Re: Re: According to Dirk, we may be trading Glennon.

#469399
dalaca
Participant

A simpler version. Clady for Glennon straight up.

That doesn't work for Denver due to Dead $$$ under the 2016 Contract even after trading Clady this year they will still have 1.2M on the Books in DEAD CAP SPACE in 2016!CLADY is a poison pill for them and ANYONE who TRADES for him in 2016! He's going to be released or restructured which will cost Denver more $$$ longer than 2017 where his Cap against is 600K.

The trade is contingent on both players agreeing to new contracts?

Why would WE restructure CLADY at that point he will be off the books in 2017!  ????DEAD CAP SPACE in  2016 = 1.2MDEAD CAP SPACE in  2017 = 600KWhy would you want to continue to pay him post 2017 if you were the BUCS?....Goes against everything LICHT does in DEAD CAP SPACE / Guaranteed contracts!In my scenario both TEAMS get what they need in the original TRADE!

To ensure he is here long term? Dude is only 29, and has been in the Pro Bowl just about every season. I am too tired to look it up.

So, he is 2 years younger than Dotson and approx. 8.5M more expensive?...... Dot can play! resign him to a 2-3 year deal for a total of 8-9M =  done! And DRAFT his replacement in OT Le'Raven Clark with the Denver #1 pick or Tampa's #2~

I agree that Denver would have issue with dead money / adding players into the mix for a trade. I can't really take Dotson seriously though. In my opinion, he isn't even a viable backup on most teams. I really hope home and EDS are gone at the start of the season.

0
0
No votes yet.
Please wait...