PDA

View Full Version : Steelers Looking to Quickly Re-Up Bryant McFadden Posted Fe



fordfixer
02-05-2009, 10:04 PM
Steelers Looking to Quickly Re-Up Bryant McFadden

Posted Feb 5th 2009 8:40 AM by JJ Cooper (author feed)

http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/02/05/stee ... -mcfadden/ (http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/02/05/steelers-looking-to-quickly-re-up-mcfadden/)

Filed Under: Steelers, AFC North
As they create room in the trophy case for a sixth Lombardi Trophy, the Steelers also have some decisions to make. Four of the team's top five offensive tackles are free agents (although Willie Colon is only a restricted free agent), as are starting cornerback Bryant McFadden and No. 3 receiver Nate Washington.

But according to Sports Illustrated's Don Banks, the Steelers have already decided on their top free agent priority. Banks says the Steelers plan to try to re-up McFadden before free agency begins on Feb. 27. With $19 million in cap room, Pittsburgh has some room to get McFadden under contract while also either re-upping Max Starks or trying to bring in free agent offensive line help.The Steelers' decision to prioritize McFadden makes sense, as he is a quality No. 2 cornerback, and re-signing him would ensure that the Steelers keep together the key pieces of the NFL's No. 1 defense. If McFadden was allowed to leave in free agency, the Steelers' best in-house option would be William Gay, who was surprisingly solid as a nickel back this year. In fact, Gay was rated as the best nickel back in the league by Football Outsiders' game charters.

But if McFadden is brought back, the Steelers have four solid corners with Gay and Deshea Townsend giving the Steelers depth and the ability to match up well with No. 3 receivers.

Pittsburgh could also decide to make keeping its offensive line together a priority instead--starting left tackle Max Starks and left guard Chris Kemoeatu and injured left tackle Marvel Smith and backup tackle Trai Essex are all free agents. But in doing that, Pittsburgh would be locking up mediocrity instead of trying to improve on a bad situation.

It wouldn't be that surprising if Pittsburgh re-upped Starks -- he's an adequate (nothing more, nothing less) left tackle with weight-control issues, but there aren't a lot of starting left tackles sitting out on the free agent market, and rookies tackles available at pick No. 32 aren't usually able to step in and star. At this point it would be difficult to spend much money at all on Smith when back issues have sidelined him twice in the past two years. Essex is a dime-a-dozen backup and Kemoeatu has been maddeningly inconsistent.

That's where Banks' story seems to lose its way. He also says that the Steelers will likely make cornerback its top priority in the draft. That's laughable, especially if the Steelers re-up McFadden. While Banks may think that Ike Taylor has been picked on a lot, he's actually the best cornerback on the No. 1 defense in the league. On the other hand, the Steelers offensive line could use upgrades at every position. If the Steelers don't make offensive line their top priority in the draft, then something is seriously wrong.

BURGH86STEEL
02-05-2009, 11:03 PM
It just goes to show that there are no easy answers for a team that wins a lot. There are always tough decisions to be made. Steelers usually get it right. As some of us argued, they were right to give Starks that one year deal.

Steelhere10
02-05-2009, 11:08 PM
glad to see Gay getting his deserved praise.

Chadman
02-05-2009, 11:21 PM
It wouldn't be that surprising if Pittsburgh re-upped Starks -- he's an adequate (nothing more, nothing less) left tackle with weight-control issues, but there aren't a lot of starting left tackles sitting out on the free agent market, and rookies tackles available at pick No. 32 aren't usually able to step in and star

This has been Chadman's biggest arguement in favour of re-signing Starks- there might simply be nothing better on the table.

While he's not 'great', the Steelers managed to win a SB with him at LT.

ray
02-06-2009, 12:44 AM
It wouldn't be that surprising if Pittsburgh re-upped Starks -- he's an adequate (nothing more, nothing less) left tackle with weight-control issues, but there aren't a lot of starting left tackles sitting out on the free agent market, and rookies tackles available at pick No. 32 aren't usually able to step in and star

This has been Chadman's biggest arguement in favour of re-signing Starks- there might simply be nothing better on the table.

While he's not 'great', the Steelers managed to win a SB with him at LT.
I'll have to agree with you, try and resign Bmac and Starks as long as it won't break the bank as extending James Harrison's contract is another biggie.

phillyesq
02-06-2009, 09:06 AM
I said before that I think re-signing McFadden might be the key to the offseason. Even if they keep Starks as well, still think that they need a OT, OG/OC, and at least one younger player on the defensive line. If cornerback becomes a need for the Steelers as well, it will be much harder to address their needs on both lines.

Oviedo
02-06-2009, 10:21 AM
It wouldn't be that surprising if Pittsburgh re-upped Starks -- he's an adequate (nothing more, nothing less) left tackle with weight-control issues, but there aren't a lot of starting left tackles sitting out on the free agent market, and rookies tackles available at pick No. 32 aren't usually able to step in and star

This has been Chadman's biggest arguement in favour of re-signing Starks- there might simply be nothing better on the table.

While he's not 'great', the Steelers managed to win a SB with him at LT.

:Agree We aren't going to pay Jordan Gross $9M per year and when you draft as low as we always do you get devlopmental OL not starters.

I am of one mind (separated by multiple time zones and hemispheres) with Chadman that Starks is and has been our most reasonable choice.

I will be admittedly stunned if we resign Bmac before Feb 27th. Once he hits the open market we will be outbid.

pfelix73
02-06-2009, 11:15 AM
Well, one of the 2 will be re-signed. Starks or Smith. Again, it's been reported that Smith may be re-signed just because they now believe his back problems are 'behind' him and they can sign him dirt cheap. They might get into a bidding war with Starks and other teams. They would try to avoid that. George Foster might be an option as a back up.

Good call on looking for a CB at 32. I like it. OR whomever might fall....

A G/C at 32 would make sense as well.

RuthlessBurgher
02-06-2009, 11:25 AM
It wouldn't be that surprising if Pittsburgh re-upped Starks -- he's an adequate (nothing more, nothing less) left tackle with weight-control issues, but there aren't a lot of starting left tackles sitting out on the free agent market, and rookies tackles available at pick No. 32 aren't usually able to step in and star

This has been Chadman's biggest arguement in favour of re-signing Starks- there might simply be nothing better on the table.

While he's not 'great', the Steelers managed to win a SB with him at LT.

:Agree We aren't going to pay Jordan Gross $9M per year and when you draft as low as we always do you get devlopmental OL not starters.

I am of one mind (separated by multiple time zones and hemispheres) with Chadman that Starks is and has been our most reasonable choice.

I will be admittedly stunned if we resign Bmac before Feb 27th. Once he hits the open market we will be outbid.

Gross is a much better deal at $9 million per than Starks at $6 million per. I even think Gross is a better deal at $10 million per than Starks at $5 million per. At this point, I doubt Gross even hits the market so this could all be moot (I initially thought Carolina would franchise Peppers and not be able to re-sign Gross, but with Peppers declaring his desire to play elsewhere, they may just franchise Gross and be done with it), but if he becomes available, that is the kind of guy worth paying for...a Pro Bowler at a prime position entering his prime. That doesn't come around often, and it rarely, if ever, happens at LT.

Who else is in the conversation for top tackles? Of course, you have recent high draft picks like Joe Thomas and Jake Long, but their teams would never let those guys hit the market. Guys like Walter Jones, Flozell Adams, and Chris Samuels are on the downsides of their careers. Other Pro Bowlers at tackle include Michael Roos, Jason Peters, and Jammal Brown. Gross is unquestionably one of the best in the league, and Starks is nowhere close to being in that class. This team rarely makes much of a splash in free agency, but if ever there was a time to do it, this would be the case, no question.

Oviedo
02-06-2009, 11:44 AM
It wouldn't be that surprising if Pittsburgh re-upped Starks -- he's an adequate (nothing more, nothing less) left tackle with weight-control issues, but there aren't a lot of starting left tackles sitting out on the free agent market, and rookies tackles available at pick No. 32 aren't usually able to step in and star

This has been Chadman's biggest arguement in favour of re-signing Starks- there might simply be nothing better on the table.

While he's not 'great', the Steelers managed to win a SB with him at LT.

:Agree We aren't going to pay Jordan Gross $9M per year and when you draft as low as we always do you get devlopmental OL not starters.

I am of one mind (separated by multiple time zones and hemispheres) with Chadman that Starks is and has been our most reasonable choice.

I will be admittedly stunned if we resign Bmac before Feb 27th. Once he hits the open market we will be outbid.

Gross is a much better deal at $9 million per than Starks at $6 million per. I even think Gross is a better deal at $10 million per than Starks at $5 million per. At this point, I doubt Gross even hits the market so this could all be moot (I initially thought Carolina would franchise Peppers and not be able to re-sign Gross, but with Peppers declaring his desire to play elsewhere, they may just franchise Gross and be done with it), but if he becomes available, that is the kind of guy worth paying for...a Pro Bowler at a prime position entering his prime. That doesn't come around often, and it rarely, if ever, happens at LT.

Who else is in the conversation for top tackles? Of course, you have recent high draft picks like Joe Thomas and Jake Long, but their teams would never let those guys hit the market. Guys like Walter Jones, Flozell Adams, and Chris Samuels are on the downsides of their careers. Other Pro Bowlers at tackle include Michael Roos, Jason Peters, and Jammal Brown. Gross is unquestionably one of the best in the league, and Starks is nowhere close to being in that class. This team rarely makes much of a splash in free agency, but if ever there was a time to do it, this would be the case, no question.


The issue becomes who else you won't sign for the $3-4M delta between Starks and Gross. Do we sacrifice extending Harrison? Woodley? Heath? Perhaps Santonio?

That $3-4M extra for Gross could have some unintended consequences in the future for players who are impact players.

I'd love to have Gross but it won't happen.

phillyesq
02-06-2009, 12:34 PM
It wouldn't be that surprising if Pittsburgh re-upped Starks -- he's an adequate (nothing more, nothing less) left tackle with weight-control issues, but there aren't a lot of starting left tackles sitting out on the free agent market, and rookies tackles available at pick No. 32 aren't usually able to step in and star

This has been Chadman's biggest arguement in favour of re-signing Starks- there might simply be nothing better on the table.

While he's not 'great', the Steelers managed to win a SB with him at LT.

:Agree We aren't going to pay Jordan Gross $9M per year and when you draft as low as we always do you get devlopmental OL not starters.

I am of one mind (separated by multiple time zones and hemispheres) with Chadman that Starks is and has been our most reasonable choice.

I will be admittedly stunned if we resign Bmac before Feb 27th. Once he hits the open market we will be outbid.

Gross is a much better deal at $9 million per than Starks at $6 million per. I even think Gross is a better deal at $10 million per than Starks at $5 million per. At this point, I doubt Gross even hits the market so this could all be moot (I initially thought Carolina would franchise Peppers and not be able to re-sign Gross, but with Peppers declaring his desire to play elsewhere, they may just franchise Gross and be done with it), but if he becomes available, that is the kind of guy worth paying for...a Pro Bowler at a prime position entering his prime. That doesn't come around often, and it rarely, if ever, happens at LT.

Who else is in the conversation for top tackles? Of course, you have recent high draft picks like Joe Thomas and Jake Long, but their teams would never let those guys hit the market. Guys like Walter Jones, Flozell Adams, and Chris Samuels are on the downsides of their careers. Other Pro Bowlers at tackle include Michael Roos, Jason Peters, and Jammal Brown. Gross is unquestionably one of the best in the league, and Starks is nowhere close to being in that class. This team rarely makes much of a splash in free agency, but if ever there was a time to do it, this would be the case, no question.


The issue becomes who else you won't sign for the $3-4M delta between Starks and Gross. Do we sacrifice extending Harrison? Woodley? Heath? Perhaps Santonio?

That $3-4M extra for Gross could have some unintended consequences in the future for players who are impact players.

I'd love to have Gross but it won't happen.

Spending the extra money wouldn't necessarily mean that the Steelers sacrifice elsewhere. They had probably $10-12 million tied up at LT this season between Starks, Smith and Essex. There was also a lot of money tied up at center -- the cap hit from Mahan's bonus (a few million, iirc) plus another couple of million for Hartwig.

I'd rather see Gross/Hills at LT than seeing the Steelers overpay a combination of mediocre players at that position and elsewhere on the line. I'm also worried about what will happen with Starks, who has work ethic/conditioning issues in the past, signing a long term deal.

RuthlessBurgher
02-06-2009, 12:43 PM
It wouldn't be that surprising if Pittsburgh re-upped Starks -- he's an adequate (nothing more, nothing less) left tackle with weight-control issues, but there aren't a lot of starting left tackles sitting out on the free agent market, and rookies tackles available at pick No. 32 aren't usually able to step in and star

This has been Chadman's biggest arguement in favour of re-signing Starks- there might simply be nothing better on the table.

While he's not 'great', the Steelers managed to win a SB with him at LT.

:Agree We aren't going to pay Jordan Gross $9M per year and when you draft as low as we always do you get devlopmental OL not starters.

I am of one mind (separated by multiple time zones and hemispheres) with Chadman that Starks is and has been our most reasonable choice.

I will be admittedly stunned if we resign Bmac before Feb 27th. Once he hits the open market we will be outbid.

Gross is a much better deal at $9 million per than Starks at $6 million per. I even think Gross is a better deal at $10 million per than Starks at $5 million per. At this point, I doubt Gross even hits the market so this could all be moot (I initially thought Carolina would franchise Peppers and not be able to re-sign Gross, but with Peppers declaring his desire to play elsewhere, they may just franchise Gross and be done with it), but if he becomes available, that is the kind of guy worth paying for...a Pro Bowler at a prime position entering his prime. That doesn't come around often, and it rarely, if ever, happens at LT.

Who else is in the conversation for top tackles? Of course, you have recent high draft picks like Joe Thomas and Jake Long, but their teams would never let those guys hit the market. Guys like Walter Jones, Flozell Adams, and Chris Samuels are on the downsides of their careers. Other Pro Bowlers at tackle include Michael Roos, Jason Peters, and Jammal Brown. Gross is unquestionably one of the best in the league, and Starks is nowhere close to being in that class. This team rarely makes much of a splash in free agency, but if ever there was a time to do it, this would be the case, no question.


The issue becomes who else you won't sign for the $3-4M delta between Starks and Gross. Do we sacrifice extending Harrison? Woodley? Heath? Perhaps Santonio?

That $3-4M extra for Gross could have some unintended consequences in the future for players who are impact players.

I'd love to have Gross but it won't happen.

I doubt it happens either, but that doesn't stop me from pushing for it. If they signed Gross, the immediate impact would be that they would be out of the running to retain McFadden. I would be much more confortable with Gross as my LT and Ike, Gay, Deshea, and a 3rd round CB/return guy than I would be with Starks as my LT and Ike, BMac, Gay, and Deshea at corner. I would be willing to sacrifice that small piece of our defense for a huge upgrade at our weakest position on offense. They should still be able to extend their young studs by sacrificing some of the older vets over the next couple of years like Foote, Hampton, Townsend (I'm still hoping Hines takes a Farrior-like deal to retire as a Steeler, but we'll see).

MeetJoeGreene
02-06-2009, 02:04 PM
I doubt it happens either, but that doesn't stop me from pushing for it. If they signed Gross, the immediate impact would be that they would be out of the running to retain McFadden. I would be much more confortable with Gross as my LT and Ike, Gay, Deshea, and a 3rd round CB/return guy than I would be with Starks as my LT and Ike, BMac, Gay, and Deshea at corner. I would be willing to sacrifice that small piece of our defense for a huge upgrade at our weakest position on offense. They should still be able to extend their young studs by sacrificing some of the older vets over the next couple of years like Foote, Hampton, Townsend (I'm still hoping Hines takes a Farrior-like deal to retire as a Steeler, but we'll see).

:Agree That is the crux of it right there. You have to look at it from an overall team perspective and I think you nailed it. I have been having similar thoughts but you articulated it perfectly.

Flasteel
02-06-2009, 08:37 PM
It just goes to show that there are no easy answers for a team that wins a lot. There are always tough decisions to be made. Steelers usually get it right. As some of us argued, they were right to give Starks that one year deal.

And this, despite other arguments, is why I know you possess a brilliant mind Burgh :Boobs

papillon
02-06-2009, 11:43 PM
It wouldn't be that surprising if Pittsburgh re-upped Starks -- he's an adequate (nothing more, nothing less) left tackle with weight-control issues, but there aren't a lot of starting left tackles sitting out on the free agent market, and rookies tackles available at pick No. 32 aren't usually able to step in and star

This has been Chadman's biggest arguement in favour of re-signing Starks- there might simply be nothing better on the table.

While he's not 'great', the Steelers managed to win a SB with him at LT.

They managed to win a SB with Starks, Kemo, Hartwig, Stapleton and Colon. I don't think they can pull off the repeat with that group (no matter how much Ben talks them up). :P

PAppy

mshifko
02-07-2009, 01:15 PM
guys, jordan gross is demanding jake long #1 overall draft pick money...he's not coming to pittsburgh

max starks did a fine job this season...he's been solid and needs to be retained and can be retained for less than gross...bmac needs to be resigned as well...he's a great tackler and in a 3-4 that's the key thing for corners...

Slapstick
02-09-2009, 11:04 AM
The Steelers won a SB with Max Starks as the starting LT...

Curiously, they also won a SB with Max Starks as the starting RT...

The dude must be doing something right...

Remember the Tomlin mantra: continuity....

papillon
02-09-2009, 11:49 AM
I'll be happy when we can update this thread with Bryant Mcfadden signed a multi year deal that will keep a Steeler for the next 5 years.

Pappy

Oviedo
02-09-2009, 11:55 AM
I'll be happy when we can update this thread with Bryant Mcfadden signed a multi year deal that will keep a Steeler for the next 5 years.

Pappy

:Agree but I don't think we will hear that. I think the decision will come down to resigning Starks OR resigning Bmac. If I am correct Starks is the higher priority because there is no PLan B to not resigning him. With Bmac you have an option in Gay. We have no option on the roster without Max at LT.

My logic for why we won't resign both is that we also have to pay attention to extending Harrision, Heath and Woodley. All of who I believe are down to one year next year and all who deserve big paydays more than Bmac does.

papillon
02-09-2009, 12:19 PM
I'll be happy when we can update this thread with Bryant Mcfadden signed a multi year deal that will keep a Steeler for the next 5 years.

Pappy

:Agree but I don't think we will hear that. I think the decision will come down to resigning Starks OR resigning Bmac. If I am correct Starks is the higher priority because there is no PLan B to not resigning him. With Bmac you have an option in Gay. We have no option on the roster without Max at LT.

My logic for why we won't resign both is that we also have to pay attention to extending Harrision, Heath and Woodley. All of who I believe are down to one year next year and all who deserve big paydays more than Bmac does.

The good news, if there is any good news here, is that, this will be Harrison's final contract, so, get that one done first. A 5 or 6 year deal for Heath and that could be his final contract with the Steelers. The Steelers may have to pay Woodley twice with big paydays at this point (well, that is actually bad news financially).

I guess the unknown with Bmac is what he considers fair and what the Steelers consider fair market value for a corner back in the 34 defense.

How much will the cap increase this year? Does the 20 million we're under the cap include savings from cutting Smith and releasing Foote? There are other cap casualties that may occur as well. Kemo? Essex?

Pappy

Oviedo
02-09-2009, 12:40 PM
I'll be happy when we can update this thread with Bryant Mcfadden signed a multi year deal that will keep a Steeler for the next 5 years.

Pappy

:Agree but I don't think we will hear that. I think the decision will come down to resigning Starks OR resigning Bmac. If I am correct Starks is the higher priority because there is no PLan B to not resigning him. With Bmac you have an option in Gay. We have no option on the roster without Max at LT.

My logic for why we won't resign both is that we also have to pay attention to extending Harrision, Heath and Woodley. All of who I believe are down to one year next year and all who deserve big paydays more than Bmac does.

The good news, if there is any good news here, is that, this will be Harrison's final contract, so, get that one done first. A 5 or 6 year deal for Heath and that could be his final contract with the Steelers. The Steelers may have to pay Woodley twice with big paydays at this point (well, that is actually bad news financially).

I guess the unknown with Bmac is what he considers fair and what the Steelers consider fair market value for a corner back in the 34 defense.

How much will the cap increase this year? Does the 20 million we're under the cap include savings from cutting Smith and releasing Foote? There are other cap casualties that may occur as well. Kemo? Essex?

Pappy

The $20M figure often cited is with all our free agents off the books so that means no Marvel, no Starks, no Bmac, etc. When you look at it that way it is not as much as you would think or hope because you will have to add some number of those guys back in or their replacements. That is why the talk of going after someone like Jordan Gross is fantasy.

RuthlessBurgher
02-09-2009, 01:34 PM
I'll be happy when we can update this thread with Bryant Mcfadden signed a multi year deal that will keep a Steeler for the next 5 years.

Pappy

:Agree but I don't think we will hear that. I think the decision will come down to resigning Starks OR resigning Bmac. If I am correct Starks is the higher priority because there is no PLan B to not resigning him. With Bmac you have an option in Gay. We have no option on the roster without Max at LT.

My logic for why we won't resign both is that we also have to pay attention to extending Harrision, Heath and Woodley. All of who I believe are down to one year next year and all who deserve big paydays more than Bmac does.

Harrison and Heath are both entering the last year of their contracts, but Woodley signed a 4 year rookie deal, and this was his second season, so there are still two more years to go on his deal (and even then, he would be a RFA, not a UFA).

One question to anyone with knowledge about how the salary cap works...if we extend Harrison or Heath beyond next season (say for another 5 years, hypothetically), the signing bonus would be pro-rated over those 5 new years (2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014), right? Why would this impact our 2009 cap? He would get that huge signing bonus money in his pocket now, but then would only get the weekly salary that was agreed upon in his last contract througout the 2009 season, since that new contract wouldn't kick in and impact our cap until the new contract actually kicks in after next season, right? I know sometimes teams will re-structure the final year of a previous deal when constructing an extension when they have a gigantic balloon payment in the last year that might destroy the team's cap, but if the final year of Heath and Harrison's previous deals are team-friendly (which they are) wouldn't we just leave their 2009 cap value alone, giving them a big lump signing bonus now on a contract that kicks in a year from now? I could be totally way off on this...that is why I am asking...

Oviedo
02-09-2009, 01:46 PM
I'll be happy when we can update this thread with Bryant Mcfadden signed a multi year deal that will keep a Steeler for the next 5 years.

Pappy

:Agree but I don't think we will hear that. I think the decision will come down to resigning Starks OR resigning Bmac. If I am correct Starks is the higher priority because there is no PLan B to not resigning him. With Bmac you have an option in Gay. We have no option on the roster without Max at LT.

My logic for why we won't resign both is that we also have to pay attention to extending Harrision, Heath and Woodley. All of who I believe are down to one year next year and all who deserve big paydays more than Bmac does.

Harrison and Heath are both entering the last year of their contracts, but Woodley signed a 4 year rookie deal, and this was his second season, so there are still two more years to go on his deal (and even then, he would be a RFA, not a UFA).

One question to anyone with knowledge about how the salary cap works...if we extend Harrison or Heath beyond next season (say for another 5 years, hypothetically), the signing bonus would be pro-rated over those 5 new years (2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014), right? Why would this impact our 2009 cap? He would get that huge signing bonus money in his pocket now, but then would only get the weekly salary that was agreed upon in his last contract througout the 2009 season, since that new contract wouldn't kick in and impact our cap until the new contract actually kicks in after next season, right? I know sometimes teams will re-structure the final year of a previous deal when constructing an extension when they have a gigantic balloon payment in the last year that might destroy the team's cap, but if the final year of Heath and Harrison's previous deals are team-friendly (which they are) wouldn't we just leave their 2009 cap value alone, giving them a big lump signing bonus now on a contract that kicks in a year from now? I could be totally way off on this...that is why I am asking...

I think the bonus starts getting counted in the year it is received which would be in 2009 if they extend with a signing bonus. That would add to the cap for 2009.

The only reason I mention Woodley is because I think you need to extend him now. If he keeps getting better you may not be able to resign him particularly given the uncertainties of a new CBA when he would come due.

SteelerOfDeVille
02-09-2009, 01:49 PM
BMac, Starks, Trai, Harrison will all be priorities to be re-signed, with BMac being the hardest one (because he'll have high demands).

I still think they'll target a lineman in the 1st (either offensive or defensive). They need an OT, an OG and an eventual replacement at C... D-Line is also aging and will need some youth.

My short list of potential draftees includes:
Eben Britton, Alex Mack, Duke Robinson, Tyson Jackson, William Beatty.

Many of these guys are likely to be gone, but, it'll be BPA among o-line, d-line, if possible. If BMac is re-signed, CB falls WAAAY down on the priority list. I could, however, see a LB if one falls (say, Laurinitis).

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
02-10-2009, 03:31 AM
There was also a lot of money tied up at center -- the cap hit from Mahan's bonus (a few million, iirc) plus another couple of million for Hartwig.

Actually, Mahan is still on the books for next season. Because he was released after June 1, only this season's bonus number was counted, which was $800K. He still has 3 years on his 5 year deal, so we are still on the hook for $2.4M of cap money for Mahan in '09. :shock: :?