Not quite sure what to make of this. IMO he's too small to be an every-down defensive end, and we already have a plethora of linebackers. Might this be a sign that Ferri is on the bubble? Is Emry's starter job in danger?
http://alsinsideout.com/the-snap/batman-coming-to-als/
As I wrote on February 25,2011-Als still active on FA market" Jones is a good player and the can play DE and LB; I see him rotating with Anwar Stewart and John Bowman; he is also a very good special teams player.
Amongst the 42 dressed players on the 2010 Grey Cup, Diamond Ferri is the most “vulnérable”; he had an ordinary 2010 season and health issues. Jones should replace him on the roster. He also can be a LB.A good player to have.
To me, only the position of K/P is not “solved”,yet,at least based on what we know.
Richard
I know Popp is a big fan of Ferri and his style of play, so while I dont think hes in trouble, he does have his ailment issues. And we don`t know how quickly Banks will recover from his knee injury. So Jones provides depth and competition.
Also if the Als go with a Canadian K/P, there is room for a 3rd designated import. Jones who had 17 special teams tackles last year would be perfect in that role.
There is always room on a football team for hard working guys like Ferri and Jones. This is a good signing.
I hope our new DC is prepared to be creative in his use of Kitwana Jones.
As I recall, he was most effective in Sasktachewan when he was a sort of 'wild card'. . . not a starter at any particular position, but he'd be slotted in at different positions( DE, DT, MLB, OLB) on different plays so the other team never knew where the heck he'd be coming from. When they tried him as a starting DE (Or a starting LB) he wasn't nearly as effective, in my opinion. Once he's nailed to a particular spot, given his size (or lack thereof) the other team has a much easier time stopping him. I do believe he's far more effective coming off the bench into different positions on different plays; the other team can't scheme against that.
He’s great for us. He is a top ST player and he can rotate at both DE and LB ! Great pickup.
Oh, I agree that he's a good player. I'm just not sure where he'll fit in and how we'll make his salary work against the cap.
You take out Proux, Cahoon, Cobourne, Lambert plus the increase to the SMS and you've got 400 to 500k to play with right there. Plus Jim will make a final round of adjustments at the end of camp based on who wins and loses starting positions.
I'm not too worried.
Those roster spots will be taken by other players, so it's not an outright savings of the departed players' salaries. Also, we re-signed a number of players to new contracts and presumably those players have gotten raises (SJ Green, Guzman, etc.). Finally, I don't think Dwight Anderson came cheap.
Plus Jim will make a final round of adjustments at the end of camp based on who wins and loses starting positions. I'm not too worried.I'm not worried either. I trust Jim to do the right thing. I just have concerns. :)
To HfxTC:
You wrote: "You take out Proulx,Cahoon,Cobourne,Lambert +SMS and you've got 400 to 500K to play with right there".These 4 players will all have to be replaced, so you have to take into account the salaries of these "replacements".The net funds /savings available,even with $50,000 increase in SMS, will be much lower/smaller than your numbers.
To me,including the minimum increase of $50,000 in SMS, the net savins should range between $150,000 and $180,000.My calculations are as follows:
SMS.Increase of 50,000
Proulx to be replaced by Crawford. Net savings ranging between 0 and $5,000
Cahoon to be replaced by Lambross or draft choice. Net savings ranging between $60,000 and $70,000
Cobourne to be replaced by Whitaker or Bernard or Marc. Net savings ranging between $30,000 and $35,000
Lambert to be replaced by Matte or Bomben. Net savings between $10,000 and $20,000
Total of net savings/funds available: Ranging between $150,000 and $180,000.
While there will be net funds available,we have to look at the other side of the "ledger"i.e. net additional costs. At this time and based on my calculations,these additional costs range between $220,000 and $295,000; these calculations/estimates are:
Signing of Green. Additional costs ranging between $65,000 and $75,000.
Signing of Anderson. Additional costs ranging between $65,000 and $75,000.
Signing of Brown. additional costs ranging between $25,000 and $35,000
Signing of Guzman. Additional costs ranging between $25,000 and $35,000.
Signing of Cox. Additional costs ranging between $20,000 and $30,000.
Signing of Bekasiak. Additional costs ranging between $10,000 and $20,000.
Signing of Bédard. Additional costs ranging between $10,000 and 15,000.
Signing of Desriveaux. Additional costs ranging betweem 0 and $10,000.
Total ofnet additional costs: Ranging between $220,000 and $295,000.
Based on all these numbers the shortfall rande between $70,000 and $115,000.
To these numbers we have to take account the release of Duval; assuming that he is replaced by David,the net savings should range between $30,000 and $40,000, reducing the shortfall ranging between $40,000 and $75,000.
Finally, I am quite positive that Anthony Calvillo has received a signing bonus of $50,000 or so,in December 2010,thus reducing his based salary accordingly in 2011; it could be the same for Chip Cox and J.P. Bekasiak,although not as high as Anthony. If we only take Anthony's bonus into consideration, we go from a maximum shortfall of $25,000 to $10,000 funds available. If there were bonuses to Cox and Bekasiak,there is probably no shortfall.
It is always difficult to make some calculations,since we don't have the actual salaries/bonuses paid; nevertheless,my numbers are realistic,at least I think so.
Richard
Awesome replies and I was just making mention of the money available for redistribution. You can also add Duval at least 50k saving. Leak another small saving...
I have included Duval.-net savings ranging between $30,000 and $40,000-
Leak. I don't anticipate net savings.
If Jones is /has been signed, definitely additional costs.
Richard
So barring injuries at camp that would send vets on the 9 game , some vets could be either traded ,cut or asked to take a pay cut... and then there is Curt Dublanko and this year's crop of rookies that haven't been added yet.
Unless the SMS is increased by $100,000 or more, we may have to make unpopular decisions; it is one of the reasons why I have written,on a few occasions,that Kerry Watkins may have to be traded. Our 3 highest paid import receivers-Green,Richardson and Watkins- are making roughly between $425,000 and $440,000; this is huge for 3 import receivers; only Calgary are paying accordingly to their 3 top import receivers; this is one of the reasons why they could not pay/afford Anderson.
With regards to Curtis Dublanko, I don't anticipate that it will have a "negative financial impact", since he could replace Walter Spencer,for instance. With regards to the other drafted rookies, I don't expect more than 1 to be included as part of active roster; if so,he will also replace player that were on the roster so,again, no negative impact. I would not be surprised if the Als draft at least 2 junior players.
Richard
With Rodriguez on the roster, Watkins might be the best trade option. I'd be really sad to see Kerry go, but this is a slot-driven league. If we can shed some salary at receiver, it makes sense to target the WR position.
The question is, what kind of return could we expect if we traded Watkins?
As I wrote before, if we trade Watkins, it will be to BC; it is the only team that need a good WR and have something that we need badly; if the trade is made, we would get,amongst other scenarios, Paul McCallum. Other scenarios are changing drafting position with BC,in round 1, or getting their number 1 draft choice. We won't make the trade,unless we can improve our drafting order,at least that is what I think. If we could draft number 3,in round 1, we could then draft a good WR/SB,either Parker,Coehoorn or Iannuzzi.
BC cannot "afford" Watkins and McCallum and the same with us; if we get MCCallum,we have to reduce our SMS by no less than $100,000,hence Watkins. Both teams will benefit. Such a trade would add no less than $35,000 to $40,000; sonce I have already account for net savings with Duval.it is why I have only $30,000 and $40,000. Combined we are talking of net savings ranging from $65,000 to $80,000.
We can then select a K/P in the draft and he would learn,under McCallum, for the next year or 2.
We can afford to trade Watkins,since import receivers is our number 1 "force".
Richard
Richard
While I respect your ideas. We have really different opinions of McCallum. a 41 year old kicker that makes six figures plus and who's chocked in the few big games he's played would not be on my radar. I think trading Watkins after losing Cahoon and Cobourne would be suicide, way too much change even for AC. With Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg and Hamilton all thin or squarely lacking at the Oline position I dont think we need to trade up to get a receiver unless hte Als want a receiver and one of the two kickers. I'm not sure the kickers will be available at 16, so you might be on to something.
I have to agree here: losing Watkins after all the other losses to our offensive squad would be a catastrophe.
Not only will the loss of Cahoon be felt (even when his receiving stats were down the respect defences around the league showed Cahoon opened up a lot of room for other receivers) but losing Andrew Hawkins....who filled in so well when Watkins was down with the separated shoulder leaves the Alouettes rather weak in the "deep-threat" department.
That's assuming Calvillo will have the time to go deep without Cobourne watching his back. But if defences aren't stretched deep on occasion...that short pass is going to get pretty hard to complete. Not sure if anyone's mentioned whether we'll ever again see the like of little AC catching passes out of the backfield...but the Alouettes offence simply cannot afford the loss of another element of their once powerful offensive machine.
I say again: it would be a disaster to lose Watkins at this time.
I'm on the fence here. I do agree that losing Cobourne, Cahoon, and Watkins in the same year would present a formidable challenge to our attack. That said, if there is any part of our team that could potentially survive such a turnover in personnel, it would be our offense. After all, a year ago, what did we know about S.J. Green? We also have Rodriguez at WR. It seems like Popp and Trestman are really going after the bigger receiver bodies to create size mismatches all over the field. I highly doubt that Popp would trade Watkins this season, but in the unlikely event that he does, I have faith that our offense will recover.
Hooray for faith-based blogging!