in the league. It's quite possibly one of the weakest positions at the very top.

Scotty D · 02-09-2012, 10:01 PM

Rotoworld is has a blurb saying Freeney doesn't want to play linebacker in the Colts new 34. He has a 19 million contract and they can save 14 million by cutting him.

BeerBaron · 02-09-2012, 10:05 PM

If he's unwilling, cut him and put the money saved towards resigning Mathis if he's willing.

Giantsfan1080 · 02-09-2012, 10:10 PM

Good for the Giants. Leave some options open for DE if Osi leaves.

Complex · 02-09-2012, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

Once again, I think you overestimate the overall safety talent in the league. It's quite possibly one of the weakest positions at the very top.

His name is Jeff Diamond, the writer, I don't trust him. Unless his name Adam Schefter,Jay Glazer or even Peter King and Jason Laconfronta or w/e his name is.

Mr. Goosemahn · 02-09-2012, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Complex

His name is Jeff Diamond, the writer, I don't trust him. Unless his name Adam Schefter,Jay Glazer or even Peter King and Jason Laconfronta or w/e his name is.

Jason LaCanfora.

I hate him, nothing he reports ever comes true.

Caddy · 02-09-2012, 10:20 PM

LaCanfora is the absolute worst.

Pit Bull #53 · 02-09-2012, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Complex

His name is Jeff Diamond, the writer, I don't trust him. Unless his name Adam Schefter,Jay Glazer or even Peter King and Jason Laconfronta or w/e his name is.

Jeff Diamond used to be in the Titans front office as team President.

Also, the franchise tag on a safety is probably one of the lowest of any position. Probably wouldn't be a bad thing.

Complex · 02-09-2012, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caddy

LaCanfora is the absolute worst.

I know but at least he got somethings right. I never heard of Jeff Diamond until today.

Edit: He did work for the titans. UGH IDK know how you double someone salary after being such a crappy player.

Complex · 02-09-2012, 10:33 PM

RT @JosinaAnderson: Stanford Routt's agent William Vann McElroy told me, "Stanford already has visits planned with Buffalo and Tennessee."

BeerBaron · 02-10-2012, 07:15 AM

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...atingcap-room/

Some other potential targets for Steelers restructuring and/or cuts.

Quote:

Here’s a list of the large Steelers salaries that could be trimmed down, one way or another: tackle Willie Colon ($4.5 million); linebacker Larry Foote ($3 million); nose tackle Casey Hampton ($4.89 million); linebacker James Harrison ($5.565 million); guard Chris Kemoeatu ($3.577 million); quarterback Ben Roethlisberger ($11.6 million); offensive lineman Jonathan Scott ($2.2 million); defensive end Aaron Smith ($2.1 million); and receiver Hines Ward ($4 million).

They really need to watch doing too many more restructurings because they're just going to wind up back in this same spot in another year or two.

I've heard that Aaron Smith is likely to retire, so his will be gone.

I'd also just straight up cut Hampton and Ward. If no one else signs them, then bring them back later for the vet minimum.

Shane P. Hallam · 02-10-2012, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...atingcap-room/

Some other potential targets for Steelers restructuring and/or cuts.

They really need to watch doing too many more restructurings because they're just going to wind up back in this same spot in another year or two.

I've heard that Aaron Smith is likely to retire, so his will be gone.

I'd also just straight up cut Hampton and Ward. If no one else signs them, then bring them back later for the vet minimum.

Ward, Hampton, Kemoeatu and Foote will likely be cut. One of Colon or Scott as well.

BeerBaron · 02-10-2012, 10:29 AM

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...to-start-over/

Cap hell and QB/OC turmoil already? I'm enjoying this too much.

Jughead10 · 02-10-2012, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...to-start-over/

Cap hell and QB/OC turmoil already? I'm enjoying this too much.

Well Ben isn't the smartest guy in the world. And he barely sticks to the called plays anyway. It's not a good match. I like Haley a lot, but this is a poor fit. He won't go for improvisation from Ben and Tomlin's cheerleading/chest bumping on the sideline.

BeerBaron · 02-10-2012, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

Well Ben isn't the smartest guy in the world. And he barely sticks to the called plays anyway. It's not a good match. I like Haley a lot, but this is a poor fit. He won't go for improvisation from Ben and Tomlin's cheerleading/chest bumping on the sideline.

I will be the loudest one when people starting laughing at the Steelers eventual collapse from all of this.

Pittsburgh fans are going to lose their ****. They better hope Crosby is healthy by then. The only thing that saved them the last time the Steelers missed the playoffs was that the Penguins did well.

Nalej · 02-10-2012, 11:18 AM

I don't understand the hire at all. After their old OC *retired*, they claimed to be going back to their smash mouth run-the-ball roots.
Then they hire Haley... one does not equal the other

zachsaints52 · 02-10-2012, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nalej

I don't understand the hire at all. After their old OC *retired*, they claimed to be going back to their smash mouth run-the-ball roots.
Then they hire Haley... one does not equal the other

He tried at the beginning to be smash mouth, but when you dont have the OL or RBs to do it, plus one of the best WRs in the game, he switched it.

Mr. Goosemahn · 02-10-2012, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nalej

I don't understand the hire at all. After their old OC *retired*, they claimed to be going back to their smash mouth run-the-ball roots.
Then they hire Haley... one does not equal the other

From what I've read recently, he was fired for some behind-the-scenes things too. Clashed with FO and Tomlin at times, granted Ben way too much freedom when it came to run the offense, leaked more info to the media than he should've.

Haley will be the opposite of Arians when it comes to letting Ben control the offense, which is what I feel was the main reason Arians was fired. And by the way Ben has reacted to the change, there might be some substance to it.