Trade Hartline and a 4th for A. Johnson
- Thread starter BenchFiedler
- Start date
So you wouldn't mind having 25MIL+ locked into 2 WRs one of which is 33 years old and the other is an over paid speed guy...? You can laugh at me all you want but that's poor cap management, and I didn't even metion Hartline`s cap hit if he gets traded...at anyone who wouldn't break their finger trying to pull the trigger on that trade.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2004
- Messages
- 7,868
- Reaction score
- 8,077
The comedy factor in this thread is great.
Hartline is an ok receiver. Landry was brought in for a reason. He's going to obliterate Hartline in time. Unlike Hartline, Landry is going to make tough plays at tough times to win ball games. Hartline, if you study it, pads his stats against weaker Db's in non-pressure situations. When you are in a really tough deal, and you really need a play, Hartline is most certainly not your guy. In a Green Bay type offense where we trot out lots of receivers, and we let the pressure coverage get handled somewhere else, sure, Hartline will make some catches and get some stats that make him look good. You can look at every NBA team, and someone will have a decent scoring average too and not be that good.
At the end of the day, if you're on the road in the cold late, and you need a win against a good team and you need a catch, Brian Hartline is not your guy and if you're sitting there watching as a homer, you know in the pit of your stomach that Brian Hartline is not going to make a play for you. Bless his heart. But he will get you some stats against extra defensive backs in non-pressure situations. That's who he is.
This is why we needed to get Landry. You're not going to win these tough situations with Hartline. Hartline is an 8-8 player. Not a bad player. Just an 8-8 player. Landry is going to come in and in a tough situation kick a good defensive back's ass and win games. He's a winner.
What's worse, he's actually showing some weird character problems. He craves some sort of Twitter controversy or another, usually to show some bravado to make himself look like a tough kid. "Coo I will catch it." Sure, if this situation doesn't matter..
Hartline is an ok receiver. Landry was brought in for a reason. He's going to obliterate Hartline in time. Unlike Hartline, Landry is going to make tough plays at tough times to win ball games. Hartline, if you study it, pads his stats against weaker Db's in non-pressure situations. When you are in a really tough deal, and you really need a play, Hartline is most certainly not your guy. In a Green Bay type offense where we trot out lots of receivers, and we let the pressure coverage get handled somewhere else, sure, Hartline will make some catches and get some stats that make him look good. You can look at every NBA team, and someone will have a decent scoring average too and not be that good.
At the end of the day, if you're on the road in the cold late, and you need a win against a good team and you need a catch, Brian Hartline is not your guy and if you're sitting there watching as a homer, you know in the pit of your stomach that Brian Hartline is not going to make a play for you. Bless his heart. But he will get you some stats against extra defensive backs in non-pressure situations. That's who he is.
This is why we needed to get Landry. You're not going to win these tough situations with Hartline. Hartline is an 8-8 player. Not a bad player. Just an 8-8 player. Landry is going to come in and in a tough situation kick a good defensive back's ass and win games. He's a winner.
What's worse, he's actually showing some weird character problems. He craves some sort of Twitter controversy or another, usually to show some bravado to make himself look like a tough kid. "Coo I will catch it." Sure, if this situation doesn't matter..
Did Hartline and Wallace sign offset deals? Because that could mitigate the cap hit.
But even if it would be something less than stellar cap management... the health of the cap is not a good enough reason to make bad football decisions. Andre Johnson is a much better football player right now than Brian Hartline will ever be. He'll be a better player two years from now than Brian Hartline will ever be. Not trying to upgrade the position because we signed him to a big extension is doubling down on a bad decision. Better to correct the bad decision, and sooner rather than later.
The game is played on the field, guys. Not in an actuarial table. The goal should be to manage the cap, not let the cap manage you.
So Be
Club Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2006
- Messages
- 16,572
- Reaction score
- 2,216
The $4M cap hit for Hartline is from the 4 years remaining on an accelerated hit for his signing bonus , which does not enter in. AJ's contract has him getting a $10M salary plus a $1M work out bonus, which would need to be absorbed by a trading team without a renegotiation. The offset is for players who are cut and signed by other teams.
Miami has done very well in cap management but, not to the point of making a deal like this. Few teams in the NFL can.
Ok, so basically, you are saying we should go after every trade available that upgrades our team this season, regardless of cap implications, team needs and player age? Do you think Andre Johnson makes us a super bowl contender? how about 2 years from now? If your going to trade Hartline, wouldn't it make more sense to trade him for a position of need? No ones arguing that AJ is the better player, just that this trade makes no freaking sense whatsoever...
Getting rid of Hartline -- or otherwise realizing that you need to do better than Hartline -- is a long term win. Grabbing Johnson for a few years is a short term win. The "trade" -- not that it's going to happen -- would therefore kills two birds with one stone.
The Hartline debate is almost a carbon copy of the Davone Bess debate. A lot of Dolphins fans are overrating Hartline... they think you can win the big time games with him, that Dolphins fans need to realize what they have.
Phooey. I trust my eyes. He's not good enough. The sooner we recognize that as an organization the better.
Southbeach might be 100% right on the numbers. It might be a financial pipe dream in addition to being other kinds of pipe dream, but as long as the Dolphins are not actively trying to move on from Hartline they'll be making the wrong decision.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jimi
The World Is Yours
I said it was A need, not our biggest. But anytime you can fill a need at a play-making position, you should do it.
100% Dolphins
Starter
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 938
- Reaction score
- 1
keep hartline.
even though johnson is one of the premiere receivers of the league, we need more help on the o-line so Tanny has more time to connect with his receiving corps.
no sense in having two Ferrari's ( wallace+johnson) if you can't afford the fuel to supply them the energy to operate.
100%
even though johnson is one of the premiere receivers of the league, we need more help on the o-line so Tanny has more time to connect with his receiving corps.
no sense in having two Ferrari's ( wallace+johnson) if you can't afford the fuel to supply them the energy to operate.
100%
So Be
Club Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2006
- Messages
- 16,572
- Reaction score
- 2,216
If this or any deal like this came available at the start of free agency, it's a whole different deal, and a number of teams could have seriously considered it. Now, almost all teams are low on cap space. They would need to cut players to make room with no replacements available.
You want to get rid of Hartline and that's fine, but I cant believe you`d do so by trading him for a 33year old WR on the decline who is going to make 15MIL+ the next 3 years and call that sound roster management... Johnson had 5 TDs last year