Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from murghkhor. Show murghkhor's posts

    Should Pats release Nick Kaczur



    Ten logical cap casualties for 2010

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By Bill Barnwell
    Football Outsiders

    While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in 2011, they already have one advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports have: nonguaranteed contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck paying an underperforming player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations can choose to cut a player, and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to him. 


    Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the cash from a signing bonus immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to spread the cap hit from a signing bonus across the length of a contract. 


    For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal results in a cap hit of $2 million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a player's base salary, incentives and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the bonus money assigned to the cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's cap, forcing the team to devote a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no longer on the roster. That's commonly known as "dead money."


    This year, though, things are different. Because this is an uncapped year, teams can release players with onerous base salaries and large signing bonuses without having to worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That presents teams with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for good. Assuming there will be a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are plenty of examples of bad contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified 10 below, listed alphabetically.



    Bernard Berrian, WR, Minnesota Vikings
    When the Vikings signed Berrian away from the Chicago Bears in 2008, the hope was he would emerge as the team's No. 1 receiver while keeping safeties honest, opening holes for Adrian Peterson in the process. He hasn't produced like a No. 1 since then, though, and with the emergence of Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin this past season, Berrian might not even start in 2010. Most of Berrian's bonuses have been paid already, but here's a chance for the team to save some genuine money: He's due $3.7 million this year, and in 2012, that rises to $6.9 million. That's too much for a slot wideout.


    Reggie Brown, WR, Philadelphia Eagles
    While the Eagles normally see healthy returns when they sign young contributors to long-term deals, Brown's 2006 extension has proved to be an exception. No better than the team's fourth wideout at this point, Brown has more than $3 million in bonus money left on the team's cap to go along with nearly $11 million in base salary. While Philadelphia would love to get a draft pick for him, he's likely to be released. (Note: Shortly after this article was written, Brown was sent to the Buccaneers for an undisclosed draft pick. The deal makes sense for both teams; the Eagles get Brown's salary off their roster, and the Buccaneers get a deep threat to play alongside their collection of tall, slow guys.)


    Marc Bulger, QB, St. Louis Rams 
    Bulger's 2007 contract extension has proved to be a disaster; since then, he's missed 12 games, and when he's been healthy enough to play, the Rams have gone 5-31, with Bulger throwing more interceptions than touchdowns. Whether or not the team chooses to draft Sam Bradford in April, it's pretty clear Bulger is not going to be a part of the next successful Rams team, making him a good candidate for salary relief. Cutting him now would keep up to $6 million off future Rams' caps and save $37.5 million in yet-unpaid salary. St. Louis might want Bulger to tutor Bradford, but that's one expensive teacher.


    Nate Clements, CB, San Francisco 49ers
    While the 49ers' defense took a huge step forward this past season, it wasn't because of their most expensive player. Clements became the highest-paid defensive player in history when he signed an $80 million contract with San Francisco in 2007, but he lost his job last year before suffering a season-ending shoulder injury. The team still has $8.5 million of Clements' initial $22 million signing bonus left on its cap and owes him a $6 million base salary that rises steadily to nearly $11 million in 2013. The team has suggested Clements will return, but that seems short sighted.


    Vernon Gholston, LB, New York Jets
    The former sixth overall pick is solely a special teams player in New York, having shown virtually nothing during his first two seasons as a pro. He's young -- so there's still some promise -- but it would be unprecedented for a player who started so poorly to turn into a star. With a good chunk of a $21 million signing bonus left on the Jets' cap in future seasons and little interest league-wide, Gang Green are better off cutting their losses.


    T.J. Houshmandzadeh, WR, Seattle Seahawks
    Houshmandzadeh chose Seattle over Minnesota; had he chosen the Vikings instead, Sidney Rice would have been consigned to the fourth wideout slot and likely never had his breakout year. Sometimes, it's the moves you don't make that work out. Seattle ended up with the lesser of the two players. Houshmandzadeh turns 33 next season and can't get the separation he needs to get downfield, making him a very expensive possession receiver with no upside. His $7 million base salary for this season is guaranteed, but the team can save about $1.5 million on its cap and nearly $26 million in base salary from 2011 through 2013 if it releases him. 

    Nick Kaczur, T, New England Patriots
    Kaczur consistently has been the weak link of a once-formidable Patriots offensive line, and while the team signed him to a contract extension in the summer of 2009, the emergence of Sebastian Vollmer should force him out of New England. The team could trim $3 million in bonus money by releasing him, while avoiding his $2.7 million base salary for this year.



    Tommy Kelly, DT, Oakland Raiders
    When the Raiders gave Kelly a $50.5 million contract extension in 2008, it seemed incomprehensible; Oakland had one of the worst run defenses in the league, with Kelly and Warren Sapp manning the middle. Sapp retired, and Kelly got a huge contract in the hopes that he'd become, well, the next Warren Sapp. In that sense, he has been; the Raiders' rush defense is still awful, and Kelly doesn't offer enough as a pass-rusher to justify his contract. The Raiders still have a good chunk of Kelly's $18.2 million in signing bonuses (he received a second signing bonus in 2009) hanging over their future cap space, and Kelly isn't worth the $4.5 million he'll get this year as base salary. That goes up to $7 million by 2014; it shouldn't.


    Bob Sanders, S, Indianapolis Colts
    No one doubts Sanders' incredible talent, but since he signed a $37.75 million contract extension in December 2007, he has played in four of a possible 32 regular-season games. More than $7.3 million in bonuses remain on the Colts' cap over the next three years; the team is better off cutting Sanders and re-signing him to a new, cap-friendly deal. 


    Roy Williams, WR, Dallas Cowboys
    Williams' tenure in Dallas has been an unmitigated disaster, with the Cowboys giving up far too much in terms of draft picks and cash to acquire and retain the former Texas star. At this point, he's the team's third receiver (behind Miles Austin and Jason Witten), and there's no reason to believe he's going to get much better. Williams is owed a guaranteed $9.5 million bonus this season, but if the Cowboys cut him, that bonus won't be applied to the cap over future seasons. They'll also save nearly $3.5 million in salary this year, a figure that will go up to nearly $33 million by the time his deal ends in 2014. How much do you think denial is worth to Jerry Jones? 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from krismk. Show krismk's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    It's hard to believe that Kaczur would be on this list.  There are many more veteran bandits in the NFL, and a burlap bag full of rookie contract winners to feed the dogfish and gulls.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    How does Jamarcus Russell not make this list? He's utterly hopeless and makes a TON of money. They would be better of signing Delhomme than keeping this sack of meat.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    Geez who the heck wrote that article.

    Kaczur is the 15th ranked Right Tackle in the NFL according to pro football focus and the 31st out of ALL tackles Right or Left.

    They just extended him and this might be Matt Lights last year. It's the final year of his contract.

    I would not think Kaczur is going anywhere.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    I would pay money for Kaczur to NOT be on the pats next year. Maritime, you asked who is better on their roster? Everyone! Levoir for one, and any veteran FA for another. Kaczur is just awful. Watch the Carolina game (where they did the tackle rotation bc BB loves his veterans so he wanted to give NC a chance to compete) and it's very noticeable when Kaczur is in because Brady is running for his life (unless NC gets tight end help). 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    not unless they got someone to replace him....ask the same question after free agency and the draft....
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rodimus77. Show Rodimus77's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    That would be an absolute YES!!!!!! Get rid of this clown, along with his turn style, Door Matt of a twin brother also. Put Levoir at RT with Vollmer at LT. Problem solved! 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from btownteamsrking. Show btownteamsrking's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    Ive been wishing they would drop this useless POS since last year.  he is responsible forBrady's messed up ribs.  he is a damn turnstyle.  100% garbage. anyone notice the offense was at its best when he didnt play? 

    id pay some of my own cash for the Patriots to drop this garbage player.  

    he can take his drugs with him...
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    light and kaczur will most likely start the season, but seabass and levoir are the future tackles. kaczur will probably end up as a depth player. as for light, i think we should look into trading him now while he may still have some value. there are a lot of teams desperate for o-line help and the free agent pool was a mess. make we could trick a team like washington, detroit, or seattle into thinking that he can still play at a high level (which i doubt is actually the case).
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from tagandtrade. Show tagandtrade's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    they built the contract right

    all the money hits this year and the money descends as his contract expires.

    I think they did this so they could tender mankins and trade him in the event they get a 1st and 3rd.

    In the event that occured Kaczur would be the number one backup for light and vollmer.

    Light will move to the right Vollmer and Mankins will make for the best left side in football and perhaps the meaniest.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronk1. Show ronk1's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    all the money does not hit this year. salary is non guaranteed, so he can be released and Pats out from under his contract abligation this year which is close to 3 mil
    seems like a training camp decision if Kaczur does not start salary is too high.
    always thought Kaczur was a better run blocker than pass blocker...maybe if Pats play run n grind on offense Kaczur is better option than Light?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    His value increases as the #6 lineman. With injuries always a concerned, the uncapped year...he carries a very reasonable number. Maybe losing his starting job relights the fire, maybe not, but why dump him now? It makes very little sense, I don't think he's as bad as some think. Hasn't been great, but I guarantee a lot of teams would be comfortable giving him a starting job in the NFL.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from siestafiesta. Show siestafiesta's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    LeVoir's the future RT???

    Come on.  He's a journeyman they picked up off the scrap heap for depth.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from angel3781. Show angel3781's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    In Response to Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur:
    Geez who the heck wrote that article. Kaczur is the 15th ranked Right Tackle in the NFL according to pro football focus and the 31st out of ALL tackles Right or Left. They just extended him and this might be Matt Lights last year. It's the final year of his contract. I would not think Kaczur is going anywhere.
    Posted by Low-FB-IQ


    That was funny, I needed a good laugh!  I actually did check out Pro Football Focus seeing how you referenced it, just so that I could see first hand how they'd rank him.  A couple things though:

    1.)  Pro Football Focus is just one source of info, and I highly doubt that anyone would argue that they're the "Definitive Source".  Therefore, I'll read their opinions but take them with a grain of salt.

    2.)  That website that you mentioned ranks players according to # of sacks, QB hits given up, and hurries.  When you go over the numbers, there isn't a whole lot of separation between the 15th & 32nd ranked OT's as they pretty much have identical stats.  But you do see a clear difference in the stats among the top 5-10 OT's, therefore stating that Kaczur is the 15th ranked OT on this list is not impressive by any stretch of the imagination.

    3.)  There is no other analysis given (such as a breif scouting report for example) other than those stats mentioned above.  Therefore how can you truly evaluate/compare talent between players with nearly identical stats with a total lack of information?

    4.)  Their rankings are done on a seasonal basis.  Kaczur was ranked 15th for 2009.  However, if you look over previous seasons, guess what.....?  Furthermore, while the site does give mention to number of games played, and numbers of snaps etc...  The rankings are still weighted based on sacks allowed, QB hits, and hurries irregardless of number of games played which totally screws up the entire rankings in my opinion.  You cant just say player A is better because he allowed 8 sacks (for exammple) over player B who allowed 12, when player A may have played in only 11 games all season compared to player B who played all 16.  How is that legit?

    Regardless, Kaczur is definately gone soon because he is the weak link on this line.  As soon as Vollmer started games at LT in Light's abscense, it was clear that he was a better LT than Light.  However, once Light came back, Vollmer was utilized as a swing tackle (playing both LT & RT) since Light could only play LT.  If you noticed from the games, when Light was playing LT, Vollmer was always the RT.  However, Kaczur wasn't necessarily always the RT when Vollmer was over at LT.  They played Levoir quite a bit.  Your're right that Light is playing his final season here, and that Vollmer should become the de facto LT.  However, there's no reason not to think that at some point in either this draft or the next that Kaczur won't find himself replaced.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Pancakespwn. Show Pancakespwn's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    Lol Kaczur actually played really well this year. Hes not going anywhere if someone should be on that list its Matt Light.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mungomunro. Show Mungomunro's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

     Kaczur,Light and Vollmer sounds like pretty good to me.

     We run the spread offense allot and our linemen are out on an island for all to see if they get beat.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from btownteamsrking. Show btownteamsrking's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    In Response to Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur:
     Kaczur,Light and Vollmer sounds like pretty good to me.  We run the spread offense allot and our linemen are out on an island for all to see if they get beat.
    Posted by Mungomunro


    do u know why our tight ends dont catch the football?  Because they DONT RUN PASS PATERNS.  they are too busy helping nick kaczur's sorry pathetic blocking. 

    We should trade light and kaczur and Volmer who outplayed both by a distance should be the left tackle.  THen we draft someone at #22 to take kaczualty's spot. 

    nc is garbage.   again, he can take his drugs with him. we dont need nor want them.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from unclealfie. Show unclealfie's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    In Response to Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur:
    LeVoir's the future RT??? Come on.  He's a journeyman they picked up off the scrap heap for depth.
    Posted by siestafiesta


    Good call. I was wondering if anyone was going to point that out. 

    Just goes to show how so many on this board just like to run their mouths and have absolutely no football knowledge.

    LeVoir was claimed off waivers from the Rams two years ago. The Rams. And this clown wants to let Light go, and make LeVoir a starter.

    Right.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from chrisakawoody. Show chrisakawoody's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    They should not release him.  They should put him at the stadium entrance on game day.  After all, his nickname in the press after the last Pats/Colts game was "Turnstile".
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur

    In Response to Re: Should Pats release Nick Kaczur:
    If you can’t find an offensive lineman in this draft, you might never do it. – Gil Brandt
    Posted by gridlocked

    The o-line slipped a bit last year. Brady was never comfortable in the pocket. The Pats have many needs but none more than offensive line.
     

Share