PDA

View Full Version : How tradeable is Anthony Weaver?


TheRealJoker
02-10-2009, 10:36 PM
Just got a thought in my head. Anthony Weaver was a good 3-4 DE before coming to Houston and is out of place as a 4-3 DE.

With all the new teams moving to a 3-4, I think that Weaver would be worth something to one of those teams. Most notably the Broncos and the Packers who are making the switch and who do not currently have all of the pieces in place. I realize that Weaver's contract makes a trade very tough to do but do any of you think its possible to do a sign and trade type deal?

I think we could get atleast a 5th for Weaver's pedigree as a starting 3-4 DE if his contract were restructured. I'm sure he'd like to go back to a role he was more successful at as well. This would give us another pick in the upcoming draft and allow us to get rid of one of our highest paid and underperforming players.

Wolf
02-10-2009, 10:41 PM
his contract is too high

gtexan02
02-10-2009, 10:43 PM
I don't think his salary is too high for a trading partner. The only reason he has a big cap number now is bc he was given way too much guaranteed. If we traded Weaver, whatever team gets him will have to pay him 3.5 million per year for the next 2 seasons. None will be guaranteed. Thats not really that high of a salary if he starts somewhere else, and he could always restructure or sign a new deal to procure additional guarantees and make his numbers more cap friendly

TEXANRED
02-10-2009, 10:43 PM
Just got a thought in my head. Anthony Weaver was a good 3-4 DE before coming to Houston and is out of place as a 4-3 DE.

With all the new teams moving to a 3-4, I think that Weaver would be worth something to one of those teams. Most notably the Broncos and the Packers who are making the switch and who do not currently have all of the pieces in place. I realize that Weaver's contract makes a trade very tough to do but do any of you think its possible to do a sign and trade type deal?

I think we could get atleast a 5th for Weaver's pedigree as a starting 3-4 DE if his contract were restructured. I'm sure he'd like to go back to a role he was more successful at as well. This would give us another pick in the upcoming draft and allow us to get rid of one of our highest paid and underperforming players.

About the same as the Peso on the open market.

Wolf
02-10-2009, 11:07 PM
I have NOT looked it up ,but , If I recall his average is about 40 tackles a year and(I might be generous) 5 sacks over his career ..average wise (if that)..

I don't think the guy tanks it ,but for a business standpoint and with that am't of flow going to him, i think you could get someone to do about the same with a lot less money

He has worked under RS so maybe he can breakout.. I don't know

Wolf
02-10-2009, 11:14 PM
..///

Lucky
02-10-2009, 11:30 PM
Weaver doesn't carry the trade value of a bag of balls. Much less a draft choice. If the Texans do the right thing, and cut him loose, Weaver won't get a contract above the vet minimum.

Weaver has been here 3 years, and Travis Johnson has been here for 4. They've shown nothing to deserve their contracts and were outplayed last season by street free agents. Cutting them will be addition by subtraction.

Carr Bombed
02-10-2009, 11:32 PM
He was a bad fit here from the beginning.....he's more of a 3-4 end than a 4-3 end. To answer your question though.....Weaver doesn't really have any trade value. Players like him are a dime a dozen in the middle rounds of drafts, he brings nothing special to the table really, and I can't wait for Houston to move on without him. Everytime he takes the field we're playing with one DE and 3 DTs on the Dline.

gtexan02
02-10-2009, 11:50 PM
Weaver has been useless in our defense since he's been here, but I think he would still be attractive to 3-4 teams looking for veteran help at the crucial end position. He may not have lit up the stat sheets in Houston, but his 50-ish tackles per year are about par or better than most 3-4 ends get in a season. His 5 (or less?) career sacks would fit nicely into that position as well

During the last 4-5 games of the season, when our defense suddenly looked "different" because of the playcalling, Weaver end up looking much much better than he ever had. He had an INT and a handful of tackles for a loss. Who knows, maybe he'll make some miraculous turn around

keyser
02-11-2009, 12:03 AM
I don't see us getting a draft pick for Weaver, but I could see a team that is switching to a 3-4 being willing to make a trade for Weaver, giving up a player in a similar situation who could play in a 4-3, but won't work in the 3-4. Basically, each team would be getting rid of a player they could easily get rid of anyway, and gets to try out a new player that might fit better. I'm not familiar enough with the Broncos or Packers to know whether they have such a player on their roster.

WolverineFan
02-11-2009, 12:22 AM
To answer that question just know that Weaver and tradeable should not be used in the same sentence. With his contract he has no value to anybody. You could sign somebody that may not be as good, but who has 1/4 the price tag. A good deal for any team really.

Big Lou
02-11-2009, 12:50 AM
I think a "contract restructure and trade" would be possible especially if you tell him that he can either do that or just get cut.

Either way, hopefully Rick Smith can get him to at least restructure. He should feel a little guilty with what he's bieng paid. I know that this is a bussiness, but the Texans ussually do the right thing with it's players. Look what they did with Carr, they could have been total a-holes, but they manned up.

Come on Anthony be a "Team Player"!!!!!

TexansMVP
02-11-2009, 01:09 AM
Can someone jog my memory but was Weaver signed under Casserly or Smith?

Jackie Chiles
02-11-2009, 01:29 AM
Weaver has been useless in our defense since he's been here, but I think he would still be attractive to 3-4 teams looking for veteran help at the crucial end position. He may not have lit up the stat sheets in Houston, but his 50-ish tackles per year are about par or better than most 3-4 ends get in a season. His 5 (or less?) career sacks would fit nicely into that position as well

During the last 4-5 games of the season, when our defense suddenly looked "different" because of the playcalling, Weaver end up looking much much better than he ever had. He had an INT and a handful of tackles for a loss. Who knows, maybe he'll make some miraculous turn around

As terrible as Weaver has been for us in the sack department he was actually serviceable as a 3-4 DE. 15.5 career sacks, only one of those coming with us in the last three years. So 14.5 with Baltimore in the 4 seasons he was there as a 3-4 DE. He was never a star but he was a very solid player. Quite a few thought his sack numbers would actually take a slight uptick if he signed with a 4-3 team. Man were they wrong. Count me as one of them, I was pleased when we signed him. Figured he would be a 5-6 sack a year guy who was solid against the run. I don't believe the decline in production is a product of the scheme switch, I just don't think he is the player that he once was, for whatever reason.

Anyway, with regard to the original question, players like Weaver do not get traded. He has been banged up with us and has had little to no production. Even without his signing bonus tacked on his contract wouldn't turn into nearly enough of a bargain to warrant a team giving up an asset to acquire him. If we draft a pass rusher in the first 3 rounds odds are he gets cut IMO. Maybe in the NBA were expiring contracts actually have value.

Jackie Chiles
02-11-2009, 01:30 AM
Can someone jog my memory but was Weaver signed under Casserly or Smith?

Casserly was the GM, Kubiak was the coach, and he was signed in the FA period before the 2006 draft at a time where we probably didn't imagine Mario being the number 1 pick.

DiehardChris
02-11-2009, 02:43 AM
Anthony Weaver, during his Texans tenure:

1 sack
2 interceptions

That's the only stat I need to see on him. Completely and utterly untradeable.

Lucky
02-11-2009, 07:03 AM
I think a "contract restructure and trade" would be possible especially if you tell him that he can either do that or just get cut. In that scenario, Weaver would prefer being cut. Then he could sign with any team that wants him. If such a team exists.

mussop
02-11-2009, 07:07 AM
If some team would hire Isiah Thomas as their GM we might have a chance.

nunusguy
02-11-2009, 07:10 AM
Weaver is a valuable "locker-room presence", as they say. After all, that seems to be a popular rationale for paying D-Rob guaranteed money at or approaching 23-25 M.

TexansFan33
02-11-2009, 07:28 AM
We Might get a 7? :texflag:

Malloy
02-11-2009, 07:48 AM
IMO there are 2 options.
1: Try to see how he works out with the, hopefully, new philosophy on defense. If not, then bye bye.

2: Count our losses and take the hit right away. Good luck as a free agent Weaver.

Silver Oak
02-11-2009, 07:57 AM
Anthony Weaver, during his Texans tenure:

1 sack
2 interceptions

That's the only stat I need to see on him. Completely and utterly untradeable.

wow...1 sack? suckage.

Ole Miss Texan
02-11-2009, 09:50 AM
Weaver playing on this team is almost like a zone blocking offensive linemen playing in a pure pure power blocking scheme. I don't know what kind of trade value he really has but just b/c he hasn't done well here doesn't mean he has zero value for any of the other 31 teams. That's what frustrates me so much about fans and the free agent market. I would love to package him with a draft pick to send to Denver for Dumervil... but that's highly unlikely.

I really do think he has considerable value for a 3-4 defense, ESPECIALLY one that is starting the transition and has a lack of personnel to fit that role. If that is worth a team trading for him, I have no idea.

Polo
02-11-2009, 10:14 AM
Weaver has no trade value.

If I'm switching to a brand new 3-4 defense the last guy I'm thinking about brining in is Anthony Weaver.

As a GM what exactly am I hoping Weaver brings to the table if I make that trade?

I'm not just gonna pull the trigger on some nobody DE just because he has familiarity with a system.

Better yet, If you are a fan of one of those teams how would you like it if your GM traded away a pick for Anthony Weaver?

I bet you'd be pretty pissed.

Hervoyel
02-11-2009, 10:49 AM
I'm undoubtably going to be in the minority on this but I think we stand pat with Weaver (and TJ for that matter) for one.... more... year.

New coaches, new system, last chance for both of these guys. The new DC and DL coach will know by the time camp gets here whether they want to hang on to either of these two guys. I imagine that's the only real reason Weaver remains at this point.

Ole Miss Texan
02-11-2009, 11:03 AM
Weaver has no trade value.

If I'm switching to a brand new 3-4 defense the last guy I'm thinking about brining in is Anthony Weaver.

As a GM what exactly am I hoping Weaver brings to the table if I make that trade?

I'm not just gonna pull the trigger on some nobody DE just because he has familiarity with a system.

Better yet, If you are a fan of one of those teams how would you like it if your GM traded away a pick for Anthony Weaver?

I bet you'd be pretty pissed.

I understand where you're coming from. But take the Broncos as an example. I'm fairly certain they won't be running a full blooded 3-4 defense the whole time, i think they'll transition towards one. Why? Because they might have 1 player right now that could be a good fit on the 3-4 DL. The nose tackle is a huge issue, which they don't have. Plus if you look at filling these needs in the draft how would you feel about starting a rookie NT and a rookie end, next to a veteran end that hasn't ever played in a 3-4 before? They need guys to groom and free agency will only take you so far to get starters. Is Weaver going to be high on a teams list of a guy they really want to have? Doubtful, but sometimes you've got to look at guys that are 3rd, 4th ....6th on your list.

I think it could be similar to the Eric Moulds trade, didn't we need a WR at that point?

mussop
02-11-2009, 11:21 AM
Weaver playing on this team is almost like a zone blocking offensive linemen playing in a pure pure power blocking scheme. I don't know what kind of trade value he really has but just b/c he hasn't done well here doesn't mean he has zero value for any of the other 31 teams. That's what frustrates me so much about fans and the free agent market. I would love to package him with a draft pick to send to Denver for Dumervil... but that's highly unlikely.

I really do think he has considerable value for a 3-4 defense, ESPECIALLY one that is starting the transition and has a lack of personnel to fit that role. If that is worth a team trading for him, I have no idea.

Something I hadnt considered is that they may think he has some value to one of the teams that will be switching to 3/4. Denver and Green Bay who we all know Smithiack are familar with, are both going to need alot of new pieces to get thier D's switched over. They arent going to be able to get everything they want in one draft.

Despite his poor production he is a veteran well versed in the 3/4. Could be valuable to someone as a stopgap player.

mussop
02-11-2009, 11:22 AM
I understand where you're coming from. But take the Broncos as an example. I'm fairly certain they won't be running a full blooded 3-4 defense the whole time, i think they'll transition towards one. Why? Because they might have 1 player right now that could be a good fit on the 3-4 DL. The nose tackle is a huge issue, which they don't have. Plus if you look at filling these needs in the draft how would you feel about starting a rookie NT and a rookie end, next to a veteran end that hasn't ever played in a 3-4 before? They need guys to groom and free agency will only take you so far to get starters. Is Weaver going to be high on a teams list of a guy they really want to have? Doubtful, but sometimes you've got to look at guys that are 3rd, 4th ....6th on your list.

I think it could be similar to the Eric Moulds trade, didn't we need a WR at that point?

You said it better.

Polo
02-11-2009, 11:23 AM
I understand where you're coming from. But take the Broncos as an example. I'm fairly certain they won't be running a full blooded 3-4 defense the whole time, i think they'll transition towards one. Why? Because they might have 1 player right now that could be a good fit on the 3-4 DL. The nose tackle is a huge issue, which they don't have. Plus if you look at filling these needs in the draft how would you feel about starting a rookie NT and a rookie end, next to a veteran end that hasn't ever played in a 3-4 before? They need guys to groom and free agency will only take you so far to get starters.

But why would you go out and get Weaver ? You know that it's going to be a bit of a rough transition so why go out and get Weaver and his high salary when you'll most likely be looking to replace him in the very near furture?

I don't see how picking him up will be more beneficial than going after younger players you can groom or using guys already on the roster. You're essentially saying that they should trade for him just because he has experience in a 3-4...If you're trading for a player your're hoping to get something of value in return...

Why would I trade a 5th round pick for Weaver and his high salary when I could use that 5th or a 4th to get a young player that I can groom?

I think it could be similar to the Eric Moulds trade, didn't we need a WR at that point?

Eric Moulds is a decent comparison.

I wouldn't call that a beneficial trade for us. Eric Moulds really added nothing to the development of our franchise....All he did was keep Walters off the field more and burned up a draft pick that we could've used.

gtexan02
02-11-2009, 11:28 AM
But why would you go out and get Weaver ? You know that it's going to be a bit of a rough transition so why go out and get Weaver and his high salary when you'll most likely be looking to replace him in the very near furture?

I don't see how picking him up will be more beneficial than going after younger players you can groom or using guys already on the roster. You're essentially saying that they should trade for him just because he has experience in a 3-4...If you're trading for a player your're hoping to get something of value in return...

Why would I trade a 5th round pick for Weaver and his high salary when I could use that 5th or a 4th to get a young player that I can groom?



Eric Moulds is a decent comparison.

I wouldn't call that a beneficial trade for us. Eric Moulds really added nothing to the development of our franchise....All he did was keep Walters off the field more and burned up a draft pick that we could've used.

There aren't a plethora of NFL players just sitting around with experience at running specific systems.

Weaver is young and showed a lot of promise as a 3-4 DE. It was only after switching to the 4-3 that he completely fell off the map.

His contract is 3.5 million per season, with 0 guaranteed if we trade. A team could easily restructure this with zero cap penalties. He only has 2 years left on his deal, so even if he didnt' work out, he could be cut with zero penalties

Polo
02-11-2009, 11:35 AM
There aren't a plethora of NFL players just sitting around with experience at running specific systems.

Weaver is young and showed a lot of promise as a 3-4 DE. It was only after switching to the 4-3 that he completely fell off the map.

His contract is 3.5 million per season, with 0 guaranteed if we trade. A team could easily restructure this with zero cap penalties. He only has 2 years left on his deal, so even if he didnt' work out, he could be cut with zero penalties

So if you're a new coach switching to a 3-4 you'd trade away a pick to bring in Anthony Weaver ?

I'm sorry guys, but I'm just not seeing that.

Atleast when we brought in Moulds we had good reasons for doing it at the time.

If another team traded anything for Weaver I maybe could see a 6th. 5th is too high though.

ChampionTexan
02-11-2009, 11:39 AM
There aren't a plethora of NFL players just sitting around with experience at running specific systems.

Weaver is young and showed a lot of promise as a 3-4 DE. It was only after switching to the 4-3 that he completely fell off the map.

His contract is 3.5 million per season, with 0 guaranteed if we trade. A team could easily restructure this with zero cap penalties. He only has 2 years left on his deal, so even if he didnt' work out, he could be cut with zero penalties

Have you ever noticed how many trades occur in the NFL that include veteran players? Not very many. Have you ever noticed how many veteran players who are of little/no use to their team yet still under contract get cut? A whole lot more.

I see no reason to believe that Anthony Weaver is any different than the numerous players who get let go by their team with nothing received in return.

Ole Miss Texan
02-11-2009, 11:42 AM
My whole thought is that you got to get a veteran presence on the team that fits what you're trying to do. These new 3-4 teams should be looking for young guys in the draft certainly (early and often) but most won't be able to start right away. Weaver has two years left on his contract earning about $7.5 million. I think a team would definitely want to restructure somehow.

As for giving up a late round pick for him? I think it comes down what they do in free agency. Pickings can be slim and I'm not real sure who all is out there that fits on a 3-4 defense. If you can't get anyone servicable in free agency, then you got to get guys that fit somehow. Weaver may have a 5th round value if they can do something with his contract... he could have a 7th... he could have nothing. But a team would be swimming upstream if they think they can use that 5th-7th rounder on a guy and get him to be their starter by the season or next. I fully support drafting these guys and grooming but you have to have someone to groom them behind.

I feel Weaver could be very useful for the right team. I think it will come down to whether they can fill their void(s) in free agency. Even if you pick an early guy up in the draft, rookies hit a wall, especially when playing in the trenches.

I think a Weaver-trade is far from a good possibility, he'll most likely stay on the team or get cut. But I do think there are some possibilities out there for this, however unlikely they may be.

Polo
02-11-2009, 12:11 PM
Why would you bring in Weaver as a veteran presence ?

Right now Weaver has the same trade Value that Morlon had.

If we couldn't trade Morlon I'm not sure why you guys think we could/would trade Weaver.

Morlon has played in the 4-3 and 3-4...has a lot of tackels on his resume...

And no one wanted him as a "veteran presence" to help groom young guys...The same exact arguments you all are using for Weaver could have been used for Greenwood and the plethora of veterans cut all the time...

But if you think Weaver has trade value...So be it...

b0ng
02-11-2009, 12:20 PM
I'm undoubtably going to be in the minority on this but I think we stand pat with Weaver (and TJ for that matter) for one.... more... year.



I think that is what's going to happen as well, but only because we wouldn't be adding anything (like cap money) by cutting these two underachievers.

But I think TJ and Weav both end as backups for the Texans before they are cut.

Hervoyel
02-11-2009, 12:26 PM
I think that is what's going to happen as well, but only because we wouldn't be adding anything (like cap money) by cutting these two underachievers.

But I think TJ and Weav both end as backups for the Texans before they are cut.


Entirely possible, even probable. Anything more would be a very pleasant surprise.

Ole Miss Texan
02-11-2009, 12:39 PM
I think the need for a LB may not be as urgent as a need for 1, 2 or even 3 new defensive linemen.

The thread is about how tradeable is Anthony Weaver. Short answer is: Little to none. But it is something that warrants discussion. I think there will be a market out there of teams that would want to add Weaver to their rotation as a 3-4 DE, however the most likely scenario is that the Texans will release Weaver and a team will pick him up as a FA.

As far as trades go with veteran players? This was released in October, 2008:
Oakland Raiders trade for veteran defensive player (http://fantasyhumor.com/?p=1641)

Big Lou
02-11-2009, 01:08 PM
Weaver has no trade value.

If I'm switching to a brand new 3-4 defense the last guy I'm thinking about brining in is Anthony Weaver.

As a GM what exactly am I hoping Weaver brings to the table if I make that trade?

I'm not just gonna pull the trigger on some nobody DE just because he has familiarity with a system.

Better yet, If you are a fan of one of those teams how would you like it if your GM traded away a pick for Anthony Weaver?

I bet you'd be pretty pissed.

I thought Weaver played fairly well in the Ravens 304. I think they weren't running anything exotic then.

ChampionTexan
02-11-2009, 01:16 PM
I'm undoubtably going to be in the minority on this but I think we stand pat with Weaver (and TJ for that matter) for one.... more... year.

New coaches, new system, last chance for both of these guys. The new DC and DL coach will know by the time camp gets here whether they want to hang on to either of these two guys. I imagine that's the only real reason Weaver remains at this point.

I think that is what's going to happen as well, but only because we wouldn't be adding anything (like cap money) by cutting these two underachievers.

But I think TJ and Weav both end as backups for the Texans before they are cut.

I wouldn't be shocked to see him back either, but don't forget, it's not just cap considerations (which is approximately a break-even deal), there's real money involved too. If he's cut, there's $3.5 Million of base salary (translation - not cap space, but genuine cash) that the Texans don't have to spend.

Texecutioner
02-11-2009, 01:17 PM
Trading Weaver for anything would be great. It's not the value that you'd be getting in return that would be the positive, it would be the fact that you're simply dumping him and not having to waste money on him for another year. With Weaver out there at DE, it's almost like we only have one DE he is so worthless. I would be happy just to get rid of him and free up the cash.

ChampionTexan
02-11-2009, 01:24 PM
Trading Weaver for anything would be great. It's not the value that you'd be getting in return that would be the positive, it would be the fact that you're simply dumping him and not having to waste money on him for another year. With Weaver out there at DE, it's almost like we only have one DE he is so worthless. I would be happy just to get rid of him and free up the cash.

How would trading him free up any cash?

Texecutioner
02-11-2009, 01:48 PM
How would trading him free up any cash?

Getting his salary off the books. We're paying him way to much money for what he is bringing to the table. We're practically just throwing money away at nothing. At least we wouldn't be paying him anymore.

gtexan02
02-11-2009, 01:52 PM
How would trading him free up any cash?

A lot of people seem to post with the thought process that McNair's money is their own money. While cutting Weaver would only really "free up" about 800,000 in salary cap space, it would technically save McNair about 3.5 million this season (and next year, too).

If that 7 million over 2 years savings was directly parlayed into the fans, then I'm all for it.

ChampionTexan
02-11-2009, 01:53 PM
Getting his salary off the books. We're paying him way to much money for what he is bringing to the table. We're practically just throwing money away at nothing. At least we wouldn't be paying him anymore.

I guess I should have asked how would a trade be preferable to just waiving him (since you already said "it's not the value that you'd get in return that would be the positive")?

ChampionTexan
02-11-2009, 01:54 PM
A lot of people seem to post with the thought process that McNair's money is their own money. While cutting Weaver would only really "free up" about 800,000 in salary cap space, it would technically save McNair about 3.5 million this season (and next year, too).

If that 7 million over 2 years savings was directly parlayed into the fans, then I'm all for it.

Where are you coming up with $800,000? I'm coming up with less than that (like around $200,000).

gtexan02
02-11-2009, 02:00 PM
Where are you coming up with $800,000? I'm coming up with less than that (like around $200,000).

inthebullseye.com

Weavers cap figure this season is 6.2 million.

If we cut him, we save that 6.2 million, but incur a penalty of 5.4 million (2.7 million this year and next year, but you can't prorate penalties this season)

Texecutioner
02-11-2009, 02:05 PM
I guess I should have asked how would a trade be preferable to just waiving him (since you already said "it's not the value that you'd get in return that would be the positive")?

I was talking about in a trade though, where we don't have the penalties like you do when you release someone. That is why I said I would trade him for anything we could get because the positive would simply be to get rid of his awful contract where we aren't paying it. He doesn't do anything on the field, so paying him give us no value in return. Trading him for practically nothing though gives us value in having more money to spend on other players that might be useful. I just don't really see why anyone would want to trade for him with the amount of money that is on his contract

infantrycak
02-11-2009, 02:14 PM
I was talking about in a trade though, where we don't have the penalties like you do when you release someone.

The cap hit for trading him would be the same as releasing him unless you designate him a June 1st cut in which case they could spread it over two years. In either case it isn't a penalty situation, it is accounting for already paid bonus money which has not already appeared on the cap.

Texecutioner
02-11-2009, 02:16 PM
The cap hit for trading him would be the same as releasing him unless you designate him a June 1st cut in which case they could spread it over two years.

Why would we have to pay the same amount of money out if we traded him?

gtexan02
02-11-2009, 02:21 PM
Why would we have to pay the same amount of money out if we traded him?

Weaver's contract was for 5 years, 26.5 million, with 12.5 million of that guaranteed.

Its split into salary and guaranteed money. The Texans have already paid him the guaranteed portion of the contract, but due to the rules of the NFL, they are allowed to spread the cap hit of the guaranteed portion to other years. We decided to split the cap hit into roughly 2.5 million per year over the 5 years, meaning we are still on the hook for the remaining ~5 million (he's got 2 years left on his deal).

Whether we trade him or cut him, we are still required to account for that money we've already dished out by taking the hit on the cap this year

Texecutioner
02-11-2009, 02:24 PM
Weaver's contract was for 5 years, 26.5 million, with 12.5 million of that guaranteed.

Its split into salary and guaranteed money. The Texans have already paid him the guaranteed portion of the contract, but due to the rules of the NFL, they are allowed to spread the cap hit of the guaranteed portion to other years. We decided to split the cap hit into roughly 2.5 million per year over the 5 years, meaning we are still on the hook for the remaining ~5 million (he's got 2 years left on his deal).

Whether we trade him or cut him, we are still required to account for that money we've already dished out by taking the hit on the cap this year

I wasn't aware of that. Geez, this Weaver deal is even worse than what I thought it was. I'll be so glad to get rid of him when we do.

chicagotexan2
02-11-2009, 02:34 PM
about as tradable as shares of AIG and Citi. Little by little the last remnants of the Casserly era are being scraped away. And no I don't give him credit for the 06 draft class.

gtexan02
02-11-2009, 02:43 PM
Shoulder problem, remember? No 2nd story windows for sure

danger6
02-11-2009, 06:47 PM
What is the economic difference to the Texans between cutting him now versus cutting him in training camp?

b0ng
02-11-2009, 07:27 PM
What is the economic difference to the Texans between cutting him now versus cutting him in training camp?

I think it costs the Texans $2m to cut him no matter what this year. He's good enough to be a backup so why take the hit?

False Start
02-11-2009, 07:31 PM
Anthony Weaver, during his Texans tenure:

1 sack
2 interceptions

That's the only stat I need to see on him. Completely and utterly untradeable.

Yeah that pretty much says it all right there. If we could get a bad ass DE in the draft, we might as well hold onto him as a backup like b0ng said.

I did however, trade him for a 4th round draft pick on Madden 09. :cool:

PHAROAH
02-11-2009, 09:25 PM
A. Weaver is a scrub cut him and let's move away from that failed project.