PDA

View Full Version : Possible Cap Casualties


TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 12:10 AM
I'm interested to see who anyone thinks might or should be cap casualties. It's been pointed out to me that it is risky to let veterans go when they impact the leadership of a team, but sometimes a team has to make decisions that will help a team.

I think there a few needs that need to be addressed.

Walker/Payne/Johnson/Smith is too much money tied up in DTs when a switch to a 4-3 means only 2 can start. Johnson and Smith are the younger and healthier players so I don't think they go. Payne is only 31 and would provide a good 3rd DT. He's also more cap friendly and less injury prone. So...

Walker is signed through 2009. His accelerated cap hit would be $7.3 million. He is due for $5.8 this season. It would cost the Texans $1.5 million to cut him, but would definitely help out over the next 3 years.

Marcus Coleman lost his starting spot and probably a lot of supporters with his lackluster play. He made mental mistakes and showed a lack of effort at many times. He's signed though 2007. His accelerated cap hit would be $2.5 million against a salary of $3 million. It's a no brainer when you save money.

Steve Mckinney doesn't need to necessarily get cut unless he refuses to renegotiate. He's in the last year of the contract that is due to pay him $4.7 million this season. His allocated bonus is $800k so it would save the team almost $4 million to release him. $4 million a year could get the team LeCharles Bentley. Hmm...I'd rather go that route. I think they can restructure, keep him and still save the $4 million.

Todd Wade is due a ton of money over the next 4 years. No really, if you weigh it out it equals 2000 lbs. Can he handle a regular zone blocking scheme? He struggled a lot last season and I think the team would be much better served looking to the draft for a starting RT. His accelerated cap hit would be $6.7 million. He is due $5.1 this season and who knows how much more the following. It would cost $1.6 million to release him and the team would get better.

With those 4 changes the Texans save about a million and a half this season. Now, if they wait until after June 1 for Walker and Wade they could push $7 million to next season's salary cap...hmmm...possibly no cap next year. You might see a lot of June 1 cuts this year if they can push half the cap hits onto 2007. If the Texans save $8 million off that cap to add to the $9 they have available now they could look to add a LeCharles Bentley and a Chris Hope possibly.

powerfuldragon
02-14-2006, 10:16 AM
if i was on the texans squad, i'd take less money this year to be able to play under the superb new coaching staff. Esp. if i was on offense.

MorKnolle
02-14-2006, 10:24 AM
Marcus Coleman should be gone, not so much as a cap casualty but because he quit on the team and isn't worth the money we're paying him, and getting rid of him frees up $500k against the cap. I could see Walker or Payne going since we have $15+ million against the cap tied up in four DTs. Cutting Walker costs us $1.5 million while cutting Payne saves us $540k, so Payne would be the more likely candidate there, although outside of salary considerations I'd rather see Walker leave. Steve McKinney needs to take a serious pay cut or he's gone. I had heard a while ago he said he would take a pay cut, but on the radio this morning they said he wouldn't take a pay cut. Either way, if we cut him he gets paid nothing for this year and it saves us $3.9 million against the cap, so we have some pretty good leverage to negotiate a salary cut with him, not to mention he didn't play very well last year. If he doesn't want to cut his salary at least in half, then cut/trade him. I wish we could get rid of Wade and I don't want him to be playing next year (the guys on 610 this morning agreed with that point) but he is real expensive to get rid of so we probably can't cut him and hope he takes a pay cut, but I don't know if he will. That said, we could possibly package Steve McKinney, Marcus Coleman, and Seth Payne/Gary Walker to a team for a 5th round pick, and I would definitely take that rather than cutting them and getting nothing like we did with Sharper, Glenn, and Foreman last year. However, with their high base salaries I'm not sure someone would take all three of them, but we can hope.

keyfro
02-14-2006, 10:42 AM
cap casualties are going to be coleman, mckinney(if he won't restructure) and weigert (if he won't restructure)

trades will likely come from gary walker and peek(restricted free agent but what will likely happen is we'll offer him enough to get atleast a 3rd round pick compensation for him)...payne is another option...one teams like new england, pittsburgh, and miami wouldn't mind looking at...gary walker though is probably our best option to trade...before we re-signed him baltimore was looking hard at him...cleveland needs quality people as well as arizona...peek is probably going to get attention from the new teams running the 3-4 defense...i could see san fran, cleveland, miami, and oakland taking a long look at him

i know peek is a fan favorite...heck he's one of my favorite players but he simply does not fit the 4-3 defense...he doesn't have the coverage skills to be a linebacker and he doesn't have the size to be a DE...remember he has problems keeping his weight around 250...he showed up the OTA's this past year at 260lbs and by the end of the season he was almost to 245lb again...if he could show the ability to cover in pass he would be a great strongside linebacker

Coach C.
02-14-2006, 10:50 AM
Mork I like your plan there are a couple of guys of other guys that would be gone also, but that was discussed on our FA thread. Walker, Wade, Weigert, and McKinney have to be restructured or let go. Save Weigert because he can mentor a rookie getting ready to take his job. McKinney said on 610 after the season ended that he was willing to restructure, but not take a pay cut, so either he does not understand or he wants to go play for another team. Either way no big problem. One thing that is a must is Coleman has to go, his apathy can no longer poison the team.

Keyfro dont see Peek going anywhere this year. We need all the athletes we can use on defense. He showed up at OTA's at 260 and they wanted him to drop a little, he ended the year at 248 which if he goes to 260 again and ends the year about the same as a pass rush specialist or weakside pass rusher i have no problem with that.

TexanBacker your avatar is a big need for us, and if we are smart and want to turn this team around quickly he would go a long way to doing that.

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 10:58 AM
I would say that Walker and Wade could definetely be cap casualties. To be honest I think we could unload them and come off way better in a trade. Look at Arizona as a possible trade partner. They need help on both lines and their running game. If we give them Walker and Weigart we would actually save maybe 1.5 to 2 mill. as opposed to keeping them. You want to make it enticing for Arizona throw in Morency. (As much as I might like this guys potential he said himself that if the Texans got Bush he would ask for a trade. I'm not saying the Texans will get Bush, but Morrency's comment just struck the wrong nerve with me.) We could get help in our wide receiver corps. and another player or maybe a pick next year. I think the Texans are in a great position to improve this yr. this is just one scenario where they could come out on top. I'm sure they can manage to unload cap space without many problems.

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 11:01 AM
Mork I like your plan there are a couple of guys of other guys that would be gone also, but that was discussed on our FA thread. Walker, Wade, Weigert, and McKinney have to be restructured or let go. Save Weigert because he can mentor a rookie getting ready to take his job. McKinney said on 610 after the season ended that he was willing to restructure, but not take a pay cut, so either he does not understand or he wants to go play for another team. Either way no big problem. One thing that is a must is Coleman has to go, his apathy can no longer poison the team.

Keyfro dont see Peek going anywhere this year. We need all the athletes we can use on defense. He showed up at OTA's at 260 and they wanted him to drop a little, he ended the year at 248 which if he goes to 260 again and ends the year about the same as a pass rush specialist or weakside pass rusher i have no problem with that.

TexanBacker your avatar is a big need for us, and if we are smart and want to turn this team around quickly he would go a long way to doing that.

Do you have a link to that FA thread?

Coach C.
02-14-2006, 11:01 AM
you know dat boy I like your idea somewhat. Maybe a package deal of our 5th, Walker, McKinney, Wade for their 4th and Bryant Johnson. I would take that trade anyday, not sure they would want the money that would be tied up in that deal though. http://www.houstontexans.com/fan_zone/messageboards/showthread.php?t=16789 here ya go dat boy

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 11:01 AM
Nevermind I think I found it. Sorry.

cap1
02-14-2006, 11:02 AM
I hope we can clear up some more space. Especially on the OLine. We pay our OLine way too much for the product they put on the field. And if we can clear up some of money, we can afford to bring in a Bentley. We have some big holes that need to be fixed before we go into the draft. :twocents:

cap1
02-14-2006, 11:04 AM
TexanBacker your avatar is a big need for us, and if we are smart and want to turn this team around quickly he would go a long way to doing that.


Alright, I am not really educated on some of the guys in the draft. Who is the player in his avatar.

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 11:06 AM
Thanks, I just think that our team can manuever our personnel to improve alot this yr. more than we could expect and free up or use the cap more efficiently. However your deal sounds real good too, I think I would pull the trigger on that deal as well.

TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 11:06 AM
If McKinney is willing to renegotiate, but not take a pay cut, they could spread what is due to him out over 3 years and give him a little bigger bonus.

Give him $6 million over 3 years and a $2.1 million signing bonus.
2006 - $900,000 salary $700,000 bonus + $800 from last contract
2007 - $1.3 million salary $700,000 bonus
2008 - $1.7 million salary $700,000 bonus

Chances are slim that after this year or if he was cut that he would get a contract for anything more than the vet minimum at this time. He wouldn't get a signing bonus, so if he didn't make the team he would have only the $800k he got when we cut him. With this renegotiated contract he would still get that $800 and then get at least a guaranteed $2.1 million which could be as good as he could get on the free market. It still saves the Texans $2.2 million this season.

I think he could still be a valuable part on the line. I'd prefer him at guard and let either Hodgden take over or draft someone like Mangold or Eslinger.

Coach C.
02-14-2006, 11:09 AM
Alright, I am not really educated on some of the guys in the draft. Who is the player in his avatar.

It is Mario Williams stud DE from NC State. 6'6" 285-290 compared to Ju Pep. Has played DT, DE, and OLB for NC State through his career there. He is a horse the kind I want taking blocking away from Peek, Babin, and Orr so they can blitz and rush freely.

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 11:10 AM
I hope we can clear up some more space. Especially on the OLine. We pay our OLine way too much for the product they put on the field. And if we can clear up some of money, we can afford to bring in a Bentley. We have some big holes that need to be fixed before we go into the draft. :twocents:

Bringing in Bentley is enticing, but I would rather go with Enslinger. If we can get him, because Bentley is very expensive, we already have a serviceable center, and Enslayer fits the Zone Blocking scheme well. Also they can both play guard. The main reason I wouldn't go after Bentley is because while he may be an upgrade. He might not be the best money spent at this point.

TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 11:12 AM
Alright, I am not really educated on some of the guys in the draft. Who is the player in his avatar.

It's Mario Williams, DE extraordinaire from North Carolina St.

Dude's a monster. He'd be our Dwight Freeney, Julius Peppers, Jevon Kearse.


The only thing I wonder about trading guys like Wade/Walker is if their salaries are bad enough to keep another team away. The Texans pay the bonus, but the Cards would still be on the books for a lot. At least they could dump them for free if they didn't live up to the billing. Plus, as we found with Sharper and the Eagles will find with T.O. If teams know we want to get rid of someone and will release them outright, it's stupid to trade for them unless you are afraid someone else will sign them first. We're the only team dumb enough to do that lately when we traded for Buchanon. They were going to let him go, but we thought Washington would grab him first or beat us to a trade. Oh well, if we can trade them and get a couple of late draft picks that can be used to move up even, the more the merrier.

Coach C.
02-14-2006, 11:12 AM
Now see dat boy, I feel the exact opposite on that. I think Bentley at G fits the zone scheme and he brings a toughness to the line. Which means we can get Eslinger or Mangold and they are there to replace Weigert if need be or help out Hogdon who got injured after a couple of games.

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 11:19 AM
Now see dat boy, I feel the exact opposite on that. I think Bentley at G fits the zone scheme and he brings a toughness to the line. Which means we can get Eslinger or Mangold and they are there to replace Weigert if need be or help out Hogdon who got injured after a couple of games.

If he was brought in to play guard I would have no problem with that, and if we were able to get Enslayer or mangold. I would probably be ecstatic. I was saying that because I've heard alot of talk about him coming in to play center. Thinking about it, if he did come in though I think I would rather get Setterstorm to play guard opposite of him. I think that would really balance our line out.

Coach C.
02-14-2006, 11:20 AM
If he was brought in to play guard I would have no problem with that, and if we were able to get Enslayer or mangold. I would probably be ecstatic. I was saying that because I've heard alot of talk about him coming in to play center. Thinking about it, if he did come in though I think I would rather get Setterstorm to play guard opposite of him. I think that would really balance our line out.
now we can agree on that

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 11:23 AM
It's Mario Williams, DE extraordinaire from North Carolina St.

Dude's a monster. He'd be our Dwight Freeney, Julius Peppers, Jevon Kearse.


The only thing I wonder about trading guys like Wade/Walker is if their salaries are bad enough to keep another team away. The Texans pay the bonus, but the Cards would still be on the books for a lot. At least they could dump them for free if they didn't live up to the billing. Plus, as we found with Sharper and the Eagles will find with T.O. If teams know we want to get rid of someone and will release them outright, it's stupid to trade for them unless you are afraid someone else will sign them first. We're the only team dumb enough to do that lately when we traded for Buchanon. They were going to let him go, but we thought Washington would grab him first or beat us to a trade. Oh well, if we can trade them and get a couple of late draft picks that can be used to move up even, the more the merrier.

See I think the situation would be different, because shopping a guy would be to our advantage. We don't have to get rid of them they could still play a significant role on our team. Sharper wanted out as did T.O. so with the guys we would shop our situation wouldn't be the same.

MorKnolle
02-14-2006, 11:23 AM
If you packaged a couple guys together you could maybe trade for a 5th or 6th, but cutting/trading Gary Walker and Todd Wade each cost us an additional $1.5 million against the cap so that reduces the amount of cap room we have. I'd like to release both of them but I don't know how viable of an option that is this year. Depending on who else we release and sign, we could probably afford to dump one of them but not both.

MorKnolle
02-14-2006, 11:26 AM
If he was brought in to play guard I would have no problem with that, and if we were able to get Enslayer or mangold. I would probably be ecstatic. I was saying that because I've heard alot of talk about him coming in to play center. Thinking about it, if he did come in though I think I would rather get Setterstorm to play guard opposite of him. I think that would really balance our line out.

This would be a studly OLine upgrade for us next year and is possible if we trade down to the #4/5 pick and add their 2nd round pick and whatever else to even out the deal:

LT Chester Pitts (already on roster)
LG Zach Wiegert (already on roster)
C Nick Mangold (#36/37 pick)
RG LeCharles Bentley (free agent sign, 6 years, $26-28 million with $12 million bonus)
RT Eric Winston (#33 pick)

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 11:28 AM
If you packaged a couple guys together you could maybe trade for a 5th or 6th, but cutting/trading Gary Walker and Todd Wade each cost us an additional $1.5 million against the cap so that reduces the amount of cap room we have. I'd like to release both of them but I don't know how viable of an option that is this year. Depending on who else we release and sign, we could probably afford to dump one of them but not both.

What I alluded to earlier was cutting or trading in pairs. If you cut Walker and Weigart you would save money, because the amount you would save on Weigart is greater than what you would loose with Walker. If you cut Wade, you could cut McKinney and have a similar effect. There are moves like that accross the board. Wether the Texans would do it is another question.

TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 12:06 PM
See I think the situation would be different, because shopping a guy would be to our advantage. We don't have to get rid of them they could still play a significant role on our team. Sharper wanted out as did T.O. so with the guys we would shop our situation wouldn't be the same.


The Texans just need to make sure teams don't think they definitely want to get rid of them. Play it up as, "With a switch to a 4-3 and a more traditional zone blocking scheme, we have extra DTs and Todd Wade doesn't fully fit in the scheme." Maybe they could get a pick out of it.

TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 12:08 PM
This would be a studly OLine upgrade for us next year and is possible if we trade down to the #4/5 pick and add their 2nd round pick and whatever else to even out the deal:

LT Chester Pitts (already on roster)
LG Zach Wiegert (already on roster)
C Nick Mangold (#36/37 pick)
RG LeCharles Bentley (free agent sign, 6 years, $26-28 million with $12 million bonus)
RT Eric Winston (#33 pick)


I like the looks of that line. I think Bentley wants to play center, but I'm sure for the right money he will play guard.

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 12:18 PM
This would be a studly OLine upgrade for us next year and is possible if we trade down to the #4/5 pick and add their 2nd round pick and whatever else to even out the deal:

LT Chester Pitts (already on roster)
LG Zach Wiegert (already on roster)
C Nick Mangold (#36/37 pick)
RG LeCharles Bentley (free agent sign, 6 years, $26-28 million with $12 million bonus)
RT Eric Winston (#33 pick)

The line I think would or should start next yr. would be as follows.

LT Pitts (already on roster) He's shown he's capable of handling this possition.
LG Bentley (FA) I'm not sure about the money, but this guy is way better than Weigart and should get this position.
C Hodgdon (already on roster) He showed promise last yr. and would be more comfortable there this yr.
RG Setterstorm or Mangold (Draft) I think a rookie could come in an handle this position and these two guys I think would definetely hold it down here.
RT Wand (FA) He could be had at a great price and I feel he got a bum deal this yr. even if we drafted a tackle I think Wand would hold this position at the start of the yr.

TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 02:03 PM
Wand is someone that hasn't been mentioned, but you are right, he could be a darkhorse candidate. He was a project that was oddly enough the starting LT during the year that the team had the least number of sacks if I remember correctly. Maybe it was year 2. Still, he struggled with the Freeney's of the NFL. Well, who doesn't? He has quick feet and long arms. Maybe at RT he could do well with someone like Sherman working with him. He's a RFA and should be able to come back for a decent price.

Big B Texan Fan
02-14-2006, 02:10 PM
Wand is someone that hasn't been mentioned, but you are right, he could be a darkhorse candidate. He was a project that was oddly enough the starting LT during the year that the team had the least number of sacks if I remember correctly. Maybe it was year 2. Still, he struggled with the Freeney's of the NFL. Well, who doesn't? He has quick feet and long arms. Maybe at RT he could do well with someone like Sherman working with him. He's a RFA and should be able to come back for a decent price.
It was year #3

whiskeyrbl
02-14-2006, 03:19 PM
This would be a studly OLine upgrade for us next year and is possible if we trade down to the #4/5 pick and add their 2nd round pick and whatever else to even out the deal:

LT Chester Pitts (already on roster)
LG Zach Wiegert (already on roster)
C Nick Mangold (#36/37 pick)
RG LeCharles Bentley (free agent sign, 6 years, $26-28 million with $12 million bonus)
RT Eric Winston (#33 pick)
I like this but i think Bentley is making it clear he wants to go home and play with the Browns,if that is the case how about this scenario:
LT- D'brick #4
LG- Pitts
C- Mangold #33
RG-Setterstrom #36 (If Winston not available)or McKinney
RT-Winston #36 (If available) or M. Brown

MorKnolle
02-14-2006, 03:22 PM
I like the looks of that line. I think Bentley wants to play center, but I'm sure for the right money he will play guard.

Mangold could probably also play OG, so between him and LeCharles you have two guys that could interchange at C/OG.

MorKnolle
02-14-2006, 03:25 PM
I like this but i think Bentley is making it clear he wants to go home and play with the Browns,if that is the case how about this scenario:
LT- D'brick #4
LG- Pitts
C- Mangold #33
RG-Setterstrom #36 (If Winston not available)or McKinney
RT-Winston #36 (If available) or M. Brown

That would also be a really nice OLine, but using our top 3 picks on OL isn't likely going to happen and I wouldn't want to do that, I would leave out D'Brick and take Mario for our DLine then Winston at #33, Mangold at #36 (Winston is more of a danger of being taken at 34/35 so I take him first), Setterstrom or Davin Joseph would be nice but both will be available in the 3rd, and I think Wiegert is still fine for one more year.
Line without Bentley:
LT Chester Pitts/Eric Winston
LG Zach Wiegert
C Nick Mangold/Drew Hodgdon
RG Davin Joseph/Mark Setterstrom/other draft pick (maybe Mangold/Hodgdon)
RT Eric Winston/Chester Pitts

whiskeyrbl
02-14-2006, 03:37 PM
I would agree with you on that mork did you get that web address?
:yahoo:

Runner
02-14-2006, 03:40 PM
So there are those who think we should start two or even three rookies on the o-line next year? I think that is more than a little risky. Even Pitts, who most think highly of on this board, stated he finally started playing instinctively just this past season - his 4th. (Sorry, no link to the quote. I believe there was a post about that early this season).

A Texan
02-14-2006, 03:46 PM
You want to make it enticing for Arizona throw in Morency. (As much as I might like this guys potential he said himself that if the Texans got Bush he would ask for a trade. I'm not saying the Texans will get Bush, but Morrency's comment just struck the wrong nerve with me.) We could get help in our wide receiver corps. and another player or maybe a pick next year. I think the Texans are in a great position to improve this yr. this is just one scenario where they could come out on top. I'm sure they can manage to unload cap space without many problems.

Don't matter what Morency said. He's one guy the Texans definitely need to keep.

whiskeyrbl
02-14-2006, 03:50 PM
So there are those who think we should start two or even three rookies on the o-line next year? I think that is more than a little risky. Even Pitts, who most think highly of on this board, stated he finally started playing instinctively just this past season - his 4th. (Sorry, no link to the quote. I believe there was a post about that early this season).
I think we can agree next year we are not going to the playoffs so why not get good young talent in here and let them learn and start our run in 2007?

MorKnolle
02-14-2006, 03:51 PM
I would agree with you on that mork did you get that web address?
:yahoo:

Yeah, I've seen it a lot before, I haven't read thru many of the player profiles as they've been posting more of them recently and I didn't look at the specific guys you mentioned yet. I have used that site a lot though in putting together a lot of my offseason ideas.

MorKnolle
02-14-2006, 03:56 PM
I think we can agree next year we are not going to the playoffs so why not get good young talent in here and let them learn and start our run in 2007?

True, and we have to start at some point. We can't keep bringing in overpriced free agents and hope to patch together a good OLine from that. Most good OLines are built thru the draft, we have a lot of problems in our OLine, and this is a great year for OLine talent to bring in and build around. We have to start somewhere and we obviously haven't built it with talent to this point other than Pitts and then the aging Wiegert and McKinney. I think we can keep Wiegert as a starter for next year, we'll have to keep Wade because of his contract, and we have some other guys that are decent for backups (Milford Brown, Drew Hodgdon could be a legitimate starter, Todd Washington) so if our rookies can't beat these guys out at the start of the year then they can sit for as long as it takes them to be ready and better than our other guys, which shouldn't be very long at all in most cases, especially if we can bring in guys like Winston, Mangold, and Joseph/Setterstrom.

Coach C.
02-14-2006, 03:57 PM
Runner I agree with you, but I think that the two rookies that Mork is talking about are very NFL ready. That will add alot to the situation, I mean Khalif Barnes was not that good this year, but find a person that would not have preferred him over Wade, Riley, or whoever else we trotted out there at RT. It always takes time, just got to go for NFL readiness.

Runner
02-14-2006, 03:58 PM
I think we can agree next year we are not going to the playoffs so why not get good young talent in here and let them learn and start our run in 2007?

Well, IMO:

1) I want to try to win next year
2) We have some good talent on the team; the coaching will now take advantage of the talent
3) The draft is still a crapshoot - if 1 or 2 of those rookies don't pan out we are back where we started

4) (I don't really care about this one other than it is irritating) the fans of this team expect top notch performance the player's first year, or the word bust get pulled out faster than a "fire somebody" thread.

edited to add:

5) We need to use some of those picks to fill other holes too.

TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 04:01 PM
It was year #3

I just looked it up. I could have done it earlier, but my research guy was on break.

Year 1 - 76 sacks given up
Year 2 - 36 sacks given up
Year 3 - 49 sacks given up
Year 4 - 68 sacks given up

Year 2 was the best. I'm not sure what this all means except they were still much better in year 3 than last season and that was with Wand starting.

infantrycak
02-14-2006, 04:43 PM
I mean Khalif Barnes was not that good this year, but find a person that would not have preferred him over Wade, Riley, or whoever else we trotted out there at RT.

Don't know where you get Khalif Barnes was not that good. For a 2nd round rookie he played well enough to have most Jags fans thinking they have their LT for the future. I mean, sure 3.5 sacks given up and 2 penalties (12 games started) is nothing by Texans standards...oh, wait improvement is less than that. Never mind.

whiskeyrbl
02-14-2006, 04:44 PM
well my thinking on this is if you try to rebuild with FA on our OL your looking at a quick fix for 2-3 years then what?Back to square one.I guess it just depends on what your looking for.I'm looking to have a solid team for years to come not just the next 2-3.

Runner
02-14-2006, 04:54 PM
well my thinking on this is if you try to rebuild with FA on our OL your looking at a quick fix for 2-3 years then what?Back to square one.I guess it just depends on what your looking for.I'm looking to have a solid team for years to come not just the next 2-3.

I understand that it is all good for the o-line if the picks all pan out, but there is no guarantee. Most pros - good, bad, average - looked good on draft day, that's why they were picked.

Also, if we are looking for a solid team as opposed to just a solid o-line in the long term we have lots of other holes we need to fix. The defense is in serious need of some young talent, and young talent seems to perform better faster on the defensive side of the ball.

However, over the next few weeks we'll see how the coaches feel about this as contracts are offered, cuts are made, and free agents are picked up. The draft will just be the final piece of the puzzle before camp, depth charts, and the other really good stuff happens.

whiskeyrbl
02-14-2006, 05:01 PM
I agree here is how i would address the draft if we trade down to the Jets for a 1st and 2nd this year:
#4 Mario Williams DE(instead of D'Brick)
#33 N.Mangold C
#36 Joseph CB (SC)
#65 V.Adejanu DE (Indiana)
#66 Setterstrom OG (MINN)
#97 C.Humes RB (Virg. Tech)
#129 S.Green WR (LSU)
#161 R.Harper S (ALA)
#193 Bieneman TE (Wash.St.)

TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 06:19 PM
well my thinking on this is if you try to rebuild with FA on our OL your looking at a quick fix for 2-3 years then what?Back to square one.I guess it just depends on what your looking for.I'm looking to have a solid team for years to come not just the next 2-3.

I think you can get a mix. It's why I lean towards restructuring McKinney's deal, try and bring in someone like Bentley, who's still young, and then draft a couple of young good linemen.

The line this year could have Pitts/McKinney/Bentley/Weigert/Winston, with Hodgden and Eslinger, Setterstrom, or Mangold in the fold as well. I wouldn't start more than one rookie if possible and 3 of those on the line are already familiar with the offense. Maybe start Hodgden and keep Weigert as the first lineman on the bench. It's a group they can grow with and then when Weigert goes or McKinney goes they have good young players to take their place. By that next year you could have Pitts/Setterstrom/Eslinger/Bentley/Winston and they are all young enough to be around for awhile.

Runner
02-14-2006, 08:30 PM
The line this year could have Pitts/McKinney/Bentley/Weigert/Winston, with Hodgden and Eslinger, Setterstrom, or Mangold in the fold as well. I wouldn't start more than one rookie if possible and 3 of those on the line are already familiar with the offense. .

So of these 8 or 9 lineman, and counting Pitts as a tackle, we'd have two tackles on the team? I don't think the new coaching staff is going to act like any player can play any position on the line like the previous brain trust did.

Runner
02-14-2006, 08:32 PM
I agree here is how i would address the draft if we trade down to the Jets for a 1st and 2nd this year:
#4 Mario Williams DE(instead of D'Brick)
#33 N.Mangold C
#36 Joseph CB (SC)
#65 V.Adejanu DE (Indiana)
#66 Setterstrom OG (MINN)
#97 C.Humes RB (Virg. Tech)
#129 S.Green WR (LSU)
#161 R.Harper S (ALA)
#193 Bieneman TE (Wash.St.)

I didn't watch enough college football or read enough draft reports to comment on most of these guys, but it is a nice mix of positions. Since I'm no draftnik, I'll leave it at that.

TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 09:28 PM
So of these 8 or 9 lineman, and counting Pitts as a tackle, we'd have two tackles on the team? I don't think the new coaching staff is going to act like any player can play any position on the line like the previous brain trust did.

I'm assuming Wand is still around. Weigert played tackle last season for the final few games, playing well, so he can play there as well. I didn't mention him since he wouldn't be a new addition and I don't think he'll start. He might get looks again, though.

dat_boy_yec
02-14-2006, 09:44 PM
I'm assuming Wand is still around. Weigert played tackle last season for the final few games, playing well, so he can play there as well. I didn't mention him since he wouldn't be a new addition and I don't think he'll start. He might get looks again, though.

Wand is a guy I really hope they keep. He showed he could handle the LT position before they devised help for the LT so I'm sure he could compete for the LT spot and if nothing else man the RT spot. I could see Weigart as a backup for Gs and Ts if he restructures otherwise I think he would be a cap casualty, or involved in a trade.

Runner
02-14-2006, 11:09 PM
I'm assuming Wand is still around. Weigert played tackle last season for the final few games, playing well, so he can play there as well. I didn't mention him since he wouldn't be a new addition and I don't think he'll start. He might get looks again, though.

Ok.

They usually only carry about 8 lineman (I think); that was the point I didn't state clearly. So your original list will have to be a little shorter.

Runner
02-14-2006, 11:11 PM
Wand is a guy I really hope they keep. He showed he could handle the LT position before they devised help for the LT so I'm sure he could compete for the LT spot and if nothing else man the RT spot. I could see Weigart as a backup for Gs and Ts if he restructures otherwise I think he would be a cap casualty, or involved in a trade.

I'll put my prediction on the table right now. It won't surprise anyone.

Wand starts game 1 next season at left tackle. He'll have a strong year. Not pro-bowl, but very solid.

TexanBacker93
02-14-2006, 11:42 PM
Ok.

They usually only carry about 8 lineman (I think); that was the point I didn't state clearly. So your original list will have to be a little shorter.

Very true. They might look to keep 9 if they draft 2, but I didn't even count when I posted that. Although I was thinking that they would end up with Mangold, Setterstrom, and Eslinger. I see them drafting one of those guys. Well, I'd like to see them draft one. If they also draft someone like Winston that would give them 2 rookie linemen. Sign Bentley. Keep Pitts, Wand, Weigert, McKinney, and Hodgden. That leaves Washington, Weary, Wade, Walter (say those names 5 times fast) , and Brown on the outs. If they stay with 9 it would be either Washington because of his flexibilty or Wade because of the contract.

AustinJB
02-15-2006, 01:13 AM
Wand is a guy I really hope they keep. He showed he could handle the LT position before they devised help for the LT so I'm sure he could compete for the LT spot and if nothing else man the RT spot.

Are you serious? Seth Wand? The same guy that gave up 12.5 sacks in 2004. I know he only had two this past yr. but he didn't start any games...I don't think.

I don't necessarily dislike Wand, but I would definately rather see Pitts and/or Wade at OT.:twocents:

infantrycak
02-15-2006, 07:31 AM
Are you serious? Seth Wand? The same guy that gave up 12.5 sacks in 2004. I know he only had two this past yr. but he didn't start any games...I don't think.

I don't necessarily dislike Wand, but I would definately rather see Pitts and/or Wade at OT.:twocents:

Pitts? The same guy that gave up 15.5 sacks in 2002 and then went to 5.5 in 2003. Maybe Wand can contribute and improve.

TexanBacker93
02-15-2006, 09:28 AM
Plus, I believe some of the sacks given to the tackles are from the inside pocket collapsing and Carr flushing into the outside rush. At least I know I've seen that happen. Whether they give that sack to Pitts or Wade or Wand I don't know.

Texans Horror
02-15-2006, 09:39 AM
Very true. They might look to keep 9 if they draft 2, but I didn't even count when I posted that. Although I was thinking that they would end up with Mangold, Setterstrom, and Eslinger. I see them drafting one of those guys. Well, I'd like to see them draft one. If they also draft someone like Winston that would give them 2 rookie linemen. Sign Bentley. Keep Pitts, Wand, Weigert, McKinney, and Hodgden. That leaves Washington, Weary, Wade, Walter (say those names 5 times fast) , and Brown on the outs. If they stay with 9 it would be either Washington because of his flexibilty or Wade because of the contract.

I like the Texans picking up Winston, but just to add to the discussion, I don't think he would play much his first year due to his knee injury. It is for the same reason that I think he will fall in the draft and the Texans could pick him up pretty cheap.

I see them doing their best to get Bentley, but I don't think they will do much to draft on the offensive line this year, the reasoning being that coaching will pick up a lot of what was lost, and that we have lots of holes to fill.

infantrycak
02-15-2006, 09:43 AM
Plus, I believe some of the sacks given to the tackles are from the inside pocket collapsing and Carr flushing into the outside rush. At least I know I've seen that happen. Whether they give that sack to Pitts or Wade or Wand I don't know.

If you add up the sacks from Stats, Inc. they do not come to the total on the season so they are not forcing attribution for every sack onto the OL. Unfortunately, they do not break down who was responsible--RB, TE, QB--for the non-OL sacks.

Texans Horror
02-15-2006, 09:43 AM
I'll put my prediction on the table right now. It won't surprise anyone.

Wand starts game 1 next season at left tackle. He'll have a strong year. Not pro-bowl, but very solid.

I've said several times before that I think/hope that Wand starts at LT. My prediction is that Pitts will join him at guard and that, as the season progresses, they will become a very stout side. My line prediction for next year, from left to right, is Wand, Pitts, Bentley, Weary, and Weigert. In 07, they bring in Winston at RT.

MorKnolle
02-15-2006, 10:07 AM
I'll put my prediction on the table right now. It won't surprise anyone.

Wand starts game 1 next season at left tackle. He'll have a strong year. Not pro-bowl, but very solid.

Wand will never play LT over Pitts, he might get a shot at RT if we don't bring in anyone else in the offseason to play there, but with Wade's contract I'm not sure they'd play Wand over Wade either.

I like the Texans picking up Winston, but just to add to the discussion, I don't think he would play much his first year due to his knee injury. It is for the same reason that I think he will fall in the draft and the Texans could pick him up pretty cheap.

I see them doing their best to get Bentley, but I don't think they will do much to draft on the offensive line this year, the reasoning being that coaching will pick up a lot of what was lost, and that we have lots of holes to fill.

By the time the season starts he should be almost if not all the way over his knee injury, and I do hope that concern is enough to drop him to #33 where we can get him. I think he can definitely beat out Wade/Wand/whoever else for at least the RT spot at the start of the year.

I hope they do go after Bentley hard, and I think they will look at OLine some in the draft since there are so many good ones out there and it is definitely a need of ours, although the coaching should help improve our current guys. I'd love to see us sign Bentley and draft Winston and Mangold, that would improve our OLine so much.

Runner
02-15-2006, 10:31 AM
Wand will never play LT over Pitts,


I've been wrong before - heck, I said repeatedly during last training camp that "Riley was a downgrade of Wand and would never start in front of him".

In my defense, I was only half wrong with that one - this half: would never start in front of him :)

Contrary to popular thought, Pitts does have weaknesses. One of which is playing a team game on the o-line. It is telling that Pitts was never asked to double team even elite defensive ends from his guard position, but as soon as he was moved to tackle Brown was given the responsibility to "watch Pitts's back" on inside rushes. This in addition to the tight end help he got in some games.



but with Wade's contract I'm not sure they'd play Wand over Wade either.


This comment still scares me. Why don't we just list the players by position, sort by salary, and skip training camp?

Frankly - and I'm taking another flyer here - I wouldn't be surprised to see Wade cut. I think he is so unsuited to the scheme the Texans will use that his salary will be dead space even if he is on the team, so cutting him just adds another $1.6M to what is already dead space. Nothing against Wade; I think he would be a good player for another team that suits his style better and would be picked up immediately if we do cut him.

And that brought us back to the original topic of this thread!

wags
02-15-2006, 10:40 AM
I've said several times before that I think/hope that Wand starts at LT. My prediction is that Pitts will join him at guard and that, as the season progresses, they will become a very stout side. My line prediction for next year, from left to right, is Wand, Pitts, Bentley, Weary, and Weigert. In 07, they bring in Winston at RT.

Yikes!!! Pitts is a better tackle than guard. Wand was bad in the limited time he did get last year. No way I want him blocking anywhere for Carr. Weary is pathetic as well.

Not a shot at you, we just have crappy players to try and form an OL with.

Texans Horror
02-15-2006, 10:42 AM
By the time the season starts he should be almost if not all the way over his knee injury, and I do hope that concern is enough to drop him to #33 where we can get him. I think he can definitely beat out Wade/Wand/whoever else for at least the RT spot at the start of the year.

True, but if I remember correctly, even Wand played only during special teams for about a year while he "learned" the line. Is this just the old regime being too conservative? I don't know, but with a knee injury, I know the longer you can stay off it, the better it will heal, so playing Winston only some of the downs and giving him a chance to pick up the game would be beneficial.

bigTEXan8
02-15-2006, 10:48 AM
Here's who I want gone:
Bradford
Walker
Wade
Coleman

Runner
02-15-2006, 11:21 AM
Yikes!!! Pitts is a better tackle than guard.

Therefore he is the best tackle on the team? That doesn't necessarily follow.

The goal is to field the synergistically best o-line we can, not put Pitts at his best position. Wand/Pitts is a solid, young, healthy left side. Pitts/(Brown or McKinney) is not as good. We can use our free agent picks to shore up the center and RT positions and get the line fixed quicker by going back to our 2004 left side rather than create an additional requirement for a left guard.

A brief summary of many threads that list my points why Wand will surprise people next season:

1) Wand has the speed, quickness and agility to play left tackle in the (assumed) Texans scheme. His weakness is in technique, and the new staff is capable of teaching that.

2) Wand is one of the best run blockers on the team, and the running game is a very important part of our offense. Just because run blocking gets ignored on most discussions about the o-line on this board doesn’t make it any less important.

3) Pitts made vast strides between his first and second year at left tackle – Wand could easily do the same. If Pitts was not given a chance to play and improve his second year, he might not even be on the team any more, much less be the popular choice for “best lineman on the team”.

4) I trust the new coaches are better than the old ones, and will teach a coordinated team offense, not a bunch of one-on-one stuff. Wand played one-on-one in pass protection against all defensive ends last year, which was very poor scheming by the coaches. They certainly didn’t require the same from Pitts this year, even though they were playing a stunted pass offense. For instance, the only two people I’ve seen go one on one with Freeney game after game were Pace and Wand. And Seth Wand is no Orlando Pace.

5) A lot of the perception of Wand comes from the stuff posted last year, like “replace the LT and the line will be good” and “the o-line is the root of all our problems”. Well this past year has shown the fallacy of the first statement, and we as fans have realized this past season that not all sacks are directly applicable to the o-line.

6) Wand’s strengths when he came to the team included a hard work ethic and the willingness to learn. With a good coaching staff these can be leveraged to fix his weaknesses: he does work out like a maniac (recall last off-season Capers had to kick him out of the weight room after marathon sessions because Capers was afraid he was going to hurt himself). Also, the new coaches can use his willingness to learn to teach him to fix his technique. After all we condemn other players for “not putting in the time” and “not fixing their bad habits”. Shouldn’t we credit the players who do?

7) He has something to prove. Nothing like a PO'd attitude to get your game up.

That’s my reasoning.

MorKnolle
02-15-2006, 11:46 AM
True, but if I remember correctly, even Wand played only during special teams for about a year while he "learned" the line. Is this just the old regime being too conservative? I don't know, but with a knee injury, I know the longer you can stay off it, the better it will heal, so playing Winston only some of the downs and giving him a chance to pick up the game would be beneficial.

It was a mixture of a conservative coaching regime and the fact that Wand was not 1st round-quality talent. If we draft Winston and someone that is currently on the team is more prepared to start at RT for the early part of next year I have no problems with them starting over Winston until he is physcially and mentally ready to play over them, but I think he's good and smart enough and we don't have anyone that talented that will keep him on the bench for very long at all. Winston also has the added luxury of being able to play OG for us too if we decide to put him there for the first few games of his career so he can get some significant playing time while not being at OT, while Ferguson, for instance, is basically only really suited to play LT.

Also, back to your OLine prediction, if we have that personnel group in I think it would go more like: Pitts, Wiegert, Bentley, Weary, Wand. The Texans sound like they are pretty certain that Pitts is going to play OT for them, and I think they are pretty certain he is their LT unless they go after a guy like D'Brick or Winston to seriously compete for that spot. I don't think they'll move Pitts back to OG and put Wand at LT, maybe bump Pitts to RT if a newcomer beats him out for LT but that's it.

SILVER VADER
02-15-2006, 11:55 AM
if i was on the texans squad, i'd take less money this year to be able to play under the superb new coaching staff. Esp. if i was on offense.SPIT-FIRE DRAGON MASTER,YOU HEARD ANY IDLE ****-CHAT,ABOUT CARR GOING TO THE RAIDERS,FOR 1ST RD PICK

dat_boy_yec
02-15-2006, 09:39 PM
Also, back to your OLine prediction, if we have that personnel group in I think it would go more like: Pitts, Wiegert, Bentley, Weary, Wand. The Texans sound like they are pretty certain that Pitts is going to play OT for them, and I think they are pretty certain he is their LT unless they go after a guy like D'Brick or Winston to seriously compete for that spot. I don't think they'll move Pitts back to OG and put Wand at LT, maybe bump Pitts to RT if a newcomer beats him out for LT but that's it.

On your o-line prediction I agree except for the Bentley part. If we brought him in we should play him at guard, I think Hodgdon did well his rookie season and should improve in his sophmore season. So the line would be more solid. Nothing against Weigert but I think Bentley and Hodgdon provide better potential.

I think Pitts will have to beat Wand out for the LT spot. Wand went one on one with everyone he faced while Pitts had help. Not knocking the guy but this kinda puts them on a more level playing field. Because it begs the question how would Wand had performed had he had help. However I do agree that both these guys should stay at the tackle position.

TexanBacker93
02-15-2006, 10:57 PM
Frankly - and I'm taking another flyer here - I wouldn't be surprised to see Wade cut. I think he is so unsuited to the scheme the Texans will use that his salary will be dead space even if he is on the team, so cutting him just adds another $1.6M to what is already dead space. Nothing against Wade; I think he would be a good player for another team that suits his style better and would be picked up immediately if we do cut him.

And that brought us back to the original topic of this thread!

I still agree that by pairing up a couple of player cuts they save money. Restructuring McKinney and cutting Wade can save money. Cutting Coleman and Walker will still cost a little, but it's eased a little.

As far as who plays, I have faith that the new regime will play the best players that give the team a chance to win. That's why I think if Wade or Walker can't start they might as well get rid of them.

Runner
02-15-2006, 11:53 PM
Also, back to your OLine prediction, if we have that personnel group in I think it would go more like: Pitts, Wiegert, Bentley, Weary, Wand.

It is very interesting (to me anyway) that you pick Weary over Brown. Do you care to elaborate on your reasoning? Weary was written off by the previous coaching staff until the end of last year - until it came down to playing him or Wand. I'm interested in what other people think of his performance when he got a little playing time.

Note: believe me when I say that Pendry writing him off carries little weight with me.

Runner
02-16-2006, 12:05 AM
On your o-line prediction I agree except for the Bentley part. If we brought him in we should play him at guard, I think Hodgdon did well his rookie season and should improve in his sophmore season. So the line would be more solid. Nothing against Weigert but I think Bentley and Hodgdon provide better potential.


It's too bad that Hodgdon got hurt so soon before we got to see him come all the way up to NFL game speed. He might be exactly the type of player we'll need on the o-line with our system - mobile and strong enough.

I do hope this injury thing is a fluke and not a portent of things to come...

dat_boy_yec
02-16-2006, 09:04 PM
It is very interesting (to me anyway) that you pick Weary over Brown. Do you care to elaborate on your reasoning? Weary was written off by the previous coaching staff until the end of last year - until it came down to playing him or Wand. I'm interested in what other people think of his performance when he got a little playing time.

Note: believe me when I say that Pendry writing him off carries little weight with me.

It's obvious that Weary is better than Brown. How many times have you heard Weary's name during the time he played, I didn't. To me that means he's not a penalty waiting to happen, upon further observation you see Brown totally blows his duties. I guess I can understand that sometimes, but I saw him help block someone and a linebacker run right by him unblocked various times. I did not see that happen with Weary. Add the fact that Weary is lighter and quicker than brown and it's obvious that Weary is the better guard. I've always thought Weary had potential, when we got him he was I think the third highest ranked guard behind Hutchingson and someone else who I can't remember at the moment. Personally I don't understand anything the previous coaching staff did last yr. If they had managed the personnel we had correctly we could have easily won 5-6 games this season.

TexanBacker93
03-08-2006, 09:50 AM
If McKinney is willing to renegotiate, but not take a pay cut, they could spread what is due to him out over 3 years and give him a little bigger bonus.

Give him $6 million over 3 years and a $2.1 million signing bonus.
2006 - $900,000 salary $700,000 bonus + $800 from last contract
2007 - $1.3 million salary $700,000 bonus
2008 - $1.7 million salary $700,000 bonus

Chances are slim that after this year or if he was cut that he would get a contract for anything more than the vet minimum at this time. He wouldn't get a signing bonus, so if he didn't make the team he would have only the $800k he got when we cut him. With this renegotiated contract he would still get that $800 and then get at least a guaranteed $2.1 million which could be as good as he could get on the free market. It still saves the Texans $2.2 million this season.

I think he could still be a valuable part on the line. I'd prefer him at guard and let either Hodgden take over or draft someone like Mangold or Eslinger.

Ok, so I was thinking 3 years instead of 4. Still this is almost exactly what the new deal is set up like. Considering at the beginning of the thread I said Coleman and Walker were going to have to go. Coleman's already gone and Walker has been told to sell the house. I think I have magic powers.

Hmm... Now I think we should trade down with the Jets and get their 1st round pick, 2nd round pick and 1st round pick next season. No Whammies. Stop.

done88
03-08-2006, 10:16 AM
Ok, so I was thinking 3 years instead of 4. Still this is almost exactly what the new deal is set up like. Considering at the beginning of the thread I said Coleman and Walker were going to have to go. Coleman's already gone and Walker has been told to sell the house. I think I have magic powers.

Hmm... Now I think we should trade down with the Jets and get their 1st round pick, 2nd round pick and 1st round pick next season. No Whammies. Stop.
I'm impressed. Now do we trade with the jets after they acquire an additional first pick this year with Aberham or do we get their pick next year? At 4 do we take d Brick or do we go with Hawk or do we go with Mario. Give us your wisdom Texan Swami.

TexanBacker93
03-08-2006, 09:22 PM
We wait until closer to draft day. We have a better chance of getting more from any team in that last week as excitement builds. The opportunity for NY to have Bush in that market is too much for them to pass on. They will have already made the trade and dumped Abraham so they are willing to give up a #2 and a #3 since they would have the #1 and #4. New Orleans takes Leinart and Tennessee takes Ferguson instead of Young. Kubiak decides to get a dominant fixture on the D with...

Mario Williams. He'll make every other player on that defense better. His pass rush ability will force QBs to throw quicker giving the DBs a better chance to succeed. If he sees double teams it opens up the pass rush lanes for Peek, Orr, and Babin.