T.O. to Oakland? (1 Viewer)

[diesel7982]

Not exactly.  We dont know how much, if any, of these guarantees are not a "signing" bonus.  Even if his bonus is only $4mil, thats still going to give them a net cap hit of $3mil + the $2-3 mil that will be TO's cap #. 

Porter is still far from tradeable.

That's very true, but it does make him more tradeable than if it were all signing bonus.Here's the link to the thread I mentioned (forgot I actually started it)...

Porter's Contract

Thing is, the extra cap hit will strictly be the signing bonus minus the (base salary for 2005 plus the prorated portion of the signing bonus).

His base salaries for the five years are 1, 1, 1, 5.2 and 6.4 million (NFLPA.org).

We don't know what his the signing bonus was, but it could be structured very nicely in terms of making him tradeable.

Yes, this is why I said in my original post that the cap hit would be $6mil($7m bonus - $1m salary) assuming it was all signing bonus. And its why in the post you quoted I said if the bonus was only $4mil the cap hit would be $3mil for the Raiders.Once we get that out of the way, we have to deal with the cost of Oakland signing TO to a new contract.

____

Im not saying a TO trade is impossible..it just makes very little sense and will risk severely cap strapping themselves both now and in the future.

 

[GoRaiders]

So do the Raiders have the cap room?

Depends on what they are willing to do with the rest of the team. They'd have to deal Woodson to clear his franchise cap number, or release Sapp and a few others, depending on what they deal for him.They wouldnt be able to keep him very long.

If this deal goes down, Woodson's days are numbered in Oaktown. Now we know why they drafted 73 CBs the last few years.

 

[vinwinephans]

diesel7982,I follow you, I guess what I am saying, depending on what the signing bonus actually was, the cap hit might not be as bad as you make it out to be.We don't know what his signing bonus was and your example is worst case scenario.BTW, where did you get $7 million in guarantees from? Everything I see says $10 mill.This is what I know based on what I read:Contract automatically voids after 3 years.Contract has $10 million in guarantees (could be signing bonus/roster bonus or combo of both). Base Salary for first 3 years is $1 million a year.First 3 years have a possible net value of $15 million (there must be incentives).Because the contract auto voids after 3 years, does that mean all the guarantees have to be paid during the first three years of the contract? Or can a guarantees be placed into a voidable year of a contract?

 

[diesel7982]

diesel7982,

I follow you, I guess what I am saying, depending on what the signing bonus actually was, the cap hit might not be as bad as you make it out to be.

We don't know what his signing bonus was and your example is worst case scenario.

BTW, where did you get $7 million in guarantees from? Everything I see says $10 mill.

This is what I know based on what I read:

Contract automatically voids after 3 years.

Contract has $10 million in guarantees (could be signing bonus/roster bonus or combo of both).

Base Salary for first 3 years is $1 million a year.

First 3 years have a possible net value of $15 million (there must be incentives).

Because the contract auto voids after 3 years, does that mean all the guarantees have to be paid during the first three years of the contract? Or can a guarantees be placed into a voidable year of a contract?

The $10 mil figure is the figure that was first reported by ESPN, but everywhere else later reported $7 mil.From what I have read, Porter has the right to void this contract, it doesn't auto void.(Though Porter will have no reason not to do so, as he'll assuredly be released after 2007, if he hasnt restructured).

The guarantees can be placed anywhere in the contract, but it would be odd for them not to be structured towards the front.

I have no clue what the incentives are that could push the deal to $15mil. It could be anything from a Pro-Bowl appearance to kicking 25 FGs.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Not exactly.  We dont know how much, if any, of these guarantees are not a "signing" bonus.  Even if his bonus is only $4mil, thats still going to give them a net cap hit of $3mil + the $2-3 mil that will be TO's cap #. 

Porter is still far from tradeable.

That's very true, but it does make him more tradeable than if it were all signing bonus.Here's the link to the thread I mentioned (forgot I actually started it)...

Porter's Contract

Thing is, the extra cap hit will strictly be the signing bonus minus the (base salary for 2005 plus the prorated portion of the signing bonus).

His base salaries for the five years are 1, 1, 1, 5.2 and 6.4 million (NFLPA.org).

We don't know what his the signing bonus was, but it could be structured very nicely in terms of making him tradeable.

Yes, this is why I said in my original post that the cap hit would be $6mil($7m bonus - $1m salary) assuming it was all signing bonus. And its why in the post you quoted I said if the bonus was only $4mil the cap hit would be $3mil for the Raiders.Once we get that out of the way, we have to deal with the cost of Oakland signing TO to a new contract.

____

Im not saying a TO trade is impossible..it just makes very little sense and will risk severely cap strapping themselves both now and in the future.

Another thing you are forgetting about is that even if there IS a signing bonus, part of it is going to count against this year's cap anyway which you don't factor in to your calculations.Porter's CURRENT cap hit for 2005 is the $1M base, plus 1/5 of whatever his signing bonus was. If you assume he got a $7M bonus, his current 2005 cap value is $2.4M not $1M and the "hit" for releasing him would be $7M - $2.4M = $4.6M.

I don't necessarily think Porter will be traded, I just don't think his contract will prevent him from being traded. The capologists are very creative. Woodson alone counts $10.5M against the 2005 cap. If you move Woodson, you can get a nice chunk of that back this year, probably enough to move Porter and sign Owens.

 

[Family Matters]

Full Article: http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/sports/0630200...owenstrade.html

Owens' Days as Bird Numbered?

PHILADELPHIA-June 30, 2005 — With all the contract squabbles continuing, are the Eagles about to give T.O. the heave-ho?

There are reports a trade is in the works with the Oakland Raiders. Owens would go to Oakland for wide receiver Jerry Porter.

T.O. may be trade bait because he wants the Eagles to give him more money.

If he goes to Oakland, the Raiders would have two of the best wide receivers in the NFL: Terrell Owens, and Randy Moss.

Yesterday, Moss told reporters he could co-exist with T.O. as long as he got the number of passes he deserves.

(Copyright 2005 by WPVI-TV 6. All rights reserved.)

TO hasn't been traded and Moss is already putting down his demands for targets. If he does get traded, watch out! This team would be a mess my friends.

 

[Family Matters]

On another front, the Vikings have to be laughing their arses off if this goes down. They would own the NFC if their D improvements work out.

 

[diesel7982]

Not exactly.  We dont know how much, if any, of these guarantees are not a "signing" bonus.  Even if his bonus is only $4mil, thats still going to give them a net cap hit of $3mil + the $2-3 mil that will be TO's cap #. 

Porter is still far from tradeable.

That's very true, but it does make him more tradeable than if it were all signing bonus.Here's the link to the thread I mentioned (forgot I actually started it)...

Porter's Contract

Thing is, the extra cap hit will strictly be the signing bonus minus the (base salary for 2005 plus the prorated portion of the signing bonus).

His base salaries for the five years are 1, 1, 1, 5.2 and 6.4 million (NFLPA.org).

We don't know what his the signing bonus was, but it could be structured very nicely in terms of making him tradeable.

Yes, this is why I said in my original post that the cap hit would be $6mil($7m bonus - $1m salary) assuming it was all signing bonus. And its why in the post you quoted I said if the bonus was only $4mil the cap hit would be $3mil for the Raiders.Once we get that out of the way, we have to deal with the cost of Oakland signing TO to a new contract.

____

Im not saying a TO trade is impossible..it just makes very little sense and will risk severely cap strapping themselves both now and in the future.

Another thing you are forgetting about is that even if there IS a signing bonus, part of it is going to count against this year's cap anyway which you don't factor in to your calculations.Porter's CURRENT cap hit for 2005 is the $1M base, plus 1/5 of whatever his signing bonus was. If you assume he got a $7M bonus, his current 2005 cap value is $2.4M not $1M and the "hit" for releasing him would be $7M - $2.4M = $4.6M.

I don't necessarily think Porter will be traded, I just don't think his contract will prevent him from being traded. The capologists are very creative. Woodson alone counts $10.5M against the 2005 cap. If you move Woodson, you can get a nice chunk of that back this year, probably enough to move Porter and sign Owens.

HS, Im not sure I understand what you are arguing here. When/If they deal Porter, they'll have a total cap charge in 2005 of (x - $1m), where x = his total signing bonus. Doesnt matter if you count out the 1/5 proration or not. The only thing that will not be counted against the Raiders cap is Porter's base.

 

[vinwinephans]

if traded...

2005 cap hit will be x

2005 additional cap hit/charge will be x - (1+x/5)

Where x is the blasted signing bonus

 

[Brintey Spears]

I have no clue what the incentives are that could push the deal to $15mil. It could be anything from a Pro-Bowl appearance to kicking 25 FGs.

Ricky Williams: "Doh!"

 

[P Boy]

On another front, the Vikings have to be laughing their arses off if this goes down. They would own the NFC if their D improvements work out.

Ummm, they don't even own their own division, much less the conference...

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Not exactly.  We dont know how much, if any, of these guarantees are not a "signing" bonus.  Even if his bonus is only $4mil, thats still going to give them a net cap hit of $3mil + the $2-3 mil that will be TO's cap #. 

Porter is still far from tradeable.

That's very true, but it does make him more tradeable than if it were all signing bonus.Here's the link to the thread I mentioned (forgot I actually started it)...

Porter's Contract

Thing is, the extra cap hit will strictly be the signing bonus minus the (base salary for 2005 plus the prorated portion of the signing bonus).

His base salaries for the five years are 1, 1, 1, 5.2 and 6.4 million (NFLPA.org).

We don't know what his the signing bonus was, but it could be structured very nicely in terms of making him tradeable.

Yes, this is why I said in my original post that the cap hit would be $6mil($7m bonus - $1m salary) assuming it was all signing bonus. And its why in the post you quoted I said if the bonus was only $4mil the cap hit would be $3mil for the Raiders.Once we get that out of the way, we have to deal with the cost of Oakland signing TO to a new contract.

____

Im not saying a TO trade is impossible..it just makes very little sense and will risk severely cap strapping themselves both now and in the future.

Another thing you are forgetting about is that even if there IS a signing bonus, part of it is going to count against this year's cap anyway which you don't factor in to your calculations.Porter's CURRENT cap hit for 2005 is the $1M base, plus 1/5 of whatever his signing bonus was. If you assume he got a $7M bonus, his current 2005 cap value is $2.4M not $1M and the "hit" for releasing him would be $7M - $2.4M = $4.6M.

I don't necessarily think Porter will be traded, I just don't think his contract will prevent him from being traded. The capologists are very creative. Woodson alone counts $10.5M against the 2005 cap. If you move Woodson, you can get a nice chunk of that back this year, probably enough to move Porter and sign Owens.

HS, Im not sure I understand what you are arguing here. When/If they deal Porter, they'll have a total cap charge in 2005 of (x - $1m), where x = his total signing bonus. Doesnt matter if you count out the 1/5 proration or not. The only thing that will not be counted against the Raiders cap is Porter's base.

What I am saying is that the real "cap hit" is not the total signing bonus minus the 2005 base salary as you present it. The cap "hit" is what he would cost against the cap if he were traded minus what he currently costs against the cap.What he would count against the cap if traded is his whole signing bonus if any. What he currently costs is 1M plus 1/5 of his signing bonus if any. The difference is the cap "hit", and would be the signing bonus minus (1M plus 1/5 of the bonus), which is different than $6M figure you put forward as the cap "hit".

 

[nerangers]

As a Porter Owner in my dynasty league, I hope this happens...I think his value goes up.Moss and Owens co-habitate? don't see it happening. Each will want the ball too much. Collins won't be able to keep either happy enough.

 

[DoubleG]

Funny, since this "rumor" has started to appear on CBSsporsline and Rotoworld, ko-jack hasn't posted since the first page.

Kudos to whoever posted it first - I read it here first - hours ago

I love this place

 

[Family Matters]

On another front, the Vikings have to be laughing their arses off if this goes down. They would own the NFC if their D improvements work out.

Ummm, they don't even own their own division, much less the conference...

I take it you're not impressed with the changes they've made?

 

[Bri]

How many people would the Raiders have to cut to get under the cap? Only Gruden would think Porter is worth TO.Why would Reid do this trade? Wouldn't the Eagles have to absorb his signing bonus this year? Could they?Doesn't Owens still want even more money?

 

[RnR]

All of you guys that are saying that Moss/Owens could not co-exist... you are forgetting one HUGE point. The opposing defense cannot double cover BOTH of them, so one of them is going to see single coverage from one play to the next. Tell me how else Randy Moss or Terrell Owens will receive single coverage for more than a handful of plays this season. These two may have big egos, but I'm positive they'll both suck it up to see that single coverage. There is no question that they could combine for 200 catches, 3000 yards, and 25-30 TDs. That's plenty to keep them happy. This wouldn't be the first time two really good receivers were on the same team.

 

[DeCleater]

Funny, since this "rumor" has started to appear on CBSsporsline and Rotoworld, ko-jack hasn't posted since the first page.

Kudos to whoever posted it first - I read it here first - hours ago

I love this place

Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic RAPTURE Today, 11:59 AM Post #1

Footballguy

Group: Members

Joined: 22-April 03

Member No.: 3642

Let the truth be known!

-- T.O. to Oakland for Porter? --

Thu Jun 30, 2005 --from FFMastermind.com

WPVI-TV 6 reports a trade is in the works between the Philadelphia Eagles and the Oakland Raiders. WR Terrell Owens would go to Oakland in exchange for WR Jerry Porter. Owens may be trade bait because he wants the Eagles to give him more money. If he goes to Oakland, the Raiders would have two of the best wide receivers in the NFL: Owens and WR Randy Moss. Yesterday, Moss told reporters he could co-exist with Owens as long as he got the number of passes he deserves.

RAPTURE

ko-jack Today, 12:00 PM Post #2

Footballguy

Group: Members

Joined: 29-May 04

Member No.: 10705

honda

--------------------

Have a nice day

Rapture posted info from a source that had not been quoted in any TO thread and within 1 minute he is HONDA'ed. I have a bit of advise for you HONDA Nazi's, GET A F'N LIFE.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

How many people would the Raiders have to cut to get under the cap? Only Gruden would think Porter is worth TO.

Why would Reid do this trade? Wouldn't the Eagles have to absorb his signing bonus this year? Could they?

Doesn't Owens still want even more money?

Well, seeing that Gruden is in Tampa Bay, then it won't matter too much

 

[Bri]

Funny, since this "rumor" has started to appear on CBSsporsline and Rotoworld, ko-jack hasn't posted since the first page. 

Kudos to whoever posted it first - I read it here first  - hours ago

I love this place 

Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic RAPTURE Today, 11:59 AM Post #1

Footballguy

Group: Members

Joined: 22-April 03

Member No.: 3642

Let the truth be known!

-- T.O. to Oakland for Porter? --

Thu Jun 30, 2005 --from FFMastermind.com

WPVI-TV 6 reports a trade is in the works between the Philadelphia Eagles and the Oakland Raiders. WR Terrell Owens would go to Oakland in exchange for WR Jerry Porter. Owens may be trade bait because he wants the Eagles to give him more money. If he goes to Oakland, the Raiders would have two of the best wide receivers in the NFL: Owens and WR Randy Moss. Yesterday, Moss told reporters he could co-exist with Owens as long as he got the number of passes he deserves.

RAPTURE

ko-jack Today, 12:00 PM Post #2

Footballguy

Group: Members

Joined: 29-May 04

Member No.: 10705

honda

--------------------

Have a nice day

Rapture posted info from a source that had not been quoted in any TO thread and within 1 minute he is HONDA'ed. I have a bit of advise for you HONDA Nazi's, GET A F'N LIFE.

I don't understand this post

 

[Bri]

How many people would the Raiders have to cut to get under the cap? Only Gruden would think Porter is worth TO.

Why would Reid do this trade? Wouldn't the Eagles have to absorb his signing bonus this year? Could they?

Doesn't Owens still want even more money?

Well, seeing that Gruden is in Tampa Bay, then it won't matter too much

that was my point

 

[Peter]

While I doubt it would happen, the ultimate goal of a NFL owner is to make as much money as possible. Adding Owens would get people talking about the Raiders even more, get them more publicity and send jersey sales through the roof.

 

[Raider Nation]

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

If this goes down, and they both stay healthy, Kerry Collins better break every single season passing record on the books next year or he is absolute garbage.And as another refute to the jackass whining about no link, I heard this on my local sports radio also. Sorry I don't have a link to their audio, guess you have to cry some more.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

And as another refute to the jackass whining about no link, I heard this on my local sports radio also. Sorry I don't have a link to their audio, guess you have to cry some more.

If people just post news without links then it could get out of hand. You need to backup your claims and a link is usually the way to provide evidence you didn't pull it outta your ####.If its on TV or on the radio, then its already in print somewhere on the internet.

Providing Links puts some credibility behind rumours. I find no fault in someone asking for a link in a crazy rumour such as this.

 

[:dancingpickle:]

And as another refute to the jackass whining about no link, I heard this on my local sports radio also. Sorry I don't have a link to their audio, guess you have to cry some more.

If people just post news without links then it could get out of hand. You need to backup your claims and a link is usually the way to provide evidence you didn't pull it outta your ####.If its on TV or on the radio, then its already in print somewhere on the internet.

Providing Links puts some credibility behind rumours. I find no fault in someone asking for a link in a crazy rumour such as this.

CRAZY :blackeye:

 

[2's wild]

Can we say Must watch Tv..Owens Moss same team crazy

 

[Peter]

Providing Links puts some credibility behind rumours. I find no fault in someone asking for a link in a crazy rumour such as this.Yeah but you're Canadian so who cares what you think?

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I don't think it's going to happen but for some reason I would like to see those 2 on the field together. I'm not even going to put my brain thru any type of projections until it's official.As a Cowboy and even a Lions' fan, Terell going out of the NFC is a step in the right direction. I don't like the trade for Philly. It probably won't be straight up, let's say it's:Jerry Porter and 2006 1st rounder for Terell OwensI still don't think I like it, but it would certainly be a lot closer to being even.

 

[JAA]

I don't think it's going to happen but for some reason I would like to see those 2 on the field together. I'm not even going to put my brain thru any type of projections until it's official.

As a Cowboy and even a Lions' fan, Terell going out of the NFC is a step in the right direction. I don't like the trade for Philly. It probably won't be straight up, let's say it's:

Jerry Porter and 2006 1st rounder for Terell Owens

I still don't think I like it, but it would certainly be a lot closer to being even.

As intriquing as it would be to consider what Phi could get for Owens if in fact they were going to trade him (I TO), I wouldnt want Porter (with his contract) or picks. Phi needs a star WR, not 1st round picks and not decent WRs. Star only please

 

[Peter]

Earlier in this thread someone showed how Porter isn't that expensive 'til what, his fourth year into the contract?

 

[Peter]

From profootballtalk.com:T.O.-FOR-PORTER TRADE RUMORS "LUDICROUS"There are rampant rumors among NFL fans and media that the Philadelphia Eagle might send disgruntled wideout Terrell Owens to the Raiders for Jerry Porter.One league insider termed these rumors "ludicrous." As the source said, "Anyone who knows anything about football knows that this deal will not happen. There's a better chance of the Eagles giving Owens a new contract, and the chances of that happening are zero."The biggest impediment to such a deal is that the Raiders paid a $7 million signing bonus to Porter earlier this year. With the bonus spread over only five years per the CBA, Porter's current cap number is $2.4 million ($1.4 million bonus allocation and $1 million in salary). Trading him would cause the entire bonus to accelerate against the 2005 cap, pushing the total cap hit to $7 million, for a net increase of $4.6 million.Picking up Owens' salary would chew up another $3.25 million in 2005 cap space, pushing the total cap cost of the deal to $7.95 million.On top of that, Owens wants a new contract.Also, it's important not to underestimate the reality that the Raiders recently handed one of those oversized PGA tour checks in the amount of $7 million to Porter. As Saints owner Tom Benson would attest, those are "real dollars." It's hard for any team to justify giving a guy $7 million -- and then sending him on his way.If, after all, Al Davis had a set of vampire dentures in his pocket for T.O., Davis could have jumped into the bidding a year ago, when Owens was a quasi-free agent.Besides, trading T.O. would be an implicit admission by the Eagles that Owens won the high-stakes stare down over the current value of his contract. Even if there would be a chance (and there ain't) of moving Owens to get a guy like Porter, the Eagles aren't going to do anything that would imply that the flinched.

 

[Family Matters]

Thanks Peter. That should but an end to this speculative talk. While it would be interesting to see them play together it just isn't realistic.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

From profootballtalk.com:

T.O.-FOR-PORTER TRADE RUMORS "LUDICROUS"

There are rampant rumors among NFL fans and media that the Philadelphia Eagle might send disgruntled wideout Terrell Owens to the Raiders for Jerry Porter.

One league insider termed these rumors "ludicrous." As the source said, "Anyone who knows anything about football knows that this deal will not happen. There's a better chance of the Eagles giving Owens a new contract, and the chances of that happening are zero."

The biggest impediment to such a deal is that the Raiders paid a $7 million signing bonus to Porter earlier this year. With the bonus spread over only five years per the CBA, Porter's current cap number is $2.4 million ($1.4 million bonus allocation and $1 million in salary). Trading him would cause the entire bonus to accelerate against the 2005 cap, pushing the total cap hit to $7 million, for a net increase of $4.6 million.

Picking up Owens' salary would chew up another $3.25 million in 2005 cap space, pushing the total cap cost of the deal to $7.95 million.

On top of that, Owens wants a new contract.

Also, it's important not to underestimate the reality that the Raiders recently handed one of those oversized PGA tour checks in the amount of $7 million to Porter. As Saints owner Tom Benson would attest, those are "real dollars." It's hard for any team to justify giving a guy $7 million -- and then sending him on his way.

If, after all, Al Davis had a set of vampire dentures in his pocket for T.O., Davis could have jumped into the bidding a year ago, when Owens was a quasi-free agent.

Besides, trading T.O. would be an implicit admission by the Eagles that Owens won the high-stakes stare down over the current value of his contract. Even if there would be a chance (and there ain't) of moving Owens to get a guy like Porter, the Eagles aren't going to do anything that would imply that the flinched.

Since this is from PFT, will we be getting someone on here saying that everything they report is crap and therefore the original rumor must be true???

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Thanks Peter. That should but an end to this speculative talk. While it would be interesting to see them play together it just isn't realistic.

Yeah, we don't want no "speculative talk" 'round here.The article raises some good points, but I still think they are wrong about the cap thing just like some folks around here. I don't think PFW knows any more than we do about the REAL amount of Porter's signing bonus.

 

[beefcake]

omg -- i think moss + owens would be more talent than kerry collins knows what to do with!

 

[vinwinephans]

The $10 mil figure is the figure that was first reported by ESPN, but everywhere else later reported $7 mil.

From profootballtalk.com:

The biggest impediment to such a deal is that the Raiders paid a $7 million signing bonus to Porter earlier this year.

Since we are all about sources in this thread, can someone please share with me a credible source citing a $7 million dollar signing bonus was paid to Jerry Porter as a result of this new contract? Everything I have seen from credible reporting sources has been mostly a credit to Lenny P's orginal contention of a 5 year, last 2 voidable, contract with $10 million in gaurentees and possible contract worth upto $15 million over the first 3 years.

Nothing I have found says $7 million and I have wasted to much of my life so far looking for it.

 

[Family Matters]

Thanks Peter. That should but an end to this speculative talk. While it would be interesting to see them play together it just isn't realistic.

Yeah, we don't want no "speculative talk" 'round here.The article raises some good points, but I still think they are wrong about the cap thing just like some folks around here. I don't think PFW knows any more than we do about the REAL amount of Porter's signing bonus.

Just to clarify, I don't mind the seculative talk, it can be fun. Hope nobody took my post to mean I have a problem with it. Besides, it would be interesting to see how it played out if it did happen. I'm not sure it would work because of the egos involved. Besides, this could be harmful to the AFC West DC's. They would need some medical attention just trying to figure whp they want to get burned with each week.

 

[B-Deep]

I am firmly of the opinion that this would be a disaster. It was enough of a rumor that Moss commented on it, so it had some legs. When you see what moss says it tells you everything. He could have said how great it would be to have that tandem together, he could have said how he admires and respects TO (even if he didn't mean it), he could have said anything that gets this team to the super bowl is fine by him.But what did he say, he can "coexist" with TO as long as he gets the catches that he deserves. :X I hope Randy Moss always gets everything he deserves, and one thing not on that list is a ring.Too bad this is never going to happen, it would have been fun to watch.

 

[Peter]

It would be awesome to watch on a weekly basis. Not only would it be a nightmare for opposing D's but I would suddenly have to drop other guys to keep Collins with what is already a tight dynasty budget.On Mike and Mike this morning they had some guy who had talked to Porter's agent...the agent said the rumor is only a rumor-it has no legs to it.So while all trades start off as rumors this one appears to be losing steam as the real sporting world catches up to the fantasy one.

 

[diesel7982]

Put this in the other thread, so might as well here. Writeup I did yesterday on the cap ramifications of the deal.

Heres a quick breakdown: Porter's contract called for $7 mil in guarantees, and he'll make $1 mil in base salary this year. So by trading him, they'd incur a net cap hit of $6 mil this year. Assuming TO's deal would call for him to recieve a $12 mil bonus over 7 years, and he'll make the vet min salary, TO would have a cap hit of a little over $2 mil. That would mean the Raiders would spend $8 mil of their cap this season on the trade and signing TO. Im not sure TO's bonus can even be prorated over the 7 years, as the CBA is not extended past 2008(or 09) currently. It may only be 5 years, which would result in TO's cap number this year being close to $3mil, and the cost of the trade being $9 mil.

To Quote PFT Again:The biggest impediment to such a deal is that the Raiders paid a $7 million signing bonus to Porter earlier this year. With the bonus spread over only five years per the CBA, Porter's current cap number is $2.4 million ($1.4 million bonus allocation and $1 million in salary). Trading him would cause the entire bonus to accelerate against the 2005 cap, pushing the total cap hit to $7 million, for a net increase of $4.6 million.

Picking up Owens' salary would chew up another $3.25 million in 2005 cap space, pushing the total cap cost of the deal to $7.95 million.

On top of that, Owens wants a new contract.

Also, it's important not to underestimate the reality that the Raiders recently handed one of those oversized PGA tour checks in the amount of $7 million to Porter. As Saints owner Tom Benson would attest, those are "real dollars." It's hard for any team to justify giving a guy $7 million -- and then sending him on his way.

So an Owens-for-Porter trade will not happen. Ever.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

Why don't the Vikings trade for him...offer something really cheap and see if the Eagles bite. The Vikings have the cap space (I believe) and if they could pull the coup of getting TO for less than what they traded Moss for then they come out ahead (not that they want to bring in another headcase). The only problem is that the Eagles probably wouldn't want to trade him to a competitor.

 

[Sinrman]

Why don't the Vikings trade for him...offer something really cheap and see if the Eagles bite. The Vikings have the cap space (I believe) and if they could pull the coup of getting TO for less than what they traded Moss for then they come out ahead (not that they want to bring in another headcase). The only problem is that the Eagles probably wouldn't want to trade him to a competitor.

Why in the world would they trade one prima-donna (Moss) and then pick up one who might be even worse?

 

[Peter]

Whatever happened to the brief rumor of the Falcons going at him? They not have the cap space?

 

[Sidewinder]

...

On Mike and Mike this morning they had some guy who had talked to Porter's agent...the agent said the rumor is only a rumor-it has no legs to it.

...

Sal Paolantonio

 

[amnesiac]

Whatever happened to the brief rumor of the Falcons going at him? They not have the cap space?

This is a much more intriguing rumor , imo. The Falcons have a better D, an established running attack. TO has proven he can make most any QB better instantly. The Falcons would be downright scary with TO onboard, moving Price to #2 with Jenkins/White #3, and Crumpler underneath.

 

[Hinezer]

Put this in the other thread, so might as well here.  Writeup I did yesterday on the cap ramifications of the deal.

Heres a quick breakdown: Porter's contract called for $7 mil in guarantees, and he'll make $1 mil in base salary this year. So by trading him, they'd incur a net cap hit of $6 mil this year. Assuming TO's deal would call for him to recieve a $12 mil bonus over 7 years, and he'll make the vet min salary, TO would have a cap hit of a little over $2 mil. That would mean the Raiders would spend $8 mil of their cap this season on the trade and signing TO. Im not sure TO's bonus can even be prorated over the 7 years, as the CBA is not extended past 2008(or 09) currently. It may only be 5 years, which would result in TO's cap number this year being close to $3mil, and the cost of the trade being $9 mil.

To Quote PFT Again:The biggest impediment to such a deal is that the Raiders paid a $7 million signing bonus to Porter earlier this year. With the bonus spread over only five years per the CBA, Porter's current cap number is $2.4 million ($1.4 million bonus allocation and $1 million in salary). Trading him would cause the entire bonus to accelerate against the 2005 cap, pushing the total cap hit to $7 million, for a net increase of $4.6 million.

Picking up Owens' salary would chew up another $3.25 million in 2005 cap space, pushing the total cap cost of the deal to $7.95 million.

On top of that, Owens wants a new contract.

Also, it's important not to underestimate the reality that the Raiders recently handed one of those oversized PGA tour checks in the amount of $7 million to Porter. As Saints owner Tom Benson would attest, those are "real dollars." It's hard for any team to justify giving a guy $7 million -- and then sending him on his way.

So an Owens-for-Porter trade will not happen. Ever.

If Al Davis wants Owens, he will find a way. My guess would be that he would give Woodson a HUGE contract that will have him making next to nothing this year to create cap room.

 

[The Man Who Met Andy Griffith]

Funny you mentioned this, I considered posting the same thing, but then I thought about it. Can Vick GET the ball to TO? Wouldn't TO get pissed EVERY time Vick runs?

TO has mentioned several times (even while playing for Philly) that he thinks Vick is the best QB in the league.

 

[CalBear]

Funny you mentioned this, I considered posting the same thing, but then I thought about it. Can Vick GET the ball to TO? Wouldn't TO get pissed EVERY time Vick runs?

TO has mentioned several times (even while playing for Philly) that he thinks Vick is the best QB in the league.

He also mentioned that Tim Rattay was a better QB than Jeff Garcia.You can't spell "TOOL" without "TO."

 

[-OZ-]

You can't spell "TOOL" without "TO."

That may be, but it doesn't mean the other statement is wrong:

He also mentioned that Tim Rattay was a better QB than Jeff Garcia.

In time, who knows really? When has Rattay had the weapons Garcia has?I'm not saying he's right, but I can't prove him wrong due to circumstances.

I realize this will be at, and is a hijack, but maybe TO isn't an idiot. (maybe)

2003

Rattay's completion % - 61.9, Garcia's - 57.4

QB Rating: Rattay - 96.6, Garcia - 80.1

2004

Rattay: 9 starts, 78.1 rating, 60.9%, 2169 yards, 10 TD, 10 INT

Garcia: 10 starts, 76.7 rating, 57.1%, 1731 yards, 10 TD, 9 INT

Which QB had a better supporting cast?

Neither is exactly setting the NFL on fire, both had their 2004 team look to replace them.

Maybe, just maybe, TO knew what he was talking about?