Why the Cards cannot/should not pay Dansby

[kerouac9]

Well Mike Sando doesnt believe Dansby is skilled enough at it apparently. I know I don't.

"The Cardinals should find a linebacker to run with those tight ends so they can let Wilson do what he does best: affect games at the line of scrimmage."

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/13374/chat-wrap-adrian-wilson-and-more

He was more likely talking about Gerald Hayes, Bertrand Berry, Chike Okeafor, and Clark Haggans. Neither of whom can cover me coming out of the backfield or split out.

It certainly wasn't Karlos Dansby walking off the field on third-and-long when the nickel unit came in.

 

[BigDavis75]

Without Dansby Wilson would've been at the LOS a hell of a lot less the past two years. Unless you think we'd have been making the exact same calls with Togafau or Highsmith out there, I guess.

I agree, also much of the TEs success against us can be attributed to how bad Hayes is in coverage (he might be the worst coverage ILB in the league) and how bad our nickel and dime guys have been.

Dansby is a bright spot on this defense and I feel K9 and aj did a pretty good job of addressing the posts in favor of letting Dansby walk BUT: people continually talk about the cap and cap implications. I would be willing to bet that most likely none of these same posters know where we are with the cap and what effects a new contract for Dansby would have on these caps, guessing at the numbers is mostly conjecture. Having paid Dansby right around 9 or 10 ten for the last two years hasn't killed our cap or forced us out of contention so why would a new deal do that to us in future years?

We have had the favor of several good, young defensive players on their rookie deals (CC and DRC) and a few on very favorable on underpaying contracts (Dock) but you have to pay for good athletic defenders and Dansby is a guy that we are going to need to pay for. He is making a smart move, he is in an ideal situation for from a market standpoint and the guy wants to get paid. I f we don't do it, shame on us he will just go to someone else and make them a better team.

Also, on the topic of replacements in FA, there aren't many that are good and many of the good ones would be RFAs because of the rules in the uncapped rules. So most likely to get a FA replacement, who would be worse from inception than Dansby due to unfamiliarity with D here and from a overall talent standpoint, we would get into a bidding war and most likely have to give up draft picks. So basically we would probably lose more from a production standpoint and give up nearly as much financially for a worse player.

 

[kerouac9]

I'm with you, BD75. People don't understand that even if the Cards give Dansby a big contract, he's going to be off the books by the time that players like Cody Brown and DRC develop into a big second contract.

The Colts can afford to pay big deals to defensive players like Freeney, Mathis, and Sanders. The Cards, especially now that Okeafor and Berry are off the books, have very little invested on that side of the ball. Also, the contracts of Travis LaBoy and Rod Hood are off the books.

 

[Duckjake]

One interception, one sack, and one forced fumble in 2009. 109 tackles.

Man, K9, I know you know your stuff, but you're digging in your heels for the wrong guy here.

Dansby's production is not irreplaceable.

How about 1 tipped pass that resulted in an INT that led to 7 points. One forced fumble that led to 7 points and a 17 yd fumble return for the game winner in just one afternoon. While guys like Patrick Willis were sitting home watching him on TV.

In addition you didn't see him whining after the loss to the Saints like some other 3-4 WILB did after losing to Minny.

And this was Montez worst season as a Cardinal. He just didn't look as quick or make solid tackles like he did in the past and was still one of our top defensive players.

The money may not be right to keep him but there is no denying that Dansby is a player and he will be hard to replace.

 

[Buckybird]

The money may not be right to keep him but there is no denying that Dansby is a player and he will be hard to replace.

people will not see his value to the defense until we have to replace him next year with a rookie or a $5 million castoff from another team. I hope the big man upstairs doesn't allow his replacement to be Higsmith, Beisel or Walker...scary!!!

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Karlos Dansby has lead the team in tackles the last two seasons. For the past two seasons, he's been the most consistent player on the defense not named "Darnell Dockett." If you repeat that he's inconsistent or he doesn't play through injury over and over, that doesn't make it so. Where does this "coming out of shape" business come from? He hasn't complained about being franchised the last two seasons, and he hasn't held out from any of the offseason activities.

#1 it's not like he is a tackling machine, or even a reliable tackler in the mold of other WILB's throughout the league. For a guy who is having a good majority of playes funneled into him he has a suprising lack of "big plays" and even 109 tackles isn't all that impressive compared to numbers put up around the league. But take all that away for a second.

Many have you inferred that Dansby is excelling in this defense but it's hard to see with the "untrained" eye. I laugh at that. If I am paying a LB (again a LB not a OL or DT) 25 million guaranteed, then my girlfriend better be able to watch a game and say "Damn - that guy is all over the field" like a Beason, Vilma,Willis etc.

And no, I am not repeating facts to make them so. It is well documented that prior to 2007 Karlos, didn't play hurt, was out of shape coming into camp, and overall had a bad attitude. I commend him for being an actual leader these past three years but it's not insane to think that after he gets paid, he will revert back to that form. Some people just need to have their feet to the fire. Seems like Karlos is one of them. Again these are things that must be taken into consideration when giving 25 million +.

Karlos Dansby is a professional. He'll play wherever he'll get paid the most to do so. Because he's one of the top three best players on this defense, and one of the top two most consistent, I'd prefer to keep him around. Even if that means letting Rolle leave instead.

Would you rather invest that $20 million in Dansby, who is on the field all three downs and is unquestionably the best player in his unit, or on Rolle, a guy who has been injury-prone most of his career, and no better than the third best player on his unit?

First off I think 20 million is way undervaluing what he expects from the Cardinals or what he will end up getting.

Secondly if Karlos is so mature all of a sudden, then why doesn't he take less then he might on the open market to play with a team he supposedly loves? On a defense he knows and with players he cares about?

Again I am not opposed to keeping Birdman at 15 million or even 17 guaranteed. That makes sense to me and keeping the continuity is worth that price. Even if he has motivation issues and even if he isn't the playmaker he thinks he is.

But at 23-25 million?? LOL. No Thanks. If we didn't draft very well these last three years I would be more inclined to keep anybody/everybody who showed a pulse and pay what it takes.

But the beauty of what Wiz has cultivated these last three years is that we can count on them to draft well and cultivate players. In Wiz I trust and I would rather give a Wiz a couple first day picks the next couple years to replace Karlos then financially strangle ourselves for 4 or 5 years and have to lose a guy like DRC, Campbell, Dockett, or (gulp) Fitz in the next couple years.

And cap or no cap the Bidwills aren't Daniel Snyder. They need to spend their money wisely. And 25 Mill on Karlos just ain't that wise IMO.

 

[Shane]

#1 it's not like he is a tackling machine, or even a reliable tackler in the mold of other WILB's throughout the league. For a guy who is having a good majority of playes funneled into him he has a suprising lack of "big plays" and even 109 tackles isn't all that impressive compared to numbers put up around the league. But take all that away for a second.

Many have you inferred that Dansby is excelling in this defense but it's hard to see with the "untrained" eye. I laugh at that. If I am paying a LB (again a LB not a OL or DT) 25 million guaranteed, then my girlfriend better be able to watch a game and say "Damn - that guy is all over the field" like a Beason, Vilma,Willis etc.

And no, I am not repeating facts to make them so. It is well documented that prior to 2007 Karlos, didn't play hurt, was out of shape coming into camp, and overall had a bad attitude. I commend him for being an actual leader these past three years but it's not insane to think that after he gets paid, he will revert back to that form. Some people just need to have their feet to the fire. Seems like Karlos is one of them. Again these are things that must be taken into consideration when giving 25 million +.





First off I think 20 million is way undervaluing what he expects from the Cardinals or what he will end up getting.

Secondly if Karlos is so mature all of a sudden, then why doesn't he take less then he might on the open market to play with a team he supposedly loves? On a defense he knows and with players he cares about?

Again I am not opposed to keeping Birdman at 15 million or even 17 guaranteed. That makes sense to me and keeping the continuity is worth that price. Even if he has motivation issues and even if he isn't the playmaker he thinks he is.

But at 23-25 million?? LOL. No Thanks. If we didn't draft very well these last three years I would be more inclined to keep anybody/everybody who showed a pulse and pay what it takes.

But the beauty of what Wiz has cultivated these last three years is that we can count on them to draft well and cultivate players. In Wiz I trust and I would rather give a Wiz a couple first day picks the next couple years to replace Karlos then financially strangle ourselves for 4 or 5 years and have to lose a guy like DRC, Campbell, Dockett, or (gulp) Fitz in the next couple years.

And cap or no cap the Bidwills aren't Daniel Snyder. They need to spend their money wisely. And 25 Mill on Karlos just ain't that wise IMO.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

#1 it's not like he is a tackling machine, or even a reliable tackler in the mold of other WILB's throughout the league. For a guy who is having a good majority of playes funneled into him he has a suprising lack of "big plays" and even 109 tackles isn't all that impressive compared to numbers put up around the league. But take all that away for a second.

Many have you inferred that Dansby is excelling in this defense but it's hard to see with the "untrained" eye. I laugh at that. If I am paying a LB (again a LB not a OL or DT) 25 million guaranteed, then my girlfriend better be able to watch a game and say "Damn - that guy is all over the field" like a Beason, Vilma,Willis etc.

And no, I am not repeating facts to make them so. It is well documented that prior to 2007 Karlos, didn't play hurt, was out of shape coming into camp, and overall had a bad attitude. I commend him for being an actual leader these past three years but it's not insane to think that after he gets paid, he will revert back to that form. Some people just need to have their feet to the fire. Seems like Karlos is one of them. Again these are things that must be taken into consideration when giving 25 million +.





First off I think 20 million is way undervaluing what he expects from the Cardinals or what he will end up getting.

Secondly if Karlos is so mature all of a sudden, then why doesn't he take less then he might on the open market to play with a team he supposedly loves? On a defense he knows and with players he cares about?

Again I am not opposed to keeping Birdman at 15 million or even 17 guaranteed. That makes sense to me and keeping the continuity is worth that price. Even if he has motivation issues and even if he isn't the playmaker he thinks he is.

But at 23-25 million?? LOL. No Thanks. If we didn't draft very well these last three years I would be more inclined to keep anybody/everybody who showed a pulse and pay what it takes.

But the beauty of what Wiz has cultivated these last three years is that we can count on them to draft well and cultivate players. In Wiz I trust and I would rather give a Wiz a couple first day picks the next couple years to replace Karlos then financially strangle ourselves for 4 or 5 years and have to lose a guy like DRC, Campbell, Dockett, or (gulp) Fitz in the next couple years.

And cap or no cap the Bidwills aren't Daniel Snyder. They need to spend their money wisely. And 25 Mill on Karlos just ain't that wise IMO.

Who have they drafted that can fill Dansby's spot? And you say 15-17 mill is OK but 20 -23 mill is outlandish. You do realize that spread out over the likley 5 year contract it's about 1 miil per year , or just a little more than Anthony Becht made this year. I think i'd spend the money wisely, on Dansby.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Who have they drafted that can fill Dansby's spot? And you say 15-17 mill is OK but 20 -23 mill is outlandish. You do realize that spread out over the likley 5 year contract it's about 1 miil per year , or just a little more than Anthony Becht made this year. I think i'd spend the money wisely, on Dansby.

Again - do you want to lock up all the available money to spend on a guy who was the "leader" on the defense that gave up in a game winning drive in the Super Bowl and 90 points in the last two playoff games?

I think the mantra among the players is we need more depth. We have stars in Wilson, Dockett, and DRC. Now we need good to really good players across the rest of the defense and even into the second string. Signing Karlos to a signing bonus of 10 million plus is not going to allow us to do that, let alone address Dockett who if he gets to next year with no deal, you can kiss good bye.

And Dockett is 150,000 times more important then Dansby. The Bidwills have shown they are just not going to give that much upfront money in one offseason.

I would rather sign 3 good LB's to form a rotation inside and out, draft a stud in rounds 1 or 2 and then spend some money to get a third corner and reup Dockett and restructure Rolle. To me thats fixing alot of the problems that the defense that gave up all those playoff points starts.

What are we going to give up 100 points next time in that situation WITHOUT Karlos? Are we really losing all that much if Dansby walks? Do you guys really believe his skill set is irreplacable? If you pay Karlos your keeping a mediocre defense status quo and maybe even getting worse if Rolle gets cut and our already little depth leaves. You give Karlos 25 million per and you can guaran-damn-tee the defense isn't getting upgraded much from there. You okay with that?

We already hit rock bottom two weeks ago. The only direction from here is up and thats happening with or without Karlos IMO.

FYI this is all moot. Dansby and the Cardinals are both resigned to parting ways if you read between the lines. I'll bet anyone "all in" on the ASFN money I have in my bank account that hes playing else where next season, assuming the franchise tag isn't used (which would be crazy stupid IMO)

So lets stop arguing. Lets start talking about what we are going to do what we do WHEN he walks. Not IF.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Who have they drafted that can fill Dansby's spot?

But the beauty of what Wiz has cultivated these last three years is that we can count on them to draft well and cultivate players. In Wiz I trust and I would rather give a Wiz a couple first day picks the next couple years to replace Karlos then financially strangle ourselves for 4 or 5 years and have to lose a guy like DRC, Campbell, Dockett, or (gulp) Fitz in the next couple years.

FYI

 

[splitsecond]

Again - do you want to lock up all the available money to spend on a guy who was the "leader" on the defense that gave up in a game winning drive in the Super Bowl and 90 points in the last two playoff games?

I think the mantra among the players is we need more depth. We have stars in Wilson, Dockett, and DRC. Now we need good to really good players across the rest of the defense and even into the second string. Signing Karlos to a signing bonus of 10 million plus is not going to allow us to do that, let alone address Dockett who if he gets to next year with no deal, you can kiss good bye.

And Dockett is 150,000 times more important then Dansby. The Bidwills have shown they are just not going to give that much upfront money in one offseason.

I would rather sign 3 good LB's to form a rotation inside and out, draft a stud in rounds 1 or 2 and then spend some money to get a third corner and reup Dockett and restructure Rolle. To me thats fixing alot of the problems that the defense that gave up all those playoff points starts.

What are we going to give up 100 points next time in that situation WITHOUT Karlos? Are we really losing all that much if Dansby walks? Do you guys really believe his skill set is irreplacable? If you pay Karlos your keeping a mediocre defense status quo and maybe even getting worse if Rolle gets cut and our already little depth leaves. You give Karlos 25 million per and you can guaran-damn-tee the defense isn't getting upgraded much from there. You okay with that?

We already hit rock bottom two weeks ago. The only direction from here is up and thats happening with or without Karlos IMO.

FYI this is all moot. Dansby and the Cardinals are both resigned to parting ways if you read between the lines. I'll bet anyone "all in" on the ASFN money I have in my bank account that hes playing else where next season, assuming the franchise tag isn't used (which would be crazy stupid IMO)

So lets stop arguing. Lets start talking about what we are going to do what we do WHEN he walks. Not IF.

Spot on.

 

[Duckjake]

Many have you inferred that Dansby is excelling in this defense but it's hard to see with the "untrained" eye. I laugh at that. If I am paying a LB (again a LB not a OL or DT) 25 million guaranteed, then my girlfriend better be able to watch a game and say "Damn - that guy is all over the field" like a Beason, Vilma,Willis etc.

He is all over the field. The only difference is he doesn't blow people up like Wilson used to so he doesn't get the props. That's my one gripe with Montez, he's a drag 'em down tackler.

And it is not well documented that Dansby wouldn't play hurt or was out of shape coming into camp or had a bad attitude from 2004 to 2007. That was just a quote from Denny Green who we all now know couldn't coach his way out of a wet paper bag while he was in the AZ and some rumors from his college days.

Finally even though the defense gave up almost a 100 points in the two games there never would have been a game two if it hadn't been for Dansby and his three game changing plays vs Green Bay.

But like you say its likely all over on this front and hopefully the Cards can get somebody who can play that position by the end of April.

 

[kerouac9]

Again I am not opposed to keeping Birdman at 15 million or even 17 guaranteed. That makes sense to me and keeping the continuity is worth that price. Even if he has motivation issues and even if he isn't the playmaker he thinks he is.

But at 23-25 million?? LOL. No Thanks. If we didn't draft very well these last three years I would be more inclined to keep anybody/everybody who showed a pulse and pay what it takes.

So basically you're quibbling about $1 million per year on a five-year contract. That's less than what Dansby's salary was upgraded by the last two seasons.

The problem with investing heavily in linebackers is doing what the Bears and Seahawks have done in the past 5 years. The Seahawks were paying Top 10 money to Tatupu, LeRoy Hill, and now Aaron Curry. Before they drafted Curry they were paying top dollar to Julian Peterson. You can't have productions commensurate to that money unless there's other players around them to make the three big-money LBs look good.

But the Cards CAN afford to pay ONE PLAYER on their defense big money while they're shelling out to Kurt and Fitz on the other side of the ball. No one was complaining this season when we paid over $9 million to Dansby this year. The Cards will likely SAVE money over the past two seasons of the lock him up for the long term.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Again - do you want to lock up all the available money to spend on a guy who was the "leader" on the defense that gave up in a game winning drive in the Super Bowl and 90 points in the last two playoff games?

I think the mantra among the players is we need more depth. We have stars in Wilson, Dockett, and DRC. Now we need good to really good players across the rest of the defense and even into the second string. Signing Karlos to a signing bonus of 10 million plus is not going to allow us to do that, let alone address Dockett who if he gets to next year with no deal, you can kiss good bye.

And Dockett is 150,000 times more important then Dansby. The Bidwills have shown they are just not going to give that much upfront money in one offseason.

I would rather sign 3 good LB's to form a rotation inside and out, draft a stud in rounds 1 or 2 and then spend some money to get a third corner and reup Dockett and restructure Rolle. To me thats fixing alot of the problems that the defense that gave up all those playoff points starts.

What are we going to give up 100 points next time in that situation WITHOUT Karlos? Are we really losing all that much if Dansby walks? Do you guys really believe his skill set is irreplacable? If you pay Karlos your keeping a mediocre defense status quo and maybe even getting worse if Rolle gets cut and our already little depth leaves. You give Karlos 25 million per and you can guaran-damn-tee the defense isn't getting upgraded much from there. You okay with that?

We already hit rock bottom two weeks ago. The only direction from here is up and thats happening with or without Karlos IMO.

FYI this is all moot. Dansby and the Cardinals are both resigned to parting ways if you read between the lines. I'll bet anyone "all in" on the ASFN money I have in my bank account that hes playing else where next season, assuming the franchise tag isn't used (which would be crazy stupid IMO)

So lets stop arguing. Lets start talking about what we are going to do what we do WHEN he walks. Not IF.

i agree that i think he'll be gone. I just think it's a bad move by the Cards bceause it's likley they won't use that money to upgrade the defense. they may re-do DD but that's not a need since he's under contract for the next few years. I've said that i'd be ok with Dansby leaving if the Cards brought in a Vince Wilfork but that's not going to happen. Or i guess i would be amazed if it did. Instead they'll probably try and bring guys like Ryan Pickett and Fabian Washington in. To me that's downgrading the defense. You could keep Dansby and still bring in depth guys like that. Plus you're totally discounting the fact that we have zero proven outside LB's on the roster. I know alot of people are counting on Brown and Davis.I'm skeptical,but i hope they are right. I think their development can only be helped by having a guy like Dansby playing next to them instead of a rookie or Monty Beisel.

 

[Duckjake]

i agree that i think he'll be gone. I just think it's a bad move by the Cards bceause it's likley they won't use that money to upgrade the defense. they may re-do DD but that's not a need since he's under contract for the next few years. I've said that i'd be ok with Dansby leaving if the Cards brought in a Vince Wilfork but that's not going to happen. Or i guess i would be amazed if it did. Instead they'll probably try and bring guys like Ryan Pickett and Fabian Washington in. To me that's downgrading the defense. You could keep Dansby and still bring in depth guys like that. Plus you're totally discounting the fact that we have zero proven outside LB's on the roster. I know alot of people are counting on Brown and Davis.I'm skeptical,but i hope they are right. I think their development can only be helped by having a guy like Dansby playing next to them instead of a rookie or Monty Beisel.

Since the Steelers don't have any Free Agent inside linebackers the replacement for Dansby will have to come through the draft.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

So basically you're quibbling about $1 million per year on a five-year contract. That's less than what Dansby's salary was upgraded by the last two seasons.

You and Cbus have both said this but I was just citing the guaranteed money. I am not cap maven but I am assuming if Dansby is on the roster, that we get hit with the entire salary for that year, no?

So a 45 million dollar deal with 25 guaranteed, is 45 million in cap space if Karlos is on the roster for all those years IIRC. Your not assuming Karlos would get cut before the deal ends are you?

(I could horribly wrong about what I just wrote so lets step aside to allow Joe to comment)

 

[Zona_T6]

I think it's important to keep or resign Dansby, but I think its more important to restructure Docketts and Rolles contracts. Dockett is the key of their d line. Without Rolle deep, the cards will continue to have the same problem they did in the Saints game. Rolle is one of their best guys at defending the deep attack. I think it's much more important to redo those two contracts than Dansby's alone. If there was a way to do all three, that would be ideal, but it's unlikely.

 

[Dayman]

Remember when a lot of people thought Calvin Pace would be easy to replace? To fill the void, we spent over 10 million for one year of service from Travis Laboy, used a second round pick on a guy we still don't know anything about and were forced to keep Okeafor around for over 5 million. Yet a pass rushing OLB is arguably our number one need going into the draft.

I understand the argument that Dansby plays an easier position to fill, but the reasoning to let him go is the same, and I fear the results will be, as well. Finding a rookie after pick 25 who can step in and lead the LBs is far from a sure thing, and the top eight free agent restrictions all but eliminates the chance of signing an established player to take his place. With Hayes' health declining this year, our LB position has a strong possibility of being considerably worse next year if Dansby leaves. I just don't think this defense can take that chance.