- Joined
- Jun 21, 2007
- Messages
- 4,656
- Reaction score
- 643
- Location
- Suburbia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
What is Bruce Allen thinking?
"Rumors and speculation have surrounded the Washington Redskins and franchise left tackle Trent Williams for days.
Williams didn’t show up to minicamp and the rumors suggest the reasoning ranges from financial to others. Either way, the Redskins electing to move Williams would have big ramifications on the cap.
For the most part, moving Williams would provide big cap relief for the Redskins, as Spotrac explained above. The dead cap numbers are a small price to pay for the massive return the Redskins would undoubtedly get for moving a player of Williams’ caliber.
Then again, it’s hard to imagine the Redskins would ever want to move Williams in the first place. He’s going to need a new deal now as opposed to later, but they aren’t equipped to lose one of the NFL’s best offensive linemen at a time they’re trying to break in a new franchise quarterback like Dwayne Haskins."
Here’s what a Trent Williams trade would do to Redskins’ cap space
//
"Trading OT Trent Williams leaves behind dead cap hits of $3.5M in 2019, & $1.9M in 2020 to the #Redskins. He would bring cap/cash hits of $11.2M, & $12.5M to a new team.Trent Williams Contract Details, Salary Cap Breakdowns, Salaries, Bonuses | Spotrac …"
Here’s what a Trent Williams trade would do to Redskins’ cap space
There is no guaranteed money for Trent Williams two contract years left. If Trent is injured on the next play, he gets no money. That is great for Bruce Allen, but there is no incentive for Williams to step back out on the field without a new contract with at least some guaranteed money.
If the Redskins were to give some money guaranteed over the next two years, it would only cost the Redskins, if Trent were injured.
Is Bruce just being stingy? Banking on profit from injury? What's wrong with splitting the difference?
//
Last edited: