Giants Cut Arrington, Emmons, Petigout, and Morton

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Did we kick the 'GM supporters' off the site today? I thought we'd see some response from that crowd pretty quick.

There marshalling their forces for a full on assault

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

we all have our reasons for liking or disliking LaVar. Obviously, I am on the LIKE side. I think he can be a very productive player (when healthy). He proved it in our run for the playoffs. He loved DC, the fans, and felt the tradition of what it meant to be a Redskin. We dont know what was actually said in those meetings, and I am sure LaVar, being outspoken as he is, contributed to a lot of what happened. I dont dispute that. But he was not 100% of the problem and I am sure all of us can agree to that. The fact remains, when he is healthy and on the field he brings a physical nature and a play making ability that other teams have to game plan for. He was really starting to play at a high level when he tore his achillis, and was not having problems with his knee. Jansen had the same injury and came back very strong and had a solid year. I am sure he is not going to anticipate a big payday. which he shouldn't. He will be an upgrade from Marshall and Holdman. I say MLB is a position that he would be pretty good at.
My opinion.

The problem is when is he healthy?

[FRPLG]

MLB is the QB of this defense and by just about every account he never was able to get in tune with the scheme mentally or physically. I think even healthy and at his peak in terms of production our defense would be worse off than it has been with LA at MLBQB. There is not one thing he has ever done to indicate that he can run a defense. Play well, yes. Run it, no.

[MTK]

LaVar good for morale? LOL good one.

As far as him playing MLB, forget it. He's a player that needs to play in space and he's at his best running sideline to sideline. He would not deal well with having to shed off lineman and fullbacks all game long.

His injury problems are mounting needless to say. He missed most of two years with knee issues, he wasn't 100% going into this year to start with, and then he blows out an achilles. He's still a quality player if healthy, but that IF is a major concern. So major that the Giants didn't want to deal with it after just one season.

[Hog1]

To much baggage, injury, whatever. It looks real bad for a player to get kicked to the curb so quickly by his new team. Does it not?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

MLB is the QB of this defense and by just about every account he never was able to get in tune with the scheme mentally or physically. I think even healthy and at his peak in terms of production our defense would be worse off than it has been with LA at MLBQB. There is not one thing he has ever done to indicate that he can run a defense. Play well, yes. Run it, no.

Yeah nobody would ever confuse him with being a heady player, so just another reason to forget about trying to put him at MLB. Unless it's a system like in Philly where they just ask their MLB to attack the backfield but Williams' system is much more demanding mentally for the mike.

LaVar simply couldn't handle having to QB this defense.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

we all have our reasons for liking or disliking LaVar. Obviously, I am on the LIKE side. I think he can be a very productive player (when healthy). He proved it in our run for the playoffs. He loved DC, the fans, and felt the tradition of what it meant to be a Redskin. We dont know what was actually said in those meetings, and I am sure LaVar, being outspoken as he is, contributed to a lot of what happened. I dont dispute that. But he was not 100% of the problem and I am sure all of us can agree to that. The fact remains, when he is healthy and on the field he brings a physical nature and a play making ability that other teams have to game plan for. He was really starting to play at a high level when he tore his achillis, and was not having problems with his knee. Jansen had the same injury and came back very strong and had a solid year. I am sure he is not going to anticipate a big payday. which he shouldn't. He will be an upgrade from Marshall and Holdman. I say MLB is a position that he would be pretty good at.
My opinion.

There are so many ifs and yeah buts in this post:

1) He can be a player when healthy, but when is he ever on the field?

2) He may not have been 100% of the problem, but he was more than 0% of the problem. Why would we want someone who is a problem AT ALL?

3) In GW's defense, the MLB makes all the calls. Arrington is an emotional player, he's not a heady player. I wouldn't want him making calls.

4) He's not going to be recovered from the Achilles problem come the 2007 season. We need the roster spot. After all, that's why the Giants cut him (he was only due to make $900K in base salary, so it absolutely wasn't a cap decision to cut him).

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

(he was only due to make $900K in base salary, so it absolutely wasn't a cap decision to cut him).

I read that too and thought, "the injury must have been much worse than publicized for them to cut him and shave only $1M or so off of the cap."

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I read that too and thought, "the injury must have been much worse than publicized for them to cut him and shave only $1M or so off of the cap."

Don't forget, his signing bonus was $5.25 million. Divide that by 7 years, that allocates $750,000 in bonus per year. He only completed one year of the deal, meaning that cutting Arrington forces the Giants to eat $4.5 million in dead cap space in 2007. Net that against the savings from the $900K base salary, and they're actually taking a $3.6 million cap hit in 2007 to get rid of him.

That should speak volumes about their opinion of his physical abilities for the 2007 season. And who would know better than them? It's the NYG team doctors that are keeping an eye on him, and keeping the front office in the loop.

[SUNRA]

I want to see Derrick Burrgess. Plus he already wears 56# already.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

My dad calls my mom "GM" because of her initials. So I think my mom should be the Redskins General Manager!

I'd take your mom over Vinny Cerrato!

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Don't forget, his signing bonus was $5.25 million. Divide that by 7 years, that allocates $750,000 in bonus per year. He only completed one year of the deal, meaning that cutting Arrington forces the Giants to eat $4.5 million in dead cap space in 2007. Net that against the savings from the $900K base salary, and they're actually taking a $3.6 million cap hit in 2007 to get rid of him.

Total brainfart, I can't believe I forgot about the dead money.

[JankySpanky80]

Originally Posted by SUNRA

I want to see Derrick Burrgess. Plus he already wears 56# already.

Is Burrgess a Free Agent?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by JankySpanky80

Is Burrgess a Free Agent?

Nope. I believe he signed a 5-year deal worth about $20M with a $5M signing bonus two years ago. Crazy good deal for the Raiders. He was one of the best free agent signings in recent years, especially when you consider his production-to-cost ratio.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Don't forget, his signing bonus was $5.25 million. Divide that by 7 years, that allocates $750,000 in bonus per year. He only completed one year of the deal, meaning that cutting Arrington forces the Giants to eat $4.5 million in dead cap space in 2007. Net that against the savings from the $900K base salary, and they're actually taking a $3.6 million cap hit in 2007 to get rid of him.

That should speak volumes about their opinion of his physical abilities for the 2007 season. And who would know better than them? It's the NYG team doctors that are keeping an eye on him, and keeping the front office in the loop.

Sure about that? I know you're a capologist & I always appreciate your #s Schneed, but I remember when he signed everyone in NY was saying that the contract wasn't much of a risk for the team, similar to TO's deal, which amounted to a series of 1 yr. deals.