OPINION: Hutchinson in--Allen out

[pjt]

Since Hutchinson was trasitioned and not franchised what would be the cost difference of cutting Larry Allen and paying Hutch that money to sign him. Because isn't Allen on of the top payed gaurds in the league? Just a thought and even if it cost more for a this year it would be worth it long term. What does everyone think?

 

[ghst187]

nice thought, I'd be for it if the math worked out even like that. I have no idea how the transition tag works but if it costs draft picks...no.

 

[neosapien23]

Since Hutchinson was trasitioned and not franchised what would be the cost difference of cutting Larry Allen and paying Hutch that money to sign him. Because isn't Allen on of the top payed gaurds in the league? Just a thought and even if it cost more for a this year it would be worth it long term. What does everyone think?

I would rather spend on Bentley and ask LA to take a pay cut.

 

[AbeBeta]

where is that smiley that goes Kookoo Kookoo again?

 

[ghst187]

I would rather spend on Bentley and ask LA to take a pay cut.

that would be my first choice also.

 

[david_jackson]

where is that smiley that goes Kookoo Kookoo again?

that would be my first choice also.

 

[yesfan]

I would rather spend on Bentley and ask LA to take a pay cut.

Hey, maybe.I did read somewhere that said Allen was trying
to get him.That could suggest,that for the team,Allen will redo
his contract. Would be nice.

 

[sago1]

Allen costs us $7.5M this year against the cap; if we cut him, we save $3.5M this year. If we sign Hutchinson to a 5-7 year contract costing more then Seattle could pay him this year, we probably can get him w/o further compensation. I think Hutchinson earned $6.4M last year, so he certainly looking for about $7M a year and a large upfront signing bonus in the neighborhood of $10-12M. Don't know terms Carolina paid Wahe (except it $1M per year then Riveria getting) but Hutchinson certainly will expect at least same amount.

I just don't know how his signing would affect our ability to pick up a few other FAs we need like Vinetieria. We'd still need to add at least a RT. I'd also like to see an upgrade at center but addition of Hutchinson, assuming he can play in our OL scheme (whatever that may be), might help Johnson enough that it not necessary. Don't forget we must pay Allen $2M on 3 March so decision on him must be made soon. Certainly if we can bring in Hutchinson, sign Mawae & add Fabini, we will have made major OL improvement. Throw in Vinetieria and that's a tremendous FA upgrade. I just don't think we can afford all 4 of those signings, but of course it would really give us lot more flexibility in the draft.

A lot will depend on whether we go after Vinetieria or cheaper kicker like Longwell or Nedney.

 

[budsboys]

to get hutchinson i believe it would cost us a first round pick since he was drafted 17th pick

 

[budsboys]

to get hutchinson i believe it would cost us a first round pick since he was drafted with the 17th pick

 

[pjt]

i think since he is just transition tag there is no draft pick compensation. Seahawks have first right to match the offer.

 

[Silverstar]

i think since he is just transition tag there is no draft pick compensation. Seahawks have first right to match the offer.

Yep...but would rather have Bentley.

I don't see that big a difference between L.A. and Hutchinson anyway. L.A. is of course stronger, where Hutchinson would be better in overall technique.

I just think Bentley brings more to the table as a superior anchor for the OL.

 

[maxsports]

I believe the purpose of putting the transition tag is not only to be able to match any offer, but also to pick up draft picks. I don't think we can just sign him.

 

[maxsports]

well, I found the answer to this question. I thought wrong.

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (Feb. 23, 2006) -- The Carolina Panthers protected running back DeShaun Foster from free agency by naming him their transition player.

Foster is now guaranteed $5.13 million next season if he doesn't sign a long-term contract. Foster can still talk to other teams when the NFL's free agent period starts, but the transition tag gives Carolina the right to match any offer.


The Panthers just took a step towards bringing DeShaun Foster back.
If the Panthers choose not to match any offer Foster might receive, they would not receive any compensation if Foster signed elsewhere.

Carolina has until March 17 to reach a long-term deal with Foster. If no deal is reached at that point, they will have to wait until July before beginning negotiations with Foster again.

 

[rojan]

well, I found the answer to this question. I thought wrong.

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (Feb. 23, 2006) -- The Carolina Panthers protected running back DeShaun Foster from free agency by naming him their transition player.

Foster is now guaranteed $5.13 million next season if he doesn't sign a long-term contract. Foster can still talk to other teams when the NFL's free agent period starts, but the transition tag gives Carolina the right to match any offer.


The Panthers just took a step towards bringing DeShaun Foster back.
If the Panthers choose not to match any offer Foster might receive, they would not receive any compensation if Foster signed elsewhere.

Carolina has until March 17 to reach a long-term deal with Foster. If no deal is reached at that point, they will have to wait until July before beginning negotiations with Foster again.

They mustta changed the rule resently

 

[Rockytop6]

to get hutchinson i believe it would cost us a first round pick since he was drafted 17th pick

Only if he were franchised would it cost picks. Seattle will only have the opportunity to match any offer to him.

 

[JackMagist]

to get hutchinson i believe it would cost us a first round pick since he was drafted with the 17th pick

If I remember the rules right signing a transition player does not cost us any draft picks. However, the team that named him as their transition player (Seattle in this case) has the right to match the offer and retain his rights. It would depend on the offer we made and whether the Seahawks can or will match it, so unless we make a completely ridiculous offer it is unlikely that we could get him away from them.

 

[dbair1967]

Since Hutchinson was trasitioned and not franchised what would be the cost difference of cutting Larry Allen and paying Hutch that money to sign him. Because isn't Allen on of the top payed gaurds in the league? Just a thought and even if it cost more for a this year it would be worth it long term. What does everyone think?

that doesnt mean they will lose him...Seattle can match any offer for the guy

he's a very good player, but he isnt worth breaking the bank for, and Seattle will probably match anything otherwise

David

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Since Hutchinson was trasitioned and not franchised what would be the cost difference of cutting Larry Allen and paying Hutch that money to sign him. Because isn't Allen on of the top payed gaurds in the league? Just a thought and even if it cost more for a this year it would be worth it long term. What does everyone think?

Hutchinson is great and is probably the best O-Linemen from a pass and run blocking standpoint. But, I still think Bentley has better value. Bentley is probably a tad of a lesser pass blocker than Hutchinson, but I'd take his run blocking over Hutchinson's. Even still, it's hard to tell since the Saints O-Line wasn't very good last season and since Bentley was playing center....he may just be even better than I think he already is.

But the big thing is Bentley can play both guard spots along with center which is valuable to any team. With a team like Dallas that is old at both guard spots and is questionable at center, he's clearly a more valuable player than Hutchinson.

Rich.........

 

[Doomsday101]

to get hutchinson i believe it would cost us a first round pick since he was drafted 17th pick

It would not cost us any draft pick, I did check on that and according to what I read on dallascowboys.com it will not cost a draft pick getting a transitional tagged player.