Gonzales

[KYPack]

[Tex, agree with you 100%

Lee's decline is a total puzzle to me. Both TT and the coach know the value an effective TE has in MM's offense. Tony would jump start the passing offense and give us one of the more effective units in the league.

Our # 3 pick, the Jets 3 and our #4 range from picks 73 - 105. One of 'em is a stiff price, but I'd trade a potential Corey Rogers type guy for Tony any day.

Let's re-kindle that trade and get it done.

Gonzales make 5 mil per year.

What was wrong with the passing offense, it was top 5 with a first year starter at the helm. A lack of targets is surely not a problem. If our passing offense is going to get better, it needs more time, not different targets.

Lee's "decline" has more the do with use than his play. Lee caught the highest % of targets of any TE in the league with 25 or more targets (79%). He is clutch. And scored on 10% of his targets. Tony caught 62% of his targets and scored on 6% of them. Tony was thrown to more than any single player on our team (Tony had 155 targets, Jennings had 140 targets, Lee had 49 targets). Tony was the 4th most thrown to receiver in the NFL.

We are not overflowing with $$. If we don't contract over the natural cap (123M), all top 3 round draft picks displace near minimum wage players, we don't cut any expensive players, and extend Jennings, Colledge, Collins, Kamp, Pickett, Williams, and Spitz to deals fair for their level of play, we will have between 2M-7M in cap space left over. Tony would be our only move in FA/trade. If we cut Grant or Clifton, Tony would be a viable option. If Clifton isn't cut in the next 3 weeks, he isn't going to be cut this season.

Yes, we have a real live passing offense at present. But a threat like Tony Gonzales is a toy that Mike McCarthy could use to jump start this offense. I have a lot of faith in MM and think he could use a guy like him to greatly increase our offensive firepower. I'm not one of those fans who want every 'flavor of the month' FA's that come down the pike.

A guy like Tony is different story. Lee had 39 catches for 303 yards and 5 touchdowns. TG? 96 catches for 10 TD's with woeful QB's. It is true that he was featured. Other than D Bowe, Big Tony was all they had. He still is a special player and we could use some of them.

As far as your financial analysis that we can't afford a player with that salary? I don't agree with it. We are far enough under the cap to make a 10 million dollar player over a couple years fit in our total salary picture easily.

We have a solid young team. A move like this could really ramp our offense. I'd like to see it happen.

McCarthy and TT agree with me. They wanted to trade a 3 to get Tony last season. Except for a goofy political situation in KC, this trade would have already been made.

[KYPack]

if we could bring in Tony Gonzalez for just a few years and have him do the same thing for our young tight ends it would be well worth the price.

for a few years? He's 35, already played 12 NFL seasons. TE is a very physical position, those guys get beat up. Maybe Gonzalez is the exception, but I seem to remember most of the good ones retiring in their early 30s.

You mentioned the geriatric McMahon, but QB is a very different situation.

He's 32.

He'll be 33 in 22 days, HH (or should I say tartan girl?).

Send him a card, now.

[Waldo]

What was wrong with the passing offense, it was top 5 with a first year starter at the helm. A lack of targets is surely not a problem. If our passing offense is going to get better, it needs more time, not different targets.

Lee's "decline" has more the do with use than his play. Lee caught the highest % of targets of any TE in the league with 25 or more targets (79%). He is clutch. And scored on 10% of his targets. Tony caught 62% of his targets and scored on 6% of them. Tony was thrown to more than any single player on our team (Tony had 155 targets, Jennings had 140 targets, Lee had 49 targets). Tony was the 4th most thrown to receiver in the NFL.

We are not overflowing with $$. If we don't contract over the natural cap (123M), all top 3 round draft picks displace near minimum wage players, we don't cut any expensive players, and extend Jennings, Colledge, Collins, Kamp, Pickett, Williams, and Spitz to deals fair for their level of play, we will have between 2M-7M in cap space left over. Tony would be our only move in FA/trade. If we cut Grant or Clifton, Tony would be a viable option. If Clifton isn't cut in the next 3 weeks, he isn't going to be cut this season.

Yes, we have a real live passing offense at present. But a threat like Tony Gonzales is a toy that Mike McCarthy could use to jump start this offense. I have a lot of faith in MM and think he could use a guy like him to greatly increase our offensive firepower. I'm not one of those fans who want every 'flavor of the month' FA's that come down the pike.

A guy like Tony is different story. Lee had 39 catches for 303 yards and 5 touchdowns. TG? 96 catches for 10 TD's with woeful QB's. It is true that he was featured. Other than D Bowe, Big Tony was all they had. He still is a special player and we could use some of them.

As far as your financial analysis that we can't afford a player with that salary? I don't agree with it. We are far enough under the cap to make a 10 million dollar player over a couple years fit in our total salary picture easily.

We have a solid young team. A move like this could really ramp our offense. I'd like to see it happen.

McCarthy and TT agree with me. They wanted to trade a 3 to get Tony last season. Except for a goofy political situation in KC, this trade would have already been made.

Right now we are 25.5 M under the actual 123M cap.

Assuming:
We would rather not extend players in an uncapped year, and don't want to franchise them.

We would rather not contract up to the carry forward cap, instead using the actual cap as the team cap in average/yr, frontloading with the carry forward.

Our rookies will cost 2M when offset players are considered.

No older players are cut.

Bigby, Hunter, Martin, Kuhn, Tramon, and Humphrey are tendered.

If we extend the following:
Kampman at 6.5M/yr (+.5M/yr net)
Pickett at 4M/yr (+.5M/yr net)
Jennings at 8M/yr (+7.2M/yr net) (ex B Berrian contract (7.2M/yr)
Colledge at 5M/yr (+4.1M/yr net) (ex J. Scott contract (5M/yr))
Collins at 5M/yr (+4.0M/yr net) (ex K. Hamlin contract (5.5M/yr))
Spitz at 2.5M/yr (+1.8M/yr net) (ex S. Wells contract (1.8M/yr))
Williams at 2M/yr (+1.6M/yr net) (assumed #)

That is a +19.7M change. Those #'s are more conservative than generous.

Add in the rookies and we are up to +21.7M.

If we are not exceeding the actual 123M cap, we have 3.8M for free agency.
Most likely, even if TT doesn't resign all those guys, he will keep the money in case he wants to keep them. Sorry, no Tony.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

But isn't that 25.5 million before the cap increase? I was under the impression that the final figure would be close to 32-33 million.

[Waldo]

But isn't that 25.5 million before the cap increase? I was under the impression that the final figure would be close to 32-33 million.

Cap increase as in the amount we pushed forward from '08? Or from 116M to 123M.
We have 32.8M in true cap space and 25.5M in space above the actual 123M cap. I highly doubt that TT will spend above 123M unless the money is used to front load.

It is a philosophical question. Do you spend above the actual cap when you use a pay as you go system (we do)? It may be legal to spend up to the push forward cap, but what happens if a new CBA is reached before the 2010 season begins? Here come the cap cuts. The push forward is only 1 year of money. You can also use that push forward to front load and keep contracts cheap over their life, so that it creates more space in the future, making the pay as you go amount lower.

We aren't a good enough team to even consider backloading at this point.

[vince]

According to your projections Waldo, which I too think may be a bit too conservative, and this 2009 cap projection, we could cut Clifton prior to the start of the season and save an additional 7.3 mil in cap space. That would be $18.4 million left, including the carry forward from last year.

I like Gonzalez, but I think TT targets a younger but experienced OT and possibly also a 3-4 DE in FA this year. Both would be key need-based signings. If Clifton sticks this year, I'm all about a DE in FA.

[Fritz]

Here's a slightly unrelated issue, but one that matters spending-wise: if you have limited cash to spend, why spend it - as so many posters (not the ones posting here necessarily) seem to want to do - on linebackers just because we're going to a 3-4?

It seems to me there's actually a plethora of linebackers already on the team. In addition to last year's crew of Bishop, Hawk, Poppinga, Chillar, Barnett and Lansanah, we now have at least three "new" linebackers named Kampman, Hunter, and Thompson.

What we really might ought to consider in free agency is the area of real need: the defensive line. Harrell's a question mark, Pickett can't hold down the nose tackle spot alone, Cole is spotty, Montgomery seems a misfit, Jenkins is a banana peel away from the DL, and Alfred Malone plays like the english butler his name sounds like.

So I suggest that TT put the Gonzalez thing on hold and hope no one snaps up Gonzalez in the meantime. Then maybe he needs to explore the defensive end/nose tackle FA market and see what he can do.

Then, closer to draft time, when you've got a better sense of the draft, and how deep it is and what you need - then, if you want to, pull the trigger with the third. Or better yet, wait til draft day to see how things play out.

And if your waiting costs you Gonzalez, I would argue that that's okay. He is, as one poster put it, a nice "toy" for MM. Not a need.

[KYPack]

Firstly, I don't think we will get TG from the Chiefs. Pioli is over there and that boy will get all the value he can. Petersen was a GM on the firing line and made a stupid deal to try and look good at the end.

Waldo, that is some damned good work on your anaysis. Most of the time, guys don't come close to reality on those things, but you seem to be right on the beam with your numbers.

As good a job as you did, it's all supposition. No matter what, it's not factual to say we can't afford a player given the CBA uncertainity and number of signings it would take to run us out of money. Most of the guys you predict numbers for will be resigned, I think. Clifton is the huge wildcard.

Nobody knows who, when, or how much players are going to get. So to say we don't have the $ is bullshit.

TE isn't our biggest need, that's also a problem. I tend to think we won't get Tony, but damn, I'd like to see coach Mac get a toy like that. That boy would go nuts with him on the roster.

[Waldo]

Firstly, I don't think we will get TG from the Chiefs. Pioli is over there and that boy will get all the value he can. Petersen was a GM on the firing line and made a stupid deal to try and look good at the end.

Waldo, that is some damned good work on your anaysis. Most of the time, guys don't come close to reality on those things, but you seem to be right on the beam with your numbers.

As good a job as you did, it's all supposition. No matter what, it's not factual to say we can't afford a player given the CBA uncertainity and number of signings it would take to run us out of money. Most of the guys you predict numbers for will be resigned, I think. Clifton is the huge wildcard.

Nobody knows who, when, or how much players are going to get. So to say we don't have the $ is bullshit.

TE isn't our biggest need, that's also a problem. I tend to think we won't get Tony, but damn, I'd like to see coach Mac get a toy like that. That boy would go nuts with him on the roster.

The big rule with being accurate predicting contracts is to figure out whose contract their agent/TT is using as a starting point, and adjust from there. I might be a bit low on Colledge/Collins. Colledge can play T, a big premium comes from that, Collins has been to a pro bowl and a 2nd team all-pro recently, though Hamlin was a big money FA. Spitz is a bit more versatile than Wells, but really locked into the ZBS, whereas Colledge is not.

There's a lot of ways to shift things around (push as much of the $$ on the contract into next year as possible, if they have confidence it will be uncapped) to get the necessary money to sign a couple of guys, but don't expect a spending spree. IMO a bigger name guy and a smaller guy is what we'll get. If we got Olshansky and Lechler I'd be giddy.

[Harlan Huckleby]

if we could bring in Tony Gonzalez for just a few years and have him do the same thing for our young tight ends it would be well worth the price.

for a few years? He's 35, already played 12 NFL seasons. TE is a very physical position, those guys get beat up. Maybe Gonzalez is the exception, but I seem to remember most of the good ones retiring in their early 30s.

You mentioned the geriatric McMahon, but QB is a very different situation.

He's 32.

He'll be 33 in 22 days, HH (or should I say tartan girl?).

Send him a card, now.

Woah! Woah! How did I get that so wrong? I use the same google you do. He was born in 1976. 2009-1976 is ... 2, carry the 7, I come up with 38 this time. The fucker is 38 years old - forget him.

[bobblehead]

I quite agree. He probably wouldn't catch 96 passes with the Packers because Arod has plenty of other weapons, but he would be a major upgrade to this offense, especially in the red zone.

And that would make him worth a 3rd IMO.

Our red zone offense was pretty fucking amazing this year. I would be more interested in what he could do on 3rd and 7

[Bretsky]

never have too many playmakers; giving up a 3rd for him IMO is still an easy call. Remember what Keith Jackson did for our offense. He'd bring in another dimension. For a third ? In a heartbeat.

[KYPack]

Firstly, I don't think we will get TG from the Chiefs. Pioli is over there and that boy will get all the value he can. Petersen was a GM on the firing line and made a stupid deal to try and look good at the end.

Waldo, that is some damned good work on your anaysis. Most of the time, guys don't come close to reality on those things, but you seem to be right on the beam with your numbers.

As good a job as you did, it's all supposition. No matter what, it's not factual to say we can't afford a player given the CBA uncertainity and number of signings it would take to run us out of money. Most of the guys you predict numbers for will be resigned, I think. Clifton is the huge wildcard.

Nobody knows who, when, or how much players are going to get. So to say we don't have the $ is bullshit.

TE isn't our biggest need, that's also a problem. I tend to think we won't get Tony, but damn, I'd like to see coach Mac get a toy like that. That boy would go nuts with him on the roster.

The big rule with being accurate predicting contracts is to figure out whose contract their agent/TT is using as a starting point, and adjust from there. I might be a bit low on Colledge/Collins. Colledge can play T, a big premium comes from that, Collins has been to a pro bowl and a 2nd team all-pro recently, though Hamlin was a big money FA. Spitz is a bit more versatile than Wells, but really locked into the ZBS, whereas Colledge is not.

There's a lot of ways to shift things around (push as much of the $$ on the contract into next year as possible, if they have confidence it will be uncapped) to get the necessary money to sign a couple of guys, but don't expect a spending spree. IMO a bigger name guy and a smaller guy is what we'll get. If we got Olshansky and Lechler I'd be giddy.

Well, I think your projections are pretty good, but...

Clifton is a big "if",
How do you figure Tauser's deal? This was his last year on his old deal, which was 6.2 mil last year?
Would we really keep Lee? He's 28. You could keep the cheap guy (Humphrey) and Finley and have another 2.8 mil to play with.

In spite of the good work on your projections, there's a lot of water yet to go under the bridge before we can say we can't sign a vet at 5 mil per, it'll ruin our '09 cap.

Olshansky and Lechler?

Oh yeah, I'd take those two myself. Lechler especially. He had a Ray Guy-like season last year.