The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Information from overthecap.com

Denver
Offense: $53,116,015 Defense: $71,666,029 Special: $1,520,002

Vikings
Offense: $51,163,944 Defense: $54,733,341 Special: $3,296,048

Seahawks
Offense: $55,694,992 Defense: $67,761,253 Special: $5,575,000

Cardinals
Offense: $75,978,429 Defense: $65,690,866 Special: $2,500,500

Redskins
Offense: $79,608,741 Defense: $37,290,052 Special: $2,612,500

Now it's not like EVERY team is like this, but it seems to be the more dominant teams from the last few years are spending bigger on defense either in retaining their home grown stars or adding in quality FA's. While we have put an epic amount of money in the offense, and are botton feeders on defense.

Interesting. Though I think this year is a weird one; for 2017 we have the following committed:

Offense: $54,461,074 Defense: $56,207,857 Special: $2,190,000

Makes more sense?

I think increased hit for norman plus the offense doesn't include kirk, Jackson, or garcon, which all together if we retained them would be $40million or more in cap space.

Great comment I read on twitter today:

Ultra-expensive #Giants D has the same total number of sacks as Trent Murphy.

Prowl33 wrote:Information from overthecap.com

Denver
Offense: $53,116,015 Defense: $71,666,029 Special: $1,520,002

Vikings
Offense: $51,163,944 Defense: $54,733,341 Special: $3,296,048

Seahawks
Offense: $55,694,992 Defense: $67,761,253 Special: $5,575,000

Cardinals
Offense: $75,978,429 Defense: $65,690,866 Special: $2,500,500

Redskins
Offense: $79,608,741 Defense: $37,290,052 Special: $2,612,500

Now it's not like EVERY team is like this, but it seems to be the more dominant teams from the last few years are spending bigger on defense either in retaining their home grown stars or adding in quality FA's. While we have put an epic amount of money in the offense, and are botton feeders on defense.

We haven't really had home-grown stars to retain on defense. We've done a good job at keeping red chip players (Kerrigan, Baker), but frankly there just hasn't been much talent to keep.

At least we're not throwing it all away on whoever is available like we used to — and like the Giants did this past year. That's the first step in getting back on track.

I expect you'll see more home-grown talent coming up in the future, with our FO retaining the worthy ones. Breeland, Preston Smith, and Cravens. Maybe Fuller. It's going to take time, especially since McCloughan's drafting strategy doesn't target specific positions. But it'll get addressed over the long run as the law of averages takes hold.

The cap is what makes the draft so important. You have to draft your star players so you can keep them for 4+ years under the rookie (i.e., cap friendly) deals. This is also what makes your 1-3 round picks even more important.

You can only buy so much talent. If you have a QB not under a rookie deal, then the cap allows you to "buy" between 4-5 top tier players (i.e., 4 if their contracts are >10M and 5-6 if you can grab guys in the 8M range) --- and we'll already have 3 of those in Williams, Norman, and Kerrigan (they will all have cap hits >$10M next year). The rest have to come thru the draft or you're over the cap.

In that regard, next year will be difficult in that we'll have to:
- sign Cousins to a long term deal
- Norman's cap hit bumps from 8M to 20M
- Williams cap hit goes up 5M
- Resign Jackson and/or Garcon
- Resign Chris Baker (although I doubt we will...)

All while trying to fill our needs at DL, OL, TE2, and RB. If Scot truly is a BPA draft guy, he can't count on the draft to fill the clearly glaring needs like DL/OL.

According to overthecap, we'll have $47M, but we'll need more. I am confident we'll cut DHALL (saving 4.25M), Lichtenstucker (saving 3.5M), perhaps (most likely) cut Lauvao (saving 4M). If we need to, we could also cut McCoy (saving 2.4M) and Paul (saving 2M). That would give us 63.15M. Take out 20M for Cousins and we are left with 43.15M. If we resign Jackson at a 7M number, we are down to 36.15M. Rookies cost about 5M, so we are down to 31.15M. We'll need 2 OL and 2 DL plus depth. I honestly think we can get that done with 31.15M of space. I was expecting this to a "doomsday" scenario, but I actually think we are in a decent position (unless I am missing something). I like what Scot has done!!!!

This all being said, the entire concept above is why I have always hated Danny boy. After nearly 20 years, he still doesn't understand how to build a team. I believe Scot does; but Danny boy is an absolute fool.

PulpExposure wrote:Interesting. Though I think this year is a weird one; for 2017 we have the following committed:

Offense: $54,461,074 Defense: $56,207,857 Special: $2,190,000

Makes more sense?

That doesn't include Cousins, Jackson, Garcon. Assuming we resign Cousins & Jackson --- add $27M to the OFF side (totaling 81M). I anticipate that we'll also cut a couple OLs, but if their replacements aren't drafted, we'll sign other players for similar amounts.

Danny's methods and mistakes definitely are to blame ... Scot and his methodology will help rectify things over time but we still have a bit of a problem in that the "number's guy" for our franchise is Danny's stooge, Bruce Allen

Prowl33 wrote:Information from overthecap.com

Denver
Offense: $53,116,015 Defense: $71,666,029 Special: $1,520,002

Vikings
Offense: $51,163,944 Defense: $54,733,341 Special: $3,296,048

Seahawks
Offense: $55,694,992 Defense: $67,761,253 Special: $5,575,000

Cardinals
Offense: $75,978,429 Defense: $65,690,866 Special: $2,500,500

Redskins
Offense: $79,608,741 Defense: $37,290,052 Special: $2,612,500

Now it's not like EVERY team is like this, but it seems to be the more dominant teams from the last few years are spending bigger on defense either in retaining their home grown stars or adding in quality FA's. While we have put an epic amount of money in the offense, and are botton feeders on defense.

I'll give you a recap of what happens when we spend more on defense than we spend on offense:

Haynesworth
Sanders
Stubblefield
Wilkinson
Archuleta

Draft and develop. Period.

markshark84 wrote:The cap is what makes the draft so important. You have to draft your star players so you can keep them for 4+ years under the rookie (i.e., cap friendly) deals. This is also what makes your 1-3 round picks even more important.

Yep. You and Irn-Bru are all over this. How we spend our money is far less important than whether or not we've been able to build through the draft. I feel pretty confident that McCloughan understands this. Fans can't expect him to completely fix that issue in just two drafts.

1: It's not "our" money.
2: No. The money is being spent where it needs to be. The team will be improved through the draft.

^^ what the man said ...

and

it will take more than 3 drafts

Prowl33 wrote:Information from overthecap.com

Denver
Offense: $53,116,015 Defense: $71,666,029 Special: $1,520,002

Vikings
Offense: $51,163,944 Defense: $54,733,341 Special: $3,296,048

Seahawks
Offense: $55,694,992 Defense: $67,761,253 Special: $5,575,000

Cardinals
Offense: $75,978,429 Defense: $65,690,866 Special: $2,500,500

Redskins
Offense: $79,608,741 Defense: $37,290,052 Special: $2,612,500

Now it's not like EVERY team is like this, but it seems to be the more dominant teams from the last few years are spending bigger on defense either in retaining their home grown stars or adding in quality FA's. While we have put an epic amount of money in the offense, and are botton feeders on defense.

Good data!